Smart Quotes

April Fools Parade 2000
Anyone ever hear about this? I didn't, and I was living in NYC at the time.

15th Annual New York City April Fool's Day Parade
In 2000 a news release was sent to the media stating that the 15th annual New York City April Fool's Day Parade was scheduled to begin at noon on 59th Street and would proceed down to Fifth Avenue. According to the release, floats in the parade would include a "Beat 'em, Bust 'em, Book 'em" float created by the New York, Los Angeles, and Seattle police departments. This float would portray "themes of brutality, corruption and incompetence." A "Where's Mars?" float, reportedly built at a cost of $10 billion, would portray missed Mars missions. Finally, the "Atlanta Braves Baseball Tribute to Racism" float would feature John Rocker who would be "spewing racial epithets at the crowd." CNN and the Fox affiliate WNYW sent television news crews to cover the parade. They arrived at 59th Street at noon only to discover that there was no sign of a parade, at which point the reporters realized they had been hoaxed. The prank was the handiwork of Joey Skaggs, an experienced hoaxer. Skaggs had been issuing press releases advertising the nonexistent parade every April Fool's Day since 1986.

From A list of the top 100 April Fool's Jokes

Subversive Dating Advice from MSNBC?


Here's a not-so-smart quote from hotmail.com. It's from an article about 8 great first dates. Truth be told, they weren't bad: Art galleries, miniature golf, a shooting range, etc. My fave, however, was number 8.

8. Be subversive
Crash a party, sneak into a movie theatre or put up protest posters. "I'm a bit of a daredevil," admits Alton of Chicago. "I like to do wild, but harmless things on a first date as a way to test her mettle. After all, if she doesn't dig it, she won't be a good partner for me." One caution — try not to get arrested. Not only will it besmirch your reputation, but if you're a heterosexual couple, they'll put you in separate cells cutting down on the chance to get to know each other better.

Alton might be a dick, but it's not a bad idea.

Review of Italian Fascist Art Exhibit
This excellent review by the UK Guardian has got it all: smarts, style, politics and sass. Here's a longish excerpt.

Birds of Prey
Jonathan Jones

...

For a while, it almost seemed that this small private museum dedicated to 20th-century Italian art was a serious enterprise. It put on exhibitions of Giorgio di Chirico, photography and design. But lately, with startling frequency, its exhibitions have celebrated Italian art in the 1930s, without mentioning the most important fact of Italian life between 1923 and 1945. At first it just seemed naive. Now, with Futurist Skies: Italian Aeropainting, the Estorick has achieved a brilliant parody of art collectors, art historians, and the Italian government, all of whom, we are supposed to believe, have lent their support to an exhibition of fascist paintings of bombers.

Like many readers probably, I received for Christmas Philip Roth's novel The Plot Against America, his fantasy of a 1940s America, where the aviator and Hitler sympathiser Charles Lindbergh became president. But Roth's fiction pales beside what the Estorick has achieved. It is a stupendous assault on good taste that begins with a wall text about "aeropainting" - a subgenre of late futurism that flourished in Mussolini's Italy - without mentioning Mussolini, or fascism, or the invasion of Ethiopia, or any of the less-than-cosy connections that anyone with even the slightest awareness of modern history might make between flight, war and art in the 1930s.

To grasp the enormity of this silence, let's look at a painting of an aeroplane by Guglielmo Sansoni, who called himself Tato. The plane propels itself out of the stormy clouds, dark as a bird of prey. Such images in 1930s Italian art represent, according to the curators of Futurist Skies, a passion for the new perspectives and vertiginous excitements of aviation - an innocent wonder we have lost in our age of routine civilian flight. But Tato's painting does not simply depict a plane. It is a picture of a bomber. You can see the machine-gun nest in the nose, as it banks up after delivering its payload. The painting is called Aerial Mission, making its military character plain.

Tato painted this piece of fascist crap in 1937. Does the date ring a bell? It was on April 26 1937 that the Condor Legion of the German Luftwaffe, in support of General Franco's war against the Spanish Republic, bombed the Basque capital Guernica, on a market day, killing 1,654 people out of a population of 7,000. Pablo Picasso began Guernica after he read about this new chapter in the story of human cruelty. It seems plausible that Tato's painting Aerial Mission refers to the same events. For more than half a century Picasso's Guernica has preserved the memory of a town torn to pieces by aerial bombing. Now, at last, Futurist Skies gives us the other point of view: that of the murderer in the cockpit.

...

Top Lawyers in England Resign over Patriot-like Laws
(original story here)

Lawyers representing foreign suspects detained under a controversial British anti-terrorism law are to resign in protest against the legislation, a few days after Britain's highest court said it was illegal.

Ian Macdonald, one of the Special Advocates authorised by the authorities to work on terrorism-related issues, announced his decision to resign, in the Mail on Sunday newspaper, after a ruling by the Law Lords - a panel of senior judges who act as the ultimate court of appeal in Britain.

The Law Lords ruled 8-1 on Thursday that the detention of nine foreigners under the law breached human rights obligations.

"Such a law is an odious blot on our legal landscape and for reasons of conscience I feel that I must resign," Macdonald wrote in the weekly.

"My role has been altered to provide a false legitimacy to indefinite detention without knowledge of the accusations being made and without any kind of criminal charge or trial." [emphasis mine]

Up to now Macdonald had stayed on because he thought he could "make a difference", despite considering it "a wrong law brought in the wrong way to the wrong court".

Aspiring Geek

Many of you know that I dream of having the skills and technical knowledge of a hard core computer geek. Right now I have to settle for having the social skills of one. But the plus side is that I "get" jokes like the one below, posted to the geek news site slashdot. It refers to a "Dear John" letter someone wrote to Windows XP, saying goodbye to the operating system (OS) forever, because it sucks.

A dear John letter to an OS. Reminds me of when I had my last Pascal class on a VMS/VAX system:

Dear VMS:
You have tortured my life for the last time. I hate you with a pure and perfect hatred. Your renaming of my files is maddening. Your syntax is arcane and pointless. I would prefer attempting to cluster 500 Windows ME systems.

It's not me, it's definitely you.

I hope to god someone else finds this funny. Even if they're a geek, too.

Fun Fact!
Cops & courts use and have used lots of bogus science to wrongfully convict people

There have been many "scientific" tests used by the state to wrongfully convict people. While the nature of our criminal justice system is based on conflict between two sides, the federal government wields incredible resources to develop tools - infrared cameras, sophisticated wiretaps, methods of tracking people's finances - to nail people. Including, for example, tools which are later found to be completely invalid.

One of those tools was hair analysis. This was before DNA testing was widely in use, and I believe was still in vogue up to the 1980s. An expert in the field would examine a hair and determine the race of the person from whom it came, and could sometimes even match it to a suspect's hairs. And while there seems to be some correlation between race and hair type, this is obviously not a tool which should be used to put people in jail. Which it was.

Another test was bite analysis. If someone was assaulted and bitten (apparently common in sexual assault), experts (the same ones?) could look at the bite marks and compare them with a suspect's to see if they were a match. God help me here, I'm trying my damnedest not to put quote marks around every third word in this intro.

And before we go on to the latest debunked forensic pseudo-science, a small tangent. Up through the 70s, some women in the South were forced to undergo sterilization - sometimes without their knowledge. I first heard about it reading about civil rights pioneer Fannie Lou Hamer, who herself was sterilized without her knowledge. Well, there's finally something of substance written about this, in the Winston-Salem Journal. Check out the series "Against Their Will."

And now, without further ado...

November 21, 2003

THE NATION

FBI's Crime Scene Bullet Analysis Test Flawed

The technique, used in hundreds of convictions, does not provide the
specific match that examiners had believed, a science panel says.

By Charles Piller, Times Staff Writer

A panel of government scientific advisors has found that an FBI forensic
technique long used to link bullets with assailants is scientifically
flawed and potentially misleading to juries — a finding that could affect
hundreds of past convictions.

The method, which measures the likelihood of a chemical match between
bullets found at crime scenes and those found in the possession of a
defendant, has been used for more than three decades in criminal cases
involving gun violence. The Times obtained a draft of key sections of the
report, which is expected to be formally released by the National Research
Council in early December.

"In the future, it would be very difficult for prosecutors to get that kind
of evidence admitted," said William C. Thompson, a professor of law and
criminology at UC Irvine. "It raises substantial concerns about the
viability of convictions obtained based on such statements in past cases."

Thompson called the report "a slap in the face of the FBI."

A spokesperson for the FBI in Washington said the agency would not comment
on the report until it was finalized.

The National Research Council, based in Washington, also would not comment
on the report, but a source close to the study indicated that its primary
conclusions would stand in the final version.

The report is "a very substantial development — a significant indictment of
the technology," said David L. Faigman, a professor of law at UC Hastings
College of the Law in San Francisco. "The NRC has such prestige that I
can't imagine that a court, after the NRC report, would permit this kind of
testimony."

The chemical analysis of bullets found at crime scenes involves analyzing
the material for traces of contaminants or additives, such as tin and
antimony. The precise amount of contaminants is then compared to the
results from bullets found in a suspect's possession.

FBI examiners have often stated or implied in court that a bullet can be
traced to a specific manufacturing batch — even to a particular box. For
example, John P. Riley, then an FBI lab examiner, testified at a 1988
murder trial: "From my 21 years of experience doing bullet-lead analysis, I
can determine if bullets came from the same box of ammunition…. That is the
case that we have here."

His testimony played a key role in the conviction of the defendant, who was
later executed.

In more recent cases, FBI examiners have tended to match a particular
bullet not to a single box, but to a group of boxes manufactured on or
around the same day at the same factory.

The technique has offered a way to solve crimes involving gun violence when
no gun was found. It has strengthened weak cases in which evidence is
scarce or circumstantial.

A Times investigation of the technique published in February suggested that
the FBI's use of lead-analysis evidence might have been based on faulty
assumptions that greatly overstated its scientific significance.

After criticism from independent experts, the FBI commissioned the
lead-analysis study from the National Research Council, considered the
nation's preeminent group for assessing science and technology. The panel,
which included experts in chemistry, law and statistics, studied the method
for nearly 10 months.

The panel substantially agreed with recent research indicating that bullets
from the same source of lead can significantly vary in their chemical
makeup, and bullets from different sources — even those manufactured years
apart — can share nearly identical amounts of trace elements.

The finding contradicted some prosecutors' depictions of each batch of lead
as being unique, like a snowflake or fingerprint. The study suggests that
the number of "matching" bullets is impossible to determine and could be in
the tens of millions or far higher — dramatically reducing the significance
of a match.

"References to 'boxes' of ammunition in any form should be avoided as
misleading under Federal Rule of Evidence 403," the panel concluded.
"Detailed patterns of the geographical distribution of ammunition are
unknown, and as a result, experts should not testify as to the probability
that the crime-scene bullet came from the defendant."

The draft report also questioned the statistical basis of the FBI's
analysis, which had been criticized by the bureau's own statistical
consultant as scientifically unsupported. The panel proposed new research
and changes in which statistical tests are used. Although the panel stopped
short of condemning the technique outright, it sharply disagreed with how
FBI examiners have often represented bullet evidence in court.

"If we were to embrace this report, then the test really has very little
utility," said John Thornton, professor emeritus of forensic science at UC
Berkeley. "It's really watered down the significance and the impact."

(And look here for how the anti-choice folks remember Fannie Lou Hamer. Very smooth work.)

Did I mention I love the Guardian?

So the UK Guardian has brilliant articles about international affaisr, and more about the US's domestic policy than most American papers do. Today I found out it also has cute surveys. Check out my profile on the one below. (they weren't quite right about the fashion, but they did a good job otherwise)

Which brand of consumer are you?

Radical

You would rather die than be forced to wear labels. An activist who genuinely despises consumer society, you will never be seen in supermarkets: you buy your food from local shops or grow your own. You believe in alternative therapies, self-healing, getting back to basics. Despite the cottage industry image, you are technically sophisticated, creating your own power sources (windmills for electricity) and organising protests via the net. This season, and every season, you are wearing overalls. Or clothing made from hemp.

A quickie on the secret Bush

So Neil Bush (exactly) is being compelled to submit to a paternity test over a kid he allegedly had with a woman not his wife at the time. Not a particularly interesting story, but titillating enough for me to read it. Anyway, here's what I think is the juicy stuff. (the "tryst" mentioned involves other women not his wife he had sex with on a business trip)

The hotel trysts took place while Mr Bush was working as a consultant for Grace Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, which is backed by the son of former Chinese leader, Jiang Zemin, for which he was paid $2m in stock options over five years.

It is not the first time that he has been involved in corporate controversy. In the late 1980's he was director of Denver-based Silverado Savings & Loan, which collapsed at a cost to taxpayers of $1bn. At the time he denied any wrongdoing but was sanctioned by the federal government for his part in the failure.

During the deposition Mr Brown asked: "Now, you have absolutely no education background in semiconductors, do you Mr Bush?"

"That's correct," said Mr Bush.

Mr Brown also questioned him about work for Crest Investment Corporation, where he was paid $5,000 a month for work that totalled no more than four hours a week. Bush said he provided Crest with "miscellaneous consulting services". "Such as?" asked Brown.

"Answering phone calls when the other co-chairman called and asked for advice," said Mr Bush.

I just read this in the UK Guardian, perhaps the best english-language paper on-line. Maddening props to Johnny Edmond for turning me on to it.

Betcha didn't read this in the New York Times!

US pays up for fatal Iraq blunders

Over 10,000 claims but families must waive rights

Rory McCarthy in Baghdad
Wednesday November 26, 2003
The Guardian

The US military has paid out $1.5m (£907,000) to Iraqi civilians in response to a wave of negligence and wrongful death claims filed against American soldiers, the Guardian has learned.

Families have come forward with accounts of how American soldiers shot dead or seriously wounded unarmed Iraqi civilians with no apparent cause. In many cases their stories are confirmed by Iraqi police investigations.

Yesterday the US military in Baghdad admitted a total of $1,540,050 has been paid out up to November 12 for personal injury, death or damage to property. A total of 10,402 claims had been filed, the military said in a brief statement to the Guardian. There were no figures given for how many claims had been accepted.

"The US pays claims for personal injury, wrongful death and property damage," it said. "Payments will only be made for non-combat related activities and instances where soldiers have acted negligently or wrongfully."

Commanders make payments from their discretionary funds, rarely even admitting liability. Payouts average just a few hundred dollars and in some cases families have been asked to sign forms waiving their right to press for further compensation. In one area of south-western Baghdad, controlled by the 82nd Airborne Division, an officer said a total of $106,000 had been paid out to 176 claimants since July.
[That's an average of $602 a human life, folks.]

Beyond the initial payments there is little recourse for the families of the dead. No American soldier has been prosecuted for illegally killing an Iraqi civilian and commanders refuse even to count the number of civilians killed or injured by their soldiers.

Iraqi courts, because of an order issued by the US-led authority in Baghdad in June, are forbidden from hearing cases against American soldiers or any other foreign troops or foreign officials in Iraq.

In three separate cases, families have described to the Guardian how their relatives had been killed apparently without cause by American soldiers manning observation posts or patrolling through the streets of Baghdad. In one case a couple were killed in front of their three young daughters when an Abrams tank ran over and crushed their car.

The number of civilian deaths caused by the US since the war remains largely uncounted. In a report last month Human Rights Watch said it had believed 94 civilians were killed in "questionable circumstances" by American troops between May and September 30.

Human Rights Watch concluded that US troops were operating "with impunity. The individual cases of civilian deaths... reveal a pattern by US forces of over-aggressive tactics, indiscriminate shooting in residential areas and a quick reliance on lethal force", Human Rights Watch said. "The lack of timely and thorough investigations into many questionable incidents has created an atmosphere of impunity, in which many soldiers feel they can pull the trigger without coming under review."

For the families of the dead, the killings and the lack of legal recourse has provoked a groundswell of opposition to the US military occupation.

In some cases relatives have spoken of their plans to join the growing guerrilla resistance movement to avenge the deaths of their relatives. "I know the American soldiers are not inhumane because I saw them when they first came and they behaved well. But now they have changed and I don't know why," said Faiz Alwasity, who works for Civic, the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict, one of the few groups that has helped secure payments for civilian victims of the US military operations in Afghanistan and now Iraq.

"They are becoming more aggressive, maybe because they are frightened. I am afraid this is creating more resistance against them."

Feel safer now?

On 21 September 2002, The Memory Hole posted

an extract from an essay by George Bush Sr. and Brent Scowcroft, in which they explain why they didn't have the military push into Iraq and topple Saddam during Gulf War 1. Although there are differences between the Iraq situations in 1991 and 2002-3, Bush's key points apply to both.

But a funny thing happened. Fairly recently, Time pulled the essay off of their site. It used to be at this link, which now gives a 404 error. If you go to the table of contents for the issue in which the essay appeared (2 March 1998), "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" is conspicuously absent.

Because of this erasure, we're posting the entire essay below the portion we originally excerpted. Below that, you'll find a copy of the actual page from the magazine, courtesy of Bruce Koball and Boing Boing.

Excerpt from "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft, Time (2 March 1998):

While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.

I've been told that the same passage appears on page 489 of Bush and Scowcroft's book, A World Transformed (Alfred A. Knopf, 1998).

This article was posted at the Memory Hole.

Rockets on donkeys hit major Baghdad sites

By P. MITCHELL PROTHERO
Published 11/21/2003 11:13 AM

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 21 (UPI) -- Rockets fired from donkey-drawn carts
struck two major hotels used by foreign journalists and the Iraqi Ministry
of Oil Friday in a barrage that shook downtown Baghdad.

The Palestine and Sheraton Hotels, which are adjacent, were hit by a
series of rockets fired by one unmanned donkey-drawn cart in the central
Saydoon neighborhood of Baghdad at about 7:15 a.m. At about the same time,
another series of rockets - also fired from an unmanned cart - hit the Oil
Ministry, igniting a fire on the fifth floor of the sprawling office
building, which was unoccupied at the time.

The Palestine and Sheraton hotels, which were once run by international
companies but are now known to be owned by local companies, served as
media headquarters during and immediately after the U.S.-led war to depose
Saddam Hussein. Both continue to house substantial numbers of media
organizations, including the BBC, CNN and Fox News.

The hotels also house numerous civilian contractors working with the
U.S.-led occupation.

A U.S. Army Spokesman condemned the attack, which came on the last Friday
of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

"Once again the peace of Ramadan was shattered by enemy forces," said Col.
Peter Mansoor, of the 1st Armored Division.

Another military source confirmed that two other donkey-powered missile
carts were found wandering in the vicinity of the Italian Embassy, in a
nearby neighborhood. Neither of those donkeys had fired its deadly load.
There is one confirmed serious casualty from the Palestine Hotel, where
witnesses said a seriously wounded civilian was removed from the building
by U.S. troops after the attack.

Holes - presumably from rockets - could be seen on the eastern side of the
Palestine's eighth, 13th, 15th and 16th floors. Several holes could be
seen at about the 16th floor of the Sheraton. Huge shards of broken glass
fell into its open lobby area, which was mostly empty at the time.
Mansoor said eight rockets were fired at the Oil Ministry building and two
detonated.

"The enemy used homemade rocket launchers on carts attached to donkeys,"
Mansoor told reporters. "The rockets were set to a timer and hidden under
produce. We have some leads in both cases in our efforts to find who was
behind these attacks."

About 250 meters away from the hotel, an agitated donkey tethered to a
toppled cart could be seen in the custody of U.S. troops. According to the
U.S. military and local witnesses, the donkey - acting without an
accomplice - dragged the lettuce cart down the main street outside the
hotel while a timer operated the rockets.

Apparently upon the beginning of the barrage, the donkey broke discipline
and panicked, toppling the cart. At that point, the rockets disconnected
from the timer, leaving them strewn around the street. Tethered to the now
toppled cart, the donkey was unable to escape before the arrival of U.S.
troops.

"The donkey is doing just fine," Mansoor told United Press International.
Suggestions that the donkey be released to see whether he would walk home
- possibly leading to the mastermind behind the attacks - went unheeded by
U.S. military at the scene.

Because of their high profile in the media, the Palestine-Sheraton complex
has been considered a likely target of terrorist and resistance attacks.
Intelligence reports given to security personnel working for international
news networks have indicated that several groups have planned attacks on
the facility, which remains one of the most heavily guarded sites in Iraq.
Located on the eastern bank of the Tigris River, the two buildings are
among the tallest in Baghdad and are surrounded by 14-foot concrete walls
and concertina wire added by private security firms. Although the
facilities are well protected from the possibility of car or truck bombs
because of the barricades, security consultants for one major television
network, which refuses to be based at those hotels for security reasons,
said a rocket attack had been predicted.

"It was a matter of time," said one British security expert. "Particularly
if (terrorists) are willing to conduct donkey-dom operations."

Found on craigslist.org

don't fuck this up - w4m
Reply to: anon-19521231@craigslist.org
Date: 2003-11-18, 9:05AM

you have the opportunity to spend some quality time with a beautiful, wonderful girl who really likes you a lot. so do us both a favor and don't be a dumb fuck. figure it out. shit or get off the pot.

Mom Finds Out About Blog

MINNEAPOLIS, MN—In a turn of events the 30-year-old characterized as "horrifying," Kevin Widmar announced Tuesday that his mother Lillian has discovered his weblog.

"Apparently, Mom typed [Widmar's employer] Dean Healthcare into Google along with my name and, lo and behold, PlanetKevin popped up," Widmar said. "I'm so fucked."

In an e-mail sent to Widmar Monday, Lillian reported in large purple letters that she was "VERY EXCITED :)!!!" to find his "computer diary," but was perplexed that he hadn't mentioned it to her.

Upon receipt of the e-mail, Widmar mentally raced through the contents of his blog. He immediately thought of several dozen posts in which he mentioned drinking, drug use, casual sex, and other behavior likely to alarm his mother.

"I don't have one of those sites that's a big tell-all about one-night stands and wild parties," Widmar said. "I mostly write about the animation I like or little things that happen to me and my friends. But there are definitely things in there that I wouldn't, well, write home to Mom about."

Fortunately for Widmar, Lillian's comments about the site indicate that she has not delved deeply into its contents.

"Mom's main comment was that I look tired in the photos from my birthday party, so I'm guessing that she didn't get past the first page yet," Widmar said. "She will, though. She will."

Widmar said he expects his site to provide Lillian with ample cause for worry.

"Even on that benign front page, she found something to freak out about," Widmar said. "She read the entry for Monday, where I mentioned how much I hate my job, and e-mailed to say that she hoped I wasn't thinking of quitting in this economy."

"Mom had a fit when she found out that I put my television on my credit card," Widmar added. "If she reads about how I was with my friend Jayson when he got pulled over for drunk driving, I'll never hear the end of it."

"Oh God," Widmar said with a gasp. "Three days ago, I wrote something about buying pot!"

Widmar said that the idea of his mother immersing herself in the boring details of his life is just as frightening as the idea of her discovering his misconduct.

"Really, the blog is just a record of what I think about the world and how I spend my free time," Widmar said. "In other words, exactly the sort of information that no 30-year-old wants his mom to have access to."

Widmar said he imagines his inbox filling up with e-mails containing elaborate questions about an off-hand comment on Kill Bill—or, should he appear to have too much free time, requests for him to come and visit her.

"I know enough not to tell Mom that I'm seeing a girl until it's serious," Widmar said. "Now, she's going to know exactly who I hang out with, where I go, and what I spend my time doing on a daily basis. I am so in hell right now."

"God, my links alone contain unlimited fodder for Mom's neuroses," Widmar said. "She'll have access to not only my life, but the lives of all my friends who have web sites. She'll have the names of all the places in Minneapolis where we hang out, which she can—and will—look up. With the raw materials in my blog, she could actually construct an accurate picture of who I am. This is fucking serious."

"To think that I was happy that Mom was e-mailing instead of calling ever since [Widmar's sister] Karen got her online last year," he added. "I didn't see the danger."

According to Widmar, there's "no fucking chance" that Lillian will simply give the site a cursory look and never return.

"Mom loves hearing every boring detail of her kids' lives," he said. "She'd want to know what I'm eating for dinner every night, if she could. This blog is like porn for her."

"Come to think of it, why do I sometimes write about what I ate for dinner?" Widmar asked.

Seeing his blog through his mother's eyes, Widmar said he knows there's no way the site can remain unchanged.

"I know Mom will instantly become the site's most avid reader and most vocal fan," Widmar said. "As I write it, I'll think, 'How would Mom feel about this?' Even worse, I'm sure she'll give the address to all our relatives."

All of the tactics Widmar has considered to divert his mother seem unworkable.

"I could take it down for a few weeks, but I know she wouldn't just forget about it," Widmar said. "I could edit the site and send my other readers through a back door, to another blog just for them. But, I mean, that's just ridiculous."

If Widmar starts a blog at a new address, without his full name this time, he said he risks losing "close to 100" regular readers.

As of press time, Widmar had not decided whether to shut PlanetKevin down.

"The clock is ticking," Widmar said. "I've gotta act fast. At this very minute, she might be reading about the time I did Ecstasy last summer. If Mom finds that entry, I can pretty much count on our conversations for the next year being centered on the dangers of drug use."

Quotes from Double Duce, by Aaron Cometbus
I'm a big Cometbus fan. Both the author and the zine of the same name (or pseudonym, as it were). I started reading his stuff, which is about the punk lifestyle in Oakland and Berkeley, when I first moved out here, and was living my sanitized healthier happier version of said punk lifestyle. Enjoy these quotes from Cometbus's latest book, Double Duce [sic].

15. Frail Eels
Sluggos new girlfriend Vanessa was really, really loud. Late at night the
house would be dead quiet except for her howling and, occasionally, a tiny
rustling sound like someone blinking. Sluggo. He kept up the façade of
privacy against all odds. It was silly, because Duce was a big house, but
the walls were awfully thin.

When the screaming had momentarily subsided, I would hear whispering. It
was little G in the kitchen, Hey, does anyone have a cigarette they could
spare?

Yes, I would whisper, sitting at my desk in the attic at the
opposite end of the house. Come up and get it.
Sluggo would whisk Vanessa in and out of the house so fast that we barely
saw her. But, we heard her.

Hey, phone call for you, Sluggo, Id say. One more poser hobo
calling for train hopping advice. Hey, has anyone seen Sluggo?
I couldve sworn he was here a few minutes ago. Vanessa, what are
you doing in there? It sounds terrible. Sluggo will be mad if youre
messing with his cat.

When Little G and Jody first got together, they made no pretense of being
secretive about it. In the morning when he called out for a light, I
brought in a huge pot filled with lighter fluid. He invited me to down and
smoke with them. Even without three foot flames, I could se they were
glowing.

Everyone has a right, and a reason, to do it their own way, but I like it
when people are able to share that most private part of their lives.
I like seeing the charm and warmth it brings out. Not just sex, but
romance, and the crazy mix of emotions that come with it.

Too much energy focused in on itself destroys itself, in relationships
especially, so its good sometimes to have an outside party around to
bounce that energy off of. I like being that outside party, the third
wheel. I like the way I can team up with the girlfriend to tease my
friend, or team up with my friend to help him or her impress the girl.

I just figure, if you're going to share the bad times with your
friends, you should also share the good. If you're going to come to me
later when you get dumped and need to be cheered up, come share a little
of the happiness first.

37. Jed
Jed didn't have a bad thing to say about anyone. He just rattled on for
hours talking around the subject, dropping hints and asking questions
until you figured out the bad thing for him. Then he would go through
great lengths to deny it.

Don't you think, I mean I don't know, I'm probably wrong, But
I mean, no, you know how it is for some people, I'm not trying to,
like, claim my fame on the mike, you know, like the fucking ultimate, you
know, whatever, like, writer or something, but don't you think, I mean, the guy at Amoeba [record store], I guess he's pretty cool.

He wouldn't take your fanzine, even on consignment?, I said. Yeah, that's lame.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, Jed said.

It wasn't what he was saying, but it was exactly what he meant. The
victim of a northern California upbringing, Jed couldn't state a fact or
even an opinion for fear that it would offend and oppress someone.
Speaking your mind was hatred, hatred was violence, and violence was
always wrong, especially in self-defense. It was a struggle just to get
him to apologize after, instead of before, something there was no reason
to apologize for in the first place.

Jed had an incredibly strict moral code, but he kept it to himself. You
never knew his rules and the reasoning behind them. Like my cousin Jana
who kept kosher, when she said, Oh, let me do the dishes, she really
meant, Don't touch the dishes. Jana would never let me do the dishes or
serve food, and Jed would never sit down and relax. Both made me really
nervous. Finally figuring out the reasons behind their stubbornness didn't
make me less nervous, but it did make me think they were less crazy.
Jed had been a vegetarian all his life, and he took it upon himself with a
kind of fanaticism. You would see him riding around town, standing
straight up with his legs out, making sure not to touch the leather
bicycle seat. Jed wouldn't use the upholstered chairs or couches at our
house, preferring to sit on the table or on top of the fridge. Not leather
guitar straps, no gluestick, no beer with pictures of hunters on the
label, no books about fishermen. No food, almost, since anything more than
two syllables on a list of ingredients was assumed to be a meat byproduct,
and anything processed probably had feces in it from rats in the
factories. Ink and gasoline were his two exceptions to the rule, necessary
evils which he still felt guilty using.

A strict moral code does not necessarily lead to paranoia, an overactive
imagination, and ridiculous judgements and assumptions. But, theres an
undeniable connection. Jed assumed the worst at all times. Maybe he
conceded, the world was only half rotten. He even once admitted that it
might be wrong to always expect someone with a gun to pop out of the
bushes and kill him.

It was exhausting because Jed wasnt interested in having his fears calmed
or soothed. It got old trying to explain that Sean wearing sleeveless
shirts did not, by implication, make him a perpetrator of domestic
violence. Jed loved to talk, but wasn't much of a listener. You walked
away so burnt out after talking to him, but Jed burned on and on.
He was committed to pacifism, yet everything about him was so strong and
forceful. Every gesture and every fear was exaggerated. Still, he went out
of his way to make his fears worse, always going to the most dangerous
places, the most uncomfortable spaces. In his duality he was both paranoid
and completely fearless. Pacifist, yet the last person you would ever want
to fight, because his determination and nervous tension were unstoppable.

That was Jed. One of the most timid and caring people I had ever met, one
of the most overbearing, close minded people I knew. The unstoppable,
ungovernable, unintelligible force. Jed.

84. Knock on Wood
Ada and I were together, and the closer we got, the closer I felt to
becoming part of the WDH family in a new way. We had always shared
a life, but one dark, passionate, psychotic part of it was missing for me.
Now I could cook breakfast not only for my hungover roommates and their
girlfriends, but for my hungover girlfriend as well. When we all drove
home from a long miserable night together, Ada would come along, and not
even as an outsider. Then for a change, they would have to listen to me
fuck. I tried to be extra loud to make up for lost time.

When I told my friends how good I felt, how proud and lucky
to have such a great girl hanging out with me, they didn't want to know.
Good news like that has to be a secret, or masked in cynicism, or saved
for later in hindsight when everything is fucked up.

I didn't want to wait to complain or reminisce about it later, I
wanted to shout it out and tell the world. If it should happen to go
wrong, let the world laugh at me. None of that Don't say something good
or it won't happen stuff. No knocking on wood, I was kicking down the
fucking door.

What a perfect time for something new, a fresh light to shine into the
corners of my life, and our life at Double Duce. What a terrible time for
something new, trying to build it upon a foundation that was quickly
rotting away, a beautiful plant growing in a pile of shit. How could I
explain all the mixed feelings, the expectations and disappointments, the
jealousies and animosities? Then again, what made me think she was an
escape from the stress and confusion, instead of an integral part?

Shitty title but good article.

Associated Press
Violent Protests Targeting Biotechnology
Tuesday October 14, 6:36 pm ET

By Paul Elias, AP Biotechnology Writer

Violent Protests Erupting Over Biotechnology As Growing Militant Opposition Grows [sic]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A growing militant movement opposed to genetic engineering in agriculture and medicine is turning to violent and criminal sabotage -- from the bombing of a Bay Area biotech company to the destruction of genetically modified crops.

As a result, targeted companies aren't just taking extra security precautions but also often altering business strategies. The violence, which the FBI says suddenly became more serious this year, stems in part from frustration that peaceful protests have failed to slow the pace of biotech's progress.

"We've seen a drastic escalation in the use of violent tactics in the past year," said Phil Celestini, head of the FBI's domestic terrorism unit in Washington.

A range of militant environmental, economic and animal-rights activist groups have used the Internet to organize around biotechnology, first in Europe and now in the United States. Many fear the technology will forever harm nature while others object to how animals are treated in drug experiments.

A 25-year-old Californian, Daniel Andreas San Diego, is wanted by the FBI in connection with some of the most recent attacks: the bombings in August of the biotech company Chiron Corp. of Emeryville and last month of a nearby cosmetics manufacturer. Aside from a few shattered windows, little damage was done to either company.

The group that claimed responsibility for the blasts, the previously unheard of Revolutionary Cells, vowed more bombings were to come.

Authorities consider the bombings to mark a new chapter in anti-biotech militance in 2003 that included the vandalism of a Chiron executive's car and the trashing of a biology lab at Louisiana State University last month.

In France, an estimated half of the 100 plots of experimental biotech crops were destroyed this year, prompting some 1,500 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, to demand an end to the vandalism.

Genetically modified crop experimentation in Britain is also in danger due to sabotage and political opposition.

"Peaceful protests aren't ending the suffering," said Danielle Matthews, a spokeswoman for Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, an animal rights group that supports property destruction but not human injury. The group has waged a four-year harassment campaign to shut down the Lawrenceville, N.J., laboratory of Huntingdon Life Sciences, a company that tests drugs and chemicals on animals for companies including biotech firms.

"The companies say they care when they're faced with nonviolent protesters and then do nothing," Matthews said. "Maybe the companies will start caring when they have to pay to replace a few windows."

Almost since James Watson and Francis Crick discovered DNA 50 years ago, scientists have been exploring ways to manipulate and exploit those building blocks of life for everything from boosting crop yields to germ warfare.

But questions didn't arise about biotechnology's safety and impact on nature until San Francisco area scientists Herb Boyer and Stanley Cohen succeeded 30 years ago in splicing genes from one species into another. Since then, opposition to biotechnology research, first in agriculture and later in medicine, has grown, especially in Europe.

Now the criminal attacks are increasing in the United States. Chiron spokesman John Gallagher said attacks on the company, including the alleged unauthorized use of an executive's credit card, haven't changed the way the company does business.

But there is evidence that these "direct action" campaigns are having an effect on other companies.

The accounting firm Deloitte & Touche severed its ties with Huntingdon earlier this year because of harassment of its employees. Huntingdon itself moved its headquarters from the United Kingdom to Baltimore last year because of increasing violence against it.

In Britain, Bayer CropSciences said it no longer will plant experimental plots of genetically engineered crops because the government has declined to keep the locations confidential.

Bayer was the last company carrying out such trials in the United Kingdom. Other agricultural biotech companies had previously pulled out because such experimental plots were routinely destroyed by protesters.

And the biotech company Biogemma is contemplating leaving France because its experimental crops keep getting destroyed.

The unrest is also extending to the developing world, where biotech is heralded by proponents as a panacea for famine and pestilence but where anti-globalization activists fear corporate control of their livelihoods.

Last month, police in Bangalore, India arrested 29 people on riot charges after protesters injured two workers and destroyed a greenhouse at a research facility belonging to Monsanto Co., which sells genetically modified seeds.

That attack came a month after another mob in Bangalore attacked a warehouse once owned by Monsanto.

Ranjana Smetacek of Monsanto Bombay's office said the violence in India is the result of a single group's campaign against multinationals.

"I do not agree that protest against biotechnology is becoming violent in India," Smetacek said. "Most people who oppose biotechnology and Monsanto have expressed themselves in a peaceful way."