SOME THOUGHTS ON BLOGGING AS A PROFESSOR, from Daniel Drezner. I think he’s got a pretty good take on it.

ANOTHER FLORIDA ELECTION SCANDAL — this time involving a “community relations” coordinator who wrote antisemitic and anti-American emails from his Broward County computer. Some other writings by the worker include the following:

“How dare the Jews ask or have the nerve to demand an apology or compensation from their oppressors.”

“The Jews must turn that money over to blacks because they accumulated their wealth through the slave trade.”

“It is difficult for me to find sympathy for what the Jews are calling a holocaust.”

I don’t want this guy counting votes.

(Via Gregory Hlatky).

DAVE TROWBRIDGE offers an interesting perspective on claims that Bush is becoming a “dictator.”

ANOTHER TERROR BLAST, this time in Indonesia. And the tanker attack is now confirmed as terrorism. Saddam’s calling in all his chits — not that it’ll do any good.

UPDATE: James Morrow reports on whitewashing the Indonesia bombing, or at least the Islamic terror connection thereto.

AZIZ POONAWALLA is having an interesting back-and-forth with Steven Den Beste on Islam and the world. Highly recommended.

THE VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER has been trying to cash in on the D.C. sniper by nattering on about “sniper rifles” and the “sniper subculture.” This argument is pretty thoroughly demolished — by a Washington Post movie critic, no less — in this article. Excerpt:

How much does he know about guns? Is he a “gun person,” who reads the shooter’s magazines and goes to gun shows and orders sniper manuals from the reprint houses? No credible evidence exists to prove this. . . .

For one thing, he’s chosen quite a prosaic, low-cost system. It so happens we are in a period of remarkable advances in long-distance shooting, not merely with those laser range finders, but also with a whole batch of ultra magnum cartridges of very recent vintage, that make shots at heretofore undreamed-of distances possible for the common man as opposed to the skilled professional or heavily committed amateur shooter. He doesn’t appear to be using any cutting-edge technology.

His choice of weapon reveals something as well. It’s notable that he hasn’t selected a firearm or a cartridge that’s linked to sniping as it’s practiced professionally.

“No credible evidence” — just PR from an advocacy group with a bad record for trustworthiness.

NAT HENTOFF wonders why Robert Mugabe’s depredations aren’t generating more outrage:

While a critical mass of anger and indignation in this country helped end South African apartheid, there is scarcely any awareness here of the facts on the bloody ground. . . .

Why, in this country, are there only whispers, if that, from most civil rights activists and organizations, the clergy of all colors that finally awoke to the slavery and mass rapes in Sudan, editorial writers, women’s rights groups, and such trombones of the people as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? . . .

By the way, Zimbabwe is a proud member of the United Nations Human Rights Commission—along with Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and Sudan.

Like the Nobel Peace Prize, the Human Rights Commission is losing its lustre.

(Via Orrin Judd, who has a lot of other observations on the subject.)

UPDATE: Here, forwarded by a British reader, is a report on an attempted “citizens’ arrest” of Mugabe by gay human rights activists in Britain. I had never heard of this, but it shows that someone was on the job.

BELLICOSE WOMEN OF THE FUTURE: Went to a kid’s birthday party with my daughter this morning. It was at a laser-tag place, so the kids all suited up and ran around darkened mazes happily shooting at each other. They were pretty good, and the girls seemed to like it as much as the boys. My daughter had never done it before, and she loved it. She wants to go back, and has decided to have her next party there.

It’s funny because (as you may guess from the frequent Barbie references) she’s a girly-girl in most of her play activities. “But this is fun,” she said, by way of explaining the difference.

RALPH PETERS ISN’T BUYING the “Chickenhawk” argument:

THERE are few things more repugnant to a soldier than a coward who claims to speak on his behalf. At present, there seems no end of politicians and pundits claiming we dare not strike Saddam because of the danger of friendly casualties. Self-appointed voices of conscience warn of tens of thousands of American dead.

That’s nonsense. And when those who despise the men and women in uniform invoke the welfare of our troops to further their failing agendas, they transcend the commonplace cynicism of Washington. This is hypocrisy as a moral disease. . . .

Make no mistake: The anti-war voices long for us to lose any war they cannot prevent.

Don’t mince words, Ralph. You’re a columnist now — say what you really mean.

I think that Peters is right about certain sectors of the antiwar movement, who really do see the United States as the evil empire. On the other hand, I think that there are other people who are antiwar out of concerns distinct from anti-Americanism. Unfortunately, the former category has gotten most of the attention, because it includes a lot of people who are vocal and good at getting publicity. Here’s a response to those in Category Two.

Heh. I’ve never seen anyone use this title before, though it seems so obvious.

EUGENE VOLOKH has a characteristically thorough and thoughtful discussion of the Washington University affair. And scroll up from this item for still more discussion.

BAN CHEVY ASTROS! It was only a matter of time before someone made this proposal. Scroll down for a very gentlemanly admission of error in response to Eugene Volokh, too.

“VISHNU SENDS A LETTER OF GRATITUDE TO AMIRI BARAKA FOR CLEARING HIS NAME.” This makes sense, but only if you read Vegard Valberg’s latest “Misting.” And you should.

WHEN PEOPLE ASK how I’m able to post so often, I always credit the fact that I’m usually close to a high-speed always-on Internet connection. Whenever I’m not, like now, I realize just how true that is. Dialup sucks.

MAJOR BOMBING (?) AT A MALL IN HELSINKI. There was also a car bombing there last summer. What gives? The news coverage offers no suggestion of a motive, or even of the nature of the perpetrators — the story about today’s explosion even suggests it was an accident, though other information casts doubt on that. Very curious.

UPDATE: Several Finnish readers (I’ve got Finnish readers? Yep.) emailed in response to the above. The earlier car bombing was inept, (which hardly rules out the terrorist crowd) and appears to have been about drugs. The most recent explosion is still unexplained, and is looking somewhat less likely to be an accident. Finnish blogger Teemu Lehtonen is keeping an eye on things.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Jaako Haapasolo emails from Finland:

An interior ministry press conference was given at 9:15 local time, that’s about 45 minutes ago. They (including the interior minister and the national police chief) confirmed that they now suspect a crime in the mall bombing. They reported that traces of an explosive were found at the scene. At least 7 people died, at least one of them a child. The number of wounded is reported varyingly from 50 to over 80, ten of whom are wounded seriously.

No one at the press conference (including the reporters) uttered the word ‘terrorism’, I would guess by some sort of consensus decision, to avoid panic or whatever… that may change of course. I’m sure it is one of the most pressing questions on everyone’s mind here.

The shopping mall, one of the largest in the region, is located in Vantaa, a suburb of Helsinki, some 12 km north of Helsinki city centre. The blast happened at Friday night when there were around 1000-2000 people shopping there.

It is a sickening feeling. As a regular reader of Ha’aretz, I am all too familiar with the ‘drill’: Friday night, a report of an explosion, initial confusion, then the steadily rising numbers of dead and wounded…

The car bombing last summer was definitely established as criminal on criminal, a debt collection gone bad if I remember correctly. This time I fear it could be very, very different.

This is all that I know so far. I can’t find any good links in English beyond what Reuters has.

I can’t confirm this report at the moment, but there seems no reason to doubt it. Vantaa, I believe, is near an area where immigrants tend to cluster.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Looks like it was definitely a bombing. Oh, and I just noticed that Teemu says so too.

A DISTURBING ARTICLE on nuclear proliferation, from Technology Review. And here’s a scenario that we’ve heard elsewhere, too:

Unlike weapons-grade plutonium, (which is typically contaminated with Pu-240, a spontaneous neutron emitter), U-235 is difficult to detect without active probing, as with a thermal neutron source). It emits alpha particles and some energetic gamma rays, but these can be shielded with lead. This makes HEU relatively easy to smuggle. The easiest way to get a bomb into the US is probably in a shipping container. We wouldn’t detect it unless we were tipped off about where to look.

Let’s imagine a bad case. Saddam sets off a bomb in Washington D.C. Unlike the designers of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, he derives great pleasure from mass death. Unlike bin Laden, he takes credit immediately for his terrorism. He announces that he has additional weapons, and that if the U.S. retaliates, he will start setting them off in major U.S. cities.

The only response to such a threat, of course, would be the nuclear obliteration of Iraq — and I mean obliteration, using scores, or even hundreds of nuclear weapons. Because, even in the face of such a threat, you don’t want anyone else to think they can get away with this. As for the countries downwind, well, that will give other countries’ neighbors an incentive to ensure that no one threatens the United States. Lots of people will die, and the only consolation is that, maybe, it will prevent worse in the future.

A grim scenario? Yes. Which is why Saddam can’t be allowed to get that far. It’s nice to see that Congress understood that.

BACK LATER. Maybe the DSL will be back up, though the BellSouth guy wasn’t too hopeful when I talked to him.

THE READER WHO SENT THIS CARTOON from the Durham paper says the signs are verbatim from a “peace” rally held at Duke yesterday. The sweatshirt, I suspect, is entirely the cartoonist’s idea.

UPDATE: Dr. Manhattan has some observations on a related topic.

THIS NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL ON ELDRED V. ASHCROFT has it exactly right:

The Constitution says that Congress may authorize copyrights only for “limited times.” It is always difficult for a court to determine the precise meaning of broad constitutional phrases like “limited times” or “cruel and unusual punishment,” or “a speedy trial.” But at some point the Constitution’s words are violated. The court should hold that the latest extension goes too far.

There is clearly a correlation between copyright and creativity. No one but a blockhead writes except for money, Samuel Johnson said, and those who subscribe to that view would be unlikely to write if, the minute they completed their work, others could copy it with impunity. But it is a highly reluctant artist — and one with extraordinary concern for his heirs — who will not create unless his work is protected for a full 70 years after his death.

The purpose of the 1998 Congressional extension was not protecting artists, but enriching media companies that hold property rights in their creations, virtually in perpetuity. The founders did not envision copyright being put to this use, and the Supreme Court should not allow it.

The Times is right, even though I think they just called me a blockhead.

JOHN SCALZI’S ADVICE ON WAR:

If you’re going to do it, then you should make sure your opponent ends up as a grease spot on the wall, and that his country is reformulated so that it never ever bothers you again.

There’s more, and it’s worth reading.

JERRY FALWELL may be a prototype Idiotarian, but Clayton Cramer explains how his dumb comments can cause deaths in India.

Hey, nobody said idiocy was harmless.

UPDATE: Eugene Volokh gently takes me to task for the above. He says that Falwell isn’t morally at fault because a bunch of idiots riot in response to his remarks.

This is true, more or less. But nasty remarks concerning religion have a historical tendency to cause violence that no one in Falwell’s business should be able to miss. That’s particularly so at present when the situation is tense to begin with. That’s what made Falwell’s remarks “dumb.” (Well, it’s one of the things that made them dumb).

When Falwell made his remarks, he didn’t “cause” the riots in the sense that Eugene seems to think is important. But, in wartime (to quote the oft-maligned Ari Fleischer), people should pay attention to what they say. Falwell didn’t, and he should have.

Please note — and some readers who sent me angry email on Falwell’s behalf seemed to have trouble with this, though Volokh does not — that I did not advocate censoring Falwell. It’s not just those on the Left, apparently, who associate criticism with censorship.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Now Stuart Buck is chiding me too, somewhat less gently. Hey, I was nicer to Falwell than Stephen Green was. A lot nicer!

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: It’s Sunday and I’m watching This Week, and Fareed Zakaria is, basically, agreeing with me. He says that the comments made by Falwell, Robertson, et al., are hurting efforts to portray the war as being not a war against Israel. George Will is also blaming CBS for magnifying Falwell into a bigger figure than he really is. There’s an interesting back-and-forth between Zakaria and Will about the significance of Falwell, and I think Zakaria has it right here.

Zakaria calls for “American moderates” to condemn Falwell’s statements. But, Fareed, I have!

ALABAMA’S SEX TOY BAN has been declared unconstitutional. And how many DJ’s in Birmingham honored this decision by playing “Good Vibrations,” I wonder?

DSL IS DOWN: BellSouth is having some sort of major problem. I’m posting this via the backup dialup connection. Blogging will remain limited for a while.

I’M KIND OF BUSY, and will be for another hour or two. In the meantime, you can read this piece by John Lott on guns and the election. You might also want to look at BlogStreet’s top 100 weblogs ranking, just updated, and Eugene Volokh’s prediction that the Supreme Court will strike down the law in Eldred v. Ashcroft. I hope he’s right. Also, this post on OxBlog about Vaclav Havel’s support for the war on terror.

I AM NOT PRO-LIFE, as any regular InstaPundit reader knows. But what Washington University is doing to a pro-life student group is embarrassing.