Thursday, October 17, 2002 :::
Excuse my hyperbole. The only "direct action" taken on Wednesday at noon was that somebody pulled the fire alarm in Dwinelle, emptying the building for about 45 minutes. Coincidentally or not, as people were streaming out of Dwinelle, I saw a girl shouting to the crowd that there was an SJP rally on Sproul, and that everyone should go there. The rally itself was, dare I say, unimpressive. Only a few people waving signs- none of the Berkeley-appropriate mass rallies of last year. Truly dissapointing.
::: posted by Andrewski at 6:35 PM
Tuesday, October 15, 2002 :::
I'm slightly worried about these fliers I've seen around Berkeley that feature a masked member of Hamas, proclaiming that action will be taken tomorrow at noon on Sproul. Well, that's just great. One would think that SJP would attempt to play down the terror-based group, which, in a perverse way, also advocates "Justice in Palestine". Good lord, what's happening to our campus?
::: posted by Andrewski at 7:29 PM
Monday, October 14, 2002 :::
And for your reading pleasure: the executive summary of a Violence Policy Center study in 1999 of... surprise!... Civilian Sales of Military Sniper Rifles.
These same military armaments—designed and sold for the express purpose of killing people and disabling key command and control outposts—are now freely available across America's gun shop counters. As a result, this ideal tool for assassination and destruction is now easily accessible to terrorists, criminals, and the mentally unstable.
Also, the "Tarot Card Killer" as he's now known, has made the cover of Newsweek. I found at least one factual error: There is no video game, much less a popular one, called "One Shot, One Kill".
Computer geeks swore the killer was modeling himself after One Shot, One Kill, a popular videogame.
::: posted by Andrewski at 9:39 PM
An update on that sniper/videogame business. Apparently I'm not the only one who finds it rediculous to draw conclusions out of thin air: cartoonists Tycho and Gabe from Penny Arcade drew a strip about it. This MSNBC newscast suggests that since "God Mode" is videogame jargon for invincibility, police are investigating "violent videogame sites that glorify 'one shot, one kill'." I'd like to cry bullshit once again: first of all, it's the military that glorifies "one shot, one kill", and second of all, the media has its giant biased head far up its ass. Videogame violence is a phrase that makes people perk up their ears and turn to their station, and it's all about ratings in the end.
::: posted by Andrewski at 9:28 PM
I apologize for the lapse in coverage, thanks for those of you who are sticking with me and continue to read the site.
There's been a sniper terrorizing Maryland, Washington D.C., and Virginia the last two weeks... and today on CNN, some "expert" said that the authorities, currently searching for suspects with connections to the military, should focus on another sector of the population: those who play videogames. "The haystack that this twisted needle may be in may be the videogame community", he said.
Once again, people are so quick to point fingers at entertainment as a causality for violence. Fox may put a hold on Phone Booth, a movie where a man is trapped in a booth by a sniper (sidenote for movie geeks: the man in the booth is played by Colin Farrell, who will be playing Superman in the Superman vs. Batman movie). The CNN spot I saw today had plenty of footage from a number of sniper-based videogames, a couple of which I've played (and am pretty damn good at, thanks very much). The problem I see here is that with gun laws in this country, any nutcase can go on a shooting spree with minimal resistance. There is no definite evidence whatsoever that this sniper is also a gamer, but only that he is a dangerous killer. To sum up: shut up, bozo CNN experts. Next time you feel like pointing fingers, I'll tell you exactly where I'd like you to thrust them.
Question for Mr. Bush... If it is believed that Al Qaeda terrorists are responsible for last week's bombings in Indonesia, why is he so hell bent on invading Iraq? Why not finish the job with Al Qaeda? It's apparent they're the direct threat to national security, yet Bush would rather jump into Iraq. "The president also asserted that the United States military was capable of fighting terrorism on two fronts, in Iraq and the rest of the world, and that he viewed Saddam Hussein as a crucial part of the overall battle" says the NY Times article, yet I have trouble swallowing that pill. Students all over the country are beginning to organize more and more in saying that we don't want to be dragged into war, and I'm thinking I should join them. It was an article I read in the NY Times this weekend, where a student said that "We are initiating first strike against another country, and this is a first for us." As to how true that statement is, I'm not quite sure, but I welcome comments from the more history-minded of my readers (Clam, I'm looking at you). Anyways, I'm beginning to think that while it's a lot of anti-Israel and fiercely liberal folks who protest the war on Iraq, I may stand among them to be counted because I just don't want our country to enter a war we don't need.
::: posted by Andrewski at 6:22 PM
