but he's not there

only 1% of people think of god as female, with 62% considering god to be male, the online survey conducted earlier this month of 1,050 adults in britain found.1

i remember sometime during the last millenium catching part of a documentary about christians in korea or some such topic and the one clip that stayed with me was an interview of a korean man saying that not only did he believe in jesus christ, son of god, but he also believed that christ was a caucasian with blond hair and blue eyes.

i immediately thought: "how horrible!" — this pathetic person had built himself a mountain that he could never scale.

most theists and deists with an anthropomorphic vision of their diety create one in their own image and posit themselves as the "chosen people" of that god, yet here was a person submitting to a god that he could never claim kin to, no matter how hard he prays, no matter what he sacrifices.

it seems that instead of enjoying the ego-boost most religions give their faithful, this person was basically condemning himself to a permanent inferiority complex. and if god is white, blond and blue-eyed, how could this person ever have any kind of relationship with any white, blond and blue-eyed human being in which he wasn't automatically inferior (perhaps even inferior to any caucasian nonbeliever as well), all the way down to his corpuscles?

watching that guy declare his strange faith just seemed so heartbreakingly tragic.

---

¹ hat tip to p.z. myers @ pharyngula. from commenter greta christina:

the zombies' song "she's not there" keeps coming to mind. with a little tweaking, it makes an excellent atheist song. well, let me tell you 'bout the way he looks the way he acts and the color of his hair his voice is soft and cool his eyes are clear and bright but he's not there!

godwin* would be proud

(edited footage from "der untergang" (2004))

* see "godwin's law"

not for resale

i see that my generosity is not to go unpunished:

apparently the warning in the readme file supplied with my icons is not explicit enough. apparently this seller can't follow his own advice: "please read ebays policy carefully ..."

the concept of copyright itself is quite simple: if you didn't create it, you can't sell it — not without documented permission from the creator.

and while i may be the creator of these icons, even i can't sell them — not without risking the wrath of the likes of dc comics, warner bros., paramount pictures, george lucas, the beatles and any other holders of copyrights and trademarks attached to the sources of my creations.

so my advice to anyone contemplating making a buck or a pound off my icons — don't. i've already filed an infringement notice with ebay.

just be happy i'm giving them away for free to my fellow gps enthusiasts and not keeping them to myself. let sleeping dogs lie. it's not worth the £1.99.

comment of the day

from marcusA @ pharyngula, a science blog, on a video of an octopus in a finnish zoo opening a container with a screw cap:

a cephalopod opening a jar is cool. but what I really want to see is a creationist opening a book, a rare event in nature.

fireworks guaranteed

britain's times online gives the onion a run for its money:

'disneyland' comes to baghdad with multi-million pound entertainment park ... mr [llewellyn] werner, chairman of c3, a los angeles-based holding company for private equity firms, is pouring millions of dollars into developing the baghdad zoo and entertainment experience, a massive american-style amusement park that will feature a skateboard park, rides, a concert theatre and a museum. it is being designed by the firm that developed disneyland. "the people need this kind of positive influence. it’s going to have a huge psychological impact," mr werner said. the 50-acre (20 hectare) swath of land sits adjacent to the green zone and encompasses baghdad’s existing zoo, which was looted, left without power and abandoned after the american-led invasion in 2003. only 35 of 700 animals survived — some starved, some were stolen and some were killed by iraqis fearing food shortages. ... mr werner, who has been sold a 50-year lease on the site by the mayor of baghdad for an undisclosed sum, says that the time is ripe for the amusement park. "i think people will embrace it. they’ll see it as an opportunity for their children regardless if they’re shia or sunni. they’ll say their kids deserve a place to play and they’ll leave it alone."

indeed, in baghdad, what better time?

round-up of daily violence — monday 21 april 2008 around 8 am, three ieds planted in three cars targeted employees of the cabinet office. the first one was in dora and the employee was driving his own car the bmw when it exploded and he was injured in that incident. the second one targeted another employee who was injured as he was driving his hyundai car with another passenger who was sitting by him. the third one targeted a female employee’s car at alawi neighborhood. she was injured in that incident. around 10 am, two roadside bombs targeted two cars near the red crescent in mansour neighborhood. no casualties reported. around 11 am, random clashes took place at rubayee street of zayuna (east baghdad). six people were killed including a woman in that incident. around 3:20 pm, mortars hit the green zone (iz) in central baghdad. no casualties reported. around 4 pm, a roadside bomb targeted a kia mini bus near the oil marketing headquarter at zayuna neighborhood (east baghdad). one person was killed and five others were injured in that incident. around 4 pm, a mortar shell hit mashtal neighborhood (east baghdad). two people were injured in that incident. around 4 pm, clashes took place at mashtal neighborhood (east baghdad) between the iraqi army and the mahdi army. five people were injured in that clashes. around 6 and 6:30 pm, two katyusha missiles hit the supreme council headquarters. no casualties reported. around 6:10 pm, a katyusha missile hit the salhiyah compound (central baghdad). no casualties recorded, but some cars were damaged in that incident. police found 4 dead bodies in baghdad today: (3) were found in east baghdad (risafa bank); 1 was in zayuna, 1 was in husseiniyah and 1 was in mashtal. while (1) was found in dora.

baghdad green zone blasted under cover of storm militants bombarded baghdad's green zone with rockets on sunday, taking advantage of the cover of a blinding dust storm to launch one of the heaviest strikes in weeks on the fortified compound. ... iraqi police said eight missiles or mortars had hit the green zone and another 14 fell in other parts of the iraqi capital before nightfall in several quick bursts, killing two people and wounding 20. ... several more missiles were fired late on sunday evening but it was unclear if there were any casualties. militiamen have fired 700 missiles and mortars over the past month in baghdad, but u.s. forces had said they believed they had reduced the fighters' ability to strike the green zone by occupying the part of the sadr city slum closest to it. u.s. forces normally respond rapidly to missile firings with helicopter strikes, but those are impossible in dust storms.

quality of life indicators, april 20 2008 iraqi unemployment rate 27% to 60% where curfew not in effect consumer price inflation in 2006 50% iraqi children suffering from chronic malnutrition 28% in june 2007 percent of professionals who have left iraq since 2003 40% iraqi physicians before 2003 invasion 34,000 iraqi physicians who have left iraq since 2005 invasion 12,000 iraqi physicians murdered since 2003 invasion 2,000 pre-war daily hours baghdad homes have electricity 16 to 24 hrs average daily hours baghdad homes have electricity 5.6 hrs in may 2007 average daily hours iraqi homes have electricity 1 to 2 hrs number of iraqi homes connected to sewer systems 37% iraqis without access to adequate water supplies 70%

scenes from an interrogation

where: not a dark, cold, clammy fetid hold deep in the bowels of a former soviet gulag. nor, for that matter, the bright, panelled, spacious chambers of the hague's international criminal court:

tom:	this story was made public by abc a few weeks ago. it claims that you, rice, tenet and others met in the white house to discuss different methods of "enhanced interrogation," is that correct?
ashcroft:	[angrily] correct? is what correct? is it correct that this story ran on abc? i don't know that. i don't know anything about it! is it a real story? when was this story, huh? huh?
tom:	um, early april, april 9th, i think ...
ashcroft:	[interrupting] you think? you think? you don't even know! next question!
tom:	the article says that you discussed "whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning"...
ashcroft:	i said, next question!

ashcroft:	no. no, [my position on torture] doesn't violate the geneva conventions. as for other laws, well, the u.s. is a party to the united nations convention against torture. and that convention, well, when we join a treaty like that we send it to the senate to be ratified, and when the senate ratifies they often add qualifiers, reservations, to the treaty which affect what exactly we follow. now, i don't have a copy of the convention in front of me ...
me:	[holding up my copy] i do! [boisterous applause and whistling from the audience] would you like to borrow it?
ashcroft:	[after a pause] uh, you keep a hold of it. now, as i was saying, i don't have it with me but i'm pretty sure it defines torture as something that leaves lasting scars or physical damage ...
student:	liar! you liar! [the student is shushed by the audience]
ashcroft:	so no, waterboarding does not violate international law.

me:	first off, mr. ashcroft, i'd like to apologize for the rudeness of some of my fellow students. it was uncalled for — we can disagree civilly, we don't need that. [round of applause from the audience, and ashcroft smiles] i have here in my hand two documents. one of them, you know, is the text of the united nations convention against torture, which, point of interest, says nothing about "lasting physical damage" ...
ashcroft:	[interrupting] do you have the senate reservations to it?
me:	no, i don't. do you happen to know what they are?
ashcroft:	[angrily] i don't have them memorized, no. i don't have time to go around memorizing random legal facts. i just don't want these people in the audience to go away saying, "he was wrong, she had the proof right in her hand!" because that's not true. it's a lie. if you don't have the reservations, you don't have anything. now, if you want to bring them another time, we can talk, but ...
me:	actually, mr. ashcroft, my question was about this other document. [laughter and applause] this other document is a section from the judgment of the tokyo war tribunal. after wwii, the tokyo tribunal was basically the nuremberg trials for japan. many japanese leaders were put on trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including torture. and among the tortures listed was the "water treatment," which we nowadays call waterboarding...
ashcroft:	[interrupting] this is a speech, not a question. i don't mind, but it's not a question.
me:	it will be, sir, just give me a moment. the judgment describes this water treatment, and i quote, "the victim was bound or otherwise secured in a prone position; and water was forced through his mouth and nostrils into his lungs and stomach." one man, yukio asano, was sentenced to fifteen years hard labor by the allies for waterboarding american troops to obtain information. since yukio asano was trying to get information to help defend his country — exactly what you, mr. ashcroft, say is acceptible for americans to do — do you believe that his sentence was unjust? [boisterous applause and shouts of "good question!"]
ashcroft:	[angrily] now, listen here. you're comparing apples and oranges, apples and oranges. we don't do anything like what you described.
me:	i'm sorry, i was under the impression that we still use the method of putting a cloth over someone's face and pouring water down their throat ...
ashcroft:	[interrupting, red-faced, shouting] pouring! pouring! did you hear what she said? "putting a cloth over someone's face and pouring water on them." that's not what you said before! read that again, what you said before!
me:	sir, other reports of the time say ...
ashcroft:	[shouting] read what you said before! [cries of "answer her fucking question!" from the audience] read it!
me:	[firmly] mr. ashcroft, please answer the question.
ashcroft:	[shouting] read it back!
me:	"the victim was bound or otherwise secured in a prone position; and water was forced through his mouth and nostrils into his lungs and stomach."
ashcroft:	[shouting] you hear that? you hear it? "forced!" if you can't tell the difference between forcing and pouring ... does this college have an anatomy class? if you can't tell the difference between forcing and pouring ...
me:	[firmly and loudly] mr. ashcroft, do you believe that yukio asano's sentence was unjust? answer the question. [pause]
ashcroft:	[more restrained] it's not a fair question; there's no comparison. next question! [loud chorus of boos from the audience]

the force missing all is that is

the latest addition to the garmin nüvi gps custom vehicle icon fleet: a star wars tie fighter: (click to download)

NOTICE: these custom icons that i make freely available are not for resale!

previously posted custom icons include the several star trek shuttlecraft, the 1966 tv batmobile, even more batmobiles, speed racer's mach 5 and the beatles' yellow submarine.

if escher was a comedian

multiple tiers of reality stacked like a house of cards come crashing down on harried talk show host ken doral:

doral:	[disheveled, tense and chainsmoking] ... rock lyrics: do they influence our kids? our topic in two weeks. but, tonight: the elderly. good evening and welcome to the pre-taped call in show, where we tape all our shows a week in advance. i'm your host ken doral, and uh ... let's try it again! it's really not that hard, 'kay? our topic once again: [gestures to his guest, a kindly eldery man] the elderly. we're — we're taping it now, and it airs next week, 'kay? so, if you're watching me talk about the eldery, don't call to talk about it, it's too late. instead call to talk about cooking, which is next week's topic, 'kay? if you wanted to talk about the elderly, you should've called last week, when our pet care show was airing, but we were taping the elderly show ... yeah. okay, so, here we go [taps switchboard] ... hello?
caller #1:	hi ken, great show.
doral:	thank you, what can i do for you?
caller #1:	uh, my dog has a disobedience problem, and uh —
doral:	okay, okay, heh ... there you go ... ha! hahaha! okay, that's uh, boo-boo number one! hopefully that'll be our last, 'kay. ah, look, if you wanted to talk about pet care, you should've called two weeks ago when our show on racism was airing. 'kay, i'm doing a show about the elderly right now, which of course, to people watching means: call in about cooking. 'kay, we'll see if we can ... [taps switchboard] hello?
caller #2:	yeah, hi, uh — what's going on? i mean, you're doing a show about pet care, but everyone's talking about racism ...
doral:	no ...
caller #2:	... and i don't —
doral:	no, 'kay, no no no ... no, we're not doing a show about pet care, i'm doing a show about the elderly! see, the people calling about racism are watching the show that aired when we were taping the pet show, which is airing now. okay? if they wanted to talk about racism, they should've called three weeks ago, when our "crime in the streets" show aired. 'kay? it's just ... let's ... think ... before we ... alright ... alright ... okay [steels self for next caller] here we go ... [taps switchboard] hello?
caller #3:	yes, i'd like to talk about my grandma.
doral:	[with relief] oh .. oh, alright! yeah, yeah, heh ... 'kay, good ...
caller #3:	yeah, well she has this cat that's keeping her up at night and i, uh —
doral:	well, sir, sir — can i just say that that that the ... difficulty with sleeping is a common problem [gestures to elderly guest] with the elderly of today.
caller #3:	yeah, but i really think the cat is more of the problem. i mean, the cat's rambunctious and —
doral:	no, no, no, sir — OBVIOUSLY your elderly grandmother is the problem, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS WEEK'S SHOW IS ABOUT!!!
caller #3:	yeah, but i'm watching the show right now and —
doral:	[explodes] IDIOT! IT'S SIMPLE! LOOK AT THIS! — [leaps from chair, pulls tv monitor into view] IT'S WHAT'S AIRING RIGHT NOW! PET CARE SHOW! LISTEN!
doral:	[on the tv monitor, exploding] PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD! STOP CALLING ABOUT RACISM! we did that a week ago! look! here! [leaps from chair, pulls tv monitor into view, displaying ... ]
doral:	[ ... on the tv monitor, exploding] listen to me, for the last time, "crime in the streets" happened last week! EVERYTHING I'M SAYING HAPPENED LAST WEEK! LOOK! LOOK! HERE! [leaps from chair, pulls tv monitor into view, displaying ... ]
doral:	[ ... on the tv monitor, calm, pleasant and undisheveled] ... and that's it for our first show, "crime in the streets". i can't help but think that it would have gone a little better had somebody actually called in, but i guess that's because you won't see me until next week. oh well, as soon as we get the kinks worked out here, i'm sure it'll be a great, great show.

"the pre-taped call in show" was #43 on nerve.com's list of the 50 greatest comedy sketches of all time.

detail, "relativity", m.c. escher, 1953

withdrawal symptoms

where most see the recent clash in basra between maliki's u.s.-backed forces and sadr's militiamen as a further slide into quicksand, bob wright @ bloggingheads.tv sees a bright red exit sign:

bob wright: well, let me tell you — get onto why i felt a little more sanguine after this, about the consequences of american withdrawal, or at least a little less concerned about the possibility of chaos engulfing the region if america withdraws. what you saw in this was that, contrary to some stereotypes, actually none of the parties involved are crazy, okay? maliki did miscalculate a little, but once he got himself into trouble, all of the parties saw that it was in their interest to work out a peaceful solution, and they did it. and they did it without any american help. they did with iranian help. we were not involved in the solution. they worked it out without us, okay? the only effect we may have had is by doing a little more — helping maliki inflict a little more damage than he would have otherwise. it may have weakened sadr's bargaining position a little, so maybe he got a little worse deal than he would have, but as you yourself said, it's far from clear whether it's better that sadr lose or that he prevail among the shiites. i mean, we don't even — we just don't know. the main thing is that first you get order on the shiite side, then you can proceed to hope for shiite-sunni reconciliation, and as far as the ordering process on the shiite side, i thought they passed the test. y'know, they worked it out. it's stable, it did not — all hell did not break loose. we had nothing to do with the solution. iran did, and that's just ... what we're stuck with is that iran is going to be the source of, a great source of power in the shiite south, and we insured that by invading iraq, and we gotta live with it.

unfortunately both pride and greed make it extremely unlikely that america will decide to "live with it", which guarantees that we'll continue to overstay our welcome in southern iran iraq ...

all that's missing is the dilithium

the latest additions to the garmin nüvi gps custom vehicle icon fleet: star trek shuttlecraft.

the set of 3d models this line-up is based on comes courtesy of the generous community at foundation3d. only their original series shuttlecraft galileo — which unfortunately wasn't very accurate — needed substantial overhauling.

my rebuild was aided by the massive and fascinating image library at the model builders' reference vault, which includes shocking photos of the original shuttle's sad trailer park existence (much like series star william shatner's fate when the series folded) before it was reportedly purchased and completely restored (again, much like shatner when the franchise came back to life):

all shuttlecraft are available in one convenient download:

NOTICE: these custom icons that i make freely available are not for resale!

original series galileo shuttle:

the next generation type 15 shuttle:

the next generation type 17 shuttle:

the next generation type 6 shuttle:

previously posted custom icons include the tv batmobile, even more batmobiles, speed racer's mach 5 and the beatles' yellow submarine.

the great tantra challenge

on 3 march 2008, in a popular tv show, sanal edamaruku, the president of rationalist international, challenged india's most "powerful" tantri (black magician) to demonstrate his powers on him. that was the beginning of an unprecedented experiment. after all his chanting of mantra (magic words) and ceremonies of tantra failed, the tantrik decided to kill sanal edamaruku with the "ultimate destruction ceremony" on live tv. sanal eamaruku agreed and sat in the altar of the black magic ritual. india tv observed skyrocketing viewership rates. everything started, when uma bharati (former chief minister of the state of madhya pradesh) accused her political opponents in a public statement of using tantrik powers to inflict damage upon her. in fact, within a few days, the unlucky lady had lost her favorite uncle, hit the door of her car against her head and found her legs covered with wounds and blisters. india tv, one of india's major hindi channels with national outreach, invited sanal edamaruku for a discussion on "tantrik power versus science". pandit surinder sharma, who claims to be the tantrik of top politicians and is well known from his tv shows, represented the other side. during the discussion, the tantrik showed a small human shape of wheat flour dough, laid a thread around it like a noose and tightened it. he claimed that he was able to kill any person he wanted within three minutes by using black magic. sanal challenged him to try and kill him. the tantrik tried. he chanted his mantras (magic words): "om linga linga lina linga, kili kili ...." but his efforts did not show any impact on sanal — not after three minutes, and not after five. the time was extended and extended again. the original discussion program should have ended here, but the "breaking news" of the ongoing great tantra challenge was overrunning all program schedules. now the tantrik changed his technique. he started sprinkling water on sanal and brandishing a knife in front of him. sometimes he moved the blade all over his body. sanal did not flinch. then he touched sanal's head with his hand, rubbing and rumpling up his hair, pressing his forehead, laying his hand over his eyes, pressing his fingers against his temples. when he pressed harder and harder, sanal reminded him that he was supposed to use black magic only, not forceful attacks to bring him down. the tantrik took a new run: water, knife, fingers, mantras. but sanal kept looking very healthy and even amused. after nearly two hours, the anchor declared the tantrik's failure. the tantrik, unwilling to admit defeat, tried the excuse that a very strong god whom sanal might be worshipping obviously protected him. "no, i am an atheist," said sanal edamaruku. finally, the disgraced tantrik tried to save his face by claiming that there was a never-failing special black magic for ultimate destruction, which could, however, only been done at night. bad luck again, he did not get away with this, but was challenged to prove his claim this very night in another "breaking news" live program. during the next three hours, india tv ran announcements for the great tantra challenge that called several hundred million people to their tv sets. the encounter took place under the open night sky. the tantrik and his two assistants were kindling a fire and staring into the flames. sanal was in good humour. once the ultimate magic was invoked, there wouldn't be any way back, the tantrik warned. within two minutes, sanal would get crazy, and one minute later he would scream in pain and die. didn't he want to save his life before it was too late? sanal laughed, and the countdown begun. the tantriks chanted their "om linga linga linga linga, kili kili kili ...." followed by ever changing cascades of strange words and sounds. the speed increased hysterically. they threw all kinds of magic ingredients into the flames that produced changing colours, crackling and fizzling sounds and white smoke. while chanting, the tantrik came close to sanal, moved his hands in front of him and touched him, but was called back by the anchor. after the earlier covert attempts of the tantrik to use force against sanal, he was warned to keep distance and avoid touching sanal. but the tantrik "forgot" this rule again and again. now the tantrik wrote sanal's name on a sheet of paper, tore it into small pieces, dipped them into a pot with boiling butter oil and threw them dramatically into the flames. nothing happened. singing and singing, he sprinkled water on sanal, mopped a bunch of peacock feathers over his head, threw mustard seed into the fire and other outlandish things more. sanal smiled, nothing happened, and time was running out. only seven more minutes before midnight, the tantrik decided to use his ultimate weapon: the clod of wheat flour dough. he kneaded it and powdered it with mysterious ingredients, then asked sanal to touch it. sanal did so, and the grand magic finale begun. the tantrik pierced blunt nails on the dough, then cut it wildly with a knife and threw them into the fire. that moment, sanal should have broken down. but he did not. he laughed. forty more seconds, counted the anchor, twenty, ten, five ... it's over! millions of people must have uttered a sigh of relief in front their tvs. sanal was very much alive. tantra power had miserably failed. tantriks are creating such a scaring atmosphere that even people, who know that black magic has no base, can just break down out of fear, commented a scientist during the program. it needs enormous courage and confidence to challenge them by actually putting one's life at risk, he said. by doing so, sanal edamaruku has broken the spell, and has taken away much of the fear of those who witnessed his triumph. in this night, one of the most dangerous and wide spread superstitions in india suffered a severe blow.

snark of the week

jim henley @ unqualified offerings:

the following appeared this week in the new york times, the washington post, slate and the new yorker in a parallel universe ... how i got it right: looking back at a time of justified opposition to a mad, violent enterprise so many publications have expressed such overwhelming interest in the perspectives of those of us who opposed the iraq war when it had a chance of doing good that i have had to permit mutliple publication of this article in most of the nation's elite media venues — collecting, i am almost embarrassed to admit, a separate fee from each. everyone recognizes that the opinions of those of us who were right about iraq then are crucial to formulating sane, just policy now. it's a lot of pressure, so please forgive anything glib or short you read herein: between articles, interviews, think-tank panels and presentations before government agencies and policy organs i'm not permitted to mention, i'm a little frazzled. on the bright side, and i can confirm that my experience has been similar to those of my fellow prophets, being the object of so much attention, being repeatedly quizzed by eager interlocutors on the same basic points, encourages one to distill one's thinking to its essence. as kenneth pollack asked me the other day, "what the fuck was so special about you, anyway?" "for one thing," i said, "i am not sprawled on a sidewalk next the mcpherson square metro station, hoping to cadge enough quarters to enjoy the rare treat of laundering the vomit out of the only shirt i own, praying all the while that decent people do not recognize me beneath the matted beard and tangled hair." "but my thigh hurts!" he said. "shut up," i consoled him, "or i'll kick it again." still he had a way of arriving at the essential question: "what the fuck was so special about me, anyway?" why did i have the sense to oppose the us conquest of iraq when so many of our great and good supported it? sometimes i think the other question is almost more interesting: what the fuck were those other people thinking? alas, answers to that one are hard to come by, since understandable shame has closed many mouths. so my own side of the story will have to suffice. why was i right and you, if you were a powerful politician or respected pundit in 2002-2003, wrong? some guesses follow. i'm really very bright. i don't like to brag, but my iq places me in the 99th percentile of americans. odds are, for instance, that i am smarter than you. and if i'm not, you're probably not that much smarter than i am. and even if you are, it would be unseemly for you to say so. what are you, stuck up or something? you aside, i'm certainly smarter than the president, or doug feith, or joe klein. i am seventeen times as smart as senator joseph lieberman. i am twenty-five hundred percent brighter than gop presidential candidate john mccain. my superior intelligence is a superficially plausible explanation, and i don't discount it, but two immediate objections suggest themselves. first, and less crucially, it simply raises another question: how did i get so smart in the first place? the shortest answer is, "because my parents were smart, and their parents were smart too." it's very hard to say why that matters: iq appears to be substantially heritable, but it's hard to disentangle the genetic component from the environmental nevertheless — i was reared by my parents, and not, as you know, by yours. if i'd been reared by yours i'd have gotten more toys as a kid. we were poor and you, somewhat spoiled. distressingly, there's no practical program for improvement there. "be smarter!" we might say to doug feith, "you'll make better policy!" but doug feith can't go back in time and be born to other people. but in light of the second objection to the "intelligence theory," that probably doesn't matter. second objection: you didn't have to be all that bright to oppose the iraq war in advance. heck, polls suggest that most americans were dubious about the idea until the war became obviously inevitable. real enthusiasm was confined to the elite media, the bipartisan defense-policy establishment and a bunch of republican quasi-intellectuals who had spent ten years casting about for different countries to have a war — any war — with. i mean, for crying out loud, at one point our rulers declared that saddam hussein might attack america with remote-controlled model planes. you didn't have to wait to bounce that one off the folks at your next mensa meeting to judge its likelihood. nor did you have to puzzle overlong, if someone tried to put that one by you, how much stock you should put in anything else that came out of their mouths. conclusion: my manifest intelligence was definitely not necessary to opposing the iraq war. it may not have been sufficient either. i wasn't born yesterday. i had heard of the middle east before september 12, 2001. i knew that many of the loudest advocates for war with iraq were so-called national-greatness conservatives who spent the 1990s arguing that war was good for the soul. i remembered elliott abrams and john poindexter and michael ledeen as the knaves and fools of iran-contra, and drew the appropriate conclusions about the bush administration wanting to employ them: it was an administration of knaves and fools. people will object that the project for a new american century had heard of the middle east before september 12, 2001 too, so just knowing some things wasn't enough. and hey, true, but if you read"warbloggers"back in 2001-2003, the thing that really jumped out was how new all this foreign-policy stuff was to them. people without much knowledge on the subject went looking for someone to soothe a very real hurt they felt in september 2001, and the first people they ran into were raving, nationalistic morons with a preexisting agenda, clustered around the wall street journal and the weekly standard. libertarianism. as a libertarian, i was primed to react skeptically to official pronouncements. "hayek doesn't stop at the water's edge!" i coined that one. not bad, huh? i could tell the difference between the government and the country. people who couldn't make this distinction could not rationally cope with the idea that american foreign policy was the largest driver of anti-american terrorism because it sounded to them too much like "the american people deserve to be victims of terrorism." i could see the self-interest of the officials pushing for war — how war would benefit their political party, their department within the government, enhance their own status at the expense of rivals. libertarianism made it clear how absurd the idealistic case was. supposedly, wise, firm and just american guidance would usher iraq into a new era of liberalism and comity. but none of that was going to work unless real american officials embedded in american political institutions were unusually selfless and astute, with a lofty and omniscient devotion to iraqi welfare. and, you know, they weren't going to be that. finally-er, being neither republican nor democrat meant that i wasn't unduly impressed when even tom friedman, or even some clinton administration hack, assured everyone that the tinpot ruler of a two-bit despotism eight-thousand miles away would and could destroy us if we didn't get him first. here there are a number of objections. all too many self-described libertarians supported the iraq war, with that noxious fervor for which we are notorious. these people were led astray by a combination of noble and base tendencies within libertarianism. saddam hussein was a vicious tyrant, after all, and some libertarians let a commendable hatred of tyrants overrule their common sense. some libertarians remembered that war involved guns, and lots of them, and figured it must be good. and many feared that if the united states did not go to war, it might make some hippie, somewhere, happy. the more telling objection is that you didn't have to be a libertarian to figure out that going to war with iraq made even less sense than driving home to east egg drunk off your ass and angry at your spouse. any number of leftists and garden-variety liberals, and even a handful of conservatives, figured it out, each for different reasons. this objection has the disadvantage of being obviously true. what all of us had in common is probably a simple recognition: war is a big deal. it isn't normal. it's not something to take up casually. any war you can describe as "a war of choice" is a crime. war feeds on and feeds the negative passions. it is to be shunned where possible and regretted when not. various hawks occasionally protested that "of course" they didn't enjoy war, but they were almost always lying. anyone who saw invading foreign lands and ruling other countries by force as extraordinary was forearmed against the lies and delusions of the time. it's a heavy burden, i'll admit. but the riches and fame make it all worthwhile.

quote of the day

born-again democrat john cole @ balloon juice:

my iraq war retrospective i see that andrew sullivan was asked to list what he got wrong about iraq for the five year anniversary of the invasion, and since i was as big a war booster as anyone, i thought i would list what i got wrong: everything. and i don’t say that to provide people with an easy way to beat up on me, but i do sort of have to face facts. i was wrong about everything. i was wrong about the doctrine of pre-emptive warfare. i was wrong about iraq possessing wmd. i was wrong about scott ritter and the inspections. i was wrong about the un involvement in weapons inspections. i was wrong about the containment sanctions. i was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the middle east. i was wrong about this making us more safe. i was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize iraq. i was wrong when i stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath. i was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps. i was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the middle east. i was wrong about dissolving the iraqi army. i was wrong about the looting being unimportant. i was wrong that bush/cheney were competent. i was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators. i was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors. i was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies. i mean, i could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. i was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. it is amazing i could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. if you took all the wrongness i generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of weekly standard journals. i am not sure how i snapped out of it, but i think abu ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit. war should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. i will never make the same mistakes again.

breaking, part deux: pot, kettle death-cage rematch!

christian-philosopher-king-in-chief george w. bush, speechifyin' before the dept. of homeland security, and indulging in a texas-sized dose of good ol'-fashion projection:

we're in a battle with evil men — i call them evil because if you murder the innocent to achieve a political objective, you're evil.

... unless, of course, you're someone engaged in "constructive chaos". biiiiig difference, folks. like huge.

finally, flowers

then:

"think of the faces in afghanistan when the people were liberated, when they moved out in the streets and they started singing and flying kites and women went to school and people were able to function and other countries were able to start interacting with them. that's what would happen in iraq." — defense secretary donald rumsfeld, 9/13/02 "as i told the president on january 10th, i think they will be greeted with sweets and flowers in the first months and simply have very, very little doubts that that is the case." — iraqi exile kanan makiya, 3/17/03

now:

baghdad — pomp and ceremony greeted iranian president mahmoud ahmadinejad on his arrival in iraq on sunday, the fanfare a stark contrast to the rushed and secretive visits of his bitter rival u.s. president george w. bush. ahmadinejad held hands with iraqi president jalal talabani as they walked down a red carpet to the tune of their countries' national anthems, his visit the first by an iranian president since the two neighbours fought a ruinous war in the 1980s. his warm reception, in which he was hugged and kissed by iraqi officials and presented with flowers by children, was iraq's first full state welcome for any leader since the u.s.-led invasion to topple saddam hussein in 2003. — reuters, 3/2/08

all that's missing are the meanies

the latest custom vehicle icon for the garmin nüvi gps series takes a decidedly more whimsical turn:

NOTICE: these custom icons that i make freely available are not for resale!

actual size: (click to download)

close-up:

my previous custom vehicles icons, which includes various batmobiles from the 40s, 50s, 60s and 00s, as well as speed racer's mach 5, can be downloaded from my previous posts all that's missing is the "pow!" and aarrgghhz carz.

breaking: pot, kettle collide

decider-in-chief george w. bush commenting on turkey's offensives in northern iraq:

the turks need to move quickly, achieve their objective, and get out.

sounds like good advice to me, george.

ruh row*

at the beginning of february, the runaway train that is the republican party crashed another siding:

top house republicans were told in recent days that a former employee of their campaign committee may have forged an official audit during the contentious 2006 election cycle and that they should brace for the possibility that an unfolding investigation could uncover financial improprieties stretching back several years, according to gop sources briefed on the members-only discussions. the national republican congressional committee has retained a forensic auditor to review its accounting for the last several election cycles, the sources said. the nrcc’s accounting problems were discussed during two high-level conference calls between senior gop lawmakers on friday and monday night, according to republicans briefed on the calls. “there is a sense that this could be very damaging to the committee,” said a republican insider close to the gop leadership.

"damaging"? y'think?

i can't imagine that the republicans — whose fundraising prowess has wilted since 2006 — are too thrilled at the prospect of having the fbi open a criminal audit on their finances, which threatens to shutter their coffers during a crucial campaign year.

every financial advangtage the gop has enjoyed over the last few election cycles has evaporated. with the piggy bank locked up, added to the steadily accumulating retirements, special election losses and indictments, november 2008 looms as the year historians will mark as "the republican diaspora".

* see "scooby doo".

could be worse

so you think the obama-clinton fights at liberal blogs daily kos, booman tribune and mydd are nasty?

associated press: norristown, pa. — montgomery county authorities say a man stabbed his brother-in-law during an argument over who should get the democratic nomination for president. what's more, jose ortiz, 28, who's charged with felony assault, is a registered republican. district attorney risa ferman said ortiz supports hillary clinton and sean shurelds supports barack obama. she told reporters monday that the two got into an argument in a collegeville home thursday night and shurelds tried to choke ortiz. she says ortiz then stabbed shurelds in the abdomen. shurelds was taken to a hospital in critical condition, but is expected to recover.

afaik, no one on those blogs has had to take a trip to the emergency room ... yet.

quote of the day

atrios @ eschaton channeling republican front-runner john mccain:

the war is over. but it will continue forever. but the Iraqis will handle everything. but our troops need to stay there anyway.

there's a certain mad poetry at work here ...