Pesky terrorists Pt. 5

So most people are probably aware that 2 supposed car bombs were found and disabled today here in London. Good for the police. Something keeps bothering me about this though; the reports persist in referring to the bombs as "potentially viable". That suggests to me that the bombs were not viable. As in, a stunt, or carried off by amateurs. Given the UK's history of hyped-up, bogus terrorism busts (think: big airline terror story from last summer), surely we've learned our lesson by now. This couldn't be yet another example, could it? I don't have any inside information. I'm just saying.

Meanwhile, I went out to lunch today with about a dozen workmates. I don't recall last night's attempted bombing coming up in conversation.

It would seem that we "ain't bothered".

How long till the election?

There's a good piece by Boris Johnson here on the 'Torygraph' (my employer when I first arrived in London) with some sentiments that I want to echo.

First, with regard to the departure of Tony Blair:

Sky News may be treating it like the funeral of Queen Victoria, but I am really feeling quite chipper about the political extinction of Tony Blair. Yes, I was going to say, there are some of us who are bearing up pretty well, on the whole, and there are some of us who can't think of a better fate for Tony than to be carted off to the Middle East.

And on the arrival of Gordon Brown:

Suddenly my mood changed; suddenly I felt a sense of desolation and morosity that we had lost Tony Blair, and I can tell you the exact moment when I caught the bug and joined the national mourning. It was the moment Gordon Brown opened his mouth, and, with every word he uttered, the mercury of my mood started to sink and the clouds rolled in.

Yep. Pretty much the same for me. Perhaps the new Prime Minister will be excellent, but as of speech #1, I already can't stand watching him speak. Perhaps he was just really nervous and emotional. Or else, he's the most wooden, unlikeable politician I've ever seen, and as charming as a bag of poo.

I can already see that I'm going to miss that lovable rogue who walked out on us yesterday. Maybe we can all just forgive him for the Iraq thing, and he'll come back?

How to cook an occupation

How bad is it when they stop taking you seriously? In Bob Woodward's book "State Of Denial: Bush At War Part III" there is an anecdote relating America's attempt to set up a TV channel promoting America's perspective in Iraq "so that the coalition message could get on the air":

Eventually there was a U.S.-sponsored television network set up. To fill out its schedule, it broadcast Arabic-language reruns from elsewhere in the Middle East. As a result, some Iraqis took to calling it the "Lebanese Cooking Channel," especially after one day when most other major networks, like Qatar-based Al Jazeera, covered a significant news event live but the U.S.-sponsored network ran a foreign program on how to cook a rabbit.

Hand over that planet

Found in the comments section of a Wired article today:

...or maybe the "need" to kill others competing for the same resources is a universal constant. If the latter, somebody shut those SETI people up before the neighbors notice what a tasty planet we have!

Egypt photos

I've posted photos from our trip to Egypt last week. Normally I try to keep the number of images below 80 or so, but this time there were so many good ones (in my humble opinion) that I just couldn't whittle it down that far. So there are over 200 of them this time.

Sure, there are probably too many photos of statues and temples. But that stuff is cool.

Definitionally speaking

Referring to new revelations about Dick Cheney's role in promoting the use of torture, Andrew Sullivan writes today:

The only defense by Bush and Cheney against charges of war crimes is that a president definitionally cannot commit war crimes, if he's acting as he sees fit in the defense of the nation.

A president cannot commit war crimes by definition? I think I'm missing something here. So, for example, a president Hussein, or president Milosevic cannot be guilty of war crimes? Oh no, I know what he means. An American president cannot be guilty of war crimes.

Okay, to be fair, it would seem that Andrew is writing from a purely American context. He's talking about war crimes as defined under US law and in relation to the president's constitutional commander-in-chief role.

But come on. Enough with the exceptionalism already.

The new US "Detainee Treatment Act" and its amendments, which by consensus effectively allows the president -- but nobody else, honest -- to authorize "torture light", and which retroactively exempts government personnel (i.e. the CIA) from war crimes charges, should be regarded with contempt.

Let's imagine hypothetically that General E.L. Presidente, of the Great Bananian Republic, orders up a law that authorizes his intelligence service to torture prisoners of war. Does anyone suppose that this law would make the resulting atrocities legal, in the eyes of the world? Do war crimes stop being war crimes, just because the laws of the 'GBR', the offending nation, say they aren't? How about the laws of the USA? Is it different then?

Torture is evil. If the "good guys" use it, it doesn't make the torture good; it makes the "good guys" evil. And if Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld commanded or authorized torture or other war crimes, they should stand trial in the Hague just like anyone else.

I know, I'm dreaming. Not gonna happen.

Score +1 for Brown, already?

He hasn't yet officially become Prime Minister, but sounds like he's already planning to give us back a bit of the democracy we've recently lost:

Gordon Brown is to hold out an olive branch to opponents of the Iraq war by reinstating the right to demonstrate and march outside the Houses of Parliament, it has been claimed.

Restrictive legislation introduced by Tony Blair will allegedly be reversed by the Chancellor soon after he enters Number 10 next week.

Colour me impressed: The right to peaceful protest might be back! This is certainly a step in the right direction. Keep it up, you cranky, unlikeable fellow, and you just might win my admiration. And win back my vote.

Back from Egypt

We arrived home yesterday afternoon. Brilliant, unforgettable trip. I'm trying to sort through the photos and get them up quickly -- otherwise, there are so many of them that I'm afraid I'll put it off for months (I still haven't posted the photos from our Easter trip to Paris).

Paris and the big ugly

I'm no fan of Paris Hilton. I too occasionally ask myself the question that many have asked out loud: "why is this person famous?" To me, she's not even very attractive, if that is enough of a reason. But actually, most of the time I just don't think about her at all. I've seen "The Simple Life" (or fragments thereof) a few times. There were some chuckles. It was lightly entertaining. I wouldn't seek it out.

But I've got to say, the gleeful reaction from many people last week, as she was hauled back to jail crying, left a rotten taste in my mouth. There are a couple of bloggy examples here and here, but I suspect you already know what I'm talking about.

Sure she's irritating. But have we all become so 'feral' (in the words of our illustrious outgoing PM) as to turn a couple of DUI arrests into the familiar, raging, 24-hour, cable-news celebrity hypefest? Complete with the great unwashed mobs howling for the punishment? Al Gore is right on this point: We all need to focus a little bit. For example, the Middle East currently seems to be imploding, and we appear to have put ourselves at the center of it.

I know people thought that this was becoming an example of "celebrity justice". I understand people were outraged that a 45-day jail sentence looked like it was going to turn into 45 days of lounging around the pool, and partying at Chez Paris. But, okay, in the grand scheme of things? Was it that important? Were we really still under that misapprehension that everyone gets equal justice, anyway?

Maybe it's sexist of me, but when I saw the photos of Paris Hilton crying I had the opposite reaction. The sight of a young, apparently troubled, scared girl being hauled off to jail in tears doesn't make me feel happy. Some people enjoy seeing others brought low. Thankfully, I don't get much satisfaction from that, most of the time.

I wasn't even going to bother writing this, as I'd let the moment pass and it wasn't such a big deal after all. But today, Christopher Hitchens has published a piece that prompted me to add my bit. (Wow, I seem to be agreeing with this guy a lot lately, now that he's mostly given up talking about Iraq):

At some point toward the middle of last Friday, it seemed to me, one was being made a spectator to a small but important injustice. Those gloating and jeering headlines, showing a tearful child being hauled back to jail, had the effect of making me feel sick. So, you finally got the kid to weep on camera? Are you happy now?

Well said.

Back in University in Canada, whilst sitting around discussing some silly (now forgotten) issue that had everyone all excited, a Lebanese friend related how his father, who had lived through the previous civil war in Lebanon, would say "what this place needs is a good war". Maybe a couple of overseas wars aren't enough. Maybe we need one closer to home. Well, not really of course. But we could probably all do a little better at focusing on what's important in life.

But let's start with a little humanity. Making Paris Hilton cry should be very low on our collective to-do list.

Such a tool Pt. II

Lieberman doesn't seem to understand, by the way, that Iraqi Shiites would mind the US bombing their coreligionists and would probably massacre the entire British garrison in Basra as well as interdict US fuel convoys to the north from Kuwait and Basra. His irresponsible warmongering would get a lot of US troops killed for no good reason.

Lieberman comments from Juan Cole here and 'stilwell' here.

Such a tool

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN)– The United States should consider possible military action against Iran, Senator Joseph Lieberman said Sunday.

“I think we’ve got to be prepared to take military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq.”

So, Mr. Lieberman thinks that a "strike into — over the border into Iran" would frighten those Iranians silly, does he, so that they would cease and desist all naughty activity?

Foolish, foolish man.

If somebody pushes you, your natural instinct is to push them back, but harder. If they then slap you, your natural instinct is to punch them in return. Escalation like this is how simple disputes turn into serious violence. Or war.

What makes Mr. Lieberman think that Iran -- militant, confrontational Iran -- will respond to a military attack by cowering? By surrendering and backing down? A military strike to "stop them from killing Americans in Iraq" would result in the killing of more Americans in Iraq and elsewhere. Even a little nobody like me can predict that, without mental effort.

Foolish, foolish little man.

This is nearly enough to make me glad Cheney's running things. I mean, Cheney would like to start a war with Iran, but I think he at least knows that if you're going to start one, you start one. And that means taking it very seriously (I never doubt Cheney's seriousness, which makes him that much scarier to me). Mr. Lieberman seems to think that just tossing a couple of bombs at Iran will sort everything out.

Or else he knows better, and he's just pandering to the Rush Limbaughs, Ann Coulters and armchair generals in America. Which wouldn't surprise me at all, either.

Old familiar story

My parents sent this by email, and so I thought I'd pass it on. I've actually seen variations of this (though not as witty) when shopping for bikes online:

This bike is perfect! It has 1000 miles and has had its 500 mile dealer service (Expensive) It's been adult ridden; all wheels have always been on the ground. I use it as a cruiser/commuter. I'm selling it because it was purchased without proper consent of a loving wife. Apparently "do whatever the f*** you want" doesn't mean what I thought.

Noisy as ducks

Great quote found here today, on Londoners:

noisy as ducks, eternally drunk. - Verlaine