Friday, April 30, 2004

The Washington Times Owned by A Cult?????
I stumbled on this while surfing the web - The Times was founded and is owned by the Moonies! Wow! I had no idea.

I'll let you do your own google searching for information about the Moonies, but let's just say that they are an interesting group.
Let the Beatification of Rachel Corrie Continue!
I received this in my email box.....
"A Tribute to Rachel Corrie"
With Her Parents Craig and Cindy Corrie
When: Monday, May 3rd @ 7:00pm
Where: Tressider, Oak Lounge
On March 16, 2003, 23 year-old Rachel Corrie, a nonviolent peace activist,
was killed when an Israeli soldier bulldozed her as she was trying to
prevent the demolition of a physician's home in Palestine.

***For more information
Sponsored by:
ASSU Speakers Bureau
Stanford in Government (SIG)
Coalition for Justice (CFJ), OASIS,
Muslim Student Awareness Network (MSAN)

Rachel Corrie was not a "Peace Activist". She was a girl who took sides in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, and died in the process. For more information on this, visit Little Green Footballs "tribute" to her, another view by Mother Jones casting her in a positive light, and a thorough fisking of that article.

Thursday, April 29, 2004

This Election Will Be Decided at the Republican Convention
I subscribe to a few far-left listserves and one friend on them sent out this link to a piece urging protestors to New York for the Republican Convention. Here is the money quote....
Welcome to the mother of all protests The reasons for going are immense. The numbers that will be there will be incredible. The event will be historic. There will be hundreds of thousands. Most of them will be from New York City. Our goal here at is to make sure that the second largest group is from Chicago. This is not about being an activist or going to just any protest. This is about bringing everybody you know. Everyone you've ever talked to who cringes when they hear Bush's voice. Everyone who ever expressed fear and anger at what's been done in our name.

Another piece I received is urging progressives to inflitrate the Republican convention as volunteers.

If this protest happens outside the Republican Convention, we should look at it not with askance, but rather as the long awaited opportunity to demolish the protestors arguments in mass. For once, reporters will have no choice but to listen to the counterprotest, for if it is done right, it will be done on the stage of the convention itself. Let Bush/Rumsfield/and all the other speakers stand strong against these waves of appeasement and show for once and all how much of leaders they truly are. Let them define Kerry as the choice of the protestors, and let them show Americans that they are not afraid to stand up to them, unlike sisterless souljah Kerry. If they pull that off, this election will be in the bag.

Wednesday, April 28, 2004

Good Post on Airline Security
Read it here
(thanks to instapundit for the referral)

Tuesday, April 27, 2004

A Theory on The Draft (NFL DRAFT)
After watching my Browns trade up one slot and foregoing their second round pick, I can't help but feel we got the short stick. Recap - the Browns traded up from 7 to 6 in order to draft Kellen Winslow Jr., supposedly the next Kellen Winslow Sr./Jeremy Shockey, meaning one of the top two tight ends for the next 10 years. If he ends up being the next great tight end, great - I'd be thrilled.

However, there is a matter of lost opportunity. By picking Winslow they forewent picking other players with their draft picks, trading them for veterans, or trading down for extra draft picks. Further, there is a matter of risk. By having all of their eggs in one basket, a contract holdout, injury, or simple misjudgment of talent becomes ever more costly.

In the past, these costs were belittled by the argument that all the great teams have built through the draft - and that the team trading up is the team that usually gets the better of the deal. However, recently there has been a change in the system that personnel directors have been slow to come to grips with - the salary cap. Players at the very top of the draft are paid significantly more than players just a few slots down. If you are "fortunate" enough to have drafted in the top three for several years, your cap space will be largely used up on three or four players that may be stars, but just as often will be busts or still-developing projects a few years out. To compensate for the loss of salary cap room, mid level veterans, who have just come to their own and would often resign with their drafting team for a cheaper amount than testing free agency are forced out, because the money isn't even there to pay them this lesser amount. When money is finally cleaned to better the team, it ends up being used for a stop-gap solution - either overpaying for a veteran from free agency or taking a chance on an "instant" impact player at the top of the draft (who may or may not pan out, but will be paid high either way restarting the process).

On the other hand, drafting low and trading down can clean cap space. Players go from being decenlty priced in the mid-first round to being downright bargains from the third round onward (if they pan out, they are locked in relatively close to minimum salary contracts for several years, they don't they get cut with little/no damage to the salary cap). These salary cap dynamics may very well be altering the age old dynamic - instead of being better of drafting high sure things, a team can best look after its long term interest by trading DOWN repeatedly, stockpiling picks, signing them for cheap amounts, plug the savings into getting only moderatly priced/value veterans, and finally being able to afford their good drafted players who pan out upon free agency.

Its just a theory. What do you think?

Sunday, April 25, 2004

Two Races. One Printed View. Two Responses.
Fox News has an interesting story to read.

Wednesday, April 21, 2004

Key Members Senate Foreign Relations Committee Calling for "Rethinking" of Military Draft
Anybody feeling the vibe of future conscription in the air? Chuck Hagel R-Neb, chair of the Foreign Relations committee is furthering that feeling with remarks like this. Also, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del is saying the same thing. Not a good sign....

UPDATE - CATO has this on a potential draft.

Here is a petition where you can protest a potential draft.

My attitude is that we have troops stationed all over the world, many in places not essential to our national interest (if beneficial at all). Before we even begin to think about having some young men sacrifice their liberties, we should FIRST consider a reallocation of these troops to regions (Iraq/Afghanistan) where they are apparently needed.

Monday, April 19, 2004

Palestine - The Movie Series
I received this email - gives you an idea of how the "tone" of the campus debate is changing

Doesn't look like this event was posted before, Fisk is a great
journalist, so i imagine this will be quite a good film.. ***
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:59:45 -0700
From: *********
To: rinc-chat-03-04@lists.Stanford.EDU, studentsfordean@lists.Stanford.EDU

Hey guys!

This movie should be great- I encourage you to attend if you are free!

- ****

[hyperlink added by me]

April 18th - May 30th

Sponsored By:
Coalition for Justice

**FILM #1: "The Road To Palestine by Robert Fisk**

WHEN: this Sunday and every Sunday
TIME: 8:30pm
WHERE: Bechtel International Center



THE FILM: "The Road to Palestine by Robert Fisk"

The Road to Palestine

This compelling program examines the displacement of Palestinians by
Zionist immigrants and Jewish refugees. Spotlights on the militant Islamic
group Hamas, the effects of Israeli rule in occupied Gaza, and the
attitudes of Zionist settlers and Palestinian holdouts on the outskirts of
Jerusalem reveal the hostility and the humanity, powerfully depicting the
plight of refugees on both sides of the historical, religious, and
ideological divide. Not available in French-speaking Canada. A Discovery
Channel Production. (52 minutes, color)

Series: (Beirut to Bosnia)
Note: "Discovery channel"
Notes: Presenter, Robert Fisk.
Notes: VHS

April 25th : Palestine Is Still the Issue

May 2nd : Frontiers of Dreams and Fears

May 9th : Al Nakba: The Palestinian Castastrophe

May 16th : Jenin-Jenin

May 23rd : Gaza Strip

May 30th : Tragedy in the Holy Land: The Second Uprising

Sunday, April 18, 2004

Commenting on the recent assassination of a top Hamas leader, Spain's new foreign minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, said Sunday that such killings "prevent creation of a climate of peace and harmony" and a resumption of talks on the road map. The assassination was "a counterproductive initiative that does not help recover dialogue and confidence in the future," Moratinos added.

Let's get something straight - Israel's attacks do not prevent a "climate of peace and harmony." Rather, NOT ELIMINATING those who demand nothing short of unconditional surrender and are willing to murder those in their community who disagree is what prevents a "climate of peace and harmony." That's not to say Israel is a good peaceful country filled with wonderful people (it isn't). Its saying that it is time to be honest about the situation.

Given Rantisi's wish for martyrdom, and the needs of "justice" to have him killed, David Bernstein is happy both could be fulfilled at the same time (not quite sure what he means by justice, but I'll let it slide).

Saturday, April 17, 2004

First Yassin, Now this Guy - Hamas Leadership Getting Hammered
It appears that Israel is giving the leaders of Hamas what they want - Martyrdom. As I've said here before - no complaints here.

Friday, April 16, 2004

Kerry - Subtlety or Risk Aversion?
I'd definitaly agree that Bush simplifies things, but I don't think complexity is necessarily a sign of subtlety. It can also be a sign of risk aversion to taking a stand (which given the threats we are facing now, is not a good thing). Which it is must be judged by each given the facts and circumstances of each candidate, but I believe strongly that for Kerry it is the latter (his flip flops are just a bit too convient).
Posting Schedule for Next Month
Being a law student brings two times a year when I can't do much other than study, and this is one of them. Until Mid-May, I'll be studying pretty much constantly for exams. I'll still post during this period, but it won't be once a day any more. I'll try to put stuff up a few times a week. Thanks for reading, and I hopd you keep coming back.

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Lawyer Heroes Wrap Up
The event came off well, and meeting up with my old boss for lunch was fun. The dinner was well attended, and Dean Sullivan was nice enough to have me eat at her table with Carter Phillips and Steve Shapiro. Many thanks to Danny Goldman and Anne Irwin of ACS for setting the event up - it was quite packed. Oh yeah - thanks to Mandeep, Professors Pam Karlan, Robert Weisberg, Marcus Cole, and Barbara Babcock for making in class announcements.

Anyway, after dinner Carter had a bit of a message to my dad. Next time listen to my mom before signing anything.

Wednesday, April 14, 2004

Volokh is coming to Stanford in the Fall
Ying Ma sends this email
Dear Federalists,
Many thanks for those of you who showed up to our February 2 luncheon discussion featuring Prof. Eugene Volokh. As some of you know, Prof. Volokh has accepted Stanford’s offer to visit here in the fall. He will be teaching a class on free speech and a seminar on the Religion Clauses. Thank you for showing him a warm welcome when he was still mulling over Stanford’s offer. We look forward to seeing Prof. Volokh on campus next fall.

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

Animal Rights Chicanery
A friend who I often disagree with, Ray Ybarra, sent out this email
The Stanford Law School chapters of the Student Animal Legal Defense Fund
and National Lawyers Guild present...

Terrorists or Freedom Fighters?
Animal Liberation, "Domestic Terrorism," and the PATRIOT Act

A talk by Steven Best
Founder of the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs and
Chair of Philosophy, University of Texas at El Paso

Tuesday, April 13, at 12:30pm.
Moot Court Room
Food will be served.

A well-known author and activist, Professor Best will discuss the history,
ethics, and tactics of the controversial Animal Liberation Front -- freedom
fighters to some, terrorists to others. He will explore the philosophical
justifications for animal liberation and discuss the Bush administration's
use of the PATRIOT Act to crack-down on animal rights activists who use
illegal direct action tactics.

Free food is always good, so I attended. What I learned was interesting. Societal morality should be reconfigured to embrace animal rights in the future, and engaging in "violence" against property is alright because it does not physically harm sentient life and may move society towards the path of moral enlightenment. In this way, it is similar to the actions of the Jewish/French anti-Nazi resistance, the civil rights movement, and Ghandi's struggles.

Note to Professor Stephen Best - you have a problem. You neglected to tell us that the tactic of using violence to impose a moral code that the inflicted society does not presently agree with is also similar to the tactics of the Klu Klux Klan, Al Queda, and the Oklahoma City Bombers. Since they are trying (in their view) to move society to a more enlightened path as well, aren't their actions permissible?

The truth is that while we may choose to forgive a "terrorist" organization if we after-the-fact adopt its moral view, if we don't we will go after it with the full force of society's police. Which is what we should do with the terrorists of the ALDF and ELF. We should imprison their leaders, sentence them to lengthy jail time, and continually harass them and their supporters with the law. Unless of course that they stop burning stuff down or convince us that they are right.

Monday, April 12, 2004

***Please note time change....and be sure to come to this one-of-a-kind event***

The Lawyer Heroes Series
Inside the Supreme Court:
Perspectives from the Left and the Right
Steve Shapiro
National Legal Director, ACLU
Carter Phillips
Managing Partner, Sidley Austin (DC)
Moderated By
Dean Kathleen Sullivan
Wednesday, April 14th
7:00 PM Dinner
7:30 PM Presentation
Law Lounge

*Also sponsored by The American Constitution Society and The Federalist Society*

Please join us for a special presentation of Lawyer Heroes featuring two of this country's most accomplished Supreme Court advocates. Steve Shapiro, the ACLU's chief legal strategist, will discuss recent and future Supreme Court cases vital to the mission of the ACLU. Carter Phillips, a renowned Supreme Court litigator and author of the influential military brief the Michigan affirmative action cases, will talk about his experiences litigating before the Court in several high profile cases. Both also will discuss the present Supreme Court term and the future of the Rehnquist Court.

About Carter Phillips

About Steve Shapiro

Should Bush Have Preemptively Dealt with 9/11
Here's one take on how history could have been different.
Bankruptcy- Grain Farmers and Fisherman Know How to Bring Home the Bacon
In Bankruptcy, one of the keys that determine whether you get paid or not is whether your claim can be termed as a priority - if not termed as a priority and you don't have collateral, your stuck as an unsecured creditor who will be lucky to get pennies on the dollar. Some costs that are termed as prioritie are taxes, spousal support payments, contributions to employee benefits, administrative expenses, and debts to grain/fish storage facilities. Wait - did you catch that? What the hell is that doing there (section 507(a)(5) of the bankruptcy code)?

Friday, April 09, 2004

PC rethought
After thinking about my piece yesterday, I'm now of the opinion that while there are many different strains of PC, it is up to each of us to choose the strains we wish to associate with. If one is caught associating with a strain one dislikes, than it is often to one's preference to have it to work to have it changed.

The question then is whether avoiding the imposition of your vision PC on another decreases the likelihood that their PC will be imposed on you. I am skeptical of this idea - actually I think imposing your political correctness on another might be the best way to get them to back of their vision of PC that you dislike. Of course this philosophy, if adopted, could lead to multiple actors competing to up the magnitude of their PC on the other in order to get each to back off, which would make our society a less pleasurable place to live.

Thursday, April 08, 2004

Earth Day Comes to Stanford
I received this email - I've long been skeptical of environmental movements that use words such as "sustainable" (or read economists such as Malthus)
Hello -
I'm writing on behalf of Students for a Sustainable Stanford to
invite your group to participate in the annual Spring Earth Day Fair
in White Plaza. The date of the fair will be April 22nd. We hope you
can join the other groups with a table, to share what you've been
working on, educate people, recruit new members to your group, and
just have a good time. The weather should be beautiful!
This year we're gearing up for a very big Earth Week,
focusing on personal empowerment during the election year. We will be
joined on Earth Week by such exciting guests as US congressman Pete
McCloskey (co-founder of Earth Day) and legendary folk singer Joan
Baez (tentatively scheduled). On Thursday, we anticipate a
celebratory day of learning in white plaza, including :

-student environmental groups
-student cultural groups (performances)
-student political groups
-administrative departments (e.i transportation, water...)
-academic departments

Here's the info:

Earth Day Fair
Thursday, April 22
White Plaza
12:00 - 2:00 pm

Keep in mind that ProFro's will be arriving on this day, so it's also
a good way to recruit new members.
The tentative schedule for all of the Earth Week activities follows this email.

Please Respond to this email ASAP to let me know if you would like a
table in White Plaza. Also, spread the word and forward this
information to any other groups that might be interested and relevant.

Thanks a bunch!

Reiterating My Position on Kos - The Incident Puts Us on the Slippery PC Slope
XRLQ in his blog roundup said that my opinion of the scandal was that Kos was less than tasteful. That's accurate, but it wasn't the main idea of my post. My feeling is that Kos said something that does not fit into the blogsphere's notion of political correctness and now is getting hammered for it.

Wait, the blogsphere can't have Political Correctness, can't it? Of course it can - the forces that gave rise to the PC monstrosity are in the end derived from basic human nature. Change the beliefs, and you will still have people trying to enforce PC, just a different version of it. I won't isolate myself from this, for I've acted the same way - I led the charge at Stanford to keep Lynne Stewart from receiving a Stanford Law Title last year because I thought her beliefs were beyond the pale (worse than Kos, she actually advocated the killing of government officials and blowing up of buildings, despite being given the opportunity to retract her statements by me at her speech which she refused).

The key is not to be repulsed by the PC tendency in our nature, but rather to realize what we are doing and ask ourselves if it is worthwhile. I still think Lynne Stewart should not have been given the imprimatur of a university title, just as Friedman et al think that Kos went to far, which in the end treads dangerously close to the logic preventing speech that Bernstein decries in his book (that of course I haven't read) - You Can't Say That.

I kind of wonder what Bernstein would say about this. I'll email him.
The Solution to Immigration? Let's Emmigrate!
Clam is pissed about immigration. My attitude is that anybody that would give up the mountains, beaches, and girls of Mexico/Latin America for our less...."hospitable" climate is obviously here to work hard. For that matter, seeing how much better the land is south of the border, maybe WE should be the ones emmigrating. Get enough people, set up communities where we refuse to learn the language/culture. La tierra de México es una de las piases más hermosa en el mundo......debemos trasladar allá y deja de quejar sobre la immigracion. Apologies to the spanish proffecient if I butchered that sentence - its been a while since I've written anything in it.
Maybe I Was Wrong?
I was one of the few on campus who supported the Iraq war. Now with the casualty rates rising and our options to retaliate against our opposition limited I am beginning to wonder if in fact we were wrong to go into Iraq. I have plenty of time to wonder - either way, we are in Iraq for the long haul.
Ballot Controversy at Stanford?
I received this in my email box tonight....not quite sure what it means........
Today, Husbands-Schwartz supporters e-mailed a thinly disguised campaign ad to Stanford students-- an ad that brought a nasty and negative tone into this campaign and passed off written opinions as news reporting.

In an attempt to look objective, the ad lists a series of "quotes from the Daily"-- five extremely positive ones about the Husbands-Schwartz slate, and three extremely negative ones about the Lee-Mefford slate. What the ad doesn't tell you is that the three negative quotes on Lee-Mefford are all pulled from ONE op-ed piece-- a piece written by supporters of the Husbands-Schwartz campaign!!!

In addition, the actual substance of the quotes about Lee-Mefford is suspect. Essentially, the ad suggests that the Lee-Mefford slate does not and will not care about the true interests of communities of color at Stanford. In addition to exploiting the politics of racial divisiveness, this claim is an outright lie; there is nothing in Lee-Mefford's public statements or campaign literature that would suggest that they have anything but a deep respect for and commitment to the concerns of Stanford's communities of color. Believe it or not, nobody has a monopoly on issues important to the SOCC communities. Both slates have gone to great lengths to show that they will serve our communities well, and both deserve credit for their hard work.

What we have in this election are two slates that are both qualified and committed to similar objectives, but have different ideas about how to achieve those objectives. One slate, for example, decided that negative campaigning was a good way to achieve its own ends. In casting your vote, be a TRULY informed Stanford voter. Don't be taken in by false campaign ads and smear tactics. Instead, check out the candidates' websites, at:

Decide whose ideas you like best, and vote at

Wednesday, April 07, 2004

PC Textbooks Harming Our Kids Education?
Story here. One former teacher/current lawmaker defends the books as follows:
One California lawmaker and former high school history teacher defended the practice, saying the rules are necessary to give students a complete picture of history — because years ago, certain ethnic groups were barely mentioned
My question - isn't the case that anytime that you read history something is omitted? You can't have a history that tells the complete story from each perspectivebecausee there are infinite perspectives. Rather than concern ourselves with making sure that each group has their squib, maybe we should instead just focus on the basics that we want our kids to learn.
Special Interests Get a Win
WalMart loses vote to enter LA Market.
Spirited Away
Just got done watching this masterpiece per Mujon's recommendation. A good time to watch - I recommend it as well.

Monday, April 05, 2004

Interesting Debate - Should Law Admissions Just Look at GPA/LSAT?
Interesting talk today with some higherups at the Law School. I'll keep their names out of it, but the general idea was whether Stanford's policy of placing significant weight on recommendations and personal statement at the expense of LSAT/GPA in fact generates the desired more interesting student body. It is easy to see the logic of the policy - more interesting students should tend to have more interesting recs/statements. As Stanford wants a more "interesting" student body than a school like NYU or Harvard, it should look more closely at those elements of the application.

But are those elements of the application a valid proxy for interesting students? Or are they just a proxy for students who brown nose their professors and game the admissions system? If its the former, the policy is defensible, if its the later, Stanford would be better off just admitting students on the basis of GPA/LSAT.

Police - Serving the Public Interest?
Instapundit has this.

Sunday, April 04, 2004

Diana Al-Hadid Defines Meesh
My artist friend is trying to coin a word. Come look at her work.
I have trouble seeing what the big deal is. You have Instapundit grandstanding on the issue, Kos retracting stuff, and everybody up in arms. So Kos said a distasteful thing here or what? In the posts of his defenders and attackers, it is easy to detect a childish "I'm better than you because my beliefs are better than yours" strain. Hope I am not like that too often, though I bet I am.

Saturday, April 03, 2004

Bush or Kerry
If you lean libertarian and this is your dilmmena, I'm in your shoes, but if you've decided to vote major party, I think Bush is marginally better. First, a win for Kerry will be determined on some level to be a victory for foreign policy weakness by our enemies and erstwhile allies, which would lower our long term security and future diplomatic room to manuever. Second, while Bush has been bad on trade, he at least talks the talk if not walking the walk. Kerry not only walks like a protectionist - he's unabashadly for it. Finally, as you alluded to earlier, Kerry will spend more money than Bush. Of course Bush's spending record is atrocius, but I don't want it to get worse.
Why Stanford
Today is admit day at Stanford Law School, so I thought I'd write a bit on "the trinity" aka "the troika" aka HYS aka the three top law schools - Harvard, Yale, and Stanford. If you are one of the so called lucky (and I do say so called because law school has a tendency to kill your self esteemed once there) you now have instant job security if you want it. Everybody who wants a firm job at these schools gets it, which means a six figure salary along with bonus. The question then is, which school to go to.

My thoughts on the matter - if you KNOW you want to teach law - go to Yale. There isn't anybody better. If you want a diverse political experience - go to Harvard. Their federalist chapter is simply the best, and that has quite effect on the campus debate.

If, on the other hand, you want to enjoy yourself, come to Stanford. I've gotten to know people from all three schools, and with apologies to my good friend Mujon Baghai, there is a difference in the people at the three school - the people here just are more relaxed. Don't get me wrong, the place still will make you work hard. But having Tahoe and the beaches of Santa Cruz at your fingertips will give you quite a few excuses to study in an exotic location (this year I went to Tahoe five separate weekends - last year four). Oh yeah - while Harvard does have Harvard Square, and Yale has, well, nothing, for the nature lovers Stanford has the most beautiful location of any school save Northwestern. It is constant sunshine over half the year here, and you can always hike in the foothills as most do at least once a week (after all they are on campus).

Did I mention wine country? San Francisco?

Seriously - all three of the top schools will give you excellent career opportunities. Only one will let you enjoy yourself in mountains, oceans, and sunshine. So if you are one of the few admits who get the chance to choose - come to Stanford.

Friday, April 02, 2004

How to Blog and Look Like an Idiot
Contestant responds to a well written piece by Eugene Volokh by going off the deep end about Eugene's jewishness (actually he's a bit on the agnostic side, but details never matter to this crowd). In the process he completely misses the point that Eugene is making - while "legitimacy" is nice as an added benefit to the occupation, its benefits go only so far.
Outsourcing - U.S. Gets More Jobs Than it Loses
Read about it here.
Thanks to Instapundit for the link
News to Nader - Quite a Few Independents Don't like You.
Ralph is urging people to take his run at the presidency seriously, mainly because there are many "disenfranchised" independents.
Nader: One out of every three Americans call themselves independent and they've never really had an independent candidate for a long time.

Well, I rotate between being Republican and Independent, mainly because my party of choice, the libertarian party, is so weak. However, just because I get pissed at Republicans and think about voting third party DOES NOT mean I'd ever vote for Ralph Nader. Quite the opposite - in a choice between Ralph and somebody else, I would almost always vote somebody else. Making a protest vote doesn't mean I need to vote for a candidate with worse policies than those of the two major parties.

Thursday, April 01, 2004

International Ecstasy Ring Broken Up - Incentives to Sell it Never Higher.
Some big news today - Authorities have declared a major "victory" in the war on drugs, breaking up a ring of ecstasy dealers. I can't help but a feel a little disgusted. My attitudes towards drugs mirror my attitudes towards organized religion. They are addictive, cause personality distortions and possible loss of economic production, yet should be tolerated to the point that they don't encourage people to attack each other. Ecstasy is a drug that makes people want back-massages and pacifiers, not brass knuckles, so I have difficulty seeing the point behind this police effort which will serve mainly to increase the incentives for new thugs to enter the market, and existing dealers to expand their production.