Stealin' from the Church

I had to. From the lovely Via:

They shoot back

Via Skippy, of course:

[. . .]

The reuse of some object-oriented code has caused tactical headaches for Australia's armed forces. As virtual reality simulators assume larger roles in helicopter combat training, programmers have gone to great lengths to increase the realism of their scenarios, including detailed landscapes and - in the case of the Northern Territory's Operation Phoenix - herds of kangaroos (since disturbed animals might well give away a helicopter's position). The head of the Defense Science and Technology Organization's Land Operations/Simulation division reportedly instructed developers to model the local marsupials' movements and reactions to helicopters. Being efficient programmers, they just re-appropriated some code originally used to model infantry detachment reactions under the same stimuli, changed the mapped icon from a soldier to a kangaroo, and increased the figures' speed of movement. Eager to demonstrate their flying skills for some visiting American pilots, the hotshot Aussies "buzzed" the virtual kangaroos in low flight during a simulation. The kangaroos scattered, as predicted, and the visiting Americans nodded appreciatively . . . then did a double take as the kangaroos reappeared from behind a hill and launched a barrage of Stinger missiles at the hapless helicopter. (Apparently the programmers had forgotted to remove that part of the infantry coding.) The lesson?

[. . .]

I'd sorta like to see deer and bear do this during hunting season.

Update: 16:15:

Fortuitously, Ol' Yella illustrates my point beautifully.

Nutz

[. . .]

Bush is a classic Caligula-type personality: "(He) is preoccupied with fantasies of power and being loved. Such a person requires 'automatic compliance.' He or she is 'exploitative' of others, 'lacks empathy, is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.' And also 'shows arrogant, haughty behavior or attitudes." "--Has a grandiose sense of self-importance, exaggerates achievements and talent (or lack thereof), expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements." (Diagnostic and Statistical manual: Charasteristics of N.P.D.) The last time the world stage entertained such manifest entitlement and madness was Adolph Hitler. The comparisons are entirely legitimate.

[. . .]

M and T (and Harry Hound) take a look at Bush's mental stability. Stop laughing.

Katyusha Update

Yesterday, in the wake of the news about the rockets widely missing the supposed targets of two U.S. ships in Jordan, I did a post about the type of rockets used and why I thought they missed. I did that one out of my head. I was pretty close, but my info was dated and incomplete. Here's a better look at them.

A letter from Cindy Sheehan

Via Truthout:

I got an email the other day and it said, "Cindy if you didn't use so much profanity ... there's people on the fence that get offended.

And you know what I said? "You know what? You know what, god damn it? How in the world is anybody still sitting on that fence?

If you fall on the side that is pro-George and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George Bush, stand up and speak out.

After that wishy-washy beginning, she gets down to brass tacks. This gal is my hero. No shrinking violet, that's for sure.

A Fringe Idea With Political Clout

Jon Carroll sounds off on Intelligent (cough) Design:

Intelligent design is not science. It is not even a field of study. It is a belief system wrapped up in "scientific" language. Scientists have been studying the origin and nature of life on earth for at least 4,000 years. In that time, they have come up with a number of hypotheses. Then new evidence has been turned up, and the old hypotheses have been discarded, often reluctantly.

Scientists, like all humans, really hate to discard ideas that they have defended for years. The history of science is a history of unhappy people reluctantly changing their minds. Imagine the person who first realized that the sun was just another star. Terrible, terrible news. It's the universe saying, "You're not special."

The intelligent design people have never suffered such a crisis. They have never changed their minds based on new evidence. That's because they started with the desired results and worked backward.

The intelligent design people don't do mosses. They don't spend 17 years in a laboratory with a glass case full of earthworms. They are indifferent to the symbiotic relationships that create lichen. The intelligent design people are not interested in studying; they are interested in preaching. They do not present papers; they present sermons.

It's not an equal struggle. It's the world scientific community against a few guys with some Web sites and a lot of political clout.

Here's what it's like. Suppose there were a conference on child development and parenting. And some people are saying that children should start early on a rigorous academic program, and others are saying no, they should have real childhoods and be allowed to develop their creative abilities naturally. And some people say that children should get regular allowances, and others say, no, children should always do chores to get money. And some people say children should get complete sex education and access to birth control devices as soon as they reach puberty, and others say no, that just encourages promiscuity and reinforces our society's unhealthy preoccupation with sex.

And then someone says, "We should throw pingpong balls at them. All day, every day, we should throw pingpong balls at our children. It just seems like the right thing to do."

That's the role of the intelligent design people in serious discussions about the nature and the origin of life. They are the pingpong-ball people. They're not even talking about the same thing. They have an agenda. They want to change the subject.

Even their most basic premise is false. The theory of natural selection does not deny the existence of God. It has no opinion on the matter. The theory of natural selection arose from a series of observations and experiments by people who were, for the most part, believing Christians. Faith and science can live very comfortably together, if only someone would give them the chance.

I could probably live with these ID whackjobs and their moronic ideas if they didn't want it to be enshrined in law that everybody else has to be taught to be as ignorant as they are.

Stalin Organs

As we all have no doubt heard by now, Al Qaeda is claiming credit for firing three rockets at the USS Queerbarge Kearsarge. I expressed some doubt at various blogs that it was the target by wondering how they could possibly miss a target that is 600 feet long and rises forty or more feet out of the water at the flight deck, and 150 feet at the superstructure, and is tied to a dock, i.e. parked, to boot

Well, I take it all back. I was just watching Confused News Network and now I know.

The rockets were WWII Russian "Katyusha" missiles. They are deployed from a towed launcher that contains multiple rockets in a rack, maybe twenty of 'em. They're three or four feet long and have no guidance once they leave the launcher. It is an "area fire" weapon and as such is impossible to aim with precision. It is pointed in the approximate direction and angled upward for range in the "I shot an arrow into the air, it fell to earth I know not where" mode. To hit anything with it, the Russians fired thousands of them in a barrage. They make a terrific back blast and a huge cloud of dust when they go off. As soon as it is fired, the truck hooks the launcher up and hauls ass as it is sure to draw counterbattery fire. The U.S. had a very similar weapon.

Wehrmacht soldiers called 'em "Stalin Organs" and they did indeed play a deadly tune.

It's my guess that the rockets were left over from the Soviet Union's involvement in Egypt, but I certainly wouldn't rule out that these fanatics towed them overland from Afghanistan behind a Nissan pickup. Hopeless, but it gave them something to do.

The chance of hitting a specific target with only three antique examples of a crude, even for its time, device is highly dependent on Allah's good intentions towards the mission. It would be like trying to take a shower with three drops of water.

Friday Cattle Dog Blogging

Baby pictures:

Princess Shayna at about 6 months.

None better

Than the Rude One:

[. . .]

See? You get it? It's not that the administration's a bunch of stumblefucks who couldn't wipe their asses with a diagram and feces-finding tissue. It's that the lack of body armor and, oh, say, a plan is exactly what's needed so the troops really suffer for their country. It's a morale builder, not a soul wrecker.

[. . .]

If Dick Cheney is breathing he's lying. Or he's insulting the United States Military once again by comparing them with a bunch of untrained, weakly-armed, barely cohesive bands of citizen-terrorists who were cobbled together to fight against an occupying power. Or he's the most ironic motherfucker in history.

[. . .]

Kinky

Excellent article on Kinky Friedman and his run for governor of Texas in The New Yorker.

Kinky, in his life and work, has always felt most comfortable as an outsider: a Jew in Texas, a Texan in New York, a reactionary in progressive circles, and a progressive in conservative circles. "Too smart for country, too country for the intelligentsia," as the journalist Larry Sloman - better known as Ratso, who in the mysteries plays Watson to Kinky's Sherlock - once put it. In front of a liberal crowd, Kinky throws in as many racist and sexist epithets as he can think of. If it's a country crowd, he uses bigger words and makes fun of rednecks. Naturally, this is part of his political appeal: politicians are always careful to say nothing offensive, whereas Kinky is careful to always say something offensive; he provokes not to stop conversation but to start it. It's a delicate balance, however. As Evan Smith, the editor of Texas Monthly, for which Kinky wrote a column for four years, put it, "If he's too much like the Kinky we all know and love, he risks not being taken seriously - but if he's too serious he risks just being another guy. People will say, 'If I wanted an unfunny guy, I'd vote for one of the actual candidates.' "

Kinky will have to convince voters that he's at least a little serious, and this means convincing them that he is sincere. Willie Nelson, aboard his tour bus just before a show in New Jersey, told me, "They come to hear just how far out is this guy, and I think that's true of any entertainer who is being honest and truthful." Kinky has said that he would appoint Nelson as his energy czar, in order to explore expanding the use of biodiesel, an alternative fuel that Nelson uses in his buses and cars. "They want to know how honest you're gonna be," Nelson said, "and I haven't seen him back off on anything."

I'd love to see him turn Texas politics on its head. Go to Kinky's site and read, then get on his emailing list.

History has a way of repeating itself...

On Aug. 19, 1934, a plebiscite in Germany approved the vesting of sole executive power in Adolf Hitler as Fuhrer.

Of course, that could never happen here...

What We're Fighting For

Just to keep us focused, I present this post at The Poor Man Cafe. He starts by quoting Paul Begala on " Anti-War Imagery and the Iconography of Hate". That's worth a read in its entirety.

Then follows up with a bunch of quotes by wingnut hatemongers. Read 'em and refresh your memory.

They want to destroy everyone who doesn't drink their demon kool-aid, and our nation in the process.

We're fighting for the survival of Democracy and Freedom. Make no mistake about it.

Krugman

[. . .]

Two different news media consortiums reviewed Florida's ballots; both found that a full manual recount would have given the election to Mr. Gore. This was true despite a host of efforts by state and local officials to suppress likely Gore votes, most notably Ms. Harris's "felon purge," which disenfranchised large numbers of valid voters.

[. . .]

Go read. Great thanks to Melanie.

Iraq is lost

This via Wolcott:

It's over. For the U.S. to win the Iraq war requires three things: defeating the Iraqi resistance; establishing a stable government in Iraq that is friendly to the U.S.; maintaining the support of the American people while the first two are being done. None of these three seem any longer possible. First, the U.S. military itself no longer believes it can defeat the resistance. Secondly, the likelihood that the Iraqi politicians can agree on a constitution is almost nil, and therefore the likelihood of a minimally stable central government is almost nil. Thirdly, the U.S. public is turning against the war because it sees no "light at the end of the tunnel."

As a result, the Bush regime is in an impossible position. It would like to withdraw in a dignified manner, asserting some semblance of victory. But, if it tries to do this, it will face ferocious anger and deception on the part of the war party at home. And if it does not, it will face ferocious anger on the part of the withdrawal party. It will end up satisfying neither, lose face precipitously, and be remembered in ignominy.

[. . .]

It looks like Bush has painted himself into a corner. Good. Wait for the terror threat level to go up sometime soon to distract us from the reality once again.

Sign on

Add your name to the Freedom of Information Act request. Jane:

[. . .]

Well here's your chance to bear witness to the fact that you did not go quietly. On Monday the DNC will file a Freedom of Information Act request for documents pertaining to John Roberts' work as a political appointee under the first Bush administration that the White House has so far refused to turn over to the Senators who have asked for them. The request will come from Howard Dean and anyone who wishes to put their name to it. You can read the formal request and add your name here:

[. . .]

Finally! One about Me 'n Fixer!

From Jaime O'Neill:

Because most of the fighting now being done requires far less marching than was once needed, it is only reasonable to propose that perhaps we have arrived at a time in the history of human struggle when the old people can do the fighting.

This guy has never been in the service. It ain't the marching that hurts. It's the running and the hills with a full load. Even at eighteen, I loved those fuckin' Camp Pendleton hills, and they loved fuckin' me! I see his point though: march long enough, you'll get to a hill and have to run up it.

Tapping that pool of warriors should be easy. Aging males are easily the most gung-ho of all warriors.

From Rush Limbaugh and Karl Rove right on down to the guys who write letters to the editors of the nation's newspapers, the fiercest warriors are men over 50, men with expanding waistlines and receding hairlines who would tear the enemy a new one if only they could get up off the sofa in less than three tries.

Besides, many of these older men work out regularly and eat sensibly. The popular wisdom now has it that 60 is the new 40, and 40 is surely young enough to serve in the military.

Guys like Rep. Tom DeLay, for instance, look to be in fine shape and would make good soldiers, I'm sure.

Tom DeLay and me in the same fire team? Sign my aging white ass up! D'ya think they'd notice if the Squad Automatic Weapon bullet holes in him were in the shape of my initials? That there's two belts worth?

So, because these males are really, really angry, why not give them an outlet for all that anger, and soon, while they can still see to fire their weapons?

Yet another social benefit of my proposal is to be found in the potential for saving vast sums of money that would otherwise go toward health care for these aging males.

This is sounding like win-win!

An additional advantage to my proposal is that it would get these men out of the house. As it is, far too many of them, especially those who have retired early, are annoying their wives, are constantly underfoot and are often in the way.

Mrs. G says it's win-win too! She's so supportive.

As an aging man myself, I would readily join the ranks of the aging army, but I think my skills are more valuable here at home, thinking up ideas for victory like the aforementioned proposal.

I think that's the whole problem with war. Old men get pissed off and send young men to fight the stupid wars they start. Maybe if the old farts had to go fight 'em, they'd wise up.

Anyway, go read the whole thing. It's a hoot!

Gotta quit checkin' stuff out late at night. My senses are dulled from the day. I'll post anything!

What's in a name...

Donna Gillespie in the EssEffChron:

It's time for the pro-choice movement to change its name. "Pro choice" is not a slogan to conjure a drumbeat summoning people to march for human rights. "Choice" brings up images of entitlement, of having the leisure to choose. You choose ice cream flavors. Or whether to buy the Prada shoes or the Hermes bag when you can't afford them both.

I propose that we choose a name that resonates with our highest values: "Equal justice for women." "Reproductive rights for all women." "Reproductive justice for women." Or perhaps "full civil rights for women." Whatever term in settled on, it should be something that carries a moral force. We should be saying it with all the passion with which people once said, "Give me liberty or give me death." Yes, it's that kind of issue. The best answer, when anyone asks you if you're for "abortion on demand" is: "Certainly. I'm also for human rights on demand."

Conversely, those who believe in full human rights for women must stop allowing anti-abortion groups to disguise their intentions behind the label "pro-life." I propose that we start calling them what they are -- advocates of forced birth. (my bold)

Let's face it: To force an unwilling woman to give birth is a barbarous act. This is the dark side of the anti-abortion movement that its proponents don't want the public to closely examine. At a recent anti-abortion march here in San Francisco, I saw a baffling placard proclaiming: "Women deserve better than abortion." What, exactly, would that "better" be? For the woman whose birth control has failed her to be put under house arrest for the first six months of her pregnancy, to assure that others' will is done and not hers? We should condemn this with the same righteous fury with which we condemn spousal abuse and rape.

I think she's got a good point. Names and image are all about marketing. The truth doesn't necessarily sell as well as a lie, as we all know from watching the Bush administration at work. I like the term "wingnut whackjobs", f'rinstance, but it may not have broad appeal even though it's the truth.

Mein Kampf

A very big hat tip to Glen.

Bend Over, Marine

This one totally pisses me off. From OhioNewsNow:

AUSTIN, Texas A decorated Marine doesn't qualify as a Texas resident any more because of the time he spent serving in Iraq.

That's what Carl Basham says officials told him when he tried to enroll in Austin Community College.

He's registered to vote in Texas, has a Texas driver's license and does his banking there. But he says officials told him that's not enough to qualify him for the lower tuition Texas residents pay.

That means he'd have to pay around 26-hundred dollars a semester in tuition, instead of about 500 dollars.

Basham did two tours of duty in Iraq.

Officials at the college will only say Basham didn't meet state requirements. They say privacy laws prevent discussing his case.

Those rotten sonsabitches. Go do your duty as you see it, and your reward for risking your ass is a financial penalty for being out of state? Motherfucker!

Why Bush Won't Talk To Cindy

Marjorie Cohn at Truthout:

Why didn't Bush simply invite Cindy in for tea when she arrived in Crawford? In a brief, personal meeting with Cindy, Bush could have defused a situation that has become a profound embarrassment for him, and could derail his political agenda.

Bush didn't talk with Cindy because he can't answer her question. There is no answer to Cindy's question. There is no noble cause that Cindy's son died fighting for. And Bush knows it.

If Bush were to give an honest answer to Cindy Sheehan's question, it would be that her son died to help his country spread US hegemony throughout the Middle East.

But Bush has no intention of ever pulling out of Iraq. The US is building the largest CIA station in the world in Baghdad. And Halliburton is busily constructing 14 permanent US military bases in Iraq.

George Bush knows that he cannot answer Cindy Sheehan's question. There is no noble cause for his war on Iraq.

Bush has got his ass in a crack over this war, and knows that it's starting to cave in. It's all PR now. Any success in the wake of his disastrous decisions depends on an ignorant, cowed press and public, and Mrs. Sheehan's efforts are starting to bring attention to it and convince other anti-war folks that they can come out of the closet and speak up.

I'll be glad to see his hiney out of the vise and his neck in a noose.