THE EPIC OF LIRBJA FONE. i am italicized. bejai is not. well. he is so much more than not italicized!!! bejai is font, system of writing, mindsharer pleasure center itself. bejai is sun itself. well. hm. he would disagree. but he is the sun. this shit is 5,418 words long. fuck!!!! yess?! yea its a goodness i have decided. it is good to talk so even tho he will be tired. he doesnt have class tmrw tho. usually i talk way more don’t worry. this time it was like a blogterview.

April 20, 2010

the days blur together like…candles…in the dripping wax…of time. also there’s so much, no, not so much, but there’s a tiny bit of gunk under my toenail. mhm.

anything else?

*yawnnnn* nomnomnom. my hands are in my pants.

really? what are they doing there?

being kept warm. it’s kind of chilly.

um. is it true that…it’s comforting to have your hand on your dick? like, not…sexually?

i like to, sometimes, my hand likes to live…kind of…in my pubic region? i think there is sort of something comfortable about it, but i think it has to sort of do with the pants being warm.

really? then why don’t you just touch your pants?

you do. you put your hands in your warm pants.

so it’s not your dick then?

no. not specifically.


um. hmmm. *yawwwnnn* why did the thin hippopotradamus go on and on about a dick in his hand?

no, he called it the mix cd. i mean he called the mix cd it. but he talked about it later.

that’s a great idea. to introduce each song on a cd like with a radio announcement.

that’s not what he did.

i know but it’s a great idea. i would make you one with all beach boys songs but it would make you sad.

no, actually, i think i can handle it now.

*yawnnnnnn* i had a giant yawn. they call me mister yawn. doodoodooo.

i’m blogging all of this.

really? REALLY?! still?!

is that ok?

mhmm. you know the couch in well-being heiss? not the one in the bay windows? what do you think of it? well, my dirty underwear is here on the floor, with my socks. but do you have any opinion about it? aesthetically?

that’s an odd question! isn’t it the same as the other one?

they are so different!

they are both maroon i thought!

yeahhhh. describe it.

it’s maroon right?

do you picture it as a solid color in your head?

yeah. wait, is it not?!?!?!

it’s like orange and brown!


yeahhh! i was looking at it and i was like woahhh, it’s like plaid, orange and brown! it’s like such a couch! i can’t decide if it’s ugly or not.

it’s probably not ugly. what do you mean it’s such a couch?

aren’t all couches such couches? i think maybe though. well. the couch that’s maroon, is the one with all the papers on it.

isn’t it true that the other one might have had paper on it but then someone took the paper away?

yeah! *yawnnnnn*

say something wildly interesting.

is that a MOLE on my leg?! or is it the eiffel tower!

more interesting.

okay okay, i will do better than that. *laughs hysterically* is that a planter’s wart? or are you just happy to see me?!

what’s a planter’s wart?

they’re like ugly warts that people get on their feet.

why are they called planter’s warts?

i don’t know, thats’ just what they’re called.


this is not wildly interesting.

it’s not?! okay okay, i will say something interesting. um. ummmmm. [silence]


according to alternet, jp morgan chase this year made 12 billion in revenue but it’s not only paying taxes but it’s getting tax breaks from the government.

is that unusual?

i don’t know if its unusual but it doesn’t seem right. this was a very angry article. it was like all of the investment banks are getting record profits and paying record bonuses but they also don’t pay any taxes.

how much do you trust alternet?

i haven’t made up my mind yet. i trust it as much as the nytimes but i don’t trust the nytimes.

really?!?! not more than the nytimes?

yes, in terms of the opinions being more like mine, but not in terms of presenting facts. i have the same amount of trust for most media sources in presenting facts, and it’s really low. my trust in alternet may increase because i’ve only been reading it for 2 weeks but i may read it more. whereas the nytimes, i have a long relationship with it, and so it’s less likely that i will trust them more in the future. also with like slashdot, i trust them a lot but they don’t make such claims you know? like slashdot is like submissions from internet readers saying that things are interesting. it’s not claiming to be the truth perse. so i trust it cuz they’re way less ambitious.

mhm. its weird that we trust less ambition. it’s weird that we trust humbleness.

i think trust is the wrong word. i guess it’s not like i’m more likely to believe it. i respect the fact that it’s not saying opinions are facts.

do you believe in fact? do you believe in the existence of fact? do you believe that fact is fact?

no but i believe there is  distinction between something generally referred to as fact and something generally referred to as opinion and they exist on some kind of continuum that our language does not adequately express but is probably useful in some sense.

what is useful?

that trope i guess, of fact vs. opinion.

what’s trope?

or like, i don’t know. that continuum.

but what’s trope.

trope would be like…

is that a kind of mold?

like theme, i guess?


yeah, like a trope, it’s like a literary term i think originally, so it’s like a recurring like idea or set of ideas. that like come up again and again. so like in this case it would be like the idea of fact against opinion, is like a trope that comes up a lot of times in discussing media, even though it’s like poorly defined.

do you think we should define it?

i think it’s a task bigger than my current brain capacity at this hour. but i think we should definitely define it in the future.

do you. do you think that. i don’t know that i could define fact. i think it is all hoobledy gobbledy. like. i think it is all purple snake post-its you know?


like scissors rock finger doom, like a flood battery.

are you talking really slow because you’re also typing?


and you’re also talking funnier because you’re typing it. like you’re talking how you blog which is interesting. through your fingers, i blog the way i talk.

what does that mean? tell me more.

like i say something in the way i talk, and then it comes to your blog as the exact same thing via your fingers. like you blog something but it comes to my ears as the exact same words as you blogged it.

your words?

no, your words. it’s still your words. we’re talking about you.

no but i’m transcribing your words exactly.

noooo. both of us. i said something the way i talk, like normally. then you wrote it down on your blog. so my blogging was in the manner of my talking. does that make sense?

my blogging you mean?

your blogging of my words. my voice on your blog. whereas you on the other side of the conversation, you were blogging the way that you blog.

you mean i was talking the way that i blog?

no no no. you’re. i mean yea. you’re blogging the way that you blog and speaking that out to me. meaning you’re talking the way you blog. meaning i’m blogging the way that you talk. the way that i talk. but through your fingers. but it’s still like me because my voice, like my words, are entering the blogosphere. so it’s like i am blogging.

ohhhhh. so basically, i am your scribe.

well yea, but what makes it interesting is that my, on your blog, my part of the blog is coming out the way i blog, whereas  your part of my conversation is coming out the way you blog.

so, your side of the conversation is normal, because you’re talking normally. my side of the conversation is bloggy because i’m blogging. your side of the blog is conversational. my side of the blog is bloggy?

*exasperated sigh* wait read that back to me?

you said, “my side of the conversation is normal, because i’m talking normally. your side of the conversation is bloggy because you’re blogging. my side of the blog is conversational. your side of the blog is bloggy?”

yeah yeah yeah. except for…yeah. i guess it doesn’t matter.


let’s say something nice.

like dolphie? a cutie baby named dolphie was sleeping soundly in a bed. and along came dolphie’s good friend renoir. “dolphie,”  renoir said, —


are you still blogging?!


then why did you say to say something nice!

so that the blog post can end on something nice!

i feel like that deserves a different kind of story!

ok! give it to me.


oh by the way i’m drinking coke zero. isn’t that weird?

that’s SO weird. today i cooked bananas but they didn’t come out as good as usual..

nooo whyyyy?

i don’t know, they stuck to the pan but they usually never stick to the pan!

today i left a banana on loren’s pillow and he took it to eat at his staff meeting.


why is that funny?

because you said it really slowly. with pauses in weird places.

it’s cuz i’m blogging.

i know but it’s still funny-sounding. i am but a little baby. toodootooodoooo do doo dooo.

hey um should i be worried that i give him despair? he said it didn’t come from me though.

well if it doesn’t come from you then i don’t know.

cuz i was like trying to get him to say more about it.


and then i was like well i didn’t think it would come from me, the despair, because i don’t think i’m so big to be able to give someone despair, you know?

mhm. are you still blogging?

is that ok?

yea i guess.

why do you guess?

um it’s making you talk realllllllly slowly, but i like think it’s fine because i think it leads you to, i imagine it helps you get your thoughts clearer so it ends up being faster.

faster than what?

like saying three sentences that you haven’t like thought about.

mhmmm. well the thing is, i’m talking slowly because i wanna tell you exactly what happened.

well that’s my point, that’s why it’s ok. if you were just talking slowly and it had no benefits for me,  it would be annoying. but you’re being really precise.

well. don’t you love me?

of course i love you!

but like just slowness would annoy you?

it wouldn’t like annoy me a lot but would be like an annoyance. but it wouldn’t make me not wanna talk to you, you know?

so you’d still wanna talk to me?

i’d just be a little annoyed by that thing.

aw i wish you wouldn’t be. actually, it’s really cute that you would be!

well i feel like it’s no different from any little annoying thing that someone could do.

well, you don’t get annoyed very easily!

that’s true. i’m using the term annoyance in very vague way.

what way?

like sometimes the sound of people chewing annoys me. but when you chew, it doesn’t annoy me.

it does annoy you when i chew! i can tell!

sometimes. but sometimes the sound of someone chewing, especially on the phone, is a little annoying but i’d wanna talk to you anyway. this would be a similar thing.

but this isn’t even the same thing because there is a point to the slowness.

but i was saying, if there wasn’t a point it would annoy me the same way. but yeah, back to loren. this would be such a HUGE blog post. you should copy and save it somehow so it doesn’t accidentally not post.

yea i will! yeah. um. um. so yeah loren was like, you don’t bring the despair. and i was like yeah, i was hoping you’d say that, because i don’t think i’m so big that i can give someone despair you know. do you understand that?

i think so…

do you want me to break it down?


are you sure?

yea. i think i get it intuitively, and also just know what it means.

yea cuz we don’t speak the same language sometimes, usually.

well i feel like you blogging means you’re speaking a different language than usual.

you’re saying it’s clearer when i’m blogging?

no i said it was NOT clearer. i said i DIDN’T think that.

ok. so where were we? do you remember?


do you wanna go?

i wanna hear the rest of the story! then i wanna go to bed.

you can go now if you want!

no i wanna hear the story!

ok. so loren was like, the despair doesn’t come from you. and i was like, yeah, i was hoping you’d say that, because i don’t think i’m so big that i can give someone despair you know? like that’s arrogant. i didn’t say arrogant but that’s what i meant. arrogant is so hard to type! um. so yeah. say something?

what do you mean?

that was good. so then i was, like being humble right, and he made this scoffing sound!

a what sound?

scoffing sound. do you wanna guess why?


do you wanna guess?

cuz he’s a hippopotamus?

haha no, that’s not the right answer.

because? he’s a scotch? tape?

he’s not scotch!

i tried to make scotch sound a little like scoff, like a scoff tape. like a baby tape?

he is a baby. he is SO baby.


um. yeah. so he scoffed. and this was so good. do you know why he scoffed?


he said to me “YOU ARE SO BIG.”


isn’t that so nice?


like, i am big. for him. i can make impact. i have consequences. that’s unusual. is that unusual?

what do you mean? not for you! you seem to impact everybody that you meet!

but no one thinks i’m big.

i think you’re big! i think you’re big!

well you just love me cuz you’re my mom!

but you’re so HUGE! you are like, in the way that he is talking about, you’re SO BIG!

what is that way he is talking about?

the way that you have the power to make him feel despair!

but noooo! i don’t wanna make him feel despair!

but you inspire big things. like big emotions. because you are big.

i’ve wanted to be big for so long.

you’ve always been big! it’s hard for you to see because everyone else looks small.

today i felt small because all the professors were hating, trying to catch me riding dirty!

trying to catch me riding dirty! trying to catch me riding dirty! trying to catch me riding dirty! i’m in my dirty car! now i went to the car wash! now they can’t catch me riding dirty! cuz my car is clean CLEAN! so fresh and so clean CLEAN! trying to catch me riding dirty! trying to catch me riding dirty! trying to catch me riding dirty! trying to catch me riding a bicycle!

that was a surprise ending!

yeah! haha. now i’m back. back to life back to reality. ok!




i love you!

i love you too mommy.

i am just a little koala bear.

awwwwwww! why is no one else so loving and saying of loving soft things like confessing to be different types of bears! today i saw a field guide to new england! SO MANY CUTE BIRDS WITH CUTE FEATHERS!

little birdy?!?!


flap flap

flap flap

um. we are Lirbja.

i am or you are?

we are!

we are.

the adderall has kicked in.

*laugh* shall you get to your work and me to my sleep?

yeah. oh god it’s ecstasy. *pant* it feels so good! i love it everything is good. i won’t do it too much don’t worry.

don’t worry!

it’s just….do you judge me?

no! no judgment, only worry! no judgment.

why worry?

i’m afraid of drugs, you know that.

i’m sorry i know i know i’m sorry!

my worry is not debilitating.

it is so rare. taking of drugs you know. i’ve had this pill for months. since epic j. ernie. i’ve saved it for now. i have self control.

i understand. mhm me too.

hahaha what do you mean me too?

no i said you do.


but i have self control too. sometimes i don’t go to the bathroom when i have to because i have class so  i don’t go even if there’s a line.

you’ve come so far!

no no no i was talking about pizzle. i was trying to be silly. i see your mistake though.


the other thing happens too.

um. do you know that i think you are great?

yeah i do. i think you are great too.


you’re so great!



i feel small you know. the professors make me feel small.

don’t feel small you’re so big! they are small in comparison. that is why they lash out like little small people.

like ants? i like ants though.

no like. those angry. like those angry tea party people.

boston tea party?

well yes kind of . well no.

what do you mean?

well the tea party, they are the dwindling white majority so they are lashing out!

i’ve never heard that phrase “tea party”!

really?! like the tea party-ers?

yeah! i’ve never heard that.

you should look at alternet! they have an article right now you should see. the times has one too.

what the fuck? are they racist?

the general consensus is that they’re disproportionately racist people, like at one tea party convention they were saying racial slurs.


they were saying racial slurs to the black congressman and throwing bricks at the windows of congresspeople they don’t like. i still read the nytimes op-ed section.

they still have that program at wesleyan?

yea it’s smaller now. though less people take the paper now for some reason. but i took one. the tea party, it’s like an issue, that the literati are talking about i guess.

the digerati?

i said the literati.

the digerati is also a cool word for it!

yeah. they are talking about how the tea party movement is getting angry and the republican party needs to disavow it. like sarah palin was making a map [[[……]]] *garble lost*

what is she doing? still trying to be president?

i don’t think ssarah palin could ever defeat barack obama, she is too radical.

i never thought of radical as right!

people talk about the radical right.

i feel like i’ve lost the politics because of the novel. i feel like i’ve lost the politics!

nooo. if the newspaper wasn’t lying here i wouldn’t know what’s going on right now. certainly important things happened, like john paul stevens–

who the hell is john paul stevens?

liberal justice, he is retiring cuz he’s like 90. barack obama would choose someone more toward the center than stevens.

fuckkk, why?!

i don’t know! a lot of people thought barack obama was really progressive cuz he is black, and that’s racist. and they thought hillary clinton was not because she was saying some rather aggressive things. it was so obviously a gender dynamic thing that made her come across as more towards the right than she was.

alene made a good point though, to take politicians’  words at face value, especially when they’re on aggression.

barack obama just didn’t seem aggressive during the campaign.

like his rhetoric?

yeah. hillary clinton was doing something unprecedented, like a woman running for president. in that situation, not taking into account the gender dynamics, with the excuse of taking what politicians are saying at face value, is ridiculous i think. because obviously gender dynamics are huge in any situation.

i know but like. i don’t know if alene was saying that. like if hillary needs to talk aggressive to be president, she also might need to walk aggressive to be president.

yea but barack obama is no peace-monger!

ha ha peace-monger!

i was really disappointed by barack obama and the peace movement thing.

he’s doing the anti-missile thing though!

he’s just continuing what bill clinton was doing.

ohh, i didn’t know bill was on that.

yea, barack obama is going back to the clinton line. it was one of those things where he really didn’t change much about the policy. but it’s like so depressing, but it’s like, ha ha, now instead of having 500 missiles pointing at each other, we have 300 missiles pointing at each other! it’s like we haven’t been fighting for 20 yrs, why do we have ANY missiles! we’re operating on the principle that we never use the weapons, but i get the feeling that that’s bad logic!

america is never gonna use the weapons even if others use the weapons?

yeah! i mean if russia does, we might, but that’s never gonna happen! we’re never gonna use these weapons! [[[…..]]] all they are is ridiculously dangerous accidents waiting to happen. what i want, it’s never gonna happen, it’s not the world we live in. but barack obama should stand up and say, FDR started this thing as an executive decision, and i am now executively going to fucking end it. we’re not gonna need them! they have no purpose. we need to get rid of them. that’s why it’s really depressing for me to read news articles about smaller nuclear weapons initiatives about how we won’t use them on people who don’t threaten us. it’s like OBVIOUSLY we’re not gonna use nuclear weapons on people who don’t threaten us!

so you’re saying it’s silly to include that as a conditionality, that “we’re not gonna use nuclear weapons on people who don’t threaten us!” because it’s so obvious?

YEAH! our new policy says that we’re not gonna use them on people who have signed the non-proliferation treaty, and also people who haven’t threatened us. that second part is like *laugh* crazy! the states that could conceivably use nuclear weapons on us haven’t signed the treaty! even states like india and pakistan haven’t signed it.

the non-proliferation treaty?

yea! basically the states that signed it are all the european states which have nuclear weapons. and a number of 3rd world countries which don’t have nuclear weapons. and south africa which gave up nuclear weapons, which is awesome, and gave up on developing them even if it was possible, which was awesome. also, the one country that got attacked by nuclear weapons doesn’t feel the need to have them!

i think it’s more like they did get attacked so they feel the need to NOT have them!

the u.s. is using nuclear weapons as an excuse to protect against nuclear weapons. the only state that has had to worry about that chose not to! it’s a symbol. it’s a symbol of how…silly our policy is. the united states is THE ONE! like you know? like, when is the united states going to fire a nuclear weapon from a submarine?! if the u.s. was gonna use a nuclear weapon, it would be on ONE rocket probably, it wouldn’t be like we’re sending 15 nuclear weapons from a submarine!!!

a submarine?

yea! also the cold war operated on the principle that–

what did they call that? the principle?

mutually assured destruction is what they called that. no, i know what you mean. there’s another word for it.


yeah. yeah. but yeah like it’s so depressing to live in a world where the political system and the government is so twisted that they have these horrible weapons and the best thing that they can to do to start getting rid of them is these useless treaties that don’t do anything.

don’t you think getting it down from 500 to 300 gives hope to get it down to 100 which gives hope to bring it down to 50 which gives hope to bring it down to 1 which gives it hope to bring it down to 0?

yea, it’s a good thing. it’s a good thing. but i feel like we don’t have to take baby steps! and russia, we’re never gonna fight them!

but russia and u.s. are not bffs either.

yeah but–

also, isn’t that a cause for not despairing that we’re never gonna use the weapons? as far as useless charades, at least this one is useless, and not horrible, because you’re saying we’re never gonna use them!

yea but…[[[_____]]]


also, also, if the u.s. got rid of its weapons then we might actually have some authority to start convincing states like pakistan and israel to get rid of them.

why are you saying pakistan and israel? is that cuz you think of them as two states that shouldn’t have them because they’re unstable?


yes. pakistan has demonstrated it doesn’t have a secure hold over the material. and israel, i see them as sort of a rogue state, who might [[[…]]] the whole occupying power thing.


i mean, we do that too.


i mean. i guess we’re occupying iraq from the beginning with the assumption that we would leave. where israel sees palestine as inferior and occupiable forever.

well…i know you’re not bff of america but…i don’t know if america was there with the assumption that we would leave, in real. in rhetoric, but not in real.

yeah, but the military occupation though. israel is heavily militarized! israel has malls, and check points and check points! so when israel says that like, when israel kind of implies that they have no intention of leaving ever, that’s. like. a step beyond what the u.s. has done.

but do you think it’s more honest and in some way better?

no. the u.s. wanted to exploit iraq economically. imperialists and neo-conservatives in the u.s. think that what benefits america benefits everybody. so they really did think it would help the iraqis! from studying all this i’ve really come away with that. thomas jefferson, [[[_____]]] *garble lost*. they really thought that by helping americans they would help the iraqis. development bullshit. well not all development is bullshit. with israel, they’re not thinking anything like that.

what do you mean they’re not thinking anything, you mean the people of israel?

yeah. i mean americans as a whole are imperialistic. the american mindset sort of includes an imperialistic mindset. whereas israel doesn’t have a uniform imperialistic mindset. there are groups that wanna leave, groups that–

wait wait how do you know that the general israeli mindset isn’t…what i’m about to say–this is really prejudiced. but i’d rather be dissed for it and change my mind if i’m wrong. isn’t the mainstream israeli mindset pro-colonizing?

well… my sense is that the people who are really gung-ho settlers in israel, are a minority, even though they’re a really large minority. there are other people who only strongly support occupation. a number of people there have random views, like a large set of people who think israel should be a binary state. and another large set of people who think the palestinians should all go to jordan.

what do you think of those people? who think the palestinians should go to jordan?

those people are crazy.

cuz they’re kicking the people out of their own land?

yeah. [[[_____]]] but then, he was like “there’ll be boats, don’t worry!”

was he being funny?!

i don’t think so. i don’t know. i mean our professor might have been being funny. but yeah it was like, “we don’t want them all to drown! they’ll have boats!”

that’s kind of cute? can you see how that’s kind of cute? well, i love boats. no, boat is my favorite word. so maybe that’s why i think it’s cute.

yeah. the issue is complicated. the whole issue of the bi-national state, and how you can’t have a bi-national state. so israel HAS to leave west bank, or occupy it forever.


but NOW i’ve just started reading recently about a third option. the only place that currently uses it is lebanon. what it basically is is a democracy grouped around religion. lebanon’s problem is that there are more arabs than christians. so like, the french were controlling syria and they decided that they wanted an ally in the middle east so they took a part of syria that had lots of christians in it and turned it into lebanon. and lebanon had its own identity as a place just not a political nation. and so they created lebanon.

what the hell man.


wait. can i please be angry now? what the fuck france? how does france make a state like that!

actually i don’t know about the french creating lebanon. don’t quote me on that. i don’t know about the people’s own history. i don’t want to deny–

can i just blog it anyway and say you’re unsure?

yeah. ok. but the french were a really bad colonial power in the middle east. the british were bad but the french were terrible. so yea, in lebanon in 1948 they did a census and found that 51% was christian and 49% was arab.


well they’re all arab i guess. 49% was muslim. so those numbers, even though there are way more arabs now, they have continued to use those numbers. so basically they’ve created a system of government where the president is always christian, the prime minister is always muslim, the second-to-the-prime minister is aways christian…so everyone in the country is registered either as muslim or christian and you can only vote for a candidate of your own religion.

does that work out?

it kind of works out, but they didn’t do a new census. they haven’t ever done a new census. there were a huge civil war and at the end of the war, they were basically sick of fighting and they went back to the old system.

in lebanon? why was there a war?

it was just a civil war. i don’t know the details. i used to know the details but it’s been a while since i took that class. i think there were like religious tensions.

so then i guess the system wasn’t really working.

yeah that was the point. but it seems to be working now. my overall point is that some people in israel are discussing a similar system, to get around the problem of muslims outnumbering jews in israel. including the west bank and gaza, they would create a system of government where each religion could vote for their own religion, so each religion would be equally represented, even though there are more muslims.

is that ok? can that be ok? even though it’s not democratic?

it can be ok? i don’t think that would ever happen because israel would rather have the west bank be a separate country than do that, but the point is that new options are being considered where there never were before.

who is considering? israelis or us?

israelis. israeli intellectuals.

do you speak of hope?

i think hope is too strong a word for israel and palestine. i mean the world can change really quickly.

you mean, BUT the world can change really quickly?

yeah. like single events can change things hugely.

remember that book we read that summer? it was formative for me. what was it? about modernity? you read it first then i read it?

al-qaeda and what it means to be modern! that was a formulative one for me.

that book was the shit!

it was very like, just its basic thesis, that, that, islamic fundamentalism is modern, you know, like–

in the sense of making broad trends, instead of nuanced views of the world that are obviously more accurate?

no, it’s new. it came with globalization.

what came with globalization?

islamic fundamentalism. that’s why i’ve been saying that it came out of the modern world, it’s new and modern. and if we pretend like it’s primitive compared to us, as ideologies, that’s inaccurate. they come from the same place.

what does? what two ideologies are you comparing? islamic fundamentalism and western imperialism?


it’s 3am.

really? i have to go to bed. goodnight baby.

goodnight mommy.



March 25, 2010

ohhhhh dearrr…

PARIS – A Frenchman will face trial after hacking into Twitter accounts, including that of U.S President Barack Obama, a French prosecutor said.

The 24-year-old man from central France was arrested on Tuesday and could face up to two years in prison in France for fraudulent access to a computer system. The arrest followed a joint operation between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the French police, according to French state prosecutor Jean-Yves Coquillat.

The man, whose name hasn’t been release, is charged with having hacked into the Twitter Inc. social-networking accounts of famous people. He did this in April 2009 after posing as a site administrator, said Mr. Coquillat. As well as Mr. Obama’s account, he hacked into that of singer Britney Spears, he said.

omfg what now

March 9, 2010

Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill have settled on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would eventually be required to obtain.

Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill are proposing a new national biometric ID card that would be required of all U.S. workers. WSJ’s Laura Meckler explains the proposal and the objections from privacy advocates.

Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker.

The ID card plan is one of several steps advocates of an immigration overhaul are taking to address concerns that have defeated similar bills in the past.

The uphill effort to pass a bill is being led by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), who plan to meet with President Barack Obama as soon as this week to update him on their work. An administration official said the White House had no position on the biometric card.

“It’s the nub of solving the immigration dilemma politically speaking,” Mr. Schumer said in an interview. The card, he said, would directly answer concerns that after legislation is signed, another wave of illegal immigrants would arrive. “If you say they can’t get a job when they come here, you’ll stop it.”

Revolving Door: Immigration Legislation

The biggest objections to the biometric cards may come from privacy advocates, who fear they would become de facto national ID cards that enable the government to track citizens.

“It is fundamentally a massive invasion of people’s privacy,” said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. “We’re not only talking about fingerprinting every American, treating ordinary Americans like criminals in order to work. We’re also talking about a card that would quickly spread from work to voting to travel to pretty much every aspect of American life that requires identification.”

fuck fucking incarceration

March 4, 2010

how angryifying this is. big mistake? YOU are the big mistake. not you. but you. you know who you are! fucking individualism and individual responsibility…you talk of the abuse these people have perpetrated. what of being abused and betrayed by the state? what of being abused by society? humans are humans. why does no one know this.

In the rush to save money in grim budgetary times, states nationwide have trimmed their prison populations by expanding parole programs and early releases. But the result — more convicted felons on the streets, not behind bars — has unleashed a backlash, and state officials now find themselves trying to maneuver between saving money and maintaining the public’s sense of safety.

Lawmakers in Oregon this month temporarily suspended a program they had expanded last year to let prisoners shorten their sentences for good behavior (and to save $6 million) after an anticrime group aired radio advertisements portraying the outcomes in alarming tones. “A woman’s asleep in her own apartment,” a narrator said. “Suddenly, she’s attacked by a registered sex offender and convicted burglar.”

In Illinois, Gov. Patrick J. Quinn, a Democrat, described as “a big mistake” an early release program that sent some convicts who had committed violent crimes home from prison in a matter of weeks. Of more than 1,700 prisoners released over three months, more than 50 were soon accused of new violations.

appalling so appalling

March 4, 2010

chileans in heisses of brick? stfu WSJ. naomi klein ilu.

Ever since deregulation caused a worldwide economic meltdown in September 2009 and everyone became a Keynesian again, it hasn’t been easy to be a fanatical fan of the late economist Milton Friedman. So widely discredited is his brand of free-market fundamentalism that his followers have become increasingly desperate to claim ideological victories, however far-fetched.

A particularly distasteful case in point. Just two days after Chile was struck by a devastating earthquake, Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens informed his readers that Milton Friedman’s “spirit was surely hovering protectively over Chile” because, “thanks largely to him, the country has endured a tragedy that elsewhere would have been an apocalypse…. It’s not by chance that Chileans were living in houses of brick–and Haitians in houses of straw–when the wolf arrived to try to blow them down.”

hah, parmesan cheese

February 1, 2010

students failing because of twitter texting

hah. not that i care about waterloo university. or any university. or whether kids can do the grammar. grammar is stupid lame. inventive language is the best. people aspire towards all the wrong things. but this summary is highlarious, and thusly i post.

“30% of freshman university students fail a ‘simple English test’ at Waterloo University (up from 25% a few years ago. Academic papers are riddled with ‘cuz’ (in place of ‘because’) and even include little emoticon faces. One professor says that students ‘think commas are sort of like parmesan cheese that you sprinkle on your words.’ At Simon Fraser University, 10% of students are not qualified to take the mandatory writing courses.”

oi vey

January 24, 2010

and again…”when the media is the disaster”

Soon after almost every disaster the crimes begin:  ruthless, selfish, indifferent to human suffering, and generating far more suffering. The perpetrators go unpunished and live to commit further crimes against humanity. They care less for human life than for property. They act without regard for consequences.

I’m talking, of course, about those members of the mass media whose misrepresentation of what goes on in disaster often abets and justifies a second wave of disaster.  I’m talking about the treatment of sufferers as criminals, both on the ground and in the news, and the endorsement of a shift of resources from rescue to property patrol. They still have blood on their hands from Hurricane Katrina, and they are staining themselves anew in Haiti.

Within days of the Haitian earthquake, for example, the Los Angeles Times ran a series of photographs with captions that kept deploying the word “looting.” One was of a man lying face down on the ground with this caption: “A Haitian police officer ties up a suspected looter who was carrying a bag of evaporated milk.” The man’s sweaty face looks up at the camera, beseeching, anguished.