Despite 3 dissenters, yesterday, the United States Supreme Court rightfully ruled that Americans are barred from providing support (via money, arms, training, advice, assistance, etcetera…) to any foreign terrorist organization.  The decision cleared up a nebulous area in two previous decisions regarding the legality of punishing activities not linked to terrorism. The law stems from a Los Angeles based ‘Humanitarian’ Law Project that wants to provide support to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (”PKK”) for the purpose of filing human rights complaints before the UN, and coordinating peace negotiations with Turkey.  Yet, for years our State Department has deemed PKK a terrorist threat, and so this decision supports the assertion that any interaction with similar groups would serve to embolden, empower and legitimize their cause.

The results of a recent study by Michigan University’s, Dr. Christine Stanik, reveals that women with limited education and poor career prospects usually attract men who could provide them a stable financial future.  This behavior has evolved with societal reinforcement, and greed is not necessarily the only impetus. Dr. Stanik posits: “In ancient times, women evolved an attraction to men with wealth because they knew such a mate could improve the chances of their offspring’s survival…It is a very strong gut feeling that is hard to shake off, especially when a woman does not have her own career which would give her financial independence.”  Interestingly, Anna Nicole Smith, the oft-referenced tragic figure discussed in several posts, was one of Dr. Stanik’s examples.