Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Why is America so Anti-Sex lately?
ugh! Fuck you Channel 6.. who the fuck cares? Does the company pay taxes? Does it's employees? Are they doing nothing illegal? Then leave them the fuck alone!
We're going backwards
What can I say about the abortion debate that hasn't already been said before? Not much. All I can say is that because I'm pro-choice doesn't mean that I'm for abortions for everyone all the time. I'm just saying that we shouldn't remove the choice from the equation. Whatever..
The reason I'm writing today is that, well, we're going backwards and it's beginning in South Dakota where it is now illegal to perform an abortion. Even in cases of rape and incest. Nice going peeps! Keep up the good work! Soon we'll be bringing out the scarlet letters and performing ritual sacrifice..
The reason I'm writing today is that, well, we're going backwards and it's beginning in South Dakota where it is now illegal to perform an abortion. Even in cases of rape and incest. Nice going peeps! Keep up the good work! Soon we'll be bringing out the scarlet letters and performing ritual sacrifice..
Police arrest teen over Photos?
So let me get this right. Police were cruising MySpace (hmn.. sounds like they read my blog) and found the page of a teen that was from a local high school. On that page were photos of drugs, the teen with a gun in his hand, and some claims that he was a drug dealer.
First of all, let me ask you how they were able to determine that the page was created by, maintained and essentially owned by the teen. They can't you know. At most they can supena MySpace and perhaps get the pages email address registration but what does that proove exactly? How easy is it to spoof email?
Ok lets assume that the page belongs to the kid (though any half ass lawyer should be able to get the case thrown out right there). How is it that anyone can proove that the photos were genuine? The NBC10 page says : "there are pictures of ecstasy, marijuana-stuffed cigarettes and cocaine" . Uh really? How do they know that the cigarettes were stuffed with pot? How do they know the cocaine wasn't powder? I made a film in highschool called "Lower Marian Vice" that was a take off of the popular Miami Vice (this was the 80s) where we had guns, and drugs all over the place. Were they real drugs? Nope.. but you sure couldn't tell by looking at the film.
Ok, so assume that in some crazy world the pigs were able to determine that the photos were real. When did it become illegal to post photos of drugs on the internet? When did it become illegal to post photos of guns on the internet? The gun apparently was seized and legally belonged to the kids father... so how is that illegal?
Here is the kicker "The teen bragged that he was making $250,000 a year -- an unlikely claim, police said".. ahh.. so the kid was lying here and boasting to look cool. Who is to say that he wasn't boasting about the rest?
Anyway, here is what I have to say. Hello Philly cops!! Hello? I am a drug dealer. I make $500,000 a year selling extacy, cocaine and pot. I have a gun and I'm not afraid to use it. As proof, here are some actual photos :
First of all, let me ask you how they were able to determine that the page was created by, maintained and essentially owned by the teen. They can't you know. At most they can supena MySpace and perhaps get the pages email address registration but what does that proove exactly? How easy is it to spoof email?
Ok lets assume that the page belongs to the kid (though any half ass lawyer should be able to get the case thrown out right there). How is it that anyone can proove that the photos were genuine? The NBC10 page says : "there are pictures of ecstasy, marijuana-stuffed cigarettes and cocaine" . Uh really? How do they know that the cigarettes were stuffed with pot? How do they know the cocaine wasn't powder? I made a film in highschool called "Lower Marian Vice" that was a take off of the popular Miami Vice (this was the 80s) where we had guns, and drugs all over the place. Were they real drugs? Nope.. but you sure couldn't tell by looking at the film.
Ok, so assume that in some crazy world the pigs were able to determine that the photos were real. When did it become illegal to post photos of drugs on the internet? When did it become illegal to post photos of guns on the internet? The gun apparently was seized and legally belonged to the kids father... so how is that illegal?
Here is the kicker "The teen bragged that he was making $250,000 a year -- an unlikely claim, police said".. ahh.. so the kid was lying here and boasting to look cool. Who is to say that he wasn't boasting about the rest?
Anyway, here is what I have to say. Hello Philly cops!! Hello? I am a drug dealer. I make $500,000 a year selling extacy, cocaine and pot. I have a gun and I'm not afraid to use it. As proof, here are some actual photos :
Monday, February 27, 2006
How to Elect a President
I tend to write a lot about voting. (see here and here for examples) The reason is simple, I want my vote to count and I want to feel like I have some control over the govenment.
If I lived in New York or Texas I wouldn't have a vote in the presidential race. That's because those two states are hardcore Blue and Red states. No matter what happens, no matter how hard I try and "get out the vote", those states will go Blue and Red. The electoral college the way it is set up ensures this. To get elected, a president only has to concentrate on a small number of states. These states are the ones that can go either way and have significant number of Electoral Votes. This is really no way for us to pick a candidate. We need to go to a popular vote.
But that is hard to do. Each state has to go along with this plan and there are all kinds of complexities when changing the constitution. If we ever tried to change it, it would take years. So what can we do?
There is a group/movement called the "National Popular Election of the President" (catchy huh?) that has a wonderful plan that will work and that we can help make work. The plan is simple. Each state at their leisure and if they want to participate in electing the president by popular vote simply passes this law: "we the state of XXX will award all of our electoral votes to the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia." In addition they add to the law that "This law would only come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical form, by enough states to elect a President—that is, by states possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes."
In a sense it's a total hack, but guess what.. It can work. So your assignment is to write your local state legislators and lobby them to implement this bill. I know I'm going to.
If I lived in New York or Texas I wouldn't have a vote in the presidential race. That's because those two states are hardcore Blue and Red states. No matter what happens, no matter how hard I try and "get out the vote", those states will go Blue and Red. The electoral college the way it is set up ensures this. To get elected, a president only has to concentrate on a small number of states. These states are the ones that can go either way and have significant number of Electoral Votes. This is really no way for us to pick a candidate. We need to go to a popular vote.
But that is hard to do. Each state has to go along with this plan and there are all kinds of complexities when changing the constitution. If we ever tried to change it, it would take years. So what can we do?
There is a group/movement called the "National Popular Election of the President" (catchy huh?) that has a wonderful plan that will work and that we can help make work. The plan is simple. Each state at their leisure and if they want to participate in electing the president by popular vote simply passes this law: "we the state of XXX will award all of our electoral votes to the presidential candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia." In addition they add to the law that "This law would only come into effect only when it has been enacted, in identical form, by enough states to elect a President—that is, by states possessing a majority (270) of the 538 electoral votes."
In a sense it's a total hack, but guess what.. It can work. So your assignment is to write your local state legislators and lobby them to implement this bill. I know I'm going to.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
9/11 once more
I've gotten a lot of responses by email (would love them to have been comments) about my Loose Change post. Mostly people saying: "the video is compelling and there are some issues that we don't know, but I can't believe it was a govt. conspiracy.. too many people involved would have to keep secrets...", etc. Let me clarify my stance a bit. First off I don't think it was a govt. conspiracy. I think it was Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, Bush Sr., other Bush men, a few other insiders (in this case not Rove) combined with a select few defense contractors and CEOs that were the main perpetrators. As for the real ground operatives, the CIA has a ton of them that specialize in doing things and never telling anyone about them. These are the kinds of people who on a daily basis do all kinds of odd things in the name of Patriotism--Stuff that they don't question at all because it is part of plan that they don’t know nor want to understand. Everyone else involved? They could have been duped into doing things for other reasons. I truly think the rest is all manipulation and misdirection. Qualities that the BHW is not lacking at all.
As for the video, sure I’ve got some issues. I think if the director was more skilled, it would have been more convincing, and I think that some questions were unanswered, but the film shows that there are clearly huge holes in the official word and the BWH insistence on secrecy about everything doesn't help make the conspiracy theory's go away.
But the video appealed to me more than most because I had heard two other theory's/fact sets before it. First was the whole pentagon plane thing. There are dozens of sites talking about the fact that there is 0 wreckage from the 757 and the verifiable fact that all surveillance tapes from the area (hotels nearby, etc) were immediately confiscated by the FBI (I’m sure those agents were manipulated into thinking that they needed to confiscate them for some official reason.. this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about in the first paragraph). Anyway, I firmly believe that a 757 did not hit the pentagon. Secondly (and I don't remember where this came from) there was a story about all RF devices not being allowed to operate on 9/11 in the vicinity of the towers (TV microwave, etc.) on that day. That combined with the fact that NASA (and the military) having proven that they can fly large planes large distances does not rule out that the planes were remote controlled.
Most of the comments and criticisms I heard made mention of the passengers of the planes. Where are thy? Yup I don't know. Personally I differ from the film in that I think that they were in fact on some of the planes involved in the attacks. I think were 3 planes and one missile. The missile hit the pentagon (cruise missile is my guess form looking at the damage and the wreckage and the site). The 3 planes I think were actual passenger planes that were filled with people but remote controlled. So in my version all the people did in fact die. I think the one in PA was either shot down accidentally and covered up by the military (thinking either that they made a huge mistake, or did the right thing but that the people in America "would never understand we shot down a passenger plane") or the passengers broke into the cabin to find no pilots and the remote controllers simply blew it up to cover up evidence… Which would explain why there was no wreckage or bodies at the “crash site”
In either case, the bottom line in my book is that things did not go the way we've been fed and I’m sure we’ll never know what happened, but we can’t simply let the machine feed us all the time. We as a people should be vigilant and we should always question. Weather for fun, for profit or for country, we should always question.
As for the video, sure I’ve got some issues. I think if the director was more skilled, it would have been more convincing, and I think that some questions were unanswered, but the film shows that there are clearly huge holes in the official word and the BWH insistence on secrecy about everything doesn't help make the conspiracy theory's go away.
But the video appealed to me more than most because I had heard two other theory's/fact sets before it. First was the whole pentagon plane thing. There are dozens of sites talking about the fact that there is 0 wreckage from the 757 and the verifiable fact that all surveillance tapes from the area (hotels nearby, etc) were immediately confiscated by the FBI (I’m sure those agents were manipulated into thinking that they needed to confiscate them for some official reason.. this is the kind of stuff I’m talking about in the first paragraph). Anyway, I firmly believe that a 757 did not hit the pentagon. Secondly (and I don't remember where this came from) there was a story about all RF devices not being allowed to operate on 9/11 in the vicinity of the towers (TV microwave, etc.) on that day. That combined with the fact that NASA (and the military) having proven that they can fly large planes large distances does not rule out that the planes were remote controlled.
Most of the comments and criticisms I heard made mention of the passengers of the planes. Where are thy? Yup I don't know. Personally I differ from the film in that I think that they were in fact on some of the planes involved in the attacks. I think were 3 planes and one missile. The missile hit the pentagon (cruise missile is my guess form looking at the damage and the wreckage and the site). The 3 planes I think were actual passenger planes that were filled with people but remote controlled. So in my version all the people did in fact die. I think the one in PA was either shot down accidentally and covered up by the military (thinking either that they made a huge mistake, or did the right thing but that the people in America "would never understand we shot down a passenger plane") or the passengers broke into the cabin to find no pilots and the remote controllers simply blew it up to cover up evidence… Which would explain why there was no wreckage or bodies at the “crash site”
In either case, the bottom line in my book is that things did not go the way we've been fed and I’m sure we’ll never know what happened, but we can’t simply let the machine feed us all the time. We as a people should be vigilant and we should always question. Weather for fun, for profit or for country, we should always question.
Any day now....
So GWB says : "As we see more of these Iraqi forces in the lead, we will be able to continue with our stated strategy that says as Iraqi forces stand up, we will stand down" (from here). Gives you confidence right? Well, how many Battilions in Iraq are ready to fight on their own? Up until reciently the number was 1. Now it's 0.. Seems like we'll be leaving the county quite soon now.
Oh wait, we didn't tell you the whole story
This is wrong on so many levels. You know the UAE deal to take over 6 of our ports? Well it's not six, it's 21! It's not clear to me right now how the media got the original story wrong, but I would venture to guess that the BWH kept it from us and somehow it got out. So in my mind they have not only been incompetent, but deceitful as well. Kudos to the media here, but on the other hand, how could they have run with this story for weeks without digging deeper to find the real truth?
Saturday, February 25, 2006
iTunes suckers
I've said it before, iTunes and the iPod are a joke.. do you know why? Apple has all of those songs digitally managed so you can't copy them or play them on anything else but an iPod.. duh.
My Uncle
My unlce was a guest poster here once. I've posted his stuff on my older blogs as well from time to time. I like his point of view and I think he likes to write so I've offered him a guest posting spot. I asked him to write once a month for us.. I don't know if he'll accept. I guess we'll see...
Update : apparently he posted already.. somehow due to some quirk in Blogger, his post is below this one (here). His blogger name is : FlagrantAmerican
Update : apparently he posted already.. somehow due to some quirk in Blogger, his post is below this one (here). His blogger name is : FlagrantAmerican
Some Vacation Thoughts
I like to change my routine while on vacation. I sleep on the other side of the bed, do much of the cooking but don't make coffee and do many other things that I don't usually get a chance to do thus the vacation aspect. It works for me anyway. Well this year I decided to get as much of my news as possible from Fox News. Now I didn't follow every story in detail but I did a fair amount of sampling Fox’s offering while watching TV in Cancun (BTW, The English shows with Spanish subtitles seem to be helpful in learning some simple sentences in Spanish. But don't bother trying to watch The Simpsons in Spanish without English subtitles unless you know Spanish already. They could be saying ANYTHING).
Anyway, back to Fox. There seem to be two basic show designs. The solitary reporter/commentator like Brit Hume who I found to be the best on the network or the blowhard type like O'Reilly vs. the foursome model which has two dark haired horn-rimmed guys who came out of Brigham Young and Duke (optionally, one can be black with an Indiana accent), a smiling liberal professor or columnist who takes all the shots with a laugh and the perky blond out of the Ann Coulter mold who pillories the professor. Fair enough, that's the general format they choose. But what comes out of their mouths is most interesting. On every show with the exception of Brit Hume (which may account for my favorable view of him) one or more of the righties is telling us "What the liberals would like you to think...." or "The Democrats would like to see this happen....." with the liberal and Democrat labels easily juxtaposed in any context and for every story. It was a regular drumbeat and the number of times that paricular phraseology was used was very noticeable to me as a regular non-viewer. I hear that line of argument from hard core Republicans. So that's where it comes from. Hmmm, it must be working.
Even the simpleton Colmes will jump on the repetition/minimization background noise soundtrack that they create in the name of making their case. Give us facts about what's being discussed and don't be simply counter to the left. People who think differently on an issue aren’t necessarily Democrats or worse yet Liberals. It seems to me that Fox News IS the right wing propaganda mouthpiece that a lot of people say it is. Better to get your fake news from The Daily Show since at least it's product is labeled correctly.
Some stories snuck beneath the radar....
Submarine attack on Arlen Spector deflected using the old Capitol Hill standby. Launch a review by the Ethics committee. That'll learn you other buggers who might be thinkin' about....well, thinkin'. Stay in line and nobody gets hurt.
Cheyney's facts waited 24 hours to be sure they came out right only that "zilch alcohol" became one beer at lunch. Mary Joe Kopekne's folks may see this a different way.
The Dubai port hubbub is more another shrewd political move than the stumble it’s being portrayed as. Even the much practiced Scott McClelland couldn’t convince anyone that Bush learned of this from the news reports. Bush isn’t running in November so Republicans in Congress just got a softball lobbed to them. Meanwhile, Bush might either just win or just lose a veto override vote if it ever comes to that. The real trick now is to get the Republicans to disagree with it because they are strong on security and the Democrats to disagree because they are prejudiced and/or unwilling to support our partners in the War on Terror. Besides, the British think its okay. Must be a Frenchy idea. And it takes the surveillance issue off the front page to boot.
Good to see that the same old, same old prevailed while we were gone.
(Interestingly, the promo and introduction for one of the shows Fox and Friends or something like that has a One Way sign showing. It points to the right. What's that all about?)
Anyway, back to Fox. There seem to be two basic show designs. The solitary reporter/commentator like Brit Hume who I found to be the best on the network or the blowhard type like O'Reilly vs. the foursome model which has two dark haired horn-rimmed guys who came out of Brigham Young and Duke (optionally, one can be black with an Indiana accent), a smiling liberal professor or columnist who takes all the shots with a laugh and the perky blond out of the Ann Coulter mold who pillories the professor. Fair enough, that's the general format they choose. But what comes out of their mouths is most interesting. On every show with the exception of Brit Hume (which may account for my favorable view of him) one or more of the righties is telling us "What the liberals would like you to think...." or "The Democrats would like to see this happen....." with the liberal and Democrat labels easily juxtaposed in any context and for every story. It was a regular drumbeat and the number of times that paricular phraseology was used was very noticeable to me as a regular non-viewer. I hear that line of argument from hard core Republicans. So that's where it comes from. Hmmm, it must be working.
Even the simpleton Colmes will jump on the repetition/minimization background noise soundtrack that they create in the name of making their case. Give us facts about what's being discussed and don't be simply counter to the left. People who think differently on an issue aren’t necessarily Democrats or worse yet Liberals. It seems to me that Fox News IS the right wing propaganda mouthpiece that a lot of people say it is. Better to get your fake news from The Daily Show since at least it's product is labeled correctly.
Some stories snuck beneath the radar....
Submarine attack on Arlen Spector deflected using the old Capitol Hill standby. Launch a review by the Ethics committee. That'll learn you other buggers who might be thinkin' about....well, thinkin'. Stay in line and nobody gets hurt.
Cheyney's facts waited 24 hours to be sure they came out right only that "zilch alcohol" became one beer at lunch. Mary Joe Kopekne's folks may see this a different way.
The Dubai port hubbub is more another shrewd political move than the stumble it’s being portrayed as. Even the much practiced Scott McClelland couldn’t convince anyone that Bush learned of this from the news reports. Bush isn’t running in November so Republicans in Congress just got a softball lobbed to them. Meanwhile, Bush might either just win or just lose a veto override vote if it ever comes to that. The real trick now is to get the Republicans to disagree with it because they are strong on security and the Democrats to disagree because they are prejudiced and/or unwilling to support our partners in the War on Terror. Besides, the British think its okay. Must be a Frenchy idea. And it takes the surveillance issue off the front page to boot.
Good to see that the same old, same old prevailed while we were gone.
(Interestingly, the promo and introduction for one of the shows Fox and Friends or something like that has a One Way sign showing. It points to the right. What's that all about?)
Congress is just a bunch of sad fucks
Please tell me why TIA is still operational? In case you didn't know about, TIA or Total Information Awareness is a government data mining program that was shut down 2 years ago by congress becasue it was (and still is) incredibly powerful datamining operation.. here is a description (lifted from The Total Information Awareness Resource Center)
Neoconservative New York Times columnist William Safire notes the potential of the TIA program as follows:
"Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as "a virtual, centralized grand database."
Here is how John Markoff of the New York Times describes the capability of the TIA program:
"...it will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from Internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant. Historically, military and intelligence agencies have not been permitted to spy on Americans without extraordinary legal authorization. But Admiral Poindexter, the former national security adviser in the Reagan administration, has argued that the government needs broad new powers to process, store and mine billions of minute details of electronic life in the United States. Admiral Poindexter, who has described the plan in public documents and speeches but declined to be interviewed, has said that the government needs to 'break down the stovepipes' that separate commercial and government databases, allowing teams of intelligence agency analysts to hunt for hidden patterns of activity with powerful computers."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and numerous other privacy and civil libertarian groups have lined up in opposition to the TIA program.
Now I ask you.. if congress killed this orwellian terror of a program, why is it still in operation? Can't they do anything? Or did they know it was still alive and hoping that we wouldn't notice?
Neoconservative New York Times columnist William Safire notes the potential of the TIA program as follows:
"Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as "a virtual, centralized grand database."
Here is how John Markoff of the New York Times describes the capability of the TIA program:
"...it will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from Internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant. Historically, military and intelligence agencies have not been permitted to spy on Americans without extraordinary legal authorization. But Admiral Poindexter, the former national security adviser in the Reagan administration, has argued that the government needs broad new powers to process, store and mine billions of minute details of electronic life in the United States. Admiral Poindexter, who has described the plan in public documents and speeches but declined to be interviewed, has said that the government needs to 'break down the stovepipes' that separate commercial and government databases, allowing teams of intelligence agency analysts to hunt for hidden patterns of activity with powerful computers."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and numerous other privacy and civil libertarian groups have lined up in opposition to the TIA program.
Now I ask you.. if congress killed this orwellian terror of a program, why is it still in operation? Can't they do anything? Or did they know it was still alive and hoping that we wouldn't notice?
Friday, February 24, 2006
Restaurant Week
This week is Restaurant Week again here in Philly. I believe they do it bi-annually. In either case, my lady and I went out to try a couple of places. My choice wasn't too good, hers was awesome. Here's my short reviews:
Friday, Saturday, Sunday is a little spot in Center City that has been around since the 70's. I've never been there. One time, about 6 years ago I had a drink in the bar above the place (called Tank Bar) and really liked the cozy atmosphere. I figured it was time to give the place a shot. Overall it was ok. For appetizers, I had the mushroom soup (supposedly a specialty) was pretty tasty but nothing really spectacular. K had the Pate and was quite happy. For dinner, she had the Euro Chicken and wasn’t the least bit impressed and I had the Filet Mignon which was just average. The place was cozy and warm, but the service was miserable. The waiter seemed to hate us from the first moment he saw us and no matter how nice we tried to be he still treated us like shit. Eventually he just disappeared and the manager took his place. We gave it a C+ overall.
K chose Patou. Her choice was based on the menu. We'd seen the place in our travels and it looked like a tiny little joint. When we went in, we were greeted by a doorman who opened the door and then a huge curatin to reveal the entry. This place looked like it was just a bar, albeit a very cool looking one. Soon we were ushered back into the eating area. It was spacious with a high ceiling, white walls and cool lighthing. Our waitress was nice and reccomended some great stuff for us to eat. To start, the bread dish had this pesto sauce that was better than any I'd ever tasted. For apps, I had the tuna tartare which was spectacular. She had the crispy calamari which was quite good but not as great as mine. For dinner she had the skate fish and I had the lamb. Both were really really good. Dessert was just as amazing. Overall we gave it an A-. It's a bit pricey so we can't go back right away to be sure, but we will be soon.
Friday, Saturday, Sunday is a little spot in Center City that has been around since the 70's. I've never been there. One time, about 6 years ago I had a drink in the bar above the place (called Tank Bar) and really liked the cozy atmosphere. I figured it was time to give the place a shot. Overall it was ok. For appetizers, I had the mushroom soup (supposedly a specialty) was pretty tasty but nothing really spectacular. K had the Pate and was quite happy. For dinner, she had the Euro Chicken and wasn’t the least bit impressed and I had the Filet Mignon which was just average. The place was cozy and warm, but the service was miserable. The waiter seemed to hate us from the first moment he saw us and no matter how nice we tried to be he still treated us like shit. Eventually he just disappeared and the manager took his place. We gave it a C+ overall.
K chose Patou. Her choice was based on the menu. We'd seen the place in our travels and it looked like a tiny little joint. When we went in, we were greeted by a doorman who opened the door and then a huge curatin to reveal the entry. This place looked like it was just a bar, albeit a very cool looking one. Soon we were ushered back into the eating area. It was spacious with a high ceiling, white walls and cool lighthing. Our waitress was nice and reccomended some great stuff for us to eat. To start, the bread dish had this pesto sauce that was better than any I'd ever tasted. For apps, I had the tuna tartare which was spectacular. She had the crispy calamari which was quite good but not as great as mine. For dinner she had the skate fish and I had the lamb. Both were really really good. Dessert was just as amazing. Overall we gave it an A-. It's a bit pricey so we can't go back right away to be sure, but we will be soon.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
9/11 Was an Inside Job
The link at the bottom of this post is to a video called "Loose Change". For those of you who don't know about this film, it's a film about 9/11. But it's a lot different than you are used to. It is an incredbily well put together film that explains (using many facts) how 9/11 could have been perpetrated not by Osama Bin Laden but by our own government. I know this sounds like a far fetched conspiracy theorey at first, but I ask you to watch just the first 10 minutes and tell me if you aren't intrigured.
The premise as presented is totally plausable and makes complete sense. Plese not only give the video a look, but tell your friends. The truth may never be known, but we can at least fight for it.
Don't take my word for it. Here is an article about it that was in the Villiage Voice!
Click Here for the film. You won't be dissapointed.
Cheney was Drunk!
Apparently Cheney was totally drunk when he shot his friend in the face with a shotgun.. Interesting but totally not surprising. Always good to be playing with guns while inebriated. Note that this is the man who is reponsible for convinging George Bush to send thousands of Americans to their death for no reason in Iraq.. I sure feel happy I not only had nothing to do with getting this administration elected, but was against it publicly from the start.
Nothing Funnier To Geeks Like Me
I love when the pigs get all confused and incredulous. I also love how clueless and obtuse they are when it comes to their old fashioned laws as they appliy to the internet and computers and software. To that effect, I submit the following story about how cops in the UK were about to arrest some "software pirates" that were simply following the law and then got mad when they found this to be the case. Guess they should concentrate on shooting some innocent subway patrons instead.
Well, we're almost there.. just a little more and we'll be in 1984
"HOUSTON Houston's police chief is suggesting putting surveillance cameras in apartment complexes, downtown streets and even private homes."
link
link
Security in the USA
You know.. I just can't help posting this piece by Ronnie Polaneczky in the Philadelphia Daily News.. Good to know the paper hasn't totally gone to crap.
Case in point: When my family and I visited Punxsutawney, Pa., on Groundhog Day, we were frisked by security before boarding the shuttle bus to Gobbler's Knob to see furry Phil.
Because those terrorists can infiltrate anywhere.
Except, apparently, our country's seaports.
Case in point: When my family and I visited Punxsutawney, Pa., on Groundhog Day, we were frisked by security before boarding the shuttle bus to Gobbler's Knob to see furry Phil.
Because those terrorists can infiltrate anywhere.
Except, apparently, our country's seaports.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Arab port deal - part 2
So a few days I posted about the Arab Port Deal. Since then, it's turned into a hurricane of activity in the government. The interesting thing I've noticed is how the Republican congressmen are turning against the deal. Let me clue you in on something here: a) the president has an approval rating of less than 45%, b) The VP is even lower, c) the president is a lame duck, and most importantly d) the midterm elections are upon us. Of course congress would be against this deal! They don't want to look soft on terrorism and they could care less about supporting the BWH becasue they are on their own now for getting re-elected. Be sure to notice how up until the election they oppose him more and more. It's not that the R's finally got backbones, its that the BWH ride is over and they know it and it's time to get re-elected!
Anyway, so today I read that the President didn't even know about the deal until a few days ago. A deal that his administration put together and set up!!! You can look at this in one of two ways. Either the administraion is running by itself w/o the prsident in the loop or the president is lying to us again. Either way, its bad bad bad man.
Anyway, so today I read that the President didn't even know about the deal until a few days ago. A deal that his administration put together and set up!!! You can look at this in one of two ways. Either the administraion is running by itself w/o the prsident in the loop or the president is lying to us again. Either way, its bad bad bad man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)