Wonkette, no longer necessarily a mortal enemy, has a scan of the actual letter in question.

"My friends laugh at you."

Wonkette's friends laugh at Chris Matthews' stationary. Purple paisleys on the side?

Let's adjust: Chris Matthews is a tubby eighth-grade girl.

Posted by: Ace at 11:43 AM | Comments (19)
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

His best effort to make sense of the silliness.

This is what turned me off of the first movie. It was simply too stupid. It ruined everything for me:

What we hear in the first movie about using humans as a power source is nonsense; humans consume energy, they don't produce it. The reality is that the captive humans in the Matrix exist so that the Machines have something to do. That was their solution to the apparent paradox of needing humans to serve but also needing to not be enslaved by humans. The humans were enslaved by the Machines, and Machines assumed full control over deciding what kind of service they would provide to those humans.

Here's the alternative explanation I provided in my own head. Morpheus is an idiot. The humans don't produce energy; as den Beste notes, that's just fucking retarded.

No. The Machines' true supercomputer is a cyborg system. All those humans have been put into comas in order to use their brains -- their natural, organic computers -- as a massively-parallel organic/cybernetic computer system.

Why did they invent the Matrix, the dreamworld for the humans' brains to work in? For two reasons: In the guise of "living out their lives" and doing mundane tasks at work, they're really doing the computations and work the giant cyborg computer requires. When Neo is coding at work, he's really doing task the giant computer requires for one purpose of another. He's doing actual work by dreaming of doing work.

(What about janitors? Well, either they're "metaphorically" doing work -- their brains are being used to do computer work by imagining they're doing certain physical tasks -- or else there really aren't any true human janitors in the Matrix. Perhaps janitors and those whose work isn't directly applicable to computer processing don't really exist; they're fake comptuer-created characters in the Matrix, for the purpose of versimilitude.)

Also, it's necessary to give the comatose-but-still-sentient beings a world to "interact with," or else they'll simply go insane from being prisoners in a machine and thus will not be able to contribute to the supercyborgcomputer's processing power.

I kind of like that explanation. I'm not sure what den Beste would say about it-- maybe it's as daffy as the "humans provide energy" explanation -- but it sounds good to me.

That said, even with that user-provided edit, the movies (especially the sequels, but even the superior original) are still pretty sucky and dumb.

And irresponsible. Murdering all those innocent security guards and cops, who are, in fact, real human beings who can be killed by dreamworld violence? There are some messages that I think are just blantantly irresponsible and borderline evil to send, especially packaged in a nice little teen-friendly action movie.

Thanks to John S. for the tip.

Posted by: Ace at 11:26 AM | Comments (61)
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.

For some time I've been wondering why we aren't more aggressive about destablizing the Iranian government. Why not begin air-dropping in crates of AK-47's and ammo and bombs and anti-tank missiles and radios? Certainly a lot of this would be captured by the government; but then, they have all the guns and bombs and radios they could want. (And the anti-tank missiles would be just strong enough to take out their crappy Soviet export tanks, not our well-armored Abramses).

We seem to have this national consensus that we will not promote civil war or further violence, except if its by our own military, with our military quite-humanely limiting the number of deaths to a minimum. But why should this be such an imperative?

If there is in fact a good-sized chunk of the Iranian population willing to dethrone the mad mullahs, why not arm them? Why should the Iranian government have a monopoly on weaponry?

In America, we say that the second amendment protects us from tyranny; an unarmed population fears the government, but the government fears an armed population, etc. Why not export this particular Ameican value to Iran?

Yes, some of the weapons would be used in terrorist attacks. But only very few. Those seeking a revolution don't try to alienate the rest of the population by blowing them up. The weapons would be used, guerilla style, in taking out Revolutionary Gaurds and their barracks and the local police, both regular and secret. All legitimate targets in any war.

Just wondering.

Iran certainly exports a lot of weapons and bombs to the Palestinians and Iraq. Why shouldn't we return the favor and balance the insurgent-weapons trade deficit?

Posted by: Ace at 11:16 AM | Comments (28)
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

Powerline quotes and critiques a Rich Lowry article in National Review (paper version only, so here's your chance to get a taste of it if you're not a subscriber).

Basic idea: There is a schism now between hawks. There are those who still embrace the idea of democratizing the Middle East.

And there are a growing number of those who once supported that idea who now say "The Hell With Them" all, let them rot.

I have to say that I was only a tepid supporter of the democratization project. It sounded good in theory, but I couldn't really get on the bandwagon of calling liberals "racists" for suggesting that democracy would have a hard time taking root in the bloodsoaked soil of the Middle East. My inclinations in this regard tend to be punitive and Jacksonian, not ameliorative and Wilsonian.

There's one big difficulty with the "To Hell With Them" position, though: It's a political disaster for Bush and American foreign policy.

As common wisdom now holds that Saddam did not have WMD's, was not a threat, and had no ties to Al Qaeda (all very dubious propositions, but accepted, I think, by a majority of Americans and certainly a great majority of the world's population), there is only one real remaining victory condition for a successful Iraq war: the transformation of the country into a functioning, peaceful semi-democracy which respects pluralism and human rights.

The "To Hell With Them" brigade, of which I could see myself joining had other victory conditions been more clearly met (finding and seizing WMD's, proving close connections between Saddam and bin Ladin of the sort the media would actually acknowledge), would essentially be calling for an acknowledgement of failure in Iraq were we to simply let the psychopaths butcher each other and let the country descend into civil war.

So, alas, we have to stay and fix this fucked-up country if we are to preserve American honor.

That's not the most tangible reason for continuing to fight a war, however. In fact, it's gotten us into trouble before.

I wouldn't say the project to create a stable, peaceful Iraq is doomed. Things may well work out. The threat of a civil war is frightening not only to Americans, but to the Sunnis who continue to support the terrorist insurgency, and they may recoil from the coming horror they are about to inflict on themselves at the last moment.

I have to admit, though, that if I knew the country were to be in this sort of shape this long after the invasion, I think I would have objected to the ground-troops option and supported instead a sustained airstrike campaign designed to simply destroy Saddam's ability to control his country. And then to let the inevitable civil war that would follow sort everything out.

In other words, if civil war is inevitable anyway, why have our boys in the thick of it?

I don't know that civil war is inevitable. It may yet be avoided. But if civil war does break out, I can't see how our invasion and attempts to rebuild the country can be viewed as useful.

Posted by: Ace at 11:03 AM | Comments (46)
Post contains 537 words, total size 3 kb.

One thing I like about him: He's honest. Unlike other Democratic politicians who seek poltiical advantage without committing themselves to any actual position, Feingold actually puts some skin in the game.

Blog reactions at the Blogometer. Liberals, you won't be surprised to learn, are all super-duper psyched about this, while conservatives don't seem to care much, figuring Feingold's move to decrease national security aggressiveness is a net political plus for Bush.

Posted by: Ace at 10:47 AM | Comments (25)
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

Not sure if this is good or bad. Yes, it's destabilizing and may lead to civil war.

On the other hand, it sends a signal. "Stop killing us, or we will begin slaughtering you" is probably the best possible diplomacy at the current moment.

I only hope the Sunni insurgents get the message before the full-on ethnic cleansing and random butchery begins.

We'll see if they do:

Shiite vigilantes seized four men suspected of terrorist attacks, interrogated them, beat them, executed them and left their bodies hanging from lampposts in a Shiite slum today, according to witnesses and government officials.

The graphic display of street justice was the first response to a coordinated attack on Sunday evening that killed more than 50 civilians in a Shiite market, and it seemed to only add to the seeping sense of lawlessness.

In Sadr City, the Shiite slum that is essentially a city within a city, government forces have vanished. The streets are ruled by aggressive teenagers with shiny soccer jerseys and machine guns. They poke their heads into cars and detain whom they want. Mosques blare for American troops to stay out. Increasingly, the Americans have been doing just that.

...

Against this violent backdrop, and with the threat of a Sunni-Shiite war growing, Moktada al-Sadr, the militant Shiite cleric who leads the largest Shiite militia, called for calm. At a news conference that was televised across the country, he said he had the religious authority to confront Sunni Arab insurgents — and the power to crush them — but he would not do so.

If even firebrand lunatic Moqtada al-Sadr is calling for calm, I think we'd have to guess that the media is no longer wishfully overstating the chances for full-on civil war.

Posted by: Ace at 10:37 AM | Comments (6)
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

Very potty-mouthed. Includes a good picture of Phelps, presumably after he got roughed up a little.

Perhaps he paid for the service. Maybe he digs that.

Thanks to Craig.

Posted by: Ace at 10:30 AM | Comments (5)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

Background: Clinton W. Taylor proposed sending Yale officials (fake, press-on) fingernails as a protest against Yale's admission of a Taliban official.

The nails symbolized the Taliban's habit of yanking out the fingernails of women who'd pained their nails whorish colors, which quite frankly I like. The whorish colors, I mean. Not the yanking out of fingernails, although I suppose it's okay between two consenting adults.

The campaign is called "Nail Yale."

Well, a Yale official wrote to Taylor, anonymously, but Taylor tracked him back and found his name and then later called him up.

And the Ugly was from a Yale Development Office Assistant Director, Alexis Surovov (Yale Â’02), who sent us a love note entitled "Y Do You Hate Yale?":

What is wrong with you? Are you retarded? This is the most disgraceful alumni article that I have ever read in my life. You failed to mention that you've never contributed to the Yale Alumni Fund in your life. But to suggest that others follow your negative example is disgusting.

Mr. Surovov didnÂ’t sign his e-mail, and he sent it through a Columbia account. After DebbieÂ’s husband, a Yale Computer Science graduate, traced it back to him, Clint called him at his Yale office on Thursday to ask if he really thought we were retarded.

"Personally, that’s how I feel about it," he said. He didn’t approve of our "terrorist tactics" and when asked whether he really meant that, changed it to "terror tactics." He thought the red fingernails we advocated sending in were "a stretch," and a bit gruesome—"like something out of Quentin Tarantino’s movie Hostel." [Which is a horror film about backpackers being brutally tortured and killed.]

"Yeah, thatÂ’s the whole point," Clint said. "This isnÂ’t a movie. The Taliban really did this stuff!"

Taylor has now started a blog about this protest, and Yale's, ummmm, retarded response. No address for that, yet; I guess it's just getting started.

But you can join the "retarded" protest by sending fingernails to Yale officials' addresses found here.

Posted by: Ace at 10:14 AM | Comments (7)
Post contains 346 words, total size 3 kb.

Then again, nobody expects a Spanish 'artist' to turn a synagogue into a gas chamber. Not even the Germans thought of that one!

But leave it to a conceptual artist to think of turning an old German synagogue into a gas chamber in order to:

"draw attention to "the banal way in which the Holocaust is remembered" and encourage reflection on how guilt is perceived."

So how did he do it?

Santiago Sierra directed the poisonous exhaust fumes from six cars through long, black tubes into the former place of worship in the small town of Pulheim, near the city of Cologne.

Obviously he is equally unconcerned about global warming and good taste.

What else is on his resume?

The internationally known artist, who lives in Mexico City, has been involved in other provocative works in past, including tattooing the backs of six unemployed Cubans and dying the hair of Africans blonde to make them look European.

I'm sure his next commission will be in Teheran.

Meanwhile, back in the world of the banal...

Synagogue Attacked in Ukrainian Town

Demolition of only Tajik synagogue begins

French Jewish leaders slam weekend assaults on three Jews

Posted by: Tanker at 09:06 AM | Comments (12)
Post contains 204 words, total size 2 kb.

Not really. It's about a terrier who mistook a guy's penis for a chew toy. It sounds made-up but it's written sort of funny.

The story's caption for the above pic, by the way, is "A Jack Russell with the right kind of ball."

Thanks to Scott.

Posted by: Ace at 08:55 AM | Comments (13)
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.