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 because 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