Zoning Free Speech

Bush, Free Speech, Private Property

During a Memorial-Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery, the president expressed his “awe of the men and women who sacrifice for the freedom of the United States of America.” Earlier in the day, he had put his “awe” into action by signing

[T]he Respect for America’s Fallen Heroes Act, passed by Congress largely in response to the activities of a Kansas church group that has staged protests at military funerals around the country, claiming the deaths symbolized God’s anger at U.S. tolerance of homosexuals.
The new law bars protests within 300 feet of the entrance of a national cemetery and within 150 feet of a road into the cemetery. This restriction applies an hour before until an hour after a funeral. Those violating the act would face up to a $100,000 fine and up to a year in prison.

Bush honors so-called freedom fighters by limiting the freedom for which they allegedly fought? The Act, of course, is an extension of the suppression of peaceful assembly via “free speech zones,” perfected under Bush, and documented here by James Bovard.

The only acceptable limits on speech are 1) those proscribed by private property—you have no right to deliver a disquisition in my living room, unless I allow it. 2) When speech poses a “Clear and Present Danger,” for which the required threshold is extremely high, as it should be. (I’d say that limiting speech is so abhorrent that, to give but one example, the preferred course of action against imams who publicly preach and incite violence against Americans on American soil is deportation, not censorship.)

The Silly Sex?

Feminism, Gender, Logic, Reason

Barbara’s comments here sent me in search of a priceless excerpt from Norah Vincent’s book. Its title is self explanatory: Self-Made Man: My year Disguised as a Man.

Vincent, a lesbian in her regular life, describes dating women while disguised as Ned:

“I listened to [the women] talk literally for hours about the most minute, mind-numbing details of their personal lives; men they were still in love with; men they had divorced, roommates and co-worker they hated…. Listening to them was like undergoing a slow frontal lobotomy. I sat there stunned by the social ineptitude of people to whom it never seemed to occur that no one, much less a first date, would have any interest in enduring this ordeal …”

Seconded in my VDARE.com article, “The Silly Sex?”:

“The Apprentice candidates constitute a restricted sample, chosen for a combination of looks and status. Despite this, the disparities in character and cerebral agility between the men and the women could not be more glaring. An obviously dé class é act, the women would have been utterly risible if they were not so revolting….”

Question: Vincent had clearly dated women before. Had she always found them generally lacking? If not, what changed once she assumed her fictitious identity? I have an idea, but it’ll have to wait until tomorrow. I’m tired.

Answer: Vincent probably dated lesbians, not straight women. The following are generalizations, but nonetheless valid, I believe: the lesbians I’ve known over the years (my sister, for one) are not as petty and self-absorbed as straight women. My best friend in Cape-Town was a beautiful and feminine gay woman. In addition to her keen intellect, we got on famously because she was without pettiness. There was no rivalry in the relationship just good intellectual rapport. I’d say she combined the emotional intimacy and empathic qualities often associated with women and the rationality and clear thinking identified with men. Although I still think that to make people fairer, kinder, and more compassionate, one has to first teach them to think and reason.

About such generalizations: Individualists, libertarians in particular, think that broad statements about aggregate group characteristics are collectivist, ergo 1) forbidden 2) erroneous. This is a confusion—it demonstrates an inability to jump a level of abstraction. Generalizations, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence not hunches, are not incorrect. Science rests on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decision in their daily lives based on probabilities and generalities. That one chooses not to live in a particular crime-ridden area, for example, in no way implies that all residents there are criminals.

Men and women do in general display a different emotional and intellectual make-up, but this doesn’t preclude countless individuals from transcending the stereotypes associated with their gender. True, Oprah’s target market is huge—distressingly so. But a lot of women are not prone to becoming addled by Oprah.

Holland Keeps Afloat; Why Can't New Orleans?

America, Europe, Government, Hollywood, Technology

It ought to be called The Anatomy of a Disgrace. The latest word on why the levees of New Orleans failed, faults their design, construction, and maintenance. In shorthand: everything about them!

I have not read the report, however, if it didn’t, it ought to have mandated, first, that the US Army Corps of Engineers be summarily dismissed—and then dismantled. And second, that the job be privatized. And pigs will fly, I know. Since these solutions are a pipedream, let our excuse for an Engineering Corps be forced to visit The Netherlands, and and learn from the masters who designed the great Maeslant Storm Surge Barrier in Hoek van Holland.

You must have heard the saying, “God created the world and the Dutch created the Netherlands.” This is not an exaggeration:

“The name the Netherlands refers to the low-lying nature of the country (nether means low). Its highest point is the Vaalserberg hill in the south east, which reaches 321 meters above sea level. Many areas in the north and west, constituting more than 25% of the total area of the country, are below sea level. The lowest point near Rotterdam is some 6.7 meters below sea level.

I believe New Orleans is only about 3 meters below sea level.

Earlier this month I visited the Maeslant Storm Surge Barrier, a true monument to human ingenuity. Engineers should find the information on this site fascinating. The mechanism is described as follows (I watched the mini-models in action):

“If a water level of 3.00 meters above NAP is anticipated for Rotterdam the Storm Surge Barrier in the New Waterway has to be closed. In these circumstances the Storm Surge Barrier computer – the Command and Support System (Dutch acronym BOS) instructs the Control System (BES) to shut the barrier. The BES implements the BOS’s commands.

In the event of a storm tide, the docks are filled with water, so that the hollow gates start to float and can be turned into the New Waterway. Once the gates meet, the cavities are filled with water and the gates sink to the bottom, thus sealing off the 360 meter-wide opening. After the high water has passed the gates are pumped out and the structure begins to float again. Once it is certain that the next high water will not be another abnormally high one, the two gates are returned to their docks.

When the New Waterway is sealed off it is no longer possible for shipping to pass. The storm-surge barrier will only be closed in extremely bad weather—in probability once every ten years. A test closure will probably be conducted once a year in order to check the equipment. This will be done when there is little shipping. With the rise in sea levels the storm-surge barrier will need to close more frequently in 50 years time, namely once every five years.

Incidentally, CNN subjects us to endless Katrina kvetching from its edgy, newest, girl reporter, Anderson Cooper. But Cooper is no journalist; he’s an instrument in the Oprahfication of the news. Has he done a story on how the Dutch stay afloat? Of course not; why supply your viewer with useful information, when you can continually tug at their heartstrings instead? Or has he deigned to report on how many people died due to the colossal collapse of these Third-World compatible structures? We still don’t know.

Holland Keeps Afloat; Why Can’t New Orleans?

America, Europe, Government, Hollywood, Technology

It ought to be called The Anatomy of a Disgrace. The latest word on why the levees of New Orleans failed, faults their design, construction, and maintenance. In shorthand: everything about them!

I have not read the report, however, if it didn’t, it ought to have mandated, first, that the US Army Corps of Engineers be summarily dismissed—and then dismantled. And second, that the job be privatized. And pigs will fly, I know. Since these solutions are a pipedream, let our excuse for an Engineering Corps be forced to visit The Netherlands, and and learn from the masters who designed the great Maeslant Storm Surge Barrier in Hoek van Holland.

You must have heard the saying, “God created the world and the Dutch created the Netherlands.” This is not an exaggeration:

“The name the Netherlands refers to the low-lying nature of the country (nether means low). Its highest point is the Vaalserberg hill in the south east, which reaches 321 meters above sea level. Many areas in the north and west, constituting more than 25% of the total area of the country, are below sea level. The lowest point near Rotterdam is some 6.7 meters below sea level.

I believe New Orleans is only about 3 meters below sea level.

Earlier this month I visited the Maeslant Storm Surge Barrier, a true monument to human ingenuity. Engineers should find the information on this site fascinating. The mechanism is described as follows (I watched the mini-models in action):

“If a water level of 3.00 meters above NAP is anticipated for Rotterdam the Storm Surge Barrier in the New Waterway has to be closed. In these circumstances the Storm Surge Barrier computer – the Command and Support System (Dutch acronym BOS) instructs the Control System (BES) to shut the barrier. The BES implements the BOS’s commands.

In the event of a storm tide, the docks are filled with water, so that the hollow gates start to float and can be turned into the New Waterway. Once the gates meet, the cavities are filled with water and the gates sink to the bottom, thus sealing off the 360 meter-wide opening. After the high water has passed the gates are pumped out and the structure begins to float again. Once it is certain that the next high water will not be another abnormally high one, the two gates are returned to their docks.

When the New Waterway is sealed off it is no longer possible for shipping to pass. The storm-surge barrier will only be closed in extremely bad weather—in probability once every ten years. A test closure will probably be conducted once a year in order to check the equipment. This will be done when there is little shipping. With the rise in sea levels the storm-surge barrier will need to close more frequently in 50 years time, namely once every five years.

Incidentally, CNN subjects us to endless Katrina kvetching from its edgy, newest, girl reporter, Anderson Cooper. But Cooper is no journalist; he’s an instrument in the Oprahfication of the news. Has he done a story on how the Dutch stay afloat? Of course not; why supply your viewer with useful information, when you can continually tug at their heartstrings instead? Or has he deigned to report on how many people died due to the colossal collapse of these Third-World compatible structures? We still don’t know.