Reason 287 or so to support Obama

Bahbrah wants Hillarah. Can't wait for the endorsement of Hillarah from Yanni, Celine, and Joan Baez. I need to wash.

The UK's Privacy Katrina

W has to feel somewhat of a schadenfreude boost from this. Almost half of Britain's population falls subject to potential identity theft with one screw-up from a junior level administrator. This incident happened as Britain is debating whether or not to establish the issuance of national identity cards which, as you might imagine, is making the debate a trifle more lively.

The questions raised over this are near-limitless, but chief amongst them should be:

1) How on earth can a junior admin have that kind of access? If *1* person without a lot of clout can access that kind of data, couldn't *1* person be bought off rather easily for such information? Multi-person integrity is rule number one through number 2973 or so with such information--force a conspiracy for it to be illegitimately obtained.

2) Disk encryption...ever heard of it? Much of it is free--the rest of it is cheap.

3) Doesn't this prove that a central repository for this kind of information is, generally speaking, a Bad Idea (TM)?

When talk of a national ID card here in the US is raised, I don't fear an evil genius in the basement of a secret mansion sending my information to the Russian mafia, I fear a lazy/uninformed/flawed admin/software product (or a combination of any and all the latter) finding a way to screw up. What if the admin is two mortgage payments behind on his house? What if he likes to gamble a bit too much? What if an organization plants someone on the inside? (Don't think it can happen? Look here). What if...you get the idea.

It's not conspiracy I fear, it's incompetence. And we need look no further than our own White House to fear that. It's not that I don't give out potentially sensitive information to my bank, my frequent flier program, even iTunes, but they need my information and they have an enormous imperative--in the way of massive cost and bad publicity--to keep it from leaking out. If they do, the government is there to hear my grievance and, hopefully, redress it. If the federal government lets it leak out, where do I go?

I feel bad for people in the UK that might get hurt from this, but I hope it shows a few here in the US how the idea of national ID cards (and the need for data security), should be looked at very, very carefully and seriously.

Kasporov in Jail

And so it begins--Kasparov is in Russian custody. He is simply trying to run and trying to form an opposition, not trying to overthrow anyone. If you don't think of Russia as an enormous potential problem, think again. And if you haven't heard Kasparov speak, please have a listen. A very impressive man:

Post 101

So I've had 100 posts thus far. I realize it's not exactly a landmark occasion, but I'm glad I've had the semi-discipline to get this far. With any luck, I'll get a few readers!

I'm averaging about 20 posts or so a month, which puts me on the lower end of decent bloggers, but I have a full time job and other shizzie going on, so I don't feel too terrible about it. This was supposed to be more of a journal effort anyway.

I've added blogspot's new slideshow feature which grabs images off of my public picassa album. Look for links on the right hand side. I don't guarantee satisfaction, but it might be interesting to you. Happy Thanksgiving to all, and may Phoenix have but one day that could reasonably be called "cold" before March 1 of next year.

Obama in Iowa

C'mon Iowa. No more Hillarah. Besides, you owe us for Kerry last time around.

Another Obama perk

Barron Young Smith states it well, Obama is going past the normal baby-boomer crap related to drug use. Instead, he has the most compelling contra argument a kid can hear: they are a waste of time. I always thought so as a teenager and as a college kid too.

It's not that smoking some weed will make you homeless and destitute, but have you ever seen a hard-core stoner? They're pathetic. And heroin, crack, meth...no thanks. That stuff really could make you homeless and destitute (happened to a friend of mine, actually). And the hard stuff doesn't help you get laid so, what's the point?

Worst President Ever Watch

"So, yeah....that money we gave you for joining the military....we're gonna need some of that back now that you're a cripple." Don't believe he can be that idiotic AND grotesque? Well, read it for yourself. If the D candidates can't capitalize on this one, *I'm* running for President in four years.

The Promised Land

For me, it's Central and Northern California. I've been lucky to see much of the world (though there is still much more to see, to be certain), and I have yet to see a place quite as perfect.

A buddy of mine now works for Apple computer, so I have a place to crash if I head up that way. He lives in Los Gatos, near San Jose, and is very close to the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains. So, for the first day, the matter of order was a trip to my beloved Monterey.

Went to the aquarium for the first time in about 10 years and was pleasantly surprised. It's still basically the same, of course, but now they have a young Great White and a couple sunfish in the big tank. It's the only place in the world with a Great White in captivity, and they know it can't last, but they are taking care of him for a little while until he gets a little bigger (he was caught in a fishing net). The sunfish they have there are gi-frickin-normous. The big one weighs about 1000 pounds and looks like a cross between a flounder, a flying saucer, and James Edward Almos. Just take a look at a picture of him here--I can't explain it. The pics of the jellyfish came out much better though.

After that, we did the 17 mile drive thing and had a couple whiskies out on the patio of the Spanish Bay resort listening to the Piper serenade the sunset that wasn't really there--pretty foggy. But listening to a Piper out on the tee box of one of the world's most beautiful and pristine golf courses...the fog just makes it better. Whatever sins Tom Watson may have been guilty of, forgive him. Spanish Bay absolves all.

The next day we went hiking in Big Basin Redwoods State Park. Incredible place--though the hike we took damn near killed me. I agreed to do the 10-mile-and-change hike vs. the 5-mile-and-change hike. Then I was talked into doing an 11-miles-and-change trail because the route looked fairly flat and there was more to see that way. Then, after starting out on it and, conspicuously, not being told about a detour, we were presented with a sign telling us about a controlled burn and an alternate route that added not just another mile or so, but a drastic elevation change for flavor.

Sunny point number 8 or 9, when they talk of an elevation change ranging in 1600 feet, they don't mean it in the same way as a mountain--as in go up 1600 feet and then down, but a continuous range in elevation of 1600 feet--up and down, and up and down....forever. Or so it seemed, anyway. *Then*, sunny point number 14 or so, the route ended up being uphill for the last 3 out of 4 miles. I could feel my legs starting to fail (as in, trembling and stinging quads fail) but, painfully, and thankfully, made it out of there. Enough of my sob story though.

The place is amazing. I've seen the films, the pictures, the documentaries, etc., but one is never quite prepared to really grasp how amazingly huge those trees really are until one actually sees them. And a few of those trees are older than Jesus--some maybe even older than Socrates or Julius Caesar. Most all of them over 200 feet (of which there are quite a few) are older than gunpowder, the Crusades, the discovery of the New World, Azteca, the Ming Dynasty, Islam, the Enlightenment, and the printing press. And these are trees. It's a great place to feel small and temporal. Pictures can be found here.

But before you think I've gone all hippie, know that my friend enjoyed driving his new V-8 Audi on the roads in and out of the place. I was jealous, but glad that he got more out of it than me since I was the one crashing at his place. What made me more jealous was the fact that he lives an hour or less from this place--and a shade over an hour from my beloved Monterey--whereas I live an hour away from......Casa Grande.

I had salmon with a Singapore curry sauce served in a banana leaf for dinner later that night! And it was under 20 bucks! The weather was beautiful. The women were beautiful. The scenery was beautiful. The gas stations sucked, but they are gas stations--they are supposed to suck. People there don't dine on hot dogs and taquitos with a half-gallon of orange Fanta to cleanse their palate, so they don't need nice gas stations. Instead, they eat things like salmon with a Singapore curry sauce served in a banana leaf and cleanse their palate with fine wine or gourmet coffee or ginger lemonade or, perhaps, just plain frickin' water, but it's good. godDAMMit is it good.

If that makes them snobs, fine, let me be a snob with them. But I would submit that they just know a shitload more about living well than most. No wonder they have all the money, talent, and innovation. If you were a gifted person sitting on a multi-million dollar idea, where would you want to live?

OOPS!

Er, uh....OOPS! Big phukin, uhhh...OOPS! What can you say about this other than, well, you know?

As Schneier quotes from the article:

[H]ow did an illegal alien from Lebanon who was working as a waitress at a shish kabob restaurant in Detroit manage to slip through extensive security background checks, including polygraphs, to land highly sensitive positions with the nation's top law enforcement and intelligence agencies?

How indeed? Though, as a person who has worked in US Intelligence, it's not *that* hard to believe. Still very improbable, yes, but some of the cliche jokes about US Intelligence aren't that far off.

My favorite part (and why we in Military MI called the FBI stooges), is this:

Prouty, according to court documents, first entered the United States from Lebanon in 1989 on a one-year nonimmigrant student visa. After her visa expired she illegally remained in the country, residing in Taylor, Mich., with her sister and another individual. In order to stay in the country and evade immigration laws, she offered money to an unemployed U.S. citizen to marry her in the summer of 1990. But according to her indictment Prouty "never lived as husband and wife with her fraudulent 'husband' and the marriage was never consummated sexually."

A shish kabob waitress with ties to Hizbullah gets into the FBI and CIA with one of the most common ploys done in ANY country to get citizenship and what is considered noteworthy for the report is whether or not she slept with the guy. *That* is hard to believe. I would have had my ass shredded about 5 seconds after my superiors read that if I submitted it in a report. And I would have deserved it.

Shallow End of the Gene Pool Watch

This chick sounds fun to party with. This guy, not so much--has some anger issues, apparently.

One huge step closer to Creeeeeeepy

A cloned primate embryo is reported to have been successfully done.

Obama

First, I have been negligent in my posts--my apologies, just wrapped up in personal crap. Enough of that though.

I find myself still supporting Obama, but I am still far from enamored with him. I think that is a good thing though. Were I enamored of a candidate, there would have to be something wrong with me, the candidate, or both.

Obama is normally cool and calm in his demeanor. He is normally very gracious and courteous in his remarks. Somewhat sophisticated (though I think he holds back quite a bit in the campaign), forgivably cliched in his responses at times, but always rational and decent.

He doesn't throw his hands in the air or give a thumbs-up when meeting a crowd, he politely waves and bows--or just bows. He doesn't talk in the patronizing Clinton/Gore/Hillarah style of veeeeery sloooow woooooords as if we're retarded chimps that have to be taught about the dangers of fire. He doesn't prattle on about bumper sticker slogans or pickup trucks or butterflies or bears in the woods. And he seems so....honest. One gets the impression that he has a hypersensitive bullshit meter that he has worked very, very hard to temper (I really like that part--if I'm right--because it shows much more discipline than I have).

He is a politician, so he has to round the corners of some political stances, yes, but he is very honest about his childhood and early adulthood (notice how no one brings it up now that he's been honest, btw), he tells Black church leaders that there is a problem with homophobia in the Black community, he tells an anti-war Democratic base that there will likely be a bump in his defense budget the first year or two he is in office, he tells teachers unions that--though he would dismantle the No Child Left Behind Act--accountability is still a good aspect of it and that he will maintain that part of it.

He tells us that there is a terrorist threat, but we're fighting it the wrong way. That there are threats to us, but none unmanageable. And consistently tries to remind us that we really are a great nation capable of so much more than we want to give ourselves credit for. I truly, truly believe he sees the potential of America in the same spirit Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, Truman, and JFK did. Not in the Hollywood way Reagan did, but in the true, rational, tempered, and beautifully sensible way of this:

"Look at us. We are the most powerful nation in the annals of History. We have a better way. We are the only country on earth founded by the Enlightenment. We can do more, with less, and better, than any country on earth not because we are that innately brilliant or capable, but because we are so much better equipped to do it. We are the lucky ones, but we must not only realize our luck--we must act upon our luck. The only demise foreseeable for us can come from within."

And with all the above that I like so much, it worries me a little. I don't know if it will sell well to the majority. And, even if he wins the nomination, I don't think he would win a large majority in a general election--though I do think he would win. He is just too much for so many. Like, love, hate, or dislike him, I doubt any would say that he doesn't represent a substantial change for the US. And people are often, and understandably, wary of that very thing. But what a change it could be.

An end to the baby-boomer psycho drama that has been going on since the Vietnam War, an entirely new bent on foreign policy not born of realpolitik or the Messiah, a reformation of American Liberalism that is not built upon the Great Society (Noam Chompsky be GONE!)... Ahhhh, a boy can dream.

More Bireli

I'm not even sure what this is. A critic once said that Bireli plays like he's hearing aliens speak to him while he's playing. This is a definite example of it. I've just never heard or seen anything quite like him before.

(UPDATE: Original source was unavailable--trying to fix that now, 11 November).

And so it Ends

Rug, a dog that went from my dad to me, then to me and my brother, then to my brother, was finally put down. My brother has a good post on it here. Before my dad got her in 1992 or '93 (not sure), she was in an abusive home and my dad semi-voluntarily rescued her (the woman he was dating at the time worked in a home for abused mothers and the dog had to go someplace, so...).

Anyway, I never liked that dog--sometimes hated her guts--and wanted to, literally, kill her on more than one occasion. Freak weirdo of a mammal that cost me more money than I even want to think about (in the thousands). And, as you might imagine, she wasn't overly fond of me either. But, strangely, she was never really afraid of me or timid around me unless she knew I was mad. More strangely still, until her death she would always come up to me with a doggy smile and say hey. It was never overly affectionate, but more of a "Hey dude, what's up?" without really being too terribly interested in the answer.

I guess we just understood each other. And, if we were ever alike in anything, we realized that we can be annoying pains in the ass and that we deserve to get put in our place for it sometimes. It doesn't mean we have to hate each other afterwards. There's just not enough time for that.

JR Don't Love Me

No reply from JR Dunn as yet. Perhaps he's dismissed me as a hippie-freak-Lefty or, prolly more like it, he just doesn't want to spend the time or effort necessary to reply to just one person via email who might be a hippie-freak-Lefty. Whatever the case, I promise to give him an audience should he choose to respond further. But until then, I'm gonna keep on preaching that hippie-freak-Lefty blather that torture is wrong. Torture is stupid. Torture is un-American. Torture is repulsive to many conservatives as well (and I am no goddammed hippie), and that America is, indeed, guilty of torturing people--some even to death.

I'm sure that latter part gives JR pause as well, but I guess we will have to wait and see.

A Conversation about Torture II

As I mentioned in the post below, J.R. Dunn took immediate care to respond to my "Letter to the Editor" regarding his article. I won't post his response verbatim because I don't have his permission and, at this point is not public--even to all three of my readers (ok, all two). But, in essence, he asked me how the likes of Khalid Sheik Muhammed are covered by the Geneva Conventions. Fair question. My response, in full and overlong though it might be, is below:

"Wow! I wasn't expecting a response at all, much less this prompt of
one. In all honesty, thank you for your attention to this.


The short answer is that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, technically, is not
(or at least should not be) covered by the Geneva Conventions--you are right. Ideally, he should be tried by U.S. Federal law and New York State law for mass murder and a number of other charges. I still don't think torture should be condoned under those circumstances either and, as an investigator who has performed a number of interrogations, realize that if you simply scare the hell out of guy long enough he will tell you that it was him and Liberace that really stabbed Julius Caesar on the steps of the Roman Senate if that's what you want him to say. It doesn't make it necessarily so.


That aside, I wasn't talking about just him. I was talking about enemy combatants met on the the field of battle by our Armed Forces. If this is a war on terror, and I believe it is, then we should abide by the laws of war and we should abide by the Army field manual. Further, as a moral, rational, and traditional imperative, we should abide by the standard set down by George Washington during our Revolutionary War and treat enemy combatants humanely.


Which brings us back to the Sheik. If he was being held in custody by our military, (1) how was he not, at that time, considered an enemy combatant, and (2) if he was, why would our military not be subject to the same rules it has observed since George Washington, much less the Geneva Conventions?


Then General Washington wrote, after we had captured 1000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton in 1776, "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren..."


And, yes, piling on, John Adams wrote to his wife in a letter in 1777 about the subject "I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won't prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed."


President Lincoln Lincoln instituted the first formal code of conduct for the humane treatment of prisoners of war in 1863. Lincoln's order forbade any form of torture or cruelty, and it became the model for the 1929 Geneva Convention. Dwight Eisenhower made a point to guarantee exemplary treatment to German POWs in World War II, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur ordered application of the 1949 Geneva Convention during the Korean War, even though the U.S. was not yet a signatory. In the Vietnam War, the United States extended the convention's protection to Viet Cong prisoners even though the law did not technically require it.


To stray from this tradition and this law is, in my view, not only harmful to the war effort and unintelligent, but a betrayal of our traditions and the beginning of becoming like our enemy.


Thanks again for your attention to this.

Regards,

Travis"

A Conversation about Torture

I was pleasantly surprised to find that, much to his credit, J.R. Dunn is attentive not just to his readers, but to obnoxious ones like me as well. A recent article of his is titled "The 'Torture' Fraud of the Left." I found disagreement with it and sent a letter to the editor. He responded within minutes. Truthfully, I didn't even think he would have the ability to see it that quickly if he wanted to, but obviously he did and he challenged my letter.

I won't give his response in full unless he agrees to allow me (and I haven't asked as yet since I have no idea if this will continue), but I appreciate him taking the time to respond. So please read his article in full and I will post my letter to him below--grammatical errors and all.

"Sir,

Actually, torture has already been defined by the United Nations as:
"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as
obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession,
punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a
third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind,
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of
or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other
person acting in an official capacity."


Article3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits "[v]iolence to life and
person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment
and torture; …outrages upon personal dignity, in particular
humiliating and degrading treatment."


Article 75 prohibits murder, "torture of all kinds, whether physical
or mental," "corporal punishment," and "outrages upon personal
dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, … and any
form of indecent assault."


The United States is a signatory to all the above. Further, after
WWII, the United States prosecuted Nazis that claimed they only
participated in vershaerfte Vernehmung--what translates, roughly, as
"sharp questioning" or "enhanced Interrogation"--using these
definitions of torture and articles in the Geneva Conventions. Why
not deal with the matter of law and torture as it exists on the books
now? If your argument is that we should withdraw from the Geneva
Conventions, fine, say so. But to say we are not in violation of them
is palpably wrong.


Lastly, if water boarding is not torture, why did the Khmer Rouge find it so useful? If prolonged sleep deprivation is not torture, why was it the preferred method of Stalin? Does it not give you pause to be defending them as well? Does being stripped naked and shackled to a metal bed in a stress position while in a chilled room and having water poured over one's head until shaking violently from hypothermia and then having to be immediately treated by a physician so one doesn't die not qualify as torture? Would you simply dismiss such things as "not commendable" if they happened to US citizens? And as for the "threat of death" being a necessary component of torture in your view, does the death of detainees while in our captivity not prove to you that sometimes the threat of death was, indeed, quite real?"

More theft from Andrew

I need to start reading more blogs, but Andrew Sullivan got a hold of another interesting one here:

Dig that Ron Paul

The cat raises well over $3 million in one day. He's now passed the one day record of Mitt Romney and is well on his way to the $12 million goal by Dec 31st. Expect a blitz of advertising in New Hampshire and, possibly, a serious dent in the polls/primaries. If he can come away with double digits in the NH primary, the GOP will have to take him quite seriously, in my opinion. It could be the beginning of a true erosion of the religious "cultural conservatives" in the GOP and force the GOP to address what have been traditional conservative principles and their betrayal of them.

I should say that I am no sort of conservative and I disagree with much of Ron Paul's platform--in fact, a very large amount of it. But I would much, much, rather have Goldwater conservatives push the GOP platform than self-righteous evangelicals. More importantly, Ron Paul shows that one can be a conservative and anti-war, conservative and a civil libertarian, and conservative and tolerant. It has always been that way, but the last 10 years or so of American conservativism would lead one to believe otherwise.

Though rather sad to think of now, believing in civil liberties (to include Habeus Corpus, of course), a non-aggressive foreign policy, and a deep reverence for the Constitution used to be things American liberals and American conservatives didn't have to negotiate on--they were just a given. The Cold War did challenge that common ground--particularly the Vietnam War--but it seems to be eroding at a terrible, and frightening, rate now. Here's hoping we will move closer to those days of common ground again. And, paradoxically, perhaps Paul will help the Democrats grow at least a few vertebra in a new defense of civil liberties vs. capitulating to the Decider every time they have to show a spine.

The Humiliation of W

For all the attacks on President Bush's intelligence or competence--normally emphasis on the former--I would submit that the more appropriate attacks are on competence. To attack his intelligence (or lack thereof) is an easy attack and, well, not very intelligent in my view. I doubt very much that any of us can imagine Reagan or Eisenhower or FDR reading Plutarch in their den for inspiration in their forthcoming memoirs yet, regardless of your view of them, they were quite effective presidents. They were competent, they were not morally lazy, and they took their jobs seriously.

Now we see something like this. A tragicomic retelling of what has been known for some time--our CIA knew *nothing* of any accuracy regarding Saddam's WMD capacity. And the most powerful nation on earth being played the fool by a shit-can engineer looking for a green card. Is it all Bush's fault? Of course not. Is it all, ultimately, his responsibility? Of course it is. And that's the point.

Our current President has left behind nothing in the way of legacy. Nothing--except for failure. Nixon was, quite fairly, reviled by many and left the Presidency in shame. But he left behind an all-volunteer Army, took us off the antiquated gold standard, started the Environmental Protection Agency, normalized relations with China and initiated detente. Clinton was actually, legally, impeached but left behind a budgetary surplus, stopped the genocide in the former Yugoslavia, lifted millions out of poverty, pushed through the crime bill that was Giuliani's real platform for success, founded NAFTA, and reformed welfare (Giuliani's second platform of success, btw). One can have many disagreements with the former two presidents mentioned, and I have my share--even with the latter legacies they left behind. But it cannot be denied that they left something lasting.

W has left nothing of value. Nothing. He is, as Bill Maher has said, a disaster that walks like a man. His legacy is of suspending Habeus Corpus, of authorizing torture, of making America not a symbol of freedom and democracy, but a symbol of bungling neo-colonialism. A nation that spies on its citizenry, treats its great Constitution as an obstacle, the antithesis of the Enlightenment, the nightmare of Thomas Paine and George Orwell. We have become a lugubrious joke. We have played into the hands of the short-sighted, and dishonest, cynics that claim America is a collection of superstitious dimwits that worship only money in the end and care very little for anything beyond our own borders unless it makes us richer in the short term.

The aforementioned cynics saw only our potential weaknesses. And this President is the manifestation of all them. A morally lazy, elitist, superstitious plutocrat with no sophistication, no vision--a man-child that was not disciplined appropriately as a child or as an adult.

But much more than the humiliation that W may or may not feel, W is our humiliation as a nation. And we will long be apologizing for him. Or at least I hope so.

Why I could never be a programmer

This thing is awesome (at least to me), but it took three months to create. I just don't have that kind of patience.


Animator vs. Animation by *alanbecker on deviantART

Iraq's New Fighting Force

I can only hope this is staged: