Wednesday, June 05, 2002 :::
Evidence why John Ashcroft is an evil, evil man.
This news is miraculously both shocking and totally expected: Ashcroft has proposed that those coming into this country from Muslim and Middle Eastern countries will be fingerprinted and photographed. Every dark Arab individual is now a suspect.
An arguement against this system:
And we're trying to root out racial profiling in our local police departments? The Justice Department is taking a pretty huge leap here by introducing this new "policy". I don't know if all this fingerprinting and so on will prevent even one terrorist attack, but it certainly will foster a hateful attitude in our American conscious. Wave the white people through, but, "Hey! You with the turban! You forgot to scan!"
An arguement for those in favor of this system:
Imagine, perhaps, you are a convenience store owner. The amount you sell each day reflects how well your store does, so obviously you want to sell every bit of product you have. A group of teenagers wearing baggy jackets come in and start looking through the magazines, touching the candy bars, and fiddling with the beef jerky. You'd rather err on the side of mistrust than possibly lose income to your store from shoplifters, right? A sensible owner would stop the kids and be more cautious and protective of his stock. Our government has to work the same way- we pay our taxes so that we can go to work without fear of a totally random, unforseen terrorist attack. Preventative measures aren't risky- they're just common sense.
My conclusion:
I don't think this is completely unheard of. I understand that the men who hijacked the planes and used them as weapons were all middle eastern men. But this is no different from pulling over black men in nice cars "just in case". It's scary how fine the line between suspicion and racism can be. I fear for our civil liberties.
::: posted by Andrewski at 1:05 PM
Tuesday, June 04, 2002 :::
If you feel strongly in favor of medicinal marijuana and live in the Bay Area, you might be interested in the National Day of Direct Action taking place Thursday, June 6. 53 cities are planning protests at the DEA headquarters and federal buildings, so check out the Americans for Safe Access website to see how to get involved with what should be an interesting little clash of the titans: The heartless DEA vs. the stoned masses. Oakland and the Bay Area have particularily strong support of medical marijuana, so expect to see this one become top news later this week.
::: posted by Andrewski at 4:30 PM
Interesting story on the front of the Chronicle yesterday. Some West Hollywood Assemblyman is pushing a bill that would make the legal smoking age 21 insted of the current 18. As a non-smoker, I think that cigarettes are downright nasty, with zero benefits at all to society at large. But, that's my personal choice for my body. I think that adults should be allowed, to a moderate extent, to do what they want to their bodies, even after age 18.
Most countries have greatly lowered age limits that abstractly define when "adulthood" is. Why is it in Germany, the drinking age is 16 and there are far fewer per-capita drunk driving and alcohol related fatalities? Because if you're caught driving while drunk in Germany, you lose your license for the rest of your life, period. In America, you get a slap on the wrist and you may even become President despite it. In any random population, there are going to be people who are significantly mature before 18, and people who are going to be significantly immature even after that age. Why is it that Americans think that raising the age kids can legally buy cigarettes will reduce teen smoking? Instead of scare tactics, if our government wants to keep teenagers from trying substances (which is a hopeless battle to begin with), they should try information campaigns (I even think the recent Truth campaign has been a step in the right direction).
But in the first couple of paragraphs of that SF Chronicle article, the most damning evidence is clearly present: Assemblyman Koretz says explicitly: "There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that once someone turns 18 that they are now able to make better choices". Does he not realize that politicians such as himself are elected partially by people over 18 and less than 21? Is he saying, indirectly, that the voting age should be raised to 21, because 18 year olds cannot be trusted to make better choices? Maybe that's step two of this well-thought out redefinition of an American adult.
I think the danger and damage of electing rediculous politicians such as Koretz is far greater to this country than in letting a couple of 18, 19, or 20 year olds smoke cigarettes.
In other news... when CalWatch is on, she's on.
::: posted by Andrewski at 1:49 PM
Monday, June 03, 2002 :::
Update: Great news! This global warming thing has pissed off Rush Limbaugh!
Oh, there is a Santa Claus!
::: posted by Andrewski at 10:11 AM
"The world has changed... I can feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air."
I can read it on Drudge. Lots of interesting news today, the top being that the Bush Administration has apparently woken up this morning as Democrats and released a significant study on the effects of global warming. This study is basically the same thing everyone's known for a while now, but the fact that this particular administration is throwing out this information is significant in its own right. It tells me that at least someone there isn't going to ignore the environment, tear it down for oil or other fossil fuels. Here's the NY Times article.
A flashback to those wacky war-torn decades our generation missed, the NSA has released a new ad campaign with bizarre, eyebrow raising kickbacks to the days of paranoia and fear of a Communist invasion. Information Security beings with you, square jawed American charicature! Maybe it's only weird because I've been so into the irony of these kitsch propaganda posters- hell, I even have Modern Humorist's "When you pirate mp3s, you're downloading Communism!" poster on my wall. To see it all again, being revived because the word "terrorist" replaces "communist", is a bit of a shock, isn't it?
::: posted by Andrewski at 10:10 AM
