Furl

Check out John Battelle's Searchblog: Grokking Furl: Storage, Search, and the PersonalWeb and Furl itself. Here's a bit of what John Battelle says about Furl:

Mike [Giles] started Furl about a year ago to solve a problem he - and a lot of us - had with bookmarks. Namely, bookmarking is a lame, half-assed, unsearchable, flat, linkrotten approach to recalling that which you've seen and care to recall on the web. Now, a lot of folks have made stabs at solving this particular problem, but Mike's got a lot of very cool features built into his beta, and more on the way.

And from my conversation with him, he's got one more thing that others might be missing: a clear sense of what Furl could do if it were part of a massively scaled platform like AOL, Yahoo, Google, or MSN. If I'm reading him right, he's smart enough to realize that what he's built will probably be a feature set on everyone of those platforms before the end of 2005, and he's also smart enough to know that by launching Furl, he's forced all of them to consider him as the person to watch in the space.

So what is it about Furl that made me write that past paragraph? After all, it's just a web page-saving application. Right? Well, yes and no. Furl does a good job of helping you manage your web browsing. It adds several features that others don' t have - full text search on your saved pages, for example. But Furl saves the entire web page you've "furled", not just the URL, which prevents link rot, on the one hand, and creates what I'll call a "PersonalWeb," on the other.

Now, having your own PersonalWeb is a very cool thing. Every page you care about is now saved forever, and is searchable. How I wish I had Furl while I was researching my book for the past year. This application was inconceivable before the cost of storage and bandwidth began to fall toward zero.

This is a neat tool. Instead of saving bookmarked links that eventually 'rot', now I can save, search, and share webpages on my own PersonalWeb. Here is the link to Ghost Town Orange's filing cabinet.

April 19

I wonder if anyone remembers what Timothy McVeigh wore on April 19, 1995, the day he blew up the Murrah Federal Building in OKC?

He was dressed for the mission in his favorite T-shirt. On the front was a picture of Abraham Lincoln with the motto "sic semper tyrannis," the words Booth shouted before he shot Lincoln. The translation: Thus ever to tyrants.

On the back of the T-shirt was a tree with blood dripping from the branches. It read, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

This T-shirt was sold by Southern Partisan, a white supremacist neo-Confederate magazine.

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)

South Africa

While browsing for South African Election results, I found this interesting story: SA cave yields oldest known jewellery (Randolph E. Schmid, in the Mail & Guardian):

About 75 000 years ago someone living in a cave overlooking the Indian Ocean bored holes in a set of shells and strung them as beads -- the earliest known human jewellery.

The newly found beads are more than 30 000 years older than any other known human jewellery.

The discovery of the Stone Age beads in South Africa supports the theory that traits associated with modern people, such as using symbolic items, developed early, rather than thousands of years later after humans migrated to the Middle East and Europe.

The previously oldest known human ornaments are perforated teeth and eggshell beads from Bulgaria and Turkey, 41 000 to 43 000 years old, and 40 000-year-old ostrich-shell beads from Kenya.

Another South African story (Jane Flanagan, in the London Telegraph): African voters return Boer farmer who defected to ANC
:

An Afrikaner farmer who was born into the party that created apartheid in South Africa has become an MP for the mostly black African National Congress.
Hannes Combrink, 33, a grape farmer from the Northern Cape province, lost most of his friends and divided his family when he defected from the National Party to the

ANC, which won a landslide victory in the country's third democratic election last week.
'People refused to talk to me at farmers' meetings and wouldn't sit with me at church,' said Mr Combrink, who was the chairman of the pro-apartheid National Party youth council.
'I felt intimidated and they felt betrayed, but I just couldn't be part of all that 'whites against the blacks' stuff any more. I lost a lot of white friends, and now I mix mostly with black or brown people, which is unusual were I come from.'

Winning Hearts and Minds in Iraq: Destruction of Relief Supplies and Rampage at the Aadhamiyah Mosque

Rahul Mahajan (Empire Notes) reporting from Iraq -- This is What Occupation Looks Like -- Destruction of Relief Supplies and Rampage at the Aadhamiyah Mosque:

We talked with Issam Rashid, the chief of security for the mosque. He told us the story. At 3:30 am on Sunday morning [April 11, 2004], 100 American troops raided the mosque. They were looking for weapons and mujaheddin. They started the raid the way they virtually always do -- by smashing in the gates with tanks and then driving Hummer in. The Hummers ran over and destroyed some of the stored relief goods (the bulk of the goods had already been sent to Fallujah -- over 200 tons -- but the amount remaining was considerable). More was destroyed as soldiers ripped apart sacks looking for rifles. Rashid estimated maybe three tons of supplies were destroyed. We saw for ourselves some of the remains, sacks of beans ripped apart and strewn around.

The mosque was full of people, including 90 down from Kirkuk (many with the Red Crescent). They were all pushed down on the floor, with guns put to the backs of their heads. Another person associated with the mosque, Mr. Alber, who speaks very good English, told us that he repeatedly said, "Please, don't break down doors. Please, don't break windows. We can help you. We can have custodians unlock the doors." (Alber, by the way, was imprisoned by Saddam for running a bakery. As he said, "Under the embargo, you could eat flour, you could eat sugar, you could eat eggs, all separately. But mix them together and bake them and you were harming the economy by raising the price of sugar and you could get 15 years in prison.)

The Americans refused to listen to Alber's pleas. We went all around the mosque and the adjacent madrassah, the Imam Aadham Islamic College. We saw dozens of doors broken down, windows broken, ceilings ripped apart, and bullet holes in walls and ceilings. The way the soldiers searched for illicit arms in the ceiling was first to spray the ceiling with gunfire, then break out a panel and go up and search.

Mr. Mahajan comments in a follow-up post: "The dominant opinion in the United States, liberal or conservative, seems to be that we can't cut and run.":

At the same time as their existence in Iraq provokes violence and as their brutal methods provoke violence, U.S. forces do nothing to provide security. Kidnappings of Iraqis for ransom are rife -- nobody ever investigates. Leading academics are being killed -- ditto. People are afraid to walk the streets after 9 or 10 -- nobody does anything about this. Women are far more constricted in getting around than they used to be. The list goes on and on. The U.S. military does nothing, absolutely nothing, about these security problems.

Anyone who swallows any of this propaganda about "providing security" should spend one day talking to people in Iraq.

I'm against the occupation for what I consider to be deep-lying structural reasons that would be valid even if it were conducted more humanely (I've written on this before, but I do have to collect all my scattered thoughts here and write about it again). But I have to say, from all of my experience interviewing Iraqis, one conclusion stands out clearly: had this occupation been carried out by British, Dutch, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, Spanish, everyone but the United States, the level of resentment would be far lower, as would the level of violence. It is the arrogance and brutality of the Americans here that is the primary grievance of Iraqis (and second is the negligence and the fact that nothing works).

I wrote earlier about talking to Mr. Alber at the Abu Hanifa mosque. When we asked if the Americans apologized after raiding the mosque and finding nothing, he looked at us quizzically and then said, "No. A year ago, they would apologize. Now they don't even do that. But we know the American apology. We know what it means." While saying this, he mimed a savagely contorted face and a man taking his foot and grinding someone else into the ground. And, believe me, he is anything but an extremist. The people at the mosque have done their best to be conciliatory to the Americans.

So a lot more has to be said about this issue. But the U.S. military is doing no good to Iraq -- unless you count taking Iraq's oil money and using a tiny fraction of it to pay corrupt contractors to paint schools for ten times the cost that Iraqis could do it for. Yes, the vast majority of the money spent on "reconstruction" (and aside from repainting I've seen precious little of it) comes from Iraq's own oil money. And it's causing huge amounts of violence. This is all hidden by the cut and run phraseology.

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)

'alternate histories'

If you don't like what actually happened, you can always paste over the past.

Historian Tristram Hunt comments on what if history in the Guardian:

EH Carr dismissed such whimsical exercises as a red herring worthy not of scholarly pursuit but an idle "parlour game". Characteristically EP Thompson went one stage further, dismissing "counter-factual fiction" as "unhistorical shit". Both pointed to the futility of pondering multiple variables in the past and the logical problem of assuming all other conditions remained constant. But despite their warnings, the thirst for virtual history remains undimmed. And while Carr was right to dismiss them as an amusing pastime, behind the light-hearted maybes lurk more uncomfortable historical and political agendas.

The conservatives who contribute to this literature portray themselves as battling against the dominant but flawed ideologies of Marxist and Whig history. Such analyses of the past, they say, never allow for the role of accident and serendipity. Instead, the past is presented as a series of milestones in an advance towards communism or liberal democracy. It is the calling of these modern iconoclasts to reintroduce the crooked timber of humanity back into history.

The unfortunate truth is that, rather than constituting a rebel grouping, "what if" history is eerily close to the mainstream of modern scholarship. The past 20 years has witnessed a brutal collapse in what was once called social history. The rigorous, data-based study of class, inequality, work patterns and gender relations has fallen away in the face of cultural history and post-modern inquiry.

Research into structures and processes, along with a search for explanation, is overshadowed by histories of understanding and meaning. In many cases this has led to a declining emphasis on the limitations that social context - class status, economic prospects, family networks - can place on the historical role of the individual. Instead, what we are offered in the postmodern world of contingency and irony is a series of biographical discourses in which one narrative is as valid as another. One history is as good as another and with it the blurring of factual, counter-factual and fiction. All history is "what if" history.

Here is the last question from probably the worst presidential press conference ever:

Let's see, last question here. Hold on for a second. Those who yell will not be asked. I'll tell you a guy who I've never heard from -- Don [Gonyea, of NPR].

Q I appreciate it.

THE PRESIDENT: It's a well-received -- (laughter.)

Q Following on both Judy's and John's questions, and it comes out of what you just said in some ways, with public support for your policies in Iraq falling off the way they have -- quite significantly over the past couple of months -- I guess I'd like to know if you feel in any way that you've failed as a communicator on this topic? Because --

THE PRESIDENT: Gosh, I don't know. I mean --

Q Well, you deliver a lot of speeches and a lot of them contain similar phrases, and they vary very little from one to the next. And they often include a pretty upbeat assessment of how things are going -- with the exception of tonight's pretty somber assessment, this evening.

THE PRESIDENT: It's a pretty somber assessment today, Don, yes.

Q I guess I just wonder if you feel that you have failed in any way? You don't have many of these press conferences, where you engage in this kind of exchange. Have you failed in any way to really make the case to the American public?

THE PRESIDENT: I guess if you put it into a political context, that's the kind of thing the voters will decide next November. That's what elections are about. They'll take a look at me and my opponent and say, let's see, which one of them can better win the war on terror? Who best can see to it that Iraq emerges as a free society?

Don, if I tried to fine-tune my messages based upon polls, I think I'd be pretty ineffective. I know I would be disappointed in myself. I hope today you've got a sense of my conviction about what we're doing. If you don't, maybe I need to learn to communicate better.

I feel strongly about what we're doing. I feel strongly that the course this administration has taken will make America more secure and the world more free, and, therefore, the world more peaceful. It's a conviction that's deep in my soul. And I will say it as best as I possibly can to the American people.

I look forward to the debate and the campaign. I look forward to helping -- for the American people to hear, what is a proper use of American power; do we have an obligation to lead, or should we shirk responsibility. That's how I view this debate. And I look forward to making it, Don. I'll do it the best I possibly can. I'll give it the best shot. I'll speak as plainly as I can.

One thing is for certain, though, about me -- and the world has learned this -- when I say something, I mean it. And the credibility of the United States is incredibly important for keeping world peace and freedom.

Thank you all very much.

Since President Bush mentions incredibly important credibility, read this interview with German Army General Klaus Reinhardt (the former commander of the NATO-led Kosovo force KFOR) on what is going on in Iraq:

Q [Anke Hagedorn, of Deutsche Welle]: The U.S. has obviously underestimated the amount of resistance to an occupying power in Iraq. In your opinion, was this development to be expected? What have the Americans done wrong?

A: In the decisive time directly after the war ended, when the wave of plundering and murdering began, the Americans put the basic requirements of the civilian population in question. It was during this time that the waterworks, the power networks and many schools, for example, were destroyed. And that's when the Americans basically lost the trust of the Iraqi people, who were hoping that life would get better after Saddam Hussein. As long as the Americans aren't able to improve conditions for the Iraqis, as long as they are unable to change how they are perceived from occupier to friends committed to helping Iraq over the long term, then it seems to me that the Americans have lost their credibility.

President Bush, America's credibility does not rest on the ability to 'kick butt.'

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)

Justice Scalia has reporters tapes erased

Justice Scalia must think he's an emperor: Legal Experts Express Concern About Erasure of Scalia Tapes. But one wouldn't expect him to have much use for the 4th Amendment.

Update

April 12, 8:15 PM
I apologize to Justice Scalia: it was the US Marshall's fault (from EditorandPublisher.com:

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has apologized to the two reporters whose audio recorders were seized during a speech that the Justice gave last week at a high school in Hattiesburg, Miss.

In a letter to Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Executive Director Lucy Dalglish, Scalia said he didn't approve of the actions by a U.S. Marshal, who seized the recorders and ordered the recordings erased. "You were correct that the action was not taken at my direction; I was upset as you were," Scalia wrote. "I have written to the reporters involved, extending my apology."

Justice Scalia said that he is revising his 'media policy' to allow print journalists to tape-record his appearances; he still does not want to be recorded or video-ed for broadcast.

Nathan Newman on War, Globalism & Sectarianism

Interesting reading: Nathan Newman Reflections: War, Globalism & Sectarianism

White House releases August 6 memo; Earth spins out of orbit as secret sources and methods are revealed

Here is an image of the first page:
The second page continues:

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.

Image and text from Reuters.

I am sure it took much effort to apply magic marker to all the top-secret sources. Here is what Aljazeera has to say: 'Memo contradicts Condoleezza Rice.'
And here is what the New York Times report said before the full memo was released.

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)

Which New York Times Columnist am I?

You are Paul Krugman! You're a brilliant economist with a knack for both making sense of the current economic situation and exposing the Bush administration's lies about it. You somehow came out as the best anti-war writer on the Op-Ed staff. Other economists hate your guts for selling out to the liberals. To hell with 'em.

Which New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla
Here's a link to the Unofficial Paul Krugman Archive.
Update, April 10, 2004. The Quizilla image of Krugman isn't working, so I have fixed it. He even looks a bit like me. :-)
Or maybe it's just his beard. . .

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)

More reason to doubt any good news from Iraq (is there any?)

A gaggle of Republican political appointees staff the Office of Strategic Communications (in Baghdad. Apparently they view their job as making sure President Bush is re-elected. Recent press releases from the propagandists include:

Bremer, Barzani Regret Badran's Resignation; Thank Him for Excellent Service

Scrap Metal Export Licensing Procedure

Iraqi Olympic Hopefuls Arrive in Colorado to Begin Training

Optimists Club Organizes Baghdad Chapter

Beautification Plan for Baghdad Ready to Begin

The Reality is Nothing Like What You See on Television

Here's a piece of the AP story:

The U.S. team stands in deep contrast to the British team that works alongside it, almost all of whom are civil or foreign service employees, not political appointees. Many of the British in Iraq display regional knowledge or language skills that most of the Americans lack.

The drive to re-elect Bush is a sensitive topic. Several coalition officials angered by what they see as CPA politicking -- with U.S. accomplishments in Iraq being trumpeted to help Bush -- grumbled privately, but would not go on record with complaints.

But Gordon Robison, a former CPA contractor who helped build the Pentagon-funded Al-Iraqiya television station in Baghdad, said Republicans in the press room intensely followed the Democratic presidential primaries as John Kerry emerged as the presumed nominee.

"Iraq is in danger of costing George W. Bush his presidency and the CPA's media staff are determined to see that does not happen," Robison said. "I had the impression in dealing with the civilians in the Green Room that they viewed their job as essentially political, promoting what the Coalition Provisional Authority is doing in Iraq as a political arm of the Bush administration," he added.

Our taxes at work. Lovely.

Their job would be so much easier if criticizing the President were a felony or at the very least a high misdemeanor:

There needs to be a law passed where any person who disrespects the "Office of the Presidency" by making false accusations and spreading deliberate rumors about the president, should be charged with a felony or at the very least a high misdemeanor.

You can read more at the link. (This web-page must be a parody--the weird photo of the author in front of the American flag, the mixed metaphors and otherwise poor writing--this can't be a real conservative, can it?) I guess Republicans no longer believe in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (when Republicans are in the White House.)

SCLM

The New York Times informs us that Op-Ed page writers can just make stuff up. Read all about it here. Now you know why Friedman, Safire, Brooks, and Dowd are so frequently wrong. They don't have to be factual. Tom Tomorrow says that the Times should preface each opinion piece with this little gem of honesty:

EDITOR'S NOTICE: Even though some of the things in the following column may sound to any reasonable reader like statements of objective "fact," everything that follows is actually nothing more than a statement of the author's "beliefs," which, while they may be illogical, crackbrained or infuriating, are nevertheless exempt in every respect from the Times' error correction policy.

Of course, Krugman is always 100% factual:-) despite what Krugman stalker Luskin says.

Father, let me dedicate All this year to you
In whatever earthly state You will have me be
Not from sorrow, pain, or care Freedom dare I claim;
This alone shall be my prayer: Glorify Your name.
--from New Year's Hymn by Lawrence Tuttiett, 1864 (alt.)