Craft writing assignment: Write a scene showing someone leading a double life. Show the strain the character feels in juggling the two lives.

The chirp of her cell phone roused Claire from an intermittent sleep. As she fumbled for the phone, she tried to remember where she was. The sweltering unconditioned air of the hotel room reminded her: Tangiers. And not the tourist area.

Flipping the phone open, she put it to her ear and said, “Artemis here.”
Read More »

Read More »

One of my favorite short stories is “Requiem,” by Robert Heinlein. (It’s actually a sequel to “The Man Who Sold the Moon,” another of my favorites.) The title of the short story comes from the title of a poem by Robert Louis Stevenson, and the poem is quoted in the story. Maybe it’s just because of the association with the story, but I’ve always liked this poem.

Since the poem is no longer copyrighted, I can reproduce it here:

Requiem

Under the wide and starry sky
  Dig the grave and let me lie:
Glad did I live and gladly die,
  And I laid me down with a will.

This be the verse you ‘grave for me:
  Here he lies where he long’d to be;
Home is the sailor, home from the sea,
  And the hunter home from the hill.

This poem is engraved on Robert Louis Stevenson’s tombstone in Samoa.

Well, my new computer is up and running. I still need to install a whole bunch of software, but I’ll do that over time.

I’ve tried some data recovery software on my old hard drive, but no luck so far. At least my MP3′s were on a separate hard drive, so all I had to do was move that into the new machine. I don’t have to re-rip all my CD’s. Whew!

The data I do want to retrieve is all my old e-mails and photos I took with my digital camera, plus some Words and Excel documents. Fortunately, my novel is safe because I always uploaded the files to the web.

Saddam Hussein is probably going to face a trial by an Iraqi tribunal for the things he did while dictator of Iraq. Trials of deposed dictators, almost by necessity, involve the application of law ex post facto (at least with regards to national law.) If they did not, then the dictator could argue that since the law was whatever he wanted it to be, nothing he did was a violation of the law.

From a logical standpoint, however, this is not a serious objection. The dictator cannot simultaneously argue that when he had the power, he could make the rules, but that those now in power cannot make the rules.

So Saddam Hussein will face justice, and he deserves what he gets.

But what if Hussein had not been deposed and eventually captured? What if he had given in to President Bush’s ultimatum just before the war, and had gone to live in the south of France (or somewhere else that would take him)? Would an Iraqi (or other) tribunal still be able to bring him to justice for his crimes?

There’s certainly international precedent for allowing it. The only reason General Pinochet was not extradited from the United Kingdom to Spain to stand trial was because of his health. And even though the Chilean constitution granted him immunity from prosecution in Chile, that immunity was later revoked.

Now, there is a fairly clear argument that, since the Chilean constitution was essentially imposed on Chile by Pinochet when he stepped down as leader of the country, the provisions granting him lifetime immunity from prosecution are not binding. After all, a coerced agreement is not truly an agreement. If I agree to give you $100 in return for your agreement not to kill me, you cannot really object to my later attempts to retrieve my money on the basis that you’ve kept your side of the bargain.

So, there is no dictatorial immunity based on ex post facto grounds, nor on the grounds of “agreement.”

Does this mean that all trials of former dictators should be allowed to proceed?

While it is tempting to answer yes and let justice be done, there are practical reasons to exempt some former dictators from prosecution.

A coerced agreement should be unenforceable, but that does not mean all coerced agreements should be violated.

Let’s say the dictator of Country A agrees to step down and allow democracy, as long as he is immune from prosecution. He steps down, and then some time later is brought to trial for his crimes and convicted. Justice is served, but…

The dictator of Country B has seen what happened. How likely is it that he will step down, no matter how many guarantees of immunity he is given?

The Pinochet precedent serves as a deterrent. But it does not deter dictators from committing horrible crimes; it deters them from stepping down.

So, what would be the ideal policy for dictatorial immunity?

A dictator can claim immunity from prosecution for what he did while in power if he voluntarily transfers power to a democratic government.

(Note: This entry was originally published on my now-defunct political blog, Attilathepundit.com.)

Possibly the best part of the movie is when Frodo finally confronts the Dark Lord in his throne room, and the Dark Lord tells him it is his destiny to join him, but that first he must kill his father, Saruman. Frodo doesn’t want to kill Saruman because he feels there is still good in him, but when Saruman threatens Frodo’s sister, Frodo fights harder and cuts off Saruman’s hand. The Dark Lord starts shooting lightning bolts out of his hands, and…

Sorry, that was Return of the Jedi. I got them mixed up. It’s after 4am. I’d better get some sleep.

Glad I got the name straightened out.

Just got back a few minutes ago. Some Tolkien purists are going to have a cow (or whatever the Middle Earth equivalent is), but I really enjoyed it.

I’ll be off shortly to wait in line for a midnight showing of the final Lord of the Rings installment. Jordan Commons has 17 screens, one of which is being used for the sold-out showing of the entire trilogy. The other sixteen screens have a midnight showing of Here Comes the King Again (or whatever) and they are all sold out.

Anyway, I have to say that I’m very excited to see it, especially “the final epic battle between good and evil … portrayed by having the Dark Lord Sauron pursue Frodo and Sam (the ring-bearing Hobbits) in a spectacular car chase through Middle Earth.” See here for more details.

Without even knowing the results of the Monday night game, I can do my football update.

Dallas Cowboys: After having been crushed two weeks in a row, it was nice to see them doing the crushing. They shut out the Redskins.

Klingon Warriors: A tocuhdown catch by Todd Heap sealed the victory for my fantasy football team in the first round of the playoffs. That means for the first time in the four years our league has been running, my team is in the Super Bowl and has a chance to win the Millard Frymore Memorial Trophy.

And — for the third straight week — BYU’s football team DID NOT LOSE!

Congratulations to President Bush and our military for their persistence.

And especially, congratulations to the Iraqi people. Yes, it really is over.

(Note: This entry was originally published on my now-defunct political blog, Attilathepundit.com.)