Desktop icon cartoon

similar in tone (i.e. violent) is this animaion about the flash authoring envoronment. (from boing boing)

On a somewhat related theme, try typing “about:mozilla” into your Firefox address bar, if you haven’t already…

See also “Whee!”

I’d like to post an email in sent to Neil Cavuto tonight:
” I enjoyed the interview with Eagleton. However, it did appear there were several obvious questions you might have put to him, that you failed to ask. Eagleton said he was “pessimistic” about the apparent inability of the “free” world to effectively address the threat posed by nations like Iran. Inasmuch as his fears, and the apparent remedy he proposed, the military option, were identical to those he and the neocons proposed prior to the Iraq invasion, you might have asked whether we should do to Iran what we did to Iraq. If that is not what he had in mind, then what?
At some point these folk are going to decide whether it is possible for America to live in this world at peace with peoples and nations who view the world diffently than does America. It would appear that it is the American view that nations that do not agree with us, who do not share our policy aims, do not even have the right to arm themselves against the possibility that America or its allies might invade them–an idea not so far fetched: think, Iraq!
Amidst all the anx and arguments the question looms: can America live in peace with nations that differ with us politically, philosophically, culturally and otherwise?
We exude an incredible arrogance in our attitude toward the rest of the world. We take it as a given that the Iraquis before the invasion, Hezbullah, the Palestinians in the territories, the North Koreans, etc., have no right to the same self defense that we claim is a birthright of Iraelis, Americans and Brits. I am confounded as to the basis for such assumptions. We arm Israel to the teeth, and regard it a cardinal sin for the people with whom they have territorial disputes to be armed at all! What, I ask in all sincerity, is that about?
During the recent 34 day war, countless American and Israeli statesmen were on television decrying the fact that Lebanon had not complied with the one UN resolution that required that they disarm the Hezbellah militia. They sighted this as the principal legal justification for the vicious attack on Lebanon’s civilian population. It was as though UN Resolutions were so sacrosant that a nation which failed to obey them deserved all the destruction that came to them.
I employed Google to find out how Israel had performed with respect to U.N. Resolutions. The result: “From 1967 to 1988 the UN Security Council passed 88 resolutions directly against Israel and during that span, Israel was condemned 43 times. During this time, the UN General Assembly passed 429 resolutions against Israel, and Israel was condemned 321 times.”
So, what is going on here? Are we advocating not international law, but the law of the jungle? Do we believe that everybody else in the world is so coyed or stupid that they do not know what is going on?
The hypocrisy of our foreign policy cannot do other than abet the cause of lawlessness and terrorism in the world. America should stand for, deminimus, peace, justice and fairness. When we, the most powerful nation in the world, abandons those standards, we leave the rest of the world in such obvious peril that history can do no less than condemn us.