weljim

sweet victory

2004-11-22T13:34:00.000-08:00

I am happy to report to any random soul who wanders across my blog that on saturday last i successfully took down phlome, zero, and others in a 5 1/2 hour game of no-limit texas hold 'em.

The victory was particularly sweet because I came back from almost certain defeat to win the day.

To all my poker buds, thanks for the contribution. I swear I won't buy leather pants.

Terrorism Debate

2004-11-18T16:16:00.000-08:00

I have been engaged in an interesting debate with an anonyomous poster that originated with my post entitled "al aqsa" on 11/12/04. Because I feel it is interesting, I am re-posting the original post here along with the follow up comments.

Anonyomous, thank you for a spirited debate, I look forward to your next response.

================================

al aqsa

They managed to get the coffin off the helicopter and members of the security force actually carried it by hand halfway across the compound and onto a jeep.

At that point, several members of the al aqsa martyr's brigade literally climbed on top of the coffin.

These are the guys who are considered the "new generation" of the militant wing of Palestinian politics. Their primary goal is to get back to the "glory" days when Arafat was a bonafide terrorist (as opposed to a president, symbol, etc.) These guys think that they own Arafat's corpose. Yikes.

When the name of your military group has the word "martyr" in it, you probably don't have what I would call long-term prospects.

Anonymous Comment #1

Arafat is a hero for bringing the Palestinians people's plight to the world stage. Israel's occupation of Palestine would have otherwise gone unnoticed. Perhaps his methods in the beginning were particularly violent. But were they anymore violent than, say, bombing Gaza or the West Bank?

Here's a question for you... How would you react if a bunch of Arabs came and occupied Texas?

My Response #1

The difference is that my ethics and morality do not allow me to justify any action in support of my beliefs. The ends cannot justify using any means, regardless of external impact. Terrorism is extremism. The danger of extremism is that extremists believe there are no limits to what they can to achieve their ends. This is incompatible with a civilized world. I can never accept that "martyring" oneself without any regard to moral and ethical boundaries is a justifiable means of political change.

Anonymous Comment #2

Moral and ethical boundaries are not definable in a vacuum. Thus, the moral and ethical boundaries of Westerners cannot be compared with the values of people who have been held captive in their own land for decades. For the persecuted people, martyrdom may be the only viable course of action for combating the occupation, particularly in light of the militaristic advantage American provides to Israel.

My Response #2

I agree that a frame of reference is required to define moral and ethical boundaries. However, there are some elements of right and wrong that are absolute, in any culture, under any circumstances. The ends cannot justify the means if those absolutes are violated.

It is wrong to kill innocents in order to further a political objective, ANY political objective, no matter how noble or just. It is wrong if the Israelis do it. It is wrong if the Americans do it. It is wrong if the Palestinians to do it. It is just wrong, absolutely.

Also, your comments presuppose that the individuals perpetrating the terrorism are doing so only as the logical result of a moral evaluation of their situation. I believe this is a faulty premise. The majority of the terrorists are irrevocably committed to the destruction of Israel, not just the salvation of the Palestinian people. This is a generational hatred that runs deep and it is NOT something that comes from a level headed moral and ethical appraisal of their current situation.

Bottom line: terrorism is just wrong.

Political Skill

2004-11-18T16:00:00.000-08:00

President George W. Bush at former President Bill Clinton's presidential library dedication:

"Arkansas is a state that knows political skill when you see it. A fella in Saline County was asked by his son why he liked Governor Clinton so much. He said, 'Son, he'll look you in the eye, he'll shake your hand, he'll hold your baby, he'll pet your dog . . . all at the same time.'"

Schwarzenegger for President?

2004-11-14T08:37:00.000-08:00

More buzz in the media about grass roots efforts to create momentum for a constitutional amendment that would allow foreign-born U.S. citizens to run for President.

Arnold's popularity seems to be fueling the fire. There is a lot of talk these days about "Schwarzenegger Republicans" - those moderate Republicans who tend to be more liberal on social issues and more conservative on fiscal and role-of-government issues.

Because I count myself among this ilk of Republicans, I have tried to pay particular attention to the "Schwarzenegger Republican" phenomenon and I will certainly watch with interest as support emerges for this constitutional amendment.

Reasons for Bush Victory

2004-11-14T08:01:00.000-08:00

I have been listening to the many different theories on why President Bush won the election, especially by such a surprisingly wide margin.

There are several key theories for the victory:

The "morality" factor - the claim here is that the presence of many key perceived moral issues on ballots around the country (e.g., definition of marriage) brought out a larger portion of the Republican base.
The "flyover" states - many have asserted that the Democrats are out of touch with the so-called "flyover" states, the vast portion of the country that lies between the coasts and outside of the major cities. The extreme elements of the Democrat party have taken to claiming that these voters are ignorant or misinformed. Since these extreme elements tend to be the ones whose quotes end up all over the media, this does not bode well for the Democrats' efforts to change perceptions among this surprisingly influential group of voters.
"Rove / Cheney 2004." I actually saw a bumper sticker that said "Rove / Cheney 2004" the day after the election. That made me chuckle. Rove was the chief strategic architect on the Bush campaign and the results have made him appear to be nothing short of a genius. I think he is at the top of his game as a political operative, but in my opinion, the main reason for his success was his ability to take advantage of the top two bullet points above. The Clinton election team in 1992 was fond of using the phrase "it's the economy stupid" when planning out their strategy to beat out the elder Bush. I think that Rove's team probably used the phrase "it's the average American voter, stupid." Kerry's campaign missed the boat on that one.
Kerry's inability to clearly define what he believes in. Many have asserted that Kerry was unable to create the perception that he had a clear set of values and positions on key issues. To be clear here, this issue is not about actually having clear positions. This is about successfully creating thee perception of having those positions. Clinton, for example, was famous for promising just about everything to everyone. But he had the charisma and the handling team around him to manage the way he and his beliefs were perceived by the masses. During the presidential debates, likely voters polled on their perceptions of the outcome of the debates mostly indicated that Kerry did a "better job" in the debates. But what is less well known is that they also consistently indicated that Bush was more believable and that his beliefs, whether popular or not, were clear and consistent.
National Security. I saved the best for last. I personally believe that this was the most significant factor in the campaign and that it amplified the effects of some of the items above. The United States is currently at war. It is not a traditional war with a clearly defined, sovereign nation enemy. It is a war against terrorists and despotic leaders who directly threaten the security of United States interests and interests of our allies. On the eve of the election, one of Kerry's campaign officials had a strange response when asked about his prediction on the outcome of the election. I don't have the exact quote, but his comments were something along the lines of how it would be almost impossible to unseat an incumbent president in war time. I believe that for many, "on the fence" American voters, their vote came down to the question, "Do I believe that John F. Kerry can lead this country in a time of war." I think the answer of the overwhelming majority of these voters was a resounding "No Way." I think this goes back to Kerry's perception as a flip-flopper and his inability to create a clear perception on his position on Iraq and how he would lead our nation through what is likely to be a protracted conflict with terrorists around the world.

For anyone out there balking at the Republican claim that Bush received a mandate in this election when he received a solid majority of 51%, keep in mind that Clinton and the Democrats claimed a mandate in 1992 with only 41% of the vote, a result which gave them only a plurality, not a majority.

al aqsa

2004-11-12T04:47:00.000-08:00

They managed to get the coffin off the helicopter and members of the security force actually carried it by hand halfway across the compound and onto a jeep.

At that point, several members of the al aqsa martyr's brigade literally climbed on top of the coffin.

These are the guys who are considered the "new generation" of the militant wing of Palestinian politics. Their primary goal is to get back to the "glory" days when Arafat was a bonafide terrorist (as opposed to a president, symbol, etc.) These guys think that they own Arafat's corpose. Yikes.

When the name of your military group has the word "martyr" in it, you probably don't have what I would call long-term prospects.

wild scene

2004-11-12T04:18:00.000-08:00

As I get ready for work, I am watching the various news channels in amazement as two helicopters land in Ramallah, one of which is presumably carrying the body of Yasser Arafat.

The Palestinian security forces have formed a hopeless looking ring around the helicopters and are firing shots into the air trying to hold off the mob.

Meanwhile, spotted through the crowd are people with black hoods and machine guns, looking distressingly like the worms who like to behead people on camera. There is speculation that they and others may try to abduct the body and somehow transport it to Jerusalem, where every Allah-fearing Muslim wants him to be buried.

The crowd has overwhelmed the security forces now and are literally bumping up against the helicopters. The people inside can't even get the door open.

There are high ranking officials of the governments of Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, and the EU on these helicopters. I think I'd be shaking in my shoes if I was one of them.

Can you say "powder keg"?

other people think michael moore sucks too

2004-11-11T20:32:00.000-08:00

Check out cooper. he thinks michael moore sucks too.

Interesting excerpts:

"When I'm driving down the freeway, I often think to myself "I wish I had a dollar for every idiot, dipshit and tard in the world." Haven't we all thought that? Believe it or not, somebody actually has several dollars directly from every idiot, dipshit and tard in the world. His name is Michael Moore. Apart from the obvious reasons why Michael Moore sucks, I'm going to first put forward my credentials. Moore has often criticized Americans as being the dumbest people on the planet, saying that most Americans have never even left the country."

"Michael Moore provides nourishment for the brain-dead masses. The people who wait in line to see his "documentaries" (and then forward everybody they know emails about it) are some of the most uninformed troglodytes this country has ever seen. How else can you explain their jubiliation over the re-hashed urban legends, half-truths, and edited news clips shown in Fahrenheit 911?"

This guy made an entire movie about how michael moore hates America. By michael moore's logic, that must mean it's true.

This guy has more free time than me and he keeps up with michael moore's American-hating activities here.

I think that michael moore sucks

2004-11-11T20:20:00.000-08:00

I think that Michael Moore sucks. I don't think he sucks just because I disagree with his opinions. Here are the reasons that he sucks:

1 - He hates America
2 - He had the continent-sized balls to assert that the 51% of American voters who voted for the President did so because they were "uninformed."
3 - He is making another stupid movie, this one is called "Fahrenheit 911 and a half"
4 - He hates America

The good news is that his stupid movie is set to come out in 3 years, just in time to derail the next sacrifical lamb that the democratic party sends out to the slaughter in 2008.

Perhaps he should consider moving to Ireland with Robert Redford. Anyone who threatens to leave the country just because they disagree with America's choice for their President should get the hell out. They don't deserve the freedoms that are enjoyed by citizens who are decent enough to respect the outcome of a democratic process.

Large Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma-B-Cell Type

2004-11-11T20:05:00.000-08:00

My friend zero has Large Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma-B-Cell Type. This sucks. He has to have chemo and radiation. My mother just got through with several months of chemo. That sucked, but she came through it strong. zero is ready for the fight and will kick the Large Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma-B-Cell Type's ass. Much information is available from Phome.

history of the blog

2004-11-11T20:02:00.000-08:00

I was wondering so in case you are read this:

==========================
A weblog is usually defined as a personal or noncommercial web site that uses a dated log format (usually with the most recent addition at the top of the page) and contains links to other web sites along with commentary about those sites. A weblog is updated frequently and sometimes groups links by specific subjects, such as politics, news, pop culture, or computer issues.
Some people are of the opinion that Mosaic's What's New page in 1993 was the first weblog. It was essentially a list of links that a few people thought were worth passing along to others. However, it wasn't until December 1997 that Jorn Barger coined the term "weblog" in his Robot Wisdom Weblog.
In 1998, only a handful of blogs existed, and many of the bloggers knew each other and linked to each other's sites. Rebecca Blood, author of The Weblog Handbook, notes that one preeminent site listed only 23 blogs in existence at the beginning of 1999. The media started noticing blogs later in 1999 and drew attention to the phenomenon. But it was the proliferation of free weblog-creation programs in 1999 that made blogging into a hugely popular pastime. Before this software was widely available, most weblogs were hand-coded by web developers and others who taught themselves HTML. The new programs made it easy for anyone to create their own weblog.
Blogger was released in August 1999 and was an immediate hit. This simple weblog application allows users to create any kind of weblog they desire. By October 2000, Blogger users were creating 300 new blogs a day, and the Blogger directory had over 5,500 blogs listed. In November of the same year, the 10,000th Blogger weblog was created. As of 2002, Blogger claimed over 750,000 users.
The rise of tools like Blogger also changed the content of weblogs. While they had begun as link-driven sites offering alternative viewpoints on news and other subjects, weblogs began to collide with online journals. Blogger-style tools allowed links and commentary to quickly grow into longer essays and diaries on the Web. Online journals had existed before this, but weblog applications made journals easier to manage for those who didn't know HTML.
Weblogs and online journals are often confused, and they can frequently overlap in content and style. But purists point out that a person writing in an online journal or diary is logging their life, not the Web. Weblogs still exist to log what's going on around the World Wide Web.
==========================

I found this here but it might be a cobweb now.

disturbance

2004-11-11T17:12:00.000-08:00

MSNBC is doing a report on all the bloggers who are bitching about the vote in Ohio. I find this disturbing.

It disturbs me because I don't want it to be true. I don't want it to be true because I want Bush to be President for four more years.

It also disturbs me because it shouldn't take the world of the blog to entice the media to pay attention to any real possibility that there was enough widespread voting fraud in Ohio to make a difference in the election.

The remnants of the Kerry campaign have sent representatives to "check out" the recount activity in Ohio.

Disturbing.

Flight 93

2004-07-24T09:34:00.000-07:00

The following article appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 7/22/04. It gives a very specific account of what happened on Flight 93 on September 11.

The words and deeds of those passengers have made a profound impact on me personally.

The passengers who died on that flight are, in my opinion, American martyrs. The thing that stands out mostly clearly to me when reading this is that it underscores the simple reason why the terrorists will never win. The terrorist “martyrs” are made through hate and brainwashing and misinformation. Ours were made through a freely made choice to step up and fight back against evil.

The passengers aboard Flight 93 made a choice to try to live. At a moment of crisis that few of us could ever even dream of experiencing, they embodied everything that is great and valuable about our culture and our society.

The conclusion is this: we will never, ever stop fighting back against terrorism and evil. They can try to kill us, to destroy our way of life, to tell their lies and spread their hate, but we will never, ever let them win.

Some day, if I am blessed with children, I hope to take them to that field in Pennsylvania to help them understand what the American spirit is truly all about.
=================================================

The Wall Street Journal

Panel Finds Flight 93 Passengers
Never Made It Into the Cockpit

With Passengers Approaching, Terrorists
Crashed Plane Into Pennsylvania Field
Associated Press
July 22, 2004 7:27 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- Passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93 fought back against the hijackers but never made it into the cockpit, the Sept. 11 commission concluded.

The assertion, included in the panel's dramatic summary of the harrowing flight, contradicts the firmly held belief by some victims' families that passengers breached the cockpit and fought with hijackers inside during their final moments. (See the report's findings below.0)

In phone calls from the plane, four passengers said they and others planned to fight the hijackers after learning of the attack on the World Trade Center in New York earlier that morning. Passengers then rushed down the airliner's narrow aisle to try to overwhelm the hijackers.

Relying on the cockpit recorder and flight data, the commission said terrorist-pilot Ziad Jarrah violently rocked the jet's wings and told another hijacker to block the door. With the sounds of fighting outside the cockpit, Mr. Jarrah asked, "Is that it? Shall we finish it off?"

Another hijacker, who wasn't identified, replied, "No, not yet. When they all come, we finish it off."

Mr. Jarrah then began pitching the nose of the plane up and down to throw passengers off balance.

Seconds later, a passenger who wasn't identified yelled, "In the cockpit! If we don't, we die!" And 16 seconds afterward, another passenger yelled, "Roll it!" Investigators previously have said they believe passengers tried to use a food cart to break the cockpit door.

Mr. Jarrah said: "Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!" He then asked his fellow hijacker, "Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?" The other hijacker answered, "Yes, put it in, and pull it down."

Roughly 90 seconds later, the jet rolled onto its back and crashed into a Pennsylvania field at more than 580 mph, killing everyone aboard.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Battle for United 93

Excerpts from the commission's report on what happened on Flight 93 after passengers realized the plane had been hijacked.

At least ten passengers and two crew members shared vital information with family, friends, colleagues, or others on the ground. All understood the plane had been hijacked. They said the hijackers wielded knives and claimed to have a bomb. The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passengers to the back of the aircraft.

Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that two people were lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead—possibly the captain and first officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been killed.

One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the hijackers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the presence of a firearm. … No evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found at the aircraft's crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of a gun being fired or mentioned at any time.We believe that if the hijackers had possessed a gun, they would have used it in the flight's last minutes as the passengers fought back. …. Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably fake.

During at least five of the passengers' phone calls, information was shared about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew members to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided, and acted.

At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as follows:"Everyone's running up to first class. I've got to go. Bye."

The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened to the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the din.We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sustained.

In response, [hijacker] Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59:52, Jarrah changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault. The recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking glasses and plates.

At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane.

Five seconds later, Jarrah asked,"Is that it? Shall we finish it off?"A hijacker responded,"No.Not yet.When they all come,we finish it off." The sounds of fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said,"In the cockpit. If we don't we'll die!" Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled,"Roll it!" Jarrah stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said,"Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!" He then asked another hijacker in the cockpit,"Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?" to which the other replied,"Yes, put it in it, and pull it down."

The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, a hijacker said,"Pull it down! Pull it down!"The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them.The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right.The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting "Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest."With the sounds of the passenger counterattack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from Washington,D.C.

Jarrah's objective was to crash his airliner into symbols of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United 93.

This is my blog.

2004-07-03T11:47:00.000-07:00

This is my blog.