The State of the Arctic

A stunning update to the arctic climate research going on at the NOAA reinforces all the recent news that climate change at the poles is accelerating.


Old Ice vs New Ice - 1988, 199, 2001, 2005
[ download the PDF here ]

This AP article summarizes the basic conclusions, adding to the drum beat that we are heating things up:

"Signs of warming continue in the Arctic with a decline in sea ice, an increase in shrubs growing on the tundra and rising worries about the Greenland ice sheet.

"There have been regional warming periods before. Now we're seeing Arctic-wide changes," James Overland, an oceanographer at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Washington state, said Thursday.

For each of the last five years it was at least 1 degree Celsius (1.8 F) above average over the entire Arctic over the entire year, he said.

The new "State of the Arctic" analysis, released by the U.S. government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, also reports an increase in northward movement of warmer water through the Bering Strait in 2001-2004, which might be a factor in continuing reduction of sea ice."

But there is some interesting cross-currents in the data, from the LA Times article by Robert Lee Hotz:

"Yet the researchers also found new patterns of cooling ocean currents and prevailing winds that suggested the Arctic, long considered a bellwether of global warming, may be reverting in some ways to more normal conditions not seen since the 1970s.

Taken together, these findings may be evidence, the researchers said, of the region struggling to keep its balance, as rising temperatures slowly overturn the long-established order of seasonal variations.

'This is a region that is fighting back,' said lead author Jacqueline Richter-Menge, a civil engineer at the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory in Hanover, N.H. 'There are things that showed signs of going back to norms, trying to right themselves under very dire circumstances.' "

The dude's name is Hotz.

The Tragedy of the Commons

I had suspected that there would be some way to reconcile our sense of justice (the meek shall inherit) with evolution (only the strong survive) -- that altruism and goodness are not just foils to some needed "survival behavior" (aggressiveness, greed) but true driving factors in the success of the breed.

A terrific re-cap of our situation from Julia Whitty under MoJo's current cover headline "Evolve or Die", with some insights as concerns global warming, and maybe some tools that would allow us to understand our behavior as a species...

"The Thirteenth Tipping Point"

I was particularly taken with her spin on the idea of the Tragedy of the Commons. My take: if we all live in a system wherein selfish behavior almost certainly guarantees success (comfort, wealth, power, however you want to measure it), but selfless behavior provides the greatest success for all -- people will continue to act selfishly. This is the refutation of the old "industrial" notion that what's good for business is good for the nation: the calculated acts of selfish entities will serve the selfish entities, not the general welfare of the nation or planet.

And thus the tragedy is truly Shakespearian in nature. We are driven to construct and then act out our own doom. But Whitty allows this hope:

"A recent study hints at the evolution of altruism. A team of Swiss and American mathematicians and population biologists ran a variant of game theory known as a public goods game, in which players contribute money to a common pot that an experimenter doubles, divides evenly, and returns to the players. In ordinary play, if all players contribute all their money, everyone wins big. If one player cheats, everyone wins small. If an altruist and a cheater go head-to-head, the cheater wins consistently. This paradox is known as the Tragedy of the Commons.

But in the new computer variant, population dynamics were introduced into the game. Players were divided into small groups that played among themselves. Each player eventually "reproduced" in proportion to the payoff received from play—thereby passing her cooperator or cheater strategy to her offspring. Mutations and dispersions were introduced, creating a shifting population of individuals divided into groups of changing sizes and allegiances.

After 100,000 generations, the results were surprising. Rather than succumbing to the cheaters, the cooperators overwhelmed them."

So we can see that in the short term, cheaters (the selfish) will win; but a view from the ages holds nearly certain victory for the selfless.

Then consider the corporation, built to compete, if possible dominate, in an environment of world-wide commercialism, often ruthlessly self-serving. It may take several human generations for the corporation to spawn and evolve; tho the span of that cycle appears to be shrinking with our post-industrial, "flat-world" globalism. Still, if it takes something on the order of 100,000 generations to see the successes of "the commons", we're in for quite a wait -- if we're holding out hope for cycle No. 100,000, how does it feel to be at cycle No. 42?

In addition, now that we've built this economy around a resource that, when consumed, is slowly destroying the planet -- can we affect the situation? Are we, like a Hamlet, destined to drive to a dark ending? If this is true, it's almost frightening to conclude: we need to accelerate the economy in order to see the true pay-off.

But, is there a way to cheat the system for the common good? Doesn't evolution require odd mutations and transformative breaks in the line? There are examples of large-scale human benefits of commercial ventures I can think of: Indian casinos, Saudi and Alaskan oil windfalls, charity branding (such as Product RED, etc). I'm sure there are more, but these examples seem to rely on our selfish natures to give a common-good payday (we like to gamble, drive SUVs, shop). Like a lottery system that pays for public schools -- how do we wean ourselves of the bad behavior once we introduce it to the system?

But if we don't capitalize on our selfishness, we are left with this puzzle: how do we commercialize and exploit our generous natures? Otherwise, what's the business model for altruism? And how do we ask our species to take responsibility for our actions without requiring frequent flier miles or the free prize in the box? What does a corporation built for the common good really look like?

I am always brought back to the Bolivian water protests. A harsh example, to be sure, but there was a time when developed countries would provide assistance to third-world nations through NGO's like CARE -- we would teach the people who were not benefiting from the knowledge how to pump their own clean water through sustainable systems that fit their economies. Now corporations like Bechtel will try to find ways to make a buck; they do not introduce sustainable systems, that is not in the interest of the corporation. But the people protested, and were able to, at least in part, take back some control; after all, unlike oil, water is truly required for life.

I dread hearing that without some incentive (money, titilation, fame), people are not driven (to work, build, create). Of course, the most efficient (and significant) economic entities in human history had access to free labor, and the best incentive is a whip and a spear -- our species has traveled some distance in 5,000 years. As in evolution, if you leave it in ocean waters long enough, a hippo will turn into a dolphin. The tragedy then, is if the hippo still thinks he's a hippo -- and that the change has taken so long, he just doesn't notice.

Eventually, we are getting better and better and the game is playing to the good. There is solace in that, but we don't have to be passive players. We can push the game to get better faster, and given the pace of global warming, we had better get on it. So I agree with Whitty in this: we do not lack incentives for this evolution. We lack leadership.

Massachusetts is the New South Carolina

A new comprehsvie climate survey from the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment that shows how the cliamte here in Massachusetts will soon (by the end of this century) be on par with the climate that we're familiar with in South Carolina (from Boston.com):


"The study also predicted less snow, more extreme storms and frequent droughts -– key events that could harm tourism, agriculture and the region's economy.

'The very notion of the Northeast as we know it is at stake,' said Cameron Wake, an author of the report and an associate professor at the University of New Hampshire’s Climate Change Research Center. 'The near-term emissions choices we make in the Northeast and throughout the world will help determine the climate and quality of life our children and grandchildren experience.' "

Global warming study: Boston temperatures could mirror highs in South

The report is available from the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment -- the report in PDF form:

Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast, a report of the NECIA

Herding the Security Cats

I flew out to the west coast last weekend. The security lines were not as bad as I thought they might be, but I flew out of Providence instead of Logan to avoid the real mess (and possibly loose concrete ceiling panels). Here's a quick report:

First, I saw perhaps a half dozen people on four flights with drinking bottles: water, gatorade, iced tea. Second, on two flights, there were passengers that insisted on talking on their cell phones long after the atttendants asked for them to be turned off. Third, I sat next to a lady doing needle point -- she had a pair of scissors.

Now, I'll admit that I find the security rules to be ridiculous. But to see these completely unnecessary violations of protocal really made me think: the US will never be safe because we are too spoiled to allow rules to govern our lives. Even rules that might save our lives.

One fellow with a cell phone (vulgar, annimated, and loud) was talking to a friend (?) about skateboarding and a skatepark he had recently seen. Dude, it was f-ing this and f-ing that. Totally!

I mentioned to one young lady with the bottle of water (which I'm quite sure was vodka): "Wow, you brought on a bottle of water." And she replied, "Yeah. Did I do something wrong?" I said, "No, I guess not if you're thirsty." Then she and her husband ordered tomoato juices and poured in some of the "water". Cheers!

Am I a wuss for thinking that I should follow rules I don't agree with -- for the safety and respect of my fellow passengers? It makes you feel like they'd deserve whatever they got. Except I'm on the same f-ing plane. Dude.

Peak Oil Is No Myth

A very interesting debate between progressive thinkers on Peak Oil going down -- Greg Palast and Richard Heinberg:

Why Palast Is Wrong

An Open Letter to Greg Palast on Peak Oil

I guess this is in anticipation of a new book from Palast -- the BBC reporter who did so much work to get at the facts of the Florida Election debacle (in his earlier book, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy "). It sounds like Greg is splitting hairs on this, but it reminds me a lot of the spin-spin and counter-spin that added to the confusion around, for example, Global Warming (oh, it's not real, scientists disagree about it, it's effects are exaggerated for political reasons, etc.).

Cause it sounds like they agree on the big issues: conservation, alternative energy sources, environmental impact of a fossil fuel economy. Palast simply seems not to buy the fact that we are quickly running out of crude -- the rest appears to be a conspiracy (oil co's, govt, etc).

It's clear: the last barrel of oil is gonna be a whole lot harder to get than the first. Peak Oil is the point at which we have consumed as much as is left in the ground -- but we'll never get the total of the "second half". It seems important to understand this if we are to plan and manage a better scenario for the future. Even if we don't agree with an "oil crash" or other slightly more "apocalyptic" future-views, we can see the very serious implications of a country like China or India driving energy markets to price extremes that will make our economy strain.

While it's important to manage our fears, and check our businesses and government; it's more important to stay clear about the facts and focus on the truth. Eyes open folks; keep em open.

A Movie with Gore

Went to see "An Inconvenient Truth" tonight. A great movie and a great story. I had discussed the movie previous to seeing with a friend who was rather annoyed by two things: that it was "all about Al Gore" and that Gore used a Mac -- the constant product placement. Well, of course, Al Gore happens to be on the board at Apple Computer, so the product placement is rather a given (especially since the movie is basically about the "slide show" he has on his computer). But the personal stuff is the story in the movie -- I don't think the movie would have felt like a movie without that narrative. It would have felt like a slide show.

The scariest thing was the data graph showing the rising levels of CO2 -- when Al Gore gets on this electric lift so he can point out the "spike". Here is the study, conducted by a group from the University of Bern, specifically cited by Gore:

From a BBC News article:
"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years." (Thomas Stocker, study leader)

CO2 levels are higher than at any time in the last 650,000 year. Ack! And not just a little bit higher, but nearly 30-percent higher than at any time during that period. This is not a piddling look back a few hundred years, or even a few thousand years -- but over half a million years. Our civilization is just over 2000 years old. Our species is likely about 200,000 years old. We have never ever faced a crisis like this. Ever.

These are recorded levels (the lift is used to get to the predicted increase over the next fifty years); it gets pretty vertical!

Reading some of the blog posts in reply -- some millions or billions of years ago, CO2 levels were thru the roof. Al Gore is a nut case; he's Chicken Little. But the 650,000 year time frame is pretty much coincident with the appearance of our "species branch": modern man. Homo sapiens heidelbergensis dates back to approximately 800,000 years at the extreme. We have never lived through a geologic change of this scale.

The question is: why should we not do everything we can to assure that our species survives? That civilization can move forward beyond the next two generations? Why dismiss this?

One scene in the movie, Gore shows a slide that he says was from a Republican "slide show". It shows a scales with the word "Balance", and in one pan is a pyramid of gold bars, and in the other is the globe (I think representing "environmentalism"). Economy vs. ecology. Will some please explain to the Republicans how this is supposed to balance?

In the end, this is a very personal story; the movie was right about that. Even though it is a story that may touch and affect more than 9 billion people in less than fifty years, it is personal on a global scale. Each of our actions will have an intense and direct affect on everyone else. The politics of this are clear, too; as Robert Green Ingersoll famously said, “In nature there are neither rewards nor punishments; there are consequences.” The scale of those consequences are now readily apparent.

So I take the story very personally, too. And, hey, I get to write this blog on my very own PowerBook -- looks just like Al's.

Tech Support Guaranteed to Frustrate

From today's Boston Globe, an article by Keith Reed -- what's wrong with this concept:

"Next time your cable service is on the blink, log on to your computer instead of picking up the phone to get a little customer satisfaction. You might have to wait less to chat with a human being who can fix your problem than to talk with an agent on the phone. And they may be better equipped to help you."

What you don't see is the half-page photo-illustration in the paper edition: a man with a a notebook computer says, "My cable stopped working". Below, a service rep replies on another laptop, "Your cable modem appears to be swtiched off". An impossible scenario. Think.

You also don't see that on the front page is a little banner ad that reads "Online technical chat sessions are allaying computer angst".

Yeah, that's right. What if your cable service is your internet service? If your cable is out, how ya gonna chat? Wait less? Man, you are gonne be waiting a real long time. Didn't anybody catch this in editorial? I hate reading illogical twists like this -- especially since I've provided tech support on some fairly large scales. I know some nutty executive is going to try to convince his/her company to do away with phone support based on articles like this (I know cause it has happened to me).

What's worse is that the article is about ComCast, a company that I have to deal with almost daily, and a company that has just awful tech support. They are almost telling you that you need DSL or some other ISP if you expect support on your cable TV or phone service.

Stop the insanity.

Planet TV on Global Climate Change

I got hooked on this video podcast show some months ago cause it was funny and truly interesting. I was discussing global dimming with some colleagues, and one of my co-workers suggested I check out the show.

Admittedly, sometimes, they have crazy robot projects or people retrofitting jet engines on motor scooter. But Episode 172 was different -- an editorial on Gloabl Climate Change.

There’s a lot of head-in-the-sand behavior going on about so many things. The legacy we’re leave to the next generation is shameful — and I mean our environmental, ecomonic, and political legacy. And more so because we have been *consciously wreckless*.

If this doesn't explain the issue and the imperative for a change in our behavior as a species, then nothing will. Check out this show:


Click to watch the QuickTime movie
Transcript here.

Worst President Ever

The Worst President in History?

You're Not the Decider of Me

Bush: 'I'm the decider' on Rumsfeld

"I hear the voices, and I read the front page, and I know the speculation. But I'm the decider, and I decide what is best."

What an idiot. Does anyone else think he sounds like Ralph Wiggum?


Well, I guess so!

"I don't appreciate the speculation about Don Rumsfeld; he's doing a fine job; I strongly support him."

Don't appreciate? Didn't he say nearly the same thing about "Brownie"? So what is a decider, you ask?

Machine that always halts

It's almost funny.

Kunstler's Long Emergency

Just finished reading "The Long Emergency" by James Howard Kunstler, a very-very dark look forward to a time when we begin to run out of oil; ie. in about thirty years.

We will soon (or have already) gone past the point of "global oil peak" -- the halfway mark when we have consumed as much oil as is left in the ground. but, as Kunstler points out, the half we got is the easy half, the second half is going to be harder to extract and of much lower quality. There are no "hybrid" airplanes. Everything that's made from plastics or machined with power tools is about to become much more scarce. Our global economy is about to hit a giant speed bump.

When oil was first pumped in 1859, the poluation of the US was around 30 million, and the world population was around 1.2 billion. The population of the US has increased ten-fold in 150 years. The world population has about tripled. Kunstler makes it clear: these increases are sustained only by the massive use of cheap oil. The loss of fossil fuel on a population totally dependent on it results in: famine, disease, strife, and unrest. The past gave hints of the future: remember the gas lines? rolling black-outs? What happens to people working or living in 30-story skyscrapers when the power goes out?

Before we started pumping it, there were about 2 trillion barrels of oil in the planet. The world currently consumes about 84 million barrels per day; it will consume 103 million barrels per day by 2015, and 119 million barrels in 2025. At some point it will take more energy to extract the oil than is recovered; at which point we will be, essentially, out of oil -- we will never really recover all the oil in the planet. This oil was like an endowment; we could have invested it in something that would generate some kind of return -- we could have developed and built wind, solar, or geothermal technologies. Instead, we basically drove around a lot and burned away our inheritance.

Which sucks cause I really do like driving around a lot.

Kunstler takes it a step further -- a return to a regional economy, regional self-reliance, and regional governance. It sounds a bit like the Dark Ages run with computers. The loss of plentiful oil is double-compounded by the environmental legacy of our oil consumption: both the natural environment (global warming, industrial farming) and our built environment (suburbia, lack of mass transit). In 30 years, by the time the Long Emergency is in full swing, the world's population is expected to surpass 8 billion. One of the most thought-provoking books I've read in some time. Here's a good sampler:

An exceprt on the Rolling Stone Web SIte

Don't believe Kunstler? -- how about believing Chevron:

"It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil. We'll use the next trillion in 30."

TT Turns Two

I kept a little diary in my Palm when I decided to order the Audi and let go of the Mercedes:

- I ordered my TT 3.2 Roadster on January 17, 2004.
- Audi confirmed the order on the same day.
- Manufacturing scheduled for week 8/2004 (Feb 22).
- Manufacturing confirmation on January 27, 2004.
- Shipment notification from factory, March 11th.
- Arrival due into Davisville Port (RI) on March 12th.
- Released to carrier on March 17th.
- Arrival at Clair International (Boston) March 18th.
- Inspection and prep at Clair, March 20th.
- Delivery and driven home on March 22, 2004.

Since it was shipped from the factory in Gyor, Hungary, on March 11th, I think it's fair to consider this her 2nd birthday. That, plus it was such a nice day, I took the TT for a little tour with the new digital SLR and shot some reference shots that would really test the camera (chain link, wood siding, etc). I posted them on my .mac homepage, but the little wizard down-sampled the images. Click the full-res below to get a better idea of what the camera can do (original images from the camera are 3456x2304).

Great Posts on 228 Incident

Found these interesting blog posts via Misadventures in Taiwan Podcast:

228 was Chiang Kai Shek's fault!
Chiang's Grandson Suing Authors of 2-28 Report

More on ther Report itself on Taipei Times:
228 report provides food for thought

Also a link to more about the Report here:
[President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) with image of 228 victims]
Report blames Chiang for 2/28 incident

More about the 228 Incident here:
228 Memorial Museum

Screening: Hidden In Plain Sight

We're screening another movie -- this one is Paul's suggestion:


Hidden In Plain Sight

"'Hidden In Plain Sight' is a feature-length documentary that looks at the nature of U.S. policy in Latin America through the prism of the School of the Americas (renamed, in January of 2001, the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation), the controversial military school that trains Latin American soldiers in the USA."

February 26th (Sunday) at 1:30pm.

Same deal as before: big screen, LCD projector, lots of snacks. Donna asks you bring a non-perishable food donation for the food pantry. See you then!

To Annoy or Not to Annoy

Thank goodness someone is stepping up to challenge this:

Lawsuit challenges new 'e-annoyance' law

Here's what they say:

" The challenge to the 'annoy' law, filed in federal district court in Arizona, asks for a preliminary injunction barring federal prosecutors from enforcing the rule. It claims the law's invocation of the word 'annoy' is 'ambiguous, overbroad and vague' and violates the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "

Go get em. Or at least really annoy em!

[my previous post on this]

Banner Sent to the Peace Abbey

The Walpole Peace and Justice Group presented the banner on the Town Common again this morning, and then sent it on to the Peace Abbey in Sherborn, where it will be on display for a while. Unfortunately (very unfortunately), we have to update the stars.

We had great supportive waves and honks -- but it seemed that more folks felt comfortable yelling obscenities today. Not sure what that says about the mood of the country. One man called us "haters". I'm not sure how or why he reached that conclusion, but it's hard to imagine that he was shouting with anything but hate in his own heart. Another man yelled, "Yeah I do hope they all come home so they can pound your f---ing a--es!". Good morning to you, too!

By this evidence, those who support our troops are all about hate and violence. If our troops are in Iraq, I sure hope they don't carry this hate. We will never win a war of hearts and minds if they do. If our troops are in Iraq, I sure hope it's not because they believe violence will turn thoughts and feelings in that country. The imposition of our will on another nation through violence is the exact opposite of liberty. So, I hope our troops are people of peace, even if we have to carry guns. I certainly hope our troops do believe in liberty, even as they work to re-shape a nation we destroyed.

One man approached us in a curious way at first and left very angry when he understood our message. He said, "you should be glad they're over there so you can be free over here". To me, that's the non-sequitur: terror, 9/11, WMDs, freedom, service, democracy -- from where I stand it seems none of those things were ever, or are yet connected by the war in Iraq. In fact, I think we are losing more freedoms here very day because of the Patriot Act, the loss of power of the FISA Court, and the imperious policies of the current Administration.

But I think it's nearly impossible, with a President who equates peace protests with enemy aid, to have people understand that I do support our troops. Not only with my tax money ($440 billion?), but also in spirit. I truly believe that if there is any good to come of the fighting over there, it's because of the good work of our troops.

But that does not mean I agree with the policies (or the misguided reasoning!) that placed them there in the first place. Like Representative John Murtha, I believe that opportunity to do anything positive is, essentially, gone; we've done all we can. But today, we actually had some people approach us in order to make donations (do we take donations?), and also to join. Working with this group continues to fuel my hope.

Best Wiki Entry Ever!

I was just watching the Simpsons and homer was complaining that he could be sent to the South Pacific as a missionary becasue he did not believe in "Jebus" -- a quick Google search led to this entry:

List of neologisms on The Simpsons

Thought I'd share.

Extreme Pacifism

Ah. Love it when an idea in my head is manifested somewheres by some nuts:

Non-violet Protest-bots

Of course, this is happening in Spain, and the original post is in Spanish (click image on above Engadget link for translation):

"European activists are considering to unfold robots supplied with placards to protest against the leaders of the G8. A twenty of robots of meter fifty of height, equipped with stabilizers and being able to be mounted or to be operated by remote control, will be unfolded this summer in Edinburgo, according to information of the office of communications of activistasa.
The American military are considering to unfold robots armed with machine guns to fight against the Iraqian insurgents. A twenty of robots of a meter of height, equipped with cameras and operated by remote control, will be unfolded this spring in Iraq, according to information of agency Associated Press."

ANA Project 2007

Okay you facist clowns -- try to gas these troops!

The "Annoying" Law

I've had several (more like a never-ending series) of discussions with people about writing laws that require people to be "good". You can't legislate "goodness" -- it's stupid to try cause you end up with unbelievable arcane and useless laws that makes life complicated and frustrating. Like the "Blue Laws" here in Massachusetts. So I was really disturbed by this op-ed new item by Declan McCullagh on CNet:

Create an e-annoyance, go to jail

"Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.

It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.

This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison."

FAQ: The new 'annoy' law explained
Here is the language from the law:

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Man, there's so much annoying crap on the internet, how they gonna make this law work? And then why have the law at all? The key is, in order to be illegal, it must be the intent of the author to annoy. It's extra strange cause it sounds like you can be as annoying as you want so long as you reveal your identity. So, you gotta just feel sorry for the guy who runs "annoy.com". I means, it's annoy-dot-com -- what else is that site gonna be about?

Or how about the "best blonde joke ever" thing? I find that whole thing incredibly annoying. But like P2P file sharing, how they really gonna root it out and completely remove it from the internet -- it's linked everywhere!

Two years in Federal prison.

Googling Winston Chou

Oh no! Another Winston Chou -- and this guy is a real @-hole:

Forum on Peaceful Reunification

It's not me, Mom! I'd never accept the title of President of the Hong Kong Region China Peaceful Reunification Association. Wait. Huh? The what?

"It is an undeniable fact that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China," Chou said, noting that "the future of Taiwan only lies in reunifying with the motherland." He said the practice of the "one country, two systems" principle in Hong Kong and Macao demonstrates the tremendous success of the principle and that it is applicable to Taiwan as well.

When political toadies use words like "undeniable fact", " inalienable part", and "reunifying with the motherland", it sounds so damned sincere, right? And I guess it doesn't explain this:


Tens of thousands of people have taken part in a march in Hong Kong to demand a fully democratic political system. [BBC]
Check the Wikipedia entry
Organized by the CHRF
Also checkout: Hong Konger Front

I hope *my* posts and identity are messin *him* up! -- maybe get his butt elected President of the Hong Kong Region China Painful Re-education Association. Yeah. But, I suppose this is what I get for Googling my own name from time to time. And if you go to Google images, you'll find my long lost other-brother:


Larry Chou

The dude went to Winston Churchill High. What are the odds? And now by adding all this to my blog, I'm gonna totally screw it up. Yay! Google anarchy!

Worlds Apart Screening at WPL

The screening for the movie tonight (Jan 3rd) has been cancelled. It has been rescheduled for February 7th. Below is more info from the WP&J Press Reelase:

The Walpole Peace and Justice Group is continuing their speaker series ... at the Walpole Public Library. This month’s talk will be given by Tom Jackson. Mr. Jackson will screen his documentary, “Worlds Apart: 9/11 First Responders Against War”.

The film documents his trip to Afghanistan with 9/11 first responder, Megan Bartlett. It is a brutal and honest look at Afghanistan post U.S. invasion. Mr. Jackson will allow time for a discussion after the film with the goal of presenting ideas for taking nonviolent action for peacemaking. The speaker series is held the first Tuesday of each month at 7:30 at the Walpole Public Library. All talks are open to the public and the press is always welcome.

Here is a link to the film's web site with clips and more: Joe Public Films