Applied Indifference

“But Brian, does this mean you are saying that all this talk of terrorism is just hype, and isn’t ever going to happen? How do you explain 9/11, if you’re so smart?”

No, it doesn’t mean that terrorism (specifically of the Islamic Jihadist strain) is not a threat to life.

The explanation is simple. Remember the “Rational Actor Assumption”? Well, it’s based upon Western Civilization’s idea of what is rational. And in our world, it is not considered rational to want to rule the world with an iron fist and deal death to all who disagree. In our world, it is not rational to be willing to die in the process of slaughtering innocents for the purpose of sowing fear. Simply, Western Civilization’s rationality is centered on the preservation of life.

In the world of the Islamic terrorist, all these things ARE rational. Islamist rationality is based upon the concept that corporeal life is meaningless except as a vehicle to get the the next life. And to get to the right place in that next life, you need to kill certain types of people that some book says God doesn’t like. And if you happen to die while doing so, or trying to do so, POOF! straight to paradise for you.

For all its internal inconsistencies, even Communism was rational. It sought a way to create a utopian society on Earth. It failed, but that was a function of its inherent lack of ability to accomodate real humans. Islamism is NOT rational, nor is it consistent. Which is why we are justified in being wary (being afraid emboldens the enemy, so we won’t do that) of the Islamist movements sweeping the world.

And it is precisely the nature of these movements that makes an all-out nuclear war unlikely.

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Just watched a show on the History Channel about the “Doomsday Clock”. You know the one - Where midnight represents the thermo-nuclear annihilation of all life on Earth, and we were just 7 minutes away. when they came up with it, the upper limit on the clock was fifteen minutes to midnight, because The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists honestly believed that nuclear war was just about inevitable. (It is also worth noting that a not insignificant number of people (not just at the Bulletin) who esposed this view were pro-Soviet, and expected the U.S. to start the war)

To this day, they seem to think it’s a foregone conclusion that we will wipe ourselves out in a nuclear free-for-all. However, I have a different view. We were never in danger of nuclear annihilation. Sound radical? You bet. Things are a little different now, but not much. An all-out nuclear assault is still as likely as monkeys taking flight from rectums. A one-off incident of nuclear terrorism is likely.

There’s one thing that underlies my entire thesis. Nobody ever really believed that a nuclear war was winnable. Sure, they said it. But nobody rational could ever conceive of a situation in which nations engaged in unrestricted, unlimited nuclear war could have anything but losers (note that this was the premise of War Games - great movie, by the way).

This thesis is often referred to as the “Rational Actor Assumption”. Simply, at the height of the cold war, it was reasonable to conclude that the Soviets didn’t want to die any more than we did. Therefore, nuclear war was unlikely. And in all the proxy wars we fought, there were no nukes ever used. And as long as everyone involved doesn’t want to die, this assumption works.

Even now, when faced with an enemy that doesn’t want to live, I still think that the possibility of a nuclear response is as close to nil as one can get. Even if a nuke were detonated in midtown Manhattan, and the public cried out for nuclear devastation of the holy cities of Islam, I don’t think such destruction would be forthcoming. The political price is too high to bear.

And before you try to hit me in the face with North Korea, Kim Jong Il is crazy, but he’s not suicidal. He’s trying to play the same game that Gorbachev and Reagan played, but neither he nor Clinton is very good at it. Nuclear Poker requires a good poker face. Clinton (and Bush) smile way too much for them to be effective. And have you looked at Kim? Could you ever take him seriously?

Yep. Here I am, some schmuck (posting in my pajamas, natch) basically saying that sixty years of doomsaying and fear-mongering were entirely wasted. All that energy that could have been put to productive use was instead used to scare people into believing something impossible was likely to happen at any moment.

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

“This Democrat is tired of supporting Ted and his Dome Village.”

That’s what Milton Sidley said when asked why he is increasing the rent on a homeless shelter run by Ted Hayes in L.A. from $2500 to $18333.

This happened two days after Ted Hayes spoke to a Republican women’s group and expressed his support for President Bush.

It is left as an exercise for the student to determine who supports the homeless here, and who is the racist.

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Background: Billy is not too bright. Doesn’t pay attention to anything going on around him. Oblivious. I met his cousin and uncle today.

I’m walking in to the store to pick up a few Christmas cards. Kid in front of me, and what appears to be his father behind him. Kid opens the door just enough to slip through, and keeps going. (this kind of thing is happening more and more, and I suspect that the feminist screech of “I can open a door you know” might have something to do with it, but it’s mostly that kids are just not taught to be polite).

So, I go through and gather my cards. Idiot boy nearly walks into me several times. I get to the register, and it’s my turn, but I CAN’T GET TO THE COUNTER. Why? Idiot-man is standing up at the counter waiting for idiot-boy, and blocking my path. I tried, politely, to get the clod to move. I get the patented Billy “Who, me?” look.

Why do we let stupid people breed?

Tags: Randomness by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Staring in early 2006, every movement your car makes will be tracked, if you happen to live in England, that is.

Everywhere you drive your car, your plate will be photographed, translated, and stored in a database. This is great, if you happen to have nefarious designs on people. Sure, I understand the potential use for the fighting of crime and terrorism. I also understand the abuse that will happen. And in my estimation, the bad FAR outweighs the good.

The guy that’s looking to rape you will now just punch up your tag number, and be able to figure out everywhere you go, and when. Congratulations, you’ve just created the stalker’s wettest dream. If you think that this cannot happen, you have never had your credit card number stolen from the inside. The people that work for the government are just as fucked up as everyone else, statistically speaking. Which means that there is some number of stalkers, rapists, pedophiles, etc. working in the Chief Constable’s office.

Of course, the individual violations aren’t the only negative. There’s the issue of privacy. You will no longer be able to travel anonymously, since someone will always know where you are.

And there’s also the fact that every government looks for new revenue opportunities by monetizing bad behavior. Look at seat-belt laws, the doubling of traffic violation fines in construction zones, red-light cameras and the shortening of yellow lights. Don’t think that they won’t be issuing automatic speeding tickets to everyone who dares go too quickly between cameras.

These cameras also make it really easy for the police to harrass you if you happen to have an unpopular opinion. And when the nanny-state becomes less, shall we say, benign? It’s a simple matter to track you down and arrest you.

I can hear you saying “But Brian, why do you care? This is happening in Britain. It couldn’t happen here in the United States!” Yeah? Bull. They’re putting cameras in the entire subway system in New York, and they’re already talking about surface cameras too.

And you know what comes after that.

You would do well to remember this one thing: Der Staat ist nicht Ihr Freund.

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Popped open one of this year’s batch of Honey-Wheat. Day-um.

Ok, I did calculate the ABV at 8.5%, and believe me, it definitely packs a punch.

What I didn’t expect was for it to be this smooth after only a month in the bottles. And the flavor is quite nice. Unlike most mass-market “Honey” beers, this one actually has the flavor of the honey. This is the second batch I’ve made. First time I used alfalfa honey, this time wildflower. Wildflower honey has a much stronger flavor, and is much more pungent. I like it, but if you don’t then don’t use it. Clover is a much mellower honey, and would probably yield a nice drink as well.

And so, for your enjoyment, the recipe.
[Read more →]

Tags: Beer by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

New York Transit Strike. Look for Bloomberg to break the union. Organized Labor just shot itself in the foot with a Howitzer. Primadonnas striking for more money than they could possibly be worth, while inconveniencing millions of people during the biggest retail week of the year.

Leftist reaction to the Bush/NSA flap. Left-wing columnists and pundits are now talking about “impeachment” if the Democrats take over the House in 2006. I called that in 2001. The Democrats promised it after the Clinton impeachment.

Videogames in the crosshairs. If Hillary and Joe get their way on video games, look for them to attack movies next. And look for the Congress to be emboldened to go after satellite radio and pay tv. There have already been grumblings in the Senate by idiots who are pissed that Stern is slipping through their fingers by going to Sirius.

“War on Christmas”. Those who are “offended” by Christmas and its symbols in the public square would do well to remember that without Christians, this nation would not exist, and the freedoms they enjoy wouldn’t either. I’d much rather live in a country where I need to tolerate a religious festival that I don’t believe in, than live in a country where I can have my head separated from my body for not embracing the state religion with sufficient enthusiasm.

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Another thought occurs to me. I noted that there are groups of people actually opposed to allowing a vaccine for Human Papilloma Virus (which causes most forms of cervical cancer) to be given to girls. Apparently it is most effective when given after puberty, but before sexual activity.

And some religious nutbag group is against it because they think that it will lead to their little darling princesses becoming raging sluts. OK, they didn’t put it that way, but they believe that this vaccine will cause greater sexual promiscuity.

And so the question that comes to my mind is “If you have to rely upon your daughter’s fear of having her ability to produce children taken away, or of dying an horrific death to cervical cancer to keep her chaste, what does that say about your parenting skills?”

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

Source article

In a case of “sensitive 90s kind of guy” trying to pretend to assert manhood in a feminist way, Dalton Conley tries to argue (or at least question) whether a father should have any rights over the nascent life he implanted in a woman’s womb.

It amuses me that the entire argument, from the gender-feminist left, the pussy-whipped men, and the right-wing “God fearin’” men, boils down to what rights a “father” has over a child. And the argument always falls back on “child support” in some fashion, such as “when all men pay child support, then maybe we’ll give them a say”.

Entangled with this whole mess is the abortion “discussion”. There are those that argue that women can abort a fetus with no input from the man, and he should just deal with it. There are those that argue a man ought to be able to get an injunction preventing the woman from having an abortion. I’ve heard people argue that a man should be able to force a woman to get an abortion (!). There are even those who argue that he should be able to walk away scot free.

Nobody ever makes the argument that they shouldn’t have engaged in the horizontal bone-dance in the first place.

See, there used to be a reason why sex before marriage was frowned upon. The whole POINT of marriage, before the gender-feminists decided that it was oppressive, was to create an environment in which children were actually sought. And the whole argument about “unwanted” children was rare. Certainly, restrictions on contraception (surgical or otherwise) would leave that possibility open. But it was post “women’s liberation” that the problem came to the fore.

With the liberation of sex from the institution of marriage came the need for contraception. After all, the swinging single shouldn’t have to risk sex actually performing its purpose, right? And what if contraception failed? Then there was this whole pesky pregnancy thing in the way, and who wants to marry THAT loser just because you’re carrying his kid? The solution to that was abortion.

Now, since men just expect women to put out, and marriage is now a sham that anyone can get out of with little or no reason, men want to have their cake and eat it too. Tough shit fellas. You had the chance to nip this in the bud back in the 60s. But all those willing young women were too much for ya, eh? Maybe if you’d have kept it in your pants we wouldn’t be having this argument over abortion.

To my mind, there is a very simple solution to the whole issue of unwanted children, father’s rights, and abortion. Don’t have sex with anyone you wouldn’t be willing to make a baby with.

But I guess that’s too much to ask, isn’t it?

Tags: Politics by Brian Corbino
Comments Off

From Fox News story copied without permission since these things disappear or change frequently

MIAMI — A federal air marshal shot and killed a 44-year-old American Airlines passenger who claimed to have a bomb in his bag and ran off of the plane, a Department of Homeland Security official confirmed to FOX News.

The air marshal pursued and tackled the suspect, a U.S. citizen, on the jet bridge between the terminal and the Boeing 757.

“The passenger … indicated he had a bomb in his bag,” Dave Adams, a federal air marshals spokesman, told FOX News in a telephone interview.

“The subject was incapacitated,” Adams said. “He was subdued.”

American Airlines flight 924 was arriving at Miami-Dade International Airport on Wednesday when the incident occurred.

“There was an incident at the Jet Bridge involving FLT 924 departing Miami for Orlando [after arriving from Colombia]. A federal marshal was involved in the incident. No further comment,” American Airlines spokesman Tim Smith said in a statement.

Homeland Security officials confirmed to FOX News that this is the first time a federal air marshal has discharged his or her weapon since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Details surrounding the incident were not immediately clear, but footage showed medical personnel boarding American Airlines flight 924 with a stretcher and around 25 to 30 police vehicles on the scene.

Sources told FOX News the person may have been unbalanced. One witness said the man frantically ran down the aisle and a woman, apparently his wife, said he suffered from bipolar disorder and hadn’t taken his medication.

“Bipolar disorder is a treatable medical illness marked by extreme changes in mood, thought, energy and behavior,” according to the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance Web site.

The plane arrived from Colombia and its final destination was Orlando.

The incident forced airport officials to close Concourse D but the rest of the airport remained open. The concourse has been reopened.

Aviation experts postulated that the situation must have been seen as a dangerous one if the air marshal drew his gun.

“The conditions [that would warrant an air marshal to fire his or her weapon] ought to be one where he has identified a threat to security” on the flight, Ron Goldman, an aviation attorney and pilot, told FOX News.

Martin Gonzalez, spokesman for Colombia’s civil aviation agency, said he had no information regarding the incident.

“The flight left normally with no problems,” he told The Associated Press in Bogota.

He said he did not have a list of passengers who were aboard the plane.

FOX News’ Catherine Herridge and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

MAY have been mentally ill. Is there any doubt? If he was an actual, y’know, terrorist, he wouldn’t be likely to divulge his intentions until just before pushing the button.

And saying “I have a bomb”, and then running from the nice men with guns whilst reaching into your bag is certainly not the best way to prolong one’s life.

I’m just sayin’

Tags: News by Brian Corbino
Comments Off