| |
Thursday, October 17, 2002
How did I not hear of this?
This article about luxury/executive busline running between Pittsburgh and Cleveland. It makes great sense. The traffic and the distance from downtown for both airports is so abysmal, it defies reason for anyone to fly to either place other than for connecting flights. At the risk of sounding like a minor conspiracy goof, I am guessing that part of the reason for not reading about this in the local fishwrap is that the Cleveland Plain-Dealer is a huge supporter of Hopkins Int'l Airport and its attempts to expand. Wouldn't want to write about a good, useful and smart service that might offer some competition.
Damn if Dan Savage doesn't nail it when it comes to why war with Iraq is a good thing. He blasts the anti-war left and their arguments, and he even supports overthrowing the House of Saud. The whole thing is excellent, but here's an excerpt
But wait! Iraq isn't in cahoots with al Qaeda, so why attack Iraq in the war on terrorism?
Because we're not just at war with al Qaeda, stupid. We're at war with a large and growing Islamo-fascist movement that draws its troops and funds from all over the Islamic world. Islamo-fascism is a regional problem, not just an al Qaeda problem or an Afghanistan problem. To stop Islamo-fascism, we're going to have to roll back all of the tyrannous and dictatorial regimes in the Middle East while simultaneously waging war against a militant, deadly religious ideology. To be completely honest, I would actually prefer that the United States go to war against the ridiculous royal family in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have been using American money to export their intolerant and deadly strain of Islam all over the world (the kind of Islam that inspires people to blow up discos in Bali), and getting rid of the Saudi royal family and their fascist clerics makes more sense than getting rid of Saddam.
The Lament of All Guys
Bill Simmons does a pretty good column the stages of losing in Vegas to a TV wrestling match. One paragraph in the middle of the column, though, summed up the complaint my friends and I have been discussing since the start of college football (have I mentioned our season tickets at Pitt games are right next to the student section).
Anyway, we ended up waiting in a maddeningly long line to get into Rain, one of those 21st century clubs where you can freak dance, pop Ecstacy pills like Pez and order rohypnol daiquiris. Why couldn't they have had these places when I was in my early-20s? Why did I miss out on the whole "Girls dress like hookers and act like them, too" era? Somehow my prime was sandwiched between the late-'70s (Disco Era, drugs and free love) and the early-'00s (no clothes, designer drugs, tons of sex). I had the late-'80s and early-'90s, when girls wore baggy sweaters to cover their rear ends, drugs were evil and everyone was terrified of AIDS. Really, really, really bad times. Ten years either way and I could have been prominently involved. It's haunting.
So depressing at times.
Einhorn Guilty
Ira Einhorn was found guilty of 1st degree murder for the death of his then girlfriend Holly Maddux 25 years ago. The jury deliberated for a total of about 2 1/2 hours to reach this conclusion. Einhorn faces life without parole. No surprise, his lawyer said they will appeal. The judge, speaking to Einhorn, gave a most excellent insult to the hippie-guru-pseudo-intellectual
Judge William J. Mazzola had harsh words for Einhorn after the verdict was read, calling him "an intellectual dilettante who preyed on the uninitiated, uninformed, unsuspecting and inexperienced people."
Mazzola said that Einhorn was the type of person to "buy a book and read the first and last chapters and feign some special understanding."
Sadly Peter Gabriel never made an appearance. In fact, now Peter wants to set the whole thing straight about his relationship with Ira -- through his publicist.
Yesterday, in a statement from his publicist, Gabriel recounted the genesis of his Ira experience. In 1976 or 1977, he said, his former wife's sister invited Einhorn and Maddux to visit them in England.
Gabriel, saying he was interested in the psychic research conducted by Einhorn and mind doctor Andrija Puharich, said he stayed in touch with Einhorn for "a while after." Maddux was killed in 1977.
Gabriel said he was approached for money to fund Einhorn's defense but declined. Einhorn skipped bail in 1981.
As for his name's coming up again, he said: "I resent the allegations or implications that I have been asked or have agreed to appear as a character witness in this trial, that I funded Mr. Einhorn on the run, or that somehow I endorse violence against women."
Einhorn Verdict Reached
The jury in the murder trial of Ira Einhorn returned a verdict this morning. The verdict has not yet been announced.
Wednesday, October 16, 2002
Enterprise must have just ended.
Without fail, some time after 9 pm eastern, I usually get at least a few google search hits for "jolene blalock topless"; "nude blalock"; or some other permutation.
Once again, I do not have any photos or links to such.
Idiotarian Alert
Simon " Aerial Bombing in Afghanistan won't work/beware the Afghan Winter" Jenkins is back with a new piece in The Times called "The Bali bombing must kill off war with Iraq". (It won't top his " America Should Not Squander Its Sympathy" piece, I mean how can you top:
Politicians and editorials are demanding that the Taleban be ordered to extradite bin Laden under threat of massive missile attack, with the same threat visited on neighbouring Pakistan. What if these insecure regimes cannot deliver? It took the presence of a land army to defeat both Presidents Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic. America is unlikely to send a land army back to the Middle East, least of all to Afghanistan. America’s ordering Arab governments to do its bidding has been tested for more than a decade and has not worked. The region today is the worst possible advertisement for such coercion. It has produced the climate in which terror breeds.
Of course Herculean efforts must be made to bring to justice those responsible. But the pursuit of justice should be the essence of the strategy, building on the unprecedented sympathy shown to America throughout the region. That sympathy is a precious commodity. It took years to bring the Lockerbie suspects to book, years of failed aggression against Libya. Success came only when the West stopped ostracising Colonel Gaddafi and cut a deal with him. The best possible outcome of this crisis would be a new sensitising of Western diplomacy in the Middle East, as an essential preliminary to co-operation in countering regional terrorism. It will never be countered by main force.
...
A great assault on Muslim states from the air would be the answer to bin Laden’s prayer. Fanatics would flock to his cause. To many Arabs it would seem to legitimise the Manhattan slaughter. Nato revenge raids would not only lower the West to the same barbarism as was shown by the terrorists. It could hardly be more counter-productive to the anti-terrorist cause.
These dreadful people seek neither wealth nor territory, only fame for their cause. They need sanctuary. But the Russians spent a decade trying to flush them from the Afghan mountains and were condemned by the West for their troubles. That conflict destroyed a moderate regime and created a fanatical one, from groups recklessly financed by the Americans. The British Empire met its Waterloo on the North-West Frontier. So did the Russian Empire. Are the Americans about to follow?
Sometimes you need to re-read this stuff for a good laugh. The latest isn't quite that good, but part of that is because he tends to rehash the same material used in the aforementioned piece.)
The merchants of fear say that Britain is next. Americans, French and Australians have been targeted by “al-Qaeda” since September 11. Britain has eerily escaped. Yet Britain stands shoulder to shoulder with George Bush. Britain bombs. What awful horror is now being hatched in some hotel room or garret? Yesterday the Foreign Office added its mite to global terror by telling British citizens to avoid poor Bali, which must be as safe as anywhere on Earth. London is far more at risk.
Beware the "merchants of fear." Um, who are they? Yes, London might be riskier given the number of Islamofascists calling for a jihad who live in London. So Australia, a strong supporter of US actions sees its people attacked; while France, opposing the US invading Iraq also sees its interests attacked. And Simon sees the logical link?
At the same time Tony Blair told the House of Commons that the threat from “weapons of mass destruction” is as great as the threat from terrorism. I find it hard to credit that he really believes this. Even if it were true, no sensible person could hold that declaring war on Iraq is the best way of averting either threat. Over the past decade a gang of fanatics, financed by Saudis and trained mostly in Western cities, have tried to sow mayhem round the world. Occasionally they have succeeded.
So he thinks Saudi Arabia is the greater threat than Iraq? Well, I can't really disagree, though it isn't like Saddam doesn't help to finance terrorism. Oh, wait, I forgot suicide bombers in Israel do not count.
They have apparently not been caught. Afghanistan was a show of retaliative firepower. Iraq is a sabre-rattling distraction. Both have been upstaged by an exploding vehicle. People are being murdered now, not in two years’ time “if Saddam were able to get some uranium from an African source”. There is not a shred of evidence that President Saddam Hussein is behind any recent outrage. There is evidence that al-Qaeda is still active. Mr Blair may be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, but Iraq must now be distracting every intelligence resource in the whole of Asia and recruiting hundreds to the militant cause.
Bali should stir a real argument over the containment of terrorism. The argument is over means, not ends. Peace-loving people everywhere want terrorism crushed. They want relations between states governed by tolerance. They do not agree on how. The dialectic has thesis, antithesis and, I hope, synthesis.
Taking his cue from Gore, the argument is now that the only terror group to go after is Al-Quida. That way, going after any other threat is war-mongering. As for those precious intelligence resources being diverted, yeah, there were no warnings that there might be a terror attack in Indonesia.
Yes, Bali should stir a real argument over terrorism, but containment isn't an option when you are talking about terror organizations not countries. Intellectual that Simon is, he tries to be Hegel with dialectic. Thesis=hawks; antithesis=doves; synthesis=the balance/compromise. That, however, would require honest characterization of both sides of an argument. Simon has already shown an inability to perform such an activity.
The thesis is simple. The growth of sophisticated terrorism can brook no compromise. The explosive force of September 11 has been repeated in less dramatic incidents in Yemen, Kuwait and Bali. States that house and train terrorists must be crushed. States that might do so in future must be crushed as well. America has the power. It must do the deed.
A little overblown and heavily simplified, but for the sake of argument, okay.
The thesis holds that the United Nations concept of national sovereignty is defunct. Might grants America the right of entry, search and arrest. Even a putative threat, as in Mr Blair’s Iraq dossier, justifies a pre-emptive attack. The War on Terror is, said George Bush a year ago, an all-out war, a world war, a war possibly without end.
Last month the thesis was restated in the White House’s astonishing and little-noticed National Security Strategy. This asserted America’s right to stop any other country “from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing or equalling the power of the United States”. It also asserted America’s generalised right to take pre-emptive action in support of that hegemony. The assertion acknowledged no external authority. Instead it required a large military budget — “full spectrum dominance” — because pre-emptive attack needed more power than mere deterrence.
If by " United Nations concept of national sovereignty" he means, well I'm not really sure what he means. I am guessing that he views hawks as respecting nothing but brute strength and force. This is a blatant lie and conveniently ignores the fact that the UN has left its own resolutions unenforced and put itself in the position of being defunct
As for the NSS, well it's not exactly ground-breaking, nor is it some secret hidden document as Jenkins intimates.
The antithesis regards this thesis as dumb. It holds that terrorism is fuelled not by the warrior’s zeal for territory but by a messianic yearning to give a bloody nose to the rich and powerful. Such resentment is encouraged rather than diminished by talk of war. Anti-Western sentiment has long underpinned Third World politics. It will do so as long as wealth coexists with poverty. But the terrorist’s power lies in his capacity not to kill but to incite fear, to play on Western cowardice and paranoia.
Ah, so the initial argument is: you're a poopyhead. Then it is the traditional root causes that poverty is the reason. Conveniently ignoring the well-documented wealth of Al-Quida's founder. Notice what else is missing from the so-called counter argument: any mention of religious fundamentalism/zealots. After all, Osama's biggest problem with the US was its presence in Saudi Arabia, not its place in the world.
This antithesis demands that America make itself loved, not feared. The terrorist should be treated as a criminal. The tank of envy in which he swims should be drained, not filled with the “blood of martyrs”. Americans should show the confidence of the powerful, not the trigger-happy jumpiness of the vulnerable. Westerners may be hurt by al-Qaeda, but the West is not threatened. Those who flaunt their wealth to the world must expect occasional stabs of resentment. So, cries the antithesis, America stay at home. Stop trying to bully the world.
Um, Simon, that was your argument last year. So far there is nothing here that suggests you have changed this view. It's also nice that you've decided that you speak for all.
To thesis and antithesis there must be synthesis. As a “pro-American” I have no objection in principle to the world’s richest, most open and most democratic state seeking the “whole enchilada”, as the Pentagon strategy is dubbed. I would have supported Woodrow Wilson’s similar, albeit abortive, crusade in 1918. Absolute power may corrupt absolutely, but democracy carries its own protection against abuse. Mr Bush’s most cogent critics today are not in Europe but in America. Strategists, diplomats, politicians and commentators seethe with argument and debate. They and public opinion will ultimately decide how big an enchilada Mr Bush consumes.
He's "pro-American"? Well, the good news is he agrees that European criticism is irrelevant to the equation. As for US public opinion, "let's roll."
Meanwhile, synthesis must cling to common sense. It defies common sense now to light a fuse under Islamic militancy with a “pre-emptive war” on Iraq. It defies common sense to incite extremist opposition in Pakistan, Iran and Egypt, on whose Governments the search for al-Qaeda depends. It defies common sense to confuse Saddam and al-Qaeda and link them to every outrage. The Bali bombs could be an Indonesian reaction to Australian action in East Timor. Why glorify al-Qaeda with omnipresence? Common sense would a year ago have built on the outpouring of sympathy for America after September 11. Even Iran, Syria, Libya and the Palestinians offered help to combat the new terrorist curse. To be anti-American was then to be beyond any tolerable pale. September’s “coalition against terror” was genuine. A campaign to isolate al-Qaeda could have been launched across the world, including in Indonesia whose Islamic militants are now on the rampage.
Where have I heard this before? Oh, yes, again from Simon's past pieces
A great assault on Muslim states from the air would be the answer to bin Laden’s prayer. Fanatics would flock to his cause. To many Arabs it would seem to legitimise the Manhattan slaughter. Nato revenge raids would not only lower the West to the same barbarism as was shown by the terrorists. It could hardly be more counter-productive to the anti-terrorist cause.
We're still waiting for this. Do you get the feeling that Simon is having trouble admitting his future views were oh, so slightly off.
The bombs that fell on Kabul wrecked that coalition. The bombs that may again fall on Baghdad will obliterate it. Setting up Osama bin Laden and Saddam, once sworn enemies, as idols of anti-Americanism was strategically reckless. Al-Qaeda was not crushed in Afghanistan. If the Bali bomb was indeed al-Qaeda’s, the organisation has clearly lost none of its ability to reduce Western states and their economies to quivering terror.
Yep, he's still a little bent to be so wrong. But just you wait, history will honor Simon.
The National Security Strategy and Mr Bush’s recent speeches suggest that the war on terrorism and the war on Iraq are now entwined with the thrust for global hegemony. There is a triumphalism to the talk of Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, that is out of character with America’s traditional caution. It is as if Afghanistan were sufficient balm for the wounds of September 11. Now other worlds must be conquered.
Translation: America is being imperialistic. They seek to rule the world.
Britain’s role during such periodic bursts of American imperialism is to be a friendly restraining hand. Yet last week, as al-Qaeda was allegedly planning its Bali massacre, Mr Blair was in Moscow trying to sell his Iraq weapons dossier to Vladimir Putin. At the subsequent press conference Mr Putin’s face said it all: “You can’t possibly believe this stuff, surely?” Mr Blair looked like an antiques dealer caught passing off a Woolworth jug as Ming. What did he think he was doing?
Yeah, gassed Kurds does not mean that Iraq really has chemical weapons.
The Bali bomb is a symptom of anti-Western sentiment, generated not by Osama bin Laden but by the American and British reaction to him, a reaction now shifted to Saddam. America would not be threatening war on Iraq but for September 11 and Mr Blair would not be acting as his salesman. It is bin Laden who has called forth the drums of war. It is bin Laden who has been allowed to set the global agenda for the new century, distracting the world’s attention from peace, poverty, trade, ecology and Aids. How did we come to accord this dreadful man such power?
Remember, this is a "pro-American" who is blaming America for Bali.
I still believe that al-Qaeda should have been treated as common criminals, not set on a plinth as warriors. They should have been depicted as mere gangsters whom every state, even Afghanistan, could be induced to surrender with appropriate inducements. Terrorists should not now be free to turn the tap of anti-Americanism on and off at will. To wage “war on terrorism” in bin Laden’s name may have been justified, even moral. It was stupid.
Wow. Once Simon sets his mind to something, even reality won't let him see it any other way. By the way, what happened to the dialectic he was supposed to present?
The clear danger of hegemony is that it induces such stupidity. Those with absolute power always think they need more, and when they have it they yearn to use it. Sometimes they use it wrongly. Cold war leads to hot and many more people get killed.
And eggs lead to birds which lead to birds shitting on my car. Which makes about as much sense as this article.
Einhorn Update
Closing arguments took place today, with Einhorn's attorney calling the mummified remains of his ex-girlfriend, found in Einhorn's steamer trunk 2 years after she disappeared "just a piece of circumstantial evidence."
Still, there were some new columns looking back at Einhorn's testimony from Tuesday.
They tend to focus on Einhorn reading from his old diaries and his reaction:
Einhorn read the jury various diary entries - penned 25 to 40 years ago - that described his passions, his rejections, and the "red rage" of violence he felt when spurned by lovers.
From the witness stand, Einhorn called his writings "literature."
And as the crush of courtroom spectators rumbled with disbelief, he wiped his eyes when his attorney asked him to read a diary entry from Oct. 5, 1977 - about four weeks after Einhorn says Maddux disappeared, and four weeks after prosecutors contend he beat her to death and stuffed her body in a steamer trunk.
...
Looking up from a thick, yellowed journal, Einhorn rapidly blinked his eyes.
"Talk about Holly eases the pain... . An angel lingers in my mind," Einhorn read aloud, wiping his eyes.
Assistant District Attorney Joel Rosen later told reporters: "I saw him rubbing his eyes and sniffing like he was crying. It was a total act. It was totally phony."
Maddux's sister Meg Wakeman told reporters: "I was a little astonished that he would stoop so very, very low... . It was revolting."
...
Einhorn's emotional moment, like most of his 41/2 hours on the witness stand yesterday, focused on the counterculture leader's daily journals.
In thick, bound volumes, Einhorn filled pages upon pages with his tiny-print handwriting of personal musings, graphic sexual details, and stream-of-consciousness accounts of his activities.
When asked to read portions aloud, Einhorn said he would happily do it and spoke dramatically. He objected when Rosen began reading portions to the jury with improper inflections.
"This is my journal!" Einhorn exclaimed.
"But it's his cross-examination, Mr. Einhorn," Common Pleas Court Judge William J. Mazzola said.
Obviously there wasn't going to be a lot of sympathy for Einhorn, especially here.
The general opinion seems to be that Einhorn is a sure bet to be found guilty, and most see it coming from Einhorn's own words.
In 1979," Ira sighs, "my life was over."
No one sighs with him.
At least no one that I saw in Courtroom 305 in the Criminal Justice Center, where Ira is on trial for Holly's murder. And that includes the jury. By yesterday afternoon - after six hours of Ira on the stand - a few jurors began to stare at Ira as if he were a cockroach that was trying to crawl onto their laps.
Such is the power of his charm.
Is it a surprise that Ira's little tale failed to fly? Not to you and me. But it probably is to Ira.
This guy could give a narcissism a bad name.
My bet is that Ira believed he would get up on the witness stand, dazzle the jury with his brilliance, and be acquitted.
...
"To kill what you love when you can't have it seems so natural... ," Ira wrote in one of his many diaries.
That was about an earlier relationship - he choked that girlfriend. Another he hit over the head with a Coke bottle. "Violence always marks the end of a relationship... ," he wrote about that one.
Rosen produced a number of such diary entries yesterday, handing them to Ira, who obliged by reading them aloud - and often with feeling.
This is called wrapping the noose around your own neck.
Ira was too smart to be tricked for long. This stuff about violence and killing was figures of speech, he said.
"This is literature," Ira harrumphed. "This is metaphorical."
Metaphorical, my patootie.
Just to Pile On
When it comes to the Cincinnati Bengals, well I'm just grateful not to be a fan. 5 Years ago, Sports Illustrated columnist Rick Reilly did a column on what he considered to be the toughest job in sports: being the head of ticket sales for the Florida Marlins on the heels of their fire sale after their World Series championship. This article, though, may top that:
Last Thursday, a man from the Cincinnati Bengals sales department left a message on Jim Achberger's voice mail. Achberger and his brother own six club seats at Paul Brown Stadium, an investment currently as desirable as Enron stock. The Bengals man wanted to know how he could help. Short of abducting the Oakland Raiders and dumping them on the PBS sand, he couldn't. But give him a point for trying.
"Just a courtesy call," he began. "Besides better play on the field, if you have any ideas to improve the club level ..."
Jim Achberger wasn't hearing the rest. His jaw had dropped, smashing the STOP PLAY button on his machine.
Besides better play. That's great.
...
"We haven't responded to this," Jim Achberger said, "because we don't know what to say to this poor guy without making him feel like an idiot."Jim's brother, John, relayed another story, from last Sunday. It seems he saw a fan at a PBS urinal, making animal noises "like he was passing a stone." John Achberger asked the man if he was OK. The Bengals trailed Pittsburgh 31-0 at the time.
"I got 24 club seats," the guy said. "Does that answer your question?"
Jim and John have six clubs, at $1,000 apiece. They run a small company. They've had tickets for 15 years. They love the Bengals. They remember The Jungle. They thought for years that greatness - or at least occasional OK-ness - would return. Now, they've had it. They're passing stones. Figuratively. Just like you.
How could it be better? Besides, of course, better play.
"Free drinks," Jim suggested. "I want to be dead-drunk by halftime."
OK. The team's sales staff is trying. It's not their fault they're selling the pigskin equivalent of Yugo parts. They're doing what they can to ease the pain. It's a measure of the Bengals' top-to-bottom buffoonery that even a well-intended phone call comes off as a comedic act.
It is pathetically funny.
Then just for fun a county commissioner in Cinci wants to have the lease at Paul Brown Stadium redone, arguing the Bengals are in breach of contract for failing to field a competitive team as per the agreement. Sure it's a cheap stunt to get the guy attention and embarrass the Bengals, and it will fail, but it's amusing.
Growing Awareness
Is an interesting thing to watch. This column in the Guardian by Clive James (link via InstaGod) is a great example. He is a semi-admitted Australian "leftist" coming to grips with Bali, and debunking his "own" including an editorial I mentioned earlier (part of a collection of stupidity).
The consensus will die hard in Australia, just as it is dying hard here in Britain. On Monday morning, the Independent carried an editorial headed: "Unless there is more justice in the world, Bali will be repeated." Towards the end of the editorial, it was explained that the chief injustice was "the failure of the US to use its influence to secure a fair settlement between Israelis and Palestinians." I count the editor of the Independent as a friend, so the main reason I hesitate to say that he is out to lunch on this issue is that I was out to dinner with him last night. But after hesitating, say it I must, and add a sharper criticism: that his editorial writer sounds like an unreconstructed Australian intellectual, one who can still believe, even after his prepared text was charred in the nightclub, that the militant fundamentalists are students of history.
But surely the reverse is true: they are students of the opposite of history, which is theocratic fanaticism. Especially, they are dedicated to knowing as little as possible about the history of the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. A typical terrorist expert on the subject believes that Hitler had the right idea, that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a true story, and that the obliteration of the state of Israel is a religious requirement. In furthering that end, the sufferings of the Palestinians are instrumental, and thus better exacerbated than diminished. To the extent that they are concerned with the matter at all, the terrorists epitomise the extremist pressure that had been so sadly effective in ensuring the continued efforts of the Arab states to persuade the Palestinians against accepting any settlement, no matter how good, that recognises Israel's right to exist. But one is free to doubt by now - forced to doubt by now - that Palestine is the main concern.
The main concern of fundamentalist Islam is with moderate Islam, and especially with those Islamic states which, if they have not precisely embraced democracy, have nevertheless tried to banish theocracy from the business of government. That fundamentalism loathes the western democracies goes without saying: or rather, it goes with a lot of saying, at the top of the voice. But the real horror, for the diehard theocrats, is the country with a large number of Muslims that has been infiltrated by the liberal ideas of the west. As a rule of thumb, you can say that the terrorists would like to wreak edifying vengeance on any predominantly Islamic country where you can see even a small part of a woman's face. Starting with Pakistan, you can see more and more of a woman's face as you move east. It was therefore predictable, after September 11, that the terrorists would bend their efforts in the same direction. I only wish that I had predicted it straight away: we would all like to be blessed with as much foresight as hindsight. As things happened, it took me a few days.
He still has a high regard for Pilger and Bob Ellis, so he's not over to the dark side yet, but he is at least showing signs of looking beyond his own little world.
Feeding my old habits
Just encountered a nifty little blog from an "insane SF fan" (science fiction not San Francisco) called Maximum Verbosity.
What he said
Great little piece by Tim Cavanaugh of Reason about reactions from representatives of the "religion of peace" to recent events. The whole short article is great, but here's the concluding paragraph with emaphasis added.
What has taken its place is an increasingly shrill recitation of slights and insults that have supposedly injured the sensibilities of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, al-Jazeera, various university professors, and others. The Rev. Jerry Falwell's new career as an international insult comic creates an easy target for Islam's self-appointed defenders; but the bromides of anti-discrimination are no substitute for actual discussion of some pretty important ideological questions. Not every Cold War leftist was a closet Stalinite, and I'd certainly like to believe that not every Imam is a secret jihadist. Unfortunately, the people who should be persuading me are too busy changing the subject.
Tuesday, October 15, 2002
How Dumb Do They Think People Are
Wow. I didn't think much of the Apple "switch" TV commercials. I mean, I just didn't see how successful it could be (and the background music really annoyed me). Apparently Microsoft did find the ad campaign compelling, because they offered their own version. The trouble is, it was a lie
Microsoft has pulled a phony Mac-to-PC "switch" ad after the switcher was uncovered as a Microsoft PR rep.
Microsoft had posted a breezy advertisement on its website purportedly written by a freelance writer who switched to Windows from the rival Macintosh platform.
The ad echoes Apple's high-profile Switch campaign, which features ordinary people telling why they switched from the PC to the Mac. Apple's ads uses real people, who clearly identify their names and occupations, and speak in their own voices.
Microsoft's ad, on the other hand, did not identify the woman.
She turned out to be an employee at a public relations company hired by Microsoft: Valerie G. Mallinson of Shoreline, Wash.
Whoops.
So how was it discovered. Good, professional investigative reporting? Well, eventually.
Trouble erupted after amateur sleuths at a popular technology website, Slashdot.org, noticed that a photograph showing the woman with a cup of coffee was a stock image available from Getty Images' Photodisk.
Slashdot readers picked out what few personal details they could find hinting at the woman's identity. Unlike the Apple ads, which prominently include customers' names, Microsoft's mentioned only that the author was a 5-foot-3-inch free-lance writer who once rented a Lexus and is married to a man who is 6 feet tall.
Documents accompanying the ad, which encouraged other Windows users to tell Microsoft about their experiences, included references to Mallinson's name, public relations firm, Wes Rataushk & Associates Inc., and personal website.
Then the AP completed it when it "tracked Mallinson by examining personal data embedded in Microsoft Word documents that Microsoft had published with its controversial ad."
According to the article the ad is in the Google cache (direct links in the article).
This is dumb on so many levels. Mac users are legendary for their fanaticism and support. To put out a false ad, is just red meat. Didn't they think that if this wasn't completely truthful, Mac supporters would find every flaw and shred it?
Instead, this will further their delusions of an ongoing conspiracy against Macs.
Bad for Ohio
Great, the state I live in (the physical one, not my mental) has decided that
it will adopt a science curriculum that leaves it up to school districts whether to teach the concept of "intelligent design," which holds that the universe is guided by a higher intelligence.
The board voted unanimously in favor of the standards, which emphasize both evolution and critical analysis of the theory. It will adopt them formally in December.
They've been battling over this for a year, but I never believed it would happen. Not that they are claiming that this is in any way showing support for creationism intelligent design
"In no way does this advocate for creation or intelligent design," said Michael Cochran, a board member who had pushed for the concept to be included in the standards. "I do look upon this as a compromise."
The decision follows weeks of behind-the-scenes talks to reach an agreement with members who wanted alternative theories to evolution to be put of an equal footing with Darwin's theory.
One more reason to get out of Ohio before my daughter hits school age.
UPDATE: Apparently not everyone sees it as a win for intelligent design
Backers of evolution and supporters of the alternative concept "intelligent design" said the recommended standards provide depth for Ohio's 1.8 million public school students to critically analyze all scientific theories.
Both also say the guidelines support their point of view.
"We won big time here. The creationists have lost. There is more evolution in the standards now than there would have been had they kept their mouths shut," said Patricia Princehouse, a philosophy professor at Case Western Reserve University and founder of Ohio Citizens for Science, a pro-evolution group.
The Speculation First
The Ira Einhorn murder trial is creating an amusing sideshow for a grisly, 25-year old murder case. Philadelphia Daily News Columnist Theresa Conroy has her own questions for Ira.
Ira Einhorn, the city's most infamous blowhard, is expected to take the stand today to explain how his girlfriend's mummified body ended up in a trunk in his closet.
The self-proclaimed "planetary enzyme" probably will continue blaming Holly Maddux's murder on the CIA, the FBI or the KGB.
...
Trying to poke holes in his credibility will be prosecutor Joel Rosen, who has waited a decade to cross-exmaine Einhorn. He probably doesn't need our help, but we wanted to offer the prosecutor our most pressing questions for the old hippie.
• Where were you on the night of Sept. 11, 1977?
• Hey, whatever happened to Peter Gabriel and Ellen Burstyn testifying for you?
• You didn't have one thing to do with organizing Earth Day, did you?
• Come on, tell us: How did you get all those women to sleep with you?
Finally, the Man, the Guru, the Psychic Warrior Testifies
Kicking it up a notch with Ira himself taking the stand
Ira Einhorn testified under oath about their often-troubled relationship, giving his version of what happened on the day she vanished.
"There were loving times and happy times," Einhorn, 62, said from the witness stand in the 11th day of his murder trial. "But I was not a monogamous man, and she had increasing difficulties with that."
As their five-year relationship progressed, he said, she became increasingly dissatisfied with his promiscuity.
"I think we loved each other very much, but I think we had a difficult time creating a context where that love could flower," Einhorn said, prompting snickers from the packed Common Pleas courtroom audience.
At least the snickers didn't come from the jurors.
Einhorn, who was on the stand for more than two hours answering questions from defense attorney William Cannon, insisted that he did not kill the 30-year-old Texan, nor was he ever violent with her.
Family and friends never saw or heard from Maddux after Sept. 10 or 11, 1977. Her mummified body was found 18 months later, locked inside a steamer trunk in Einhorn's apartment in West Philadelphia.
Einhorn did not offer his theories that her body was planted - possibly by government agents - inside his apartment.
Probably a good strategy given juror reaction to the defense witnesses who advanced this and similar notions.
Einhorn took credit for the first Earth Day and said he played a role in the creation of the federal Environmental Protection Agency. Einhorn discussed his antiwar and civil-rights activism. He also mentioned his interest in physics and what he called "psychotronic" mind-control weaponry.
But when Assistant District Attorney Joel Rosen repeatedly objected to some of Einhorn's lengthy monologues, the former counterculture leader flushed at the prosecutor's interruptions.
I'm sure there are plenty who would like to see him pay for those roles.
Here's one reporter's take on his testimony:
WE WAITED 23 years to hear Ira Einhorn's side of the story. Now we can't wait for him to shut up.
...
He bragged that he was "leader of a community that didn't exist yet." He even falsely claimed to have been on the Earth Day committee and being partially responsible for creating the Environmental Protection Agency.
And, in case you were wondering, Einhorn revealed, "I have a Virgo moon."
Ouch.
Then came the cross-examination.
In nearly three hours of cross examination, former hippie Ira Einhorn testified today that he was not upset that Holly Maddux was moving out of his apartment for her own place in September 1977.
"Holly did not leave me. We made a mutual decision," Einhorn, 62, said, adding that the two had planned to remain lovers. He said that he was not extremely upset about their changing relationship.
But Assistant District Attorney Joel Rosen led Einhorn through a series of diary entries the counterculture leader wrote in the days before the 30-year-old Maddux vanished.
"I feel so rejected and lost," Einhorn wrote on Aug. 21, 1977. In following days, he wrote of deep frustration, hurt and jealousy sparked by her new love affair with a man she met on New York's Fire Island.
Damn paper trails will get you every time. Then there's the famous steamer trunk.
Einhorn testified today that he used the steamer trunk to store important papers detailing "new types of weaponry." He said the last time he added documents to it was most likely in the fall of 1978 - or a full year after prosecutors say Maddux was killed.
Prosecutors say no such papers were found when police discovered the trunk in Einhorn's apartment in 1979 and opened it to find Maddux's body.
More from his psychic warfare files, I guess.
It's All About the Customer, Really
From the getting a clue department for AOL (subscr. req'd):
America Online Inc. said it will no longer accept pop-up advertising on its flagship Internet offering. The announcement coincided with the launch of the latest version of the service.
"This new policy will contribute to our most important goal -- a better member experience," said Jon Miller, America Online's chairman and chief executive. "The most important thing we offer advertisers is the chance to be part of a service that consumers love, and we've determined that pop-ups aren't the best way to do that."
You think? Don't get too excited AOL users, because
Members won't see an immediate change in their service because the company must work through an inventory of promotions it has already committed to run. America Online also said it will continue to use pop-ups to notify members about key features on the service, and on a limited basis, to make special offers from parent company AOL Time Warner Inc.
Joy.
A Director Who At Least Partially Gets It
Steven Spielberg was soundly mocked (even by South Park, Episode 609), and deservedly so, for his re-release of E.T. that removed all guns and replaced them with walkie-talkies. Well, in the DVD release of E.T. he is including both the original and the "enhanced" version in the package.
"My intention was never to replace the original film," Spielberg said in a statement released Monday. "When people buy 'E.T.' I want them to know they have the original movie, not just for collectors and aficionados, but for everybody who remembers it and wants to continue remembering it just that way."
Bravo, Mr. Spielberg, bravo. Now, someone go show this to George Lucas.
World Series Storylines
So it is a California series. The Giants and the Angels. The Giants advance after knocking off St. Louis in 5. Plenty to second guess LaRussa in the 8th and 9th innings which I may do later today if I have time. For now, a look at the probable world series stories. My prediction on the stories that will be flogged to death in the days leading up to and throughout the World Series, and then some of the stories that should be covered, but will be ignored or given the short shrift.
Stories that you will be hearing/seeing to no end, along with some stock portions:
-- An all Wild Card World Series
-- All-California WS; last time was '89, the Bay Area WS between the Giants and the A's; lots and lots of replays of the earthquake moment.
-- Rally Monkey; beat it into the ground some more, please, and stupid David Eckstein is the Rally Monkey jokes, leading to:
-- David Eckstein, the team "spark-plug"; (I am a huge Eckstein fan, the kid is scrappy, fun to watch, only a hair taller than me, everything I dreamed of being before my complete lack of coordination caught up with me but) trust me given the way Fox sports and Tim McCarver covers these things it will be completely overblown.
-- Barry Bonds; best player since..., ever?; his postseason "failures"; can he put the ghost of Sid Bream to rest?; will he be like Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, Walter Johnson and so many other all-time great players who will never win a Championship?; Barry Bonds, period.
-- The genius of Dusty Baker and will he leave the Giants after this season (quick answer, No); the way he handles the players and Bonds
-- The gritty, scrappy, never-say-die Angels
-- Angels' set-up reliever Francisco Rodriguez (but missing the better questions of is this a situation of where Rodriguez will assume the closer role from Percival next year the same way the Yankees did it with Mariano Rivera taking over from John Wettland after '96)
-- The Giants (the team with the greatest player in the last 40 years, possibly longer or ever [Bonds], one bona fide all-star player [Kent] and others [Aurilia, Snow, Santiago, Sanders, Bell, Lofton -- older, average players at best] versus the Angels (a team without a dominating player [Anderson is either having a breakout year or is this year's Brady Anderson, Salmon and Erstad have never been consistently great players, and Glaus, who they will conveniently ignore)
-- The Angels in 1986
The better stories that will not be seen or discussed the way they should:
-- How Pac-Bell Park was privately funded (except for the land) - the story MLB, NFL, NHL, and NBA don't want told - considered the nicest and best (or at least top 3) of the new generation of ball parks, this stadium isn't a tax-payer drain
-- Who thought putting a rock pile with a fountain out in left-center field at the Ed was a good idea?
-- The jobs done by the GMs and scouting departments on both teams; for the last few years in the postseason there has been continual raving about Brian Cashman and Billy Beane, the Yankees and A's GMs. Cashman because of working for Steinbrenner, the continual run of excellence by the Yankees, the money spent and getting such good players to fit while still keeping and developing homegrown talent. Beane for the development of great players and the budget constraints. Well, the job by Sabean in keeping the Giants as contenders for the last 5 years despite a (somewhat above) middle level payroll that has a large chunk going to Bonds and a few others is remarkable. He definitely deserves a lot of respect. Stoneman and the Angels scouting should get a lot of coverage, for hiring the manager, Mike Scioscia, to finding the pieces for this team at a mid-level payroll. There have been a lot of questions about Stoneman as a GM, but he sure looks good right now.
-- Troy Glaus, as maybe the best 3d baseman in the game today, potential to rival Mike Schmidt; does the increase in offense skew the numbers?
-- The similarity in closers - Nen and Percival; both have done the job for a number of years but neither is truly dominating; their tendencies to make their teammates and fans unsure of the outcome even when they come in to close.
-- What does Mike Scioscia do that makes this team play so well? There will be plenty of superficial coverage of the job he did for this team, but I still don't see any good explanation as to the how or why?
-- Why won't the Giants let the A's move from Oakland to San Jose, i.e., actually move further away (the answer is money, but I'd like to see them spin it)
-- The Giants have never won a world series since they moved to SF. (there was a classic Peanuts where Charlie Brown abruptly cried out "Why couldn't Willie McCovey have hit the ball 2 inches higher?")
-- Is the Wild Card a good thing? Neither team was even the best team in their division. Doesn't this start to reduce the importance of the regular season?
Okay the last one was mine. I have already admitted that I don't like the Wild Card and was rooting against the Wild Card teams based on that. Now I have no choice. I think I have to go with the Angels. They make the game so much fun to watch.
Monday, October 14, 2002
Have you liked any?
If Peter Bagge ever started went back to writing and drawing "Hate!" or any other comic on a regular basis, once again I'd probably end up with the comic book monkey on my back. As it is, I just pick up his annuals, which collect these little gems. Of course his admission that he has never held any US President in high esteem in his lifetime reminded me about something I had discussed with a friend a while back.
Has there ever been a US Attorney General you ever liked? Obviously we had been discussing Ashcroft.
I'm 33. The first AG I ever became aware of was Ed Meese in 1985, by virtue of the "Meese Commission." Hated that prude, treating Playboy as porn and just trying to eliminate all signs porn everywhere. To a teenage boy, it is assumed there is a special place in hell waiting for this kind of freak.
Then Dick Thornburgh -- jerk
William Barr -- not around long enough to have a real strong feeling, but I didn't like him.
Janet Reno -- puh-lease.
That brings us to John Ashcroft. You have got to be kidding.
I know that part of it is the job. As the "top cop" the AG is always trying to find ways to get criminals and wants to make it as easy as possible -- hence the problem with that whole Bill of Rights thing. Still, they always seem to get too wrapped up in less important stuff. Soft core porn; low level drug busts and the whole drug war; and trying to skip due process, search and seizure, warrantless searches, and those "damn legal technicalities."
Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees
An article from the Guardian (of course) that seems to have all the elements there for realizing why Islamofascism needs to be fought. The dots, however never get connected.
The dollars which pour into Bali make it the jewel in Indonesia's tourism crown. Its status is akin to one of China's special economic zones, a place where the normal rules are bent and broken. During Indonesia's periodic outbreaks of unrest, consular advice for tourists traditionally exempts the island from the warnings which apply elsewhere in Indonesia.
In 1999, when Australian support for East Timorese independence caused a chilling of relations between Jakarta and Canberra, only Bali seemed immune from the tourist drought. Part of this comes down to the island's unique culture, a blend of Hinduism and animism which visitors regard as more tolerant than the Islam practiced in the rest of Indonesia.
The island is home to what are probably Indonesia's only openly gay bars. Topless bathing, which is regarded with extreme disapproval in most of the rest of Indonesia, is also tolerated by the Balinese.
...
Until now, Bali had managed to keep this paradise island status pristine, despite Indonesia's economic collapse and the growth of religious, ethnic and separatist violence in the archipelago. The Indonesian government regards the island's tourist industry as a cash cow, and has been care ful to keep it free of the strife which has affected other parts of the country.
But it sits in the middle of a ring of violence. Thousands fled the neighbouring resort island of Lombok in 2000, when Muslim mobs looted and burned Christian, Hindu and Chinese houses in the capital Mataram. The province of East Java to Bali's west has also been rocked by periodic rioting against the region's Chinese minority.
In both cases, Bali was the first refuge for people fleeing the violence. It has become known as a safe port in the storms which have torn through Indonesian society since 1997 - a happy reputation which has now been irreparably damaged.
...
· Most of Bali's 3 million people are Hindu; the rest of Indonesia's 207 million population are predominantly Muslim. In urban centres, there are small Indian, Arab, and ethnic Chinese communities. Bali has a relaxed culture, which unlike many other parts of Indonesia is tolerant of alcohol and western-style nightlife
Emphasis added.
So a an island that is a tourism cash cow that even the Indonesian government tries to protect from the Islamists, while it turns a blind eye to their actions elsewhere in the country; that is one of the only pockets where there is very little Muslim presence; a place where non-Muslims have fled to when being attacked -- is now a target.
The problem is, "peace at all cost" leftists don't see that. Instead they see things like root causes where " Unless there is more justice in the world, Bali will be repeated" (and they don't mean catching and killing the bastards who did this)
Apart from the obvious response of taking precautions and of trying to bring terrorists to justice, the real issue is how to deal with the underlying causes. Of course, this is not easy; it may not even be possible. It may be that there will always be enough people in the world with irrational beliefs about the wickednesses of others to want to kill them at random.
But some of the pool of grievances on which al-Qa'ida draws are real injustices – in particular the failure of the US to use its influence to secure a fair settlement between Israelis and Palestinians. These injustices ought to be resolved anyway, but resolving them may well reduce the supply of potential martyrs to murderous causes.
Reading shit like that makes me sick to my stomach. Of course it can only be worse if I read Fisk, without taking a good antidote (anti-Fisk? a fisking Fisk).
Of course, America must be blamed for Bali. America screwed up, is this call.
For months, while their political masters have been increasingly obsessed by Saddam Hussein, western intelligence agencies have warned of planned terrorist attacks by al-Qaida or, more likely, other Islamist extremist groups with similar objectives and outlook.
They have warned in particular about the likelihood of attacks on such American and British targets as bases and embassies - targets, in other words, which represent the governmental, military, presence of major western countries in the Muslim world. Commercial targets, equally symbolic, were also in their sight.
The awful message of the bombing of the Bali nightclub is that Islamist extremists appear to have changed their tactics with horrific implications. Bali may be a Hindu region dominated by western tourists in the world's largest Muslim country, but the nightclub was the easiest and softest of targets.
What? The warnings have been made. This idiot even concedes that, but somehow it is the US's fault that Islamists in Indonesia attacked vacationing westerners in a resort/club in Indonesia. All because there is a focus on taking out Iraq's fat man, leading other sovereign countries that have known of their Islamists and turned a blind eye to continue to do so.
So, what Richard Norton-Taylor wants the US to do is to tell the non-western countries what they should be doing. Wait, that's imperialistic and doesn't respect national sovereignty.
So, the US should leave other countries alone to do what they think is best. No, wait that's isolationism, and puts innocents at risk.
Well, maybe there should be a new UN Commission to look into this and issue its report. Maybe the UN Commission on Human Rights could look into it, with its members like Libya, Zimbabwe, and... No. Never mind.
I got it, let's blame it on the Israelis.
Sorry to Nitpick
I really shouldn't bother pointing this out considering the context of the photo relating to bombing in Bali (and hopefully this will be corrected soon!), but this grammar error in the caption is inexcusable -- especially in the NYTimes.
Women lighted candles today in Kuta, Bali, in memory of friends who died in Saturday's bomb explosion at a popular night club.
It showed up on the front page of the NYTimes Website under the photo and if you enlarge the photo you get the same incorrect caption. It is, however correct under the photo in the actual story.
Totally Commercialized
The family spent part of the afternoon at a Barnes & Noble yesterday. With a 4 month old and the weather getting cold, there isn't a lot you can do, but we really needed to get out of the house. Tons of calendars were on display, including the box calendars.
Then I saw this:
Michael Moore's 2003 Stupid White Men Boxed Calendar .
Has the man no shame? Is nothing safe from his crass commercialism? Must everything be about making money for Michael Moore?
It's Not His Fault He's a Moron
Jerry Falwell, after causing a riot in India, and once again being decried as a bigot and an idiot -- really, it's the only way he gets any media attention anymore -- has apologized. Sort of.
On Saturday, Falwell issued a "statement of reconciliation."
"I sincerely apologize that certain statements of mine made during an interview for the September 30 edition of CBS's `60 Minutes' were hurtful to the feelings of many Muslims," Falwell said.
He said he made the remarks in response to "one controversial and loaded question" at the end of an hourlong interview.
"That was a mistake and I apologize," Falwell said.
It's not Jerry's fault. It was the reporter's fault for asking a question in an interview. What was the question?
Falwell believes most Muslims want to live in peace but, he says, the lines have been drawn. Christians and Jews are on one side, Muslims on the other and, he says, those lines were drawn more than a thousand years ago.
“You wrote an approving piece recently about a book called ‘Unveiling Islam,’” Simon said to Falwell. “And you — the authors of that book wrote, ‘The Muslim who commits acts of violence in jihad does so with the approval of Mohammed.’ Do you believe that?
“I do,” Falwell answered. “I think Mohammed was a terrorist. He - I read enough of the history of his life written by both Muslims and – and - non-Muslims, that he was a - a violent man, a man of war.”
“So, in the same way that Moses provided the ultimate example for the Jews and same way that Jesus provided the ultimate example for Christians, Mohammed provided the ultimate example for Muslims and he was a terrorist?” Simon responded.
“In my opinion,” Falwell answered. “And I do believe that - Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. And I think that Mohammed set an opposite example.”
Damn sneaky.
Of course, you can count on at least one cleric in Iran to help make the moron's case for him.
In the meantime, Shiite Muslim clerics in Lebanon and Iran have reacted with rage to an American clergyman calling Islam's prophet a "terrorist," and an envoy of Iran's supreme leader called for his death.
Iranian cleric Mohsen Mojtahed Shabestari, addressing weekly Friday prayers in the northwestern town of Tabriz, said the Rev. Jerry Falwell was a "mercenary and must be killed," the Farsi-language daily Abrar reported Saturday.
"The death of that man is a religious duty, but his case should not be tied to the Christian community," Shabestari, a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted as saying.
The sad thing is, most of the time these days, the Shiites seem moderate compared to the Wahibbists.
|
|
