A new US Army report claims that Twitter could potentially be used as a communication tool for terrorists and other sketchy characters. Well, duh.

As a communications tool, Twitter can be used by anyone to communicate anything. The same could be said for radio, the Internet in general, the Post Office, messenger pigeons, and smoke signals. I’m glad the US Military has so much extra cash lying around they can commission reports on the blatantly obvious.

But it gets better. From the report:

“Twitter has also become a social activism tool for socialists, human rights groups, communists, vegetarians, anarchists, religious communities, atheists, political enthusiasts, hacktivists and others to communicate with each other and to send messages to broader audiences.”

Oooh, those sneaky vegetarians. They’ll destroy us all with their Twitter mastery. Thanks to Her Highnessness for the link.

Way, way back in December of 1999, the world was a different place. The economy was booming, global warming was a phrase whispered only by paranoid delusionals, and we had yet to experience the horror of September 11th and the bumbling authoritarianism of the war on terror.

Into this seeming paradise came one of the defining pop-culture moments of our generation: Budweiser’s “Whassup?” campaign. It began as genius, quickly became annoying, and gradually became part of the cultural landscape. Even now, people (often with irony, occassionally not) will greet each other with a fervent “whaaaasssssuuupppp?” It is a relic from a time that now seems very long ago:

Of course, a lot has happened since then. Awful things that breed cynicism and crush optimism. Once again nailing the zeitgeist, the original cast of the “Whassup” ad (sans Anheuser-Busch) have reunited to bring us this: 

A “whassup” for the grim, meat-hook realities of 2008. Amazing how we can chart the torment of American society through a premise devised by a beer company.

Or, maybe not.

This one’s for you, MB.

A good friend of mine is getting married this weekend. And, as an occassional reader of this blog, he was fervent in his desire to see some Mixed Martial Arts-related content. In fact, my invitation to his upcoming nuptials may have been contingent on some MMA content appearing on Nunc Scio at some point before his getting hitched.

This posed a bit a of a problem. Namely, I know next to nothing about the exciting world of sweaty men pummeling each other into submission inside a cage-like ring known simply as “The Octagon”. The finer points of MMA technique are largely lost on me. I can offer little insight into who has the best chance of winning the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) this year. But in my preliminary research, I noticed somthing odd: MMA in general, and the UFC in particular, is banned in Ontario. That means no live ultimate fighting for our province’s hardcore fans.

Why? Well, because the licensing authorities have taken the view that it is illegal. According to section 83 of the Canadian Criminal Code, “prize fighting” is against the law, except in:

“A boxing contest between amateur sportsmen, where the contestants wear boxing gloves of not less than one hundred and 40 grams each in mass, or any boxing contest held with the permission or under the authority of an athletic board or commission or similar body established by or under the authority of the legislature of a province for the control of sport within the province, shall be deemed not to be a prize fight.”

This seems strange to me for two reasons. First, the fact that boxing- a sport every bit as violent as MMA- is given an exception smacks of hypocrisy. In the end, all of these sports are about hitting other people. Once you allow one, reason dictates you allow all of them. Second, this strikes me as the kind of law that protects exactly no one from  nothing.

To explain: if two stout gentlemen both freely enter an octagonal ring for the purpose of assaulting one another, accepting all associated risks, then we should let them. And, similarly, if a crowd of people want to pay money to watch it, they should also be permitted to part with their hard-earned luchre for a night of bloody violence. If someone is injured or (goodness forbid) killed, then he has no one to blame but himself. If you watch more than 30 seconds of a MMA bought, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that maming or death is a very likely outcome.

By banning MMA, the Government of Ontario presumes to tell us two things: they won’t allow us to hurt ourselves even if we want to, and more problematic, only they know the best ways for us to incur bodily injury. Both of these things seem to impinge dangerously on the realm of individual liberty, and that’s not right.

So, for the sake of freedom, logic, and a good kick in the face, legalize MMA. Let the prospective combatants fight if they want to. You’ll be doing our democracy a favour, and will make my friend very, very happy.

In my effort to maximize my utility for my readers, I’m launching a new occasional feature. Nunc Scio’s Continuing Political Taxonomy will attempt to catalogue the endless variety of political animals that clutter the public landscape.

Part the first: Churchius Ignoramus

C. Ignoramus is a large biped common to the Midwestern and Southern United States. Herds of these strange mammals have been known to swing entire elections, as they mindlessly follow their leaders towards increasingly strange policies. Its baffling rejection of reason and logic make its continued survival, let alone ecosystem dominance, a complete mystery to evolutionary biologists. It should noted that the C. Ignoramus typically does not believe in evolution, and biologists are investigating whether this renders the species immune to the theory’s dictates. It should also be noted that the C. Ignoramus further believes that all evolutionary biologists are going to Hell.

Here, observe the C. Ignoramus in its natural habitat:

Note several defining features of this exemplary specimen:

• Large, frequently blinking vacant eyes;
• Exaggerated, aggresive head movement;
• Impressive ability to take a non-political issue (whoever has “more belief in the Lord”) and make it a defining political issue;
• Predilection for telling people how to live their lives (“that should be the defining issue for everybody”)
• Overt racism;
• Condescension (“I’ll pray for him”);
• A spectacular ability to vote against her own interests, due to an ill-defined belief that a magical dude who lives in the sky will make everything OK; and
• Tendency to make judgements about others based on spurious, often mendacious evidence.

Yes, truly one of nature’s most intriguing and inexplicable creations. Special thanks to DA for the footage.

This entry is crossposted with blogTO.

Of all the various television templates created by man to variously entertain and sell advertising, few are more intolerable than the medical drama. With the exception of House, these shows are the broadcast equivalent of smashing yourself repeatedly in the face with a hammer, because it feels so good when you stop.

So imagine my delight when I heard the Bad Dog Theatre- Toronto’s source for low-budget, gonzo comedy- was doing an improvised send-up of this hated genre. And Hot Doctors in Love doesn’t just roast medical drama. The cast of this entertaining show immolates it, leaving nothing but comedic gold in their wake.

Read the rest of this entry »

Finally. Public transportation I can get behind.

A bunch of genius Brits have launched a campaign to raise about $12,000 to place pro-atheist advertising on the side of London buses. And, they reached their goal in something like an hour. So, starting in January, commuters in will be treated to this rather warm, inobtrusive message (the photo above is a mock-up).

Now, if you are a religious person, the first mistake would be to perceive this as an assault on your beliefs. Not so. Religious advertising- not to mention overt signals of faith- are everywhere. This is just an attempt by those who aren’t religious to claim a bit of the public sphere for themselves.

And if you happen to be an atheist…awesome bus ad high five!

If you’d still like to donate, go here. If they raise more money, they can extend the reach of their ad campaign. And thanks to MN for the link.

Our humble metropolis, much maligned by both its citizens and the hordes of slack-jawed troglodytes cluttering up its periphery, may not be so bad after all.

Foreign Policy magazine has listed Toronto as #10 on its global cities index, right in there with heavy hitters like New York, London and Tokyo. And, we beat out popular favourites like Berlin, Sydney, Madrid and Beijing.

The list measures 60 cities against 24 metrics in five broad areas: business activity, human capital, information exchange, culutral experience, and political engagement. Toronto does particularly well in human capital and cultural experience, and is middling in the other three.

Always nice to get a little unsolicited validation. Now if we could just fix our ^$#&$#@ transit system.