Is This America?

I'm betting a bit concerned about what's going on in the United States. The WikiLeaks scandal just highlights how bad things have become, things we thought had changed under Obama.

Salon.com has some great articles about exactly what is happening. They are well thought out and contain lots of links supporting what the author claims:

• Why Julian Assange is a journalist: A look at why the First Amendment DOES apply.
  
• The government's one-way mirror: On the rise of government surveillance of innocent US citizens. Come on, say it with me: If you haven't done anything wrong, what do you have to hide? [Wait, couldn't we say the same about the government?]
  
• The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention: On how Manning is being held in solitary confinement, which is considered torture, because he is ACCUSED of wrongdoing. It also touches on the harassment of his supporters and why Manning is actually a whistleblower, not a traitor.
  
• Getting to Assange through Manning: The government can't prosecute WikiLeaks without also going after the regular media, so it's trying to link Manning and Assange in some kind of collusion.
• Government harassing and intimidating Bradley Manning supporters: This is supposed to be a free country. But if you support Manning or WikiLeaks, expect to have all of your electronics confiscated if you ever leave the country and return. Because Customs doesn't need a warrant to do that.
  

I had hopes that after Obama took over, some of the most egregious changes to our civil liberties would go away. But it appears it may be getting worse.

I'm not sure if this is related, but I ran across an interesting WikiLeaks article at the Sacramento Bee. At least, it looked interesting. I found the link via a search engine but when I clicked on it I got a 404 - article not found message. I thought the link was bad, so I searched the Bee's website for the article, and found it, and clicked on it. And got the same 404 error message. So I tried some more links. The articles about WikiLeaks gave me 404 errors, but the other articles seem to be fine. I want to know what the hell is going on!?! Is the Bee getting harassed by the government? Or are they policing themselves so that they don't get harassed? Either way, it's WRONG!


Here's a quote (via Salon) from the leaked chat logs that Wired magazine released. It's Manning saying why he did what he did (emphasis Salon):

Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

Without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public. Words to think about.

Free Speech is Free Speech: Part 4

Westboro Again!?! I should have established by now that I firmly believe in Freedom of Speech. Even from morons ;) But what the fuck is wrong with these Westboro people? Now they plan on protesting at Elizabeth Edwards' funeral. I really don't understand how they can do this. They have to be completely insane. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Just because you CAN say something doesn't mean you SHOULD say something.

Boycott Body Scanners! Update I

I found a great article (h/t Gizmodo) about the whole debacle. It's from the Washington Examiner. And it's someone saying some of the things I've been thinking. Like: what about explosives in body cavities? (Which we already know the terrorists do.) What about people keeping copies of my naked body? (Which the US Marshal Service did in Florida.) Etc. Etc.

The most telling point is my favorite. How many people have died from terrorism, in the US, during the last decade? About 3,000 on 9-11. But we have to give up a ton of civil liberties because of that. How many people were murdered during the last decade - 150,000. But we don't have metal detectors at the Interstates leading into New Orleans.

Think about it people!

Boycott Body Scanners!

There is a call for people to boycott body scanners at airports on Wednesday November 24, 2010. And I hope everyone does. This is something that I feel strongly about. I understand about safety. That we should go through metal detectors and have our bags scanned. That's fine.

But then 9-11 happens and all of a sudden the TSA is tearing 1" nail files off of fingernail clippers. It did nothing for safety, but hey, they could say they were doing something. They took safety seriously. (The fingernail files eventually stopped.)

Then a guy tries to blow up an airplane with a shoe bomb. So now we have to take off our shoes at airports, and have them scanned. And as far as I can tell there has never been a 2nd shoe bomb.

Then a guy tries to blow up an airplane with an underwear bomb. So now we have to go through a body scanner (which is a strip search!) or get a thorough physical pat down (sexual molestation).

What's next? Al-Qa'eda has used explosives contained in a body cavity before. Will I have to get a body cavity search next? Where will it stop?

Hell, it's so annoying that I never want to fly again. But I refuse to give them that satisfaction! I really have to wonder sometimes, how much of this is real safety, and how much is just plain juvenile meanness? You don't want someone seeing you naked - fine, we'll punish you with an invasive pat down! You don't like it - don't fly! Then we don't have to scan/pat as many people. Besides, what makes you think you deserve the right to fly anyway? (Alright, I'm heading to crazy town now . . .)

Dropping H's Part 2

Yes, an update to my stupid grammar rant. Because I found an exception to the H-rule. Actually, it's not an exception, but some people might think it is. An honorable profession: in this case it is an, because we don't pronounce the H in honorable.

The basic grammar rule is that if the first syllable of the word starts with a vowel, when it's pronounced, then it's an instead of a.

Examples: A one-room house, AN honest mistake, A history of mankind, AN open bar.

Thus concludes today's grammar lesson. Enjoy.

Do We Look That Stupid!?!

Alright, I'm sure by now that everyone has seen the video of the missile in California. Which is now "officially" a jet contrail. First of all, it looks like a missile contrail, not a jet contrail. Secondly, in some video shots you can actually see the flames of the missile. (To me, it looked kind of like shots of the space shuttle launching, once it's up high.) Thirdly, this happened the day before Obama was in South Korea. A friend of mine thinks it's a reminder to the North Koreans and others that we can launch missiles off of submarines. When I searched for it on Yahoo! I used the terms missile and California, and Yahoo! popped up North Korea there too.

The Pentagon isn't fooling anyone. Except people who really think the news is always correct and never wrong. I don't mean to sound like some crazy conspiracy theorist, but I used to live in the southwest. Sometimes we would see weird planes that didn't "officially" exist yet, but were being tested and were classified. So it also wouldn't surprise me if the missile was a new one being tested by the military.

Dropping H's

Alright, one of my new pet peeves is people using the letter H incorrectly. And by that I mean, using "an" in front of a word starting with "H." Like last night, when CSI used the term An Historic Event. In this country, we pronounce the letter H, and it acts as a consonant (because it is one). It should be A Historic Event. I feel like whoever is writing these things has some idea that "it sounds fancier if I do it this way." Kind of like people who use the word whom, instead of who, but don't actually know the correct time to use it. (For the record, I sometimes use whom, but only when it's correct. You use it in places where you would use him or her. And it's mostly dropped out of usage anyway, because it seems to confuse people.)

Example: Who ate the leftover pizza? (He ate the leftover pizza.)
To whom are you talking? (I am talking to him.)

Well, saying An Historic doesn't make you fancy or knowledgeable - it makes you stupid. Unfortunately, it seems to be pervasive in many of the books I've read recently, which makes me wonder if grammar books recently changed, or will be changed, to reflect the new incorrect usage. Well, I say STOP! Take a stand against incorrect grammar! And while you're at it, stop using 's after words that end in S. When I was a kid it was the Smith's house and the Rogers' house. Apparently some grammar books are now saying it's the Rogers's house, which is horrible. STOP IT!