jmoiron.net

For a long time now, I've lived with insecurity in a way which in some ways reflects my ideals for political and social structure (or anarchy). Its not that I don't want to be secure, or I can't be secure, its that for the most part, besides your occasional Mac user from japan looking for a Narsillion demo, only friends check my site. For this reason, the comment's system was launched with the warning and the notification that it does not in any way alter content of your posts. For this reason, the root password to my machine is fairly public knowledge.

This might be stupid, or whatever, but the bottom line is this wasn't a problem for me or for any of the normal people who visited here. I don't require login, and this apparently wasn't a problem, either. (and remains to not be a problem). But as always, a childish script kiddie moron has to ruin it for everyone, and if you've had your eyes open at all in the past few months, you know who champion is. So, instead of my deutche visitors looking for a mplayer rpm's screwing with me, it was of course my best friend and roommate attacking the good mr. omlette.

This is not the first offense by far. Even today, happythursday, the curator one and the same with arsjerm, contains a script that uses a vulnerability with IE 6.0 on windows XP (the most popular combination for visitors to this site, I might add) that executes malicious code and shuts down your computer. I mean, who could resist, right? Instead of trying this out on the ignorant masses, Jerm first turned it on his friends, ruining data(?) and feeling generally bad for it. Next up, he stole the aim passwords of myself and Mr. Ayala and decided to spin a night of mischief and deception.

That would be fine if that was all. He also messed with wei's aim bot just because he could, and just yesterday posted javascript when I specifically asked people not to. What does this mean?

It means that every day he lets me borrow his laptop and I do not do evil things to it, I am making a mistake. It means that when I decided not to save his mysql password to a file, I'm making a mistake. It means that when I notified him that I had access to his administration files and then did nothing to mess with his site for weeks on end, it was a very large mistake. Why are these mistakes? Because he is not a friend worthy of trust, and in order to make him realize why this is a bad thing, I have to be the same way back.

So who is worthy of trust? Well, by my estimates, just about everyone. But if I tell you you can rummage around the garden as you please, but don't touch my fucking apple tree, I better not see your ass with applesauce. It doesn't matter if its a minor offense, it betrays the trust that was the foundation of the relationship.

Saturday should be interesting. Apparently, we will be allowed to march and there is a large chance that I will not be arrested for using my right to free speech. Hopefully, some good speakers will be there to tell me things I already know.

Tonight, Ed Helms did an interesting and poignant (although perhaps it was not the point) segment called 'ad nauseum' about the new anti drug ads circulating tv. Of special note were the ads that went (something like) "This is Dan. This is the joint Dan bought. This is the cartel that smuggled the pot to the dealer that sold Dan's joint to Dan. And this is the family that was lined up and killed by Dan's cartel for getting too close". That seems like a reasonable facsimile.

That is an attempt by the religious right (although I'm sure they are not alone by a long shot in their beliefs) to entrench the thought that drugs are bad in an extremely pro-drug environment. For instance; a speaker says "I used to smoke pot", and everyone claps and cheers. Nobody boos. If someone said "I used to molest children", I doubt he would receive the same acclaim. The government has a lot of work cut out for them convincing people that drugs are bad when the drug life, the drug culture is so prevalent and strong in America.

But why do they think that telling Dan that 8 steps up the drug chain his minuscule amount of money went towards killing a family? The money Dan spent on his joint probably couldn't pay for all of the bullets used in any execution style murdering. And even if you use the argument that all drug money counts like all votes count in an election, could you not argue then that every time we pay taxes we are killing innocent Afghan civilians and brutalizing peoples all over the world? Every time we pay a cent to the IRS we are enabling our 20% share of the WTO's power to continue its trend of trade with policy, pushing impoverished nations further and further into debt, destroy or strip their natural resources and leave its people starving and infrastructure even weaker? Where are these commercials? They speak the same ideas, and more evidence backs up their truths.

After ad nauseum, the daily show cut to a commercial break, and the first commercial was one for Kay diamonds. Another commercial featuring a guy who buys his wife or girlfriend jewelry and she is breathless at this show of love. I remarked "here honey, only one African family of 4 had to die to get this earring to you", and then Phil intelligently extended it to .. "This is Dan. This is the diamond Dan bought.." Im seriously thinking about putting together at least some sort of story board for this. For those of you who are interested in more information about the strife that comes with diamond mining operations in Africa, hop over to guerilla news network and take a look at their documentary Diamond Life.

The only excuse for actions such as these are that the majority of the people in this country actually think that they are doing the right things for their families. They don't want their kids to do drugs, but its okay if they relax every once in a while with good old jack, kick off their shoes and beat the old wife a bit. Meanwhile, this nation's adults and leaders continually oppress and kill people all over the world, spreading a virus of foreign policy that is driven by economic interest alone, not democracy.

Not spread by democracy? You're damned fucking right its not. The US trained Osama Bin Laden to fight the soviets and then to topple a democratic government in Afghanistan. The result was the Taliban, a strict religious government that persecuted and executed its impoverished people in soccer fields built (with apparently very little funding) by the international community. Exactly 28 years before the tragedy at the pentagon and world trade center plaza, the united states executes Salvador Allende in Chile and installs a dictatorship which results in thousands of people getting killed. Roughly 11 years before that, the United States trains Cuban refugees to attack mainland Cuba after Castro decides to nationalize several extremely economically controlling and asphyxiating businesses. This results in an embargo (Economic!) on Cuba lasting to this day. The United States funds and supports Saddam Hussein throughout his wars with Iran and the slaughters of his own people, but in 1991 when he invades Kuwait, through a misunderstanding of a US request, the question of oil and our attentions hits the US and the international community, and the American mass media propaganda machine starts to paint Saddam with brushes they borrow from World War II. In the decade previous to that, the United States and CIA install Manuel Noriega as the leader of Panama, and then overthrow him as he begins to disobey. The United States crushes an overwhelmingly popular socialist movement throughout Latin and South America during the 1960's. The United States ignores the economic condition of Brazil and Zimbabwe, the 28% of the people of South Africa afflicted by a full scale nightmare AIDS epidemic, and the insane ruler of North Korea who holds the world hostage with nuclear missiles and even boldly threatens their use for what? For a war with Iraq, a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world. Their plans upon conquest? To set up a United States Military general as dictator.

The list goes on and on. Democratic leaders in Guatemala, democratic prime ministers in Iran, all overthrown by the US or by groups backed by the US and replaced with US friendly dictators. Those who are not friendly with the US fall victim to the US media's propaganda machine and are made into demons that terrorize their people and pose a threat to the US and to the rest of the world. Once a country has fallen to our military might, they are no longer important to the media. Does anyone know who or what type of government is set up in Afghanistan? No, because it doesn't matter anymore. People in Afghanistan still fall victim to Taliban attacks, they are still poor, and they still do not enjoy a nonsecular democratic regime. In fact, one of the few men who could unite the Afghan's and rule in a reign of peace was almost assassinated by the United States.

Is the war on Iraq about oil and economic policy? Hells yes. Is the war on drugs about money? An even bigger hells yes. To even deny that a US sponsored "illegal drug" selling program would be profitable is laughable. As of 1993, laundered profits , aka drug money, exceeded United States deficit payments by almost $40,000,000,000. As of the same year, 10 years ago keep in mind (the war on drugs has INCREASED since then), the cost of the drug war was $400,000,000,000. Thats -$440,000,000,000 for the government right there.

But drugs are dangerous, right? If you get crazy on drugs, you can kill people without knowing it. Of course, illegal drugs account for less than 8% of motives for homicides in the United states, right behind robbery and trailing by 30% "arguments". But these drug users are dangerous. Mandatory minimum sentences for drug use has increased the amount of federal prisoners in prison for 1 or more years by over 400% in the past 20 years. Not only this, but when compared to the risk factors for other things, Marijuana in particular is almost indiscernible from 0 on the charts, whereas automobiles, alcohol, tobacco and obesity weigh in numbers that would make Bundy jealous.

So why not make it legal? According to studies you are 40% less likely to get addicted from habitual use of marijuana than from alcohol, 10% less likely than from Tobacco, and are less likely to die from or kill anyone because of marijuana. Hemp as a plant has an impressive array of uses, and can produce more fiber per acre than cotton. All this while damaging the soil less and being able to grow in a wider array of climates and soil conditions.

I'm really not sure, when weighing the evidence and the obvious economic gain from legalizing at least marijuana, the federal government doesn't want to do it. It's painfully obvious that the War on Drugs only ends up costing the American tax payer money in multiple ways, and only exports an insane amount of money to nations where the drug is grown. Its obvious that the culture of Americans is such that habitual marijuana use is not frowned upon, but cheered. So why?

The answer is pretty simple. Diamonds is big business. Alcohol is big business. Tobacco is big business. Drugs are big business; but its not American big business. Its too late in the game to get involved, impose restrictions and tax joints. There is already a complex system of smuggling and distribution that will probably always be able to provide drugs at a lower cost than the government or any business could. Its like the warez scene; it can't be outdone by legitimate practices because of its speed and its efficiency.

So in part we fight the war on drugs and the war on Iraq to protect our kids and our pockets. We do what we think is right because we are told its right, not because we know its right. Less than 3% of illegal drug related deaths are to those under the age of 20. Its okay not to know that though. The spine you stick through your sweethearts ear is attached to diamonds that have been presoaked in the blood of African women and children. Oh well. 500,000 Iraqi children died because of the gulf war, and we have done nothing good for Afghanistan after our magical regime change. This whirlwind of chaotic revenge has been tightly focused and honed after the bloodhounds on capital hill caught the scent of oil and knew that they could use 9-11 as an excuse. Meanwhile, before this 6 month barrage of anti-Iraq propaganda, less than 30% of the nations people believe that Saddam Hussein is a bigger threat than Osama Bin Laden.

So that's how it'l go down. On Saturday I'll march somewhere to protest and inevitable war. Today, my little brother will go to school and be educated in the DARE program by a cop who is fresh off of his AA meeting last night. Elsewhere in America, people will be fed the same lies I've attempted to dismantle tonight and believe it because they have nothing else to believe. And maybe, just maybe, I'll have a topic for that article I am going to write for the stute. Or maybe I already have it.

edit I could not believe my eyes, but this headline appears to be true. Happy fucking valentines day.

Arafat agrees to share power: appoint prime minister.

Also, apparently, the Canadians do not trust the US. Nor do I.