Ok, here's the Iran thing - if the Iraqi dissidents sponsored by Tehran move into Iraq to fight against Saddam Hussein, they'll be considered enemy combatants. Wha...? If you're on our side, you're the enemy? Damn. I can't honestly believe that people accept this kind of crap - has no one read 1984?

Oh wait, it gets better...Rumsfeld is alleging that *IRAN* is helping Iraq somehow. As best as I can tell, he's not giving any details of any kind - which makes sense, since IRAN WILL NEVER LIFT A FREAKIN' FINGER TO HELP SADDAM HUSSEIN. That's about as likely as...ok, I can't come up with anything that ridiculous that's actually half-way plausible. Good God - what are we doing?

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper

Why am I quoting Eliot? 'cos I just heard that Rumsfeld has branded Syria as "hostile" for providing military equipment to Iraq. In other words, the Project for a New American Century (a.k.a. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Jeb Bush, and more) are kicking their plans into full gear. Those plans? Do a Google search for "Project for a New American Century" and take a look at the documents - these people plan to conquer the Middle East. All of it, basically. This is sooooo not good.

What a weird, weird world we live in - this big deal is made over the supposed column of Iraqi armor on its way down from Baghdad for hours today...and now, CNN.com (why do I keep looking there? I feel dirty...) has a small headline saying something along the lines of "Oops! Not real! No threat! We swear!" How am I supposed to know what to believe?

Oh my god - Paul Cellucci, US Ambassador to Canada, just told the Canadians that we're upset with them. And there "there may be short-term strains here."And "security trumps trade," which sure sounds like a threat to me. Jesus Christ. Stop the country...I want to get off! 

Lowell is really quite nice when it's warm and sunny, especially when the rivers and canals are running high. Lowell is the ur-American mill town - the first town in America to be built entirely around the mills. For that matter, it would never have existed without the mills - there was nothing here before then. It's a town of its rivers (I live right at the confluence of the Concord and Merrimack Rivers) and its canals (more canals than I can name - my building is surrounded by the rivers on two sides and a canal between the two on the remainder, for example), and they're all running high right now, melt-off from the snowy winter. There's something soothing about water running, at least to me. I've always been fascinated by it. And it's all the more so when the water is so high as to make the trees growing alongside the Concord, behind my building, look like they're drowning - the river's got to be running at least three feet above normal, probably higher still.

They've also reopened the trolly lines. They're just curiousities now, ferrying tourists from one part of the National Historical Park to another - the downtown (where I live) is full of old mills, and a number of them now hold museums as well as apartments, like the one I'm in. The trolley storage facility is across the street from me - I can see them coming out in the morning. There's a trolley line going across the street and through Kerouac Park, on my side of the street but seperated from my building by a canal, but it's not used any more - the tracks run down to the old Federal building, next to my building complex, which is being rebuilt as an arts center for the Middlesex Community College, based across the street from the Fed building. Across the Concord from the Federal Building lies the Lowell Auditorium and the adjacent Merrimack Rep Theatre, with a massive Catholic church next door to MRT. It's a nice area, right around here, with plenty of history. I really appreciate it.

But right now, I've got to run - I saw ducks in the Concord that looked hungry, and I've got some stale bread...

CNN.com headline:

President presses Congress for $75 billion to fund war, promises humanitarian aid "as soon as possible"

The unseen rest of the quote?

"...or whenever we get around to it. They're just poor people, right?"

Quote seen on a baseball message board:

George Bush is not the Anti-Christ. There is no such thing as "the Anti-Christ." George Bush is simply Benito Mussolini without the journalistic background.

God damn...I just can't stop being so amazingly angry. This is astonishing to me - how did we get here? Is this really happening? I know, it obviously is, but it doesn't feel real, on some level. I mean, the US? Invading another country? While the whole rest of the world condemns us? It's one thing when we're already THERE (Vietnam) but this...this is the Soviet Union invading Afghanistan. That's the only parallel I can come up with. And that's SO not a good parallel.

There's an article at Salon today talking about the feeling of needing to leave the country. I can't deny it, I 've been feeling that myself. I've even found myself casually looking at job sites for Montreal, just in case, y'know. Is that what this has come to? Are we really that complacent as a people that we'll accept invading other countries on a whim, insulting anyone who disagrees with us (and then implicating them in arming the countries we're invading), and depriving ourselves of our most basic and important civil liberties? Well, yeah, this is America - land of the pretty damned dumb.

Oh, yeah, 'FNX posted their top 500 alternative songs of all time here with exactly one numetal song in the top 50, some crap from Linkin Park - as if I know the song. =) Teen Spirit was #1 - shock and surprise - followed by Closer and then Blister in the Sun, if you'll believe it. How Soon Is Now, which was ALWAYS #1 when they did this in the mid '90s, dropped to #6, and they put Should I Stay Or Should I Go at #7. Huh? THAT's the top Clash song of all time? Of course, I heard the DJ refer to Train in Vain as being off of Clash on Broadway...which it is, but it first appeared as a hidden track on London Calling, but well, they obviously need to listen to that album again anyway.

And on a Salon blogs note - our friend filchyboy is up to his old tricks again. Look at safersex.org, where he's getting his 7000 hits a day recorded at...and then look at his blog. Not the same thing - he's cheating the counter again. Not that I really care that mcuh any more - oh no! He might dethrone the chick talking about porn! Oh no! I really need to get reinvolved in the community, don't I?

Just watched Boondock Saints - a nearly-straight-to-video piece of Tarentino-esque action with a massive infusion of South Boston and, well, morals, if that's possible. Nice film - definitely deserved better attention than it got at release. It's getting it now - the DVD was the #2 selling DVD at Newbury Comics, where I bought it for $12 today...then again, any quality movie at $12 SHOULD sell like hot cakes - I also picked up Mars Attacks and Drop Dead Gorgeous for 8 bucks a piece. Good movie buying. Anyway - nice movie, actually makes Billy Connolly, crazed Scottish comedian, into a total badass, and has some quality Willem Dafoe in drag, which is something we ALL need more of. Watch it if you like Tarentino, Woo, Ritchie.

I wasn't going to watch any action flicks right now - didn't think I could handle it, what with the war movie on my TV every day, but this didn't feel real, not like what's going on in reality. Of course, while I was watching this, a couple dozen more cruise missles and poorly-guided-bombs landed in Baghdad. If you get the Boston Globe, look at the picture on the top half of the front page of the "War on Iraq" section - it's a home, destroyed, with a kid holding some rabbits standing in front of it, staring at the camera. I almost started crying, just to look at it.

Also, as a sign that the reporting in my local paper is a hell of a lot more honest than CNN and their ilk, here's the headlines for the three lead stories from the Globe today: "US units battle resistant Iraqis", "As war strategy unfolds, risks may grow", and "Combat erupts in a port city thought secure". All very objective headlines, just describing the facts that their stories recount. CNN's big headline currently? "ADVANCING ON BAGHDAD" with a subheadline of "Battle rages in Nasiriya". In other words, you can find the facts in their stories, but they're spinning the front news to look only at the supposed positives. It's all about the spin job, how the war is sold.

We're winning this war, that's obvious. This phase of the war, the organized army v. organized army phase, we'll win it. But it's already proving bloodier than expected by most anyone - even me. I was hoping it wouldn't be nearly this bloody - I was praying that Hussein died in that first strike. Because, at last count, something like 30 Americans have died for this, another, what, 15 or 20 are prisoners. I don't have numbers on Iraqi dead, but they've got to dwarf the American casualties, which are already far, far too many. I know, now that we're in there, we have no choice. I understand that, and even reluctantly accept that. I hope it ends so quickly that no one else needs to die, though I know it won't happen. But that is not going to stop me from raging against this horrible mistake we're making. That is not going to stop me from calling for comprehensive and committed planning to building a truly democratic Iraq, even if the government it elects is not one friendly the US - see this article for why this is so, so important. That is not going to stop me from taking to the streets to make sure we don't do this again. We've already accidently hit Iran with errant Tomahawk missles, not to mention the busload of Syrian civilians we accidently slaughtered. The whole world will hate us if we don't do everything completely right from this point onward - and lord knows the Bushies are going to fuck up as much as humanly possible, maybe more than that. We need to scream to the world that Bush does not represent the American people, that we are his victims, too. And we need to stop him, through massive application of public pressure, from taking this further. Do your part. Stop the next war now.

Holy damn! Polanski won the Directing Oscar for The Pianist! Damn! I still haven't seen it - too depressing subject matter for me lately - but I've heard it's supposed to be great. But it's amazing that the Academy actually did give an award to POLANSKI. I mean, this is a man who can't enter the country because he was arrested for having sex with a 14 year old girl. I heard that some people in Hollywood were trying to get him permission to come back to the States for the ceremony but were rejected...that's a shame.

Oh, and good on you Michael Moore.

CNN's headline for a story about the demonstrations today: Americans demonstrate for, against war. In the article, they mention the New York protest (anywhere from 100,000 to 500,000 antiwar protesters), San Francisco,  DC, Chicago antiwar protests...and one small pro-war protest in Chicago. It's ludicrous to think that any pro-war protest anywhere in the country could match up to the NY protest (...which, if you haven't heard, stretched down Broadway from 42nd St. to Washington Square Park, packed solid...100,000 is the very conservative estimate), yet CNN has still opted to put the "for" ahead of "against". As if we didn't already have more than enough proof of their bias...

I was in the Boston rally and march Thursday night - it was great, even though the ANSWER twerps hijacked it. Hopefully the United for Justice With Peace people (including Salon Blogs' own Toby), who are organizing a big rally and march for next Saturday on Boston Common, will remember to get their own sound system to keep the ANSWER twerps from taking control. Nothing ruins a good protest like Communists...

Why are we now hearing that the attacks might not start tonight? C'mon, we all know it's coming. Everyone knows what's going to happen - why is the Bush administration trying to leak that they might wait? Just to keep us all on edge further?

...and now Saddam Hussein himself has rejected the ultimatum. I'm actually surprised that he hasn't already launced attacks against the US troops massed in Kuwait - well, ok, they're well defended there so he's unlikely to do much damage. But still - all hell is going to break loose at 8pm EST Wednesday night...I have a feeling I won't be sleeping much tomorrow night. I know I'm going to end up watching all night, even when no news comes in, like it's some video game, or Black Hawk Down 2: Baghdad Style.

Which does remind me - where am I going to watch it? Obviously, Fox Not News isn't an option, and CNN, while it has Amanpour in Kuwait City (she's generally a good reporter and commentator) and Robertson in Baghdad (another British-trained telejournalist, good at just reporting and not editorializing too much), I really don't want to listen to the American talking heads. I wish I got BBC News TV here - maybe BBC America will pre-empt their normal array of British sitcoms for BBC News - they did that for 9/11, giving me a news source I could actually watch without wanting to throw things at the TV.

Three ministers and three private secretaries (parliamentary represenatives of ministers, I think) have resigned from the Labour government in the UK - this is all by noon GMT, or 7 this morning EST...in other words, before the debate in the House of Commons today. The Commons vote on war comes tonight, at 2200 GMT, or 5pm EST. It'll take 245 Labour MPs (out of a total of 410 Labour and 648 total MPs, by my count) voting against war to stop the resolution, assuming every Conservative votes for it - which may not be the case, since 14 Tories voted against the previous Iraq vote back in late February (joining the Liberal Democrats, Welsh and Scottish nationalists, and 122 Labour MPs). I'm betting it'll pass, but barely - and not by enough for Blair to keep his job.

Oh, and in other news, the Poles are sending 200 soldiers to the Gulf. Oh, joy - our coalition is soooo broad-based.

So now all the politicians are lining up behind the "We're at war! No dissent allowed!" sign - Lieberman, all the Republicans, even supposed critics like Kerry...what the hell? Isn't the whole point of a democracy such that we can disagree at any time with anything? My favorite was a bit I heard from DeLay, evil bastard that he is, something about "There was a time for vigorous discussion, but not now." That made me giggle - as if the "patriotic" warmongers ever allowed us to have a vigorous discussion without calling us traitors.

And I keep hearing that piece-of-shit line - we must support the troops, blah, blah. I heard Kerry spout it, among many others...of all people, John freakin' Kerry should know that "supporting the troops" does NOT mean sending them to get shot at, gassed, etc... Everyone in this goddamned country seems to be a hypocrite and there's nothing I can do but rant.

Why does everybody keep saying "coalition of the willing" even in other contexts? I just heard someone on CNN describe the US coalition in Kosovo in '99 as a "coalition of the willing" - what does that expression have to do with anything? It's not even like it's catchy or anything...

Heh - the Iraqi foreign minister's reaction to Bush saying Saddam should leave? Bush should leave office instead. I've got an even better idea - why don't they both leave?

Well, we've reached the point where the rumors are flying madly - on various message boards on the 'net, you can find all kinds of theories as to what's happening right now. I've read that B-52s have taken off from a base in the UK, a base that was used to launch B-52 missions in '91, and I've read some weirdness in New Mexico around major air bases...I'm sure that I'll find far more if I keep looking. And I can't stop - I know 95% of what I find is completely untrue, and the remaining 5% is misleading, but it's like the greatest car crash ever - I just can't turn away. We're going to WAR. What else can I do now?

Huh...got a hit earlier today from a US Pacific Command HQ IP...just browsing from the blogs.salon.com page, it seems. If anyone else in the military happens to see this, PLEASE understand that those of us who are opposed to war are all (well, except for the scattered few total morons) supporting you - by which we mean you not getting killed.

And, of course, the markets are skyrocketing up...which doesn't make the least bit of sense to me. I mean, uncertainity about whether - no, when - we'd go to war pushed the markets down, but *knowing* we're going to war is pushing them up? How does that work? How does knowing the price of oil is going to go even higher, massive economic damage in the region, increased risks of terror, etc - how does all that make the market stronger?

Now they're saying a 72 hour ultimatum is, and I quote, "right in the ballpark." Which means Thursday night.

Yes, the black is deliberate.

...Powell is making some damned flimsy excuses for the supposed "material breach" that justifies this war.

"We were hoping, but had no illusions..." regarding Iraq co-operating. Uh, you didn't want them to co-operate. You made it much harder for them to co-operate, but aiming a whole lot of guns at them.

He's attacking France and Russia, sort of...blaming them for not passing the resolution that the UK put forward. More or less.

Ah, the US, UK and Spain together decided to throw out the resolution and go it alone. As if anyone but Bush actually had a real voice there.

Bush is going to deliver an ultimatum - leave or war, which we all know means war. I think the main reason they're doing this ultimatum isn't even the fig leaf of an excuse, but because they need a day to get everyone out of Iraq, and this gives them a reason to wait another day.

"all of the leaders spoke of a future for Iraq that will be brighter" - yeah, because the freakin' oilfields will be on fire.

Powell - Bush is committed to the UN. HA!

This is reality?

Fun listening to The Connection on 'BUR right now, interviewing a French news analyst. He's talking about how France and Britain will come back together "once Tony Blair is toppled". Heh.

Hey - Powell's talking...

From Reuters, via WBUR: U.N. Inspectors Checking Out of Baghdad Hotels

U.N. officials said the chief weapons inspectors would tell the Security Council later on Monday that their teams would leave Iraq within 24 hours.

Yet more evidence - Tuesday's the day.

So they're saying Hussein's got to leave Iraq to prevent war...that's going to happen. And the US is alleging that there's new evidence that Iraq is preparing to use chemical weapons - no shit! I'm shocked! A country we're about to invade, a regime we're about to overthrow, is ready to use any and all means to protect itself? What a fucking surprise.

From the Beeb, on Bush's speech tonight:

The speech will not be an immediate declaration of war, but it will give Saddam Hussein only a few further hours to leave Iraq or face an attack, according to the BBC's Justin Webb in Washington.

Yeah, it'll be Tuesday. United for Peace is serving as a clearinghouse for day-after protests - if this goes down like I expect, I'll be in Boston Wednesday afternoon.

BBC is reporting that the second resolution has been withdrawn from the Security Council, and the White House is saying Bush'll address the nation at 8pm EST tonight. The bombing won't start tonight - they still need time to get the UN inspectors and other foreigners out of Baghdad. Tomorrow night, I'm betting, around 6:30 or 7pm EST - gotta catch the network news shows, after all.

Damn, this is really happening.

From the Beeb online - Diplomacy hour-by-hour. Let's watch diplomacy fail! Woo!

It's really happening...we're honest-to-god going to war, sometime in the next week. I have a hard time believing it - I mean, c'mon, this isn't the '60s, right? We learned from Vietnam, right? My mom's just in shock - she's going to vigils on the town common almost nightly, and she's ANGRY...way angrier than I've ever seen. Well, other than when she's angry at me, but that's a different matter... =) Hey, small things - anything that can make me feel a little less doomed right now is a good thing. We're going to war. And it's not going to be as easy as the punditocracy is saying it'll be - a military analyst on NPR as I was pulling in to work today was saying that, yes, the traditionally military aspects of the war will be over quickly - the head-to-head battles with the organized military units of Iraq's army. But the street fighting in Baghdad? The guerillas? Resolving the situation in Iraqi Kurdistan once the Turks invade? (and don't tell me that Colin Powell telling the Turks not to invade will stop them...) The eventual uprising by whichever of the Sunni or Shi'ite Arab Iraqis we push back down? (which is, of course, almost certain to be the Shi'ite - after all, we're going to institute a new military dictatorship...and all the generals are Sunni. That and the Saudis would throw a fit if we were to give the Shi'ites any power. And the Bushies' fear of Iran would also keep them from helping the Shi'ites...etc...)

I saw a simple estimate of how many occupation troops will be needed, just for keeping order: 1 occuptation soldier for every 500 occupied inhabitants, plus 1 officer for every 10 soldiers. With Iraq's 23 million inhabitants, that works out to just about exactly 50,000 soldiers and officers. 50,000 - think about that for a minute. Add in the troops we will HAVE to commit for infrastructure rebuilding, putting down revolts, dealing with the Turkish/Kurdish war...100,000 troops doesn't seem unlikely. And we're not talking about a 90 day occupation here - it'll be years 'til we're out.

I'm not rooting for a quagmire - oh, god, no. The single biggest reason I'm against this war is that I don't want to see American soldiers die - I know, they signed up, knowing the risks, and their job is to die, if needed, for their country, but for anyone to die in this war is an insult to their dedication and honor. But it's hard to hope for a quick-and-easy war...because that'll only give the Bushies more ammo for the next war, be it in Syria, Iran, North Korea...who knows. But there will be another one, if this one goes cleanly. And that's even more horrifying than we were are now.

I don't know what to do about all this. I feel useless...no, I AM useless. 1/3 of the country is vehemently against the war - and the other 2/3 actually buy the allegations that Iraq is connected to al Qaeda. I try not to be an arrogant elitist, I don't WANT to feel smarter than the rest of the country...but when a majority of the country buys Bush's line on Iraq and 9/11 hook, line, and sinker, what am I supposed to think? When the rest of the country seems to believe everything it's told, how am I supposed to have faith that they'll realize the truth in the end? We're a nation of suckers, one born every minute, and the Bushies are taking advantage, to say the least. I heard some electricians working on something in the new building saying something like "If Gore had won, we'd all be reading the Koran now." "Yeah, we'd be praying on our lunch breaks." Now, putting aside the spate of stories on our troops, praying in the Kuwaiti desert, and the ironic juxtaposition there, this just makes me sick. I know it's wrong to look down on others, but how much of a moron do you have to be to spout that kind of shit?

ESPN Classic is showing maybe my favorite sporting event of all time - Game 7 of the '84 NBA Finals, Lakers at Celtics. This game is everything I love about basketball - fast, good shooting, good defense, real hatred between the teams, crazy loud crowd...and this is coming at the end of maybe the greatest series in NBA history. Check out Bill Simmons' piece of how Game 4 of the '84 Finals proves that the NBA isn't as good now as it was then...which is pretty obvious, but still. Game 4 had the clotheslining of Kurt Rambis by Kevin McHale and overtime, but Game 7...it was in Boston. It ends with the crowd just falling onto the court for the last couple minutes of the game. Damn, I love this game...

I'm going to sit hear and watch 19 year old basketball now... =) I already missed the Greatest Game Ever, though - the triple overtime game 5 from the '75 Finals between Boston and Phoenix, which I still haven't seen...it was on from 12 to 2, with a documentary on it before hand. Ah well...

Paying Taxes Electronically. You can file now, but not pay your taxes until 15. Here's how. [The Motley Fool]

Crap! Taxes! Damn news aggregator, reminding me I need to do my taxes...

... an astounding admission by a Washington Post writer who revealed the truth to Poynter.Org columnist Jim Romenesko: White House reporters have to have quotes that they publish, after "background" interviews, approved by the Stalinist censors in the Rove/Fleischer office of White House Communications. Not only do the so-called reporters have to get approval before including the quotes in an article, the White House can alter the quotations and demand that they be printed as though they were the original quotations. As a strategy, Rove and Fleischer have White House Staff provide many interviews on "background" so that then they can force the reporters to submit to the White House censors any quotations that they want to actually print.

If the Washington Post, New York Times, television network news and other major media had even an ounce of integrity -- just an ounce -- they would pull their reporters out of the White House at once. They are providing the Bush Administration with a cloak of legitimacy, when the reporting is really only censored pablum. This is something out of the Stalinist Soviet Union, not America. The Washington Post, in particular, has taken an editorial turn into the dark side in the last few years. If the Post truly believed in a free press, it would shutter its White House operations right now, until such time as the Rove/Fleischer Pravda operation accepted the ground rules for a free press. But we won't hold our breath. Just as Rove and Fleischer need the Stepford/collusionist White House Press Corps, the Post and other "news" outlets need to give their readers and viewers the appearance that they are covering the White House. Of course, they aren't really "covering" anything. So-called "journalists" are paid six figure salaries to be stenographers for Ari and Karl.

We just wonder who passes out the knee pads as the White House Press Corps files into the briefing room.

Cyber terrorism 'overhyped'. Terrorists are not about to launch an attack in cyberspace, say security experts at the CeBIT technology fair. [BBC News | Front Page | UK Edition]

Well, duh. Not only do I think that the potential impact of "cyberterrorism" is pretty limited, but I highly doubt it'd be a big enough deal to get terrorists to actually do it...I mean, which will get you more press: shutting down some ATMs or hijacking a plane?

Bush is saying that he'll reveal a "road map" for Mideast peace. Sometime. I think he's claiming he'll show it when there's a flying pig, or some such...oh, no, check that - when there's a Palestinian prime minister with "real authority". Which I guess means "Once Arafat's dead, Sharon's killed 3/4 of the West Bank population, and the survivors agree to just leave." This road map reminds me of Nixon's secret plan to end the war in Vietnam - if he told you about it, it wouldn't be secret any more, now, would it?

John Chambers, illustrious CEO and all-around lead mucky-muck here at Cisco (and major Republican donor, and much more...but that's another rant...) just received  the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) "My Boss is a Patriot" award. Now, I know, the award itself isn't a bad thing - it's for supporting employees in the National Guard and the various military Reserves, an important thing, especially now that the Reserves are being thrown into near-constant active duty. But I'm cringin' anyway...it's that word "patriot". Why couldn't they have called it "My Boss Supports Our Men And Women In Uniform"? When did "patriot" become such a loaded word, anyway? It just feels uncomfortable to me - I think mainly because of how it and - even more so - "unpatriotic" are used. They're just used to seperate Us and Them...argh. I lost my train of thought. Ah well.

I've been really, really enjoying Doonesbury's running gag this week on the paradoxes and self-contradictions in the argument for war - check it out here: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. NPR also had a funny bit on All Things Considered yesterday on the logic of war - give it a listen. Oh, and check out this article at the American Prospect, in the same vein: Tolkein Internationlism: George W. Bush is Gollum...

Crap! I hate browsers! I just had a long piece written and wiped it out by clicking a damn link in an email. Argh. Time to rewrite...

Turkey outraged by Ocalan verdict. Turkey plans an appeal after a European court rules that jailed rebel Abdullah Ocalan did not get a fair trial. [BBC News | World | UK Edition]

...wait, are you telling me that a Kurd didn't get a fair trial in Turkey? Say it ain't so!

I know, I know...Ocalan sits astride the line between freedom fighter and terrorist, at best. But I'm a lot more sympathetic to the Kurds than I am to the Turkish justice system...

Stocks Open Slightly Lower. Stocks appeared weaker due to a steep drop in Britain's stock market and deepening concerns over a looming war with Iraq. By Reuters. [New York Times: Business]

Stocks? Lower? I am SHOCKED, I say SHOCKED!

A coalation of the wavering: Britain wobbles on war [The Smirking Chimp]

This has to be a hell of a sign for the Bushies - the Canadians are garnering more world respect on Iraq than the US. And it's looking more and more likely that the UK will drop out of The Coalition Of The Paid-off - maybe we're not paying them enough? Would that leave ANY military forces from anyone else involved in this? I'm not counting Kuwait, obviously - that's just a wing of the US Army anyway. The only supporters this would leave the US with are Spain, Italy, the Eastern Europeans, the occupied Arabs (i.e., Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, U.A.E...), Israel (hah!), and Japan, as best as I can tell. I don't see any of them sending troops into Iraq, for some reason.

This has gone beyond bizarre - that's what I just have a hard time handling. It's one thing to disagree with the administration on foreign policy. It's one thing to think that the administration is making mistakes. But these people...they've done everything wrong. EVERYTHING. I can't find a single thing they've done *right* on foreign policy since they came into office. Let's see...they tried to pick a fight with China - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, since the Chinese government is a reprehensible dictatorship exploiting its people for the benefit of a small elite and all. But once an easier enemy showed up, China got re-evaluated and magically became an ally - notice how they're not threatening to veto the W Wants War resolution? The Bushies managed to stumble into quite literally the largest outpouring of goodwill the US has received since we, y'know, won World War II - and NONE OF IT IS LEFT. I mean, damn. They've successfully pissed off every other democracy on the planet (except for Japan, so far...) including the ones that you really have to WORK at to piss off, if you're the US - Canada, the UK (Tony Blair notwithstanding), Australia, Mexico...you know, our strongest allies? The public in those countries thinks Bush is a ninny. They're right, of course, but that's not the point. Sure, they're finally getting somewhere in the erstwhile War On Terror, but bin Laden slipped through their fingers, it took a year and a half to catch Mohammed, they've violated pretty much every treaty there IS for treatment of prisoners, etc...and don't even get me started on the Constitutional violations domestically. And Iraq...oy. With both Iraq and North Korea, it really feels like the Bushies are reading from a Choose Your Own Adventure book, looking ahead at the outcomes from their potential choices, and ALWAYS taking the worst one. I mean, neither luck nor incomptence alone can explain how poorly these guys have done.

There was an excellent article at Salon yesterday about the difference between Bush I and Bush II on foreign policy...while I think Bush I was a lousy president, who did a good job of making the US economy go downhill, and I disagree with many of his objectives in foreign policy, it's hard to argue that he was bad at foreign policy. He and his team decided what they wanted, and went out and made it so, persuading the rest of the world that they wanted it, too. They got SYRIA to support the Gulf War, for chrissakes! In terms of behavior, Bush II is the polar opposite of Daddy...why should the entire world pay the price for W's insecurity vis a vis his more intelligent and successful father?

...not meaning to be a whiner, but isn't a 21,000 fuel-air explosive bomb a weapon of mass destruction...?

'Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom': After the Advent of the Bitchun Society. In Cory Doctorow's science fiction novel set in Disney World, death is a thing of the past. By Taylor Antrim. [New York Times: Books]

Hey, good for Cory Doctrow (of bOing bOing, of course)! Gettin' reviewed in the NYT...not bad at all.

Damn - even with the last couple months of slacking on the posting, I've still used 43% of my 40mb of Radio space. Damn! How did I do *that*?

See her picture in a thousand places 'cause she's this year's girl
You think you all own little pieces of this year's girl
Forget your fancy manners
Forget your English grammar
'Cause you don't really give a damn about this year's girl

Congrats to the Clash for the Rock Hall of Fame induction, but the publicity they've gotten (sadly, most of it due to Joe Strummer's death) has overshadowed the other inductee to come out of the punk movement of late '70s England - Elvis Costello. I first really listened to Costello only a few years ago, back when I was working in the music department at my college bookstore. I was introduced to a LOT of good music during that time - no real shock there. But only a few albums really stuck with me - Whiskeytown's Faithless Street, Primal Scream's Vanishing Point, a few others...and Elvis Costello and the Attractions' This Year's Model. I'm listening to it right now, as you could probably guess - just got to the ultra-catchy "Pump It Up", which still makes me want to bounce around the room after hundreds of listenings. Costello wasn't really a punk...I'd say he's more a musical descendant of Paul McCartney than anything else - combining pre-rock pop influences with straightforward Buddy Holly influenced rock and roll, and a certain snarl that McCartney never had. My first thought, when I heard about Costello's collaboration with Burt Bacharach, was to laugh - it just sounded silly. It also sounds like selling out, the once-punkish rocker teaming up with a lounge act...but it WORKED. Costello can rock with the best of them, but at the core, he's got a pop sensibility like nearly no one else ever has. If ever anyone has deserved to be in the Rock Hall, it's him.

Oh, and then there's maybe my favorite Elvis Costello moment - the Saturday Night Live 25th anniversary show. Not a bad show in general - mainly because it had a healthy dose of Bill Murray. But anyway - various musical acts played - including The Beastie Boys. They started playing "Sabotage" when Elvis charged out from off-stage, grabbed the mike and said "Ladies and gentlemen, I'm very sorry...there's no reason to play that song tonight." And then the Beasties and Elvis slammed into "Radio, Radio"...doing a repeat of a bit Elvis did with the Attractions 20 years earlier on SNL. I just thought it was cool. =)

Two more reasons why Boomtown may be the best thing since sliced bread:

In the episode I mentioned earlier, they just threw all semblance of reality out the window and had one cop jump off the roof of a motel and gun down three Russian mobsters using two machine guns he conveniently came up with. I'm not sure where he got them. But hey, it was one cool scene. =)

And in the episode I just finished watching, they let Neal McDonough, DA David McNorris, he of the disturbingly striking blue or maybe gray eyes, native of Dorchestah, MA (as is Donnie Wahlberg, also in Boomtown and Band of Brothers along with McDonough, both written by Graham Yost...ack, IMDB-trolling again...) bust out "You've never seen me when I'm HAMMAHED! HAMMAHED! HAMMAHED!" As a Mass. native, I appreciate that. =)

Hey, look, kids! American soldiers murdered two Afghan detainees while in custody in Afghanistan in December! God bless America!

*sigh*

Boomtown does all the little things right, it really does. The episode I'm watching now has a Russian girl in it, named Lara...and what plays during a dramatic scene with her? Lara's Theme from Dr. Zhivago. That's sooooo right. I like it. This show makes me happy and bouncy. =)

Oh God...and I thought invading Iraq was fucking insane. But no, no, no...according to Nicholas Kristof, the Bushies are "reluctantly" pushing the idea of a military strike against North Korea this summer if diplomacy fails. Which it will, since we're, y'know, NOT TRYING. This can NOT be serious. I mean, Iraq is winnable, I guess. Iraq's military can be beaten, Iraq's air forces are insignificant, Iraq has no capacity to do any real damage to any of its neighbors, etc...North Korea, on the other hand...let's see, they have a million soldiers on the border with South Korea. A well-trained, well-armed army. They've got enough artillery within range of Seoul to flatten the city in next to no time. They've got missles that EASILY have the range to strike Tokyo and the rest of Japan (and myabe the ability to hit California, though that's a lot more questionable). Oh, and they've got chemical and biological weapons, almost certainly, and very likely have nuclear weapons. Yeah, attacking them makes PERFECT sense.

Let's put aside the moral aspects. Yes, we can win a war with North Korea. In a straight-up, never-mind-the-casualties war, we can win a war against just about anybody. But a war with North Korea would have plenty of casualties: thousands of Americans dead, for certain, probably tens of thousands. Not to mention the cost of military equipment lost, very, very expensive military equipment - planes, tanks, and probably even naval vessels - remember, that missle the North Koreans just tested last week was an anti-ship missle. That's a LOT of money.

Which gets me to the economic ramifications. South Korea is the 10th largest economy in the world. Seoul is the largest city in South Korea. In the event of all-out war with North Korea, Seoul will transform into a smoking wasteland within a day or so. Think about that: the capital of the 10th largest economy in the world destroyed. Think the world economy would react well to that? You've got to assume that South Korea would be an economic non-factor for years recovering. Oh, and Japan - sure, it wouldn't get the full-on annhilation, but we're still talking about some major damage to, if I remember correctly, the SECOND largest economy in the world. Can you say "massive world-wide depression the likes of which none of us have ever seen"? I certainly can - and if we go to war with North Korea, you better be prepared for just that.

Oh, and the humanity: I can't see how this possibly could end without hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of dead. Yeah, MILLIONS.

Kim Jong Il is prepared to go to war with the US. He honestly believes he can win, and believes that he will eventually be attacked by the US anyway, so why not get it going now? That's why we're seeing the deliberate provocations - restarting the nuke program, testing missles, the spy plane interception...he's gambling that we'll back down and give him what he wants: economic aid and a formal non-aggression pact. And if not? Well, he believes he can win, as I said. You've got to think the Bushies aren't so stupid as to not know this. But it seems they are...not a crisis? If this isn't a crisis but Iraq IS (ok, Iraq is a crisis...because we sent 250,000 troops there and said we were going to invade)...

This just can't be real, can it? One stupid decision and the whole world gets fucked. I thought we put this behind us when the Cold War ended. Why are the Bushies trying so hard to start it again?

Well, that was nifty - I'm watching the pilot of Boomtown, which they've been showing on Bravo today, and there's a sequence with a cop chasing a suspect on foot. There's some techno music playing, and I know I recognize it from *somewhere*, but where? It hits me - Run Lola Run. Niiice. I appreciate that...there's something inherently cool about a show that thinks to reference Run Lola Run. Well, I think so - I love me that movie.

Something that's been bothering me: under Patriot II (officially the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, but hey...), the government has the right to take away my citizenship if I'm associated with a terrorist group. That bothers me on plenty of levels in and of itself - it seems like an out-and-out violation of our constitutional rights as American citizens, which is...well, nauseating. But that's not all - how do we know what groups are terrorist? I mean, yeah, I know about Al Qaeda, Hizbullah, ETA, the various and sundry IRAs (though I don't think the Provos have been designated as such by the State Department - they'd have to arrest the entire population of Boston) but there's a lot more...how many of these are on the lists? How many other organizations that aren't there are on the list? How about domestic terrorists...? Oh, wait - if I remember correctly, the law only applies to foreign terrorist organizations, thereby protecting Ashcroft's buddies in the anti-abortion terrorist group Army of God. But still - how am I supposed to know what groups are actually on the list?

...ok, I think I found it here on the State Dept's website - but I know this is out-of-date, since we just recently designated a couple Chechen groups last week - part of buying off the Russians for Iraq. Now I'm going to try to find an example of a "terrorist" organization in operation today that's NOT on the list - one that we tacitly support...

From the "yeah-I'm-a-big-dork" department:

I'm getting an inordinate amount of satisfaction out of being the first person in the entire building to get my nameplate up on my cubicle. Yeah, I know, but hey, small things, right?

Driving down to our new building this morning (oh, I didn't mention? We're moving. Everything. In two weekends. It's been insane - part of why I've been AWOL so much) to set up the build machines, I heard a funny thing on the best damn sports show, period. No, not the one called that, but the actual best damn sports show, period - NPR's Only A Game, at 7 and 2 every Saturday on WBUR (and I assume other stations, but hey, I only know mine). Great intelligent commentary on sports. But anyway - a commentator made a wisecrack about the Avignon Presidency which just killed me. It's exactly the right combination of too smart and too accurate. Anyway - off to do work. I think I'm going to be spending a large swath of my day plugging things in. Joy. =)