Anti-Terrorism

So the bad news is that London increasingly seems to be under seige by Islamic terrorists. The good news is that their latest attempts haven't been successful. Three cheers to the brave London policemen who killed the latest attempted bomber! The story indicates that they shot him at extremely close range - it takes a lot of balls to get that close to a man with explosives strapped to him. Not to mention the good police-work of identifying him in the first place.

UPDATE: So it now appears that the police killed a completely innocent man. That means that pretty much everything I said above is incorrect - they actually did a poor job identifying the man and shot him without any real evidence that he was up to anything illegal.

Here's to hoping that the police take steps to prevent this sort of tragedy from occurring again.

Scotty!

Sad news - James Doohan, Star Trek's Scotty, passed away today.

Doohan was an impressive man off-screen. I already knew about his WWII service, but it's worth repeating:

At 19, James escaped the turmoil at home by joining the Canadian army, becoming a lieutenant in artillery. He was among the Canadian forces that landed on Juno Beach on D-Day. "The sea was rough," he recalled. "We were more afraid of drowning than the Germans."

The Canadians crossed a minefield laid for tanks; the soldiers weren't heavy enough to detonate the bombs. At 11:30 that night, he was machine-gunned, taking six hits: one that took off his middle right finger (he managed to hide the missing finger on screen), four in his leg and one in the chest. The chest bullet was stopped by his silver cigarette case.

I didn't already know that his, ahem, child-producing skills were likewise impressive:

Doohan's first marriage to Judy Doohan produced four children. He had two children by his second marriage to Anita Yagel. Both marriages ended in divorce. In 1974 he married Wende Braunberger, and their children were Eric, Thomas and Sarah, who was born in 2000, when Doohan was 80.

Dr. Roberts, J.D.

So, from what I've read so far, the President's nomination of John Roberts to the the Supreme Court appears to be the most sensible pick we could hope for. I have to say that I'm surprised and relieved. It looks like the Democrats' tenacity in fighting judicial nominees may have paid off big time.

Of course, to be safe, let me note that I'm reserving final judgment for now.

Mine's Not A High Horse (Anymore)

So you may remember a post of mine from a long, long time ago about how, since I'm an atheist, I don't like being pressured into participating in religious activities, and how I'll try very hard to avoid doing so. How hard? Well, judging by this past weekend, not very.

My grandmother was being honored upon her retirement for her 25 years of service to the Synagogue where she worked. This involved a kiddush luncheon and also several mentions of her in the service, including the participation of her, her daughters, and (you guessed it!) her grandsons.

So my brother, two cousins, and I got to go up and dress the Torah (I'm sure that's not what it's called, but it's an accurate description), each of us decked out in a yarmulke and tallit. Four non-Bar Mitvah'd Jewish boys faking it (and not very convincingly). Did I feel like a fraud? Yes. Did my grandma just about plotz (explode)? You betcha. And in the end, that's why I don't really feel bad about it.

The worst part of the service, actually, came when the cantor paraded the Torah around the sanctuary before placing it back in the ark. He stopped briefly at each row and the congregants reached out to touch the Torah. When he got to me, I stood stock-still for what seemed like an eternity, with the cantor glaring at me, before he moved on. Thing is, the adulation people were showing for the Torah just seemed inappropriate (isn't idolatry, like, totally forbidden in the Ten Commandments?). I mean, I'm no Talmudic scholar or nothing, but I totally was not buying the argument in the English-language section of the prayer book that this sort of thing was different from idol-worship. I can understand considering holy the words in the Torah, but not the book itself.

Finally, I have to say that I kinda enjoyed the sermon (or whatever you call it) that the Rabbi gave. Partly, it was because the Rabbi emphasized that the Torah is not to be understood literally, something that I think a lot of people seem to forget nowadays. Secondly, I actually kind of enjoy all of those Mosiac stories. Maybe it's just because they resemble history (and, in fact, may actually be history, albeit with some, uh let's say, embellishments).

All You Need is Rove

I don't have a lot to add to the whole Valerie Plame thing. Karl Rove should resign or be fired, but I doubt that will happen. It's extremely doubtful that his leak was an accident, and it certainly wasn't done for the greater good. But Bush will probably keep him anyway.

But one thing that continues to puzzle me is the whole controversy over Time magazine handing over Matt Cooper's notes. Time had to choose between the law and the principle of maintaining confidentiality. Jacob Weisberg does a very good job in this article defending Time's decision, because, with all due respect to Judy Miller and the New York Times, there's no such thing as a right to maintain confidential sources, at least not at the federal level. And the reason is to avoid cases like this, where confidentiality aided in the comission of a crime. So there's not really a choice here, unless journalists think that they're above the law. But frankly, that's a really bad precedent to be setting. How, then, do you decide who's a "journalist"? And how do you prevent other professions from claiming similar rights?

Judging Non-Judgmentalism

One of the things that bothered me so much about the period right after 9/11 is how often you heard someone on the left say "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" or some such thing. They said it as if it were a profound thought. But really, it was a cliché standing in for a failure to make a moral judgment. Yes, yes, "judge not ...," but failure is the right word. What sort of world would we live in were we all to abdicate the responsibility to tell the difference between right and wrong?

I bring this up because following the bombing in London, we've been hearing some of the same moral abdication from the left again. See this post for some examples. What make this so abhorrent is that these same leftists who are too sophisticated to judge terrorists have no such problem when it comes to Wal-Mart, Karl Rove, or Imperialism. So then, either they just don't think terrorism is that big of a deal, or they don't think it's wrong. Either way, that's a huge blindspot, and a big part of the reason that Kerry lost the election.

On a related note, apparently Oliver Stone is directing a movie about 9/11. That this is a terrible idea almost goes without saying, but if you're not convinced, read this.

Lawnmower Update

Oh, so it turns out that I'm not incompetent. The lawnmower engine was defective - it wasn't pulling gas from the tank. So it would start when primed but wouldn't keep going. My father-in-law and I returned the mower to Sears and got a replacement on Sunday.

Score one for the city boy.

Public Prayer

So Annie and I were having a very nice time at her aunt and uncle's 4th of July party when it suddenly came time to say grace before dinner. The 50 or so people gathered around the pool and took hands and her uncle said some things.

Annie and I, both being atheists, decided to stay inside and not participate. I, in particular, think that it's disrespectful to participate in religious ceremonies if you are an unbeliever, so when I do have to I make sure to neither actively participate nor be disruptive. For instance, at a church wedding, funeral, or baptism, I'll bow my head, but I won't repeat the prayers or even say "Amen." After all, I'm pretty sure that if God does exist, he doesn't want me faking it.

Anyway, after the prayer had started, our absence must have been noticed, and so Annie's dad came inside and pretty much told us that we were being rude by not participating. Not wanting to cause a scene, we sheepishly went outside and took our place in the circle, with 100 eyes trained on us. The prayer then continued and concluded by singing "God Bless America." Annie and I pretended to sing along. Annie and I both felt sufficiently chastened that the remainder of the evening was marred.

This sort of thing is exactly why I absolutely abhor the idea of government sponsored prayer. Look at what happens when peer pressure is brought to bear against unbelievers. Imagine the greater coercion and imposition on free-will if the pressure is exerted by government.

But I'm also confused, frankly. Why is it that Christians often want to compel the participation of unbelievers or heretics? I mean, isn't part of the point of Christianity that you freely except it and embrace Jesus Christ as your savior? Someone who has been coerced into participating isn't exactly letting Jesus into his heart, now is he?

Maybe this just can't except the idea that someone sincerely does not believe, and that such a belief can be as sincere as that of someone who does believe. Maybe they think of the prayer as a communal, not a religious, activity. But then why must it have religious content?

I truly don't have the answers to these questions. I can only hope that people of faith can come to respect those of us who live moral lives, but do not abide by any particular creed.

SCOTUS

So Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring, paving way for the President to nominate someone who's idea of the perfect social order is Alabama, circa 1950. The Senate will then descend into the chaos (remember that judicial compromise? - out the window). Democrats will try to block the nomination by any means necessary. Frist will scream "obstruction" (how dare the opposition party disagree with the majority!) and threaten to go nuclear. In the end, Bush will likely win and get his social ultra-conservative. Girls in Mississippi will have to start driving to Illinois for their abortions.

But amid all of this doomsaying, I think that we liberals ought to focus on some very important. What's that, you ask? Blame. In other words, who's fault is this mess? Oh, I'm sure there are lots of candidates - Tom Daschle and John Kerry, for being lousy leaders; James Dobson and Ralph Reed, for being such social neanderthals; President Bush, for tricking us all into believing in 2000 that he was a moderate.

But the real blame in my book has to go to Ralph Nader. Remember? The asshole who cost Al Gore the election? Yeah, without him, Gore would be President, and we could look forward to a nice moderate liberal to replace O'Connor, a nice moderate conservative.

Oh, you might say, Nader's hardly the real culprit here, and besides you're just kicking a guy who's already down. To which I answer, maybe and sure, but so what?, respectively. Progressives decided in 2000 that Clinton and Gore were some sort of crazed arch-conservatives in disguise, rather than the best liberal leaders since JFK. So they deliberately torpedoed Gore in order to get Bush in 2000, and then hopefully a "real" progressive in 2004. But it all failed miserably.

So now we just have to sit and wait for Bush to nominate his ultra and wait for the fireworks to begin.

Exam, Part 2

So I got back my exam that I took on Tuesday, and as I thought, I got 41 out of 50, a low B. However, everyone found the test hard, and so the the highest grade was a 45, and the professor grades on a curve. Plus, she decided one of the questions was vague, and so adjusted the scores of those who got it wrong.

In the end, then, I got a 42 out of 45 - 93%. So now I'm no longer worried about getting an A overall. And next week I only have two nights of class - Monday is a holiday and Thursday I have a flight to catch. These two things combined mean that I can relax and not worry about school this weekend.

The 'Burbs

So I just had my first Dammit, I'm a City Kid! moment here in sunny suburbia.

You see, growing up we never had a lawn. Well, we did, but it was about 2' x 6', literally. So that didn't exactly require a lawn mower. Mostly, our neighbor who was a professional gardener just weed-wacked it from time to time.

Anyway, this evening I got out of class early (the professor decided that we were ahead of schedule, so he skipped the lecture and just gave us the quiz - awesome!), so I came home and decided to be productive by mowing the lawn. So I got out of my work clothes, dragged the mower out of the garage, and then, in full view of the neighbor lady who was outside on the phone, proceeded to have trouble starting the damn thing. Mildly embarassed, I gave it a couple I'll-pretend-I-know-anything-about-engines once-over and then tried again.

Nothing.

Okay, so now I wheeled the thing out of her view, and proceeded to check the oil. It was fine. Then I checked the gasoline. Hmm, I thought, gasoline doesn't normally have tiny little bubbles in it. That most be what they're talking about when they say don't use stale gas. So I went back to the garage, got the gas can, and proceeded to pour in new gas. I then promptly overfilled the tank and spilled gas on the mower. Dammit. That's okay, cause gasoline evaporates quickly.

So I screwed the gas cap back on tightly, and decided to wait a few minutes. Well, while I'm waiting, how about I check the underside of the mower, just in case something is stuck in the blade? So I tilted the mower over, and cleaned out some clumps of grass. Excellent. Now, let's turn her back over. Oh shit! Gas has now spilled out of the overfilled (remember?) tank. It's all over the engine and there's a puddle on the ground.

So at this point, I figured I ought to get the hose and dilute the spilled gas on the ground. But, trying to play it cool, I decided to water the petunias, rain lillies, and boxwood bushes. That done, I sprayed down the driveway to dilute the spilled gas (which has mostly evaporated already). Down the drain (and into Lake Michigan!) went the last of the gasoline.

Now I looked at the mower. The gas on the engine appeared to be evaporated. But it still smelled of gas. Dare I start it and risk igniting the entire damn thing? I hemmed and hawed for several minutes, crouching thoughtfully by the mower, trying hard to look like I knew what I was doing. Finally, I decided to just chicken out.

Defeated, I went inside to burn some CDs and write this post. The computer! There's a machine I know how to use.

Exam

So I had an Exam in my Civil Procedure class last night. The teacher told us beforehand that it was going to be 50 questions, mixed true/false and multiple choice, and that it would only take about 30 minutes. So I totally wasn't worried about it, even though it covered 7 chapters. After all, how hard could a 30 minute test be?

Well, I'm not going to say it was really hard, but I should have studied much better. There were at least a dozen questions that I really wasn't sure about, and when I checked some of them later in the book, I realized I had missed most of them. So I think I'll be lucky if I end up with a B on this test. Which sucks, because the percentage of my tuition that my employer reimburses is tied to my grade, and we only have two more tests. So I'm thinking that I pretty much have to ace them to get an A in the class (and get 100% of my money back).

Things that Suck

1. Karl Rove
2. The Kelo Decision
3. Torture
4. The War
5. John Bolton

You know those surveys where they ask "Do you think that overall the country is heading in the right direction?" I never know how to answer, because it's a ridiculously broad question. But this week, I have no such reservations. Things are looking pretty bad on the political front.

1. So Karl Rove thinks all liberals are sissy traitors, huh? And the White House is standing behind his comments? Well, with all due respect, fuck you Mr. Rove, and fuck you, too, Mr. Bush.

For the last week, we've been told that Senator Durbin's comments comparing American torture with that practiced by totalitarian regimes was so beyond the pale that the Senator should be forced to walk on his knees five miles across broken glass before apologizing to every member of the armed forces personally. But Karl Rove's comment? Perfectly acceptable. The White House finds it "puzzling" that anyone would object.

Fuck that. As a liberal who most certainly does not think that terrorists need therapy (they need a bullet in the brain or a 500-pound bomb in the gut) I want a personal apology from Rove. What's say, Karl? Are you man enough to admit your error?

2. The Supreme Court thinks it's okay for private property to be seized by eminent domain and given to other private citizens/corporations? Wait, when did this become a communist country? I thought our system was supposed to be based on individual property rights. But I guess the 4 liberal justices + 1 proved me wrong.

Well, guess what? When Walmart comes for my house, I'm coming for yours, Justices Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Souter.

3. This hasn't really been much in the news recently, but y'know, aren't we still torturing/murdering inmates and not really coming clean on it?

Are we going to start acting like a civilized country any time soon, or is it anything goes?

4. Oh, and remember that war in Iraq thing? It's still going on. And we're not winning. And the President doesn't really seem terribly concerned.

I mean, it's been over two years now, and there's no end in sight. The solution? More of the same. Here's a different idea - how about anything else? More troops might be a good place to start. But that would require admitting error, and that seems unlikely (see number 1).

5. Can we drop the fiction that John Bolton is going to walk into the U.N. and magically the place will start working perfectly? That's the best argument conservatives have come up with for why an untrustworthy, incompetent, undiplomatic (more precisely, anti-diplomatic) bully should become ambassador the United Nations, but it's complete hogwash. If confirmed, Bolton will instantly become the least popular guy at the U.N., meaning that he will accomplish zero. I agree that the U.N. needs reforming, but this isn't the way to do it.

Pot Kettle Black

Okay, I'm not a big fan of Howard Dean, but this comment by Dick Cheney struck me as utterly absurd:

I've never been able to understand his appeal. Maybe his mother loved him, but I've never met anybody who does.

This from a man who'd kill and eat Santa Claus if the Energy Industry told him it would increase profits.

Cardinal Sin

Cardinal Jaime Sin. Good man. Unfortunate name.

Sin had a sense of humor about his name, often referring to his residence as "the house of Sin."

Ancient Civilizations

As a follow-up to yesterday's post, there is this recent article on what appears to be the oldest known civilization in European yet uncovered by archaeologists:

Archaeologists have discovered Europe's oldest civilisation, a network of dozens
of temples, 2,000 years older than Stonehenge and the Pyramids.

More than 150 gigantic monuments have been located beneath the fields and
cities of modern-day Germany, Austria and Slovakia. They were built 7,000 years
ago, between 4800BC and 4600BC. Their discovery, revealed today by The
Independent, will revolutionise the study of prehistoric Europe, where an
appetite for monumental architecture was thought to have developed later than
in Mesopotamia and Egypt.

To continue on yesterday's theme, I find it fascinating that one of the first things ancient civilizations from all parts of the world did was built huge temples and shrines - that there was, as they say, "an appetite for monumental architecture." I guess the urge to build huge monuments has always been there, just because. And to this day, we carve faces in mountains, construct massive dams, and build 1,776 ft. tall buildings. But in doing so, we're not really besting our ancestors, but emulating them with ever more sophisticated techniques.

Just one more piece of evidence that humans across all cultures are really more alike than different.

This Is Neat

I saw this story in today's San Francisco Chronicle online:

Until now, few scientists have dared to speculate that the ancient Polynesians visited Southern California between 500 and 700 A.D., that is to say, in the centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. This is known as the "transpacific diffusion" hypothesis.

I find theories like this to be really cool. Not because I want to prove that "the man" has been hiding information about the achievements of minorities or something, but because the idea that technologically primitive people in the past were still incredibly smart, resourceful, and brave. Most people wouldn't travel across the ocean in a canoe nowadays with a GPS guidance system, but here's evidence that a number of people made the trip roughly 1500 years ago, presumbably with only the stars to guide them. That's impressive. And every time I hear about one of these fantastic trips in the ancient or medieval world - Chinese ships circumnavigating the world, Basques fishing off of Canada, Roman legionnaries fighting in China - I find it fascinating, even if I know that some of the stories might turn out to be unfounded.

Ryan Adams is Crazy

So, this is a tardy follow-up to my previous post about Jeff Tweedy. As you'll remember, I was worried that Tweedy was too happy, sober, and stable to keep making good music.

Somehow, judging from this picture of his latest Letterman appearance, I don't think I have to worry about that problem with Ryan Adams:

Summertime Blues

Ugh.

I'm taking two classes in summer school, which means for the next 7 weeks, I'm going to have 8 hours of work and 3 1/2 hours of school Monday-Thursday, plus of course, work on Friday. And then there's reading and homework. Now, there's a chance that my professors will let us go early every night (that has happened in previous classes), but I didn't get that impression from my first class last night.

I'd really prefer to only be taking one class, like a couple of my friends, but I need to maintain 6 credits to keep my student loans deferred for the semester.

At least this is only until the end of July. This too shall pass ...

Evil

In this complex world, one should usually be circumspect about making moral judgments ("judge not ..."), especially when it comes to categorizing something or someone as evil. But I feel no such need for circumspection in this case.

What is it with young, white Texans attacking mentally retarded black men? At least in that case, the attackers got justice, Texas-style (one got life in prison and two are scheduled for execution).

The most galling part of the case in Linden is this quote from the ex-mayor, Wilford Penny:

"But I don't think there was anything racial about it. These guys were drinking, and this guy [Johnson] liked to dance. I'm not surprised when they get to drinking and use the n-word. The black boy was somewhere he shouldn't have been, although they brought him out there."

Okay, three things:

1) there's nothing racial about calling a black man the n-word? um, what?

2) the "boy" in this case is a middle-aged man, thank you very much

and 3) the victim "was somewhere he shouldn't have been." Yeah, somehow I doubt we'd hear that rationalization if a white girl was raped in inner-city Houston or something of that sort. Then, it would be "how could something horrible happen to such a nice girl?"

Anyway, I hope you find yourself in hell some day soon, Mr. Penny (your clock is ticking). You and all the nice boys from Linden, Texas who think it's funny to beat retarded black men.