Month: March 2007 Page 3 of 4

Popular Support for the Rule of Law . . . in Pakistan

By MB

On March 16, 2007

It seems that things are heating up in Pakistan. Earlier this month, Gen. Pervez Musharraf suspended the Chief Justice of Pakistan’s Supreme Court, ostensibly for “misuse of authority.” However, as noted in this BBC piece, the Chief Justice has “a reputation for taking a firm line against government misdemeanours and human rights abuses.” As news of the Chief Justice’s removal spread, so did protests. Today, it was reported that:

Police in the Pakistani capital Islamabad on Friday used tear gas to clear the offices of the private Geo news channel as it broadcast live footage of clashes with protesters.

Windows were smashed in the lobby as officers tried to interrupt transmission of violent scenes near the Supreme Court, where suspended chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry stood before a panel of judges over allegations of misuse of office.

Undoubtedly, some of the motivation behind the protests is political. Nawaz Sharif (former prime minister, deposed by Musharraf) and Benazir Bhutto (also former prime minister, lost (in a questionable election) to Sharif) are adept at stirring protests into action when it benefits them. But the discontent that has erupted in response to the Chief Justice’s removal seems to go far beyond business as usual. As the Washington Post reports:

“Nothing like this has happened during the time Musharraf has been in power,” said Ayaz Amir, a columnist for the English-language Dawn newspaper. “This has shaken the country. It has shaken the government. This is the most serious situation Musharraf has faced, and it has all the potential of getting out of hand and turning into something bigger.”

It may be strange to think of Pakistan – a country that generally welcomed its military dictator when he first took over – as being all that concerned with the rule of law. But that may well be what we have here.

Perhaps there’s hope for VA Republicans

By MB

On March 13, 2007

In Policy, Politics

Get this: today, an elected Virginia Republican said something making national news, and it wasn’t hate-filled or embarrassing!

In all seriousness, though, I’m glad to see Sen. Warner standing up for what’s right:

I respectfully but strongly disagree with the chairmanâ€™s view that homosexuality is immoral.

Now, this doesn’t mean I expect him to start helping Rep. Meehan get this policy changed, but it’s a wonderfully refreshing change from what we’ve come to expect from his side of the aisle. Here’s hoping for more.

Also, check out Jeff Huber’s take on the matter. He’s retired Navy, and knows a thing or two about the matter at hand.

Putting the Public in Public Hearings

By MB

On March 13, 2007

In Distribution, Policy, Politics

Carl Malamud‘s recent work at finding a way to ensure that video of all open proceedings at the Capitol is freely available is a fantastic example of active citizenship. He’s just given Speaker Pelosi a report on his efforts, which I quite recommend as reading to anyone with even a passing interest in the mechanics of making public proceedings available to the public. For the rest of you, though, it can be summed up as this:

Based on 25 years of experience in the field of computer networking and a 2-year investigation of this specific issue, I have absolutely no doubt that it is technically and financially feasible for the U.S. Congress to provide a permanent broadcast-quality video record of proceedings and hearings for download on the Internet. Technically speaking, this is a â€œno-brainer.â€ This is simply a matter of will.

Make sure your Representatives put their will behind this effort.

Viacom Sues Google for $1B

By MB

On March 13, 2007

In Distribution, Policy, Tech

Looks like I got my wish. I’d much prefer seeing this in the news to where they’re going to bury Britney’s hair, anyway.

Gen. Peter Pace: Morally Unfit for Command

By MB

On March 13, 2007

In Policy, Society

As you may have heard, Rep. Marty Meehan has introduced legislation to repeal the US military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Gen. Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked about the issue by the Chicago Tribune. And this is what the top military officer in this country has to say about men and women currently under his command:

I believe homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.

[ . . . ]

I do not believe that the armed forces of the United States are well served by saying, through our policies, that itâ€™s okay to be immoral in any way, not just with regards homosexuality. So from that standpoint, saying that gays should serve openly in the military to me says that we, by policy, would be condoning what I believe is immoral activity.

Too bad he and the other generals don’t feel so free to pass public judgment on the morality of so many other issues facing the military today.

Militarizing Space

By MB

On March 12, 2007

In Policy

James Oberg, a 22-year NASA veteran writing at the Space Review, has an interesting piece up in which he examines (what he posits to be) myths and half-truths that stand in the way of a “trustworthy set of international reality-based agreements regarding constraints on future actions in space or on Earth.”

The militarization of space is one of those public policy areas in which very few actors drive policy. We could all do with a little more education on the subject, I think.

Via Slashdot.

E-book Readers

By MB

On March 11, 2007

In Distribution, Tech

Well, it seems like someone has finally squeezed a dedicated e-book reader into (what strikes me as) an ideal form-factor. Unfortunately, that’s probably the easiest challenge that e-book reader manufacturers face. While I’ve got piles of electronics in the basement proving that I’m one of those early adopter suckers that Joel Johnson was talking about, I wouldn’t even consider buying an e-book reader until I knew that I could:

buy (most) every new title in a compatible format from multiple online vendors (I imagine old titles would be made available by demand and genre);
freely transfer/back up the title (i.e., no DRM); and
download any available title at most major bookstore physical locations (e.g., I could buy a copy of Robert Kaplan’s latest just before I got on a flight at DCA).

I suspect that e-books and paper books will have less of an overlap market than publishers think. Personally, I’ve occasionally read works entirely as an e-book (e.g., Cory Doctorow’s Someone Comes to Town, Someone Leaves Town, David Weber’s On Basilisk Station, and an assortment of Strange Horizon‘s stories), but I’d much rather use it as a supplement. A significant portion of my reading is done while on the move, and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve regretted leaving what I really wanted to read at home in favor of something a little more portable (this is why it took me forever to finish Infinite Jest, and the Baroque Cycle has become an exercise in reading the first ten chapters, over and over . . . ). So, if my conditions above were met, I’d most definitely be willing to invest in an e-reader, and either buy e-books on their own, or pay a premium for a paper copy that gave me rights to an electronic copy.

Sunday Reading

By MB

On March 11, 2007

In Distribution, Personal, Society

The NYT has a piece that touches on the question of what Gen. Pervez Musharraf means to the United States. It’s an important question – far more important than the two page treatment it gets there. I do fear that it will become a political question in the US before the US even understands the question.

Jack Landers wonders what happened to public admiration of courage, valor, and honor:

Right this second, without resorting to Google, can you name a single decorated American war hero from the war in Iraq? It’s not as if there aren’t soliders and Marines over there doing extraordinarily heroic things in battle every day. It’s that nobody cares enough to tell their stories anymore. Not the Bush administration, not the media, not the general public. This is not a problem coming from the right wing or the left wing. It’s everybody.

Personally, I think it’s some combination of the cleaving of society (those who see nothing but brave soldiers, and those who see nothing but the immediate aftermath (a vast oversimplification, admittedly)) and a general loss of the concept of hero. In a way, we’ve seen almost every mythologized hero (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr.) deconstructed to show his human failings. So why make more? Until modern mass media can bring itself to grasp the concept of a uman hero, instead of a mythical one, I don’t think we’ll be seeing coverage of heroes any time soon.

Harper’s John MacArthur poses the question we Americans who support withdrawal from Iraq should all be considering: who gets left behind? And speaking of Harper’s, I reread this amazing Jonathan Lethem essay on plagiarism this morning. I won’t pretend to recognize all of the literary references it in, but that’s one of the points. It’s not a work aimed at a popular audience (something I am always appreciative of), but it’s absolutely worth a read:

A time is marked not so much by ideas that are argued about as by ideas that are taken for granted. The character of an era hangs upon what needs no defense. In this regard, few of us question the contemporary construction of copyright. It is taken as a law, both in the sense of a universally recognizable moral absolute, like the law against murder, and as naturally inherent in our world, like the law of gravity. In fact, it is neither. Rather, copyright is an ongoing social negotiation, tenuously forged, endlessly revised, and imperfect in its every incarnation.

And in service of jarring our perspective a bit: I was going to post a link to Slate’s photo series on bored couples, and extol its capture of the ordinary. And then I came across this photo by James Natchwey, who helps reminds us that our ordinary isn’t always.

London, We Have a Problem

By MB

On March 10, 2007

In Personal, Society, UK

I have absolutely no intention of ever getting a National ID card. The government doesn’t need my fingerprints, biometric details, addresses, driving licence details or my insurance numbers. As a result, it looks like the Home Secretary won’t renew my passport when it comes due in 2009. I trust the British government with my details even less than I trust the US government (and they’ve earned that distinction.)

I cannot believe that I’m saying this, but David Cameron’s Tories are increasingly looking like a reasonable response to the overreaches of Labour.

More (opposition) info about the national identity card scheme here.

So much for that

By MB

On March 10, 2007

In Cycling, Personal

All set for the first race of the season (first snowed out, second injured out) and then . . . the Man keeps me down.