He had become death, the destroyer of words
More on George Bush and his continuing attempts to treat the law with the respect normally reserved for two-dollar prostitutes with a crack habit. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was given permission to have a look through the wealth of legal opinions drafted by the White House (Basically their version of porn) which are supposed to justify among other things tapping Americans without a warrant and-surprise!- he was somewhat unhappy with the things he found. Excerpt:
1. An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.
2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President's authority under Article II.
3. The Department of Justice is bound by the President's legal determinations.
I’m sure there is a banana republic or two somewhere in the world where the President is now dancing with joy, tears flowing freely from his eyes as he hears that the President of the US has legally declared himself Superman. What a fine example to set to the rest of the world! I’ll be honest here- I’m actually going to miss Bush. The sheer audacity, the nerve makes him look like a comic-book villain albeit one with a particular fondness for red ties.
And they've been doing this for quite a while. A few months ago the US Government finally accepted that torture was illegal but before anyone could sigh with relief, they made it clear that they would continue to employ ‘enhanced interrogation techniques.’
‘Well’ enquiring minds wanted to know ‘whats the difference? Maybe you could tell us which methods fall in which category so as to avoid confusion.’
“Aah now there’s the problem, we cant do that” The White house replied ‘We cant let the terrorists know what we consider torture and what we don’t.”
So in effect, they rendered the whole thing redundant- all they have to do is call any particular method an enhanced interrogation technique and they'll argue it wasnt torture. It's very, very cheeky and I think you'll agree that my prostitute analogy at the beginning of this post was accurate.
Seriously, I’m going to miss these clowns.
***
It's not been a good month for organized religion. First we had the incredibly undignified'Teddy bear' saga(although I wonder- if it is such a precious name, why do so many Muslims name their sons Mohammed? That's hardly a sign of respect, it just kills the prestige of the name)And then there was the outrage over the film The Golden Compass based on a series of books by an avowed atheist and considered a thinly-veiled attack on Christianity. I've seen Christians picketing cinemas calling for a boycott of the film because it espouses 'atheist principles' a claim that made me chuckle as I imagined a kind of Atheists bible with all their values explicitly laid out.
I mean, what exactly are these principles? Atheism is quite simply taking the position that God does not exist. Once that's out of the way, what other values do atheists have that are different from other Christians? Unless we're taking the postition that non-belief is a set of values all on its own? I dont get it. I suspect the protestors equated atheism with immorality which doesnt make sense because religion obviously does not have a monopoly over morality. Also, if Atheists do decide to get their message out, what exactly is wrong with that? Christians-and other faiths- are allowed to do it, why on earth should they try to suppress the views of others? And in this case we are talking about film that does not even explicitly attack Christianity, but let's suppose for a moment that it does. This is not going to change a single thing about their faith or the faith of other commited Christians, so whats the point of protesting? Why waste so much time being offended and outraged? It completely puzzles me. Maybe they should have been holding a banner saying WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH IF THAT SPEECH CONTAINS VIEWS DIFFERENT FROM OUR OWN.
**
This news item caught my eye. I'm in awe.
A program that can mimic online flirtation and then extract personal information from its unsuspecting conversation partners is making the rounds in Russian chat forums, according to security software firm PC Tools.
The artificial intelligence of CyberLover's automated chats is good enough that victims have a tough time distinguishing the "bot" from a real potential suitor, PC Tools said. The software can work quickly too, establishing up to 10 relationships in 30 minutes, PC Tools said. It compiles a report on every person it meets complete with name, contact information, and photos.
"As a tool that can be used by hackers to conduct identity fraud, CyberLover demonstrates an unprecedented level of social engineering," PC Tools senior malware analyst Sergei Shevchenko said in a statement.\
And this (excerpt):
The particular high on which the A.P. story focuses is the smoking of bufotenine, a psychedelic that can be obtained from the toxin of the Sonoran Desert toad. The government has not banned possession of the toad, only possession of it with knowledge of its psychoactive potential, which transforms the toad into "drug paraphernalia":
In October, a Kansas City man was charged with possessing a controlled substance after Clay County authorities determined he possessed a toad with the intent to use its venom to get high.
Clay County Prosecutor Daniel White said possessing the toad is not illegal, but using it to get high off its venom is.
"It is easier to get it, and law enforcement might not immediately know you use it to get high," White said. "It's sort of a New Age way to get high. You convince yourself it is OK because it is something you get naturally from our environment.
"There are a lot of things that are created naturally but they are still not legal," he said.
If you live in the United States and you are ever worried that the police aren't out there fighting serious crime, fear not- they are out there running after people who own toads, what more could they possibly do?. I hope you'll sleep better at night now. To paraphrase The Simpsons, I, for one, welcome our new toad-hunting overlords...
1. An executive order cannot limit a President. There is no constitutional requirement for a President to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order. Rather than violate an executive order, the President has instead modified or waived it.
2. The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President's authority under Article II.
3. The Department of Justice is bound by the President's legal determinations.
I’m sure there is a banana republic or two somewhere in the world where the President is now dancing with joy, tears flowing freely from his eyes as he hears that the President of the US has legally declared himself Superman. What a fine example to set to the rest of the world! I’ll be honest here- I’m actually going to miss Bush. The sheer audacity, the nerve makes him look like a comic-book villain albeit one with a particular fondness for red ties.
And they've been doing this for quite a while. A few months ago the US Government finally accepted that torture was illegal but before anyone could sigh with relief, they made it clear that they would continue to employ ‘enhanced interrogation techniques.’
‘Well’ enquiring minds wanted to know ‘whats the difference? Maybe you could tell us which methods fall in which category so as to avoid confusion.’
“Aah now there’s the problem, we cant do that” The White house replied ‘We cant let the terrorists know what we consider torture and what we don’t.”
So in effect, they rendered the whole thing redundant- all they have to do is call any particular method an enhanced interrogation technique and they'll argue it wasnt torture. It's very, very cheeky and I think you'll agree that my prostitute analogy at the beginning of this post was accurate.
Seriously, I’m going to miss these clowns.
***
It's not been a good month for organized religion. First we had the incredibly undignified'Teddy bear' saga(although I wonder- if it is such a precious name, why do so many Muslims name their sons Mohammed? That's hardly a sign of respect, it just kills the prestige of the name)And then there was the outrage over the film The Golden Compass based on a series of books by an avowed atheist and considered a thinly-veiled attack on Christianity. I've seen Christians picketing cinemas calling for a boycott of the film because it espouses 'atheist principles' a claim that made me chuckle as I imagined a kind of Atheists bible with all their values explicitly laid out.
I mean, what exactly are these principles? Atheism is quite simply taking the position that God does not exist. Once that's out of the way, what other values do atheists have that are different from other Christians? Unless we're taking the postition that non-belief is a set of values all on its own? I dont get it. I suspect the protestors equated atheism with immorality which doesnt make sense because religion obviously does not have a monopoly over morality. Also, if Atheists do decide to get their message out, what exactly is wrong with that? Christians-and other faiths- are allowed to do it, why on earth should they try to suppress the views of others? And in this case we are talking about film that does not even explicitly attack Christianity, but let's suppose for a moment that it does. This is not going to change a single thing about their faith or the faith of other commited Christians, so whats the point of protesting? Why waste so much time being offended and outraged? It completely puzzles me. Maybe they should have been holding a banner saying WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH IF THAT SPEECH CONTAINS VIEWS DIFFERENT FROM OUR OWN.
**
This news item caught my eye. I'm in awe.
A program that can mimic online flirtation and then extract personal information from its unsuspecting conversation partners is making the rounds in Russian chat forums, according to security software firm PC Tools.
The artificial intelligence of CyberLover's automated chats is good enough that victims have a tough time distinguishing the "bot" from a real potential suitor, PC Tools said. The software can work quickly too, establishing up to 10 relationships in 30 minutes, PC Tools said. It compiles a report on every person it meets complete with name, contact information, and photos.
"As a tool that can be used by hackers to conduct identity fraud, CyberLover demonstrates an unprecedented level of social engineering," PC Tools senior malware analyst Sergei Shevchenko said in a statement.\
And this (excerpt):
The particular high on which the A.P. story focuses is the smoking of bufotenine, a psychedelic that can be obtained from the toxin of the Sonoran Desert toad. The government has not banned possession of the toad, only possession of it with knowledge of its psychoactive potential, which transforms the toad into "drug paraphernalia":
In October, a Kansas City man was charged with possessing a controlled substance after Clay County authorities determined he possessed a toad with the intent to use its venom to get high.
Clay County Prosecutor Daniel White said possessing the toad is not illegal, but using it to get high off its venom is.
"It is easier to get it, and law enforcement might not immediately know you use it to get high," White said. "It's sort of a New Age way to get high. You convince yourself it is OK because it is something you get naturally from our environment.
"There are a lot of things that are created naturally but they are still not legal," he said.
If you live in the United States and you are ever worried that the police aren't out there fighting serious crime, fear not- they are out there running after people who own toads, what more could they possibly do?. I hope you'll sleep better at night now. To paraphrase The Simpsons, I, for one, welcome our new toad-hunting overlords...
posted by Minzo at 5:40 AM
1 Comments:
...transforms the toad into "drug paraphernalia" - excellent stuff! A brilliant read.
Post a Comment
<< Home