More Of My Crap

Up at 2:30AM packing for a trip to New York to attend my eldest sister's wedding. Yes, photos of that event will be forthcoming, too, once I get the Africa photos done!

Today I got my new headshots done for an updated press kit. I think my head looks fat. Man, have I bloated of late! What do you think?

Back to the heavy stuff... A couple of people have asked about my contention that terrorism is a political thing and not a religious thing. After all, if a suicide bomber screams the name of his god as he murders a dozen people, is that not indication of a religious basis for his action? As I mentioned in a commentary elsewhere, it's my belief that religion is an enabler, not a cause. Politics is always the cause.

It's easy to forget that Muslims did not invent terrorism. It's been around as a political strategem for centuries. One can argue that Robin Hood was a terrorist. The patriots at the Boston Tea Party were terrorists. Guy Fawkes was a terrorist. Jews fighting for the establishment of Israel, lead by the likes of the late cyclops, Mr Begin, were terrorists. Chrstian abortion-bombers are clearly terrorists, as are the militiamen in the American frontier. The unabomber, too, was a kind of terrorist hoping to effect pro-environmental political change through his random killings. And of course the IRA were terrorists.

To expand the discussion, it can easily be argued that any force that attacks a civilian population for the purposes of attaining a political goal are in essence terrorists. When armies deliberately target civilians to win a battle or get a strategic advantage, that's terrorism. The blitzing of London in WWII was terrorism by the Nazis, designed to stultify Britons with fear. Axis launches of disease- and exposives-filled balloons to the American shore were acts of terrorism with political but no military goals. When Truman nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki, large urban centres were chosen for a maxmimal death count --not to effect a military outcome, but to both politically coerce the Japanese and to send a message to the Russians. That was terrorism. Was it justified? The hawks say so. So, by their world view, sometimes terrorism can be justified.

Clearly, religion is not necessary for the conduct of terrorist acts. It's not even needed for the generation of suicide bombers. Japanese kamikazee pilots weren't religious fanatics, after all. Rather, for those already stirred by a political bug, such as a perceived injustice, a galvinizing and linking force might be religion. It might also be race (in the case of the Jews) or nationality (in the case of the Yankees). I'm open to the suggestion that Islam might more easily lend itself to being such a galvinizing force than, say, Buddhism. The West's longer flirtation with secularism has mostly, though not entirely, removed those teeth from Christianity. But let's not kid ourselves: every religion contains the seeds for extreme dogmatic positions which lead quite easily to the enabling of terrorist actions. All that's required is enough perceived systematic injustice.

UPDATE
My Toronto Star article appears in today's issue. Read it online here and here.

Androids and Algerian Adages

You know, I've got a whole bunch of stuff saved up to write about today, but it's all at home and I'm at the office right now. Oh well...

• Later this week, genetecists will test hair allgedly left behind by a Sasquatch! Insert mandatory Robin Williams joke here.


• This is cool. Japanese scientists have built a human-looking android that can fool people for a significant period of time. While the android is neat looking, you can't help but conclude that the people it fooled were, um, retarded.


• Good news from Ireland: the provisional IRA (which is, for all intents and purposes, the actual IRA) has announced that it is abandoning violence. While this is a good thing, one can't help but conclude two things: the Irish Catholic minority will be the majority in a generation or two, so they will win regardless; and the current world opinion about terrorists and terrorisms has probably got the IRA traditionalists a little scared right now that Blair (like Putin in Chechnya) will use the Global War on Terror as an excuse to enact even more extreme military practices on Irish soil. I suppose in this one example at least the Bush doctrine has paid dividends by frightening a terror group into submission


• So scientists have concluded that taking a woman to the movies is more effective a seduction strategy than buying her expensive shit. Well duh. Any experienced dater knows that the kind of woman who prefers the latter will string you out for an eternity with no fringe benefits forthcoming. Reminds me of a wise adage told me by an Algerian friend:
  

"The woman who costs you the most is rarely the one you actually paid for."

Whole Lotta Crap

OK, let's get to it...

• Since I'm probably already on Thomas Friedman's "list" (see yesterday's post), no harm in pointing you toward this. It's a link to download a rap video. But it's not any rap video. This one is called "Dirty Kuffar" by a British outfit calling themselves "Sheikh Terra".... and they are pro terrorist! If the link doesn't work, I wouldn't be surprised. The video pops up on websites across the internet, then disappears again.
  
  For the CSIS/FBI/RCMP agents reading this, let me declare without reservation that I do not support the attitudes or exhortations expressed in the video! Quite to the contrary, any appeals to violence disgust me. I point you, my dear reader, to the video because it is simply fascinating; jihadists using the medium of their enemy --rap music-- to further their agenda. That is, of course, assuming that these bozos are serious and not just some silly kids trying to get a rise out of people. Warning: it's a pretty catchy tune.
  
  
• So India has joined the world's list of top 10 economies. Great. Maybe now they can use some of their new wealth to feed their people, give them health care, house their homeless and educate the teeming masses of street kids? What's that you say? First they have to build nuclear and space programmes? Silly me.
  
  
• Speaking of India, a new Indian HIV campaign features cricket analogies: protect your stump from getting unwanted googlies.
  
  
• Here's a summary of the Rove/Plame affair from Executive Intelligence Review. Tom Tomorrow has his own take here:
  
  
  
  
• This is a photo of the world's ugliest dog. No joke.
  
  
  
  


• Good news! Thanks to Maggie Wood, who encouraged me to turn a recent blog post into an op-ed. My article on Miss Universe --which you can read here-- will appear in The Toronto Star in coming days!
  

Click!

The people I depend on for all my online foolishness, Bravenet, have been screwing up of late. So if any of you have been emailing me at my traditional address and have not been receiving a reply, try deonandan at gmail dot com instead.

Here's an interesting story. It seems the US military issued a press release after an insurgent attack on July 13th, and another after an attack this past Sunday. Both press releases quoted an "unnamed Iraqi" who reacted to each of the attacks. The problem is that the quotes are virtually identical. Hmmm. What could this mean? I would not, of course, suggest that such quotes are being manufactured. Oh no, that would just be wrong.

Meanwhile BushCo has threatened to veto an enormous senate bill worth over $440 billion in next year's defense budget if the senate were to attempt to investigate the military's systematic abuse of Muslim prisoners in such places as Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Yes, you read that correctly. The President is attempting to compel, coerce and otherwise force the other branch of government to look the other way while he commits war crimes. Will anyone read this story or care? Doubt it.

As you may be aware, the Extreme American Right has a serious hate on for anything associated with the New York Times. Anything, that is, except the columns of Thomas Friedman which, some reports tell, are diligently and regularly read by the Monkey Prez. (Or read to him by Uncle Karl or Uncle Dick.)

Well, hopefully Friedman's latest missive will shock you. Keep in mind that this is the kind of crap that is injected directly into the brains of the current kakistocracy, and hence might just become policy. In his article, Friedman argues for a return to McCarthyism. He explicitly recommends the keeping of "lists", not only of those engaging in hate speech or those potentially inciting terrorist acts, but also --and here's where it gets scary-- those he deems "excuse makers" (in the words of former State Department spokesman James Rubin).

Who are these "excuse makers"? Well, in Friedman's world they are anyone who would suggest a model for terrorist motivations which differs from the official model put forward by BushCo. You know their model: "terrorists hate our freedoms and our way of life." The competing model, the purveyors of which Friedman would like to see monitored by law enforcement, goes something like, "terrorists hate the unilateral support for Israel, military presence in Islamic holy lands and the backing of dictators in Muslim countries."

In short, I'll be listening ever more carefully now for that "click" on my phone.

More Silliness

I've updated the photos I posted yesterday to include more images of the things I loved the most about my year in Ottawa: my beloved inversion table and my beloved ex-girlfriend.

Occasionally, in the name of being "progressive", people do the stupidest things. A few years ago the band The Barenaked Ladies was banned from performing at Toronto's City Hall because their name was deemed sexist. The pickle-up-the-ass crowd was too square to realize that the name was an innocent reference to a laddish predilection.

Well, they did it again. This past week, Toronto superbabe Natalie Glebova was denied permission to attend the opening of a festival at City Hall because her title of Miss Universe evoked concerns over sexual stereotyping. Aieee.

You know, being beautiful, as subjective an appraisal as that might be, is as valid a demarking characteristic as any other. It's also a characteristic that every single human society --and every single human individual-- has valued since the dawn of time. The only thing that has changed is how we define beautiful.

The tired line is always, "what message are we sending our young women by celebrating a woman just for her physical beauty?" Note that I don't argue for a second that the title of Miss Universe is conferred for any reason other than physical beauty.

If Natalie had won a gold medal for running fast or jumping high or floating in sync with another twit, she'd be feted royally. Well, of what value are those athletic skills, really? What message do we send our young people by celebrating the efforts of people over-indulging in physical activities of little societal value? Why do these obsessively over-conditioned people not evoke any of the same cries of poor body image projection?

When the Toronto Blue Jays won the World Series, they were given the key to the city. Yep, a bunch of hired American millionaires were celebrated by a Canadian city for their ability to play a silly game most Canadians care little about. Yet one of our own is declared the most beautiful woman in the Universe (which, I know, is innately silly) and she isn't allowed to open a bloody festival in her home town.

I don't watch beauty pageants. I think they're silly. But they're no more silly than any other arbitrary contest. The fact remains that Natalie Glebova is the world champion of this particular silly activity. And if we're going to allow our champion athletes, etc, to revel in their achievement, then I say we extend the same courtesy to Natalie. Besides, she's hot.

I leave you with this. Don't ask me why.

More Housekeeping

People from all over are sending me condolences over the death of James "Scotty" Doohan, like I was a family member or something. Scotty was cool, but he was no Sulu.

I've uploaded some more photos. This stuff is really time consuming. Still haven't got around to dealing with the Africa photos yet --they will be a week long project!

1. Asian Heritage Month literary evening
2. A year in Ottawa
   

Some Good Ol' Bush Bashing

“The problem is that the Americans have no vision and
no clear policy on how to go about in Iraq.”
-IRAQ’S former interim prime minister Iyad Allawi

Do recall that Allawi was the darling of the pro-war Bush blowjob set. Here's a lovely rant from someone else's blog:

"Bush has already undermined this country and weakened it with his lies, his tax cuts for the rich, his huge deficit, his policies of environmental destruction, his anti-science policies, his religious bullshit, his eviscerating of the Bill of Rights, the Piece'o-shit Act, his attempts to destroy Social Security, his attempts to destroy the middle class, his criminal and incompetent wars, his advocation of torture, his incredibly divisive politics that attempts to portray 1/2 of America as traitors, and his plutocracy, his kleptocracy, his theocracy, his corpocracy, his kakistocracy. Now this worst president ever, in charge of the worst group of criminals and incompetents ever, gets to put one of his own on the Supreme Court to shift the balance of power away from middle of the road moderation and toward wingnut insanity."

And here's a scary story about employers monitoring the blogging activities of potential employees. Listen, what I write here has no bearing on my employers, unless I mention them by name.... which I hope I have not done yet! I wonder what wil happen when the first court challenge is made by someone denied employment because of the opinions he espoused online. Free speech indeed.... unless you actually want to, you know, eat.

Now this is hilarious. A fellow decided to visit one of the denizens of extreme wingnut thought, a forum called "Freerepublic", and ask why Bush has not yet captured Osama bin Laden. You have to read the full exchange to appreciate the nuttiness of that crowd. His conclusion is priceless:

"Well, there you have it: Failure to capture bin Laden is acceptable because capturing him would be really, really hard. Besides, it would only make matters worse. In fact, anyone who wants bin Laden captured is a stinking lefty."

Lest I leave you with levity, Brother Hrab --always one with the light news (!)-- sends us this scary analysis of BushCo's intentions for the Middle East. The CIA analyst author believes that Syria and Iran will soon be targeted for military action, and damn the long term consequences. I can certainly see them going after Syria (perhaps using Israel as a proxy). But war with Iran, as much as the Republicans have been thirsting for it for decades, is a baaaad idea. How much you want to bet a couple of mobile nukes haven't made their way from the Soviet frontier or from Pakistan into the Persian arsenal? Iran is no broken down, demoralized patsy like Iraq.

Just my 2 cents. (1.64 cents in US currency.)

Fundamentalism Is Overstated

My friend and political polar opposite (hey, it happens) Darth Vadum posed an interesting question on his blog the other day: "Is it Islamic 'extremism' -- or is it Islam itself?" Much of my thoughts below are informed by his post and by that of a blogger he linked to.

To many of us, even posing this question has racist implications. After all, much of the pro-war crowd seems incapable of distinguishing between the unconcerned one billion people of Islamic faith and the handful who bombed New York and London. Judging a whole by the actions of a few is the hallmark of racism. However, it would be foolish and counterproductive for us to dismiss the question as disingenuous racist ramblings since, to be clear, a large proportion of reasonable but underinformed Westerners have asked themselves the same question without malicious intent.

Much of this "large proportion" is motivated by what they see as a lack of movement on the part of moderate Muslims to denounce the actions of the militant few. What the pro-war types need to realize is that such an expectation is innately racist and unrealistic. Only racist fools blame the Jewish people for the actions of the Israeli government; do we insist that our Jewish friends regularly denounce the grievous actions of Netanyahu, Sharon et al?

When the IRA was wreaking its terror in the 1970s and 80s, were all Catholic Irishmen painted with their actions? Occasionally yes, and that was a racist characterisation. But were non-militant Irish Catholics required to denounce the clearly marginal activities of the IRA?

When Christian fundamentalists bomb abortion clinics or hole up in Waco, Texas, or join militias or bomb government buildings in Oklahoma, are Christians worldwide fingered for these actions? Surely, these miscreants cite Jesus with as much Zeal as the 9/11 bombers evoke the name of Allah!

It is true that many in the dispossessed Muslim world may see Osama bin Laden as a bit of a champion, but does that make them fundamentalists, too? I would argue no, just as it does not necessarily mean that they approve of his methods. Irish Catholics probably secretly cheer the IRA, because at least someone is addressing their interests, but they don't necessarily support the IRA's murderous adventures. Similarly, the downtrodden of Chechnya and Palestine have no champions but those who would kill in their name, though I'm sure they'd prefer someone less polarizing but equally as effective; a strong politician, perhaps? The occasional cheer does not make the masses fundamentalist, rather it highlights their political suffering and desperation.

Part of the problem is the (media and Bush driven) myth of the global terrorism conspiracy. How many times have commentators lumped together the terror attacks in Moscow, Madrid, London and New York, and the on-going uprising in Israel? But the Moscow attacks had to do with a justified desire for Chechen independence; the Palestinian struggle is a for a homeland; London and Madrid appear to have been in response to the invasion of Iraq; and 9/11 was, according to bin Laden, a response to US military presence in Saudi Arabia, its support of Israel and other perceived insults.

One billion people --a sixth of humanity-- follow Mohammed. Are they all innately fundamentalist? Do they all harbour secret destructive plans for the collapse of the American hegemon? Please, get a grip.

In other news, a new study by the Saudi government and an Israeli think tank has concluded, unsurprisingly, that the so-called foreign insurgents fighting US/UK troops in Iraq were previously unmotivated to act violently prior to the invasion of Iraq. One of the many rationalizations the pro-war types used to justify the Ira war after it was shown that there are no WMDs there was that "it's better to fight terrorists over there rather than here at home." Well, it seems "we" are creating the ones we fight "over there", while the original ones are still around to bomb us at home. Yes, Virginia, there really is a monkey-brained president.

Meanwhile, fundamentalist Christians take note. Here's more strong evidence of evolution in action.

New Photos

Yes, it's true. I've finally got off my ass and have posted some new photos. Even more are forthcoming. Keep in mind that my pics are hosted by Geocities, so their bandwidth limitations may mean that if a lot of people dial in, you may not be able to access to pictures right away.

1. Wedding of Diane Persaud (2004)


2. Wedding of Ying Lau (2004)


3. Dance of Radha Jetty in Ottawa (2005)


4. CanUSACLEN meeting in Montebello (2005)


5. The Gates in New York City (2005)


6. Wedding of Alvin Vishnu (2005)


7. NSS Reunion (2005)


8. Sitar class (2005)

Housekeeping

Got some new additions to this website:

My old article about Pierre Trudeau now has an addendum which contains a letter I wrote which was published in The National Post. I know, I can't believe it either. My name associated with the National Post. Aieee.

My even older article about the new federal "head tax" for Canadian immigrants now includes two letters written by irate readers of the Toronto Star. I just love pissing off the wingnuts.

I was recently invited to review a book for the University of Toronto's new alumni magazine, Ideas. This is very exciting since Ideas has so far attracted top-notch contributors, including leading intellectuals and Nobel Prizewinners! A book review is small potatoes, I know, but I takes what I gets. You all get a sneak preview of the review here.

My personal links section has been updated!

So has my cv!

Criminals And Murderers All

"Terrorists should be considered criminals, and their acts as ordinary crimes. Physically dealing with terrorists is properly ordinary police work. There is no war involved."
-Charley Reese

Charley Reese should be king of the world. And he's a conservative, so don't nobody be accusing me of political bias!

Now, several times over the past few years a few smug war supporters have emailed me to argue that there is a fundamental difference between terrorists blowing up Western cities and US/UK troops blowing up Iraqi and Afghan cities: the terrorists targeted civilians, while "we" of the West deliberately avoided hurting civilians.

This is true. However, allow me to distill the art & science of ethics into a single sentence: Each of us is ultimately responsible for the foreseeable consequences of our actions. A terrorist detonates a bomb on a crowded subway and is responsible for the resulting deaths because those deaths were an obvious foreseeable consequence of his act.

Similarly, if one drops hundreds of kilotons of explosives over a crowded city, even when efforts have been made to make sure much of it is targeted at military sites, it is clearly, evidently and unmistakably going to result in many civilian deaths, despite one's intentions to the contrary. Claims that such civilian deaths were unexpected are, in the least, disingenuous. Thus the US/UK leadership is guilty of murder, just as the terrorists who killed people in New York and London are guilty of murder.

Oh, the apologists will argue, there is no murder in war-time, only casualties and collateral damage. How about when the war is "illegal"? And if indeed there is a true war going on, and not just uniltareral aggression by one side and a smattering of criminal activity elsewhere, then terrorist activities aren't murder at all, but simply covert military actions resulting in casualities and population thinning.

See where I'm going with this? You can't have it both ways. If this is indeed a war, then the "other side" is entitled to their attacks, at least to the extent that we should characterize them as such. But if their actions are to be dismissed simply as those of evil terrorists, then the actions of the US/UK military are also criminal and murderous.

Ottawa

In my adult life, I have lived in two national capital cities, Washington and Ottawa. Like most self-styled sophisticates, I sometimes belittle poor provincial Ottawa to my foreign friends. It is, after all, a capital city only by default (chosen by the British monarch for its distance from the US border and hence supposed safety from American invasion). However, the city does have its charms. So today I will list some of the things I actually like about Ottawa, Ontario, Canada:

1. There appears to be a shortage of single men in Ottawa. This means that there are significantly large number of unattached, gorgeous young women. Meow!
2. Ottawa is possibly the only world capital where you can regularly see men simultaneously wearing business suits and hiking boots.
3. French babes!
4. Poutine, beaver tails and several hundred cheap all-day breakfast places.
5. Ottawa is an urban greenie paradise. It's pretty much pollution free, surrounded by greenspace, peppered with very large parks, bisected by a lovely tree-lined canal, and populated by environment-friendly people.
6. Cyclists here actually use hand signals and no one mocks them for it.
7. Cyco's Bike Repair Shop on Hawthorne Street twice did minor repairs on my bike and refused to accept payment for it!
8. Did I mention the good looking women?
9. In winter, the frozen canal is a miles-long free skating rink.
10. Cheap rent.
11. Lots of government consulting work.

Now, there are many things that piss me off about Ottawa, too, but we won't go into that today. If you want to add anything, feel free to use the comment link below.

Act Of War?

Oh, where to begin? As reported here and discussed here, Karl Rove --"Bush's brain" and the most evil man in the so-called Free World-- was the bloated turd who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame to "douchebag for freedom" (in John Stewart's words) Robert Novak. The disclosure of the identity of an undercover agent is, I am told, more than a felony under US law; it's high treason. In a country in which speaking out against the war is considered treachery and where burning a flag is likely to get you lynched, I wonder how the wingnuts in the White House will react to Rove's admission that he has committed serious treason during war-time. I know exactly what will happen: absolutely nothing. Because US Right Wing, thine name is hypocrisy. Note that the only person yet to go to jail for this scandal is reporter Judy Miller, because she refused to name her source; she, apparently, was the only one capable of keeping a secret.

All right then, how best to broach this sensitive topic without getting flamed by the oversensitive crowd? Let's just jump in, then, okay? Like most of you, I have family and friends in London who were put at risk during the recent terror bombings. Like many of you, I recently stood in the very spots where some of the bombs went off. Like all of you, I wish it hadn't happened; I wish no one had got hurt; I wish no one had got killed.

However, I'm tired of this. This whole "Today We Are All Britons" meme is a little sickening. When British and American planes were dropping hundreds of thousands of explosives on Baghdad, killing thousands of Iraqis, many (if not most) of whom were innocent civilians, where was the "Today We Are All Iraqis" sentiment? When hundreds of innocent Afghan shepherds had their bodies and property ripped apart by Western ordinance, where were these sensitive, feeling bloggers with their "Today We Are All Afghans" icons? But fifty Londoners are tragically, regrettably murdered and the world stops to grieve. Maybe sympathy is only to be reserved for the white folks? (Though many of the London victims were non-white, the world still sees the UK as a white country.) There is a nasty, hypocritical and racist undertone to the global conflict that now surrounds us, and we'd better wake up and acknowledge it.

Now, I'm not one to offer the quid pro quo argument that the invasion of Iraq was the direct cause of the London bombings. After all, Islamist terrorists have been targeting Westerners long before the invasion: the attack on the USS Cole, the first World Trade Centre bombing and, of course, 9/11. But the war in Iraq was an accelerant. My argument has always been that terrorists (i.e., those who actually plan, commit and fund the attacks, not their families or innocent neighbours) are criminals and need to be captured or even killed. But addressing the source of their rage is not appeasement, it's reasonbleness. Specifically, the West must cease propping up dictators, stop directly meddling in the domestic affairs of foreign countries, and remove our military bases from foreign soil.

Having said that, the standard Bush/Blair apologists claim that the London bombings were an "act of war" rather than a criminal act. But I thought Britain was already at war? If these two precepts are to be accepted, then the bombings were not terrorist acts at all, but were rather a war-time battle, and in fact were in response to the invasion of Iraq. Pick a characterisation, wingnuts, and stick to it.

Body Count

Americans are too fat to join the military. Insert joke here. And before we Canadians get too huffy and self-important, we're not exactly a svelt nation either. But Canadians can feel good about this. Toyota is opening a new plant in Woodstock, Ontario, even though the Americans were offering double the subsidies. Why? Because the Ontario population is better educated, more easily trained and benefits from socialized medicine.

How does that work? Well, state run medicine means the employer pays less overhead insuring its employers. Toyota ran the numbers and realized the US subsidies would quickly be eaten up by higher insurance rates. Socialized medicine is a competitive advantage, despite what the libertarian zealots will tell you. Good roads, safe neighbourhoods, a clean environment and proper education are also competitive advantages. So don't ever believe a North American tycoon or magnate when he tells you he "made it on his own" or that "government gets in the way of business." Government and communities are what allow for these competitive advantages. This is why corporations must pay taxes. Ayn Rand knows where she can shove her objectivism.

According to CBC, the London death toll now tops 50. Now, 1.6 Americans are killed in Iraq each day. According to IraqBodyCount.net, the number of Iraqi civilians killed each day (assuming equal distribution of deaths over the past 2 years) is 35. If you use Lancet's fugures, the daily average goes up to 136. I have no stats for civilian deaths in Afghanistan. I imply nothing. I merely provide the figures. You're all smart people; you make your own conclusions.

(No) Panic In The Streets Of London

"Panic on the streets of london
Panic on the streets of birmingham
I wonder to myself
Could life ever be sane again?"
-Panic by The Smiths

On the one year anniversary of the death of my beloved uncle, Bhanu Benjamin Persaud, comes tragic news from London, England. Terrorists, seemingly with a connection to al Qaeda, have detonated six simultaneous explosions in the London tube, so far killing 33 and injuring 345.

This is, of course, horrible horrible news. Who among us does not have family or friends in London? It is one of my most favourite places in the world, and I was just there a couple of months ago.

Already, the predictable voices are shouting, "See? This is why we must fight the 'War on Terror'!" and, unbelievably, "This is why we went to war in Iraq!" That's some strange logic. Yes, terrorism must be addressed. No one knows better than the British, who endured generations of IRA attacks and, before that, "insurgencies" by a host of less famous groups. Guy Fawkes, the namesake of Britain's most popular day, was himself a terrorist, remember? The question is, of course, how must terrorism be addressed? More military action? Yeah, that works. Surely, someone is able to make the possible connection between waging war on a country that posed no threat to the UK (I'm talking about Iraq, people) and suffering "blowback" from pissed off Muslim extremists.

No, as I (and a thousand other people) have been saying since the morning of September 11, 2001, the only way to combat terrorism is to remove its root: perceived wrongful treatment. Those who planted these bombs must be found and prosecuted; they are murderous criminals who deserve the wrath of the British people. But please do not use this as an excuse to accelerate the very policies which are fueling the irrational rage underlying such criminal behaviour. Get out of Iraq and finance its reconstruction. Stop propping up two-bit dictators in Middle Eastern and developing nations. Pull your army bases out of other people's countries. And that's just a start.

Now is a good time to see whether the xenophobic response to 9/11 was strictly an American cultural phenomenon. Let's see how the British people respond. London is one of the finest, most multicultural and outward-looking cities in the world. They, unlike pre-2001 New Yorkers, know what it is to be attacked and understand their position in the world. I have faith that they will not panic and lash out against the world like the Americans did.

My good friend Mieke, who lives in London, sent this missive this morning:

"I just walked home from work in the pouring rain -- there are a lot of stranded people but not much panic."

Meanwhile another friend, Catharine, SMS'd me to say:

"I was cycling through central London when the explosions were going off. Am shaken but not stirred."

We do live in fascinating times.

And Why Are They So Stupid?

• Thanks to Brother Hrab for forwarding this article which debunks the myth of the "liberal media" with satirical panache.
  
  
• The same source pointed me to this blog entry which discusses a fascinating story of how a Korean woman who let her dog poop on the subway got publicly shamed over the internet. The fascinating part is the way the blogger and some others have responded, saying things like, "I would have just cleaned up the mess without saying anything." Yeah, turn the other cheek and let my dog shit on it.
  
  
• Brother Hrab was on a roll this week with another interesting forward. This article discusses how British men are remaining bachelors longer than the previous generation. No shit, Sherlock. It ain't just a British thing. Most of my friends didn't settle down until their late 30s, and some of us are still single.
  
  
• Take this quiz to determine your "ecological footprint." I scored 14.6, which is way above what my regional average is. This is not a good thing. Supposedly. I'm sure the Right wingnuts will pipe up to say otherwise.
  
  
• My cousin Ajay sends us this addictive game thingy. You drag and guide the bikini-clad woman through floating balls of cyberstuff.
  
  
• Science Magazine has published its top 125 unanswered scientific questions. They left out, "Why are Right wingers so bloody stupid?"
  
  
• Meanwhile, a reporter acquaintance who recently returned from Iraq emailed me to say that one of her dark-skinned colleagues in Baghdad was just "shot in the head by a U.S. soldier Friday. It was his day off, and he was apparently driving too close to a convoy of tanks."
  
  So just remember that when the monkey President tells you how great things are going in Iraq. An American can shoot a reporter to death and there are no repercussions. That to me is not "great", but rather tyrranical.
  
  

The Lowest Form Of White Man

You know you're rushed and groggy in the morning when, instead of shaving cream, you lather your face with toothpaste. Hey, at least my skin smells fresh and minty!

There are some who view this blog and its content as ammunition in their America-hating ways. Let me be clear about something: I do not hate America or Americans. (Besides, the whole "hate" dialectic is so stupidly simplistic only a Bush-supporter would consider using such terminology!) Rather, I have some serious problems with the way American governments have chosen to project power around the world. Indeed, the USA is without a doubt the most important nation on Earth in the past 100 years. They have produced many, if not most, of the last century's greatest thinkers, artists and innovators. So, in that spirit, let me congratulate my American neighbours on their 229th national birthday.

As an example of Americans' pioneering scientific work, my cousin Ajay sends us this story about the discovery of a new type of matter at MIT!

Sorry to rain on your celebratory parade, Americans, but it seems the EU's new fighter plane just kicked some yankee tail.

I'd like to plug Freakgirl (not in that way, pervs) for having plugged my books on her website. Good on ya, Freakgirl!

Wanna see something really gay? (And I use that term "not in the homophobic sense, but rather in the sense that it is best suited for gaylords.") Look here. It's the title sequence to the failed Dr Who spinoff, K9 & Company. You have to listen to the audio.

Look who's finally got a blog! It's none other than occasional Deonandan.com visitor and accomplished journalist Rondi Adamson! Rondi is off to Israel and the Palestinian territories for 2 weeks this month, so let's hope she keeps her head down and can control any cravings for bacon.

Speaking of Rondi, she recently published this article in The Toronto Star on her take on the Downing Street memo. Of course, I object to much of what she says, but now is not the time to rebut. You all feel free to, however.

And in celebration of the 4th of July (which was, um, yesterday) and the nominal home state of the current monkey President of those United States, I close with this quote from Robert Duvall's character in the movie Geronimo: An American Legend (1993):

"...Texans: the lowest form of white man there is. "

Live 8 (Or 0.7% Thereof)

Back from Toronto. As mentioned in the last post, the CSEB conference (where I represented the Ontario Centre of Excellence for Child/Youth Mental Health, my new employer) was loads of fun, but my week in Toronto ended with my cousin Alvin's 3-day wedding to his highschool sweetheart Anita:


Let me tell you, I love being Indian, but it's also pretty damn cool being Guyanese. Yes, we are a greasy, low class people with cheap suits, embarrassingly flashy cars, fake jewelry and a ghetto-fabulous fashion ethic, but man we sure know how to have fun. And fun was what we had at the wedding. Many of us also aspire to greatness, like Nazim Ally of Toronto who recently completed a walk from New York to Toronto to raise money to fight child poverty.

This weekend also saw Live 8, that concert thingy which will somehow reduce African poverty. Now, Live Aid was a magical thing which really had us all convinced that the world was going to change. But Live 8 is a little less convincing. It's supposed to what? Raise awareness among the population to lobby our leaders to forgive African debt? Yeah, like that's going to happen. At least Live Aid produced proceeds which could be directly invested; I don't see any direct benefit of Live 8.

Darth Vadum suggests that foreign aid (under which he lumps debt forgiveness) is not a desirable path to poverty reduction. Surprisingly, I think he makes a good point. Money alone will do little in the long run; what is needed is governmental reform. What we as citizens of the G8 should do is pressure our governments to support stable, representative government in African nations... AND to reduce debt.

Meanwhile, a certain ex-girlfriend who is possibly the smartest person I know, bristles at the idea of compelling G8 nations to donate 0.7% of their GDP (Lester Pearson's 1969 target) to poverty alleviation--- because it's innately offensive to "take money from those countries just to give back 0.7%" While I see her point, that we should avoid "taking" the money in the first place, I think there's a modicum of realpolitik that must be embraced, and that includes the laws of Keynesian economics. Wealth must first be generated through trade before a portion of it can be redistributed. Part of a call for better government is a call for stable fair trade which, one assumes, might reduce the predatory export relationships that hobble Third World economies.

But the more important news is that my squash page has been updated! Yes, my droogies, revenge was sweet!

OK, in a couple of hours NASA will slam a space probe into a comet. Stay tuned!