I remember one thing about Cho's message. He was 23 years old, but in his video he sounded like a self-pitying adolescent. In A Criminal History of Mankind, Colin Wilson wrote that criminal behavior is essentially childishness: "A criminal is an adult who continues to behave like a child." When I was in middle school and high school, I was relentlessly teased, and I occasionally had thoughts about blowing my classmates' brains out, but I never did. And by the time I hit college, even though I still sometimes felt like I didn't fit in, I had grown out of my homicidal fantasies. The point is, when was Cho planning on growing up? I guess never.
While news wags can go on and on about gun control, supposed "warning signs" and the problems of bullying, this was not a common incident. Kids are bullied all over the country, and it is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with as appropriate, and very few of them end up acting out on a level even close to Cho's massacre. Criminal behavior is a lot like the English language; for every rule, there are several exceptions, and the structure is all but incomprehensible to an outsider without a lot of study and effort.
Onto those who are complaining about oversaturation in the media, and that Cho got exactly what he wanted by being made national news. The press' fascination and fixation with the lowest of society and human behavior has existed as long as the press. Some historians believe that the reason Jack the Ripper has become as notorious as he did is because his crimes coincided with the rise of mass literacy, giving people of all classes the chance to read the gory story. Humans will always have a twisted fascination with the monsters among us: the dual lure and fear of the unknown. Back when public hangings were standard practice, the noose was often cut into pieces after the criminal was dead and sold off to the eager crowd. This is a reality of human behavior, and it's not going to go away. Even if NBC News had chosen not to air Cho's video, with the Internet and resourceful curious people, it probably would have made it out to the public anyway. Technology may change, but the race, in this respect, won't.
On a completely different topic, Boris Yeltsin, former Russian president, supporter of American-style capitalism and world-famous drunk, has died. Finally, a Russian political death that Putin and his league of evil can't take credit for.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Virginia Tech gunman manifesto
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/
Nothing in Cho's "message" to NBC News dissuades me from my initial impression that he was the stereotype of the mass murderer. It's all there: a rough early childhood (he grew up poor with his family in South Korea until they moved to Northern Virginia in search of a better life), a hatred toward the world for unspecified "wrongs" they committed against him, a delusion of grandeur (he compares himself to Jesus Christ) and the images of him putting a gun to his head. This was a deeply disturbed young man bent on destroying himself and whoever was in his path. It's not clear yet whether or not he had specific targets in his rampage. But since he seemed to see all people around him as cruel to him, it's likely that he just wanted to take as many people as he could down with him.
As for whether he could have been stopped, with warning signs such as his blood-drenched writings and threatening e-mails to female classmates, and concerns from acquaintances that he was suicidal, I doubt it. The school could have taken more drastic disciplinary action, even kicked him out of the school, but I think all that would have done was fuel his rage further. There are too many stories of men fired from jobs who come back with guns. Cho had a plan, which he worked on well in advance of April 16, and that plan was a dramatic suicide including the deaths of others. If it hadn't been Virginia Tech, he would have lashed out somewhere else, or in another way. Unless he was in prison, I don't think he could have been stopped. And what is it about hindsight being 20/20? Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the Columbine killers (who Cho mentions as "martyrs" in his message), supposedly left all kinds of warning signs that were revealed after the fact. Cho was clearly disturbed, but no one could have predicted that he would have lashed out quite like this.
Nothing in Cho's "message" to NBC News dissuades me from my initial impression that he was the stereotype of the mass murderer. It's all there: a rough early childhood (he grew up poor with his family in South Korea until they moved to Northern Virginia in search of a better life), a hatred toward the world for unspecified "wrongs" they committed against him, a delusion of grandeur (he compares himself to Jesus Christ) and the images of him putting a gun to his head. This was a deeply disturbed young man bent on destroying himself and whoever was in his path. It's not clear yet whether or not he had specific targets in his rampage. But since he seemed to see all people around him as cruel to him, it's likely that he just wanted to take as many people as he could down with him.
As for whether he could have been stopped, with warning signs such as his blood-drenched writings and threatening e-mails to female classmates, and concerns from acquaintances that he was suicidal, I doubt it. The school could have taken more drastic disciplinary action, even kicked him out of the school, but I think all that would have done was fuel his rage further. There are too many stories of men fired from jobs who come back with guns. Cho had a plan, which he worked on well in advance of April 16, and that plan was a dramatic suicide including the deaths of others. If it hadn't been Virginia Tech, he would have lashed out somewhere else, or in another way. Unless he was in prison, I don't think he could have been stopped. And what is it about hindsight being 20/20? Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the Columbine killers (who Cho mentions as "martyrs" in his message), supposedly left all kinds of warning signs that were revealed after the fact. Cho was clearly disturbed, but no one could have predicted that he would have lashed out quite like this.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Virginia Tech shooter identified
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070417/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting
Anyone who knows me or regularly reads my blog probably knew that I was going to write about this story. Call me insensitive, but I'm not particularly interested in the grief of the students, the poor security reaction after the first leg of the rampage or, least of all, "President" Bush's reaction, who I'm sure is thankful for an opportunity to show how compassionate he is while continuing to send troops to die in an unnecessary and futile war effort. What I'm interested in is the shooter, his mindset and what set him off. Even now that he has been identified as a student from South Korea, because he was a loner and died during his rampage, we still don't know much about him.
Witnesses also said the shooter looked "determined" and "calm." This was a man who had made up his mind to take his own life and those of others. He had a plan to go out in a hail of gunfire and corpses. Without knowing anything about him, I can't say what set him off (although there are reports that it was an argument with a girlfriend), but the shooting itself followed the classic template set by Charles Whitman (the Texas bell tower shooter, whose spree immediately came to my mind after hearing about Virginia Tech), from the well-prepared stock of ammunition (Whitman, an Eagle Scout, was always prepared) to the shooter turning the gun on himself or shot by law enforcement. And the shooter was an angry loner. As is often the case in this type of crime, the shooter feels the world has wronged him in some way and, with his unstable mind shaken by a troublesome event, like a fight with a girlfriend, it triggers (probably the wrong choice of words here) the rage he feels and sets him off to correct the burdens he feels the world has inflicted on him. And yes, I will be following this story, waiting for more details about the killer to figure out what his trigger could have been.
If I was the paranoid type, I'd think that the press has been saturated with this story to distract from the continuing death toll in the President's dead-end war in Iraq. Same goes with the Don Imus controversy. Again, I run the risk of being called insensitive, and being unqualified to comment because I'm not black, but I fail to see what the big deal is. Don Imus, who is in a field where the participants are practically required to out-outrage each other, probably made the comment solely because it was politically incorrect, and wanted attention. I can't say that for sure, knowing next to nothing about Imus or his radio show. He may have thought that by making a slightly offensive comment, then issuing a simple apology, he could use the controversy to gain a wider audience. It's worked before. But with professional race-baiters Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton hot on his trail, Imus was fired, unjustly in my opinion. Rappers frequently say things that are far more offensive than Imus' "nappy-headed hos" comment. Don Imus probably shouldn't have said what he said, but he never deserved to get fired. Jesse Jackson, as predicted, was on the scene, still showing indignation at a perceived offense that is hypocritical for someone who once called New York City "Hymietown." And Al Sharpton, who takes him seriously at this point? He and other prominent black activists once rallied alongside alleged rape victim Tawana Brawley, who it turned out was making up the whole story. Even from the beginning, there were serious doubts about Brawley's account of her "rape," as former FBI profiler Roy Hazelwood says in his book The Evil That Men Do. But that didn't stop Sharpton and his cohorts from trumping up the story in the press as a testament to the racism in America. Yes, racism still exists in this country, but with the careers and lives of two innocent men all but destroyed by Brawley and her "advisers," this false accusation helped no one.
Moving from the public sphere to my personal life, I had a great weekend. Bound was fun, but could have been better. The awesome bands, like Inertia and Armageddon Dildos, deserved a far bigger crowd than what was there that night. Where is everyone? Again, if I was the paranoid type, I'd think that there was a widespread conspiracy in DC against the goth/fetish community keeping potential patrons from Bound and other clubs in the area. How else to account for the sparse attendance at what should have been one of the biggest Bound events of the year? On a happier note, Todd's birthday bash at Entre Nous on Saturday was a great time for all, especially the guest of honor. Happy Birthday Todd, from all of us in the DC pary underground.
Anyone who knows me or regularly reads my blog probably knew that I was going to write about this story. Call me insensitive, but I'm not particularly interested in the grief of the students, the poor security reaction after the first leg of the rampage or, least of all, "President" Bush's reaction, who I'm sure is thankful for an opportunity to show how compassionate he is while continuing to send troops to die in an unnecessary and futile war effort. What I'm interested in is the shooter, his mindset and what set him off. Even now that he has been identified as a student from South Korea, because he was a loner and died during his rampage, we still don't know much about him.
Witnesses also said the shooter looked "determined" and "calm." This was a man who had made up his mind to take his own life and those of others. He had a plan to go out in a hail of gunfire and corpses. Without knowing anything about him, I can't say what set him off (although there are reports that it was an argument with a girlfriend), but the shooting itself followed the classic template set by Charles Whitman (the Texas bell tower shooter, whose spree immediately came to my mind after hearing about Virginia Tech), from the well-prepared stock of ammunition (Whitman, an Eagle Scout, was always prepared) to the shooter turning the gun on himself or shot by law enforcement. And the shooter was an angry loner. As is often the case in this type of crime, the shooter feels the world has wronged him in some way and, with his unstable mind shaken by a troublesome event, like a fight with a girlfriend, it triggers (probably the wrong choice of words here) the rage he feels and sets him off to correct the burdens he feels the world has inflicted on him. And yes, I will be following this story, waiting for more details about the killer to figure out what his trigger could have been.
If I was the paranoid type, I'd think that the press has been saturated with this story to distract from the continuing death toll in the President's dead-end war in Iraq. Same goes with the Don Imus controversy. Again, I run the risk of being called insensitive, and being unqualified to comment because I'm not black, but I fail to see what the big deal is. Don Imus, who is in a field where the participants are practically required to out-outrage each other, probably made the comment solely because it was politically incorrect, and wanted attention. I can't say that for sure, knowing next to nothing about Imus or his radio show. He may have thought that by making a slightly offensive comment, then issuing a simple apology, he could use the controversy to gain a wider audience. It's worked before. But with professional race-baiters Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton hot on his trail, Imus was fired, unjustly in my opinion. Rappers frequently say things that are far more offensive than Imus' "nappy-headed hos" comment. Don Imus probably shouldn't have said what he said, but he never deserved to get fired. Jesse Jackson, as predicted, was on the scene, still showing indignation at a perceived offense that is hypocritical for someone who once called New York City "Hymietown." And Al Sharpton, who takes him seriously at this point? He and other prominent black activists once rallied alongside alleged rape victim Tawana Brawley, who it turned out was making up the whole story. Even from the beginning, there were serious doubts about Brawley's account of her "rape," as former FBI profiler Roy Hazelwood says in his book The Evil That Men Do. But that didn't stop Sharpton and his cohorts from trumping up the story in the press as a testament to the racism in America. Yes, racism still exists in this country, but with the careers and lives of two innocent men all but destroyed by Brawley and her "advisers," this false accusation helped no one.
Moving from the public sphere to my personal life, I had a great weekend. Bound was fun, but could have been better. The awesome bands, like Inertia and Armageddon Dildos, deserved a far bigger crowd than what was there that night. Where is everyone? Again, if I was the paranoid type, I'd think that there was a widespread conspiracy in DC against the goth/fetish community keeping potential patrons from Bound and other clubs in the area. How else to account for the sparse attendance at what should have been one of the biggest Bound events of the year? On a happier note, Todd's birthday bash at Entre Nous on Saturday was a great time for all, especially the guest of honor. Happy Birthday Todd, from all of us in the DC pary underground.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Forced socializing
I had to go to the dentist today. I know everyone hates the dentist, but the questions about what I do and where I went to school were hardly necessary, especially from someone I only see because I absolutely have to, someone whose job it is to jam foreign metal objects into my mouth, and someone who I know really doesn't care about my answers. For most rational people, the fact that I had a very limited response to his inane questions would have been a clue that I wasn't interested in conversation, but this guy seemed to take it as a challenge. People have been doing that to me all my life, trying to draw me out. And unless I see that they're sincerely trying to get to know me because they like me as a person, and not just attempting to open my closed exterior, it's never worked. I'm not suddenly going to turn into a chatterbox just because you ask me a few questions if I have no interest in talking to you. I don't want my dentist to be my friend. I just want them to do their job and leave me alone. I'm only there out of necessity, and I hate it, and the idle chatter does nothing but heighten my resentment, which makes me even more uncomfortable. And I have to go back next week to have a cavity filled. Call me pessimistic, but I doubt that this overly friendly dentist will have learned anything from his previous failed attempts at small talk. Who actually likes being asked personal questions while they're being probed by sharp metal objects?
Now that I've vented about that evil necessity known as the dentist, I can't wait for Bound this Friday. Horror movie night on Friday the 13th. Should be a good one. There are some great bands playing, and I finally get to see DJ Medic in action, since I missed him the last time he came to Bound. You'll probably see me on the dance floor or screaming while bent over or chained and getting a good beating. On Saturday I'll be at Entre Nous to wish Todd a happy birthday. This weekend's events will be the perfect thing to get the taste of intrusive probing out of my mouth.
Now that I've vented about that evil necessity known as the dentist, I can't wait for Bound this Friday. Horror movie night on Friday the 13th. Should be a good one. There are some great bands playing, and I finally get to see DJ Medic in action, since I missed him the last time he came to Bound. You'll probably see me on the dance floor or screaming while bent over or chained and getting a good beating. On Saturday I'll be at Entre Nous to wish Todd a happy birthday. This weekend's events will be the perfect thing to get the taste of intrusive probing out of my mouth.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
In a new place...again
For those of you wondering why I wasn't out and about this past weekend, I was moving to a new apartment, which took too much out of me to want to do anything else at the end of it all. But now that the move is done, I will be coming back out very soon. The awesome new hostess at Entre Nous, Azure, is enough to get me back out.
As much as I'd love to get my new place straightened out and decorated, there is never enough time. I'm always so tired from working all day that I never feel like doing anything that requires any kind of exertion after I get home. And on the weekends all I do is sleep most of the day, and then go out at night, and then begin the whole cycle over again. Sometimes it seems like all I do is work and then recover from working so much, and I rarely get to do anything for myself, like work on the many writing projects I have currently stalled or read the stacks of books I have yet to open. I need this job to be able to afford the new apartment I love, but it just takes so much out of me that sometimes I feel like I'm just working through life instead of enjoying it.
And after last Monday, I don't even have Prison Break to look forward to, until the fall. The season finale was a killer, though. Mr. Kim, ambassador of the sinister Company, got shot by Sara after he cornered Michael and Linc; Kellerman came clean to the courts about his role in the conspiracy, and fulfilled his death wish; and Bellick and T-Bag briefly shared a cell in a Panama jail. Now Michael is also in jail in Panama, after taking the fall for Sara. But I got the feeling that Michael, being Michael, has a plan. And I have to wait for months to figure out what that plan is.
As much as I'd love to get my new place straightened out and decorated, there is never enough time. I'm always so tired from working all day that I never feel like doing anything that requires any kind of exertion after I get home. And on the weekends all I do is sleep most of the day, and then go out at night, and then begin the whole cycle over again. Sometimes it seems like all I do is work and then recover from working so much, and I rarely get to do anything for myself, like work on the many writing projects I have currently stalled or read the stacks of books I have yet to open. I need this job to be able to afford the new apartment I love, but it just takes so much out of me that sometimes I feel like I'm just working through life instead of enjoying it.
And after last Monday, I don't even have Prison Break to look forward to, until the fall. The season finale was a killer, though. Mr. Kim, ambassador of the sinister Company, got shot by Sara after he cornered Michael and Linc; Kellerman came clean to the courts about his role in the conspiracy, and fulfilled his death wish; and Bellick and T-Bag briefly shared a cell in a Panama jail. Now Michael is also in jail in Panama, after taking the fall for Sara. But I got the feeling that Michael, being Michael, has a plan. And I have to wait for months to figure out what that plan is.
Friday, March 16, 2007
More press for a professional harpy
As much as I hate to give Ann Coulter, that golem of the far right, more of the publicity that she devours like the vulture that she is, I felt I had to comment on the whole "fag" thing. Coulter has called everyone from Bill Clinton to Al Gore a fag, and now John Edwards. Like she calls all liberals "godless," apparently unaware of observant Jewish liberals and the growing Christian environmentalist movement, all men in the Democratic party are "fags" in her eyes, because if she hates Democrats, and her target audience of hate-mongering conservatives hate fags, what better way to encourage animosity between the two? She throws "fag" around like her hero Joseph McCarthy, that blackest of black eyes on American conservatism, used to throw around the label "Communist," as an all-purpose epithet for anyone who doesn't entirely agree with her extremist ideology.
I've noticed, and this has been said before, that Coulter's intense hatred of Bill Clinton, who she continues to trash even though he hasn't been in office for years, is rooted in an unrequited lust. Clinton spurned Coulter's advances, preferring full-figured Jewish girls to skinny Aryan bitches, and she then made it her mission to take him down. Her trash talk about Clinton, questioning his sexual orientation, etc., is startling similar to the rants of a scorned woman. I guess I should put this in the "paranoid theories" category.
I probably won't make it out to Bound tonight, but I'll definitely be out for Entre Nous' St. Patty's Day celebration. I can't wait to see Todd DJ for the first time, and to round out the week at a booze-filled bash with lots of good friends. I've been overworked all this week, haven't slept enough, and I didn't get my Prison Break fix last Monday. On the plus side, I had a date on Wednesday night with a decent guy; smart, literary, and actually understands what I say. I might see him again this weekend, after I recover from the St. Patrick's Day craziness.
I've noticed, and this has been said before, that Coulter's intense hatred of Bill Clinton, who she continues to trash even though he hasn't been in office for years, is rooted in an unrequited lust. Clinton spurned Coulter's advances, preferring full-figured Jewish girls to skinny Aryan bitches, and she then made it her mission to take him down. Her trash talk about Clinton, questioning his sexual orientation, etc., is startling similar to the rants of a scorned woman. I guess I should put this in the "paranoid theories" category.
I probably won't make it out to Bound tonight, but I'll definitely be out for Entre Nous' St. Patty's Day celebration. I can't wait to see Todd DJ for the first time, and to round out the week at a booze-filled bash with lots of good friends. I've been overworked all this week, haven't slept enough, and I didn't get my Prison Break fix last Monday. On the plus side, I had a date on Wednesday night with a decent guy; smart, literary, and actually understands what I say. I might see him again this weekend, after I recover from the St. Patrick's Day craziness.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Awesome night at Bound
I had a great time at Bound last night, even though my feet are aching today. Blood rocked, Elise's Playground put on a hot show, Jesse had a very nice new toy to try out on me, and as always great music and friends. Brad requested Combichrist's "God Bless" for me, a song about serial killers. Very nice of him, which reminds me, I should see Zodiac sometime this weekend. So I had a great night, with lots of support from my friends after my last less than pleasant experience out in that area. Even though my ride got delayed for reasons I won't go into here, and I just barely caught the last train at the Gallery Place station.
My dad was telling me about the Peloppanesian (I know I spelled that wrong) War, fought in ancient Greece between the Athenians and the Spartans. Usually when my dad goes off about military history, I don't pay attention, but this was interesting. It illustrated the old saying "History repeats itself." The war between Athens and Sparta started because Athens, a democracy, felt that Sparta, an oligarchy, should become more like them. Sound familiar? Sparta won, with their male citizens groomed practically from birth to be perfect soldiers. Sparta didn't last as a civilization because of their archaic values, with intellect and diplomacy eventually trumping military might in Greece, but at that point, with Athens trying to defeat Sparta on the battlefield, the field all Spartans believed was their destined living and dying place, Sparta was victorious.
The point is, no matter how great any given powerful society thinks their political system is, another society might not agree. When going up against a society where the most zealous are willing to fly planes into buildings and blow themselves up in defense of their beliefs, we have to wonder how much impact a military strike could really have had.
My dad was telling me about the Peloppanesian (I know I spelled that wrong) War, fought in ancient Greece between the Athenians and the Spartans. Usually when my dad goes off about military history, I don't pay attention, but this was interesting. It illustrated the old saying "History repeats itself." The war between Athens and Sparta started because Athens, a democracy, felt that Sparta, an oligarchy, should become more like them. Sound familiar? Sparta won, with their male citizens groomed practically from birth to be perfect soldiers. Sparta didn't last as a civilization because of their archaic values, with intellect and diplomacy eventually trumping military might in Greece, but at that point, with Athens trying to defeat Sparta on the battlefield, the field all Spartans believed was their destined living and dying place, Sparta was victorious.
The point is, no matter how great any given powerful society thinks their political system is, another society might not agree. When going up against a society where the most zealous are willing to fly planes into buildings and blow themselves up in defense of their beliefs, we have to wonder how much impact a military strike could really have had.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
My Prison Break personality
With the second leg of the second season of Prison Break progressing nicely, conspiracy, fights and some finally resolved sexual tension between Michael and Sara, I thought I'd post my results in this quiz. I can't say I'm surprised by the results, since I've found myself relating to Michael since my obsession with the show started: smart and loyal, but not exactly able to function down in the dirt of the real world. He and I both needed a lot of practice in that area.
This test tracked 4 variables. How the score compared to the other people's:
Michael You scored 81 loyalty, 73 street smarts, 80 cunning, and 97 sanity! |
You are MICHAEL SCOFIELD. You've got the stare. You've got the tatts. You'll answer to Snowflake, Pretty, Fish, or Papi. You have to beat off the ladies (and Sucre) with a stick and there's about a zero percant chance that anyone will ever outsmart you in anything. You've pretty much got it all- go ahead and bask in the glory. |
 |
This test tracked 4 variables. How the score compared to the other people's:
| Higher than 74% on loyalty | ||
| Higher than 43% on street smarts | ||
| Higher than 86% on cunning | ||
| Higher than 72% on sanity |
| Link: The Prison Break Personality Test written by cnote15 on Ok Cupid |
Saturday, February 24, 2007
My crappy night
As I'm sure most of my friends already know, I got robbed last night on my way to Bound. I was walking in the area around the Navy Yard Metro, looking for those elusive things in DC known as taxis, and someone came up behind me and grabbed my purse. I tried to pull it back, but he yanked it away and I fell. There was a gas station nearby, and I called the cops there. I'm not expecting anything, but they did give me money for the Metro ride home. I spent the night at my parents' house, since my house key was in my purse. I didn't even care about the money, but all the damage control was such a hassle. I had to get my lock changed today, stop my credit card and ATM card, and tomorrow I'm getting a new cell phone. I didn't get hurt, and it could have been a lot worse, but I'm still a bit shaken up by the whole thing, and I don't know when I'll feel ready to go out again. Hopefully I'll be out for St. Patrick's Day in a few weeks. I love St. Patty's Day.
I love going to Bound, but it's so hard to get to the new venue without a car. I've always been fine going out on my own, but now I know firsthand what bad things can happen, and I don't know if I'll be comfortable going out alone again. I've always done things on my own, and I hate the idea that I need to be with someone just to be safe. I have great friends, and some of them have offered to come to the club with me. Now I just need to get my new cell phone to contact all of you.
I love going to Bound, but it's so hard to get to the new venue without a car. I've always been fine going out on my own, but now I know firsthand what bad things can happen, and I don't know if I'll be comfortable going out alone again. I've always done things on my own, and I hate the idea that I need to be with someone just to be safe. I have great friends, and some of them have offered to come to the club with me. Now I just need to get my new cell phone to contact all of you.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Utah mall shooter update
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_us/utah_shooting
The Utah mall gunman now has a name. He was an 18-year-old Bosnian immigrant, but beyond that, all that's known about him is that he lived in Salt Lake City with his mother. His aunt said he was "such a good boy." How many times have we heard that before? They're all "good boys" until they pull the trigger. Just ask the relatives of former Eagle Scout and newlywed Charles Whitman (of the bell tower in Texas). Like Whitman, the motives for the Utah shooter's spree are unknown and, with the shooter dead, we may never know. All investigators can do is piece together facets of the shooter's life immediately before his rampage, as Texas officials attempted to do with Whitman. Since no one appeared to know anything about the shooter, he may have been a loner and, like many mass murderers, felt a need to exact revenge on the world he thought had ignored him until he ended his own life. Whitman's autopsy revealed a tumor in his frontal lobe, which may have influenced his behavior. There's no word yet on what, if anything, has been found in the Utah gunman's background that might have served as a trigger for his rampage. But you can expect me to keep an eye on this story, as I have with JonBenet Ramsey/John Mark Karr, the Amish school shooter and the Ipswich Ripper in the past.
The Utah mall gunman now has a name. He was an 18-year-old Bosnian immigrant, but beyond that, all that's known about him is that he lived in Salt Lake City with his mother. His aunt said he was "such a good boy." How many times have we heard that before? They're all "good boys" until they pull the trigger. Just ask the relatives of former Eagle Scout and newlywed Charles Whitman (of the bell tower in Texas). Like Whitman, the motives for the Utah shooter's spree are unknown and, with the shooter dead, we may never know. All investigators can do is piece together facets of the shooter's life immediately before his rampage, as Texas officials attempted to do with Whitman. Since no one appeared to know anything about the shooter, he may have been a loner and, like many mass murderers, felt a need to exact revenge on the world he thought had ignored him until he ended his own life. Whitman's autopsy revealed a tumor in his frontal lobe, which may have influenced his behavior. There's no word yet on what, if anything, has been found in the Utah gunman's background that might have served as a trigger for his rampage. But you can expect me to keep an eye on this story, as I have with JonBenet Ramsey/John Mark Karr, the Amish school shooter and the Ipswich Ripper in the past.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Shooting spree in Utah mall
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17124042/?GT1=9033
No information has yet been released about the shooter, who went into a Utah mall and killed four people with a shotgun, except that he was 18 years old. From the information provided in the article, the shooter looks like a typical mass murderer; the random victims, the public setting, the shootout with police that ended in the killer's death. One witness said that the killer looked like a "regular Joe," a sentiment that is so often heard about the perpetrators of violent crimes. With so little information about the shooter, I can't offer any insight into his motives, but, if he's like most mass murderers, as he appears to be, he lived his life as a nonentity, or had a series of escalating disappointments in his life until he snapped. The mass murderer's ultimate mission is often suicide, with the desire for one final act of revenge on the world the killer feels has wronged him.
On a completely different topic, I had an amazing night at Entre Nous' Valentine's Day Ball last Saturday. A great performance by belly dancer Yasmina, followed by two hot women as a human buffet. I got to see some good friends and a few new faces, and said a final goodbye to Rosie and Moses, who are moving to Arizona. But, as I often do, I got a bit depressed. It was a Valentine's Day celebration, and as much fun as I had at the ball, I got depressed over the lack of love in my life. Again. Sometimes when I go out, it seems that everyone is paired off except me, so often the third or fifth wheel. The guys I want are always with someone else, and the only guys who want me are total losers. Who among the lovelorn doesn't get a bit depressed around Valentine's Day?
No information has yet been released about the shooter, who went into a Utah mall and killed four people with a shotgun, except that he was 18 years old. From the information provided in the article, the shooter looks like a typical mass murderer; the random victims, the public setting, the shootout with police that ended in the killer's death. One witness said that the killer looked like a "regular Joe," a sentiment that is so often heard about the perpetrators of violent crimes. With so little information about the shooter, I can't offer any insight into his motives, but, if he's like most mass murderers, as he appears to be, he lived his life as a nonentity, or had a series of escalating disappointments in his life until he snapped. The mass murderer's ultimate mission is often suicide, with the desire for one final act of revenge on the world the killer feels has wronged him.
On a completely different topic, I had an amazing night at Entre Nous' Valentine's Day Ball last Saturday. A great performance by belly dancer Yasmina, followed by two hot women as a human buffet. I got to see some good friends and a few new faces, and said a final goodbye to Rosie and Moses, who are moving to Arizona. But, as I often do, I got a bit depressed. It was a Valentine's Day celebration, and as much fun as I had at the ball, I got depressed over the lack of love in my life. Again. Sometimes when I go out, it seems that everyone is paired off except me, so often the third or fifth wheel. The guys I want are always with someone else, and the only guys who want me are total losers. Who among the lovelorn doesn't get a bit depressed around Valentine's Day?
Friday, February 09, 2007
Interview with a great writer
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1585914,00.html
Time magazine has interviewed Martin Amis, one of the world's greatest living writers. It says he's currently in Philadelphia on a book tour. I hope he comes to DC soon, if he hasn't already and I missed him. His book London Fields is one of the best I've ever read, and his latest sounds interesting, a period piece about Soviet and post-Soviet Russia. In talking about it, he comments that if he goes to Russia, he might be poisoned, as has been the standard for perceived enemies in Putin's Russia.
His novel Money was highly critical of the cult of greed that arose in America and England in the 1980s, and in this interview, he wonders why so many Americans can't bring themselves to say that the radical Islamic fundamentalists are wrong. I agree that this violent fundamentalism is dangerous, and those responsible should pay the consequences. But at the same time, the US government should be able to do this without relying on torture and unjustified wars. I'm still waiting for proof of the link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. As I've said before, it's odd that American evangelicals and radical Islamists hate each other so much, just because they call their gods by a different name. Both factions hate gays, women and sex, and want to make religious law the law of the land. A comment I read on an online forum said that Christian fundamentalists have a "penis envy" of Islam fundamentalists, and this commenter is probably right. These radical terrorists who hate America have beaten radical American Christians at their own prudish and prejudiced game. The Islamists, in many parts of the Arab world, have actually succeeded in making their religious superstitions the law. If more American leaders keep invoking the name of God at every opportunity, give federal funding to "faith-based" charities that discriminate on the basis of religion and let American Taliban groups like the Christian Coalition continue to exert influence over them, we could end up with a Christian theocracy to rival the Islam theocracy of Iran in oppression and fear of God, if we godless liberals (and conservatives, libertarians, etc.) don't fight back. Even now, on the DC Metro, I am faced with posters advertising "A Second Look," an anti-abortion group. That a service used by people all over the city is blatantly advertising this is a frightening sign. To bring it back to Martin Amis, after this tangent, he once said that religion is "the desire for approval from supernatural beings." Outside the indoctrination of faith that many of us have had instilled in us from childhood, having been taught that religious teachings are sacred, the whole idea of religion (magical ghosts in the sky, miracles, angels and demons) is ridiculous.
On the subject of religious nutcases, I heard that Ted Haggard, the evangelical preacher caught soliciting sex from a male prostitute, has just completed a "gay rehab" program. He's no longer gay, according to the evangelical council. If only there was a rehab program to stop him from being a theocratic asshole, but I doubt his church would sponsor that.
Time magazine has interviewed Martin Amis, one of the world's greatest living writers. It says he's currently in Philadelphia on a book tour. I hope he comes to DC soon, if he hasn't already and I missed him. His book London Fields is one of the best I've ever read, and his latest sounds interesting, a period piece about Soviet and post-Soviet Russia. In talking about it, he comments that if he goes to Russia, he might be poisoned, as has been the standard for perceived enemies in Putin's Russia.
His novel Money was highly critical of the cult of greed that arose in America and England in the 1980s, and in this interview, he wonders why so many Americans can't bring themselves to say that the radical Islamic fundamentalists are wrong. I agree that this violent fundamentalism is dangerous, and those responsible should pay the consequences. But at the same time, the US government should be able to do this without relying on torture and unjustified wars. I'm still waiting for proof of the link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. As I've said before, it's odd that American evangelicals and radical Islamists hate each other so much, just because they call their gods by a different name. Both factions hate gays, women and sex, and want to make religious law the law of the land. A comment I read on an online forum said that Christian fundamentalists have a "penis envy" of Islam fundamentalists, and this commenter is probably right. These radical terrorists who hate America have beaten radical American Christians at their own prudish and prejudiced game. The Islamists, in many parts of the Arab world, have actually succeeded in making their religious superstitions the law. If more American leaders keep invoking the name of God at every opportunity, give federal funding to "faith-based" charities that discriminate on the basis of religion and let American Taliban groups like the Christian Coalition continue to exert influence over them, we could end up with a Christian theocracy to rival the Islam theocracy of Iran in oppression and fear of God, if we godless liberals (and conservatives, libertarians, etc.) don't fight back. Even now, on the DC Metro, I am faced with posters advertising "A Second Look," an anti-abortion group. That a service used by people all over the city is blatantly advertising this is a frightening sign. To bring it back to Martin Amis, after this tangent, he once said that religion is "the desire for approval from supernatural beings." Outside the indoctrination of faith that many of us have had instilled in us from childhood, having been taught that religious teachings are sacred, the whole idea of religion (magical ghosts in the sky, miracles, angels and demons) is ridiculous.
On the subject of religious nutcases, I heard that Ted Haggard, the evangelical preacher caught soliciting sex from a male prostitute, has just completed a "gay rehab" program. He's no longer gay, according to the evangelical council. If only there was a rehab program to stop him from being a theocratic asshole, but I doubt his church would sponsor that.
Monday, February 05, 2007
New potential evidence in Atlanta Child Murders case
http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0207/0202_wayne_williams.html
25 years ago, Wayne Williams was convicted of the infamous Child Murders, despite being believed innocent by many. New DNA testing might reveal that an innocent man has been in prison for 25 years.
The evidence originally presented by the prosecution was hardly airtight. Williams' car was seen speeding away from the dump site of the last victim, who, at 27, was older than the rest of the victims (but was mentally handicapped). The rest of the evidence was based on fibers found on the victims and in Williams' house, and hair found on the victims that supposedly matched Williams' dog. But as the article says, this science was new at that time, and the fibers linking Williams to the victims were common carpet fibers. The DNA evidence was mitochondrial, which is not as exact as most DNA testing.
Even in 1982, some people in Atlanta and around the country questioned Williams' guilt, calling the evidence inconclusive at best. One crime writer I read a while back believes that there was more than one killer in Atlanta at the time, and based on the variety of victims and MOs in the loosely linked cases, I have to agree. Roy Hazelwood, a former FBI profiler who consulted on the case, was positive that the killer was black because a white person would have been easily noticed in the black-populated area of Atlanta where the victims were abducted. That didn't stop the theories circulating that the KKK was responsible for the killings.
While there was evidence linking Williams to the last victim, and he was only officially tried for two murders, he was considered the Atlanta Child Murderer. As with Michael Devlin, the Missouri kidnapper, authorities tried to link Williams to all similar cases. When Bruno Hauptmann was arrested as the kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby, it was assumed that he acted alone, and was subsequently executed for the crime. But recently, far too late, evidence has come out that at the very least casts doubt on Hauptmann's exclusive involvement. Charles Lindbergh was not the most cooperative witness, and as a result many potential suspects might not have been discovered. Another former FBI profiler, John Douglas, believes that while Hauptmann likely had something to do with the kidnapping, it was highly unlikely that he acted alone. For instance, when the baby was carried down the ladder, the evidence indicated that two people were involved, one to enter the room and hand the baby off to the other, who was waiting on the ladder. While Douglas is still a strong supporter of capital punishment, the list of potentially innocent inmates either on death row, serving life sentences or already executed should be enough to make one question the ethics of this penalty.
A final unrelated note: I was looking at one of my old posts, where I referred to a short story by Albert Camus. I listed the title as "The Missionary," but the real title, found in Camus' short story collection Exile and the Kingdom, is "The Renegade." Still, it is definitely worth reading, one of Camus' best pieces of writing.
25 years ago, Wayne Williams was convicted of the infamous Child Murders, despite being believed innocent by many. New DNA testing might reveal that an innocent man has been in prison for 25 years.
The evidence originally presented by the prosecution was hardly airtight. Williams' car was seen speeding away from the dump site of the last victim, who, at 27, was older than the rest of the victims (but was mentally handicapped). The rest of the evidence was based on fibers found on the victims and in Williams' house, and hair found on the victims that supposedly matched Williams' dog. But as the article says, this science was new at that time, and the fibers linking Williams to the victims were common carpet fibers. The DNA evidence was mitochondrial, which is not as exact as most DNA testing.
Even in 1982, some people in Atlanta and around the country questioned Williams' guilt, calling the evidence inconclusive at best. One crime writer I read a while back believes that there was more than one killer in Atlanta at the time, and based on the variety of victims and MOs in the loosely linked cases, I have to agree. Roy Hazelwood, a former FBI profiler who consulted on the case, was positive that the killer was black because a white person would have been easily noticed in the black-populated area of Atlanta where the victims were abducted. That didn't stop the theories circulating that the KKK was responsible for the killings.
While there was evidence linking Williams to the last victim, and he was only officially tried for two murders, he was considered the Atlanta Child Murderer. As with Michael Devlin, the Missouri kidnapper, authorities tried to link Williams to all similar cases. When Bruno Hauptmann was arrested as the kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby, it was assumed that he acted alone, and was subsequently executed for the crime. But recently, far too late, evidence has come out that at the very least casts doubt on Hauptmann's exclusive involvement. Charles Lindbergh was not the most cooperative witness, and as a result many potential suspects might not have been discovered. Another former FBI profiler, John Douglas, believes that while Hauptmann likely had something to do with the kidnapping, it was highly unlikely that he acted alone. For instance, when the baby was carried down the ladder, the evidence indicated that two people were involved, one to enter the room and hand the baby off to the other, who was waiting on the ladder. While Douglas is still a strong supporter of capital punishment, the list of potentially innocent inmates either on death row, serving life sentences or already executed should be enough to make one question the ethics of this penalty.
A final unrelated note: I was looking at one of my old posts, where I referred to a short story by Albert Camus. I listed the title as "The Missionary," but the real title, found in Camus' short story collection Exile and the Kingdom, is "The Renegade." Still, it is definitely worth reading, one of Camus' best pieces of writing.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Half-hearted religious ramblings
This post might be a bit incoherent, since I'm a little tired (by a little tired, I mean I was practically falling asleep at my desk about an hour ago). But I caught a snippet of a Nightline report last night about the "Blasphemy Challenge" put forth by an atheist group. It consists of people recording themselves denouncing belief in God or gods. Of course, the religious establishment was up in arms about this, and the group has received death threats. Even the reporter appeared to be questioning the group's motives, calling it "indoctrination" against religious indoctrination, because they advertise to teenagers. Religious types seem to think that people can't think for themselves, can't be presented with evidence and make up their own minds without the hand of God or advertisers. While, like any ideological faction, atheism has its adherents who take the ideology too far and try everything to bring others to their way of thinking, at its heart, all the Blasphemy Challenge is doing is challenging people to reject religion. Whether or not they do it is up to them. No one is saying, "Denounce God or I'll kill you," unlike some fanatical Christians and Muslims still populating the world in the 21st century.
At this point, I have to say that I consider myself an agnostic, not an atheist. Some atheists, as Richard Dawkins relates in his book The God Delusion, consider agnosticism an easy way out, a way of having the best of both worlds. They say the existence of God can be proven. But I myself cannot prove this one way or another. I find the existence of a supreme being highly unlikely, but not necessarily impossible, and for that reason I have decided not to adhere myself to any particular faith. The uncertainty and hardships that populate our world, natural disasters, harsh climates, living things suffering, do not succeed in convincing me that there is any divine hand guiding us. We are just here, evolved from other life forms, some with higher degrees of intelligence and self-awareness than others, and I can see how that can be difficult to face without the promise of an afterlife or faith to guide the time spent on earth. However freeing it is to no longer pledge allegiance to a god, to live life for the here and now, some cannot bring themselves to take that step. As Albert Camus said, freedom is not a gift, but a chore.
Another prominent atheist, Isaac Asimov, said that the Bible is the best argument for atheism that exists. Richard Dawkins appears to agree. He views the god of the Old Testament the same way I do, as a petty, fickle, angry being that happens to have dominion over the earth. This god demands allegiance, and if he doesn't get it, he'll turn you into salt or command one of his followers to wipe out you and your entire race. Some believers, my mother included, have tried to explain that the Old Testament god was simply acting as a parent and disciplining the young human race. But if this is the supreme being I'm supposed to worship, an omniscient being who is preoccupied with how many sacrifices and prayers he gets, you'll have to forgive me for not wanting any part of it. The god of the Old Testament has the personality of a tyrannical dictator, much like the one that would later imprison and kill off the "chosen people," Adolf Hitler. No wonder so many Jews decided to abandon religion altogether and become communists, atheists and secular humanists.
Dawkins goes on to question, in a section of the book I haven't yet finished reading, if the New Testament is really any better, as many Christians insist that Jesus wiped away the vengeful god of old and replaced him with a kinder gentler deity. Jesus says in the New Testament that anyone who is not for you is against you. Bertrand Russell said that Jesus could not be considered truly moral because he believed in hell. Hell, that scare tactic of fanatical Christians since the Middle Ages, where the loving god sends those who commit any sin arbitrarily decided by him to eternal torture. Jesus has some admirable teachings, like love thy neighbor (although, as Dawkins suggests, this might only be intended to apply to other Jews, making Christians and Jews free to torment unbelievers) and turn the other cheek. But the Bible, as many have pointed out, is full of contradictions, not the least of which is two separate creation myths (try telling that to the creationists), and a lot of Jesus' better teachings are just common decency, which most of us practice with or without fear of hell.
Why, as the religious types suggest, do I need faith to be a good person? One of the major reasons Ronald Reagan didn't like the Soviets was because, as he said, they didn't believe in God and were therefore immoral. Recently, the US was attacked by men who believed so much in their god they were willing to die to please his capricious whims in the hopes of being treated to 72 virgins in the afterlife (that's the Muslim idea of heaven, which says a lot about their view of women). The fact is, people do bad things. They kill, rob and rape each other, with or without religious convictions. Just because I don't fear a god sending me to hell doesn't mean that I would rob and murder at will. When I visited Amsterdam, I didn't smoke pot, even though it was legal and widely available, because I didn't want to. I don't believe in violence as a way to solve my problems, whether or not I have a supreme being peering over my shoulder. I help out those in my life who need it because I think it's the right thing to do and I want to, not to gain access into a magical kingdom after I die. What the religious fanatics preach is an ethical system based on reward and punishment, in other words, fear.
I think I've gone on long enough. I was just in one of those moods where the thoughts kept coming and I could barely type fast enough to keep up. I'm sure I'll read this tomorrow and think, "I shouldn't have said that" or "I should have phrased that differently." Luckily, I know my friends won't send me death threats because of the views I've expressed here.
At this point, I have to say that I consider myself an agnostic, not an atheist. Some atheists, as Richard Dawkins relates in his book The God Delusion, consider agnosticism an easy way out, a way of having the best of both worlds. They say the existence of God can be proven. But I myself cannot prove this one way or another. I find the existence of a supreme being highly unlikely, but not necessarily impossible, and for that reason I have decided not to adhere myself to any particular faith. The uncertainty and hardships that populate our world, natural disasters, harsh climates, living things suffering, do not succeed in convincing me that there is any divine hand guiding us. We are just here, evolved from other life forms, some with higher degrees of intelligence and self-awareness than others, and I can see how that can be difficult to face without the promise of an afterlife or faith to guide the time spent on earth. However freeing it is to no longer pledge allegiance to a god, to live life for the here and now, some cannot bring themselves to take that step. As Albert Camus said, freedom is not a gift, but a chore.
Another prominent atheist, Isaac Asimov, said that the Bible is the best argument for atheism that exists. Richard Dawkins appears to agree. He views the god of the Old Testament the same way I do, as a petty, fickle, angry being that happens to have dominion over the earth. This god demands allegiance, and if he doesn't get it, he'll turn you into salt or command one of his followers to wipe out you and your entire race. Some believers, my mother included, have tried to explain that the Old Testament god was simply acting as a parent and disciplining the young human race. But if this is the supreme being I'm supposed to worship, an omniscient being who is preoccupied with how many sacrifices and prayers he gets, you'll have to forgive me for not wanting any part of it. The god of the Old Testament has the personality of a tyrannical dictator, much like the one that would later imprison and kill off the "chosen people," Adolf Hitler. No wonder so many Jews decided to abandon religion altogether and become communists, atheists and secular humanists.
Dawkins goes on to question, in a section of the book I haven't yet finished reading, if the New Testament is really any better, as many Christians insist that Jesus wiped away the vengeful god of old and replaced him with a kinder gentler deity. Jesus says in the New Testament that anyone who is not for you is against you. Bertrand Russell said that Jesus could not be considered truly moral because he believed in hell. Hell, that scare tactic of fanatical Christians since the Middle Ages, where the loving god sends those who commit any sin arbitrarily decided by him to eternal torture. Jesus has some admirable teachings, like love thy neighbor (although, as Dawkins suggests, this might only be intended to apply to other Jews, making Christians and Jews free to torment unbelievers) and turn the other cheek. But the Bible, as many have pointed out, is full of contradictions, not the least of which is two separate creation myths (try telling that to the creationists), and a lot of Jesus' better teachings are just common decency, which most of us practice with or without fear of hell.
Why, as the religious types suggest, do I need faith to be a good person? One of the major reasons Ronald Reagan didn't like the Soviets was because, as he said, they didn't believe in God and were therefore immoral. Recently, the US was attacked by men who believed so much in their god they were willing to die to please his capricious whims in the hopes of being treated to 72 virgins in the afterlife (that's the Muslim idea of heaven, which says a lot about their view of women). The fact is, people do bad things. They kill, rob and rape each other, with or without religious convictions. Just because I don't fear a god sending me to hell doesn't mean that I would rob and murder at will. When I visited Amsterdam, I didn't smoke pot, even though it was legal and widely available, because I didn't want to. I don't believe in violence as a way to solve my problems, whether or not I have a supreme being peering over my shoulder. I help out those in my life who need it because I think it's the right thing to do and I want to, not to gain access into a magical kingdom after I die. What the religious fanatics preach is an ethical system based on reward and punishment, in other words, fear.
I think I've gone on long enough. I was just in one of those moods where the thoughts kept coming and I could barely type fast enough to keep up. I'm sure I'll read this tomorrow and think, "I shouldn't have said that" or "I should have phrased that differently." Luckily, I know my friends won't send me death threats because of the views I've expressed here.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Prison Break and faith healers
As you might have guessed, I am ridiculously excited about the return of Prison Break tonight. We loyal fans have been waiting almost two months for a resolution to the killer cliffhanger at the end of the last episode. Aside from T-Bag finally catching up to the woman who sent him to prison, and former CO badass Bellick now sharing a cell with feared Fox River inmate Avocado, Michael and Lincoln are now in a strange spot. Mahone and Kellerman orchestrated an escape opportunity so they could kill the brothers as per their instructions from the company. When they took the bait, Mahone and Kellerman followed them, boxing them in. Then Kellerman, who organized the plan, took out his gun and shot...Mahone. Kellerman, stonewalled by the President's inner circle, now wants to exact revenge by helping Michael and Linc. But I'm not ready to trust him. He's not exactly known for his sincerity, and I think he plans on using Michael and Linc to get back in with the president. As for Mahone, it looked like he got shot in the shoulder, so he might survive. I hope he does, I don't think his story is finished yet. His dynamic with Michael (two similar characters on opposite sides is always a good story) has been the best thing about the current season. Whatever happens, I know I'll be watching, on the edge of my seat, hooked on every last twist and turn.
Onto a more serious topic. I recently read The Faith Healers by James Randi, a book that exposes preachers who claim to heal the sick by divine powers. The researchers for the project could not find one successful healing reported, and several people died after believing they had been "healed" and forgoing proper medical treatment. And of course, these "healers" lived in luxury off the contributions of the faithful. When one woman begged for some of her money back because she was severely in debt after contributing almost all of her savings to this organization, and she was turned away. The healers' techniques are based in trickery. One, Peter Popoff, had an earpiece where his wife relayed information she had received from questioning the audience, information Popoff later called out during the show and claimed came from God. To test this "divine knowledge," Randi and associates made up fake ailments which they related to the questioners working the crowd before the show. Randi says, if this information truly came from an omniscient deity, shouldn't this deity have revealed that the related information was false? But instead, they were "cured" of ailments they didn't have. Some healers even place people in wheelchairs to have them dramatically stand up, although the afflicted person never needed to be in a wheelchair. The "healers" are making millions of dollars from selling false hope to the sick. These people are criminals. But they're criminals protected by the cloak of religion, and to date, none have been prosecuted for making money under false pretenses (if this isn't true, and anyone knows of a faith healer who has been prosecuted, I'd like to hear about it), despite several scathing articles written by dedicated journalists, and Randi's book.
On a related topic, I was extremely disheartened to hear my mother, an otherwise rational woman under the spell of the Vatican, say that she believes in angels and demons possibly populating the world and controlling our actions. Even if an exorcist (and the Vatican still, in the 21st century, has an official exorcist) temporarily eases the mind of a mentally unstable person who believes they have been possessed by the devil, the basic mental illness is still there, and cannot be eradicated through prayers and holy water. The problem is, the fanatics believe that all they need is divine intervention, and disregard the real need for medical treatment as a result of blind faith. And the faith healers of the world are manipulating these beliefs and getting rich off of it, and they need to be stopped.
Onto a more serious topic. I recently read The Faith Healers by James Randi, a book that exposes preachers who claim to heal the sick by divine powers. The researchers for the project could not find one successful healing reported, and several people died after believing they had been "healed" and forgoing proper medical treatment. And of course, these "healers" lived in luxury off the contributions of the faithful. When one woman begged for some of her money back because she was severely in debt after contributing almost all of her savings to this organization, and she was turned away. The healers' techniques are based in trickery. One, Peter Popoff, had an earpiece where his wife relayed information she had received from questioning the audience, information Popoff later called out during the show and claimed came from God. To test this "divine knowledge," Randi and associates made up fake ailments which they related to the questioners working the crowd before the show. Randi says, if this information truly came from an omniscient deity, shouldn't this deity have revealed that the related information was false? But instead, they were "cured" of ailments they didn't have. Some healers even place people in wheelchairs to have them dramatically stand up, although the afflicted person never needed to be in a wheelchair. The "healers" are making millions of dollars from selling false hope to the sick. These people are criminals. But they're criminals protected by the cloak of religion, and to date, none have been prosecuted for making money under false pretenses (if this isn't true, and anyone knows of a faith healer who has been prosecuted, I'd like to hear about it), despite several scathing articles written by dedicated journalists, and Randi's book.
On a related topic, I was extremely disheartened to hear my mother, an otherwise rational woman under the spell of the Vatican, say that she believes in angels and demons possibly populating the world and controlling our actions. Even if an exorcist (and the Vatican still, in the 21st century, has an official exorcist) temporarily eases the mind of a mentally unstable person who believes they have been possessed by the devil, the basic mental illness is still there, and cannot be eradicated through prayers and holy water. The problem is, the fanatics believe that all they need is divine intervention, and disregard the real need for medical treatment as a result of blind faith. And the faith healers of the world are manipulating these beliefs and getting rich off of it, and they need to be stopped.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Missouri kidnapping suspect
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070118/ap_on_re_us/boys_found_investigation
To be honest, I don't think I know enough about this case to provide a detailed analysis. All this article says is that the suspect has pleaded not guilty, and that the county prosecutors are reconsidering another abduction case from 15 years ago in light of his arrest. The suspect is 6'4" and weighs 300 pounds, and the man described as being with the abducted boy was "tall and thin." I'll buy tall, but 300 pounds is not thin, even on a 6'4" frame. For comparison, Edmund Kemper, the "Coed Killer" who terrorized Santa Cruz in the 1970s, also weighed 300 pounds, and was 6'9", but no one ever called him thin.
The boys were found in the suspect's apartment, which leaves me wondering how he could plead not guilty. His lawyers say that he couldn't get a fair trial in the county with all the publicity surrounding the case. But in the 15-year-old abduction case, it seems that the authorities are trying to pin a cold case on a new suspect, which has happened before. When Ed Gein was arrested in the 1950s, almost every missing persons case in the Plainfield, Wisconsin area was attempted to be tied to him. Henry Lee Lucas confessed to practically every unsolved murder his interrogators threw at him, and ultimately evidence forced him to recant his staggering confession. When Atlanta was in the grips of the infamous Child Murders in the early 1980s, and Wayne Williams was officially charged with two of the murders loosely linked in the case, he was presumed guilty for all of the murders. Although the murders stopped when Williams was arrested, and there is conclusive evidence linking him to the two victims for whose murders he was charged, most criminiologists now believe that more than one killer was operating in Atlanta at the time. Even if this Missouri kidnapper is guilty of the abduction of the two boys found in his apartment, that doesn't mean he's guilty of an admittedly similar abduction. Sadly, hundreds of children are kidnapped every year. In a desperate attempt to close the case, Missouri investigators might rely on coercion to get a confession, even if the real kidnapper is someone else. In the words of Nice Guy Eddie from Reservoir Dogs: "If you torture him enough, he'll tell you he started the Great Chicago Fire, that doesn't make it so."
To be honest, I don't think I know enough about this case to provide a detailed analysis. All this article says is that the suspect has pleaded not guilty, and that the county prosecutors are reconsidering another abduction case from 15 years ago in light of his arrest. The suspect is 6'4" and weighs 300 pounds, and the man described as being with the abducted boy was "tall and thin." I'll buy tall, but 300 pounds is not thin, even on a 6'4" frame. For comparison, Edmund Kemper, the "Coed Killer" who terrorized Santa Cruz in the 1970s, also weighed 300 pounds, and was 6'9", but no one ever called him thin.
The boys were found in the suspect's apartment, which leaves me wondering how he could plead not guilty. His lawyers say that he couldn't get a fair trial in the county with all the publicity surrounding the case. But in the 15-year-old abduction case, it seems that the authorities are trying to pin a cold case on a new suspect, which has happened before. When Ed Gein was arrested in the 1950s, almost every missing persons case in the Plainfield, Wisconsin area was attempted to be tied to him. Henry Lee Lucas confessed to practically every unsolved murder his interrogators threw at him, and ultimately evidence forced him to recant his staggering confession. When Atlanta was in the grips of the infamous Child Murders in the early 1980s, and Wayne Williams was officially charged with two of the murders loosely linked in the case, he was presumed guilty for all of the murders. Although the murders stopped when Williams was arrested, and there is conclusive evidence linking him to the two victims for whose murders he was charged, most criminiologists now believe that more than one killer was operating in Atlanta at the time. Even if this Missouri kidnapper is guilty of the abduction of the two boys found in his apartment, that doesn't mean he's guilty of an admittedly similar abduction. Sadly, hundreds of children are kidnapped every year. In a desperate attempt to close the case, Missouri investigators might rely on coercion to get a confession, even if the real kidnapper is someone else. In the words of Nice Guy Eddie from Reservoir Dogs: "If you torture him enough, he'll tell you he started the Great Chicago Fire, that doesn't make it so."
Monday, January 15, 2007
A great night at Bound
I had an amazing time at Bound last Friday. Some hot scenes, great music courtesy of DJs Panic and Blacula, and lots of good friends. I saw John and Emily for the first time since SMB back in September. John has been very sympathetic to my man troubles, and he told me on Friday, "You know, you're hot, you're cool, you're smart, why do you care about these guys?" When I hear it put like that, and in the back of my mind, I know I shouldn't care, but I guess I can't help it. When it comes to love and lust, our intellects aren't exactly the deciding factor most of the time. I met a newcomer to the scene on Friday, and was flirting with him all night, and he seemed to respond, but he ultimately went off with another girl. The best part was, after an initial flash of jealousy, I really didn't care. I didn't really like the guy, he was just a guy who was there who mildly appealed to me. I'm sure I'll get another night where I'll have a newbie to break in, one who won't abandon me in favor of someone else.
I think I have a new favorite dom at Bound. Don't worry Todd, Donna, Andy and Klawdya, I will always want your services. But I met Jesse on New Year's Eve, and saw him again on Friday, and he did quite a number on me. He has a great technique, and some very interesting toys. And he was nice enough to drive me and Cat to the Metro at the end of the night. All in all, a great night. I will definitely try to make it to Bound more often.
I think I have a new favorite dom at Bound. Don't worry Todd, Donna, Andy and Klawdya, I will always want your services. But I met Jesse on New Year's Eve, and saw him again on Friday, and he did quite a number on me. He has a great technique, and some very interesting toys. And he was nice enough to drive me and Cat to the Metro at the end of the night. All in all, a great night. I will definitely try to make it to Bound more often.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Bush says: "More troops to Iraq"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070111/wl_nm/iraq_iraqis_dc_2
As illustrated by the thoughts of several Iraqi citizens (you know, the people this war was supposed to help), the US presence is not helping. One civil servant says that it is a mistake to focus on the military when the problem is politics. The insurgency is still a problem, but the major focus, now that we've gotten ourselves stuck in this mess, should be on building a solid government, which is what the US promised Iraq, after searching in vain for WMDs, of course.
One Iraqi even called the escalation of troops "undemocratic," since it's not what the majority of Americans want. I have no comment on that, I think it speaks for itself. Another Iraqi said that the government has promised a lot but hasn't delivered. Iraq might become an American-style democracy after all.
But Bush wants more troops put in harm's way in Iraq. Another Iraqi citizen expressed fears that a greater US military presence might even escalate the violence. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein and installing a democratic government was a noble thought, but it didn't quite work in practice. Bush admitted to a "mistake" in his Iraq policy, but will sending in more troops correct it, or will more US soldiers and Iraqis die in pursuit of a so-far elusive goal (and the all but impossible goal of stamping out terrorism)? We'll have to wait and see.
A while ago, Saddam Hussein was executed for his crimes against his enemies. Bush says he didn't watch the video. I'm afraid I'll have to call bullshit on that, but don't hold me to it, I don't have any proof. I find it very hard to believe that Bush didn't watch the man who he said tried to kill his father getting hanged. We all know how much Bush loves a good execution, and this was the biggest one in years, and it was Bush's sworn enemy getting killed. Based on this circumstantial evidence, I have to conclude that Bush and his league of evil were sitting at the White House cheering as Hussein was led to the gallows. But like I said, I have no proof, so don't force me to take an oath and testify.
My political ranting aside, things are starting to look up for me. I've all but forgotten about the last two guys who screwed me over, and I got to see Dolphy and Angie after a way too long absence at Entre Nous last Saturday. Dolphy said she'd have something for me at Bound tomorrow night, so I'll be coming back to Club Lime to find out what she's got. I haven't been to Bound in far too long.
As illustrated by the thoughts of several Iraqi citizens (you know, the people this war was supposed to help), the US presence is not helping. One civil servant says that it is a mistake to focus on the military when the problem is politics. The insurgency is still a problem, but the major focus, now that we've gotten ourselves stuck in this mess, should be on building a solid government, which is what the US promised Iraq, after searching in vain for WMDs, of course.
One Iraqi even called the escalation of troops "undemocratic," since it's not what the majority of Americans want. I have no comment on that, I think it speaks for itself. Another Iraqi said that the government has promised a lot but hasn't delivered. Iraq might become an American-style democracy after all.
But Bush wants more troops put in harm's way in Iraq. Another Iraqi citizen expressed fears that a greater US military presence might even escalate the violence. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein and installing a democratic government was a noble thought, but it didn't quite work in practice. Bush admitted to a "mistake" in his Iraq policy, but will sending in more troops correct it, or will more US soldiers and Iraqis die in pursuit of a so-far elusive goal (and the all but impossible goal of stamping out terrorism)? We'll have to wait and see.
A while ago, Saddam Hussein was executed for his crimes against his enemies. Bush says he didn't watch the video. I'm afraid I'll have to call bullshit on that, but don't hold me to it, I don't have any proof. I find it very hard to believe that Bush didn't watch the man who he said tried to kill his father getting hanged. We all know how much Bush loves a good execution, and this was the biggest one in years, and it was Bush's sworn enemy getting killed. Based on this circumstantial evidence, I have to conclude that Bush and his league of evil were sitting at the White House cheering as Hussein was led to the gallows. But like I said, I have no proof, so don't force me to take an oath and testify.
My political ranting aside, things are starting to look up for me. I've all but forgotten about the last two guys who screwed me over, and I got to see Dolphy and Angie after a way too long absence at Entre Nous last Saturday. Dolphy said she'd have something for me at Bound tomorrow night, so I'll be coming back to Club Lime to find out what she's got. I haven't been to Bound in far too long.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Assorted theological and political musings
As you may have noticed, I changed the name of my blog. The first title was off the cuff, uninspired, and every time I saw it I hated it. But I didn't change it, because I didn't know what to change it to. After seeing another blog subtitled, "From a godless liberal" I thought, this is perfect. What better phrase to encapsulate what my blog is all about? So I am now Salomedesade: Godless Liberal.
On to something I've been thinking about for a while. The Bible, that historical document/holy text that many believers take literally to the detriment of differing beliefs and rationality in general, works best as a surrealist novel. Like all works of fiction, it incorporates elements from the time it was written, so it has historical significance in that respect. The fantastical devices it employs, epic floods, voices in the sky, raising the dead, are not meant to be realistic, but are used to make a general point. Through the supernatural fiction elements, a basic theme of the nature of humanity and how to live comes through to most people, the ones who don't dwell on the gory punishment parts. While the Bible imparts valuable life lessons in parts, altruism and unconditional love, its implausible explanation of the creation of the world should not be taken literally to the detriment of real science and science education and it should not be used as an excuse to murder and pillage those who don't interpret it the same way. Have you ever heard of literature scholars killing each other over differing interpretations of Marquez's or Borges' (masters of magical realism) works? Maybe that's not the proper way to speak of a text that so many hold sacred, but like I said, I'm an unbeliever, and an English major.
My parents and I were talking about Gitmo today (we are all firmly opposed to "President" Bush's foreign "policy"), and my dad said he was surprised that Cuba hasn't kicked us out yet. After all, the US has been at cultural war with communist Cuba and its now ailing dictator Fidel Castro since the 1960s. So I was thinking, the US is housing prisoners suspected of plotting against America in a country they know hates America. For all we know, the Cubans are secretly aiding the "evil" Arab terrorists housed there (if any) in a massive plot to destroy America. But I'm the paranoid type.
On to something I've been thinking about for a while. The Bible, that historical document/holy text that many believers take literally to the detriment of differing beliefs and rationality in general, works best as a surrealist novel. Like all works of fiction, it incorporates elements from the time it was written, so it has historical significance in that respect. The fantastical devices it employs, epic floods, voices in the sky, raising the dead, are not meant to be realistic, but are used to make a general point. Through the supernatural fiction elements, a basic theme of the nature of humanity and how to live comes through to most people, the ones who don't dwell on the gory punishment parts. While the Bible imparts valuable life lessons in parts, altruism and unconditional love, its implausible explanation of the creation of the world should not be taken literally to the detriment of real science and science education and it should not be used as an excuse to murder and pillage those who don't interpret it the same way. Have you ever heard of literature scholars killing each other over differing interpretations of Marquez's or Borges' (masters of magical realism) works? Maybe that's not the proper way to speak of a text that so many hold sacred, but like I said, I'm an unbeliever, and an English major.
My parents and I were talking about Gitmo today (we are all firmly opposed to "President" Bush's foreign "policy"), and my dad said he was surprised that Cuba hasn't kicked us out yet. After all, the US has been at cultural war with communist Cuba and its now ailing dictator Fidel Castro since the 1960s. So I was thinking, the US is housing prisoners suspected of plotting against America in a country they know hates America. For all we know, the Cubans are secretly aiding the "evil" Arab terrorists housed there (if any) in a massive plot to destroy America. But I'm the paranoid type.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Post New Year's Eve report
I had an interesting weekend to close out the year. On Saturday I went to Entre Nous to help my friend Sharon celebrate her birthday, and it was one of my best trips to EN in a long time. I saw a lot of friends who I hadn't seen in a long time, and had a very nice bathroom break with someone (that's all I'm saying here, I'll leave the rest to your filthy imaginations). And Larry B. played some Def Leppard, which got my ass all over the dance floor. At the Bound/Entre Nous bash at the Republic Gardens on Sunday, I had a great time with all my friends, but two exes were also there, both with the new girlfriends they ditched me for. I hope I created a bit of an envious stir in them in my red dress (which I got several compliments on), but most likely they just ignored me. Although that would have been difficult if they were downstairs while James was using his vibrator glove on me. Maverick said they could probably hear me down the street.
I have to admit I got a bit depressed around midnight, with everyone off in pairs kissing each other to ring in the new year, and me all alone. But I got over that quickly, with my amazing friends coming up to me to wish me a happy new year (two asshole guys excluded). All in all, not a bad way to start the new year. Thank you to Todd and Jennifer, and Todd and Elena of LoveVoodoo, for hosting this huge event.
To all of you out there in my MySpace and Blogspot net universe, I wish you a happy new year, and I wish you the very best, even if the best is yet to come to me. Don't let me get you down with all of my complaining about the lack of love in my life.
I have to admit I got a bit depressed around midnight, with everyone off in pairs kissing each other to ring in the new year, and me all alone. But I got over that quickly, with my amazing friends coming up to me to wish me a happy new year (two asshole guys excluded). All in all, not a bad way to start the new year. Thank you to Todd and Jennifer, and Todd and Elena of LoveVoodoo, for hosting this huge event.
To all of you out there in my MySpace and Blogspot net universe, I wish you a happy new year, and I wish you the very best, even if the best is yet to come to me. Don't let me get you down with all of my complaining about the lack of love in my life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)