![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
So much for one of the major, daresay central, promises Obama pledged when campaigning. But hey, when Gibby gets caught trying to spin as hard as a dryer does, the most the media does is a light chuckle at his expense.
July 5th, 2009
So much for one of the major, daresay central, promises Obama pledged when campaigning. But hey, when Gibby gets caught trying to spin as hard as a dryer does, the most the media does is a light chuckle at his expense.
July 4th, 2009
Going to buy one.
Reason? While I have a laptop, it is a 17 inch widescreen model. When a laptop gets this big, it's really not mobile. It's portable. Not really worth taking it out of the case if you won't be using it for a couple hours straight. Just too much of a hassle.
A 13.3" Macbook or Macbook Pro is a couple pounds lighter and has a smaller footprint. Pulling it out quickly for just a few minutes isn't as much of an imposition, and it's battery life is quite a lot better than what I have now- I will be able to pull out just the laptop, rather than the AC adapter too. Also, well, it's a Mac, and the research I've done suggests that my current laptop is not OS X friendly. I could probably get it to run, but I'd most likely lose a lot of performance relative to the current Ubuntu install.
A side benefit is if you buy one for college via the Apple Store, not only do you get the student discount but you get a free iPod. Well, technically, you get a $229 rebate on an iPod. This will let me upgrade my current 30GB fifth gen iPod. I'll probably go with a larger capacity 6th Gen iPod Classic. To get an iPod Touch 32GB would set me back $170 after the rebate, and thats just too much for capabilities that are largely replicated on my phone already. And getting an iPod touch of a lower capacity would just not make much sense to me, I'd be stepping backwards on one of the major capabilities of my current iPod.
I suppose I'll load the current iPod with a whole bunch of gospel and country and show my mom how to use it, and give it to her. I'll have little need for it.
And then next month if my plans to upgrade my mac Mini to the current Mini go well, my mom may get her computer replaced with a nice, albeit somewhat aged, macintosh. Her compaq is old and showing it. My Mac Mini though, is like the day I bought it. All I'd have to do is wipe the hard drive and reinstall from the system discs, and she'd be set. I might not simply give her the Mini, but I don't see charging more than a couple hundered for it.
Reason? While I have a laptop, it is a 17 inch widescreen model. When a laptop gets this big, it's really not mobile. It's portable. Not really worth taking it out of the case if you won't be using it for a couple hours straight. Just too much of a hassle.
A 13.3" Macbook or Macbook Pro is a couple pounds lighter and has a smaller footprint. Pulling it out quickly for just a few minutes isn't as much of an imposition, and it's battery life is quite a lot better than what I have now- I will be able to pull out just the laptop, rather than the AC adapter too. Also, well, it's a Mac, and the research I've done suggests that my current laptop is not OS X friendly. I could probably get it to run, but I'd most likely lose a lot of performance relative to the current Ubuntu install.
A side benefit is if you buy one for college via the Apple Store, not only do you get the student discount but you get a free iPod. Well, technically, you get a $229 rebate on an iPod. This will let me upgrade my current 30GB fifth gen iPod. I'll probably go with a larger capacity 6th Gen iPod Classic. To get an iPod Touch 32GB would set me back $170 after the rebate, and thats just too much for capabilities that are largely replicated on my phone already. And getting an iPod touch of a lower capacity would just not make much sense to me, I'd be stepping backwards on one of the major capabilities of my current iPod.
I suppose I'll load the current iPod with a whole bunch of gospel and country and show my mom how to use it, and give it to her. I'll have little need for it.
And then next month if my plans to upgrade my mac Mini to the current Mini go well, my mom may get her computer replaced with a nice, albeit somewhat aged, macintosh. Her compaq is old and showing it. My Mac Mini though, is like the day I bought it. All I'd have to do is wipe the hard drive and reinstall from the system discs, and she'd be set. I might not simply give her the Mini, but I don't see charging more than a couple hundered for it.
ID4 is my favorite movie for today. (Not gonna watch it; out of time... but maybe in the morning.) There's a reason for that. One, it's about blowing stuff up, and well, that's what Mr. Jefferson said you ought to do on July 4, was blow stuff up... and two, is the great riff on the Henry IV St. Crispin's Day speech:
Good morning. In less than an hour, aircraft from here will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest aerial battle in the history of mankind. "Mankind." That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: "We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!
In these days where despite our seeming successes at the ballot box we seem to be semi-permanently less free than we were at the turn of the century, perhaps it may well be time to simply remember that the Cascades are high and the Emperor, whatever color or party he may be, is far away... that all politics, ultimately, are local, and to simply concentrate on seeing to it that we here in this little corner of the world live as freely as we can, faraway kings and armies be damned, and to foster that idea wherever it will take root... building islands of freedom until the islands can be connected by bridges and ultimately by land mass...
Freedom for me is about going where I want when I want how I want, and the converse personal responsibility that I alone am *ultimately* responsible for my personal safety.... and also about being with whom I want to be with, and the converse personal responsibility to maintain those relationships how I and those with whom I maintain them see fit, to communicate, sometimes to lead and sometimes to be content to follow. This past year has been all about that - learning to live by myself, without four-wheeled conveyance, learning the sheer joy of zen with motorcycles and the satisfaction of taking care of your own wheels. It's been about making friends, and also about being independent... about learning who I am and where I *want* to be in the world... and carving out that niche and making it my own.
May you find your own Independence... and your own community. It's a very American thing to do.
Now, let's go blow stuff up! :)
Good morning. In less than an hour, aircraft from here will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest aerial battle in the history of mankind. "Mankind." That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: "We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day!
In these days where despite our seeming successes at the ballot box we seem to be semi-permanently less free than we were at the turn of the century, perhaps it may well be time to simply remember that the Cascades are high and the Emperor, whatever color or party he may be, is far away... that all politics, ultimately, are local, and to simply concentrate on seeing to it that we here in this little corner of the world live as freely as we can, faraway kings and armies be damned, and to foster that idea wherever it will take root... building islands of freedom until the islands can be connected by bridges and ultimately by land mass...
Freedom for me is about going where I want when I want how I want, and the converse personal responsibility that I alone am *ultimately* responsible for my personal safety.... and also about being with whom I want to be with, and the converse personal responsibility to maintain those relationships how I and those with whom I maintain them see fit, to communicate, sometimes to lead and sometimes to be content to follow. This past year has been all about that - learning to live by myself, without four-wheeled conveyance, learning the sheer joy of zen with motorcycles and the satisfaction of taking care of your own wheels. It's been about making friends, and also about being independent... about learning who I am and where I *want* to be in the world... and carving out that niche and making it my own.
May you find your own Independence... and your own community. It's a very American thing to do.
Now, let's go blow stuff up! :)
I play in a community band in a suburb of Chicago. This morning our group played in the parade. After we were finished, I watched the rest of the parade and I spotted this atheist "float"!!! It got booed. I don't know who "Rob Sherman" is. At first I thought well maybe this guy is a d-bag and that's why they are booing but then I overheard a guy say "Ugh, atheists" as he shook his head.
Here's my footage:
Here's my footage:
annoyedOkay, I'll give up on the search engines and ask y'all.
Every morning, on my way home from work at 7am, one of the radio stations in Pittsburgh plays The Star Spangled Banner sung acapella by a group of men. It's got great harmony, but it's not on a station I usually stop at as I'm scanning through the band for songs that rock to keep me awake on the way home. (And proud as I am about being an American, I don't want to hear it every morning)
Well, I was talking to my wife about patriotic music this morning and mentioned it, but I can't find any mention of the group that does it - I suspect it's a country station (though I could be wrong), but don't see any mention of it on Y108 or Froggy's websites. She's usually at home getting the kids up at that time so she hasn't heard it.
Thanks! And Happy Fourth of July!
Every morning, on my way home from work at 7am, one of the radio stations in Pittsburgh plays The Star Spangled Banner sung acapella by a group of men. It's got great harmony, but it's not on a station I usually stop at as I'm scanning through the band for songs that rock to keep me awake on the way home. (And proud as I am about being an American, I don't want to hear it every morning)
Well, I was talking to my wife about patriotic music this morning and mentioned it, but I can't find any mention of the group that does it - I suspect it's a country station (though I could be wrong), but don't see any mention of it on Y108 or Froggy's websites. She's usually at home getting the kids up at that time so she hasn't heard it.
Thanks! And Happy Fourth of July!
This question goes out to those who frequently visit the South Side Works and park in the garages there. I apologize for asking here, but I never seem to be down there when there are actually attendants present in the payment stations and the Network Parking web site contact information has not proved useful...
In each of the South Side Works garages there are a number of highly convenient spots right by the entrance on the first floor marked with signs for "green" vehicles. At first glance, you might think such spots are restricted on an honor system sort of like the ones in the East Liberty garage near Whole Foods. Once you pull into such spots though, you notice the fine print on the sign states that you must have some sort of official decal / permit identifying your car as such in order to park there.
Does anyone know how you go about getting such a decal? I drive a TDi and burn biodiesel (pure in the warm months, blended in colder weather) and would like to take advantage of these spots sometimes, especially when I have older relatives visiting who can't walk as far as my wife and I can.
In each of the South Side Works garages there are a number of highly convenient spots right by the entrance on the first floor marked with signs for "green" vehicles. At first glance, you might think such spots are restricted on an honor system sort of like the ones in the East Liberty garage near Whole Foods. Once you pull into such spots though, you notice the fine print on the sign states that you must have some sort of official decal / permit identifying your car as such in order to park there.
Does anyone know how you go about getting such a decal? I drive a TDi and burn biodiesel (pure in the warm months, blended in colder weather) and would like to take advantage of these spots sometimes, especially when I have older relatives visiting who can't walk as far as my wife and I can.
I'm a little cranky over the 4th of July, I have to admit. I'm getting worried about this idea we Americans have that everything has to be picture perfect. Maybe its why we charged ourselves and mortgaged ourselves into a depression. Whatever the reason, we have this image of the founding fathers standing in some picturesque way before a document that would change the world. And while the document itself was important, it didn't happen like the painting said it did.
John Adams would be rolling over in his grave today. He was very much about history being recorded as it happened. Perhaps that was so that he wouldn't be remembered solely as the man who signed the Alien and Sedition Act, but he wanted history to be accurate. It was, he believed, important. I completely agree.
The Declaration of Independence was signed starting July 3rd through the middle to end of August. The founding fathers, all declared outlaws by the English, scurried under cover to actually sign the document so that they would not be caught, brought to England and hung. I think an image of Jefferson under cloak, being aided by Adams to enter the boarding house they worked in is a much better picture.
America's form of democracy is not a good form of government, but at the moment, its the best we've got. That's not my quote; it's Churchill. And soon, when it fails, finally collectivism will be able to be implemented.
Still, there is something very inspiring about being American. I speak with my friends from Serbia, and they recall NATO bombings and a time they lived without heat or running water. As an American I never had to worry about that. I can freely speak out against my government, only getting myself put on a watch list, not in jail or killed. I have the luxury, despite being unable to pay my bills, of being in the top ten percent of the world's economy. I can practice whatever religion I want.
So today, even though history isn't completely accurate, I stand in respect of those words I will put down here for all to read:
( Read more... )
John Adams would be rolling over in his grave today. He was very much about history being recorded as it happened. Perhaps that was so that he wouldn't be remembered solely as the man who signed the Alien and Sedition Act, but he wanted history to be accurate. It was, he believed, important. I completely agree.
The Declaration of Independence was signed starting July 3rd through the middle to end of August. The founding fathers, all declared outlaws by the English, scurried under cover to actually sign the document so that they would not be caught, brought to England and hung. I think an image of Jefferson under cloak, being aided by Adams to enter the boarding house they worked in is a much better picture.
America's form of democracy is not a good form of government, but at the moment, its the best we've got. That's not my quote; it's Churchill. And soon, when it fails, finally collectivism will be able to be implemented.
Still, there is something very inspiring about being American. I speak with my friends from Serbia, and they recall NATO bombings and a time they lived without heat or running water. As an American I never had to worry about that. I can freely speak out against my government, only getting myself put on a watch list, not in jail or killed. I have the luxury, despite being unable to pay my bills, of being in the top ten percent of the world's economy. I can practice whatever religion I want.
So today, even though history isn't completely accurate, I stand in respect of those words I will put down here for all to read:
( Read more... )
I thought I was getting better. Maybe I'm not. I have these little rashes all over. There are these aches that aren't going away. And my left thumb is swollen. ...and I still have a bit of a cough. Not good. Not good at all.
worriedJuly 3rd, 2009
Just got back from the First Friday swing thing. It was good, but my left hip is acting up. Actually, it's been acting up all day. I was just hoping it would leave me alone until tomorrow. I got through the lesson segment though. It was a bit painful, but worth it. I got a taste of lindy hop. That was rather fun. But once the lessons were over, I was not only in pain, I was tired. Sign to go home for sure. It may be a week since I started feeling better, but there is no way I'm going to let myself relapse. Even if it does mean I miss the rest of swing night.
On a side note, I love how the hip pain is actually a network of pain that extends from my left foot all the way up my left shoulder with a brief foray to the right side. The body is a wonderfully, painfully interconnected thing.
On a side note, I love how the hip pain is actually a network of pain that extends from my left foot all the way up my left shoulder with a brief foray to the right side. The body is a wonderfully, painfully interconnected thing.
I find that the hardest part of being creative is making the time. Being naturally distractible, it takes me fifteen minutes sometimes just to put my coat down. I've heard that watching me clean can drive some people crazy because I seem to spend half my time staring in space. So how do I find my time? I'm not sure. I get to the simple stuff on an odd day, like today when I have a day off. The complicated stuff starts happening those last couple of weeks before the deadline. That's not how I want to do it.
So I need to make some time. I need to reduce my stress so I stop getting sick. And I want to start ramping up the crazy ideas: the lights, the sensors, the interaction, all of that. If it's noise in my head, I need to quiet it down. I don't know what I'm trying to do with all the stuff I've been doing lately, not exactly. But I know I want to want to make things, and I'd like to sell a few along the way. OK. I know I want to do the interactive electronics thing. I want to do it in a big way. Time just seems to get away from me. It's not just time either. Doing electronics takes some serious mental energy. I feel like there's this big tug-of-war between work and extracurricular activities. Hmmm... That's what's frustrating me. I feel like I can write software for work or do my side projects. I need to learn how to do both.
There's a big change coming along: I think I'm getting a roommate. I need the money. If I was just doing work and hanging out with friends, I could catch up with the debt without a problem. But there'd be no trips to NYC. No money for crazy projects. None of that until my debt is at least cut in half. With a roommate... I hope the new roommate works out. She seems pretty cool. She is a cancer survivor, has a chiuaua, etc. But my mess is epic. (facepalm) So much to clean out before I can take in a roommate. This should be fun.
So I need to make some time. I need to reduce my stress so I stop getting sick. And I want to start ramping up the crazy ideas: the lights, the sensors, the interaction, all of that. If it's noise in my head, I need to quiet it down. I don't know what I'm trying to do with all the stuff I've been doing lately, not exactly. But I know I want to want to make things, and I'd like to sell a few along the way. OK. I know I want to do the interactive electronics thing. I want to do it in a big way. Time just seems to get away from me. It's not just time either. Doing electronics takes some serious mental energy. I feel like there's this big tug-of-war between work and extracurricular activities. Hmmm... That's what's frustrating me. I feel like I can write software for work or do my side projects. I need to learn how to do both.
There's a big change coming along: I think I'm getting a roommate. I need the money. If I was just doing work and hanging out with friends, I could catch up with the debt without a problem. But there'd be no trips to NYC. No money for crazy projects. None of that until my debt is at least cut in half. With a roommate... I hope the new roommate works out. She seems pretty cool. She is a cancer survivor, has a chiuaua, etc. But my mess is epic. (facepalm) So much to clean out before I can take in a roommate. This should be fun.
Saw this on Bad Astronomy:
i recently got a wacom bamboo fun pen tablet- it's great by the way. it came with photoshop elements 6 but i can't install it because when i try it gets to the "initializing" stage and then shows this-
anyone know how i can cure this? or even find this setup log of which it speaks? i did download the 30 day trial version of ps-e 6 and i was wondering if this may have something to do with it...
i'm using a 13" macbook (2.2 ghz, core 2 duo, 4gig sdram, os x10.5.7...)
anyone know how i can cure this? or even find this setup log of which it speaks? i did download the 30 day trial version of ps-e 6 and i was wondering if this may have something to do with it...
i'm using a 13" macbook (2.2 ghz, core 2 duo, 4gig sdram, os x10.5.7...)
Mirrored from Phinmagic.com.
So, thanks to Evergreen’s Dan Greewald, we have a host for this year’s 24 Hour Comicbook day!!
The host is the super-groovy, Mt. Lebanon comic book store Time Tunnel Comics.
This year’s comic day is Saturday October 3,2009.
I will post more details as the become clear! Big ups to Dan and Pat Donley from Time Tunnel!
This phrase just popped into my head:
"When you cry, I'll be licking up your tears."Quite an odd turn of phrase. Must be the song I'm listening to.
It's been a long and busy week, and not a little frustrating. I've been on the early shift at work and made my 8:30am start every morning... until today, when I slept in a little. I've done some identity activism radio appearances, and lots of Lib Dem politicking. OTOH, I've also had a night round at ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
tartful_dodger's place, and spent a pleasant few hours down the pub with co-workers last night.
Tonight I will be skipping my customary Currybeer in favour of catching up on a few things; tomorrow I'll be heading to FAB Caffor a munch withgreyeyedeve, and perhaps Wagamama and the cinema afterwards. On Sunday I'll be out campaigning.
tartful_dodger's place, and spent a pleasant few hours down the pub with co-workers last night.Tonight I will be skipping my customary Currybeer in favour of catching up on a few things; tomorrow I'll be heading to FAB Caffor a munch with
greyeyedeve, and perhaps Wagamama and the cinema afterwards. On Sunday I'll be out campaigning.
rushed
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/busine
Joblessness Hits 9.5%, Deflating Recovery Hopes
By PETER S. GOODMAN
The pace of job losses quickened last month with the
American economy shedding 467,000 jobs, as unemployment
rose to its highest level in 26 years.
---------------------------
HAHAH....Where is your Messiah now???
So do the Leftards still want to claim the Stimulus worked? Where is the improvement! Where??? We spent 800 Trillion dollars for nothing....We told you the New Deal was a colossal failure in the 1930s and it will fail again in the 2000s.....yet none of you Leftards want to listen to people who understand Economics!!!!
How many times do we have to tell you? Socialism Doesn't Work.
In the words of Thomas Sowell, an actual SMART Black Man who UNDERSTANDS ECONOMICS: "When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmU
My roommate and I are planning to attend the Nik Wallenda high-wire across the Allegheny act this evening at the Regatta, and we were just curious as to whether anyone here would know where we are supposed to go to watch and/or where we should go to get the best view.
Thank you in advance!
Thank you in advance!
confusedI am now the proud owner of a Trek 7.3 bike. It's been a bit of a fortunate coincidence really...
( long )
( long )
relievedThe game show is called 'Penitents Compete'. A Muslim imam, a Greek Orthodox priest, a rabbi, and a Buddhist monk try to convert 10 atheists on each show.
http://www.newser.com/story/63439/turki
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ju
The inclusion of Buddhism doesn't make sense though, because Buddhism is not a theism-based religion like the 3 Abrahamic religions are. If they wanted to use a non-Abrahamic monotheist, they could have used a representative from one of the 3 major monotheist Hindu sects (Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism), or from Zoroastrianism.
http://www.newser.com/story/63439/turki
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ju
The inclusion of Buddhism doesn't make sense though, because Buddhism is not a theism-based religion like the 3 Abrahamic religions are. If they wanted to use a non-Abrahamic monotheist, they could have used a representative from one of the 3 major monotheist Hindu sects (Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism), or from Zoroastrianism.
The track field in Avalon was totally washed out in the big storms a week or so ago. Ergo, the fireworks have been put off until possibly Labor Day. Naturally this happens the year the Fourth of July falls on a weekend - one of the rare years that this night-shifter can go to fireworks and not have to run home and get ready for work.
So anywhere in the North Boroughs a good spot to watch some fireworks? I'd like a nice casual small-municipality display. When I looks for places to see the fireworks in Pittsburgh online, it's mostly suggestions on how to see the ones downtown.
So anywhere in the North Boroughs a good spot to watch some fireworks? I'd like a nice casual small-municipality display. When I looks for places to see the fireworks in Pittsburgh online, it's mostly suggestions on how to see the ones downtown.
July 2nd, 2009
I just switched from a Sony camera to a Kodak camera, and for some reason, my Kodak camera wont show up as a drive anywhere (finder/sidebar/disk utility) However, iPhoto is smart enough to acknowledge it and let me import photos without a problem.
I have a couple of movies on it that I want to upload, or at least save to my hard drive, but I seem to be unable to find it anywhere to copy the photos over.
(I've checked Finder preferences already, and don't have any problems with any other things I attach to my computer)
Help?
Macbook Intel Core 2 Duo, running 10.5.7
I have a couple of movies on it that I want to upload, or at least save to my hard drive, but I seem to be unable to find it anywhere to copy the photos over.
(I've checked Finder preferences already, and don't have any problems with any other things I attach to my computer)
Help?
Macbook Intel Core 2 Duo, running 10.5.7
Where would be the best place to pawn or sell freshwater pearls in PGH?
Any ideas?
Any ideas?
hi, I was just wondering if anyone knew if Mr.Smalls has a policy about cameras? I was wondering if I could bring my SLR tonight and I've called and emailed them and haven't heard back from them yet. Any ideas?
I really wondered whether to post this here. This is something I wrote yesterday in my own personal LJ. I know that Pat Condell is very popular amongst many atheists on the internet and I'm fairly sure he has a few fans here. However, having thought it over for a bit it seems to me that fans who are willing to defend Pat's recent comments have some explaining to do, so where better to do it than in the comments here?
For those who don't recognise the name, Pat Condell is the "comedian" often found advertised on Richard Dawkins' website. I've actually known people to be surprised to hear that he isn't a celebrity here in Britain. His only claim to fame is his youtube videos which he's now actually begun releasing on DVD. He's gained a following amongst atheists who fancy a laugh at the expense of uptight religious fanatics. Unfortunately he's not anything like in the same league as John Safran or as subtle (yes, I'm serious). It was part of his initial appeal that he pulls no punches in his rants, however more recently his rants have sounded more and more like the typical right-wing closet-racist mentality in the UK.
The latest video from Pat Condell makes use of typical Daily Mail prejudice. The topic? Not only that we should ban the burkha, but that women are doing an injustice to women's rights by failing to decry a woman's right to wear it. Pat Condell takes up the mantle of liberator of women both now and in the ever-precious future through his insistence that we demand that it be illegal to wear it.
Perhaps the oddest thing about Pat's video is his claim that the problem is women deciding to disguise themselves. If we were sure that women only ever wore the burkha through their own free will rather than being pressured into doing so by oppressive patriarchy then I don't quite see how it would be a problem (and I certainly cannot see how it would be the women's fault). As for the idea that is mentioned later that the burkha should not be allowed to be worn in banks, I've never heard anything so ridiculous. As Pat is keen to remind us, wearing the burkha is like wearing "a mobile tent". Now imagine a bank robber trying to make a getaway carrying their bag of swag while wearing it. They'd be lucky not to fall straight onto their (covered) face.
Worrying too is Pat's use of emphasis for effect. It often seems quite hostile, but more importantly it can give a very dodgy (and supposedly unintentional) meaning to his words:
Well this week there’s been quite a lot of talk about the burkha or the nikab or whatever you want to call it. I’m talking about the neurotic need that some women have to walk around everywhere in disguise.
"Some women" eh? So much for the feminist champion Pat claims to be later on in the video. If the whole point of this rant is to victimise some women suffering from neuroses, it doesn't fit with the supposedly noble cause Pat claims to be calling for by the end.
Apparently, according to Pat, a more healthy society where everyone is honest would not require this ban because everybody's reaction to unfamiliar styles of dress would be ridicule and condescension. Sadly, what he is describing is not far from the actual situation and it's only thanks to those of us with simple human decency that it isn't even more of an issue for Muslims in Britain.
Honest and healthy? More like bigoted and unpleasant.
Pat's first major argument appears to be that there is nothing in the Qu'ran which demands that women dress in this fashion, covering their face. That might be worth mentioning, certainly, but religions aren't simply based around scripture. In fact I'm pretty certain that EVERY religious tradition bases itself around more than scripture. Within the Christian tradition we would have to do away with rosaries, monasteries, bishops, crosses worn round the neck, holy water, and even arguably the doctrine of the trinity if Christians are only allowed to follow teachings found within their holy book. It takes a certain type of protestant Christianity to insist that scripture is the only thing which dictates religious tradition and I'm pretty sure their hypocritical in the process. Within Islam it is quite a conservative belief that religious tradition should be based not only on the teachings of the Qu'ran, but also on the actions and sayings of the prophet found in the hadiths and on top of that rules which are derived from these.
What would have been more helpful would have been an argument that the Qu'ran actively contradicts this passage (and I have certainly known Muslims claim that women are not supposed to have their faces covered according to Islamic teaching). However, this would involve putting in a good word for moderate Muslims which Pat wants to decry as 'enablers' (as we'll see in a moment).
In reply to the claim that the burkha is done to demonstrate modesty (rather like the kachhas in Sikhism), Pat's response, fairly reasonably, is that wearing "a mobile tent" is going way beyond modesty. Unfortunately that's where the reasonableness ends. The next stage of Pat's rant is to claim that all women who wear the burkha are ungrateful immigrants who hate British culture and should go back home.
Modest people don’t draw attention to themselves by dressing up in a mobile tent just to rub it in the face of a culture they despise, but for some reason insist on living in.
Now let's accept for the moment (to be as charitable as possible) that women who wear the burkha are disturbed by the commercialised and material world and wear this style of dress to withdraw. How is that different from the attitude of nuns? But then again, maybe Pat is an equal-opportunity bigot. Perhaps he would tell nuns to go to the Vatican if they aren't entirely happy with modern culture.
What the heck? I can't be the only person wondering how Pat's thought processes are working at this stage. He fully admits that there are Muslims for whom his argument is unreasonable and that there are enough of them to make them worth addressing. Yet for some reason his complete recognition that what he is posing is an unfair stereotype doesn't stop him from carrying on with it unashamedly.
Islam is responsible for the terrorist threat in the same way that Christianity is responsible for the death of Dr. Tiller. Yes, there's a link. No one is doubting that. But it's not a simple 1:1 relationship. Religions have a huge degree of internal diversity and even overlap with one another. Terms like "Christianity" and "Islam" bracket together similar kinds of religious devotion, however their expression will depend greatly on the culture and location in which you find them. Daniel Maguire is a Roman Catholic Christian and he strongly believes in his faith and the tradition of his Church. Nevertheless, he isn't going to condemn a man for performing abortions. Similarly just because someone follows the religion of Islam doesn't mean they're in favour of the burkah either. People's views about religion will differ. Nevertheless, plenty of people actually are talking about the burkha being a security threat. It's mentioned all over the place. What we could do with is a little more respect for the women who are actually wearing the damn thing and Pat does not feel inclined to contribute to this since it would conflict with the "healthy and honest" world he wants us to live in.
Pat has the audacity to claim that women who wear the burkha are condoning the oppression it is often used to achieve. That they are enablers. But what is Pat enabling? It wasn't so long ago that there was a big hoo hah over politician Jack Straw insisting that women uncover their faces when they speak to him. It was rightly pointed out in Straw's defence that he was not insisting that women do away with the burkha or nikab, but rather that within certain scenarios it might be necessary to remove it for pragmatic reasons. He certainly wasn't insisting that we forcibly unveil Muslim women, but unfortunately that was the sentiment that developed. This, it seems to me, is where the other side of the coin really comes into play. If you ban the burkha isn't this just another example of women having their rights limited by a patriarchal over-zealous authority? In the end shouldn't this be about choice. In Iran they have seen both sides of this coin, going from being forcibly unveiled to forcibly veiled and the debate today in Iran is much over personal freedom than this nonsensical issue in France of whether the burkha should be banned or not. (And let's not forget that in France there is a lot of racial tension in regards to those with Algerian roots which might influence the debate there.)
Pat also asks why feminists aren't talking about this. Clearly he hasn't bothered to look. Feminists are talking about this all over the place. Some will agree, some will disagree and most will recognise that the debate is far more complicated than he is making it out to be. In any case, Pat's criticism isn't really over silence but inaction. If we don't agree with Pat and actively campaign for the burkha to be banned we are morally culpable. It's at this point where my conspiracy theory alert starts ringing:
ZOMG THE MUSLIMS ARE TAKING OVER!
Seriously, allowing women the right to wear the burkha is not wearing down women's rights. We are still going to strongly criticise people being forced to wear clothing against their will and the chances of the burkha causing bad effects for anyone outside the religion of Islam is around about nil. There is an issue of the burkha being forced on Muslim women against their will and there is an issue of the burkha as a negative result of indoctrination. Nevertheless, to insist that this will have consequences for the daughters of 'western women' is pure shock tactics. This whole idea that Islamic ideas are going to take over the country and undermine our liberties is nonsense. The labour government is in a much better position to do that than any Muslim....
For those who don't recognise the name, Pat Condell is the "comedian" often found advertised on Richard Dawkins' website. I've actually known people to be surprised to hear that he isn't a celebrity here in Britain. His only claim to fame is his youtube videos which he's now actually begun releasing on DVD. He's gained a following amongst atheists who fancy a laugh at the expense of uptight religious fanatics. Unfortunately he's not anything like in the same league as John Safran or as subtle (yes, I'm serious). It was part of his initial appeal that he pulls no punches in his rants, however more recently his rants have sounded more and more like the typical right-wing closet-racist mentality in the UK.
The latest video from Pat Condell makes use of typical Daily Mail prejudice. The topic? Not only that we should ban the burkha, but that women are doing an injustice to women's rights by failing to decry a woman's right to wear it. Pat Condell takes up the mantle of liberator of women both now and in the ever-precious future through his insistence that we demand that it be illegal to wear it.
Perhaps the oddest thing about Pat's video is his claim that the problem is women deciding to disguise themselves. If we were sure that women only ever wore the burkha through their own free will rather than being pressured into doing so by oppressive patriarchy then I don't quite see how it would be a problem (and I certainly cannot see how it would be the women's fault). As for the idea that is mentioned later that the burkha should not be allowed to be worn in banks, I've never heard anything so ridiculous. As Pat is keen to remind us, wearing the burkha is like wearing "a mobile tent". Now imagine a bank robber trying to make a getaway carrying their bag of swag while wearing it. They'd be lucky not to fall straight onto their (covered) face.
Worrying too is Pat's use of emphasis for effect. It often seems quite hostile, but more importantly it can give a very dodgy (and supposedly unintentional) meaning to his words:
Well this week there’s been quite a lot of talk about the burkha or the nikab or whatever you want to call it. I’m talking about the neurotic need that some women have to walk around everywhere in disguise.
"Some women" eh? So much for the feminist champion Pat claims to be later on in the video. If the whole point of this rant is to victimise some women suffering from neuroses, it doesn't fit with the supposedly noble cause Pat claims to be calling for by the end.
Apparently, according to Pat, a more healthy society where everyone is honest would not require this ban because everybody's reaction to unfamiliar styles of dress would be ridicule and condescension. Sadly, what he is describing is not far from the actual situation and it's only thanks to those of us with simple human decency that it isn't even more of an issue for Muslims in Britain.
If we were a more honest society, and therefore a more healthy society, there’d be no need to ban this ridiculous outfit because it would already have been ridiculed out of existence.
Honest and healthy? More like bigoted and unpleasant.
Pat's first major argument appears to be that there is nothing in the Qu'ran which demands that women dress in this fashion, covering their face. That might be worth mentioning, certainly, but religions aren't simply based around scripture. In fact I'm pretty certain that EVERY religious tradition bases itself around more than scripture. Within the Christian tradition we would have to do away with rosaries, monasteries, bishops, crosses worn round the neck, holy water, and even arguably the doctrine of the trinity if Christians are only allowed to follow teachings found within their holy book. It takes a certain type of protestant Christianity to insist that scripture is the only thing which dictates religious tradition and I'm pretty sure their hypocritical in the process. Within Islam it is quite a conservative belief that religious tradition should be based not only on the teachings of the Qu'ran, but also on the actions and sayings of the prophet found in the hadiths and on top of that rules which are derived from these.
What would have been more helpful would have been an argument that the Qu'ran actively contradicts this passage (and I have certainly known Muslims claim that women are not supposed to have their faces covered according to Islamic teaching). However, this would involve putting in a good word for moderate Muslims which Pat wants to decry as 'enablers' (as we'll see in a moment).
In reply to the claim that the burkha is done to demonstrate modesty (rather like the kachhas in Sikhism), Pat's response, fairly reasonably, is that wearing "a mobile tent" is going way beyond modesty. Unfortunately that's where the reasonableness ends. The next stage of Pat's rant is to claim that all women who wear the burkha are ungrateful immigrants who hate British culture and should go back home.
Modest people don’t draw attention to themselves by dressing up in a mobile tent just to rub it in the face of a culture they despise, but for some reason insist on living in.
Now let's accept for the moment (to be as charitable as possible) that women who wear the burkha are disturbed by the commercialised and material world and wear this style of dress to withdraw. How is that different from the attitude of nuns? But then again, maybe Pat is an equal-opportunity bigot. Perhaps he would tell nuns to go to the Vatican if they aren't entirely happy with modern culture.
Quite apart from the obvious security threat posed by the burkha which we don’t like to talk about out of respect for their religion even though their religion is our biggest security threat. Sorry to all you peaceful Muslims but we all know that is the unfortunate truth, at least right now.
Islam is responsible for the terrorist threat in the same way that Christianity is responsible for the death of Dr. Tiller. Yes, there's a link. No one is doubting that. But it's not a simple 1:1 relationship. Religions have a huge degree of internal diversity and even overlap with one another. Terms like "Christianity" and "Islam" bracket together similar kinds of religious devotion, however their expression will depend greatly on the culture and location in which you find them. Daniel Maguire is a Roman Catholic Christian and he strongly believes in his faith and the tradition of his Church. Nevertheless, he isn't going to condemn a man for performing abortions. Similarly just because someone follows the religion of Islam doesn't mean they're in favour of the burkah either. People's views about religion will differ. Nevertheless, plenty of people actually are talking about the burkha being a security threat. It's mentioned all over the place. What we could do with is a little more respect for the women who are actually wearing the damn thing and Pat does not feel inclined to contribute to this since it would conflict with the "healthy and honest" world he wants us to live in.
Pat has the audacity to claim that women who wear the burkha are condoning the oppression it is often used to achieve. That they are enablers. But what is Pat enabling? It wasn't so long ago that there was a big hoo hah over politician Jack Straw insisting that women uncover their faces when they speak to him. It was rightly pointed out in Straw's defence that he was not insisting that women do away with the burkha or nikab, but rather that within certain scenarios it might be necessary to remove it for pragmatic reasons. He certainly wasn't insisting that we forcibly unveil Muslim women, but unfortunately that was the sentiment that developed. This, it seems to me, is where the other side of the coin really comes into play. If you ban the burkha isn't this just another example of women having their rights limited by a patriarchal over-zealous authority? In the end shouldn't this be about choice. In Iran they have seen both sides of this coin, going from being forcibly unveiled to forcibly veiled and the debate today in Iran is much over personal freedom than this nonsensical issue in France of whether the burkha should be banned or not. (And let's not forget that in France there is a lot of racial tension in regards to those with Algerian roots which might influence the debate there.)
Pat also asks why feminists aren't talking about this. Clearly he hasn't bothered to look. Feminists are talking about this all over the place. Some will agree, some will disagree and most will recognise that the debate is far more complicated than he is making it out to be. In any case, Pat's criticism isn't really over silence but inaction. If we don't agree with Pat and actively campaign for the burkha to be banned we are morally culpable. It's at this point where my conspiracy theory alert starts ringing:
Any western woman who makes allowances for, or who accommodates the misogyny of Islam in her life is a fool to herself and a traitor to her daughters who will have to live with the consequences in a society where they feel less value, less safe and have fewer rights than they do now.
ZOMG THE MUSLIMS ARE TAKING OVER!
Seriously, allowing women the right to wear the burkha is not wearing down women's rights. We are still going to strongly criticise people being forced to wear clothing against their will and the chances of the burkha causing bad effects for anyone outside the religion of Islam is around about nil. There is an issue of the burkha being forced on Muslim women against their will and there is an issue of the burkha as a negative result of indoctrination. Nevertheless, to insist that this will have consequences for the daughters of 'western women' is pure shock tactics. This whole idea that Islamic ideas are going to take over the country and undermine our liberties is nonsense. The labour government is in a much better position to do that than any Muslim....
bitchyThe conference is meeting in Pittsburgh right now.
I would like to attend, but since I am not a member yet, I need a member to help get me in-- as I understand it, non-members can attend at a $30/day rate, if they arrive as the "Guest" of a member.
Please let me know ASAP if you are willing to let me go as your guest. I will, of course, pay my own way, I just need a member to vouch for me at the sign-in table. Let me know! Thanks!
I would like to attend, but since I am not a member yet, I need a member to help get me in-- as I understand it, non-members can attend at a $30/day rate, if they arrive as the "Guest" of a member.
Please let me know ASAP if you are willing to let me go as your guest. I will, of course, pay my own way, I just need a member to vouch for me at the sign-in table. Let me know! Thanks!