I'm a 30 year old born and
raised in Los Angeles

Now a Designer
turned Information Architect
turned Design Director
at a .com in London
with my new wife Leyhsa

Archive:
Apr - Jun 01 | Jul- Aug 01 | Sept- Dec 01 | Jan- Apr 02 | May- Jul 02
Aug - Sep 02 | Oct- Dec 02 | Jan - Feb 03 | March 03

In the newborn section I was inundated with all of these freaky gadgets that I had no idea existed for babies. Things like a baby monitor that also measure the room temperature, a bottle warmer, a play mat with little stuffed animals hanging above it, etc etc. Then the panic attack hit while I was looking at this mesh net bag designed to hold bath toys for £12. I remember saying to myself, 'Babies need bath toys? But we don't even have any bath toys and now I need to get a bag for these toys I don't have! Man, am I going to be an awful parent'. That's when I realized: Even if I had the full economic power of a small country, every Disney embroidered accessory ever made and read every self-help book on child rearing in existence, I still will never have everything I need for my kid, and there will always be something I will need to do that I wasn't doing to be a good parent. It just never ends and it has only just started and that split second is when the baby buggy showroom started to spin. I made it out that day alive with a wash tub, a crib musical Winnie the Pooh thing and a brush. Leyhsa also got a teddy bear but I think she actually got it for me.

The latest news with my most recent battles with British Telecom, the most useless company in the history of bad service, is that after three long and painful months, I still don't have DSL access and am being held ransom with their crap and expensive dialup service while I wait. I sent the most obnoxious, irate and antagonistic letter of my life on Sunday to the good people of BT, and this morning it brought results. I got a call from a very perturbed Natalie saying she could 'guarantee' me that I would have service within 48 hours. So I told Natalie, 'You now make the eighth person to promise me results within 48 hours and frankly, as reliable as you might be, you have to rely on an army of lobotomized monkeys that work within your company and I therefore must take your promise with a grain of salt'. I could tell that I had found for Perturbed Natalie a whole new level of annoyance with speaking to customers. You, my friends, will hear from me on Wednesday either way on what happens next on my latest perilous journey.

Not that it should surprise anyone but their will be a war within the next two weeks. Since the inspectors ended up getting a 'No Weapons Found' Verdict, Big Bad Bush Jr. will be taking the world into his soft privileged hands and messing it up pretty good. There are good reasons why we should go to war, but there are far more reasons why you should be scared. Here's the deal as I see it:

1. We are all gonna die. There are a number of serious threats that can emerge from all of this from any one of these lovely scenarios: Rumsfeld makes good on his public threat of a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Baghdad, provoking any number of Muslim nations into an all-out blood-fest. Saddam sends a chemical attack to Israel and Sharon makes good on his already declared threat of nuking Baghdad if that happens, provoking any number of Muslim nations into an all-out blood-fest. North Korea knows that they are next and decides to take matters into their own hands and attacks the 170,000 troops based in South Korea which they have already threatened to do, right before they announce they've got the nukes to fight fire with fire, provoking any number of Eastern nations into an all-out blood-fest.
   
2. There will be anarchy in a way like no punker could ever have dreamt up. By acting in defiance of the UN, Bush is essentially pulling the plug on them, causing the legitimacy of an International coalition to crumble. This means that any Charles Bronson-like vigilante move a country wants to make will no longer be required to go through the UN since the precedent will have already been set. With nobody to answer to, except Bush and his businessmen, it all comes down to what money deals are struck at the table, and not a neutered United Nations. Can you say 'to the highest bidder' with me?
   
3. We hit an iceberg and enter another Cold War Era. With France, Germany, Turkey, Russia and China all explicitly against a war or of us turning our backs on the UN, the US makes a crap load of new enemies. Why would this be a big deal? Well, Blair has already been warned that going to war without the explicit green light of the UN Security Council would break international law and he could be tried in the newly founded International Court. Bush has already dismissed the entire premise of an International Court that he needs to obey and has backed out of it. This means that there is a strong possibility that all the other nations could back an International trial against the US-UK strike, alienating as well as posturing those countries into another Cold-like era. This means international efforts to help the US against terrorism could crumble, international business with opposing countries might impose sanctions or tariffs on our exports, or they just might say screw you all together and isolate us completely. Sound crazy? Just listen to what Colin Powell has already said about France and you can't consider China, the biggest communist country on the planet, or Russia, our former enemy, or Turkey, a mostly Muslim country, as being our best of friends, now can we?
   
4. Bush gets his ways and we open Desert Disney World by 2006. This is the worst of all scenarios because if this war becomes a push over, Bush will have all the clout he needs to mess with anyone else he wants. The other Middle East countries don't want a democratic country as their neighbor since all the others are some form of a military rule, kingship, dictatorship, etc. The last thing they will want is to be the next puppet Afghanistan Democracy making the scene for all kinds of problems to arise. For example, funding splinter terrorist factions to make civil war in Iraq or attacking other US interests. Vice President Cheney's former company (Haliburton, the one that gave him $54 million as a thank you present before he left to run for VP, the company that he still has $8 million in stock for, the one he still gets $1 million in payments from, yeah that Haliburton) is already looking at making a truckload over a 'new' Iraq. He sets his sights on Iran and South Korea and maybe even Saudi Arabia (Rumsfeld has already said that they have a government the US doesn't agree with) and his oil friends will be itching for more. The world finally sees Bush for what he is and, well, there will be much more blood-letting before it's all over in the name of the American Way.
   
5. The United States becomes the next Enron and goes belly up. The US deficit is already huge, expecting to be $1 trillion within four years, and the economy is still sputtering. People seem to think that wars are still good for economies. That was true way back when the US's economy was much smaller with the gross national product being made up of over 60% government contracts. Now it only makes up 4% with most of that going to a handful of high-tech companies, making a very little dent on the US and its tepid economy. The US is doling out billions to bribe other countries and will spend a billion on post Iraq. And the worst part is, the Bush administration still hasn't said how much this war is going to cost. The last advisor that hinted to the press at how expensive it was going to cost was fired the next day. The fact is that Bush is doing this all with YOUR MONEY, and that is a finite amount which means he has to borrow from YOUR FUTURE to pay for it. The last time we had a war in Iraq it tailspinned us into a deep recession and huge deficits. The only thing we know so far from Bush is this time it will cost even more.
   
6. I could be full of crap and completely wrong. This would be the best of scenarios. I don't usually like being wrong but this would be a case where I would be thankful for it. Bush actually turns out to be just a Mother Theresa with tanks and the world becomes a happy place. The UN will say all is forgiven and thanks for it not having to get its hands dirty. The whole of the Middle East joins hands with white folks as they sing 'Kumbaya'. Iraq becomes a model to the world and Saddam gets hired at Desert Disney to drive the Peter Pan ride. All of the billions and billions of the tax payers money to fund this thing is given back in the profits made and Universities are declared free tuition, buying homes would be partially funded for first time buyers, shelters are built across the world and homelessness is abolished. The world then cries in relief to the savior of humankind, who has been renamed as simply 'The Dubya', making him the first government official to be elected the head of the UN, President of Amnesty International, plus a major contributor to Greenpeace.
   
   I think I have more faith in BT.

It occurred to me that while this country has been as high as 92% vehemently against a war and its Prime Minister, the Queen has never said her side. She could have either spoken up for her people and protested against the war or attempted to rally its people to support Tony B. Instead, she was so curiously invisible from the airwaves, I had forgotten that she existed. I asked somebody at work that if the public was so strongly against a war and the Prime Minister has to ask the Queen's permission to use her military, what if she just said no?

The answer I got was strange;
'Oh we would never stand for that, she would be removed.'
'Even if she was doing what the people wanted?', I asked
Answer: 'She can't interfere or the public would get rid of her.'
'But if her job is to do these things and she is only allowed to do what she is told instead, why not get rid of the middle-man and fire her anyway?'
BIG ANSWER HERE: 'Because she is good for tourism'

It now all makes sense why her prat son is such a, well, prat and her grandson William, the future King someday is studying of all things, Art History as a major. Now if your job was to someday be a position of world recognition and would be meeting with dignitaries and politicians from around the world and you were to represent your government, don't you think you might pick something more relevant then Art History as a major? The answer is no, if you are actually irrelevant. And that's why the Old Lady is strangely absent during these trying times and her son is a prat and her grandson picks a major that's mostly made up of chicks. Because they know and have happily accepted the fact that they are completely useless.

We also are officially late as Leyhsa and El Presidente are still conjoined at the tummy. The due date was the 27th, but no baby still and our gut says we aren't expecting that for another 2 weeks. Leyhsa has surprisingly had much more energy then a woman ready to drop a baby normally has, and we have been trying to take advantage of that by hitting the occasional art exhibit, restaurant, or other stuff that we know we will not be seeing once El Presidente does make an appearance.

After watching the news about the war I suddenly had a fantastic idea for a baby name that could possibly eventually lead to world peace. I know it sounds far fetched, but hear me out: It all started while watching a piece on the BBC about George Bush and the White House condemnation of opposition to the war. While watching it, I had suddenly noticed there had been a stealth like inclusion into the vocabulary of the American conscience an Orwellian-like crimethought known as un-patriotic. The 1984 book introduced a concept of limiting the range of thought by associating unrelated words to have the same meaning.

Here are some examples:

• INVASION = LIBERATION
• PRESIDENT = PATRIOTISM
• WAR = MORAL
• PEACE = WEAKNESS
• DISSENT = ANTI-AMERICAN
• PROTEST = UN-PATRIOTIC

This gradual erosion in our vocabulary is a form of an attack on the freedom of speech and has been in the making with the media since 9-11. This is all part of a wider plan that has been 10 years in the making to make the people of America support unprovoked military action. My theory would be that we could turn this circumstance to our advantage, starting with the naming of El Presidente. As no doubt, Leyhsa and I will be raising an outstanding human being, a pillar of society, a leader among men, a successful yet humble person, etc, our child will be used as an exemplary moniker for all to aspire to. Since this is the case, the name of our baby will eventually be on the hearts and minds of people of all creeds everywhere.

So my theory is to turn this Orwellian infraction of rights on its head by naming El Presidente Whitey. Just think of it, people all over would soon be saying, 'Whitey is the best', 'You can trust Whitey', or 'I love Whitey'. Eventually, the introduction of my child's name could end racism and fear of the white man, leading to a coalition among all men and eventually World Peace. Despite my strong argument, the name has already been shot down by Leyhsa under the grounds that the name is stupid. Who needs world peace anyway, its WEAK.