about "The Best Comic Strip Ever!"

The characters in my strip, set in Africa's Western Rift Valley, are: the Foolish Pride of lions (Leon, the haughty and lethargic King of Beasts; his queen, Leona; and their cub Lionel, an unpromising heir to the throne); Secretary Bird, a liason between the Royal Court and the rest of the animals; cerebral, man-imitating Ape, a reader of the Substandard; peevish Rhinoceros; harmless but senseless Ostrich; Crocodile, resident of the much-frequented Watering Hole, and his dentist, Crocodile Bird; Honey Badger (alias Ratel), the "Meanest Animal in the World", and his one associate, Honeyguide; Mumbo the elephant, a descendant of Jumbo and a butt of jokes about his weight and the size of his ears and nose; Duncan the dung beetle; ill-favored and unwashed Warthog; the craven, henpecked male and shrewish female hyaenas, both of them foul-smelling and perpetually at war vs. the lions; the mistaken-identity-plagued zebras; slow and superannuated Tortoise; Oxpecker, a companion of large herbivores; Hugh the chamaeleon; and walled-up Mrs. Hornbill.

The Best Comic Strip Ever!

If you "click" the present cartoon, whizbang technology will take you to the "The Best Comic Strip Ever!" Archive.



21 June 2013

Uncommon Commentary #349: Since "Cyber" Really Means "Zero", "Cyber Command" Could Refer to Our Leadership

I don't know whether NSA Director (and leader of Cyber [sic] Command) Keith Alexander exaggerates the number of terrorist plots that his agency's controversial surveillance has "disrupted or prevented"—There was a time when I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, but, Who can still believe anything said by a member of Emperor Nerobama's administration?—but I would be surprised if it should turn out that the NSA's extremely comprehensive program has not prevented any.  Even if the Director's assertion is a fact, however, it doesn't prove that terrorism could not have been thwarted with equal or superior effectiveness by less-intrusive methods.  "Profiling", for instance, has proven remarkably effective in identifying the sort of person who commits any given crime; the one thing that stops us from employing it in the fight versus Terror is our own political-correctness, or, to use my own coinage: "Totalitarianism Lite".  "Profiling" is, of course, regarded by many of the profiled as a violation of their rights—see UC #65 for my refutation of the objection to "racial profiling"—but public-opinion polls reveal that the average person is not pleased with being spied upon by the NSA, either.  How does invading the privacy of practically the entire population qualify as less of an offence than investigating just a portion thereof?