b l a m e

blame has been a hot topic in my life lately, for reasons that would bore and annoy the average reader.

but, it's [blame's]* not only a searing subject in my own experience. turns out iran likes blame as well.

i find that [the idea that israel is trying to restore its perceived military prowess via defensive strikes against ammunition outposts] hysterically funny. clearly, the israeli defense forces are attacking the gaza strip not because of terrorist attack, raining qassams, or a generally offensive paradigmatic claim of, "drive them into the sea!"

no, no. israel is trying to make itself look better by beating up helpless militants.

i guess if you follow that logic, lebanon is trying to make up for its own internal strife by launching attacks on the palestinian refugee camps.

but that didn't make the news.

* i hate ambiguous pronouns.

retributive justice.

for what it's worth, my stance on the death penalty is as follows: people who put forth a deterrence argument need to be smacked upside the head with a pavlovian response paradigm. why? because deterrence really only works once you've experienced the deterrent mechanism. last i checked, you can only die once**.

the death penalty serves retributive justice, and perhaps too a rehabilitative purpose in relation to the families of those affected by the criminal act. i don't think it's too far-fetched to say that the original purpose of government was to enforce some sort of retributive legal system, and death certainly plays a role in that. if you infringe upon my natural right to life, then frankly, i assume that you've given up your natural right to life in exchange.

that said - i have sincere issues with the policy implications of the death penalty, especially as practiced in the united states. the criminal justice system is stacked against those of lesser economic standing. that is just a simple fact. if you can afford a better lawyer, the odds of your being sentenced to death decrease exponentially. there are countless cases of similar crimes committed by an african-american and a caucasian, and the end result is usually that the caucasian gets life without the possibility of parole and the african-american ends up on death row. how is that fair or right? that doesn't serve retributive justice. that serves the maxim, "with wealth comes power." so, in sum, i think the death penalty serves a purpose, and i'm not at all opposed to it.

but we need to fix the system.

i would like to apologize for the disjointed nature of this post.

in other news:

iran is celebrating national nuclear day. the president of iran [may his name be erased] is expected to announce the installation of 3000 new centrifuges.

it definitely sounds like the sanctions imposed by the united nations are working.

** again, with the disclaimer: this disregards a multitude of religious stances that state you can, in fact, die more than once. let's just stick with one lifetime for the sake of argument.

various and sundry.

the rain has made its point. i would appreciate it if we could get a few more days of enjoyable spring weather before pollen-storm 2007 begins in earnest.

happiness really is a warm puppy. and on that note, feed your dogs raw food. or, if you don't want to feed raw food for whatever reason [ kashrut, mess, money ], find a suitable primarily natural dog food that uses meat as its first or second ingredient. the dog food recall has really underscored the bond between man and beast - and doesn't your beast deserve the best?

the german chancellor merkel has demanded that the palestinians recognize israel as a state. that's all well and good, and i'm sure the israeli public appreciates the gesture. however, support coming from germany, while strong and again much-appreciated, is undercut by this sense in the arab community that germany is only acting out of deeply-felt guilt. the whole situation has been exacerbated by the iranian hostage crisis.

we need someone like france to take a strong stand for israel. because surely the french can appreciate having the enemy in your midst. and if that fails, the french can always pretend they had no idea of their government's official "stance." they're good at that.

iran - amalek?

this iranian hostage situation is more than a little disturbing, for a host of reasons. primarily, it shows that the iranian government [ i refuse to say his name, may it be erased ] is not as stupid as i'd previously hoped.

assume that britain and america threaten the use of force - iran looks maligned to the great majority of the arab public. assume that britain and america do nothing, go to the united nations for help [ the same as doing nothing only with a patina of legitimacy ], then iran has achieved an even more insidious goal: they've asserted strength in the face of the "western evil."

furthermore, the lone female soldier has ostensibly been releasing anti-war letters from her imprisonment. if she's writing those letters of her own free will, then that's her prerogative, although she probably could have picked better timing and definitely a better medium than letters sent through iranian diplomats. if she's being forced to write those letters, then i can only imagine what else is in store.

i'll add more to this later as things develop. outside input is appreciated - because it takes the combined brainpower of about eighteen people to even begin to piece together the middle eastern dynamic.