Retraction! Retraction!

I hereby take back everything I ever said about Christian Bale being the abslute (its a typo but I'm keeping it) hotness.

Apparently he's rocking the dead-man-walking look for a new movie, The Fighter.

His chameleon-like ways have enabled him to evade me in Santa Monica for years now. We live in the same city, Christian. How come I haven't seen you flipping out on someone yet?

The Power of Words

The LA Times posted a short piece last week about a federal judge in LA issuing a protective order and closing a trial dealing with the prison murder of Jewish Defense League ("JDL") member Earl Krugel. The article caught my eye as judges do not normally close trials to the extent that this judge did--apparently it was because Krugel was killed by a member of some skinhead prison gang that is very dangerous. But my point here is not legal.

The JDL is a terrorist organization, plain and simple. Not so active these days, but in the 1980s nd 1990s the JDL and its members, including Mr. Krugel, were responsible for planting bombs on American soil. Specifically, mosques and business offices of Arab Americans and Muslim Americans.

Now how do you imagine that the LA Times described Mr. Krugel, who was in prison for plotting two bombings in America--one on a mosque in LA and one at a Arab American politician's office? As a terrorist? A criminal? A subversive? A thug?

The LA Times referred to him as an activist.

For the LA Times to even imply that Mr. Krugel's actions were somehow legitimate has he was a "vigorous advocate" is simply bad reporting. Krugel planned and intended to plant bombs on American soil. He planned to kill people while worshiping. He plotted to kill American politicians. How is this not terroristic? If he were an Arab plotting to bomb synagogues, he would have been shipped off to Guantanamo years ago.

Upon examination, this seems to be a pattern with the LA Times. They have been referring to Mr. Krugel as an "activist" in their articles concerning his crimes since at least 2003. Even when he confessed to planning to kill an American congressman.

I'm writing to the LA Times today to find out why they have continued to shy away from the "terrorist" word in favor of the infinitely more respectful "activist."

I guess I thought that planning to bomb Americans was a terrorist act no matter who did it. How silly of me!

Worf's Grandpa Has Got To Be the Worst Klingon Lawyer Ever

For those of you opposed to geek-related posts, I suggest you move on.

Last night I was watching Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (definitely the best Trek film starring the original cast--yes I have gone against the popular grain here, but it's better than Khan. Khan's a little too campy and there's no Iman as a shapeshifter) and was floored by the trial scene. Worf's grandpa is supposed to be defending Kirk and McCoy in a Klingon trial. Worf must've gotten his cajones from his mom's side.

The trial starts out with the Evil General Chang bombastically proclaiming Kirk responsible for the death of the Klingon Chancellor and claiming that McCoy was negligent in failing to save the Chancellor's life. Worf fails to object to Chang's conclusory statements, his harassment of the witnesses, the introduction of heresay (although it was a statement against interest), and Chang's failure to offer any evidence. He is obviously too busy stroking the fabric of his awesome robe. And wondering where the hell his hairline went.

Of course, the legal rules of procedure may be different on Klingon. But even there I would assume that some type of objection would be permitted, although it is likely that in the Klingon Empire the judge would rule based upon which attorney drew blood first or something equally as violent.

But I digress.

Worf's most egregious omission was his failure to state any kind of defense for McCoy and Kirk. Does he call any witnesses? Make any arguments at all to exonerate his clients? Is it considered weakness to even offer a defense on Klingon?

I need to get my hands on a copy of the Klingon Rules of Civil Procedure. Somehow I doubt they have a meet and confer requirement, unless it involves bat'leths.

I think the combination of the Star Trek-geeking out and the legal-geeking out in this post may have pushed me over the edge of geek and into the realm of dork. And I think I'm okay with that.

Santa Ynez Canyon Trail

Lately, (I guess just in time for the state to start closing the suckers) I've been trying to get out and enjoy the state parks on the Westside. I've found Topanga State Park to be by far the one with the most trails, the most accessibility, and the least amount of crazy city people.

Look at all of the hikes you can do from Trippet Ranch, the main area of Topanga Park:

Within just a few miles of the ranch you can reach all kinds of different landscapes. We started out on Eagle Spring Fire Road.


Pretty quickly you come to an east-west fork in the road. To the right you'll go to the Pacific Palisades and toward an ocean view. To the left is Eagle Rock and more trails. We went left.


Here's the sign at the fork in the road:

The views are spectacular from the get go.

We didn't stay on Eagle Spring Fire Road too long, but instead turned right on to Santa Ynez trail, which winds its way down toward a waterfall and beautiful canyon.

It starts out as a grassland trail.

But quickly becomes more forested.


Once you get down into the canyon the trail follows a stream.

Awesome conglomerate rocks.


There is a side trail that heads to a waterfall. The end of the waterfall trail is rock climbing up into the waterfall itself.


On the way back we stopped for a snack on a long smooth rock formation that was essentially a huge slab of rock turned on a 45 degree angle. This was carved into the top.


All in all one of my favorite hikes. You can access the trail from Trippet Ranch off Topanga Canyon or from a side street in the Pacific Palisades from the other end. All sorts of weather, climates, and scenery. Out and back from Trippet Ranch to the Palisades is about 4.5 miles. Its about the same to the waterfall and back--there's a split in the trail with a sign.