VaTech

Some thoughts on this VaTech shooting. One, it seems clear to me that the policy banning weapons from the campus (including the University Police) made the VaTech campus a much safer place. Two, I wonder where the kid is who was disciplined last year for having a gun on campus? (He was licensed to carry a concealed weapon.) Three, I am certain the Virginia legislators who killed a bill in committee that would have allowed concealed-carry permit holders to carry on college campuses feel good, knowing they did their best to keep Virginia college students safe from the dangers of lawful gun ownership.

It strikes me as ironic that I probably would have been expelled from Colorado College for having my shotgun in my on-campus room. (And I wasn't the only one.) Too bad the kids at Virginia Tech believed in the rules designed to "keep them safe."

Merry Christmas

and Happy Hanukkah! The very existence of Hanukkah makes the whole "Happy Holidays vs. Merry Christmas" argument moot to me. Are we supposed to ignore Jews? I realize that Christmas is the predominantly celebrated holiday in late December, but it's not the only one. And I am about 99% sure that the miracle of the lampstand in the temple predates the birth of Christ. So, while I celebrate the birth of my savior, I've got no problem acknowleding my Jewish fellow-citizens. And if I may be so bold, please allow me to appologize for all the over-zealous, under-educated Christians out there throwing a hissy fit.

More on the Cartoons

This morning, I read an editorial in USA Today, written by a Muslim journalist, that tried to explain the outrage over the Danish cartoons depicting Muhammad. She made the following statement:

Depicting Mohammed is generally prohibited in Islam. Portrayals, however, have and can be done in honorable ways. Persian Muslims, for many centuries, have illustrated the life of the prophet through miniature paintings. The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington has a frieze of Mohammed. But these depictions are done with dignity. What we saw in the European papers were blatantly disrespectful.

Right. I think she's missing the point. I believe the point of the cartoons is that the actions they depict - suicide bombings, acquiring nuclear weapons, etc. - are "blatantly disrespectful" of the prophet Muhammad and Islam.

Killing women and children in the name of your god is OK, but drawing a cartoon of your god's prophet, well... that just crosses the line.

Interesting article. I think the authors overstate their point a little, as there has been plenty of outrage expressed over each of the Muslim activities cited - particularly over the Taliban's destruction of the ancient Buddhas. Theodore Van Gogh's murder did not pass unremarked upon either, to say the least.

However, the authors are correct that the Muslim response to indignities vs. the West's response to indignities provides a a stark contrast. The first problem we face is that we live in liberal countries, and I do not mean "liberal" in any perjorative sense. We respect the right of all people to believe in whatever they want. If someone wants to have a Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they can do so. If Dan Brown wants to write a book about Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene and the Catholic Church's 2000 year murderous cover-up, he can. People can even believe that we're really the product of an alien colonization experiment, and if people do so believe, apparently, we'll pay them millions of dollars to be in movies.

Thus, we cannot, as a core principle of our various Western governments, wage war against a religion. And, in fact, we will create international waves when China does wage such a war, even though the persecuted religion is clearly a weird cult. The flip side of this is that when cults or sects become physical and/or political threats to our society, their protection ends. Whether we are talking about the IRA, PLO, Black Panthers, ELF, etc., when you pick up a gun or a bomb, the First Amendment (or international equivalent) is no longer a shield.

The second problem that Western countries face is a corrolary to the first problem. Since we allow people to believe and say whatever they want, short of the point of threatening society, and not all Muslims are extremists, how do we tell who the bad guys are? Where we are falling short, it seems to me, is that we are not demanding that Muslims make their position on these matters clear. We do not want or intend to wage war "on Islam." Neither, however, are we mind-readers. For the sake of self-protection, therefore, I propose the only reasonable course is to wage war against all who are against us and who refuse to make their views clearly known.

I suspect that few have the stomach for this, and, to be sure, it would be a costly course of action. But when you consider one of the authors' minor points, that native Europeans are being out-bred by their Muslim immigrant counterparts, is there another reasonable course of action?

OK, this is pretty much for people who know me and have hunted with me, but the attendant stoy is fairly funny, whether you know me or not. Now, this photo looks something like what one might expect to see in the area of Joshua Tree or some other desert location. In fact, this is the middle of a marsh in Arkansas. "But it doesn't look very marshy," you say. True enough. It's been a dry couple of months in the Memphis/ Mid-South area.

Normally, this spot would have about 2-3 feet (yes, I said FEET) of water. But because the beaver dams were blown up several months ago and since it hasn't rained much since the beavers rebuilt the dams, it's dry. Or I should say MOSTLY dry.

It seems that a couple of local youngsters (those crazy kids) got into Daddy's liquor cabinet, and took Daddy's ATV for a ride. Being bulletproof teenagers, further encouraged by their courage-in-a-bottle, they decided that it would be an excellent idea to see how far into the Bayou DeView they could drive said ATV. They made this decision based on their knowledge that the bayou and surrounding environs were unseasonably dry. As it turns out, the marsh was not as dry in all spots as it appeared. See below:

"Uh, Dad, you know how you have that big, unstoppable, 4x4 Polaris Ranger?"

Funniest Dadgum Thing... Ever.

I am prone to exaggeration, and I use the superlative for too much, but this website is pretty dang funny. The war and the hurricanes and several other things took the world's focus off of TomKat (the horrible combined monicker for Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes), and not even reports of Katie's pregnancy could rekindle my interest. However, reports have now emerged that the Church (gag!) of Scientology is trying to shut down a web site dedicated to poking fun at Mr. Cruise. Well, everyone go check out the site and send it to everyone you know. Why? Because Scientologists are anti-free-speech tools.

Classic.

I don't have too much to say about this, except this is one of the coolest things I have ever seen. The only objection I have is that the woman playing Leia is not really up to 1977 Carrie Fisher standards, but really, it's all about Chewie. The great Wookie warrior is one of the coolest movie characters ever, and seeing him throw out the first pitch at a baseball game is doubly cool. Even better, he looks to be HURLING that ball - that's not one of those wimpy-old-woman throws some celebs make 15 feet from the plate. No, he's got those big Wookie paws up on the rubber and he is stepping into that throw. And one more thing I just noticed - he's at FENWAY PARK! Now, I have no love for the politicians up there, and truth be told, I don't really like baseball, but Fenway is one of those legendary sporting grounds that has a coolness all its own. As Napoleon Dynamite would say, "SWEET!"