Hezbollah in Nikes just do it

My morning news wanderings started with the obligatory spin through the Pensacola News Journal. The only article I bothered with there had this headline: Santa Rosa takes deed to part of Tiger Point road. Don't ask me why I even cared about that one. I guess it's because a government entity is gaining ownership of a piece of land and not paying for it. I'm not saying it's bad; that's just what hit me when I read the headline.

After checking out the local scene I went over the MSNBC to see what was shakin' nationwide and around the world. Right at the top, the featured story: Hezbollah gunmen seize large sections of Beirut. I can't say my initial interest had anything to do with concern for the people living in the city or the local/international political scene in the areas there. What caught my interest was the photo alongside the lead story.

Doesn't it look like that could've been a posed shot?  Look at the guy standing up in the middle, against the wall.  He's pretty buff isn't he?  And don't they all look clean?  The one guy's clearly wearing Nikes.  Go Nike.  Just do it.  Is Hezbollah sponsored by Nike?  I like how it says HOT on the building's walls.  I'm not saying this is a posed shot.  I'm just saying it looks like one.  Not all armed insurgents/revolutionaries are dirty, poor, hiding in caves.  It's a crazy world we live in.  The picture above says to me, "Welcome to 21st Century warfare."

I noticed the pic was from Reuters so I went over there to investigate further.  There, too, the Hezbollah story was top news, though not quite as prominently featured as it was on MSNBC.  The Reuters story, Hezbollah impose control on Beirut, is more thorough than MSNBC's.  That doesn't surprise me.  It's to be expected.  They have different audiences.  Of course the images caught my interest again and I clicked into the photo slideshow related to the story.  The crazy pic from above was in there.  The first one is really cool, too.

Another thing worth noting in the pictures from the conflict is how it shows that Beirut is a modern city with modern culture.  If it can happen there...

On anarchism...

It seems that people are surprised and skeptical when they see the tattoo on my arm with the anarchy sign as part of the design. It seems most people think anarchism is stupid, an impossible dream, violent, ignorant of human nature, etc. I disagree.

Here's the definition in Infoshop.org's An Anarchist FAQ:

Anarchism is a political theory which aims to create anarchy, "the absence of a master, of a sovereign." [P-J Proudhon, What is Property , p. 264] In other words, anarchism is a political theory which aims to create a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals. As such anarchism opposes all forms of hierarchical control - be that control by the state or a capitalist - as harmful to the individual and their individuality as well as unnecessary.

This is how I'd define anarchism: I'm not required to obey you. It ties in with the other symbol within my tattoo, the Star of David. The only thing I have to listen to is God. My anarchism is very much shaped by my Judaism. I believe that Jews are called by God to never bow to the state or anything other than God.

We need to remind ourselves that the System as we know it is not carved in stone. We all agreed to it. We can dismantle it. We can do whatever we want. We are fully grown homo sapiens. We have been given the powers of thought and speech and movement and a great will. Are you a follower or a leader? Do you take possession of your personal sovereignty? Or are you a Slave to the Machine You Built?

...slave to the machine, he types disdainfully on his computer. On his computer...

Reuters is Racist

As of 1:36 AM in Pensacola FL, Reuters has this on their front page:

Barack Obama's bid to be America's first black president is under fire from Democrats and Republicans alike before political debates on Saturday to help voters pick who to vote for in New Hampshire's primary.

That's on the front page. Maybe no one else sees anything weird about that, but what I see is a news organization inflicting a certain perspective on what they're covering. Isn't Obama running for President? I didn't know he was running for Black President. WTF?