I found the quote in question.

“Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatism to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind” — George Orwell

Only 1000 words to go on my last ever coursework essay. WOW! I still have my thesis to write, but it is by nature far more interesting that a set essay on the topic of 'logical relevance' and 'legal relevance' as framed by the Austrlaian Courts both in common law and under the statutory regime of the Uniform Evidence Acts.

Speaking of law essays, he's an extract from an oldie on the american constitution (it wasn't a great essay but I liked this section of it):

This power of the Constitution as an ISA is the reason why constitutional jurisprudence is such a contested discourse. Whether it be constructionalism’s appeals to history or a legal realism’s appeals to social science , to sway the supreme court towards a particular constitutional interpretation is to give authority to the norms of the group espousing it. While this has always been to some extent true , it has been most dramatically realised in the growing body of civil rights cases from Brown to Plyer v Doe. Why lobby state governments to change their laws when you can de-legitimise those laws? The growing jurispathic abilities of the contemporary Supreme Court has granted that court a stranglehold over the jurisgenative legitimacy of Congress and the President, much to the disdain of many commentators. It has become a juris-political monolith. It must be noted, however, that force is the ultimate bedrock of authority — which is exactly why Eisenhower called in the 101st Airborne to Little Rock to enforce segregation. Even though the Supreme Court had attempted to delegitimise Arkansas’ legal norms, Arkanas by so actively resisting delegitimised the Supreme Court’s legal norms.

Ignoring the whole point

Kuro5hin is covering the whole 60 minutes 'Forged Memos' fiasco. I'm not american, so I kinda missed it... but there's a lot of in depth discussion about typesetting in the 1970s and whether these particular memos are valid.

It makes me think of Orwell's 1984. Orwell's strength was deconstructing politcal language - he saw it as having a kind of social engineering effect. I can't remember the exact quote, but I'll try: "the purpose of political language is to make murder respectable and to give the appearance of solidity to pure wind". (The whole 'War on Terror' rhetoric, about the state of perpetual war, certainly reminds me of 1984... and it serves a very important legal function. Its designed to return us to a 19th Cenutry 'State of War', in which all acts of force are prima facie considered to be self defensive in nature... but I digress)

What you have here is Joe Public, right and left, focusing on the minuate of detail in the 'memos' - trying to prove them wrong and, by extension, the whole report as wrong. I don't care whether the memos are true or not, what I find interesting is the sheer amount of effort poured of these small details. It seems like a distraction from the real issues of the American election - but the 'real issues' aren't discussed by either party in the election. Its all about service records and who could best fight the war against terrorism. Its all surface. How about we hear about your strategies on how to fight the war on terrorism?

This is true of the Australian election too. Both sides are throwing around tax cuts and spending but none of them are discussing anything beyond the present. Its the perpetual satisfaction of now. I'm interested in the long term. I think the next 50 years are going to be pretty decivisive for the overall future of the planet. Don't get me wrong, I think we HAVE a future - its just what kind of future we're going to have isn't being discussed. Currently, Australia is a pretty rich nation - its just my uninformed opinion, my gut feeling, suggests that that richness is going to dissappear.

Anyways, I'm ranting because I'm meant to be working on a Litigation essay on Legal and Logical Relevance and how its been framed by the Austrlaian Courts. OOOOO> YEEEES!

Jinn New : Man I was funni!

Many moons ago, I wrote the music and sound designed a Total Conversion for Myth 2 called Jinn. One of my duties was writing little snide comments on the website which took digs at Bungie over Oni and Halo- although Bungie just ignored said digs [shame, cause it would've been nice to been offered a job on Halo. Hey, if Jamie could get a job on Halo then there's no reason I couldn't! Fucken.]

I just found one of em:

"We have been busy adding multiplayer capabilities to Jinn, in light of the current trend for 'solo only' gameplay."

And Myth.bungie.org comments: Exciting, to say the least :) Since Jinn slipped past it's original release date of "before Oni," (no doubt due to the interim project of some of the Vista members... namely: Myth III, The Wolf Age!) the Cartel now confirms that it plans to ship Jinn "before Team Fortress 2."

We still beat Team Fortress 2 to release... even if no fucking one has evered heard of Jinn and it lasted all of about a month on bungie.net. Shame, it was a great game. Still, it go Fisj and Iggy Popped work. Fisj is currently working on ER: The Game and I have NFI was Iggy Popped is doing. Shame.

Jinn is actually available as part of Myth 2: Worlds - which you can buy on Amazon here.


Wow. Memories.