If MemeStreams had higher visibility, it might have been mentioned in this article.

It has been weeks since President Bush's State of the Union speech, and I have not heard any outcry over his policy statement on cloning: "Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research: human cloning in all its forms." I can only guess that this means the public doesn't care, or doesn't understand what Mr. Bush means by this, or agrees with his nonsensical concept of what "human" means, or that somehow the stem cell scandal in South Korea has led to widespread agreement that we should just give up on such research. Any of these possibilities would be a mistake, not just for American science, but for the very human life the president seeks to protect.

It's a theoretical ban in the first place, like banning marriage between robots.

Perhaps it was President Bush who first said, "If popular culture has taught us anything, it is that someday mankind must face and destroy the growing robot menace."

Little did we know then that the menace is marriage.

But really, who are we to stand between two robots and their happiness?

All Clones Are Not the Same

In Pakistan, America is held responsible for the local reaction to the Danish cartoons. And our odious import duties on discount brassieres are adding fuel to the tire fires.

"Pakistan didn't used to be like this. All this extremism that you see here now is because of Afghanistan."

He meant the Afghanistan war that started in 1979, not the one that came after Sept. 11.

"Textile trade, not F-16's, is the only thing the US should do if at all US wanted to mellow extremism here."

Pakistani factories make everything from bras to shirts and sheets for companies like Wal-Mart, Polo Ralph Lauren and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia.

For Pakistan, American Aid Is All Guns, No Butter

To counter bin Ladenism, the military is planning a two-stage war. The first is being fought in open battles in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere and looks a lot like the kind of war most Americans assumed we'd wage on al Qaeda and terror-sponsoring states after the Sept. 11 attacks. The second stage is what senior military planners -- including Mr. Rumsfeld -- call "the Long War." It involves countering one set of ideas with another.

Enter here the business plan for General Memetics.

Lisa: They can't seriously expect us to swallow that tripe.
Skinner: Now as a special treat courtesy of our friends at the Meat Council, please help yourself to this tripe.

Hmmm, tripe.

Getting back to that war thing ...

Djibouti is a success story that hasn't made it into the news because U.S. soldiers aren't getting killed there.

This is consistent with the story that Robert Kaplan tells.

They're not much, but here are two recent Washington Post stories on "The Long War":

Rumsfeld Offers Strategies for Current War
Ability to Wage 'Long War' Is Key To Pentagon Plan

Did you notice the not-so-subliminal message back there?)

The Western Front

Ross Anderson told MPs that the upcoming release of Windows Vista would mean more computer files being encrypted.

He urged the government to look at establishing "back door" ways of getting around encryptions.

The Home Office later told the BBC News website it is in talks with Microsoft.

Did I just miss the last ten years, or did you speak too soon?

UPDATE: See my other post on this thread for another perspective from Peter Gutmann.

Ross Anderson urges Parliament to mandate key escrow; Microsoft agrees

Sweet. Although I would have appreciated a proper typesetting.

When Algerian nationalists launched a rebellion against French rule in November 1954, France, mired in similar wars for independence in its colonial territories, was in a poor position to cope with further upheaval. The Algerian strategy encompassed varying approaches and was more adaptable than that of the French, necessitating a rethinking of traditional counterinsurgency methods.

In this volume, originally published in 1963, David Galula reconstructs the story of his highly successful command in the district of Greater Kabylia, east of Algiers, at the height of the rebellion, and presents his theories on counterinsurgency and pacification. In the process, he confronts the larger political, psychological, and military aspects of the Algerian war, and provides a context for present-day counterinsurgency operations.

This groundbreaking work, featuring a new foreword by Bruce Hoffman, retains its relevancy as a challenge to traditional counterinsurgency tactics and presents approaches to predicting, managing, and resolving insurgent and guerilla conflict. The parallels between the Algerian war and modern warfare are striking, and lessons can be extracted from French successes and failures in its drive to contain and manage the Algerian uprising.

Pair it with The Battle of Algiers.

Pacification in Algeria, 1956-1958 | RAND | Monographs

Decius wrote:

Yeah, this is a partisan source, but I think ABC is likely to be reasonable.... We'll see what they say...

The information seems to be that: Iraq had dealings with Al'Q back in 1992/1993. They bought a limited amount of chemical and biological stuff back in 2000.

What are "dealings"? Anyway, it was likely opportunistic on both sides and not a strategic arrangement. If Saddam had rebuffed them, Al Qaeda could have gone elsewhere -- to Pakistan, for example, where they might have been offered nuclear materials or technology. So perhaps the US owes thanks to Saddam for sating their appetite with World War I-era technology.

As for as the "dealings" -- the US had substantial dealings with Islamist jihadists as late as 1989, funneling huge sums of money, weapons, and technical and operational support through Pakistan over a sustained period of several years. Our "ties" to the mujahideen were much stronger than Saddam's ever were, but no one ever seriously suggested this relationship as a basis for toppling the US government.

Peter Bergen -- a journalist who has worked for/with CNN, ABC, NYT, LA Times, Washington Post, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, and more -- met extensively with Osama bin Laden, conducted formal interviews of him, etc. Yet he won awards for his previous book, and he has a new book just now in stores.

'Dealings' between Iraq and Al Qaeda

Potentially of interest, but probably pretty dry reading and absent any distinctive authorial point of view.

This report summarizes a workshop on the technology, policy, and cultural dimensions of biometrics systems.

... fingerprints to facial recognition to DNA ...

This is freely available as PDF.

Summary of a Workshop on the Technology, Policy, and Cultural Dimensions of Biometric Systems

Hello and welcome to Show and Tell, a site that serves as sort of an orphanage for thrift store music and album cover art.

Highly browsable. Set aside some time.

show and tell home

I always liked this one.

Lisa: Can't you see the difference between earning something honestly and getting it by fraud?

Bart: Hmm, I suppose, maybe, if, uh ... no. No, sorry, I thought I had it there for a second.

Brought to you this week by the Enron trial.

Sorry, I thought I had it there for a second.

Lou Dobbs says his mission is to tell American viewers the truth, no matter how uncomfortable or controversial.

"There's nothing fair and balanced about me," he said, tweaking his Fox News rivals' slogan. "Because there's nothing fair and balanced about the truth."

"'He says, she says' journalism is a monstrous cop-out."

That sounds nice. But I found those sentiments rather quite at odds with this:

"People across the country tune in to Lou Dobbs because they know their views on immigration will be presented," said Rosemary Jenks, director of governmental relations at NumbersUSA, a policy group that favors reducing immigration. "He is a hero to a lot of people."

Apparently Dobbs is a "hero" to people who require daily re-affirmation of their existing views.

Dobbs's Outspokenness Draws Fans and Fire