June 28, 2002

St. Steyn of the Warbloggers

I can't remember who first coined the term "anti-plan" this week, but it's been picked up my Mark Steyn, who rolls with it like only he can:

"Had Mr. Bush kept the no-plan plan to himself until today and quietly offered it to his pals around the table at Kananaskis, Chirac would have pronounced it unacceptable, Chrtien would have ummed and awed, Blair would have sought to find some middle ground, and the result would have been a compromise statement of utter worthlessness -- like the Commonwealth on Zimbabwe."

Read it.

June 27, 2002

Andrew Sullivan thinks that if Arafat were to be elected, then we could do business with him. However, I think he's dead wrong on that.

Elections, without free press, or freedom from massive campaigns of lies and propaganda by the government, are ultimately useless. As long as people in Palestine operate under the impression that the Israeli's are the enemy, and Arafat will bring them a country, he will have the power and mandate to continue his program of keeping himself alive at the cost of everyone and everything else.

June 24, 2002

The Plan

Bush Makes Demands on Arafat

Arafat Defiant

European Union is Weary

…Ya, that’s pretty much business as usual in Middle Eastern politics.

I had a big long rant about Arafat all ready, then about 1000 words in, the power in my house died for a good 18 hours. When it came back, I recovered the document, reread it, and decided that I really didn’t need 1000 words to say what I want to say.

Bush’s new foreign policy statement regarding Palestinian is an excellent move. I’m not praise it to heavily – it’s not brilliant or anything – but it’s so rare that a President makes a simple, obvious, yet important move of this kind, that it warrants some respect.

The decision to refuse to do any more negotiation with Arafat is undoubtedly the right one, not because it accomplishes anything new or useful per se, but it simply embraces reality. The reality is, and always has been, that negotiating with Arafat is not negotiation at all, but simply assisting Arafat’s own maintenance of his position of power. He knows as well as everyone else that he will die (or even worse, loose power) if the conflict comes to an end, either at the hands of Israeli’s, or more likely, Palestinians. It’s because of this that he lives to perpetuate conflict, and it’s why it’s an utter waste of time to do business with him.

Everyone and his sister is complaining that Arafat is an elected leader, and the US has no right to refuse to acknowledge him as such – put those arguments are as irrelevant as they are wrong. Putting aside the heavy quotation marks that appear around the word “elected”, we are under no obligation to work with him, be he a dictator, a king, or an elected official.

America’s policy regarding Palestine comes before it’s policy regarding Arafat, and our policy regarding Palestine is that we want peace, stability, and statehood - in that order. If Arafat does not share those goals, but in fact works in direct opposition to them, then policy dictates that we do not do business with Arafat. It’s really quite simple that way.

June 23, 2002

What’s With Drudge?

Matt Drudge is getting really, really tabloid-y lately. I first noticed the way he incessantly refers to the Department of Homeland Defense as The Department of Precrime, a reference to the movie Minority Report. It’s clever and all, but a little much all the time. Now he’s running a headline “Genetic Horror Show: Scientists Create SpiderGoat.” and that’s just over the top.

First of all, these “spidergoats” were created over a year ago, and they’ve been covered by many manor papers, including the main story in the NYT magazine last week. This is old hat, I think Matt is getting lazy and desperate for shock value.

Secondly, these “spidergoats” are just goats - Goats with a since spider gene in them. That makes them 1/70,000th spider. It’s hardly a mythical chimaric beast; it doesn’t have eight legs of mandibles.

And finally, there’s nothing “horrific” about it at all. They’re just cute, regular old goats, that eat hay, or whatever goats eat, and live in a barn. The only difference is that along with their normal, drinkable mil, they secrete a cloudy, cotton candyish silk in the mix that can be woven into thread, exactly like spider silk, but in much larger quantities.

Now, I’m sure the actual article will fill you in on all those relevant facts, but the headline Matt Drudge chose gives the impression of giant, half spider half goat creatures wreaking havoc in a mad scientist’s lab. I have to wonder about Drudge…

[I got lazy too, no links. It doesn't really matter I guess, but I don't like to do that to often.]

June 21, 2002

Warning: Mix only in a well ventilated area.

The Dynamic Duo of Happy-Fun Pundit, and Mark Steyn have good bits about Canada’s love affair with state-controlled media.

[Speaking of unlikely combinations, Steyn and Krauthammer are on the same side of the crease. How’s that for getting your 25¢ worth?]

June 17, 2002

Weapons of Mass Destruction, The Fourth Amendment, and other phrases likely to get DoHD knocking on my door.

Via Instapundit, Eugene Volokh writes about The Fourth Amendment and The War on Terror.

He’s talking about Fourth Amendment rules and searching for weapons of mass destruction, specifically Dirty Bombs, using the example of the legality of police driving through a neighborhood with a Geiger counter searching for the bomb inside homes. Apparently, such a search would be illegal under existing rules, but since such a search is clearly reasonable, there current rules must be flawed.

I think that the solution for these cases would be to create a new legal tool to allow the necessary radical measures without setting bad precedent – a WMD Warrant. From the point of view of law Weapons of Mass Destruction are fundamentally different from any possession or object in existence. Nothing in the world is so dangerous as a WMD, and nothing warrants as much legal power as the direct search for a WMD. To this end, it would make sense that law enforcement who can demonstrate to a judge a credible cause to believe there is a WMD in a certain area should be permitted, for the purpose of finding the weapon, extraordinary legal powers.

Warrants a “get out of jail free” card as far as the constitution is concerned. A warrant is especially a legal pass issued for a one time violation of normal Fourth Amendment Rights – to search a private home or institution. They work, because the issuing of a warrant in no way sets precedent allowing searches to go on across the board. They are issued when reason can be shown that one is warranted, and it sets strict boundaries on exactly what action the warrant permits.

However, the search for a WMD is unlike the search for anyone or anything else. The mere presence of Dirty Bomb, Chemical Weapon, Biological Weapon, or Nuclear Device imminently threatens the lives of thousands of people wherever it is located. For such a unique threat, unique powers are warranted. And that is why our legal system needs to allow police to obtain a special WMD warrant, covering not just a specific residence, but a wide area, and allowing not just search and seizure, but a wide range of normally unconstitutional measures. Because the actions are ultimately under the supervision of a warrant issued by a single judge for a single occurrence, the constitutional violations entailed cannot spread into normal police practice, and because the warrant only covers the search for an actual WMD (or the parts thereof, such as 40 kg of Plutonium), they cannot be used for broader and more vague criteria, such as apprehending suspected terrorists.

I for one would be more then willing to temporarily give up almost all of my constitutional rights for the duration of a search for dirty bomb in my neighborhood, as should any other person who values their life and the lives of those around them. (Of course, living in Canada, I have no such constitutional rights, but rather a proud history of government raping of civil liberties in the search for terrorists.)

There are, I think, three criteria that must be included in any WMD Warrant before Issuing:

1. A strict limit on area to be covered by the search, to be determined based on the evidence as to the probability whereabouts of the WMD.

2. An equally strict time limit of the search, which can not be extended unless new evidence is presented and a new warrant is issued. The time limit should be determined based on the reasonable amount of time necessary to conduct a search through the area specified in point number one.

3. A strict definition on exactly what constitutes a WMD. No searches just for plans or suspected builders of devices, only actual devices, or the active part thereof (e.g. plutonium, anthrax, serine gas...)

Were such a legal tool to exist, it would create a legal criterion for law enforcement to conduct the critical searches necessary to save thousands of lives, without us trading away our freedom for safety.
“I’m Gonna Wash that Man Right Outta My Hair……”

The Forest Fire currently raging through Colorado, destroying thousands of acres of forest and displacing tens of thousands of people, was stated by a Park Ranger who was burning a letter from here estranged Husband. Hey God? Good one. I couldn’t have written a better twist myself.
When The Internet is Outlawed, only Outlaws will have the Internet

Last week, 24 people died when a fire broke out in a Beijing Internet Café. The room filled with toxic smoke and almost everyone died, except for those who squeezed out a small bathroom window.

Had the same event occurred in the United States, it would have been a minor danger, people could easily get out any of the doors or windows, but that was not the case here. Because of China’s strict control of the internet – firewalls which block almost any content the least bit controversial or anti-communist – Internet cafes often operate as underground access points for young people to have free access to information from outside China. Because they operate illegally, many cafes bar their windows and lock all their doors, to deter authorities from shutting them down. That’s what this café did, and that’s why almost everyone inside died.

I’m vaguely reminded of the atrocity committed in Saudi Arabia a few months back, when school-girls were forced back into a burning school because they were not wearing the proper head scarves. What happened in this internet café is quite different – the deaths were not the result of intentional actions of the police, but rather a terrible accident. The similarity is that in both cases, people lived in states that wanted to restrict their access to knowledge and information, and in both cases, their desire to access that forbidden knowledge forced them into dangerous situations that cost their lives.

In response to the terrible fire in Beijing, the government has ordered ALL internet cafes closed. It makes sense that they would do this, because the state has been looking for ways to curb internet access among citizens for years, and this is just a handy excuse. Now they can cut off the only source of uncensored information for most citizens, and blame it all on fire code regulations. However, instead of improving the situation, this will have the exact opposite effect – it will force internet cafes underground, to operate without any level of legality whatever. People will have to run their access points out of basements and backrooms where they can hide from the watchful eye of authorities, no matter how unfit the accommodations are.

If China really wanted to prevent further accidents such as this one, they would allow Internet Cafes to operate in the open, therefore allowing reasonable regulation and safety measures to be monitored, but they don’t care about safety, they care about shutting down the single biggest threat to Authoritarian rule in the country there is – the Internet.

Chinese people, especially young people, will not accept the loss of access the internet. Already, the most popular search term in many Chinese search engine is “free proxy server.” Why? Because offshore proxies allow people in China to bypass the National Firewall and obtain information normally blocked by the Communist Government.

In a country who’s largest newspaper reprints stories from The Onion as fact, and refuses to admit their error, but rather accuse the Onion of deliberately printing lies (it’s called satire people?), you can see why people might be anxious to consult a secondary source on their news. Unfortunately, the price they have to pay for the free exchange of facts and opinions we take for granted is higher then anyone could have thought.

June 16, 2002

Ever Seen A Wounded Veteran Figure Skate?

According to Daily Pundit, Home Depot is refusing to do business with the federal Government because they would have to follow rules governing their hiring practice, specifically:

“- Executive Order 11246 of 1965, which bans discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

- Section 503 and Section 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which requires affirmative action and prohibits employment discrimination by federal government contractors and subcontractors.

- The Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, which requires that anyone doing business worth $25,000 or more with the federal government must take affirmative action to hire and to promote qualified targeted veterans, including special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and any other veterans who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or an expedition.”

Either they really hate the government telling them what to do - really don’t like hiring certain minorities - or they’re far more devoted to their policy of hiring aspiring Olympic athletes then we thought. Odd.
The Problem with Pride

June is, among about a dozen other things, official Gay Pride Month (at least it always was under the Clinton Administration, Bush refuses to follow suit by recognizing it.) and to mark the occasion, the boys at Photojunkie want Bloggers to discuss pride and gay related things in their blogs. Naturally, Toronto hosts one of the biggest Pride weekend events in the world, so I thought that before writing what I think, I would try to gain a little public opinion. Consulting message boards, discussion groups, and other such forums, I noticed that there is a large and vocal group of people who really, really don’t like pride. I guess I never noticed before. After all, there are literally thousands of people at Toronto Pride every year, including a great deal of straight people, and our own mayor, riding a fire engine.

The issues that people seem to have with pride (apart from the rampantly homophobic who simply hate it for everything it represents) fall into two categories:

1. Pride does nothing to promote a more accurate image of homosexuals, but actually perpetuates stereotypes – by being so overtly sexual and intentionally explicit.

2. Pride days, and Pride parades, constitute preferential treatment by endorsing one sexual orientation. We would never have a straight pride or a pedophile pride, so we should not have a gay pride either.

As I said in response to these topics in other forums, I agree with the former argument (although conditionally) but not with the latter. The reasons are as follows: Pride does perpetuate stereotypes – it really does. For many people, the only “gay” event they see throughout the year is the annual pride parade, and event which in sexualized in every way possible. Oiled boys gyrating on top of floats, marchers in all states of undress, and a general atmosphere of overt sexuality – there’s no arguing with this, because it’s precisely the point of the parade.

Pride parades were started for two reasons: to allow openly homosexual people to celebrate who they are, and to force anti-gay elements in society to confront homosexuality full on. The idea being, to force change in the country by making the homosexual contingent so noticeable, and so unrelenting in their expression of their sexual identity, that they simply could not be ignored, or suppressed. This approach worked. Gay activists seized control of their own image, reclaimed stereotypes and turned them into tools of empowerment when it was needed most.

However, there was always an element of satire and drama involved in Pride parades. They were supposed to be over the top, they were supposed to be unrelenting in their sexuality, because it was both hugely fun for those involved - and politically useful. But today, things have changed. Not to say that everything is better (many things are, some still are not), but the social view of homosexuality has been altered, and it seems time that, to some extent, Pride needs to change as well. Firstly, because most people don’t get it, and secondly, because it’s less about politics and more about the party. Pride is, in many ways, too much fun. It’s such a huge celebration for so many people that it seems impossible to keep it serious, to focus on social change and not just fun.

It’s been so long since Gay Pride was fresh, provocative, and politically charged, mainstream society has forgotten all that subtle business about reclaimed stereotypes (who wouldn’t?) and just see a bunch of wackos in skin tight clothes dancing and flaunting their sexuality. It’s lost it’s ability to confront prejudice, and begun to perpetuate it. If Gay Pride wants to remain relevant and effective, it has to grow up. It has to be about inclusion, not controversy. The goal should be to bring gay and straight together with events that appeal to everyone, not simply to show off your abs.

That takes care of point number 1. Now for point number two:

A great deal of people (at least the one’s I talked to on internet message boards, as unscientific a polling method as there is) feel that the entire institution of Gay Pride is in fact prejudicial, and constitutes special and unfair promotion of homosexuality. Some say that there should be straight pride as well - while others go so far as to say that, since we would never have a parade for pedophilia or bestiality, we should not have one for homosexuality either. The latter point differs from the former by suggesting that homosexuality is a harmful perversion, but that aspect of their objection is neither here nor there to this discussion, so I will ignore it (as I so often have to do.)

The point is, why should gay people get a parade, and not straight people? What about people with hazel eyes, they were born that way too, so why can’t they have a parade? (I’m not trying to be facetious, I really heard that argument.) The answer seems to patently obvious that I feel dumb just point it out, but its too late to stop now: If straight people, or people with hazel eyes, were treated the way gay people were in society, they would be more then entitled to a parade, or a weekend festival, or a pride month, or whatever they wanted, to combat anti-hazel-eyed intolerance. Having hazel eyes, they are correct, is like being gay, in that one has no choice about it, however that is as far as the similarity goes. Nobody has ever been tortured or murdered for having hazel eyes. Nobody has been told they cannot fight and die for their country because of their eye colour, no child has ever been beaten and harassed at school, or any of a thousand other things, that happen to people simply for being born gay.

When such hate and intolerance are directed towards minorities, those groups fight back by public shows of strength and unity. Thousands of Jews march in support of Israel and against anti-Semitism, schools and government continue to endorse Black history month, or the cause of feminism. These things are not done because someone things that blacks, Jews or women are better people, deserving of special attention for being who they are – it is precisely the opposite. All these groups have, at one time or another, been seen as lesser people by society, and punished for being who they were.

The point is that “Pride” isn’t about celebrating the fact that someone is gay. Nobody should be proud or ashamed of being gay or straight. “Pride” is about being proud of surviving intolerance and discrimination, because these are things that people really do have power over – unlike their sexuality.

Whenever questions of one group versus another group come up, I get nervous. I don’t particularly like affirmative action programs, which more often then not just become reverse racism – punishing people for the inequality that existed generations ago. Equally so, I wouldn’t want something like Gay Pride to become an event which celebrates homosexuality itself, because that would be completely contrary to the idea of tolerance and diversity it claims to base itself on, but that’s exactly what I see going on. Where we go from here, I honestly don’t know, but the solution I think, lies in separating the party from the politics, because in their current arrangement, the politics can never win.
I just finished reading Robert Ludlum's "The Bourne Identity" and have begun part two in the trilogy, "The Bourne Supremacy". If you enjoyed the movie (I did) then I suggest you pick up the novel, it's much, much better. It's classic spy novel - Swiss banks, double/triple crossing bad guys, Cuban assassins, the works.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Pictograms.

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. FUD never ceases in it’s ability to simply replace facts and logic on just about any topic. Case in point: Nuclear Waste disposal. Touchy subject right? Transporting thousands of trucks full of nuclear waste across the country, scary eh? No, not really. But that’s not what the fear mongers here would have you think.

DEADLY Nuclear wastes. Congress has done NOTHING to inform us. The sky, I repeat, the sky, if falling. Read the link, then come back here. I’ll wait.


Ok, good.

First of all, do we expect congress to do anything, at all, to inform American’s about things? We shouldn’t, because that’s not their job. Let’s dispense with that little bit of pointless mudslinging now – the Senate isn’t keeping secrets, they just don’t personally inform you, the reader, about every damn thing they vote on.

Secondly, these people don’t present an solid argument for why we should really be afraid of this waste shipping through our neighborhood. It’s vaguely suggested with some sort of pictograms that:

1. Oozing barrels of glowing green waste will be shipped.

2. A dozen trucks containing this goo will inexplicably pile up and burn on our nation’s highways

3. This will somehow lead to another Sept. 11th.

Indecipherable propaganda images aside, I think we can safely surmise their point: shipping truckloads of nuclear waste about could result in either accidents or deliberate attacks which could release harmful radiation to Americans.

This, I can safely say, does not worry me in the slightest.

Because I live in Toronto.

No, seriously, Even if the trucks are going to zip past your house, you still shouldn’t worry. The chances of these trucks crashing is very low, if only because everyone is going to be so damn scared of exactly that – extra precautions will be taken. Even if a truck were to crash, there is almost no chance that any of the tightly sealed containers of waste would crack. These are not loosely sealed “Springfield Nuclear Power Plant” type drums were talking about, these containers could literally (if you’ll pardon the example) survive a nuclear blast intact. The idea that they could simply tip over and explode is ludicrous.

Finally, if they were to smash, tip over, explode, and release their contents to the four winds, the danger is still extremely minor that anyone would be hurt. Nuclear waste is dangerous stuff yes, but not as much as you think. Last month on Politically Incorrect, David Crosby called plutonium “the most poisonous stuff on earth.” Well, no. It’s not. It’s not poisonous at all, its radioactive, and even then, it’s not all that dangerous. Radiation exposure is the kind of thing that takes prolonged buildup to do harm, not one time exposure, and certainly not in whatever TINY quantity anyone in the path of a truck accident would be exposed to.

Thanks to the cold war, Godzilla movies, the Incredible Hulk, and left wing nut jobs – the meme of the 20th century has been that Nuclear anything will kill us all.
Not only do the fear-mongers make no effort to distinguish between the dangers of radioactive exposure and full blown atomic detonation (two things that have virtually nothing to do with each other), but they in fact exploit the perceived connection. As if a canister of nuclear waste, mishandled, could spontaneously explode Sum Of All Fears style, even though they know as well as anyone else that this is not just impossible, but possessing the same kind of cause and effect relationship as eating a sandwich causing the collapse of the Antarctic ice shelf. But that’s not the point. For the purveyor of FUD, there is nothing wrong with conjuring images of mushroom clouds when discussing spent uranium fuel rods in trucks.

I, for one, would feel a lot better with all the nuclear waste in the United States stored in one completely out of the way, easy to protect location. It means that if the whole place goes up in a fiery ball of impossible leftist nightmares, nobody for ten thousand miles will be exposed to anything. It also means that, with only one perimeter to protect, instead o the hundreds of locations in existence now, the total attackable surface area is greatly reduced. No terrorist could possibly get anywhere near Yucca Mountain with his head still attached to his neck. We’re all safer off with everything locked tightly in the middle of nowhere, so lets put it there.

Don’t let the Godzilla effect get you too, put facts before FUD.

I'm afraid of the world....

Its 2:37 a.m. and I’m reading about a possible Giant Sea Monster in the Atlantic Ocean, listening to Bowie’s “I’m Afraid of Americans”.

The school year is over and it feel’s good.

June 15, 2002

one browser to rule them all…

See, I love Opera - it allows me so much flexibility with multi-window browsing, an effective Bookmark management system, and a thousand other features. But there are a few glitches. It's never behaved that well for posting in Blogger. The post window is never the correct size some buttons just don't appear. Those issues i can deal with, but now it's taken to display certain bits of text I input in the wrong font. The text shows up ok to readers, but I see it wrong. Why do I care what font the text I input is you ask? Normally I wouldn’t care, except when the font that Opera chooses is Tengwar Elvish Runes.

Now, I like Lord of the Rings as much as the next guy – but among my myriad skills, the ability to speak fluent elvish is not something I can claim to do. So I would very much like it if my browser could see fit to display my prose in a language that, you know, exists.

Now we’ve got this new fangled Mozilla browser – and I hear nothing but good things about it. Does anyone know how well it works compared to Opera? Does it allow multi-window browsing or customization like Opera? Does it stick to font styles that exist in the real world for rendering text? I deeply hate Internet Explorer, especially for Blogging, but I’m not about to go out and learn goddam Elvish either.
Toga! Toga! Toga! 2000!

Thanks Laurence, and everyone else for that matter.. Just received hit number MM.
Boy of 17 hacks into missile secrets

You know what really scares me about this? Not that a 17 year old hacker could break into military secrets, but that a 17 year old hacker who was to dumb to properly cover his tracks hacked into military secrets. Not that anybody should be able to get in, but if anyone can, they should have to be the best hackers in the world, not some script kiddie who’s never heard of an anonymous remailer.

June 14, 2002

My school’s network administrator and Mac Geek wiped up this page, depicting the whole com-tech crew of the school in their respective South Park character forms. It’s truly astonishing.

June 13, 2002

Anatomy of a political movement:

1. Being unsatisfied with the terms “liberal” and “conservative”,
Steve Den Beste
has perfectly articulated his - and my – political affiliation. He’s using the term “engineerist” to describe it:

“Engineerists are socially liberal, economically conservative and politically libertarian. Note the use of lower case letters on all of those words; I'm "socially liberal" but damned well not "Socially Liberal".”

2. Following suit, Eric Raymond then started the (currently) unofficial Engineerist party.

3. King of all media Instapundit, clearly having found the party that so desperately was needed all this time, joins up, and requests a tee-shirt.

4. You’re truly - with the benefit of dual citizenship, hereby joins the party, and proceeds to set up the (even more unofficial) Canadian chapter of the Engineerist Party. Viva Liberté!

June 10, 2002

And you thought that Palestinian children were brainwashed into fanaticism:

Ah, western civilization. The glory and dignity of the British Empire.....

June 09, 2002

Puny Humans, Give me your computers

Most people waste 90% of their computer processors resources, by simply surfing the web or running applications. The left over power can, however, be reused for practical purposes.

The process of hooking together a bunch of net-connected PCs to get them to complete a task is called "distributed computing" and it's all the rage among geeks. Perhaps you've heard of SETI@Home, a program for scanning the sky for sky for alien radio transmissions.

My favorite distributed program is ChessBrain, a system that uses Idle processing power to build a massive chess-playing computer. I run this all the time in the background (it takes no actual megahertz, just whatever RAM is free, you won't even know it's there) and you should to.

More importantly, you should run it to boost my ranking. So download the program Here. Install it, then enter this data:

NAME: /|\Atari
Serial: f0yi-3716-82r1

And away you go. You’re helping to build the most powerful game playing artificial brain in existence, and more helping me climb the ranks at the same time. Do it now...
"The whole region will witness a disastrous explosion that will impact not only the region but the stability of the whole world."

Let's play a little game. The speaker of the above quotation was:

A) Genius and Super villain Ernst Stavro Blofeld?

B) Genius and Super villain Lex Luther?

C) Genius and supervillian Yasser Arafat?

It's a trick question. All three are fictional characters.

Seriously though, who does this guy think he is? The way he can promise us a massive explosion is when he inevitably has an IDF shell shot up his ass.

June 07, 2002

Israel holds non-hatred related parade, Film at 11.

This week, Jerusalem celebrated it’s first ever Gay Pride parade. The turnout was in the thousands. As expected, the ultra-orthodox members of the community strongly opposed the event, calling it perverted and such, but all in all the event went well.

It goes without saying that there is absolutely no chance in hell of a similar event taking place in the Palestinian controlled territories, so what I want to know is this: How do the ultra-leftist Palestinian supporters in America consign themselves to such a hopeless contradiction? Can you proffer support to any regime, no matter how repressive, discriminatory and hateful it is, as long as it’s seen as “oppressed”? It’s a characteristic of extremists that they can put aside the most major of differences when they share an enemy, and that certainly seems the case here.

Israel recognizes gay relationships and holds a pride parade. The Arab world summarily executes homosexuals. Yet the majority of the far-left in North America sides with Palestine, and attacks Israel. Why? Because they’re the underdogs. That’s the problem with being revolutionary. Even when the status quo is right, you still have to hate it.

June 06, 2002

I reported a while ago about my slogan “Thinking inside the box” having been stolen by the Vagina Monologues. At the time, I was forced to keep the title because I simply could not think of anything better.

That changed this week, when the esteemed Alex Beam was quoted alongside myself in a Wired News bit about blogging being taught at Berkeley.

The new slogan can been seen at the right.

June 05, 2002

Ok, there’s something that needs some serious talking-about here:

After Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the Recent Car bombing in Israel, IDF forces swept in to surround Arafat’s compound. The Palestinian “Authority” of course, said they were hunting down the militants responsible.

What seems to have been forgotten is that just this past week, Arafat himself was out looking for members – any members - of Islamic Jihad and Hamas to join his cabinet. Now, let’s be clear. He was not looking to hire a particular individual who happened to have ties to these groups; he was looking for full fledged members of these terrorist organizations to be members of his government, purely because of their virtue of being full fledged members of terrorist organizations.

Lucky for the free world, all the individuals approached thus far have declined to be members of the PA, as they feel that Arafat is (wait for it…..) too soft on Israel. But that’s not really the point:

Why would Yasser Arafat make public his “Making the Band” style talent search for the most brutal terrorists he could find, if not to send a message to the rest of us? Why would he seek out for promotion and legitimization the very enemies he “condemns” and “tracks down” for punishment? Quite simply, he would not. He wants everyone to know what he really thinks about Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and you can bet your ass that its not condemnation. In these groups, Arafat see’s all the qualities he wants in Palestinian leaders – namely the most bitter, virulent, murderous, genocidal hatred of Israel possible. He’s moved beyond saying one thing in English and another in Arabic. Now he’s saying two or three things in English, as many in Arabic, a few that contradict the others in both languages, but ultimately the same thing in every language: “I want the Israeli’s dead, and I want to hire the people to do it.”

Hope you’ve got a few extra cans of “Ensure” tucked away under your desk Yasser, because I think your gonna be in there for a long time.

…By the way, I appear to be back to blogging now. We’ll see.

June 02, 2002

This just made my day:

:: how jedi are you? ::