Saturday, March 22, 2003

posted by Mikkel , 10:49 PM Þ 

Open in windoze mediochre playa
posted by Irdial , 7:30 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 6:31 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 6:29 PM Þ 

-- Early on, CBS continued its suspect decision making and opted for NCAA basketball instead of war coverage, giving television surfers the incongruous look of embedded reporter stories on one channel and face-painted cheerleaders on CBS. It must be driving Dan Rather nuts.

-- In addition to sometimes revealing videophone reporting, this is turning out to be the war of improved graphics, as moving maps, virtual flights over Iraq's landscape and numerous sophisticated analysis of planes, tanks, helicopter and ships used in battle are on display at the networks.

-- A good argument could be made that the networks and cable channels have gone to all-war, all-the-time in their coverage -- at the expense of other news around the country -- but each found time for at least two diversions: finance and anti-war protests. In one of the strangest combinations you might see, several channels kept the stock market numbers running in the bottom right hand corner. During the "shock and awe" segment, those number spun upward. [...]

My emphasis.

SF Gate
posted by Irdial , 6:22 PM Þ 

More than 1,600 people have been arrested in San Francisco while taking part in protests against the war[...]

The Guardian
posted by Irdial , 6:15 PM Þ 

'Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq?'

This list of really astonishing facts keeps popping into my mailbox, questions like 'How much is spent on military budgets per year worldwide?' take a look for yourself. I would greatly appreciate your help in verifying the information.
Please email to me at:

Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq?

Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II?
A: 86 million

Military Budgets:

Q: How much is spent on military budgets per year worldwide?
A: Over $900 billion

Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.?
A: 50%

Q: What percent of U.S. military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the the UN?
A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount initially requested to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan)

Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq?
A: 11 years

Q: Were the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?
A: No

Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999?
A: 20 million

Chemical & Biological Weapons:

Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons?
A: Since the early 1980s

Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical & biological weapons on their own?
A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the U.S. government, along with Britain and private corporations

Q: Did the U.S. government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran?
A: No

Q: How many gallons of Agent Orange did America use in Vietnam?
A: 17 million

Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War?
A: 40 tons

Q: What, according to the UN, was the increase in cancer rates in Iraq between 1991 and 1994?
A: 700%

Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and the September 11th terrorist attacks?
A: No

Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War?
A: 35,000

Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S. tanks with plows mounted on the front?
A: 6,000

Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had destroyed in 1991?
A: 80%

Nuclear Weapons:

Q: How many countries are known to have nuclear weapons?
A: 8

Q:How many nuclear warheads does Iraq have?
A: 0

Q: How many nuclear warheads does the U.S. have?
A: Over 10,000

Q: Which is the only country to use nuclear weapons?
A: The U.S.

Civilian Deaths and UN Sanctions:

Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports?
A: 12 years

Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000 births)?
A: 38

Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000 births)?
A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)

Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as a result of UN sanctions?
A: 1.5 million

Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to sanctions since 1997?
A: 750,000


Q: Who said that by December 1998, "Iraq had, in fact, been disarmed to a level unprecedented in modern history"?
A: Scott Ritter, UNSCOM chief

Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998?
A: 300

Q: How many of these inspections had problems?
A: 5

Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party HQ?
A: Yes

Q: In 1998, how much of Iraq's post-1991 capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction did the UN weapons inspectors claim to have discovered and dismantled?
A: 90%

Q: Is Iraq willing to allow the weapons inspectors back in?
A: Yes

Human Rights Violations:

Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988?
A: 5,000

Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time?
A: 0
posted by Irdial , 6:07 PM Þ 

posted by chriszanf , 5:51 PM Þ 

DPRK Foreign Ministry spokesman on U.S. start of Iraqi war

Pyongyang, March 21 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the DPRK Foreign Ministry gave an answer to a question put by KCNA today as regards the U.S. start of military attack on Iraq. He said:

At dawn of March 20, the United States finally started its military attack on Iraq defying the unanimous protest of the international community.

The U.S. armed attack is a grave encroachment upon sovereignty.

The violation of Iraqi sovereignty already started with demanding disarmament by inspection and gradually led to the war.

The unilateral demand for the disarmament of a sovereign state itself is a wanton encroachment upon this country's sovereignty.

The encroachment upon sovereignty by military attack is the most vivid expression of violation of the rights of the people in this country.

Countries which liked to call for the "protection of human rights" in the past are directly joining in the current armed attack or conniving at it. Such "doctrine of strength" and hypocrisy disturb the international order while seriously threatening peace and security not only in the middle east but in the rest of the world.

The Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is opposed to a war.

War against the independence of a sovereign state and human rights can never be justified.

This highhanded action of the U.S. against Iraq and the war preparations now being made by the U.S. and its followers in the Korean Peninsula compel the DPRK to do all it can to defend itself and help it clearly know for what it should do more.

DPRK News Agency
posted by Irdial , 5:23 PM Þ 

Iraq TV is still on air, at the time of this post....
posted by Irdial , 9:39 AM Þ 

close your tags properly...
or DIE!
posted by Irdial , 8:04 AM Þ 

Friday, March 21, 2003

more proof of
american imperialism.

was the world better when america practised a 'laissez faire' foreign policy?

posted by alex tea , 7:33 PM

posted by Irdial , 8:03 AM Þ 
posted by b , 2:12 AM Þ 

Post a picture and help a far away friend.
posted by b , 2:11 AM Þ 
Friday, March 21, 2003

akin, do you have tracklists for the monster music shows?

major labels fund war.

straight to your hearts not the charts.
posted by alex_tea , 6:34 PM Þ 

All this seems a bit trite in light of current circumstances, but I'm not sure I have anything to add on that matter.

Anyway, more on the Gore/Apple thing, Bush demands Recount as posted on Apple's HotNews page.

Look at this too, Panther. Grrr!

And I'm going to ATP, I can't wait.
posted by alex_tea , 3:13 PM Þ 

London critical mass - webpage

the CM special tonight is meet at NFT @ 4.30pm then upto Old Street, apparently.
posted by chriszanf , 2:05 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 2:04 PM Þ 

"As if it was the city of Baghdad that was the problem. As if it wasn't the idea that you can support and fund and arm someone who you know minces his political opponents and destroys whole towns of people and that's OK because he's buying your weapons and selling you oil and starting wars with your enemies, with your help, not knowing you're helping the other side as well, covertly. As if it wasn't the idea that once that person is outside of your control you can besiege the people of the entire country, denying them adequate food, even despite a distribution system "second to none" (UNOHCI) and after twelve and a half years of suffering and death, because it didn't work, you can flatten their country, "shock and awe" them into surrendering with Cruise missiles."
posted by chriszanf , 1:31 PM Þ

There's a critical mass special tonight. NFT, Waterloo, 6pm.
posted by chriszanf , 1:12 PM Þ 


NEW YORK--Now it's official: most Americans are idiots.

Decades of budget cuts in education are finally yielding results, a fact confirmed by CNN's poll of March 16, which shows that an astonishing 51 percent of the public believe that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

There is no reason to think that. None. True, George W. Bush has asserted the existence of indirect links between low-level Al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence officials--a lame lie repeatedly denied by the CIA (news - web sites)--but even our professional prevaricator has never gone so far as to accuse Saddam of direct involvement in 9-11. Despite their increasingly tenuous grasp on reality, not even the Bush Administration's most fervent hawks deny that the secular dictator of Iraq (news - web sites) is a mortal enemy of the Islamist extremists of Al Qaeda. No mainstream media outlet has ever reported otherwise.

So why do these pinheads think such a thing? [...]

Yahoo News
posted by Irdial , 12:18 PM Þ 
posted by Mess Noone , 11:25 AM Þ 

"one hour as a divine update"
firework ed.

today. 104.4 FM, London

broadcast times:
16:00 - 17:00 h (UK)
15:00 - 16:00 h (CET)
others chk: worldtimeserver

real media/mp3 streams: resonancefm
posted by Ben , 11:02 AM Þ 

Many interesting live feeds:
posted by Irdial , 7:45 AM Þ 

MTV: supporting war, and the pacification of youth.

Dear all

In the light of the outbreak of war in Iraq in the last 12 hours, our recommendations for the scheduling and content of videos and programmes are as follows:

1. Video recommendations

Obviously, there will be heightened public sensitivity to representations of war, soldiers, bombing, destruction of buildings and public unrest at home. The ITC Programme Code requires us not to broadcast material which offends against good taste or is offensive to public feeling. We therefore recommend that videos featuring the following are not shown at the moment:

war planes
riots and social unrest
other obviously sensitive material

Examples include:
System of a Down "Boom!" - anti-war video containing facts and figures about, amongst other things, the projected casualties in the war in Iraq.
Aerosmith "Don't want to miss a thing" - contains footage from the film "Armageddon".
Manic Street Preachers "So Why So Sad" - contains footage of soldiers being killed and man throwing a hand grenade.
Passengers/U2 "Miss Sarajevo" - contains missiles, guns and buildings being blown up.
Bon Jovi "This ain't a love song" - contains war scenes and victims in distress.
Iggy Pop "Corruption" - contains wars, riots, guns and captions "we love guns" and "we love rifles".
Paul Hardcastle "19" - contains war footage.
Radiohead "Lucky" - contains war footage including injured children.
Billy Idol "Hot in the City" - contains an atomic explosion.
Armand van Helden "Koochy" - contains an atomic explosion and ships being blown up.
Trick Daddy "Thug Holiday" - contains soldiers being killed at war.

Furthermore, videos with words such as "bomb", "missile", "war" or other sensitive words in the artist or song title should not be shown at the moment.

Examples include:
Outkast "B.O.B (Bombs over Baghdad)" - song title may offend.
Radiohead "Invasion" - song title may offend.
Megadeth "Holy Wars" - song title may offend.
Gavin Friday "You, Me and World War Three" - song title may offend.
B-52s videos.

Also, please note that some evergreen tapes contain sensitive videos e.g. until recently, the MTV2 evergreen contained the Outkast "B.O.B. (Bombs over Baghdad)". We therefore recommend that music programmers ensure that inappropriate songs are removed from the evergreen tape for the duration the war.

Please note that this is not a definitive list of videos. Please use the ITC video restrictions database to check each song before broadcast. If you are aware of any other videos featuring the above images, titled with the above words or which may be unsuitable for broadcast in the light of the outbreak of war, we recommend that these are pulled from your schedules.

2. Programme recommendations

Under the ITC's rules, we have two main obligations regarding programmes:

(a) Not to broadcast material which offends against good taste or is offensive to public feeling.
For example, no programme should contain:
(i) images of war, bombs, missiles, etc that are likely to be seen as insensitive or offensive at this time (see above for further guidance).
(ii) jokes about the war, about bombing Iraqis, about the American, Iraqi or UK troops.
(iii) comments about the war that are likely to be seen as insensitive or offensive.

Furthermore, the content of each long-form show should be considered before scheduling. Scripts for presenters and news pieces must also be treated with great sensitivity.

(b) To ensure that our programmes treat the issue of war in Iraq with "due accuracy" and "due impartiality".
Therefore, we need to ensure that any programme which deals with issue of war in Iraq:
(i) deals fairly with each opposing view. It cannot be one-sided. Both sides of the argument need to be dealt with, and dealt with fairly.
(ii) does not give the view of MTV or the views of MTV presenters.
(iii) does not give facts, or opinions based on facts, that are incorrect e.g. an anti-war argument that states the war is bad because 50 million Iraqis will die (the official estimates are much lower than that), a pro-war argument that states Saddam Hussein should be toppled because he is going to invade Israel (there is no evidence of this). You need to ensure that any facts included in your programmes are accurate, and verified by an official source e.g. an Amnesty International report, a UN report, Reuters news service.

If you are unsure about the suitability of a video or programme, please call the Broadcast Standards Managers: Mark (x6195 (HC)) Dan (x7734 (HC)) or Aurea (x6197 (HC)).

Mark Sunderland
Broadcast Standards Manager
MTV Networks Europe


posted by Irdial , 7:36 AM Þ 

Vagina Power!
posted by Irdial , 7:28 AM Þ 

posted by chriszanf , 2:01 AM Þ 

I saw on Channel 4 news earlier (UK) and they said that the US military have dropped $26 million worth of bombs today on Bhagdad, more than in the first week of the 1991 war.

In contrast, the amount of aid the US had pledged for the impending humanitarian crisis is $35 million.
posted by chriszanf , 12:15 AM Þ 
Thursday, March 20, 2003
posted by chriszanf , 6:09 PM Þ 

:: how jedi are you? ::

better looking though of course ...

and for the record, being a canadian has nothing to do with being a slut. i took the test twice and i still scored

small attempt at spirit raising. everything i write seems trite at the moment.
posted by mary13 , 5:49 PM Þ 

posted by Mess Noone , 5:24 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 4:53 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 4:29 PM Þ 

The BBC is moving one gig per second on its peaks. Awesome!
posted by Irdial , 4:28 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 4:17 PM Þ 
posted by Mess Noone , 3:35 PM Þ 

apparently, the US is also bombing in Afghanistan as well at the moment in "unrelated action".

A friend in Montreal sent me a link but my french isnt that good but found this on the BBC
posted by chriszanf , 3:23 PM Þ 
posted by Claus Eggers , 3:17 PM Þ 

Al Gore and Apple

Al Gore is now on the directors board at Apple, quite what that means in the real world I don't know, but he said he is "impressed" by Apple's aproach to open source.

Why wasn't he made president? Argh. Fucking hell. The world would be so much better off. Maybe.
posted by alex_tea , 3:06 PM Þ 
posted by alex_tea , 1:48 PM Þ 

I want to be Double Dragon!

posted by Mess Noone , 1:46 PM Þ 
posted by chriszanf , 1:36 PM Þ 


:: how jedi are you? ::

i supposed i could have been jar jar... shudder... actually, i grow up to be darth vader. :P

:: how nintendo are you? ::

posted by alex_tea , 1:21 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 12:50 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 12:47 PM Þ 

Listen to the commentary. [] Transcript follows...


All right, let me see if I understand the logic of this
correctly. We are going to ignore the United Nations in order to make
clear to Saddam Hussein that the United Nations cannot be ignored.
We're going to wage war to preserve the UN's ability to avert war. The
paramount principle is that the UN's word must be taken seriously, and
if we have to subvert its word to guarantee that it is, then by gum, we
will. Peace is too important not to take up arms to defend. Am I
getting this right?

Further, if the only way to bring democracy to Iraq is to
vitiate the democracy of the Security Council, then we are honor-bound
to do that too, because democracy, as we define it, is too important to
be stopped by a little thing like democracy as they define it.

Also, in dealing with a man who brooks no dissension at home,
we cannot afford dissension among ourselves. We must speak with one
voice against Saddam Hussein's failure to allow opposing voices to be
heard. We are sending our gathered might to the Persian Gulf to make
the point that might does not make right, as Saddam Hussein seems to
think it does. And we are twisting the arms of the opposition until it
agrees to let us oust a regime that twists the arms of the opposition.
We cannot leave in power a dictator who ignores his own people. And if
our people, and people elsewhere in the world, fail to understand that,
then we have no choice but to ignore them.

Listen. Don't misunderstand. I think it is a good thing that
the members of the Bush administration seem to have been reading Lewis
Carroll. I only wish someone had pointed out that "Alice in Wonderland"
and "Through the Looking Glass" are meditations on paradox and puzzle
and illogic and on the strangeness of things, not templates for foreign
policy. It is amusing for the Mad Hatter to say something like, `We
must make war on him because he is a threat to peace,' but not amusing
for someone who actually commands an army to say that.

As a collector of laughable arguments, I'd be enjoying all
this were it not for the fact that I know--we all know--that lives are
going to be lost in what amounts to a freak, circular reasoning

posted by Irdial , 11:10 AM Þ 

-- Debka (Middle East News) []
-- Official Iraqi News []
-- Where is Read? - Iraqi Blog []
-- Kuwait Blog []
-- Back to Iraq Blog []
-- Iraq today []
-- []
-- Kevin Sites []
-- []
-- BCC News Live Feed []
-- Agonist []
posted by Irdial , 11:06 AM Þ 
posted by Claus Eggers , 10:51 AM Þ 

Good job Georgie boy is getting his hands on a fresh supply of the black stuff...

Hypocrisy in every single word. Read it and weep.
posted by Alun , 10:24 AM Þ 
posted by Mess Noone , 10:02 AM Þ 

For the first time ever, I had a dream about nuclear war. I was watching a rubbled city of sorts, and the remaining people were divided in two groups. One group were in their shelter with food and suits, and the other in a crummy shed with nothing. I noted a kind of scoffing, a looking down upon the outsiders.

So that's what we'll always be, then? Even after nuclear holocaust, we will still have people who think they're better, that they can control the world. I'm disappointed and I hope I'm not right.
posted by Mikkel , 9:55 AM Þ 

Guess why this site exists:
BTW: I'm going to the All Tomorrows Parties festival. Anyone else comming?
posted by Claus Eggers , 9:54 AM Þ 

Off to Norway for the weekend (planned long before the war!).

posted by captain davros , 9:52 AM Þ 

Global Politics Quiz

1) Which is the only country in the world to have dropped bombs on over twenty different countries since 1945?

2) Which is the only country to have used nuclear weapons?

3) Which country was responsible for a car bomb which killed 80 civilians in Beirut in 1985, in a botched assassination attempt, thereby making it the most
lethal terrorist bombing in modern Middle East history?

4) Which country's illegal bombing of Libya in 1986 was described by the UN Legal Committee as a "classic case" of terrorism?

5) Which country rejected the order of the International Court of Justice(ICJ) to terminate its "unlawful use of force" against Nicaragua in 1986, and then vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling on all states to observe international law?

6) Which country was accused by a UN-sponsored truth commission of providing "direct and indirect support" for "acts of genocide" against the Mayan Indians in Guatemala during the 1980s?

7) Which country unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile(ABM) Treaty in December 2001?

8) Which country renounced the efforts to negotiate a verification process for the Biological Weapons Convention and brought an international conference on the matter to a halt in July 2001?

9) Which country prevented the United Nations from curbing the gun trade at a small arms conference in July 2001?

10) Aside from Somalia, which is the only other country in the world to have refused to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?

11) Which is the only Western country which allows the death penalty to be applied to children?

12) Which is the only G7 country to have refused to sign the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, forbidding the use of landmines?

13) Which is the only G7 country to have voted against the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998?

14) Which was the only other country to join with Israel in opposing a 1987 General Assembly resolution condemning international terrorism?

15) Which country refuses to fully pay its debts to the United Nations yet reserves its right to veto United Nations resolutions?

Answer to all 15 questions: The United States of America.

Here's a list of the countries and dates that the U.S. has bombed since the end of World War II, compiled by historian William Blum:
China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Congo 1964
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Grenada 1983
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1980s
Nicaragua 1980s
Panama 1989
Iraq 1991-2003
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001

This test consists of one (1) multiple-choice question.
In how many of these instances did a democratic government, respectful of human rights, occur as a direct result?

Choose one of the following:
(a) 0
(b) zero
(c) none
(d) not a one
(e) a whole number between -1 and +1
posted by Irdial , 8:56 AM Þ 

EDITOR'S NOTE: CNN's policy is to not report information that puts operational security at risk.
posted by Irdial , 7:31 AM Þ 
posted by chriszanf , 12:37 AM Þ 
Wednesday, March 19, 2003

The six key lessons of 911

By Steve Kirsch
Bush has said that 911 changed everything for him. The lesson he learned is that we are not safe on our own soil. Since it is his sworn duty is to protect the US, his conclusion is that we must proactively fight terrorism and countries that support terrorists to prevent this from ever happening again. This justifies our war on Iraq. Most Americans believe him.
Unfortunately for all of us, Bush got it wrong. In fact, he got it totally backwards. He has completely misinterpreted "the lessons of 911." If we want to prevent another disaster like 911, we must remember the following six key lessons that the 911 terrorists have taught us:
Disarmament of foreign powers is not sufficient because our own weapons can easily be used to attack us
911 proved that terrorists do not need to purchase any weapons of mass destruction from any foreign power. They proved that they can use materials that can be readily obtained in the US. Therefore, the US cannot prevent such attacks by disarming Iraq, the axis of evil, or any other country. Had we disarmed every single country in the world, it would not have prevented 911 because the terrorists used US-made and US-supplied weapons. So disarmament of foreign powers is not a credible solution to this new threat.
Increasing homeland security is not sufficient because there are way too many holes and we still can't even plug one of them after years of trying

After every terrorist incident involving the use of aircraft, we increase security. Yet the attacks still happen. We do it over and over increasing security every time and every time we find that there are holes that can be exploited. 911 proved increasing airport security didn't work. So we increased it again after 911. Yet, a few weeks ago, my local TV station was easily able to pass a lead lined bag without inspection past security at San Jose and San Francisco airports. So if we haven't been able to solve that problem after 911, it is doubtful we ever will. But the point of 911 is that terrorists know where the security weaknesses are and will exploit them. So increasing security is not a credible solution to this new threat.
Attacking governments who support terrorists is not sufficient because it is not unfriendly governments who are the threat today; it is now the people from friendly nations who are attacking us 
911 proved that we are vulnerable to people from friendly countries want us to change our behavior. bin Laden and 15 of the 19 hijackers are from Saudi Arabia. The others were from Egypt. These countries have denied any links to Al Qaeda. Therefore, attacking governments who we believe are sinister is not a credible solution to this new threat because it is not governments of unfriendly nations that are the problem; it is the people of friendly nations that are attacking us. Even if we had completely obliterated every "unfriendly government," 911 would still have happened. In fact, it would be much more likely to have happened. Let's also not forget that the terrorists were trained by US citizens in the US to fly the US planes that attacked us.
We are too dependent on foreign oil
911 showed it is the money we are paying for foreign oil that is funding the terrorists who attacked us. 911 showed that we are at risk from nations who control the supply of oil.
The root cause of the attack is that people don't like us overseas because of our hegemonic foreign policies, not because they are jealous of us
If we want to stop the attacks, we must address the root cause. Specialists on bin Laden such as Milton Bearden, who headed the CIA's covert operations in Afghanistan during the 1980s when bin Laden was leading Arab volunteers to fight ''jihad'' there, noted that bin Laden's original and still preeminent goal is to rid the US military presence from Saudi Arabia. World opinion of the US has gone down since the attacks, not because people are more jealous of us, but because of our foreign policies. 911 is our "canary in the coal mine;" it is a warning sign that our international reputation is bad and that we must move to correct it or face more incidents. That means working cooperatively with other countries, not against them. We must be seen as a friend and not an enemy or a threat. Yet today, anti-American sentiment, along with hatred of all things American, is increasing, not decreasing. President Bush is viewed as no more likeable than Saddam Hussein in polls in Germany and Austria. A new poll by the Washington-based Pew Research Center indicates that the number of Europeans with a favorable image of the US has plummeted, even among the coalition of the willing. In Italy, only 34% view the US positively, compared to 70% in 2002. In Spain, only 14% have a favorable image. Even in Eastern Europe, support for the US has dropped from 80% to 50% in Poland.We are clearly moving in the wrong direction. We are expending a lot of time, money, and resources to make things worse, instead of better.
The Bush administration seems to have never learned the lesson of 

"Playground Psychology." Most children learn pretty quickly that if you constantly bully others and try to use force to influence their behavior towards you, eventually those others will retaliate - in many cases this leads to an escalating cycle of violent behavior. Children who go on to be successful very quickly learn that the way forward is to work hard and build trusting, mutually beneficial relationships with others. Children who don't learn this usually don't get far in life. The comparison here is obvious.
The 911 attacks were a predictable result of US/Western foreign policy over the past 50 years. Money and might has been used to support regimes which suppress freedom in parts of the world where stability is a requirement in order to ensure continuity of western energy (i.e., oil) supply, and what happened is probably mainly a result of this.
The biggest threat to our world may be in our own reactions, and not the incident itself
The attack of 911 was a tragedy. But the devastation caused by the attack itself pales in comparison to the potential loss of human life and the financial cost that can result from an inappropriate response to 911. Millions of lives are potentially at stake. Hundreds of billions of dollars could be spent fighting a single war we shouldn't be fighting. This is money that could have been better spent on domestic issues like the economy and education. That war could lead to other wars. Those wars could likely lead to further terrorist attacks. All of which can escalate without end. So if we make bad decisions, we can kick off a death spiral of devastation in which the more we fight it, the worse it gets. We could literally become our own worst enemy.

Putting the lessons into action

We should be asking ourselves two key questions:
  • What could we have done that would have reduced the chance that the 911 attack would have happened?
  • What should we be doing now to reduce the chance of this happening again?

The answer is obvious. We should put our efforts into addressing the root causes of this terrorism, not the symptom. We need to make it less likely that people will want to fund and/or participate in such activities.
Here are a few ideas:
  • We should have a Department of Peace and International Cooperation and Assistance, not a Department of Homeland Security. 
  • We should be supporting international treaties, not backing out of them. 
  • We should be a leader in seeking peaceful solutions to conflicts, not a leader in the pre-emptive strike. 
  • We should be respectful of foreign leaders, not insulting them by calling them pygmies. 

  • We should respect foreign governments, not label them "evil."
  • We should be having talks with our adversaries, not refusing to talk (as we are with North Korea). 

In short, we should be doing exactly the opposite of what we are doing now.

The Bush response to 911

We are ignoring the real lessons of 911 as the table below points out. We are doing the opposite of what 911 teaches us we should be doing. We are making things worse, not better. Virtually all of the actions we are taking today would not have prevented 911; we are solving the wrong problem.

The lesson from 911 The Bush response
Disarming foreign powers won't work because now terrorists are using our own "weapons" against us Disarm foreign powers, starting with Iraq
Increasing homeland security won't work because there are way too many holes and we can't make our airports safe even today Increase homeland security 
The new threat is from the people of  friendly nations, not the governments of unfriendly nations Attack governments of unfriendly nations. Focus efforts on perceived threats, rather than actual threats. Attack any government that we think might be a threat to us. Create false sense of urgency. Prioritize to attack the country that is least threatening to the US first (Iraq) and save the biggest, clearly real threats (North Korea) for last. Completely ignore the countries where the terrorists were from.
We are too dependent on foreign oil Take actions that will increase our net dependence on foreign oil such as providing additional tax breaks for businesses that purchase large SUVs, i.e., incentivize inefficiency. Do not provide any incentives whatsoever to car manufacturers who voluntarily increase their average fuel economy. Vigorously oppose increasing the fuel economy of new cars (CAFE standards), thus ensuring that our dependence will continue to grow every year. Seek expensive new sources of oil within the US that will provide only a little new oil in 10 to 20 years from now, and nowhere near enough to compensate for the increased consumption. Don't ask Americans to sacrifice. Don't ask Americans to buy fuel efficient cars. Do absolutely nothing to incentivize plug-in hybrids, proven technology that can dramatically increase gas mileage and lower emissions without any significant disadvantages compared to a conventional gas vehicle.
People don't like us overseas because of our hegemonic foreign policies Don't let foreign opinion influence our decision, but try to get foreign support. If we can't get support based on the merits of our case, try forcing them to make a black-and-white "if you are not with us, then you are against us" decision. If that doesn't work, offer billions of dollars to convince them of the merits of our argument. If that doesn't work, then just ignore them and do what we think is best, even if it means increasing the level of animosity towards the US and even if 90% of the people of the world are against us.
The biggest threat isn't the attack itself, it's now our response to the attack Launch an attack on a country that has never threatened the US, has never attacked the US, and was not in any way responsible for 911. Risk millions of human lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. The cost in human life and financial cost may both easily dwarf the cost of the 911 attack. In short, use the American government to amplify the human and financial cost of the original attack.


Eliminating weapons of mass destruction is a good thing. Increasing homeland security (at a sensible level) is a good thing. But let's not get confused. That is not what 911 teaches us. These are not the lessons of 911.
The real lessons of 911 are:
  • There is a new type of terrorism that has emerged that now threatens our security both at home and abroad
  • Conventional thinking and approaches (such as WMD elimination, increasing security, pre-emtive strikes, etc) are ineffective against this "new terrorism." In fact, they can, in some cases, make things worse.
  • To effectively fight the new terrorism, we must attack the cause, not the symptoms. If we continue to focus on and apply conventional thinking and approaches, we'll lose. We must think and act differently than we have in the past. We should be adopting approaches that foster international goodwill, not doing the opposite.

It is likely that terrorism in the US will increase as a result of our pre-emptive strike on Iraq. That's what our Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge tells us. It's also likely we'll spend at least 10 times more money fighting wars that we instigate than 911 cost us.

Ironic isn't it? In the same way, they used our airplanes to kill our people and devastate our economy, now they are using our own government to kill our people and devastate our economy on a scale 10 times larger than the original attack. In addition, they are using our own government to increase the chance of future terrorist attacks on America. All with the majority support of the American people!
The core value of America is freedom. But the terrorist have also leveraged our own government into taking away our freedoms at home, via the Patriot Act and Patriot II.
The terrorists have won. They have successfully convinced America to attack itself.
posted by Irdial , 10:56 PM Þ 

And it's on.

This is London
posted by Mikkel , 7:10 PM Þ 

Anybody heard of, or used Bitzi?

Our primary publication is the OpenBits Catalog, a collection of the best available identifying, descriptive, and editorial metadata about all kinds of digital files.

We collect this metadata from our customers and volunteer contributors, manage processes which improve the metadata's reliability and usefulness over time, and then publish the metadata in a wide variety of formats.

You can think of Bitzi as the "card catalog" for the heavenly jukebox, holding information about any and every media file that is ever reported to us ? not just the files available on the web, or through any particular service, or through any particular sharing/distribution network.
posted by alex_tea , 6:37 PM Þ 

Its over to AK:


For the "whatsitallabout"!
posted by Irdial , 6:16 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 5:23 PM Þ 

Angry Russians offered free calls to White House

A Russian telecoms company is offering free phone calls to the White House for anyone who wants to rant at George Bush.

Excom in the west Russian city of Yekaterinburg said almost 1,000 people have taken advantage of the offer.

Calls have ranged from two to 20 minutes and the tempers of some people have boiled over.

Phone operator Irina Natakhina said: "Mostly men call almost every 10 minutes and demand to be put through to the White House. When they have to wait they even begin swearing at me."

Excom general director Konstantin Ivanov found the number on the internet and said the offer will continue indefinitely.
posted by chriszanf , 2:04 PM Þ

Electronic bugging devices have been found at offices used by French and German delegations at a European Union building in Brussels, officials have confirmed.

Devices were also discovered at offices used by other delegations, said EU spokesman Dominique-Georges Marro.

Extra security measures have been adopted in the building, ahead of a meeting of EU leaders to be held there on Thursday and Friday.

The discovery of the telephone tapping systems was first reported on Wednesday by France's Le Figaro newspaper, which blamed the US.

But Mr Marro said it was "impossible at this stage" to determine who had planted the devices.

The telephone tapping comes at a time of heightened tensions within the EU - which is deeply divided over Iraq - and of worsening relations between the US and EU members France and Germany.
posted by chriszanf , 1:55 PM Þ 

If anyone wants to go to ATP Camber Sands in a couple of weeks, to see Coil, Magic Band, Parmegiani, The Fall etc. please drop me a line. My friend has spare tickets.
posted by Mess Noone , 1:23 PM Þ 

posted by Mikkel , 10:15 AM Þ 
posted by Mikkel , 10:10 AM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 9:59 AM Þ

Alan Keyes spoke at GVSU last night and I attended. He devoted all his time to the issue of war with Iraq. As you may know, Alan Keyes was the Ambassador to the UN under President Reagan, giving him a unique insight.

Keyes started out by saying he likes to focus on his opposition's arguments because to believe something he must be able to defend it against other beliefs. However, he couldn't find any logic or reason to anti-war protesters. This statement got a good laugh out of the audience.

Just because he doesn't see any reason in the protesters' arguments, doesn't mean Keyes is a big fan of the current administration's handling of the Iraq issue. In fact, Keyes was particularly harsh on Colin Powell saying he's a good peace-time secretary of state, but a bad war-time secretary.

Specifically, Keyes was critical of of Powell's insistence that President Bush go to the UN for approval for a war with Iraq. If Iraq is a sponsor of terrorism, which they are, then we don't need anyone else's approval to take care of them. By going to the UN first, we lend legitimacy to Europe's opinions. Then, when they disagree with us, we say we didn't need their approval anyway. If we don't need their approval, what was the point of going to the UN in the first place?

Heh, Alan Keyes, super-American. Who cares about the rest of the world, only America matters. It's no wonder people outside of America are getting quite annoyed with them, is it?

Furthermore, Keyes went on to say that going to the UN has weakened our position. Part of war is exploiting your enemy's weaknesses, but also to manage your allies' weaknesses. By going to the UN, we've let Iraq exploit our European allies and their weakness for inaction and bickering.

France, Germany, Russia, as well as other European nations, have all said more time was needed for inspecting and disarming Iraq. That's not equal to inaction. In fact, this is what Hans Blix has been saying, until he was pulled out.

Keyes doesn't see the Europeans' weakness as a bad thing necessarily. After the devastation in Europe left by World War I and II, they are reluctant to participate in any military action. They've seen their own evil in the past and they don't wish to bring out the worst in themselves again.

We have also seen Bush II's evil, attacking Afghanistan to get at bin Laden, promising to help rebuild the country (budget for Afghanistan 2003: $0). Clinton's evil, as he bombed away in Iraq (yes, Iraq) during the Lewinsky trial. We've seen Bush I try to clean up after Reagan deal weapons with Iraq.

People tend to caricature evil people like Hitler. It's important to remember that Hitler didn't appear as the evil caricature that we know today when he started taking over Europe. He appealed to the German sense of patriotism to gain power. His goals weren't seen as evil, and the ends justified the means. The Europeans are very wary of being fooled again.

Since Godwin's Law is already being brought up, I'll just say that I'm not being fooled.

In the end, Keyes said the current disagreement with the Europeans is nothing more than spilled milk. It is important to not left a rift divide the Americans and Europeans in the future as we are the two great powers in the world. It would be a mistake to let relations between us fail to the point where we might not be inclined to help Europe should another crisis develop over there. So, while Europe may whine and complain about our action in Iraq now, we should encourage them to get involved in the rebuilding of Iraq instead of punish them for their inaction.

Doesn't this clash with what he said before? Anyway, I'm not even sure what the point of this paragraph is. It's not really a threat and it's not really a promise, either.

The UN was set up to help limit war throughout the world. Even with the UN, there are still legitimate reasons for war. The UN, led by the US, defined those conditions and they essentially boil down to self-defense. In the war on terror, we were attacked first by terrorists. Saddam Hussein was not directly responsible, but he has well-known terrorist connections, and is therefore a valid target in our war on terror. A war with Iraq is not a new war, it's a new front in a pre-existing war; a war which we did not start.

As it is said in the source, the terrorists that Saddam supports are those fighting Turkey, Iran and Israel. It also says that there's "no hard evidence linking Saddam to the [September 11] attacks. [...] However, it didn?t express sympathy for the United States after the attacks. [...] the Islamist al-Qaeda and Saddam?s secular dictatorship would be unlikely allies." The terrorist angle, in other words, is bullshit. The weapons of mass destruction angle was already being looked at, but apparently, that is "inaction."

Indeed, if this were a separate war, Keyes would be strongly opposed to it. One reason to not go to war is for a regime change. The US is powerful, but we have to use that power responsibly to set an example. Going to war for the sole purpose of installing a democratic regime in Iraq would set a bad precedent. Starting a war to spread democracy lends legitimacy to countries that started wars to spread communism in the past. In Korea, Vietnam, and the Persian Gulf, we were not the aggressor. It is important to realize that we are not the aggressor in this war on terrorism either.

Keyes went on to suggest that if we were to go on the warpath just to spread democracy, it would likely spell the end for our own democracy. By the same token, however, inability to defend ourselves would also lead to our demise. He believes it would be immoral for the government to not take action if there is sufficient evidence that Iraq is a threat. If we were attacked again, and countless citizens died, those same war protesters would be outraged that the government had specific knowledge beforehand and did nothing.

I would be much more in favor of this war if the U.S. government would just provide real tangible evidence instead of the barrage of bullshit Powell was spreading in february, which was even a huge improvement over what Bush had been spreading since Sept. 11. So, if the arguments are "weapons of mass destruction" and "democracy," why the hell not attack North Korea? Because North Korea never tried to "kill my daddy!"
posted by Mikkel , 9:56 AM Þ 

Coalition of the bribed:

The 30 countries listed by Washington in the coalition were: Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, the UK and Uzbekistan.

See here
posted by Alun , 9:23 AM Þ 

5. Of the 535 members of Congress, only ONE (Sen. Johnson of South Dakota) has an enlisted son or daughter in the armed forces! If you really want to stand up for America, please send your twin daughters over to Kuwait right now and let them don their chemical warfare suits. And let's see every member of Congress with a child of military age also sacrifice their kids for this war effort. What's that you say? You don't THINK so? Well, hey, guess what -- we don't think so either!
posted by Irdial , 8:17 AM Þ 
Tuesday, March 18, 2003

Vigina Power! and you name the 'bad baby' panties after me!
I am impressed... Thank you irdial

Cool stuff...

and I am nice girl...

I miss cyberspace at the time
We have another war comming up in the world - I am outta words...
My brain is okay, witch is relieving so I am just a very sore person ...

Finally I got the mp3's down on regular cd's (tons of wonderful interesting mindblowing expanding music)


I am in heaven these days, biking around Copenhagen with in total danger of traffic, but I just cant stop listening to all the irdial music. It is fantastisc, genius, universal everybody should have their amount of irdial. The music makes me THINK!

I love irdial!

posted by Alison , 9:52 PM Þ 
posted by chriszanf , 8:27 PM Þ 

I read the paper this morning, then I read the "peace and progress" article.
I feel sick, and angry, and enraged. Something must be done! What will happen now that international justice has been walked over by America's big dumb boots? They apparently can do ANYTHING they want. What do you suppose the international community will do to America? The US is operating on a biblical imperative that cannot be reasoned with.
Widespread civil disobedience IS a good idea now. Thank goodness my nation does not support the war (the fascist premier of my province, of course, thinks otherwise).
posted by Barrie , 8:07 PM Þ

This is how we're being made to sound. Bumbling idiots.
posted by Mikkel , 6:18 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 2:13 PM Þ 

posted by chriszanf , 1:46 PM Þ 

There is a brutally simple logic behind America and Britain’s decision to attack Iraq. It is this: Iraq cannot retaliate. This is the American military doctrine in action, the Powell doctrine. Only attack when you have overwhelming superiority in the air and on the battlefield, and when your own casualties can be kept to a minimum. Never hit an enemy until you are absolutely certain that he cannot hit back. It is a language recognised by bullies everywhere and perfectly understood by Tony Blair and Jack Straw.

Iraq satisfies the Powell doctrine’s conditions in full. It has no air force, and its air defences on the ground have already been destroyed by American and British bombardment in the ‘no fly zone’. It has no navy. Its army, apart from its professional corps of Republican Guards, is a conscript army, too untrained to hit back, but large enough to provide target practice, as it did in the Gulf War, when Iraqi troops in retreat were bombed and strafed in what was infamously called the ‘turkey shoot’. As for chemical and biological weapons, whether or not Iraq possesses anthrax, botulism toxin, VX, sarin, ricin, mustard gas, or smallpox, they are useless on the battlefield, and no protection against air attack. Not since Abyssinia was bombed by Mussolini has there been such an unequal war against such a helpless enemy.

A new war will be genocide upon genocide. War and sanctions have killed half a million Iraqi children since 1991; two-fifths of the Iraqi population have no access to clean water; half the pumping stations and water purification facilities are out of action; Iraq’s hospitals are without electricity for many hours at a time, and desperately short of medicines and equipment. How will they cope when 800 cruise missiles and 3000 bombs rain down upon the country in the first 48 hours of an attack?

This will be an awful, terrible war crime. Its perpetrators, safe in Washington and Downing Street, boasting of the accuracy of their laser guided weapons and washing their hands of all “collateral damage”, will be war criminals. They know perfectly well how terrible will be the number of Iraqi dead and wounded. The UN report, the Oxfam report, the Medact report all forecast hundreds of thousands of casualties, and 3.5 million threatened with starvation and epidemic disease.

An impending catastrophe

We are moments away from catastrophe - in fact, from several catastrophes. First, for the people of Iraq, soon to be slaughtered in a senseless war. For the children of Iraq and neighbouring countries, who will be traumatised permanently by the destruction they have seen and heard.

Second, for the people of Palestine, for whom all prospect of an end to the Israeli occupation will be postponed indefinitely. For decades Palestinians have kept alive the hope that international law will prevail, and that Israel will be made to abide by UN resolutions 194, 242, and 338. But the US and Britain are only concerned with Iraqi compliance with resolution 1441, and Iraq will be destroyed because it failed to comply, or was alleged to have failed. But Israel will be encouraged by Iraq’s destruction to continue its brutal war in the West Bank and Gaza. How infinitely more effective suicide bombs will seem, and how much more persuasive all forms of terrorism will appear, when all hopes of a political solution are extinguished!

Eight hundred years after the Crusades, American and British ‘crusaders’ will occupy an Arab country, home to the oldest civilisation in the world. General Tommy Franks will be viceroy. Ahmed Chelabi, or someone equally unknown, undistinguished and unelected, will be the puppet president. Iraqi oil wells will be protected by the Airborne Division. Iraqi oil will be de-nationalised. And though the rest of the stock market will nose-dive as before, Exxon shares will go sky high. Iraq will be the headquarters for American domination of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and any other country where seething anger, poverty and newly radicalised youth threaten to revolt against ageing and corrupt dictatorships.

The final catastrophe threatens us all. With or without a second UN resolution, George Bush and Tony Blair are destroying all hope or pretence of international order and rule of law. The UN has been made to seem as venal, as helpless and as superannuated as was its parent, the League of Nations, before World War II. It is damned whatever it does. If it opposes Bush and Blair it will be brushed aside. If it supports them with a second resolution, it will be seen to have bowed to American bribery and blackmail. At a time when its authority is required as never before, for the protection of Iraq, of the Palestinian people, of the Chechen people, of the Kashmiri people, it will have been discarded as a useless memento of the post World War II settlement. All its treaties and conventions will be torn up. America and Britain threaten Iraq, a non-nuclear country, with nuclear weapons.

It is not too late

Millions of ordinary people, the largest majority ever assembled against any war, have demonstrated their opposition. We are being dragged against our will into a war to which we have given no consent. Parliament, which regularly tests its conscience and its scruples with debates on fox-hunting, can hardly rouse itself to debate war with Iraq. Trade unions are against the war. Churches are against the war. Liberal Democrats are against the war. Constituency Labour parties are against the war. All Britain’s artists, and almost all her professions are against the war. We are being marched to war at the behest of the Prime Minister, the Tory party, Rupert Murdoch, Conrad Black, Lord Harmsworth and Richard Desmond.

It is not too late. We can stop this madness. A government which will not listen to the people, or even consult the will of parliament, has lost the right to govern. The government of war must be removed. We must have a government of peace.

A government of peace will immediately demand the lifting of the sanctions on Iraq. It will rebuild Iraq’s shattered water purification plants, its hospitals and its power stations. Only in this way can we help the Iraqi people to rid themselves of a cruel dictatorship.

To trade unionists and workers everywhere we say: not a single sacrifice, not a single cut in services, not a single job should be lost to pay for this war. The trade unions should withdraw all financial support from a Labour party whose Prime Minister wages war on Iraq.[...]

Peace And Progress
posted by Irdial , 11:13 AM Þ 

I feel suddenly unable to blog what I was going to blog after reading the post below. *shudders, sadly*
posted by captain davros , 11:06 AM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 8:06 AM Þ 
Monday, March 17, 2003

English Sans French

The Franco-American dispute falling out over the best approach way to disarming Iraq take away Iraq's weapons has resulted in perhaps the highest level of anti-French feeling in the United States Lands since 1763.

A French-owned hotel innkeeping firm, Accor, has taken down the tricolor three-hued flag. In the House of Representatives Burghers, the chairman leader of the Committee Body on Administration Running Things has renamed named anew French fries "freedom fries" and French toast "freedom toast" in House restaurants eating rooms.

To which the question asking arises: Why stop with Evian, Total gasoline, and the Concorde (just only the Air France flights)? Let's get to the heart of the matter thing: A huge big percentage of the words in modern today's English are of - gasp! - French origin beginnings. What if, as a result of the current diplomatic dispute today's falling out between lands, the French demand ask for their words back? We could all be linguistic hostages captives.

It is time for English-speaking peoples folk to throw off this cultural imperialism lording-it-over-others and declare say our linguistic freedom. It is time to purify clean the English language tongue. It will take some sacrifices hardship on everyone's part to get used to the new parlance speech. But think of the satisfaction warm feeling inside on the day we are all able to can all stare the Académie Française in the eye and say without fear of reprisal injury: "Sumer is icumen in...."

posted by alex_tea , 8:04 PM Þ 

RSS feeds have really come of age.

We need Information! NOW!
posted by alex_tea , 8:04 PM Þ 

posted by Irdial , 7:36 PM Þ 

we will almost definitely wake up tomorrow to a world at war.

there will be demonstrations should war be declared tonight (probably at 0100 when bush gives his speech to america).

people are being urged to leave their places of work and study and converge on city centres. in london there will be a sit in on parliament square at 6pm on the day war is declared.

it seems the government don't want to listen to us, democracy doesn't work. direct action is needed.

meanwhile, this reminds me of 12 monkeys.
posted by alex_tea , 7:27 PM Þ 
posted by Irdial , 3:23 PM Þ 
posted by Mess Noone , 11:32 AM Þ 

MicroStar in action.
posted by Irdial , 8:24 AM Þ 

"The Electronic Privacy Information Center used the Freedom of Information Act in August 2002 to obtain government documents that talked about reading air travelers' minds and identifying suspicious thoughts. The NASA briefing materials referred to "non-invasive neuro-electric sensors" to be used in aviation security.

In a bizarre press release, NASA claimed it has not approved any research in the area of "mind reading" and that "because of the sensitivity of such research," the agency will seek independent review of future projects. Yikes. "

"The Electronic Privacy Information Center used the Freedom of Information Act in August 2002 to obtain government documents that talked about reading air travelers' minds and identifying suspicious thoughts. The NASA briefing materials referred to "non-invasive neuro-electric sensors" to be used in aviation security.

In a bizarre press release, NASA claimed it has not approved any research in the area of "mind reading" and that "because of the sensitivity of such research," the agency will seek independent review of future projects. Yikes. "
posted by Irdial , 8:18 AM Þ 
Sunday, March 16, 2003
posted by Claus Eggers , 10:29 PM Þ 

PSI OPS in full effect.
posted by Irdial , 8:31 PM Þ 

Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%?
Been to those meetings where someone wants over 100%.
How about achieving 103%?
Here's a little math that might prove helpful.
What makes life 100%?
is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26.
8 1 18 4 23 15 18 11 = 98%

11 14 15 23 12 5 4 7 5 = 96%

1 20 20 9 20 21 4 5 = 100%

2 21 12 12 19 8 9 20 = 103%
So, it stands to reason that hardwork and knowledge will get you close, attitude will get you there, but bullshit will put you over the top.

But look how far

1 19 19 11 9 19 19 9 14 7 = 118%

will take you.
posted by Irdial , 7:12 PM Þ 
posted by Claus Eggers , 12:21 PM Þ 

Subscribe to “Irdial-List” Our Mailing List.
The Blarchives are here.
The Blogs on are powered by WordPress.
Here is the Blogdial Atom XML feed.
Here is the Blogdial Feedburner XML feed.
Open Content 1995-2005 Irdialani Limited. All Rights Relinquished where applicable.