Thursday, February 22, 2007


This post is interesting for me to read. What do you all think?

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

You know,

The real reason Britain is pulling out of Iraq is that we're getting the upper hand there, especially in the provinces where the Brits had a presence. And, now that they won't be busy with terrorists in Iraq, they'll have a freer hand to deal with terrorists in Iran.

UPDATE: Also, they can send some much needed troops to deal with Afghanistan. The fact that countries can get credit for sending troops, and then not allow them to be used at all (Italy) is slightly disheartening, though to be expected when dealing in a post-cold war NATO environment. The Brits and Austrailians are doing an excellent job in Afghanistan, as are we and the rest of the allies. Of course, there is much work to be done.

I still think that the primary good thing about the Brits pulling out of Iraq (aside from the fact that it implies that things aren't horrible there) is that now "we" (the allies) have a few extra troops that can be credibly used to threaten Iran. I'm not saying we should use them without a lot more provocation, but I think that a credible threat could be useful. If we can bully Iran into cooperating (carrots don't seem to be working, cause they apparently don't like the taste), then our job in Iraq and Afghanistan gets a heck of a lot easier.

Thursday, February 15, 2007

"It's not a big truck! It's, it's a series of tubes!"

He's back at it...though, I actually have to say that people might get more work done in the library without facebook. Make sure you watch the video as well.


Methinks these guys are faking it.

But, beards are still cool. And, they get an A+ for location.

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

The scenario that scares me most

There are a lot of terrorist attacks that are scary. We have lots to pick from. About a week ago, we were reminded of the threat of a dirty bomb exploding in our cities when a man was arrested for smuggling 80 grams of 90% enriched radioactive material. Then, they could load up tractor trailers with fertilizer and run them into buildings, like the guy who couldn't speak english well and had no interest in learning how to drive the truck backwards evidently wanted to do.

But the thing that scares me most is a coordinated campaign of these. It's extremely easy to pull off, and extremely hard to prevent without restricting civil liberties to a level that I refuse to go to. I'm just glad that this one seems to be a solo act, and that an off duty cop was able to respond quickly enough to keep even more people from dying.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

Something to Cheer about

"So, we have 6 al Qaeda leaders captured, and possibly dozens more killed. All in the last 48 hours."

- as reported by My Pet Jawa. However, I do need to take issue with one assumtion they made to get at that number:

"But four is such a lonely number. A facilitator of foreign fighters was captured by the Iarqi Army on the Syrian border. And foreign fighters tend to mean al Qaeda. "

Foreign Fighters don't have to mean al Qaeda. They could also mean Iranian agents that we don't want to talk about.

So, perhaps the number should be 5 al Qaeda leaders captured, plus one of unknown identity. All in the last 48 hours.

Cold War with Russia?

Are us Americans trying to revive the cold war with russia?
Come again?
Yes, but the Jewish Lobby has taken control of Washington, so it's not really our fault.
Why would we want to?
No free polls

Read this article for some context.

There are some quotes that are gems:
""This surely is the beginning of an arms race in some sense," he said. "Which is all the more unjustified given that Russia has never, not on a single issue, expressed an intention to confront the U.S. or to deter it.""
Iraq? Iran? Well, I guess they haven't said that they want to confront us...but they certainly haven't been even tacitly supporting us on those issues, either.

"We should be aware that Russia has been placed in the group of targeted nations," - Gleb Pavlovsky
He says this to remind us that Russia has increasingly been placed on the lists of "unfree" nations (on many different issues) which the State Department makes. I say, perhaps you're being targeted. Perhaps you're on those lists cause you make stupid decisions. Like, not to elect governors to your territories so that Putin can appoint them himself.
"It is not as much about the [George W.] Bush Administration's self-promotion to boost ratings as it is about [creating] a system of ideological and political pressure on Russia and its allies," - Vasily Likhachev
This quote only makes sense from a Russian propaganda perspective. They know that Bush is unpopular at home, so in their minds that means that whatever he does is done to increase that approval rating. However, it doesn't make sense to me, because I haven't heard the Bush Administration crowing much about it's missile defense system expansions. And, I'm not even sure that would get him many popularity points in our country.

"Ivashov warned that unless it takes countermeasures to neutralize the U.S. threat, the country could be in for a bleak future. "Russia may end up cornered in the north, and it will become a tiny Nordic country.""

Yeah. That might happen.

Propaganda is so much fun, when you can immediately see through it. However, I have to keep reminding myself that to the Russians reading this article, it's the truth because they don't have a baseline to judge against. So, it's not very funny after all.

Whole Foods Changes Rules

So, I like lobsters, and I like the idea of a Whole Foods-like store, even if I would never spend the extra money to buy stuff from there.

However, I'm not sure I understand their reasoning in this decision. I'll wait for you to go read it and check it out.

Ok, so they seem to object to the fact that lobsters are shipped in boxes with other lobsters. Hmm...well, lobsters have hard shells, so they don't get hurt by this. Being pilled up doesn't seem to hurt them much, since it's been done for decades. It's also possible to find them this way in the wild...
The lobsters sold at the Whole Foods Store in Portland, ME, will come from a company based in New Hampshire. After the lobsters are caught in Vinalhaven, they get put in comfortable individual boxes. Well, that's after they get piled up in traps for a couple days in the ocean, waiting for the lobstermen to come pull them out of the water. After they get put in the boxes, I assume they just get shipped out...but do they go to NH before they get shipped to Portland? Cause that just seems like a waste.

The whole process reminds me of the "Last cigarette and meal before an execution." Why bother? I mean, the lobsters don't really care enough to talk to us about it, do they? And if it's been good enough for so long, why bother to worry about it now?

I like that Whole Foods is a company with Morals, I just don't understand them in this particular case. Especially since there are plenty of lobstermen in Portland who could work for them and put lobsters in individual boxes without shipping them around the North East. Then, the company might actually be able to sell a few of their lobsters in Portland, and they could support the local workers. (I've been reading too much Marx lately.)

So, does anyone understand this better than I? Cause I'd appreciate some 'splaining.

By the way

I think this would be a good time (what with the 5000'th visitor and all) to restate my thoughts about commenting.

I'm a big believer in taking credit/responsibility for what you think. You are free to think/say anything you want on this site (of course), especially if you can back it up with real arguments. (Cause then it would be a fun discussion, instead of just me making fun of you) However, I can't tell one "anonymous" person from another "anonymous" person.

I like it when people pick a screen name. I actually use my own name (minus the capital letter), and I don't think you should avoid it either. But, if you choose not to, it's easier for the rest of us to talk if you pick an anonymous name that we can follow through a discussion, and hopefully even from post to post.

Thanks. I know this is boring, but it is kind of a pet-peeve of mine. Sorry. Wait, who am I apologizing to? It is my blog...heh.


So, I'm pretty upset about something that's going on at my school. Evidently someone is placing Christian tracts in the books in our library. The worst part is that they're evidently singling out Jewish history/study books to place them in. Now, there are two sides to this.

First, the library shouldn't be upset because it doesn't destroy the books and it's not really hard to take the piece of paper out and throw it away. This idea has merit, but I don't agree. Perhaps you figured that out, because I put it first. I'll explain why I don't buy it later.

Second, the library is right to get pissed because this is defacement of private property. Well, I'm not sure it's actually defacement, cause no permanent damage is done to the books, but it's certainly annoying and people have a right to use books from a secular library without feeling pressure to change religions.

Those are both valid sides of the debate, though I lean more to the second side. This is despite the fact that I'm one of the leaders of our (rather) active Christian fellowship on campus. My opposition to this practice stems from a different cause. First, it's ineffectual. It's crap. No one will ever be converted because of a tract they picked up in a book at a library while they were trying to do research in college. They're too busy to read the stupid thing, but not busy enough not to get offended. People who read books that have been targeted in this fashion just get annoyed and get mad at the Christians who did it. That's all Christians, in their minds.

I know that the organized Christian group on campus was not responsible. However, I also know that we're the ones who will be held responsible in the minds of the campus. I am very upset that our valid, effective, and helpful ministries will be undermined by the foolish actions of people who probably don't even go to my school.

The worst part is, if I explain this to anyone who was affected by it on campus, they won't believe that we didn't have anything to do with it...cause of course we wouldn't take credit for it!

So, thanks a lot, whoever you are. You just made life more difficult for the Christians on my campus. That would be acceptable if you were to reach even one person, but I doubt that that happened. Sorry.

So, I repeat. Fools.

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Tell me what you think!

You may have noticed the new Pajamas Media banner flying at my site. This is just a way for you to do a straw poll about the 2008 elections, as you have already figured out. It's not really an endorsement of Pajamas Media, though if they want to add me to their advertising stream, I won't turn them down.

I do want to know what you think about the elections. So if you don't mind participating through here, I'll give some updates and analysis as the results come in. So far, the one vote cast seems to mimic my current thoughts. I wonder how that happened? Hmm....


I just went up over 5000 visitors! That's pretty good for a little over a year of blogging, I think. Thanks for all the visits, and I hope you keep coming back 'cause you enjoy the experience.

I'm big on de-briefing, so why don't we take this time for some feedback? Can you post a comment with what you like and dislike about this blog? If you've been around a while, tell me what keeps you coming back. If you just got here, let me know what caught your eye. Thanks!

Monday, February 05, 2007

Today's Reading

Global Warming (And a beautiful photo) - Althouse.

This is for the textually challenged readers. It is a commercial, presented without further comment: Sweet Mother of Awesome! - Surviving Grady.

Some great political analysis from Red - They call me Red.
I was going to write this post today, but then I found this, and realized that I didn't have to. It's a good thing, because I just started spring semester classes today, and I'm kind of busy. Enjoy the reading.