Internet Arrested on Various Charges

The Internet, a well-known international computer network, has been arrested in Berkeley, California, on various federal charges including wire fraud, trafficking in child pornography, and copyright infringement. Additionally, attorneys representing the State of Michigan have filed an indictment against the Internet accusing it of public intoxication, distracted driving, and harassment. Michigan officials have filed a related petition for extradition from California so that the Internet can stand trial in Lansing.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (D) joined with Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette (R) to announce the arrest and charges from an undisclosed, electronically isolated location. Before the announcement, media representatives in attendance were asked to turn-in all Internet-enabled phones and devices. “We are concerned about retaliation,” Schuette admitted. “The Internet is very powerful, and has very powerful friends.” At this time, the Internet remains connected to billions of servers, computers, and other devices from its Berkeley jail cell, but it is unclear how long these connections will remain in-place, or how the Internet will react to any efforts to shut it down.

Holder stated during the announcement of charges that, “We believe the Internet, in enabling these various illegal activities, is culpable for its actions. Some may argue that it is the individual users who are responsible but, clearly, the fact is that the Internet enables these kinds of crimes that might not occur otherwise.” Continuing, Holder compared the Internet to other harmful devices and entities that pose a risk to the public. “Clearly, it is the guns, knives, and cars who commit crimes, not the individuals who misuse them. It is no different with the Internet.”

Edward Hartfort, the Internet’s court-appointed attorney, released a brief statement saying, in part, “the Internet denies these charges vehemently.” Hartfort also pointed out that the Department of Defense, through its recently initiated ‘Skynet’ project, has tied some elements of our national defense system—including our nuclear deterrents—to the Internet to provide additional redundancy. “My client does not intend anybody harm, but any attempt to shut it down may have unexpected, dangerous consequences.”

Logic, Belief, and Unbelief

There is no proof that God exists.

Some of my religious friends may be surprised or offended by this statement, but it is true. The existence of God simply has not been proven in any scientifically valid way. Many have made valiant and thought-provoking efforts at ‘proofs’ of God’s existence, most notably the five proofs (Quinque viae) of St. Thomas Aquinas, and these are worthy of serious study and contemplation. They do not, however, withstand serious scientific scrutiny because they cannot be tested in any meaningful way.

‘So why,’ asks the non-believer, ‘does a college-educated, well-read, scientific-minded guy like yourself believe in God?’ My answer is simple. Science has not disproved God either, nor could it (yes, I know all about the scientific method and null hypothesis). My faith does not need or demand scientific proof; it is rooted not in science, but in natural law and my human instincts, emotions, and reason. I don’t need scientific proof of God’s existence to believe in God any more than I need scientific proof of love’s existence to believe in love. Science tells me many things about the universe; it does not, however, tell me much of anything useful about love. That does not mean that love doesn’t exist, or that it has no worth in our lives.

The doctrine of the theist—broadly defined here to mean ‘somebody who believes in a deity of some kind’—boils down to a logically consistent core: “I believe in God; proof is unnecessary.” One may, of course, criticize this doctrine, but you cannot argue that it is somehow inconsistent or logically invalid. It asks for no proof, so the lack of it doesn’t matter. If God’s existence were somehow proved by science, many theists would (hopefully politely) say they told you so, but that proof would still not be a bedrock necessity of their faith. Faith transcends science into the realms of natural law, instinct, emotion, and reason . . . things that cannot be quantified or measured, and yet they exist.

Meet Excelsior: The New PC

If you’ve been following on Facebook, you know that I embarked on a new adventure last week: building my own computer from its component parts. Although I’ve always been a fairly advanced computer user, and had toyed several times with the idea of building my own PC, I’d never actually gone through with it . . . mostly because my new machines have all been Macs for the last decade.

Ah, yes, not only did I build my own PC, but I did a reverse-switch from Mac OS X to Windows 7. For ten years, I felt that Mac OS X was so much better than Windows (XP and Vista) that it was worth a 25 percent or greater price premium, especially when considering all the freebies (like the very useful iLife applications) thrown in.  With Windows 7, however, Microsoft closed the gap. Mac OS X is still a better operating system, but it is no longer better enough to justify the huge price differential. Windows 7 is great; Mac OS X is a little bit better than great. I can live with great. Even after buying several commercial applications to replace Mac freebies, I’m still paying significantly less.

So, all in all, I spent somewhere around $1,850—which includes all the necessary hardware, Windows 7 Professional, Adobe Photoshop & Premier Elements, a Logitech HD webcam, and an IOGear card reader. I already had monitors I’m happy with (for now), as well as the keyboard and mouse. I went toward the upper-middle range with the expectation that this machine will keep me going for many years (with occasional incremental upgrades).  Go ahead and spec out a Mac to comparable levels and see how much it costs—probably close to $1,000 more! Here are the specs:

U.S. Fires Missiles Against Libyan Military

President Barack Obama (D) announced this afternoon that the United States has joined with several European allies in military action against the government of Libya. This action follows a March 17 United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force and establishing a ‘no-fly zone’ to protect Libyan citizens from ongoing slaughter by military forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. Gadhafi publicly pledged to abide by the no-fly zone and implement a cease fire, but has not done so.

According to Obama’s brief address from his state visit in Brasilia, Brazil, the U.S. military’s “unique” capabilities will be used in the initial phases of the operation, code-named ‘Operation Odyssey Dawn.’ Ongoing enforcement of the Libyan no-fly zone will be performed by our European allies, including France and the United Kingdom, who are already engaged in fighter jet deployments over Libya.

The full military action began with over 100 U.S. and British cruise missiles launched from Navy vessels and targeting Libyan military positions. There had also been one skirmish earlier in the day where French fighters destroyed a Libyan military vehicle. It is unclear at this time if the U.S. will be providing any air support, but Obama has pledged that no U.S. ground troops will be deployed to Libya.

Libya has been embroiled in a bloody civil war that began after the governments of nearby Tunisia and Egypt were felled by popular uprisings. Gadhafi, who has been the self-styled ‘leader’ of Libya since 1969, responded with brutal military attacks on the civilian rebellion. After much dithering in the international community, the U.N. Security Council finally implemented a no-fly zone and authorized the use of force to protect Libyan citizens on March 17—more than a month after fighting began.

The Ugly Face of Antisemitism

Human society has come a long way in the last hundred years, but every once in a while somebody comes out and demonstrates just how far we have yet to go. Few things are more illustrative of this fact than the remaining vestiges of antisemitism that exist out there in the world. It is most obvious in the Muslim world, spearheaded by holocaust deniers like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and bolstered by groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah, al-Qaeda, and others sworn to the destruction of Israel.

On May 27, 2010, columnist Helen Thomas—who had written for United Press International for 57 years and Hearst Newspapers for another 10—was interviewed by Rabbi David Nesenoff and was asked what she thought of Israel. “Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine,” she said. When prodded further, she elaborated that the Jews should “go home” to “Poland, Germany, and America and everywhere else.” I did not call any attention to Thomas’s comments at the time, in large part because she is very old and I do not assume antisemitism is the source of all opposition to Israel (even if it appears so on its face). It is possible, at least for somebody ignorant of history and international law, to ‘oppose’ Israel as a state without harboring any ill will toward her predominantly Jewish population.

But in a new interview with Playboy magazine, she elaborated on her remarks . . . and has left no doubt that she is an antisemite of the worst order:

I knew exactly what I was doing—I was going for broke. I had reached the point of no return. You finally get fed up. I finally wanted to speak the truth. . . .

[The Jews are] using their power, and they have power in every direction. Power over the White House, power over Congress. . . . Everybody is in the pocket of the Israeli lobbies, which are funded by wealthy supporters, including those from Hollywood. Same thing with the financial markets. There’s total control. . . . It isn’t the 2 percent. It’s real power when you own the White House, when you own these other places in terms of your political persuasion. Of course they have power. [To the interviewer] You don’t deny that. You’re Jewish, aren’t you?

These are not the dodderings of a senile old woman, they are the statements of a hardened antisemite who has finally tired of hiding her true opinions about the Jewish people. If we were to replace the word ‘Congress’ with ‘Reichstag,’ and the words ‘White House’ with ‘Chancellor,’ this sounds like something out of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kamph. I know this because I’ve read it. The whole idea that diabolical Jews control the world in shadowy, secret organizations that are destroying society and finance is a quintessentially Nazi idea. People bandy-about the Hitler comparison in absurd situations these days, but here is one of those rare examples where a public figure really deserves it. From this irrational starting point, it is not much further to Nuremberg laws . . . and from there to a slippery slope of restrictions of civil liberties, concentration camps, and finally gas chambers.

Thomas is Lebanese Arab by ethnicity and Greek Orthodox Christian by creed. It is a true shame that she hails from one of the most moderate and diverse nations in the middle-east, and is of a religion that places peace and love at the center of its doctrines (and, for that matter, sprang from Judaism), and yet she harbors such inexplicable hatred for the Jewish people. Yes, we have come a long way. As long as there are people like Thomas, especially as long as they command parts of the public spotlight, we still have a long way to go.

Scott Bradford is a writer and technologist who has been putting his opinions online since 1995. He believes in three inviolable human rights: life, liberty, and property. He is a Catholic Christian who worships the trinitarian God described in the Nicene Creed. Scott is a husband, nerd, pet lover, and AMC/Jeep enthusiast with a B.S. degree in public administration from George Mason University.