perfidy

As a supplement to Buckethead's droolbucket musings below (hey! Droolbucket musings would be a great name for a blog!), I submit via "fafblog" the "The Fafblog Terrorist Voting Guide." See what issues today's leading terrorists are concerned with, from women's rights to tort reform!

[wik] In truth, Buckethead's writing is, as always, as clear and pithy as it gets. If by "it" you mean the English-language instructions that come with off-brand Korean toner cartridges.

The OMB has temporarily halted progress on the Light Sport Aircraft proposal. Sport aircraft are small planes that seat two people, mass less then 1450 pounds, and can't fly faster than about 115 miles per hour. They're pretty small. They're also really easy to fly, and it's been recognized for a long time now that a simplified method to get citizens in the air would be a great idea. LSA regs are designed to do that -- they require only a driver's license for a medical (just like cars), have somewhat reduced training requirements (to lower costs), and substantially restrict what a pilot is able to do with one of these certificates.

It's designed to make flying fun and affordable again. "Certificated" aircraft, such as ye olde Cessna Skyhawk, cost north of $200,000 when new, and that's for a basic aircraft. Back in the age of American creativity, flying was cheap and easy.

Insurance, regulations, and lawyers have made mincemeat out of the public's freedom to fly.

Hopefully the OMB's objections are simple in nature and can be quickly dealt with by the FAA. OMB isn't really supposed to be doing anything other than rubber-stamping this thing; I am worried that this has something to do with "security" concerns. If so, it's patently ridiculous. Any car on the road is dramatically more dangerous than any of these little aircraft.

There's another effect, though, that people are going to be less aware of.

Small American companies are currently fairly dominant in the kit-plane industry. There are tens of thousands of industrious people out there who buy kit planes and build them...truly with an adventurous, handyman's spirit. I very much admire these folks (to see one of the best, try Dan's RV Project.

The LSA is intended to allow, for some kit planes, to allow manufacturers to assemble the aircraft themselves, and sell them. Kit planes have an excellent safety record, almost exactly comparable to certificated aircraft; having assembly done by manufacturers is almost sure to increase the safety factor of these aircraft.

These small planes often cost about a quarter of what a fully certificated plane can cost. There's a new industry waiting to happen here; thousands of jobs are waiting to be created, to build and export these little planes all over the world.

I wish the OMB hadn't found flaws in this incredibly lengthy process. The regulations have been studied to death. It's hard to believe that there's much wrong with them at this point, from a technical standpoint.

Secular Blasphemy links to a Norwegian Defense Policy Institute, the Forsvarets forskningsinstitutt, which discovered an Al Qaida strategy document that seems to bear some relationship to the Madrid bombings. Interesting Stuff.
 

Ralph Peters has an interesting piece up at the New York Post. Here's a sample:

In a routine presidential contest, the thundering emptiness of the rhetoric from both sides does little lasting harm. Our system is robust. Collectively, the American people are remarkably sensible.

But this isn't a normal election year. We are at war. While many domestic issues deserve debate, the War on Terror demands unity of purpose from both parties. It is essential that our enemies understand that we're united in fighting terrorism.

That's not the message we're sending...

Unfortunately, serious thinking about the threat is on hold until November. We need the best that both parties have to offer. Instead, we get the worst. Winning elections trumps defending our citizens.

We shall hear no end of claims from both sides that the other party is leading - or would lead - America to disaster. But the terrorist threat will force similar responses from whichever party occupies the White House. Any administration would rapidly (if perhaps painfully) learn the need to fight relentlessly, remorselessly and globally against our terrorist enemies. The War on Terror is not a matter of choice.

Danger will dictate our actions. The future won't conform to the wishful thinking of either the Left or Right. Our tragedy is that, until November, our energies will be devoted to exhuming political corpses, rather than protecting American lives. Both sides will lie. America will suffer.

Consider a few implacable - if unpalatable - truths:

• There is nothing we can do to satisfy religion-inspired terrorists. If we do not kill them, they will kill us.
• This is a war, not law enforcement. The struggle requires every tool in our national arsenal, from commandos to cops, from diplomacy to technology, from economic sanctions to preemptive war. At different times, in different locations, the instruments of choice will vary. There is no magic solution - or even a set of rules.
• The best defense is a strong offense. We cannot wait at home for terrorists to strike. We must not waver from the current policy of taking the war to our enemies. The moment we falter, our enemies will bring the war back to us.
• A terrorist attack on the United States is not a victory for either of our political parties or for any school of thought. It's a defeat for all of us. When the next attack occurs - as one eventually will - we must blame our enemies, not each other.
• Allies are valuable, but they are not indispensable. In the end, we must always do what is necessary, whether or not it is popular abroad.

Election-year recriminations over the tragic events of our time serve no one but political hacks and the terrorists themselves. The message our bickering sends to al Qaeda and its sympathizers is that Americans are divided and can be defeated.

The terrorists are drawing the - incorrect - lesson that a Democratic victory this November would allow them to regain the global initiative. Although every new administration inevitably makes some mistakes, a Kerry presidency would have to face up to the need to combat terrorism as vigorously as the Bush administration has done. The man in the Oval Office doesn't get a choice on this one.

But the terrorists read things otherwise, thanks to our public venom. They'll attempt to strike here, as they did in Spain, to influence our elections. If they succeed, both of our political parties, with their craven bickering, will be guilty of inciting our enemies.

We Americans may disagree about many issues, but we cannot afford disunity in the face of fanatical killers. Nor are we remotely as divided as our enemies are led to believe. The problem is the politicians, not the people.

Ok, so that's most of the article. But those are some powerful things to consider as we debate the issue of the war on terror. (And I might add that the learning curve for a new president unready to face those unpalatable truths might be painful, and deadly, for us.)

Via Reason I am reminded that last night the President mocked me on television. Me, and millions like me, who have been kind of disturbed over his inability to provide a straight answer about pre-libervasion intelligence about WMD's in Iraq, or what has since happened to them. I caught it on the tube while flipping around looking for "South Park," and stuck around long enough to be told that my grave misgivings about our intelligence capabilities and the probity of our national leaders are a punchline to a weak-ass joke. So screw him.

Speaking at the "Radio and Television Correspondents' Association" dinner on Tuesday, Bush did his usual schticky slideshow of Funny Fotos, including this laffer

[Monitor shows a photo of] Bush looking under furniture in a fruitless, frustrating search. "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere," he said.

Whoo, ha! Sticking it to those pansyass critics who were all like, "Ooh, where's the weapons, Mr. President?" "Ooh, Mr. Bush... where'd the weapons go?" "Ooh, we like Communism and smelling our own butts, Mr. President. And we're probably gay! And where did the weapons go?" And then Bush was all like, "Hey, man. It's cool. Look! Tax cuts!"

According to the New York Times, an officially secret agreement exists between the Scientologists and the IRS which allows members of the "Church" of Scientology-- and only that "church"-- to deduct the costs of educating children at "C"of S schools from their taxes. No other religious-schooling costs may be claimed on tax returns.

This fact only came to light when a Jewish couple claimed tax deductions for the education of their five children at Jewish schools, only to recieve a letter from the IRS denying their claim because their reciepts did not come from the Scientologists. Oops! Secret's out!

So far, both the IRS and the Creeps of Scientology have quashed subpoena requests to see this agreement, but it's only a matter of time. This is going to get weird, and after that it's going to get ugly.

Just how corrupt is our government, and just how sinister are the Scientologists?

(thanks to Marginal Revolution for the original pointer.)

OK, first of all, the guy who made the bit of fuss over Richard Simmons being in the room was out of line. If it had been me, I might have noticed him, might not have, might have cared less, but probably not. As things stand, the guy is filing charges now, misdemeanor assault I believe.

But.

If Richard Simmons ever slapped me, I don't know if I'd fall on the floor laughing or give him the most thorough beat-down of his (admittedly youthful) 55 years. And I'm no brawler; I'm actually a big fat candy-ass. But you just can't let a sissy slap you in the mouth and let it go. Period.

Would he at least approve of me working up a sweat by kicking his ass?

Writing in the New York Times Review of Pretentious Twaddle You'll Never Read And If You Say You Do, You Lie, Knowing In Your Heart You Gave Out 80 Pages From The End Of David Foster Wallace's Latest Pantload, Choosing Instead The New One From Steven King, Steven Weinberg asks the wise question, "if it costs so damn much to shoot a meatsack up there, why not just send robots to deep space instead?"

I agree with this assessment. In the wake of the assassination of their Dr. Evil/Saruman leader dude, Hamas vowed to wreak vengeance on all enemies of their bizarro-world philostophy, including of course the US. Right after this news broke, some Hamas leaders realized what they'd said and hastened to reassure the US that "no, uh... heh... it's cool, it's cool. We never meant it, baby. It's cool."

I really can't imagine Palestinian terrorists, with their long history of burning American flags and shouting anti-US slogans, would have moved so fast to reassure the US government a few years back. Obviously, there was real fear in this reaction, fear that some of Hamas' cells or allies would attack US interests and invite the mother of all retaliations, or that the US would accept even more brutal Israeli reactions if the country felt directly threatened. The war on terror, including the effective war in Iraq, has restored fear of America in the hearts of even the most brutal and vicious Middle East terrorists.

Good point. As you know, I don't really agree with many of the moves the President has made over the last couple years, but to disagree over strategy and desired outcomes is not to deny that some great things have happened: to wit, Libya turning stoolie on the international nuclear program they were in, Iraq's rape rooms closing for good, and a few shameful scandals dragged blinking into the light (Oil Food abuse, Russian-Iraqi cronyism, French double-dealing).

If terrorists fear the US... really fear us, in a change-of-britches kind of way, that's good. That's progress. If somehow the children of Israel and the children of Palestine could somehow start linking arms, singing Carpenters songs and sharing candy, that'd be much, much better, but I've wished in one hand so far and it's not filled up yet.

Well, I think this is cool....

The fledgling Chinese Baseball League has chosen legendary folk hero Sun Wukong the Monkey King and his invincible as-you-will cudgel as its mascot. Perfect!

Known best to Westerners as the inspiration for the anime series "Dragonball Z," the adventures of the Bugs-Bunny-'cept-Godlike Sun Wukong are chronicled in the 16th century Chinese novel, "Journey to the West" by Wu Cheng'en. In JttW, Sun Wukong accompanies the priest Sanzang on his journey to the Western Heaven to recover the lost Buddhist sutras. This is his punishment and reward for challenging the gods and styling himself "Great Sage Equalling Heaven" in a previous life.

I'm about halfway (1200 pages) through "Journey to the West," and I have to give it the highest possible recommendation. The book can be read on several levels: as an endless chronicle of spectacular kung-fu battles with demons; as a travel novel; as a meditation on the synthesis of Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism in Chinese thought in the 16th century; or as an extended metaphor for the individual's quest toward enlightenment. As such, even when the demon-fighting gets a bit much and the poetry goes on for pages and pages (this book has more effing poems than The Silmarillion," it's still a surprisingly compulsive read.

If you have the least interest in China, you should check it out.