skullaria wrote:
"With few exceptions ( Turkey , for example), Islamic countries are fascist, autocratic or theocratic, where women are subjugated and minorities persecuted. Islamic countries are rife with poverty and have been for centuries. Polls show that in many Islamic countries a majority of Muslims lionize the man responsible for the atrocities of September 11th and the terrorist gangs who routinely slaughter civilians in Israeli buses and restaurants. In Arab schools and on Arab television, children are taught the glory of becoming suicide bombers. Almost everywhere that Islam borders other cultures, there is violence.

The idea, then, that Islam is evil has far more plausibility than the idea that United States is evil. But merely, raising the question, "Is Islam evil?" provokes an instant, inevitable outcry: "Bigot!" "Racist!" "Zionist!" Indeed, the attempt to suppress debate on this question is so intense that few people in the mainstream will ask it."

(I really thought this was well written and an interesting viewpoint.)

I'm curious whose viewpoint it is, since it's unattached to a URL. If it's your own, I'm not sure why it's quoted.

I was in the process of responding, but I'm going to need more time to think through this. In short, though, I think the phrasing "Is Islam evil?" is intentionally provacative, so I have little sympathy for the whining about the result. If I ask someone, "Are you an asshole?", they're going to get immediately defensive, and I can hardly blame them for it.

Secondly, I'm not yet comfortable that the comparison between "Islam" and "the United States" is apples to apples. However, I think the wider debate is very interesting and I want to spend some time on it. I will try to craft a more complete response.

RE: Is Islam Evil?

Texas Rep Lamar Smith has introduced a bill to clear the way for the re-use of "orphan works" whose authors are unknown or unlocatable. This wasn't a big problem until 1976, when the US changed its rules and did away with copyright registration, so that everyone who created anything got an automatic lifetime-plus-decades copyright on it, from the lowliest napkin doodle to the most trivial Usenet post. This created the present situation where, according to the Supreme Court in Eldred v Ashcroft, 98 percent of the works in copyright are orphan works, and liable to disappear long before their copyrights expire.

The bill looks like a pretty good compromise, but the devil is in the details -- it requires petitioners to undertake "best practice" searches for missing copyright holders, but leaves those best practices up to the Copyright Office. Depending on the procedure established, this could either be the savior of American cultural history, or its downfall.

Boing boing : Orphan works bill introduced: could give old creativity a new life

Decius wrote:

Mr. Gonzales said that the administration promoted and respected the right of the press that is protected under the First Amendment. "But it can't be the case that that right trumps over the right that Americans would like to see, the ability of the federal government to go after criminal activity," he said.

Anybody know if transcripts of this are available? I'd like to know if he is being taken out of context. I'd like to see exactly what was said.

Not really out of context. The usage of "possible" in the title here implies action as opposed to simple feasibility, and Gonzales is just unclear enough that either is possible. But the last sentence does tell me that they think it's a reasonable thing to do.

Anyway, here it is :

George: "Do you believe journalists can be prosecuted for publishing classified information?"

Alberto: "There are some statutes on the books which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility. That's a policy judgement by the Congress in passing that kind of legislation. We have an obligation to enforce those laws. We have an obligation to ensure that our national security is protected."

That's courtesy of Crooks and Liars who also have the video.

RE: Gonzales Says Prosecutions of Journalists Are Possible - New York Times

"Ten Things I Hate About Commandments" is a mash-up trailer for a John Hughes style teen comedy, using footage from the Charlton Heston version of The Ten Commandments. It's masterfully done, and milk-out-the-nose funny.

It really is. I love that this kind of stuff is possible.

Boing Boing: If The Ten Commandments was a Teen Comedy

Friedman, as he does frequently, cuts right to heart of the matter here, I think.

A few notes :

But can one live with the threat from al Qaeda more readily than that from government power? That is the crucial question that must be answered. ... In the long run, is increased government power more or less dangerous than al Qaeda?

Part of what makes this such a difficult question to answer is that the results of unchecked (or poorly checked, which ends up being the same thing on a slightly longer time scale) government power are relatively well understood. We don't know exactly how things would pan out, but we have a pretty good idea of the kinds of things that would happen. Some of those ideas have been overblown by movies and the like, but I still feel like people have a decent grasp of what an exremely powerful government can do. On the other hand, we don't have a good idea of precisely how dangerous Al Qaeda is in the long run, or exactly how much effort on our part is required to reduce the threat to a reasonable level.

(this leaves out the question of what a "reasonable level" of threat really even is, which is largely what Friedman calls us to discuss. My point it that even if that consensus is had, I don't think anyone has a good feel for how to achieve that level.)

Of course, those who favor increased government power to conduct security operations believe the threat from Al Queda to be the most extreme. They have visions of nuclear annihilation and rampant islam. Many of them probably have visions of joyous liberals dancing with the terrorists, given what can be read on any given day around the internets.

I concede that the other side may sometimes minimize the danger somewhat, but it's tough to guage in a climate where *any* disagreement with a particular course of action by the administration is met with cries ranging from "obstructionist" to "traitor". I honestly and objectively don't think the left minimizes the threat as much as the right overhypes it.

The left *is*, however, extremely scared of an environment in which the government has broad powers of surveillance and the power to act on what they find. They, shit, I'll admit it, *we* fear political reprisals when the point *should* be catching terrorists. As it happens, we're starting to see some evidience that this happens. The extremists in Right Blogistan, of course, not only admit this, but glory in it. Moderate Republicans (a dying breed) and *actual* conservatives (likewise) are almost as uncomfortable with it as I am.

On both sides of the issue, it seems to us, there has developed a
fundamental dishonesty. Civil libertarians demand that due process
be respected in all instances, but without admitting openly the
catastrophic risks they are willing to incur. Patrick Henry's
famous statement, "Give me liberty or give me death," is a
fundamental pr... [ Read More (0.4k in body) ]

Civil Liberties and National Security

Toynbee tiles (also called Toynbee plaques) are messages of mysterious origin found embedded in asphalt in several major cities in the United States, and in three South American capitals as well. As of 2006, there are approximately 130 tiles, which are generally about the size of an American license plate but are sometimes considerably larger. They all contain some variation on the following inscription:

TOyNBEE IDEA
IN KUbricK's 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPiTER.

[ I've run accross this phenomenon once before... thought it was cool then, still do. -k]

Toynbee tiles

And he will be lying, again, just as he lied when he said: "Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic – it's just not going to work."

Not only will it work, but one can easily estimate how long it would take. If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society, it couldn't possibly take more than eight years to deport 12 million illegal aliens, many of whom don't speak English and are not integrated into American society.

[ Wow. Just wow.

That's brilliant. So forget the whole concept of America, and emulate the Nazis? Yeah. Yeah, lets do that. Because the Nazis had a domestic policy *everyone* can get behind.

This level of stupidity will never cease to amaze me. -k]

WorldNetDaily: Against a fence

"I don't know about you," he told his audience, referring to Bush's 2000 campaign comments on possible U.S. military involvement overseas, "but when
George Bush said he did not believe in nation building, I did not know he was talking about this nation."

Hear Fucking Hear.

Obama Assails Bush

Apologist for the GOP

Mary Cheney writes that she was "furious" when John Kerry mentioned her sexuality during a 2004 presidential debate. If Kerry had any advantage to gain, it was in pointing out the chilling example of parents — in this case, Vice President Cheney and his wife — who look the other way while their gay children are used as symbolic whipping posts by the Republican Party. If this was Kerry's intent, it was justified and timely.

Ms. Cheney also writes that she "never imagined that there were people who would try to use me and my sexual orientation for their own political benefit." If anyone has used sexual orientation in a bid to gain votes, it is the Republicans, with their scaremonger electoral tactics. To suggest otherwise is patently absurd.

How sad that Mary Cheney continues to be an apologist for the Republican Party. I understand that she loves her father, but her loyalty to his career comes at a tremendous cost to millions of gay Americans who don't hold a fraction of the rights of other Americans.

The fact that she "almost" quit her job with the 2004 Bush/Cheney ticket should not be congratulated or applauded. Almost doesn't count. In the old days, we had a name for people like her: We called them Uncle Tom.

Greg Durham,

Brooklyn, N.Y.

Responses to Mary Cheney

Waterproof enclosures for your elicit urban wifi network.

[ Sweet! Maybe it's time my apartment complex got some WiFi at the pool :) -k

p.s. "elicit" means to draw out information or provoke a response. you meant "illicit" which means unlawful or unsanctioned. ]

Weather-Proof Enclosures for Remote Wi-Fi� WLAN Equipment