Random notes
1. In the wake of Bojinka II, the TV commentators are agonizing yet again about 'home-grown' terrorists. I've agonized about why this question is so mysterious to the commentators, and just now figured it out. People who end up on TV and in politics nowadays are either attractive or privileged or both. So when they think along the lines of "giving back to society", they are talking about positive things. For people who grow up on the bottom of the social totem pole, "giving back" has a darker meaning. The consequence of such a mindset depends mainly on your peer group. If everyone around you is thinking and talking of dark and paranoid matters [eg Goths or Mohammedans], you get a suicide bomber [Columbine style or Allah style]. If everyone around you is thinking and talking about a positive and productive life, you submerge your dark thoughts and find ways to live more or less positively and productively. It still won't be as positive as the life of an attractive and popular kid, but you'll grow out of the dark stuff.

I emphasized nowadays because the cultural power of TV, and the idiotic rules of McCain-Feingold style reform laws, have 'purified' our elites. In earlier times, we had a wider variety of personalities because our entrance requirements were based partly on competence, not strictly on appearance and riches.

We need some Nixon types at the top, dark people who can understand the thinking of terrorists and figure out how to change their 'hearts and minds' in appropriately negative ways.

2. Bravo to Olmert! He was a bit slow off the mark, but he's in overdrive now, pushing hard toward absolute victory.

3. Speaking of dark, we really need to ask the following question: Whose final solution do we want? We know that Ahmadinejad's final solution is a world without Christians and Jews. We do NOT know that any significant part of the Nation of Allah disagrees with Ahmadinejad. The result of this syllogism is unpleasant, but we need to start pondering it very quickly.

4. Why are we so sensitive about religious profiling? We don't have any trouble at all with criminalizing religious beliefs. Look at polygamy. Back in the 1840's we actually made war against Brigham Young to defeat his polygamous Utah. Right now, this very minute, our FBI has Warren Jeffs at the top of its Public Enemy list. Jeffs hasn't killed or even hurt anyone; his sole crime is arranging multiple marriages. So don't try to tell me that we refuse to criminalize religion! It's only the dangerous religion, the one that wants to kill us all, that we can't seem to criminalize. THIS IS INSANE AND SUICIDAL.
  ¶ 9:05 AM