""Col. Dave Hughes, USA, Ret., is the only character who has popped up in the plot every time I've investigated the roots of a technology revolution," futurist author Howard Rheingold wrote in "Smart Mobs," his 2002 book about the sociology of constant Internet connectivity."

Dave Hughes, LONG-time fellow WELL and Colorado resident is a personal hero of mine - not-wiring the un-wired for many years now.  76 years old and, still hard at work and finally getting some national recognition - in this case in a great article on CNN - for his lifetime of hard work.  Read the article, check out his website and go join the WELL to read his years of writing. 

"Powell has long been a reluctant warrior. The former four-star general and decorated Vietnam veteran once questioned the need to go to war to liberate Kuwait. Later he counseled against military interventions in the Balkans. Now he is telling America's war-wary allies that there is no peaceful way to disarm Saddam Hussein. While the French argued that U.N. inspectors had "frozen" Iraq's weapons programs, Powell was blunt and dismissive. "Inspections," he told reporters categorically last week, "will not work." One senior State Department official explains Powell's change of heart as a gradual awakening: "People ask why Powell is becoming increasingly hard-line. It's because every day, when we wake up in the morning, the facts are clear that Iraq has gone back to its old ways and is refusing to disarm, and trying to prevent the inspectors from disarming them. It's a big decision, especially for a former general who knows what this is all about.""

A Newsweek article touching on Powell's change of heart, the concerns of our allies and the odds on the rush to war being a bluff attempting to bring about cooperation from Iraq.

"Meanwhile, Britain's war critics, both in Parliament and in the press, are far less timid than their counterparts in America. Using the type of strident language that's rarely heard by elected U.S. officials, one on-the-record Labour Party chairman recently told the Telegraph: "We have no justification at all for a war on Iraq. The logic of the situation beggars belief. It is manufactured by George Bush, and oil is a factor."

And unlike Bush, Blair does not have an entrenched neoconservative movement like the one in the U.S. that's been beating the drums of war so effectively for the past year. Neocon hawks both inside the administration (Vice President Dick Cheney and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz) and in the political press (the Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal) have been lobbying for war with Iraq almost since the moment the World Trade Center was attacked. They're convinced that toppling Saddam will not only make America safer but, after the regime change, also be the first crucial step in redrawing the entire Middle East.

"There's very little of that neocon culture here, or that messianic sense of this war," notes Kettle. "Nobody thinks we can redraw the map of the world. And Blair certainly does not talk about it.""

A good Salon article on the difficulties Tony Blair faces trying to sustain the rush to war in the face of a country thats not really interested in what Bush has to say.

"Two years into his presidency, on the eve of his second State of the Union address, almost exactly a year before the 2004 presidential primary season begins with the Iowa caucus, President Bush faces trouble everywhere he turns. War with Iraq seems inevitable even as crises in Venezuela and North Korea simmer, and al-Qaida remains menacing and elusive. On the domestic front, unemployment is still rising, the stock market continues to slump, budget deficits are climbing again -- and the president's only answer is a massive tax cut for the rich, while states and cities slash funds for public safety, healthcare and education. A broad spectrum of scientists agree that global warming is getting worse, but the administration insists the issue needs more study.

It's hard not to notice a disconnection between the challenges facing the U.S. and the Bush administration's response. And what if, against this already gloomy backdrop, things get worse on several fronts at once?

Salon asked six writers to look at worst-case scenarios on the domestic and international scenes. What if deficits mount and the war with Iraq is messier than expected? What if joblessness continues to rise but states' unemployment insurance funds collapse? What if al-Qaida rebuilds while the Palestinian situation festers? "

We've heard plenty of the 'best-case' scenarios from the Administration and their supporters.  Salon summarizes the best-case arguments, and presents their own view on the worst-case.  Are those supporting our current Administration willing to live with these consequences, which, Salon concludes, include

• Continued Arab support of the Intifada despite the installation or election of more democratic regimes in the Middle East
• Anger against the US policies growing leading to Palestinian style suicide bombings in the United States justifying furthur good-guy-bad-guyism from the Administration ensconsing us in our own Isreali-style vicious circle.
• Widespread economic breakdown in American states and local municipalities caused by Bush's bizarre economic policies.
• Environmental catastrophe
• Women's abortion rights overturned

Those holding their tounge about the Administration's stupidity because they support war against Iraq need to take a look at these articles and see if they're willing to accept these consequences for the rest of the us.

Another fine example of why its important to keep Salon around.  Subscribe now!

I've reworked my "Recent Listening/Watching" section because it was kind of boring.  The entries on the sidebar now lead to some thoughts about albums and such.  Sometimes they'll be blank, but they'll always at least include a link to somewhere for more information, and will usually include at the very least some useless blathering.