chuck kottke

It was at their wedding in Prague - Sophie was a good choice for him. > How About the Moody Blues?

Well, it's only a big problem if we don't help improve the lives of those in Muslim majority poor countries, or if we don't follow our highest ethical principles. After all, recruits happen when inequity persists. There will always be some, but lessening the odds is really where it's at.

> :laugh3: I suppose that could be the case - I did see a car covered with living grass once.. kinda fits both parameters! When did you come to realize green was a symbol for earth-friendly products?

> That's good to know - for a while the price was substantially higher, so that's quite an improvement. 70MPG Imperial converts to around 58 MPG American, so that's an excellent step in the right direction! Efficiency is the biggest part of the answer, imagine if the auto makers were required to make all new cars get 70 MPG or better - what a world of difference that would make on the global environment.

smite smote smitten bite boat bitten and since the idea has now hatched, was there a temporary egg shortage in Sydney? :lol: edit: teen idols can have amazingly long careers - I was surprised to find a Fabian Fanclub online! Fabian's Home Page

There is a connection! Mayan art, through Brian Eno! Mayan Art

White Snow Leopards are nice to read too, but they are quite elusive.. when empires have turned back to sand There you go mam, keep as cool as you can:cool: face Piles of trials with smiles:):):); it riles them to believe you perceive the web they built ...and keep on thinking free!

Given the knowledge that someone was captured who could have provided information to stop a massive attack, but did not spill the beans, I would have to wonder if torture works on someone like that anyhow. For someone so absorbed into their own world view, I seriously doubt they would give any evidence up, unless the interrogator used reason and incentives, or tricks to coax useful information out of them, and they then realized it would work to their benefit. But for the Osama bin Laden's of the world, that would never happen - they not only drank their own cool-aid, they invented the flavor. Better to let them hide as they are so apt to do in a "safe place" and keep good hidden surveillance on them (after quietly getting a real warrant from a judge based on credible evidence for doing so) - to get the information while they are part of the loop and the information they then offer is quite accurate and can be used to best effect. Hey, yes, some of the people in those places are undereducated, some are out of work looking for something to do, and thus may be lured into religious militant cults. But the answer is to offer education and resources - Greg Mortensen had great success when he listened to the people of Pakistan, and then got the resources they needed to build a school, brought in the books and supplies they needed. They really wanted to learn, and send their kids to school - there simply was no funding, supplies, learned people to offer the courses, building materials, etc. So it's maybe not as hard a problem to solve as we think it is - just a matter of doing it, funding it. Most of all, listening to the needs of the people in those areas and helping them with what they really need. Send books and desks, pencils, pens, and paper. Send supplies to build schools, equip them properly, and offer whatever the people there need and ask for. Send educators if need be. Send pumps, prime the pump - they'll do the rest. Open up investment and opportunity there, so those graduates have jobs and careers, and can make their own economies flourish. Support honest business practices, so they see us as partners in good faith. We need to regain control over our own nation to make this happen. Honest elections, getting the money out of elections is essential to our democracy - corporations are not people, we are the people! When we can send the right kind of aid, national security will become less of a concern. The best security policy is a policy that promotes global prosperity.

Yes, I agree - better to not provoke a bad reaction, but alas, people do what comes to their minds.. rarely thinking about how others will react. Perhaps it's just the noisemakers who get the attention, but once that's out there, no telling what the reaction will be. If only they had apprehended Osama, and given him a fair trial, aired all the truth, maybe that would have embarrassed certain people, but at least real justice would have been served, and perhaps citizens in Pakistan and elsewhere would have known the truth. Ending the motives that drive young people to violent extremism is the biggest thing we can do, however I know that's not easy with all the corruption everywhere. What to do, what to do.. First let's start with getting the U.S. on a level course, getting the money out of politics - beginning here allows for better policy choices affected everyone else in the world. Canada, England, U.S., Italy.. - we all need to reverse the trends..

Jaws! images (JPEG Image, 204x244 pixels)

Sounds good to me! Economics is a factor in everyone's choices without a doubt, mine as well. I can understand what we all find desirable with SUV's, but there are so many caveats to them when it comes to their effect on the environment, and yes, these smaller cars are easy to park, easy to find parking spots that they fit in! Hm, so it's the interesting design that has you looking at the Citroen.. I often wonder if it's just a change of pace we're looking for, as we get bored with the looks of the things we use on a daily basis.. so retro is in vogue now! The trick will be to blend styles and desirable characteristics with green approaches to auto designs... What if the back end of the car were stretched out longer and tapered gradually? Probably harder to park I suppose.. Well, aerodynamics is maybe 24% give or take of the energy consumption end of things, so there's room to improve everywhere else. Body weight isn't something most of us think about when we look for a car either, as long as the handling is good.. hm.. batteries are positioned low, so the center of gravity perhaps compensates in lower weight vehicles.. And these newer cars have better aerodynamics than their predecessors, and by far better than SUV's. So that's a plus. What about an electric or a hybrid? Have you considered them, or are they simply too expensive for a lease?

ok, I typed all that in for the Citroen and got a look at it - very nice! sporty muscle car look then.. Yes, the Range Rover Sport is probably harder on fuel, given the 4WD option and general aerodynamics of the vehicle class, not to mention the heavy vehicle weight. It's between the Fiat 500 and the Citroen DS3 then.. So is it mainly the leasing cost and the fuel costs which made you decide to switch?

..can't click on that link - it's all white lettering for some reason.. alright, good looking from the front, will check that out. unique too - advanced styling then perhaps caught your eye? Performance varies with these Citroens, but perhaps less performance than what you currently drive - may I ask what that is? Actually, if the Citroen is lighter than your current car, and is geared and optimized for performance, it may be the same as or even sportier that what you currently drive in that sense. (some cars have modes to choose from, selecting performance mode for fun can provide a rush, then back to economy for normal driving) Suspension and handling are other considerations as well, if you drive on windy roads, have a lot of obstacles to contend with on a daily basis (like here it would be the potholes on Parkway drive!).

the other states of mind; desire, mating dances and ritualism, sleekness in shapes, car bodies, simple happiness.. fun is a state of mind which wants less complexity, and can be had in a greener way.

Alright then - good to know that! But so many cars look good, which is subjective to what one perceives as good automotive looks, so what about the Citroen DS3 caught your eye? If I were to venture a guess, I would have to say it is part of me as well perhaps - this pull towards something that has racing credentials, has some get-up-and-go in it, and a sleek look. Better than the average sports car efficiency-wise as well.. I suppose, in some ways, we like to race, we are runners. How then to incorporate that into an environmentally sound choice? hm.. I had looked here at the Tesla in that sense, and the Aptera as well for styling, wishing the Aptera had a bit more zip to it... It's not the engine displacement, nor the horsepower/kilowatts that makes a car fast off the line - it's a combination of mass and responsiveness, instantaneous power output - electrics actually have the edge there.. unless you enjoy the sounds an engine makes? there is something to that!

Any more?

Why do you want a Citroen DS3?

I understand The_Gloaming how you feel, and were I there, I would want even more to prevent future attacks much the same as you! The real way to reduce the threat is to reduce the problems that lead a few into such radicalism. Torture is ineffective and often provides contrary information that leads investigators astray, and has been used to justify some serious actions that in the end hurt more people and create more potential terrorists. My way of seeing an answer is to reduce the forces that drive people in the direction of wanting to join militant extremist organizations, increase the true ability of international investigations to uncover and stop plots, and thus reduce the odds of it happening again. It is poverty, frustration, and being disrespected that motivates people to join militant extremist organizations and to commit extreme acts of violence, and it's been that way for a long long time - from the Weather Underground to the Symbionese Liberation Army to Jim Jones's Cult, when poor people feel pushed to the edge and are frustrated by the mistreatment they receive and the injustices they see, it's understandable where the motive force is coming from. So we would best reduce the threat by supporting the will of the people in all of the world to gain control and form real democracies. Supporting those who are fighting for their rights is essential, as well as supporting global economic fairness. Investing in their future is investing in real security, and better, more secure trading partners. On the other side of the equation is the problems of communications and turf wars between law enforcement agencies. Perhaps this matter is now lessened by homeland security, although the loss of our privacy rights and the creation of a super-sized bureaucracy wasn't necessary to accomplish the task of increasing agency cooperation.

Here from the land of wine and cheese liberals, I can honestly say I feel much the same. But indeed this isn't over, since the root of the cause has barely been addressed, and since this insane "war on terror" is like making war on raindrops. Why not re-brand it as an International Effort to Curb Violent Extremism? The IECEV ? Start with working to treat all citizens of the world justly, leveling the economic playing field, and respecting the traditions of all cultures? Put the emphasis and money on improved education, infrastructure, disease eradication and treatment, and fair trade? Seems a lot cheaper than all the ultra-expensive military hardware we've poured a good third of our U.S. budget into (covertly and otherwise). By some estimates, as much as 60% of the U.S. budget goes into war and war related things - seems like a lot more improvement in security could be had for a lot less if that money were spent elsewhere..

I agree, they are treasures of history, and we don't realize their value until they are gone. Interesting that he became a pacifist and resisted the celebrations associated with war victories, knowing perhaps all too well the dangers of excess blind loyalty and serious harm done to humanity from war on all sides. I recall the stories of my great uncle Steve, who survived trench warfare in WWI. He was every day of his life thereafter simply grateful that there were no sounds of guns or bombs going off, no one shooting at him, no one he was ordered to shoot at, no sounds of the dying; none of the madness of war.

It's often born out of frustration and someone's desire to create evidence that isn't there. Hence, in Guantanamo, personnel were under pressure to find evidence linking Al Qaeda with Iraq at the time, to justify the broader war. When normal interrogation did not produce the desired results, the decision to use torture was given the green light, and the result was used to catapult us into a big ugly unnecessary war: Senate Report: Harsh Tactics Used In Attempt to Establish Non-Existent Iraq-al Qaida Link Perhaps some would argue for the use of torture in extreme circumstances, but then who decides when, how do you stop it at just that one case, and is it ever effective? As Nancy points out, it basically doesn't work - it backfires! Good old fashioned intelligence work works, as does effective interrogation of suspects using incentives and reason. Torture is illegal, and the U.S. government must abide by it's own laws and treaties :Torture and the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I see what you're saying - yes, not everyone was out there celebrating this as some sports analogy 'victory', some were simply relieved, and wanted to feel a sense of camaraderie at that moment. Perhaps what shows up on TV is the noisy boisterous types who were chanting "USA USA USA" , since they make the biggest splash in the press. But I wonder about the numbers of each, and how this will be seen elsewhere - impressions are hard to undo, even when they are not indicative of the whole. Even so, what bothers me is that in previous moves to deal with suspicious or criminal leaders, due process has always been preserved. If for no other reason than for the preservation of our system of justice, that the principle must be upheld in all cases where an impartial trial for alleged crimes committed takes place. That has slid - Milosevic was tried, Mugabe was tried, and many others were tried in international courts. It appears Bin Laden could have been captured and tried, but instead he was killed on the spot - which is a loss of due process. When we loose due process, we set a bad precedent - it says to people who were unaware of Bin Laden's crimes that we don't stand for justice, we just take revenge. It also sets up a precedent for assassinations, something we don't want to see go on. Also, if there was involvement by others, this may have come to light at trial - but cannot now be brought out in the light for all to see.

> Yes, that must be it - too much emotion clouding reason, too much invested in recent events to reflect and change views. And yes, too many have had the mass propaganda forced on them via the corporately controlled media in this country. Simplistic answers are often the mantra being pushed as well, under the banner of ultra-patriotism. Unfortunately lawmakers do have vested interests when a corporately back agenda uses the cover of terrorist attacks to push its agenda globally, and these same lawmakers then reap benefits in the form of income down the line. True, the paralysis one feels from terror attacks is very real and unnerving, so something I need to ponder as well. From afar, it seemed as a big unfortunate event, but to have survived it and lost someone in it is a much more personal and serious matter. To find true justice and prevent further attacks is to understand the causes, change policies to reduce the global inequities, and defuse the danger through more effective & cooperative agency management. Hopefully the latter has been achieved, while the former is more a matter of our taking action to regain control of our own nations, so they may once again uphold our highest principles and values.

I agree Imke - exactly as you said it. It is immature and maybe even indicative of some mass identification with power for power's sake, as though the world's countries and cultures are nothing but sports teams, and cheer for the home team to beat (literally and figuratively) the "opponents" elsewhere - totally weird.

> Terrorists are not all the same, other interrogation methods involving reason and incentives do work actually, since what comes at us are often the "errand-boys" and not the heads. Perhaps some would be willing to undergo torture, if they are true cult followers, in which case they may not give information up either way. And yes, often the information obtained isn't correct. Good point Imke - people will say anything to make the torture stop, and unfortunately sometimes "false confessions" are desired by the interrogators, to justify some actions for their bosses. So, it's even worse than just bad information, if the torturers want to justify some very destructive acts. > In the end, I think some wanted the war, wanted to be as bad as they could be, since they would gain enormous power and wealth and control in the world (a chance to "roll the dice"). Torture is done at their insistence - people like Donald Rumsfeld insisted on torturing detainees, even against the best advice coming from interrogation experts in the Pentagon.