& Cozy Corner: US Archives

Main

December 30, 2006

Home Despot

Remember Ping Golf and their no discounts for military? Apparently, now Home Depot is up to similar tricks.

Historically, Home Depot has had an unadvertised discount for holders of military ID (active and veterans) of ten percent. The discount was at the discretion of individual store managers, and you had to know about it, and ask for it. It's been a nice policy, especially as we're renovating our house. No longer. The store we frequent has a new manager, who is following new guidance from headquarters, apparently: no more discounts for military, even if the manager wants it. (Our store manager doesn't, and is, in fact, trying to not honor the price we were quoted for some of the items on backorder).

Anyone out there have similar experience or more insight?

Posted by Andy at 01:35 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

December 28, 2006

Minimum wage

Greg Mankiw has a good way to think about the real cost of the minimum wage:

here are some hints about how to think about it in a competitive labor market using supply and demand curves. Let w be the market wage, and let W be the target wage of policymakers. Draw supply and demand curves for labor such that the equilibrium wage in the absence of any policy is below W. Now suppose the government tells suppliers of labor: Whenever w is less than W, you are paid a subsidy equal to W-w. Similarly, it tells demanders of labor: Whenever w is less than W, you are charged a tax equal to W-w. Calculate quantity supplied and quantity demanded as a function of the market wage w. Graph the new supply and demand curves, and I believe the equivalence should be clear.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, I doubt that most policymakers can calculate supply and demand curves; too many of them are lawyers, and too few economists.

Posted by Andy at 07:44 AM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

November 30, 2006

First podcast on my new iPod

(well, okay, except for Ask a Ninja)

Just caught Orson Scott Card on the Glenn and Helen Show. Such an amazing man, who gets it. If you consider yourself a moderate, this is a must hear podcast. It's long - about 40 minutes, but well worth it.

Posted by Andy at 09:53 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 23, 2006

Happy Thanksgiving

Just wanted to send a big thank you to all the men and women serving in the military today, and let you know that your sacrifice is appreciated.

Posted by Andy at 11:21 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

November 21, 2006

Close the shutters!

You're going to start hearing a lot about re-instituting the draft in this country. Let me just say a few things about this. First off, almost every argument you will hear in favor of the draft is completely and utterly wrong. Second off, the American military, today, is the most professional and disciplined fighting force on the planet. It's also one of the few all-volunteer militaries. Correlation?

Let's look at some of the arguments.

The military is a trap for the economically disadvantaged and undereducated. When was the last time you actually saw a study that supported this contention? If you'd like counterevidence, take a look at the Heritage Institute analysis.

The people who run the country aren't impacted by war deaths, so they'll make better decisions if their children are also at risk. Let's look at the numbers first. There are about 300 million Americans today. Using the Census Projections, about 80 million are too young to have served, and about 100 million are between 20-44 - let's use that as the estimate for people who could be on active duty. According to the VA, there are about 25 million veterans currently alive; there are about 1.4 million people on active duty. Given the approximately 2 children per couple birthrate, there are an estimated 200 children of Senators in the 100 million people who could serve; to match the demographic, we'd expect to find 2 to 3 of them in service. Jimmy McCain. Brooks Johnson. Hmmm, close enough, especially when you consider that many of the Senators either have children to young to have served.

As for veterans, we appear to be about 10 percent of the of-age population. Are there ten veterans in the Senate? According to their official bios: Akaka. Burns. Carper. Cochran. Graham. Hagel. Harkin. Inouye. Jeffords. Kerry. Lautenberg. McCain. Reed. Roberts. Stevens. Thomas. Warner. National Guard or Reserve: Isakson. Kohl. That makes seventeen, plus two if you count Guard and Reserves. Several more had been in the Peace Corps, if that tickles your fancy. But clearly, the Senate has a disproportionately high number of veterans.

But that's only part of the story. The argument that they aren't impacted is bogus. How many Senators have relatives making minimum wage? Who have no health insurance? Yet on these topics, we allow them to govern. The argument from impact is just another recycling of the old "chickenhawk" canard, which isn't worth dignifying.

The draft can also be used for national service. I understand the desire to permit the opt-out for those unwilling or unable to defend their country. And in cases like Israel, which has a 100% conscription rate, it's even understandable. But let's be clear: the draft is a form of institutionalized slavery. Does it matter that you're getting shot at or changing bedpans? In fact, yes. A draft for the survival of the nation is morally defensible. A draft for the purpose of creating a labor force to be applied to politician's pet projects? Morally reprehensible.

There are sure to be other arguments. Remember this, though: the draft is a bogeyman used by politicians who are opposed to the use of military options. That alone is a clear argument against it. The politicians in favor of the draft are not advocating it for national defense, or improvement of the military. They are advocating it to weaken our military and our political will. Don't let that happen.

Update: Gus Van Horn notes that

a nation cannot defend itself without an army. But what good is such a "defense" if said country denies the rights of its own citizens to decide for themselves whether to risk combat?

Hmmm. Food for thought, and a compelling argument. Question: Which is worse: the draft, or removing the right of citizens to form autonomous militias?

Posted by Andy at 09:24 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 26, 2006

How to sneak through airport security....

Bruce Schneier points us all in the direction of this simple boarding pass generator:

This webpage will produce a boarding pass good enough to get anyone past TSA, and thus, into the "secure" gate areas of the airport terminal.
Note that this will not be a valid pass, so it will not get you on the airplane. For that, you need to actually buy a ticket.

Anyone who has spent three minutes thinking about airport security has known about this attack point for a long time; all this web page does is automate the process. For any other airline, all you have to do is checkin online, copy the html of the boarding pass, and edit it (I'm assuming that that is basically what the boarding pass generator does). As noted, the answer is trivial - TSA security checkpoints must be integrated into the airline ticketing system, so they can verify the tickets of passengers.

Posted by Andy at 10:01 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

October 05, 2006

Modern caravansaries

Have you played Nation States? If so, you'd recall that it provides you the option to make policy decisions for your fictional nation; the results, exaggerated, turn your country into the sort of dystopian paradise we all want. One of the questions always amused me, which discussed the rights of indigenous nomadic peoples and private property (your options seemed to be to build them public campsites, let them trespass, or let homeowners shoot them). It seems that the private market has addressed this one for us. Apparently, Wal-Mart lets RVs park in their lots (good plan - those folks are definitely going to need toiletries!), so we don't have to build the lots ourselves.

Hmmm, how do I get Wal-Mart into my Nation State?

Posted by Andy at 11:56 PM | | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

September 29, 2006

Way to support those who support the troops!

While FODwalking, we find out that:

Because of the military discounts, Bonaventure Discount Golf in Augusta and Gordon Lakes Golf Course on Fort Gordon no longer receive Ping products...Karsten Manufacturing Corp. of Phoenix, Ariz., which has a registered trademark on the Ping brand, discontinued its Bonaventure and Gordon Lakes accounts in August.

In a letter to the shops, Ping said Bonaventure and Gordon Lakes discounted Ping clubs below Ping's "Improved Fitting, Internet Transactions and Price Policy."

So basically, Ping is saying, "No discounts for anyone, anywhere, no matter what." Except I really wonder if they enforce it everywhere, or just on shops that support the troops.

(hat tip: Blackfive)

Posted by Andy at 11:21 PM | | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Really, just the ugly

Demonizing Wal-Mart may not be the most clever strategy:

Running against Wal-Mart looks like a losing political strategy. The chain's low prices have made it enormously popular with shoppers, as many as 127 million a week, including many low-income voters.

Yet I wonder why the erstwhile populists keep going after Wal-Mart?

Posted by Andy at 08:31 AM | | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

September 15, 2006

The Axis of Demonization

What do George W. Bush, Wal-Mart, and Israel all have in common?

All three of them are demonized and vilified - often by the same group of people - far out of proportion to any actions they might take. As such, I now consider them my touchstones of sanity. One can easily talk about the bad things they're each responsible for; but to many, they have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Someone who believes that isn't wholly rational.

(and yes, I was thinking about this before being contacted by Wal-Mart's PR firm).

Posted by Andy at 05:25 PM | | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

September 12, 2006

Apology Accepted

Emilio Karim Dabul apologizes:

September 12, 2006 -- WELL, here it is, five years late, but here just the same: an apology from an Arab-American for 9/11. No, I didn't help organize the killers or contribute in any way to their terrible cause. However, I was one of millions of Arab-Americans who did the unspeakable on 9/11: nothing.

The only time I raised my voice in protest against these men who killed thousands of innocents in the name of Allah was behind closed doors, among the safety of friends and family. I did at one point write a very vitriolic essay condemning their actions, but fear of becoming another Salman Rushdie kept me from ever trying to publish it.

Well, I'm sick of saying the truth only in private - that Arabs around the world, including Arab-Americans like myself, need to start holding our own culture accountable for the insane, violent actions that our extremists have perpetrated on the world at large.

Yes, our extremists and our culture.

Every single 9/11 hijacker was Arab and a Muslim. The apologists (including President Bush) tried to reassure us that 9/11 had nothing to do with Islam, but was a twisting of a great and noble religion. With all due respect, read the Koran, Mr. President. There's enough there for someone of extreme tendencies to find their way to a global jihad.

Posted by Andy at 11:23 PM | | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Life expectancies

Steve Sernberg over at USA Today demonstrates his "grasp" of the English language:

America is a nation divided by vast differences in life expectancy, a "longevity gap" that can't be readily explained by race, income or access to health care, a study reported Monday.

Got that, right? Can't be explained by those factors? Read on:
They found that life expectancy differences are driven mainly by chronic diseases in young and middle-aged adults.
...
The longest living group, "America One," consists of 10.4 million Asians, with an average life expectancy of 85....That's 27 years longer than the average 58-year life expectancy of Native Americans in South Dakota.
...
The second group, "America Two," indicates that income isn't the key to a longer life span. This group is made up of 3.6 million low-income whites living in Minnesota, the Dakotas, Iowa, Montana and Nebraska, with an average life expectancy of 79.
...
The 214 million people in "America Three," the bulk of the population, have an average life expectancy of 78. Next, in rank order, come poor whites in Appalachia and the Mississippi Valley with an average life expectancy of 75, Western Native Americans, who live to an average of 73, and black middle America, also 73. Low-income Southern rural blacks and high-risk urban blacks, "Americas Seven and Eight," live to 71.

Every grouping he lists is identified by race or economics. I think he isn't able to have one sentence which says, "If you're Native American or black, your life expectancy is shorter than if you're white or Asian." Oh wait, he could have said that. But this is the point that closes out his story, which is his real problem:

Jonathan Skinner of Dartmouth says much of the variation depends on such individual factors as diet, exercise and smoking, not health care. "Yet we spend much of our attention and 16% of our national income on health care," Skinner says. "There's no way that differences in the quality of health care can explain 20-year gaps in life expectancy."

Ooooh, so is the subtext of this article that different racial groupings tend to make different choices in the three controllable areas that most impact their longevity? That's not a news story I'd expect to see.

Posted by Andy at 07:08 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 08, 2006

Five Years Ago

The company I work for is based in Boston. We have a satellite office in San Diego. My boss tells me I should go out to San Diego and get a feel for the office, since we'd recently added it via an acquisition. Now, I grew up in LA, and I've always preferred to fly in and out of LAX. And we had an LA office, so I could plausibly stop in there, and just drive to San Diego.

I prefer to fly on Tuesdays; it's the day with the fewest people, and I can generally get more legroom. And there is a convenient flight from Boston to LA that I've been on a number of times. Flight 11.

My boss is arguing with another VP over whose budget will pay for the trip. September 10th comes, and I'm fighting to get the issue resolved so I can book my flight and go. Then, something comes up, and I end up working until 9 pm, and decide I'll fly on Wednesday.

Tuesday morning I wake up, and drag myself into the shower. My girlfriend (now my wife) is still in bed when my landline, then my cellphone ring, but she doesn't answer the call - we were still a bit stealthy about our relationship. As I step out of the shower, the landline starts ringing again. Still dripping, I race to the phone.

It's the receptionist at work. She tells me that she has my father on another line, and that there is a family emergency and he needs to get in touch with me. I panic. If there had been a family emergency, my mom would be the one to call me - so my dad calling could mean only that it involved my mom. I tell the receptionist to tell him I'll call him right back.

I call my father. The first words I remember him saying, "You're alive." You see, my parents knew I was planning on flying to LA. And my father and I both fly the same flight when we do this, enough that he recognized the number. And when I didn't answer my cellphone, they could draw only one conclusion. But at this point, I'm still confused. What was the family emergency?

My dad tells me to turn on CNN. The first image I see is smoke billowing out of the side of one of the towers, and the caption about Flight 11.

Tragically, one of my co-workers was on one of the four flights. Every so often, a customer will mention it, sometimes because they just heard it, or as a commentary of another sort. It never ceases to startle me, as I had wanted to be on that flight.

Posted by Andy at 09:34 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 06, 2006

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

President Bush announced today the transfer of some serious terrorists to Gitmo, where they'll await military commissions (to be authorized by Congress), and revealed a little bit about the CIA interrogation centers, and their value.
Here's the text of his speech. It's a good read, all of it. But if you need an excerpt, here you go:

Within months of September the 11th, 2001, we captured a man known as Abu Zubaydah. We believe that Zubaydah was a senior terrorist leader and a trusted associate of Osama bin Laden. Our intelligence community believes he had run a terrorist camp in Afghanistan where some of the 9/11 hijackers trained, and that he helped smuggle al Qaeda leaders out of Afghanistan after coalition forces arrived to liberate that country. Zubaydah was severely wounded during the firefight that brought him into custody -- and he survived only because of the medical care arranged by the CIA.

After he recovered, Zubaydah was defiant and evasive. He declared his hatred of America. During questioning, he at first disclosed what he thought was nominal information -- and then stopped all cooperation. Well, in fact, the "nominal" information he gave us turned out to be quite important. For example, Zubaydah disclosed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- or KSM -- was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, and used the alias "Muktar." This was a vital piece of the puzzle that helped our intelligence community pursue KSM. Abu Zubaydah also provided information that helped stop a terrorist attack being planned for inside the United States -- an attack about which we had no previous information. Zubaydah told us that al Qaeda operatives were planning to launch an attack in the U.S., and provided physical descriptions of the operatives and information on their general location. Based on the information he provided, the operatives were detained -- one while traveling to the United States.

We knew that Zubaydah had more information that could save innocent lives, but he stopped talking. As his questioning proceeded, it became clear that he had received training on how to resist interrogation. And so the CIA used an alternative set of procedures. These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution, and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively and determined them to be lawful. I cannot describe the specific methods used -- I think you understand why -- if I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning, and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary.

Zubaydah was questioned using these procedures, and soon he began to provide information on key al Qaeda operatives, including information that helped us find and capture more of those responsible for the attacks on September the 11th. For example, Zubaydah identified one of KSM's accomplices in the 9/11 attacks -- a terrorist named Ramzi bin al Shibh. The information Zubaydah provided helped lead to the capture of bin al Shibh. And together these two terrorists provided information that helped in the planning and execution of the operation that captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Once in our custody, KSM was questioned by the CIA using these procedures, and he soon provided information that helped us stop another planned attack on the United States. During questioning, KSM told us about another al Qaeda operative he knew was in CIA custody -- a terrorist named Majid Khan. KSM revealed that Khan had been told to deliver $50,000 to individuals working for a suspected terrorist leader named Hambali, the leader of al Qaeda's Southeast Asian affiliate known as "J-I". CIA officers confronted Khan with this information. Khan confirmed that the money had been delivered to an operative named Zubair, and provided both a physical description and contact number for this operative.

Based on that information, Zubair was captured in June of 2003, and he soon provided information that helped lead to the capture of Hambali. After Hambali's arrest, KSM was questioned again. He identified Hambali's brother as the leader of a "J-I" cell, and Hambali's conduit for communications with al Qaeda. Hambali's brother was soon captured in Pakistan, and, in turn, led us to a cell of 17 Southeast Asian "J-I" operatives. When confronted with the news that his terror cell had been broken up, Hambali admitted that the operatives were being groomed at KSM's request for attacks inside the United States -- probably [sic] using airplanes.

During questioning, KSM also provided many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans. For example, he described the design of planned attacks on buildings inside the United States, and how operatives were directed to carry them out. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent the people trapped above from escaping out the windows.

KSM also provided vital information on al Qaeda's efforts to obtain biological weapons. During questioning, KSM admitted that he had met three individuals involved in al Qaeda's efforts to produce anthrax, a deadly biological agent -- and he identified one of the individuals as a terrorist named Yazid. KSM apparently believed we already had this information, because Yazid had been captured and taken into foreign custody before KSM's arrest. In fact, we did not know about Yazid's role in al Qaeda's anthrax program. Information from Yazid then helped lead to the capture of his two principal assistants in the anthrax program. Without the information provided by KSM and Yazid, we might not have uncovered this al Qaeda biological weapons program, or stopped this al Qaeda cell from developing anthrax for attacks against the United States.

These are some of the plots that have been stopped because of the information of this vital program.

Yes, interrogation works. Yes, our government has stopped terrorist plots since 9/11.

Posted by Andy at 10:44 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 02, 2006

Paul Ray Smith

As Secretary Rumsfeld points out:

Consider that a database search of the nation's leading newspapers turns up 10 times as many mentions of one of the soldiers punished for misconduct at Abu Ghraib than of Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith, the first recipient of the Medal of Honor in the global war on terror.

He's right. Paul Ray Smith:

Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith distinguished himself by acts of gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in action with an armed enemy near Baghdad International Airport, Baghdad, Iraq on 4 April 2003. On that day, Sergeant First Class Smith was engaged in the construction of a prisoner of war holding area when his Task Force was violently attacked by a company-sized enemy force. Realizing the vulnerability of over 100 fellow soldiers, Sergeant First Class Smith quickly organized a hasty defense consisting of two platoons of soldiers, one Bradley Fighting Vehicle and three armored personnel carriers. As the fight developed, Sergeant First Class Smith braved hostile enemy fire to personally engage the enemy with hand grenades and anti-tank weapons, and organized the evacuation of three wounded soldiers from an armored personnel carrier struck by a rocket propelled grenade and a 60mm mortar round. Fearing the enemy would overrun their defenses, Sergeant First Class Smith moved under withering enemy fire to man a .50 caliber machine gun mounted on a damaged armored personnel carrier. In total disregard for his own life, he maintained his exposed position in order to engage the attacking enemy force. During this action, he was mortally wounded. His courageous actions helped defeat the enemy attack, and resulted in as many as 50 enemy soldiers killed, while allowing the safe withdrawal of numerous wounded soldiers. Sergeant First Class Smith’s extraordinary heroism and uncommon valor are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon himself, the Third Infantry Division “Rock of the Marne,” and the United States Army.

Sergeant First Class Smith is survived by his wife, Birgit, and their children, David and Jessica.

Posted by Andy at 09:20 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

September 01, 2006

The Doomsday Clock

Gus Van Horn wonders why the Doomsday Clock has stopped:

That famous symbol of the Cold War, the Doomsday Clock (of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists) appears to have become stuck at seven minutes to midnight since some time in March or April of 2002.
...
"Surely," I thought, "What with Iran being so close and so defiant, and with North Korea likely to have the bomb already, the clock has had to be moved."

Well, actually, he's not wondering:
Well. OK. I lied. For one thing, I know how far to the left many scientists are: I am, after all, the only scientist I know of in my department at work to have voted for Bush and so was outnumbered three-to-one by scientists in my lab who voted for Dennis Kucinich in the Democrat primaries. For another, the first time I looked at this site I noticed the strong tendency to assume the worst of United States policies while only very reluctantly admitting that anyone else might possibliy be, perhaps, up to no good.

Too bad. Apparently, even nuclear scientists can believe in appeasement.
(h/t: Cox and Forkum)

Posted by Andy at 10:57 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Missile, meet anti-missile

Successful tests are good to see:

An interceptor missile destroyed a mock warhead over the Pacific Ocean on Friday in a key test of the nation's missile defense system, U.S. military officials said.

It was the most realistic test of the systems that would be used against an attack, said Missile Defense Agency spokesman Rick Lehner.

We're not done yet, but this is a great milestone. The anti-missile systems still need to deal with decoys and other countermeasures, but a missile kill is a great achievement. Bet North Korea isn't happy with this one.

Unfortunately, we've got this just in time for Iran to start handing out non-missile nukes.

Posted by Andy at 10:46 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you haven't been paying attention...

...it's all Joe Wilson's fault. Guess Valerie ought to sue him, no?

Posted by Andy at 10:15 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Aliens at Roswell!

You knew Clark Kent had to have a day job....

ICE arrests 15 aliens in Roswell working for U.S. military contractor.

Posted by Andy at 01:25 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 29, 2006

Toddler Economics

Tim Worstall has a take-down on the primitive economic sense of the Wal-Mart bashers:

To wish that WalMart move from its current low wage and lots-of-labor model, to Costco's (relatively) high wage and low labor utilization is fine, but an adult view would include the acknowledgement that for WalMart to adopt the second model would require that they fire between 860,000 and 975,000 of their current workforce. The child's view would be that everyone should just be paid more because I want it to be so! -- i.e. that there are no side-effects to such decisions.

As I said up at the top, I think Ezra Klein has indeed identified an extremely important question, quite truthfully, one of the two or three most important issues facing the country. Are we adults or children? If we are to be adults of course we should also apply the same blindingly obvious logic to the minimum and living wage movements. As Costco proves, when companies pay more for the labor they hire, they hire less of it.

As an added extra bonus I look forward to Ezra's speech in which he explains why nearly one million people losing their jobs is going to be good for America. I'd most certainly pay good money to see him deliver it to those he is arguing should get fired.

Indeed. And I think it's a nice catchphrase: Those fighting Wal-Mart want to add one million people to the unemployment rolls. Of course, isn't that Wal-Mart's real sin? Giving people an opportunity to get a job, and work their way up out of it?

Posted by Andy at 09:55 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 28, 2006

Looking for hate in all the wrong places

Jeff Jacoby points out that US airport security is still looking in the wrong places:

Nearly five years after Sept. 11, 2001, US airport security remains obstinately focused on intercepting bad things -- guns, knives, explosives. It is a reactive policy, aimed at preventing the last terrorist plot from being repeated. The 9/11 hijackers used box cutters as weapons, so sharp metal objects were barred from carry-on luggage. Would-be suicide terrorist Richard Reid tried to ignite a bomb in his shoe, so now everyone's footwear is screened for tampering. Earlier this month British authorities foiled a plan to blow up airliners with liquid explosives; as a result, toothpaste and cologne have become air-travel contraband.
...
Israeli airport security, much of it invisible to the untrained eye, begins before passengers even enter the terminal. Officials constantly monitor behavior, alert to clues that may hint at danger: bulky clothing, say, or a nervous manner. Profilers -- that's what they're called -- make a point of interviewing travelers, sometimes at length. They probe, as one profiling supervisor told CBS, for ``anything out of the ordinary, anything that does not fit." Their questions can seem odd or intrusive, especially if your only previous experience with an airport interrogation was being asked whether you packed your bags yourself.
...
But because federal policy still bans ethnic or religious profiling, US passengers continue to be singled out for special scrutiny mostly on a random basis. Countless hours have been spent patting down elderly women in wheelchairs, toddlers with pacifiers, even former US vice presidents -- time that could have been used instead to concentrate on passengers with a greater likelihood of being terrorists.
...
Of course most Muslims are not violent jihadis, but all violent jihadis are Muslim. ``This nation," President Bush has said, ``is at war with Islamic fascists." How much longer will we tolerate an aviation security system that pretends, for reasons of political correctness, not to know that?

Unfortunately, until we get off our high horse about the appearance of racial profiling, we aren't going to get away with actual racial profiling - and that's a shame.

Posted by Andy at 10:39 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Naked in Vermont

Teens in Brattleboro have discovered that nudity isn't illegal:

Here on the banks of the Connecticut River, in the busiest parking area of a downtown peppered with bookstores and coffee shops, more is meeting the eye than some people want.

A politely rebellious collection of teenagers passing time in the Harmony Parking Lot this summer has taken to disrobing. Seemingly on a whim, they shed clothes and soak up the sun, nude.

What began as a lark or an ode to youthful exuberance, has now turned into a municipal quandary, because public nudity is permissible in Brattleboro.

In the words of Town Manager Jerry Remillard, if you're naked in public, and you're minding your business, you're legal.

While we all probably have our positive daydreams about what this might be like, remember that legal nudity means anyone can be naked:

Andrew Wdowiak, who works at Everyone's Books, said that he's not put off by the nudity, but that the act has become a little tired. "I think it was more for the shock value," he said. "They weren't flagrant about it."

But last week, when about a half-dozen naked teenagers congregated outside the store," it was like they were baking a cake, and they really frosted it," Wdowiak said. "All the men were naked, and the women were topless. I needed about three drinks to erase that vision."

Hmmm, since most jurisdictions need a license to carry a weapon, perhaps we should license nudists?

Posted by Andy at 02:58 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 25, 2006

Dy-na-mite!

Why hassle with newfangled explosives?

A U.S. college student who said he bought dynamite as a souvenir in Bolivia was arrested on Friday when a bomb-sniffing dog found the substance in his luggage after he arrived at the Houston airport from Buenos Aires.

How dumb does everyone have to be?

Posted by Andy at 09:13 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 20, 2006

Giving away the store

Via WorldNetDaily:

On June 21, a senior DHS official from Washington personally guided Muslim officials from the Council on American-Islamic Relations on a behind-the-scenes tour of Customs screening operations at O'Hare International Airport in response to CAIR complaints that Muslim travelers were being unfairly delayed as they entered the U.S. from abroad.

Wow. First off, I don't care who wants to see backstage. No one should get to see how we do Customs Operations, except for Customs, any governmental oversight bodies, and third party security assessors under NDA. Period. But CAIR? Let's be frank. Even in the most positive of all worldviews, you can't call CAIR sympathetic to the plight of the average American. In a more cynical worldview, you'd have to wonder if any of the tricks used by customs will be discussed with someone who might possibly be connected to a terrorist organization.

Whoever set this up on the part of DHS needs a little reprimanding.

Posted by Andy at 06:02 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 16, 2006

America, Britain, and Israel

What is it that ties us together? It's simple, really: a veneration of Law.

Let's start with the youngest and oldest: the youngest people, and the oldest republic.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I'm hard pressed to find a more beautiful set of words on the planet. In fact, I found them so beautiful, that I have, on several occasions, uttered this oath:

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

What is about this document, this concept? In drafting this, our forefathers gave birth to a new nation, one which was greater than all of them (a hard feat!), and which could grow, and change, and survive trials and tribulations; a nation that no single man could encompass, and which each of us could contribute to, and know that our children would inherit. And one which, despite being a democracy, would have constant laws that would survive the trials of the mob.

That, my friends is America. Britain? Ahh, how we love our spiritual parent (on an aside, anyone who doesn't think that war can lead to normalized and pleasant relations has never studied the American Revolution or the War of 1812). Britain was the key to the rule of law:

TO ALL FREE MEN OF OUR KINGDOM we have also granted, for us and our heirs for ever, all the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them and their heirs, of us and our heirs

Ah, the renunciation of power by a monarch, in perpetuity. From that day forward, every man knew, sort of, where he stood. It took a while for the monarchy to be stripped of the rest of its dictatorial power, but the Magna Carta was the key (and, oddly enough, provided for the rights of Jews, and non-Jews, identically as bankers).

And Israel? The oldest and the youngest. A mere 60 years old, or several millenia, depending on how you count it. Here, too, is Law enshrined in the people and the land, but I look to the Talmud for the true rule of Law:

Why did he say: "it is not in heaven"?

Rabbi Jeremiah said: "The Torah was given to us from Mount Sinai. We do not pay attention to an echoing voice, because on Mount Sinai you wrote in the Torah: "You are to incline after the majority" (Exod 23:2).

Rabbi Nathan met Elijah (and) said to him: "What did the Holy One, blessed be He!, do in that hour?"
He said: "He laughed and said: 'My sons have outshone me! My sons have outshone me!'"

God renouncing the ability to change the law out from under man - does it get any more amazing than that?

And here we have it: the renunciation of the rule of God, King, and Mob. And that is why America, Britain, and Israel often look like inseparable allies: all three are founded in the rule of Law, and the expectation that today's rules will still exist tomorrow.

Posted by Andy at 10:14 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

August 12, 2006

Why they hate us

Soccer Dad has a collection of pieces worth reading about our enemies and why they hate us. This parallels a conversation I had with someone recently: the reason that the forces of darkness - specifically, Islamic Fascism, Islamic terrorism, and mob rule - hate Jews, Israel, and America is quite simple: culturally, we believe in the improvement of the individual, and the power of the individual. This makes us a threat to anyone with a power base built on the denigration and enslavement of the individual. We are a threat to them by our very existence, because we prove that the myths they use to enslave their followers are lies.

Posted by Andy at 08:33 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 11, 2006

Please, can I have another?

Why am I not surprised that the NY Times reports:

Israel has asked the Bush administration to speed delivery of short-range antipersonnel rockets armed with cluster munitions, the New York Times reported Friday morning. These rockets can be effective against hidden missile launchers.
...
But the Times reports that some State Department officials "have sought to delay the approval because of concerns over the likelihood of civilian casualties, and the diplomatic repercussions." The rockets, the officials told the Times, are fired by the dozen and could be expected to cause civilian casualties if used against targets in populated areas.

Hmmm, the New York Times. And the State Department. Maybe Laurence Simon can start running some form of "leaker bingo."

Posted by Andy at 01:58 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 09, 2006

Another Rommie?

Maybe Brendan Loy will join the Reynoldsian Orthogonal Moderates? (and boy, does that name just totally fail to roll off the tongue....)

Posted by Andy at 12:22 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 04, 2006

Global Power comparison

Patrick at Middle East Youth wonders:

When one country is more powerful and influential than a group of 25 nations, you know you have a problem in global power allocation.

Patrick, “global” power is merely an indicator of a nation’s economic, military, and diplomatic power. So if you question why Europe in aggregate ranks below the US, you should look at those three areas.

For economic power, most of Europe has descended into the trap that is socialism, which has a tendency to stifle economic growth. Further, Europe does a very poor job of integrating its immigrants - just take a look at the difference in the unemployment rates between “natives” of each country, and immigrant groups. The US, on the other hand, has a strong legal system to combat racism, which encourages immigrants to assimilate faster - and grow the economy. Additionally, the US has been fortunate enough not to have its country seriously invaded in 194 years, so hasn’t had the major setback that that entails. Combined, that puts the US ahead in the economy.

For military, there are really two big distinctions. First, the US has always invested very heavily in all research, but especially military research, realizing that even the civilian byproducts have a worthwhile benefit (aren’t we all happy for microwaves?); combined with economic strength, this leads to having superior military technology. And second, the US military is a volunteer military, with an incredible level of professionalism (even the loudest critics of abuses by US military personnel should admit that those personnel, at least, tend to face swift justice). This leads to a military whose individuals tend to have superior discipline and training, and armed with better equipment, than those of other nations.

As for diplomacy, while the US does have a bad history of abandoning projects (Somalia, Lebanon the first time around), or missing important ones (Rwanda, Darfur), it’s still a more credible force - and more credible ally - than most European nations.

Oh, and lastly - the US may be one nation; but it is a nation of 50 states. The EU only has 25.

Posted by Andy at 10:48 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 02, 2006

Net Neutrality Advocates

Whichever side of Net Neutrality you're on, We Are The Web is an ... interesting set of characters advocating for Net Neutrality.

Posted by Andy at 12:03 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

August 01, 2006

Mel Gibson apology, redux

This time, Mel gets his apology right:

There is no excuse, nor should there be any tolerance, for anyone who thinks or expresses any kind of Anti-Semitic remark. I want to apologize specifically to everyone in the Jewish community for the vitriolic and harmful words that I said to a law enforcement officer the night I was arrested on a DUI charge.

I am a public person, and when I say something, either articulated and thought out, or blurted out in a moment of insanity, my words carry weight in the public arena. As a result, I must assume personal responsibility for my words and apologize directly to those who have been hurt and offended by those words.

The tenets of what I profess to believe necessitate that I exercise charity and tolerance as a way of life. Every human being is God’s child, and if I wish to honor my God I have to honor his children. But please know from my heart that I am not an anti-Semite. I am not a bigot. Hatred of any kind goes against my faith.

I’m not just asking for forgiveness. I would like to take it one step further, and meet with leaders in the Jewish community, with whom I can have a one on one discussion to discern the appropriate path for healing.

I have begun an ongoing program of recovery and what I am now realizing is that I cannot do it alone. I am in the process of understanding where those vicious words came from during that drunken display, and I am asking the Jewish community, whom I have personally offended, to help me on my journey through recovery. Again, I am reaching out to the Jewish community for its help. I know there will be many in that community who will want nothing to do with me, and that would be understandable. But I pray that that door is not forever closed.

This is not about a film. Nor is it about artistic license. This is about real life and recognizing the consequences hurtful words can have. It’s about existing in harmony in a world that seems to have gone mad.

While others might not be so forgiving, Mel, I have a proposal for you. There is a good set of Jewish leaders for you to meet with. The first is Dayna Klein, a true leader. I'd propose Pamela Waechter, but she died - as a result of anti-Semitism. After you leave Seattle, you can go to France. Alfred Dreyfus can't speak with you, but the family of Ilan Halimi can help you see the extent to which anti-Semitism can go. Then, head out to Israel. Go up to Haifa, or Tzfat, and see what Jews put up with every day.

Then, you can come home, and have a few photo ops with a local rabbi eager to get his name in the paper. But meeting with us? First, go educate yourself.

Posted by Andy at 12:41 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (2)

July 31, 2006

What year is it, anyway?

Jeff Jacoby, one of the two reasons I read the Boston Globe, notes that Americans have reverted to September 10th thinking.

Gallup's numbers suggest two things. First, that most Americans, sizing up the warfare in northern Israel and southern Lebanon, recognize that Hezbollah is the aggressor and that Israel is fighting in self-defense. And second, that most Americans believe this fight has nothing to do with the United States.

I wonder, should we just rebrand September 10th as National Naivete Day?

Posted by Andy at 01:17 PM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Speculative Fiction takes on Radical Islam

Two of my favorite authors have recently taken on radical Islam.

Dan Simmons wrote, in April, an interesting story of a Time Traveler warning about the Islamic future:

“Your enemy is he who will give his life to kill you,” said the Time Traveler. “Your enemies are they that wish you and your children and your grandchildren dead and who are willing to sacrifice themselves, or support those fanatics who will sacrifice themselves, to see you and your institutions destroyed. You haven’t figured that out yet – the majority of you fat, sleeping, smug, infinitely stupid Americans and Europeans.”

He stood and set the Scotch glass back in its place on my sideboard. “How, we wonder in my time,” he said softly, “can you ignore the better part of a billion people who say aloud that they are willing to kill your children . . . or condone and celebrate the killing of them? And ignore them as they act on what they say? We do not understand you.”

I'd missed his May/June followup, which included this The End of Faith's analysis of a Pew survey of Muslims in various countries:

Over 38,000 people recently participated in a global survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. The results constitute the first publication of its Global Attitudes Project entitled ‘What the World Thinks in 2002.’ The survey included the following questions, posed only to Muslims:

Some people think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies. Other people believe that, no matter what the reason, this kind of violence is never justified. Do you personally feel that this kind of violence is often justified to defend Islam, sometimes justified, rarely justified, or never justified?

Before we look at the results of this study, we should appreciate the significance of the juxtaposed phrases ‘suicide bombing’ and ‘civilian targets.’ We now live in a world in which Muslims have been scientifically polled (with margins of error ranging from 2 to 4 percent) as to whether they support (‘often,’ ‘sometimes,’ rarely,’ or ‘never’) the deliberate murder and maiming of noncombatant men, women, and children in defense of Islam.

The results are about 2/3 of the way down the page. Go read them.

Orson Scott Card chimes in, and notes the most important quality we Americans should be looking for this November, and in two years:

For me, there is only one test of candidates for Congress this fall. Do they actively support aggressive opposition to terrorists and terrorist-supporting nations, including the continuation of the occupation and pacification of Iraq? If both candidates fit that description, then of course you can look at other issues. But whenever the choice is between Churchill and Chamberlain, then no other issue really matters, does it?

Either way, we will be at war with the madmen of the world over the next decade at least. The real issue is just how bloody it will have to be.

Posted by Andy at 11:41 AM | | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

July 29, 2006

Murder in Seattle

Via InstaPundit, Pajamas Media covers a Pakistani Muslim on a killing spree ... in Seattle:

At least five people were shot, one of them fatally, Friday afternoon at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, and one person was arrested, authorities said.

Oh, wait. That's an AP feed, did they leave something out? Via Meryl, we find better coverage:

Six women were shot - one fatally - this afternoon at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle by a man who told a witness he was upset about "what was going on in Israel."

Women! Why am I not surprised? Always the anti-Semites target our women and children.

police officers throughout the city were being asked to step up patrols of synagogues and mosques.

"We are protecting mosques because there is always concern about retaliatory activity," he said.

Huh. Yeah, because that's what Jews, especially American Jews, do. But how much do you want to bet one of those mosques has an imam, known as a firebrand, who denounced Israel and her Jewish benefactors in America, and the shooter listened to? Maybe a sermon with wording like, "As long as American Jews funnel money to the Zionist oppressor, the Palestinian resistance will fail"?

LGF calls it Sudden Jihad Syndrome. I think that's too nice. I bet it is incited, and it's murder.

There's discussion over at Winds of Change. AL has a John Brunner reference, which is always appreciated, even if not so relevant here.

Posted by Andy at 08:03 AM | | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (2)

July 26, 2006