Monday, April 30, 2007


Everyone please have Not Saussure in your prayers. He has had a family member to pass away.

This will be my last post today, I hope nothing newsworthy happens, but for NS this is my tribute.

Terrorists get theirs

5 Rats in a Hole:

LONDON — A judge sentenced five men to life in prison Monday for plotting to attack targets in London, including a popular nightclub, power plants and shopping mall, with bombs made from a half-ton stockpile of fertilizer.

The trial for the first time exposed connections between the defendants and the deadly 2005 Al Qaeda-linked attack on the city's transit system.

Details kept secret to ensure a fair trial showed that counterterrorism agents tracking the five men had also stumbled onto the transit plotters. And despite disturbing signs that the transit plot was in the works, the agents failed to piece them together in time to prevent the July 7, 2005 bombings that killed 52 people, testimony and official briefings during the trial showed.

The revelations are at odds with statements by Tony Blair's government after the 2005 attack. Senior ministers, who a month earlier had lowered the country's alert status, said the 2005 attack was unexpected and the perpetrators unknown.

Omar Khyam was found guilty of conspiracy to cause explosions made from a chemical fertilizer that could endanger life. Also found guilty were Anthony Garcia, Jawad Akbar, Waheed Mahmood and Alahuddin Amin. (link)

Nice to see these guys will be put away for a very long time (not sure on the parole requirements in the UK) but notable that the AP article spends over half its time talking about what the British government didn't do, instead of what it did.

Hindsight is always 20/20 and you can always say should have or could have after the fact. The news of this trial and sentence needs to focus on the 'dids' not the 'did nots'.

Reason to cheer

Saturday, April 28, 2007

My Vision is Cloudy

My daughter has been over yesterday and today we have soccer, so not a lot of reading for me (I'll get to you guys on the blog rolls later today) but I thought I would post this:

Who knew? An old law shuts psychics

Alerted to a forgotten state ban, Phila. authorities have closed at least 16 storefront fortune-tellers. One alleged discrimination.

By David O'Reilly and Michael Vitez
Inquirer Staff Writers
Philadelphia's fortune-tellers didn't see it coming.

Suddenly they're facing a very unhappy future.

Alerted to an obscure state law banning fortune-telling "for gain or lucre," the city's Department of Licenses and Inspections is closing storefront psychics,

"What we do is entertainment," said the owner of this fortune-telling business at 2401 Walnut St. "Shouldn't they be cracking down on rapes and murders, not palm readers?" A city official, however, said most psychics were con artists who prey on vulnerable people.
MICHAEL BRYANT / Inquirer Staff Photographer
astrologers, phrenologists and tarot-card readers who charge money for their services.

Inspectors had closed 16 shops since Tuesday, Deputy L&I Commissioner Dominic E. Verdi said yesterday.

"We were not aware it was a crime," he said, "but the Police Department came to us a few days ago and showed us where the crime code prohibits psychic readings.

"We looked into it, and it's clearly illegal. I was surprised."

Fortune-telling for profit is a third-degree misdemeanor. The law has been on the books for more than 30 years.(link)

You would think the fortune tellers would have seen this coming :)

Reason to wonder

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Say Hello to your New Cellmate Mrs. Clinton !!!

So I'm perusing the net tonight (on the rare moments recently when I have the time) and I came across this.

It appears the worst Senator in the US has apparently been a naughty-girl !! IF the story proves true ( and God I hope it does). We could be seeing the end of Hillary's Presidential campaign...the end of her Senate career... and the beginning of her stay at a federal penitentiary.

It appears that the fundraiser for her Senate campaign that a donor essentially footed the bill for was in fact coordinated (in part) by Clinton. Additionally, the tape implicates her directly soliciting entertainers (which therefore provided "in-kind" contributions by performing). Helping people illegally contribute amounts exceeding $25,000 is a big no-no according to federal election law (at least the last time I looked).

Go here for the story;
Peter Franklin Paul, in a civil fraud suit filed against Bill and Hillary Clinton, claims the former president destroyed his entertainment company to get out of a $17 million deal in which Clinton promised to promote the firm in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions to his wife's 2000 campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic Party leaders to foot the bill for a lavish Hollywood gala and fund-raiser prior to the 2000 election that eventually cost him nearly $2 million.

Sen. Clinton has claimed through her spokesman Howard Wolfson that Paul gave no money to her campaign, and her supporters have denied she had any anything to do with coordinating the August 2000 event or soliciting contributions directly from donors. Doing so would make Paul's substantial contributions a direct donation to her Senate campaign rather than her joint fundraising committee, violating federal statutes that limit "hard money" contributions to a candidate to $2,000 per person. Furthermore, knowingly accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years

Clinton's campaign has counted the more than $800,000 of in-kind contributions it reported in a 2006 amended FEC report for the Hollywood Gala as indirect, or "soft money," given to the New York Senate 2000 Committee, a state account that was run jointly by Clinton, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the New York State Democratic Party.

But the videotape, with clear audio of Sen. Clinton, documents her direct knowledge and involvement with Paul in producing the Hollywood fund-raiser and indicates she participated in solicitation of entertainers, whose in-kind contributions of their services would also constitute illegal contributions exceeding $25,000.

She'd better hope she gets the same sweetheart deal Sandy Berger received !!

One tip Mrs. Clinton - don't count on any conjugal visits from Bill !!

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Earth part Deaux?

Via Drudge and My Way News:


WASHINGTON (AP) - For the first time astronomers have discovered a planet outside our solar system that is potentially habitable, with Earth-like temperatures, a find researchers described Tuesday as a big step in the search for "life in the universe."

The planet is just the right size, might have water in liquid form, and in galactic terms is relatively nearby at 120 trillion miles away. But the star it closely orbits, known as a "red dwarf," is much smaller, dimmer and cooler than our sun.

There's still a lot that is unknown about the new planet, which could be deemed inhospitable to life once more is known about it. And it's worth noting that scientists' requirements for habitability count Mars in that category: a size relatively similar to Earth's with temperatures that would permit liquid water. However, this is the first outside our solar system that meets those standards.

"It's a significant step on the way to finding possible life in the universe," said University of Geneva astronomer Michel Mayor, one of 11 European scientists on the team that found the planet. "It's a nice discovery. We still have a lot of questions."

This looks like a major find for astrologist and the like. Of course it will take quite abit of time to discover 1) if life is supportable and 2) if life exists, but it is exciting anyway.

Now I'm waiting on the means to travel to these worlds. Until/unless we develop 'warp' drives, there will not be much in the way of traveling to distant planets in anyone's lifetime. At the speed of light it would take a little over 20 years to reach this planet. Without some major breakthroughs in science, most of us on this planet now, won't have the opportunity to travel to another (not counting possible Mars based missions).

Reason to wonder

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Terrorism (deaux)

Fox news reports on new fighting in the West Bank between Israel and the Palestinians.
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Hamas militants called Sunday for a fresh wave of attacks against Israel after troops killed nine Palestinians in weekend fighting, straining a five-month-old cease-fire.

It's extremely hard to strain a cease-fire that has not stopped any fighting yet. Of course this has never stopped the terrorists of Palestine or the MSM from reporting it.
In response to the bloodshed, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' more moderate Fatah movement urged him to consider breaking off contacts with the Israeli government, despite his pledge to the United States to hold regular meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Hamas and Fatah are partners in a coalition government.

One of the best things that could happen is that Israel stop talking to the 'moderate' terrorists. It does not matter what Abbas promises, the terror mindset is too deeply imbedded with Hamas and Fatah.

Among the nine Palestinians killed in the weekend upsurge of violence were two gunmen and a 17-year-old who died Sunday in the West Bank. The fighting also included a Palestinian rocket attack on the southern Israeli town of Sderot that damaged a home.

Israeli officials defended the killings as part of operations that have drastically reduced the number of attacks against Israelis. Palestinian officials, however, said that the deaths jeopardized their efforts to expand the Gaza truce to the West Bank.

Of course, any movement by Israel will by default jepordize expanding the cease-fire. Of course, the fact that the cease-fire isn't even good on PAPER shouldn't come into the thinking of the reporter, nor his expected reader.

No one media outlet has ever been accused of actually reporting this story neutrally, but you would think that the 'right-wing' Fox would actually play more to the middle and call a spade a spade, but...

Hamas, which has killed scores of Israelis in homicide bombings, sought to rally other Palestinian militant groups in a new offensive that would shatter the truce in the Gaza Strip.

"The blood of our people is not cheap," a Hamas statement said, inviting Palestinians of every ideological stripe to unite and "use all possible means of resistance and to respond to the massacres."

Of course your people's blood is cheap. When (for any reason) you can't convince some promising teen-ager or 'ripe' mother to blow themselves up to kill the Jews, you spend your time killing yourselves or training the children to do it for you. If you really think your people's lives are precious, maybe it's time for the 'leaders' to actually start acting like it. Governing isn't that hard a process; people have been ruling countries since shortly after people arrived. One or another of those examples should help the terrorists out.

Miri Eisin, a spokeswoman for Olmert, said Israel "reaches out for peace, while at the same time we will always consistently fight against terror." Israel will continue its operations against Palestinian militants, she said, while "always doing our utmost to avoid any innocent casualties."

Troops killed the Palestinian teenager Sunday in a village near Ramallah. Palestinian officials said he was throwing stones at an Israeli patrol when he was shot. The army said soldiers opened fire as the youth was about to throw a firebomb at a military jeep.

Earlier, an army task force raided the militant stronghold of Nablus, killing two Palestinian gunmen, including Amin Lubadi, a top bombmaker who had been wanted by Israel for more than three years. The army said an Israeli soldier was lightly wounded in the battle.

Maybe one day they'll teach their young children and teens, that throwing stones (and/or firebombs) at soldiers does not lead to a healthy-long life. Yes shooting someone for throwing stones may be too much, but if you continue to do nothing, the stones will grow or the throwers will. Israel has acted more honorably than any country could expect in dealing with the terrorist menace of Palestine. How many countries can you think of that would not, by now, have razed most of the West Bank and Gaza to the ground? The palestinians have spent their anger, money and promise attacking the one country in the whole region that would have actually taken them in. It is no secret that every arab country bordering Israel has not made a home for their fellow arabs. It would hurt the despotic leaders of the region too much if they didn't have the palestinean-pawns to run the news and keep the eyes off of their regimes.

In unrelated violence late Sunday, four Palestinians were killed in Gaza, two in a gunfight among family members and two others in apparently random shootings by criminals, security officials said. Also, shadowy Islamic groups sent warnings to cigarette dealers to destroy their wares and to barbers to close their shops.

Internal violence has plagued Gaza for most of the time since Israel pulled out in 2005. Some has pitted Hamas and Fatah forces against each other, while other incidents involve family disputes or crime. (link)

How do they figure that this is unrelated violence? Any peoples that are governed by violence and beholden to terrorists will find a way to have violence if they cannot get to their 'enemies'. These people deserve a home, but not a state. There is no way that they can seriously be considered 'humane' enough to be given a state (note: if they already had a state, ex. N. Korea, then they'd simply be a horrible country) of their own. They simply cannot govern themselves. If the 'people' truly want a state, they will show it by getting rid of the terrorists. Unlike 'most' worldwide terrorism where the perpetrators are shadowy figures rarely known until they strike, in this land, their is common knowledge of who is who.

Reason to weep

Filed:, , , , , , ,

Thursday, April 19, 2007


In the neverending saga that is the Middle East, we have yet another terrorist orginization that says it will NOT stop attacks on Israel, not unless they 'get something in return'.

Israel has been giving since the return of the Jews in 1948 and nothing has changed. Nothing will change today if Israel gives again. The Palestinian people will ultimately be the ones that (if ever) achieve peace. They will do this by renoucing terrorism and by finally not harboring the like any longer.

As long as Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad and other 'political' groups are in play, the Middle East and specifically Israel will not know a moments peace. There will be pundits and arm-chair quaterbacks alike who will ask why? (The favorite question of a lefty) As, why do the palestinians hate Israel so much, why do they kill the innocent, why will Israel not talk, etc. The terrorists (just like the terrorists in Iraq, Africa, SE Asia and around the world) keep trying to tell everyone why they do things, what they are going to do and how, yet the left simply does not hear them and continues on their liberal agenda of mothering the world to death. The terrorists state explicitly that Israel must be wiped out, not that Israel must make peace, and that the Jews must be killed. Just as Al-Qaeda and others state that everyone will become a muslim or die, these messages are loud and clear, yet the left still does not hear.

What will it take for the left (and most of the international community) to finally wake up and hear the message? No one knows, it took World War II before people of that era finally realized that Hitler was serious when he talked of world domination. Maybe this time (of course history shows us that it won't happen) the left will wake up before the world goes off the precipe. For all the screams about the 'failed' Iraqi war; these pale in comparison to the silence on Dafur, Thailand, Europe and other 'hotspots' in the world where these animals have free reign with passive (if not active) help from the 'intelligent' peoples of the world.

Islamic Jihad denied reports Wednesday that it had agreed to halt rocket attacks on Israel.

Reports in some Arab newspapers claimed earlier that the Islamist organization had reached an agreement with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to stop the Kassam attacks.

This story is a small story to the world, but it tells many what they need to know about the intents and purposes of the terrorists of that area and not ONE prominent leftist will make a note of this (unless it is to call Israel to listen, as if they have not been listening to the Muslims since the 700's).

Sooner or later all the terrorist problems will indeed go away. But will it be because we (the free people of the world) have carried the day, or will it be because the left and the cowards of the world have finally had enough and caused the capitilation of civilization as we know it.

I can only hope for me and my family that when the time comes to surrender, we are no longer are part of this world. With the current crop of leaders and high-ranking dignitaries in the world, global warming will soon come to mean a new thing if they don't finally get their heads out of the sand and start asking Why? As in why aren't we doing something about this.
Reason to question

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Gun Control - Where We're Headed !!! and ... Second Amendment Second Reading !!!

Ok - so our friends from across the ponds seem to think us Americans would do better to engage in more gun control (read: gun confiscation).

So I thought I'd post these gems that I saved many years ago.

The first one is from Robert Waters and it is called
"Gun Control - Where We're Headed!!"

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.

As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble. In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven." The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.

Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened. (link)

Go read the whole thing...

You can then draw your own conclusions as to which society you'd rather live in.

The second article is by Daniel Polsby who argues that we should treat the Second Amendment as normal Constitutional Law and not as some bastard child that isn't deserving of sitting at the same table as the others...

Normal constitutional argument begins with text.

The first question to consider, then, is:

What does the Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms? There seem to be two main theories of what sense is conveyed by the language of the Second Amendment. The theory that is most often encountered by the intelligent lay public reads the words to say something like:

"In order to make themselves secure, states have a right to have a well regulated militia, and Congress may not restrict state regulation of militia members' weapons."

This is approximately the interpretation favored by most major newspapers' editorial writers, by gun control groups, and by a broad swath of conventional public opinion, running the partisan gamut from left (e.g., Rep. Charles Schumer of New York) to right (e.g., President Nixon) and most political shades in between.

But in places where close attention is paid to what words actually say, the states'-rights reading of the Second Amendment has attracted surprisingly little support. After all, the Second Amendment does not say;

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, shall not be infringed."

Nor do the words of the amendment assert that;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

is conditional upon membership in some sort of organized soldiery like the National Guard. Indeed, if there is conditional language in the Second Amendment at all, evidently the contingency runs the other way:

"Because the people have a right to keep and bear arms, states will be assured of the well regulated militias that are necessary for their security."

Some version of this reading is supported by almost all of the constitutional historians and lawyers who have published research on the subject. Indeed, this view is so dominant in the academy that Garry Wills, the lone dissenter among historians on the proper reading of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," has dubbed it the Standard Model of the Second Amendment. (link)
Go read the whole thing...

I think Polsby's argument is pretty much rock-solid.

Gun Control

Here's a gun post that I'll gladly let speak for itself:

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Politics as Usual

Mrs. du Toit

After receiving a quick email from my sister about the events unfolding at Virginia Tech, Kim and I turned on Fox News, just in time to hear a reporter at the White House Press Conference ask “Is the President reconsidering his opinions on gun control NOW?”

And, as usual, the Press Secretary responded calmly and politely.

That is not how I would have responded (which is why I’m not the White House Press Secretary).

Here is how I would have responded:

Listen, you heartless cow, you’re turning this into politics before the bodies have been identified and the next of kin notified. What kind of human being ARE YOU? Do you have ANY sense of compassion AT ALL? Can you turn off your agitate-for-all-things-stupid-machine EVER?

OK, you want to talk the politics of gun control? We’ll talk about it then.

No, the President is not reconsidering his stance on gun control because Virginia Tech is yet another reminder of how counterproductive and counterintuitive gun control is. Over 30 human beings have been added to the death toll, caused by gun control, and your side’s continued efforts to turn America into a nation of victims, instead of a nation of responsible adults. On the contrary, anyone who watched the events in Virginia and thinks that one more law would have made a difference is delusional. (link)

Please read it all. That's what I'd like to hear in response to reporters questions :)

Kirked (update)

A resolution in the kirk'd case:
Attorneys for JL Kirk & Assocs. contacted Media Bloggers Association attorney Ronald Coleman shortly after receiving his letter stating that the MBA was representing me in this dispute on Thursday afternoon. Both sides expressed their wish to avoid litigation or further aggravation of the situation. JL Kirk’s main concern at the outset was that we communicate their position - which is different from the information originally told to me by a JL Kirk employee - that JL Kirk is not a continuation of the defunct Bernard Haldane company, either in terms of corporate identity or stock ownership, and that JL Kirk’s principal, Kirk Leipzig, is only a former Bernard Haldane employee but did not buy any assets or stock of Bernard Haldane. I can’t vouch for the truth of that statement because I have no first-hand knowledge of the facts, but evidently anyone who wants more information can obtain it from JL Kirk. (link)

Head on over and read the rest (and the comments).

Monday, April 16, 2007


Nothing like a good gun ban to keep the violence down. According to StoptheACLU, bill HB1572 which would allow students at Virginia Tech to carry handguns was shot (no pun intended) down in subcommittee back in January. Why is that important?

Virginia Tech Campus Reels From Shooting That Leaves at Least 33 Dead

Virginia Tech police and administrators struggled to explain late Monday why the campus was not locked down after a deadly shooting earlier in the day, and why students were in classrooms two hours later when a lone gunman entered a campus building and slaughtered 30 people, before turning a gun on himself.

The man responsible for murdering 32 people — the worst mass-murder shooting in American history — who carried no ID, remained unidentified late Monday, police said.

Students complained that there were no public-address announcements or other warnings on campus after the first burst of gunfire that left two dead. They said the first word they received from the university was an e-mail more than two hours into the rampage — around the time it is believed that the gunman struck again. (link)

Yes, there's no definite way to prove that passing the gun law would have kept the body count down, but giving people the right to protect themselves will surely have to come to the left one day. Of course, that day should have come long ago, so I wouldn't hold my breath on it.
Reason amongst the dhimmikrauts

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Defending the Blogosphere

Seems that James has talked me into joining this blogroll. I'll have to watch what I post now that I a member of this august board :)

Some good people in this, you can see a link to each site in my readables section at the bottom of the links, or you can click the banner to goto the Defending website.

Also, I've added JR to the readable section as well as updated some bad links and whatnot. I've fixed the problems with the donate button, it now works correctly (just in case, heh) and generally I've tried to fix the blog so it will load faster for the people that do me the honor of a visit.
Reason to take up arms

Friday, April 13, 2007

Question of the Day

Just in case there are some out there that don't know, it is the year 2007 after the birth of our Lord.

Now for the question: In this day and age, why is it that the worst possible thing you can do is mutter/yell/say a racial epitaph?

Think long and hard on this and answer in the comments. If you don't agree with the question, feel free to answer that way.

Reason to think

Thursday, April 12, 2007


Want to become an internet verb? Just follow along with this 'idea':

Original Text of Demand Letter Pg 1

Original Text of Demand Letter Pg 2

[Original on Letterhead from King & Ballow Law Offices]

Ms. Katherine Coble


Hermitage, Tennessee 37076

Re: Your Blog: “Just Another Pretty Farce”

February 27, 2007 posting regarding JL Kirk Associates (R)

Dear Ms. Coble:

This firm represents JL Kirk Associates. In the February 27, 2007, posting to your blog “Just Another Pretty Farce” you made the following false and defamatory statements about JL Kirk Associates: (link)

Read the rest of the post (and at various other places) and you'll see what I mean by becoming a verb.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007


Racism seems to be the big buzz word lately. I'm not really going to talk about the Imus episode (which, unless nappy-head is a new euphemism for black, wasn't racist; but certainly ho's was sexist).

I'm talking more 'institutional' racism here. ESPN's biggest crusade is about hiring practices (in all sports) and the minority roles thereof. Recently they also deplored the declining numbers of blacks playing baseball.

They gave a stat: 1970's the NFL roster was roughly 30% black, today it is 66% black. This particular minority makes up about 11% of the general population (lower than hispanics now I believe) but makes up 2/3 of the NFL rosters. Does ESPN have a crusade for this? Of course not. When asked, ESPN (and generally anyone that is on this crusade) will tell you that the numbers are that high because the best players get to play. Regardless of race. I totally agree, but why is it that the best players get to play, but the best coaches don't get to coach?

Granted, there are people (and will always be) that are racist and will not look at hiring a minority (in this case, black person; ESPN doesn't really harp about the other minorities much) and that is plain wrong. But if your team just fired it's coach and you KNOW the guy you want (proven winner, hall of famer, whatever) then why should you not hire that guy? If he's not someone that ESPN can talk good about and up it's 'minority hiring in the {sport}' numbers, should that really be a problem?

When looking at the playing side of sports, why is there no giant uproar on 'fair' lines of players? Why does no one get upset that 60% of all players in professional sports are not white? Because then they would be considered racists. If you then complain that only 3% of coaches, or 5% of owners (made up numbers) are minority (or black, according to who's complaining) then instead of being racist, you are pointing out racism in others.

As long as the media, and to a larger extent the people themselves, continue to put people into groups; or continue to define themselves as a part of a group, you will get this. In a system of government designed for 'majority-rule' but with safeguards for the minority (in any situation) you would think that we would be able to take people as ... well people.

The next time you hear of someone saying something bad about a group of people (regardless of the group) substitute these words in their sentence. White for color, male for sex, christian for religion and then ask yourself if the SAME sentence is racist. If you are honest with yourself, you'll probably say no. (If you are one of the few people that believe that people are people regardless of anything else, you'll say yes). Then ask yourself if that sentence would make news at all with the new words, or if the media would think it is racist. An honest answer is no.

The saddest state of this country today isn't racism, it isn't class difference and it isn't illegal immigration. The saddest thing today is that over half the people in this country spend most of everyday feeling offended about something that was not said 1) to them or 2) about them.

There are bad things said everyday. There will be bad things said everyday from now on. It's up to the people to start deciding that enough will finally be enough. When we decide to change things by teaching our kids what's right instead of showing them how to get your way by being a victim, then the country and perhaps later, the world, will start looking up.
Reason, not used apparently

Tuesday Night Video

{removed due to bug}

This was from an email from an unknown user (if it was you, tell me).

Monday, April 9, 2007

GCC (again)

I can't write much on this as I'm busy atm, but I'll leave a snippet and the link. This is especially for the climate porn people that come here (and James I'm not including you in that group, yet^^)
Why So Gloomy?
By Richard S. Lindzen
Newsweek International

April 16, 2007 issue - Judging from the media in recent months, the debate over global warming is now over. There has been a net warming of the earth over the last century and a half, and our greenhouse gas emissions are contributing at some level. Both of these statements are almost certainly true. What of it? Recently many people have said that the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action. This statement has nothing to do with science. There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators—and many scientists—seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes. The earth is always warming or cooling by as much as a few tenths of a degree a year; periods of constant average temperatures are rare. Looking back on the earth's climate history, it's apparent that there's no such thing as an optimal temperature—a climate at which everything is just right. The current alarm rests on the false assumption not only that we live in a perfect world, temperaturewise, but also that our warming forecasts for the year 2040 are somehow more reliable than the weatherman's forecast for next week.

A warmer climate could prove to be more beneficial than the one we have now. Much of the alarm over climate change is based on ignorance of what is normal for weather and climate. There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way, according to scientists at the U.S. National Hurricane Center, the World Meteorological Organization and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which released the second part of this year's report earlier this month). Indeed, meteorological theory holds that, outside the tropics, weather in a warming world should be less variable, which might be a good thing.

In many other respects, the ill effects of warming are overblown. Sea levels, for example, have been increasing since the end of the last ice age. When you look at recent centuries in perspective, ignoring short-term fluctuations, the rate of sea-level rise has been relatively uniform (less than a couple of millimeters a year). There's even some evidence that the rate was higher in the first half of the twentieth century than in the second half. Overall, the risk of sea-level rise from global warming is less at almost any given location than that from other causes, such as tectonic motions of the earth's surface. (link)

Read the rest. This is a professor and scientist of Meteorology at MIT, so maybe he has a slight clue what he's talking about.

Saturday, April 7, 2007


Suddenly it seems we have a President back in the WhiteHouse. After defying the democrats and harshly speaking of the Speaker of the House, now comes news that W plans on actually enforcing the immigration laws of this country.
Immigrants March in LA over Bush Plan

By PETER PRENGAMAN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 34 minutes ago

LOS ANGELES - Thousands of people marched through downtown on Saturday, demanding a way for the country's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants to become citizens and condemning President Bush's latest proposal.

Carrying signs saying "Amnesty Now!" and "Love Thy Neighbor, Don't Deport Him," about 15,000 people danced to Mexican ranchera music, chanted "Si, se puede!" or "It can be done!" and passed large American flags over the crowd.

Many were angry about a White House plan that would grant illegal immigrants work visas but require them to return home to apply for U.S. residency and pay a $10,000 fine. (link)

Although it's too early to tell and W has a bad track record on illegal immigration, it does seem to be a start. Of course now that the President doesn't have Congress behind him, he'll try to do the right thing. Now that it's virtually impossible for him (or Congress) to get anything done.

Hopefully this will indeed happen and somehow slow the open border policy we have now. There are millions of people in the world that want to live in this country and many of them are worth the effort to get here. We benefit greatly from the people the move here legally and contribute to society as a whole. What we don't want/need or can endure is more people here on our dime that commit crimes, drive down workplace wages and steal jobs from the 44 million or so poor people we have now.

I have nothing personally against anyone that attempts to come here (or wants to have a better life) but I do have problems with criminals. The act of coming to this country sans-rules constitutes a criminal and should be treated as such. Every crime that an illegal commits, every job they take is something that should NEVER have happened. It is not a question of being 'humane' or anything, it's a question of ideals, law and right.

Most everyone I know locks their doors or lives with a fence or some other way to protect what they have from people that want to take it. Studies will show that these things DO NOT stop criminals, but they inevitably will slow them down, giving you that chance to protect what you have. Hence immigration laws and the fence. Neither will ever stop the flow of illegals, but with the fence we have the chance of funneling people that want to be here to the proper checkpoints. And if/when the laws of this land are enforced, we have the means to do something about the people that bypass the first-line of defense. Exactly how it works in YOUR home if someone makes it past your first-line, then you have law and the police to hopefully get you justice. And maybe the first place the Feds need to start looking for people that shouldn't be here, is these handy little get togethers.

I know there are many people in this country that think just because someone is here, they have the right to be here. Happily I am not one of these. There are enough people that I support by working 12 hour shifts on any given day. I do not want to work another holiday to pay for someone that doesn't belong here.

Make of it what you will, but unless you have a legitimate argument for amnesty for ANY lawbreaker, then don't give me the spiel about these lawbreakers.
Reason to hope and rant

Thursday, April 5, 2007


It seems that it's not bad enough we have 535 volunteer generals in Washington D.C. (minus various R's and a I or 2), now we have a whole State that thinks it should run things:
Top California Democrat seeks vote on Iraq war
Thu Apr 5, 2007 5:01PM EDT

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California's top Democratic legislator called on Thursday for voters to call for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in a ballot measure for the state's 2008 presidential primary election.

"We do not have to be on the streets of Berkeley or on the streets of Oakland," state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata said. "We can now use the ballot box."

During the Vietnam War, both Northern Californian cities hosted frequent anti-war demonstrations, but with students today not threatened by a draft as they were in the 1960s, the Iraq war has not sparked the same level of public response.(link)

Do you think if we can talk California into seceding (independently or as a part of Greater Mexico) that maybe the feds will just ignore it?
Reason not used

Wednesday, April 4, 2007


One of the greatest football coaches of all-time has passed away:

Former Grambling Coach Eddie Robinson Dies
Apr 4, 8:33 AM (ET) Email this Story


RUSTON, La. (AP) -Eddie Robinson, who sent more than 200 players to the NFL and won 408 games during a 57-year career, has died. He was 88.

Super Bowl MVP quarterback Doug Williams, one of Robinson's former players, said the former Grambling State University coach died shortly before midnight on Tuesday. Robinson had been admitted to Lincoln General Hospital on Tuesday afternoon.

"For the Grambling family this is a very emotional time," Williams said Wednesday. "But I'm thinking about Eddie Robinson the man, not in today-time, but in the day and what he meant to me and to so many people."

Robinson's career spanned 11 presidents, several wars and the civil-rights movement.

His older records were what people remembered: in 57 years, Robinson set the standard for victories, going 408-165-15. John Gagliardi of St. John's, Minn., passed Robinson and has 443 wins. (link)

Prayers go out to all the family/friends of Coach Robinson.

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Tuesday Night Video

{removed due to bug}

This is from an email from ~T~


Update: It is being reported that this was a hoax (sort of April Fool's just on the wrong day). Not sure if it is or not, but there are lots of people covering it.

Global warming climate change laws, are they really for the environment?

BRUSSELS, April 3 (RIA Novosti) - The government of Belgium's French-speaking region of Wallonia, which has a population of about 4 million, has approved a tax on barbequing, local media reported.

Experts said that between 50 and 100 grams of CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas, is emitted during barbequing. Beginning June 2007, residents of Wallonia will have to pay 20 euros for a grilling session.

The local authorities plan to monitor compliance with the new tax legislation from helicopters, whose thermal sensors will detect burning grills.

Scientists believe CO2 emissions are a major cause of global warming. (link)

I wonder how many burning grills they'll have to find before they can 'offset' the use of the choppers for it? Climate change proponents (if they truly believe what they preach) should worry about cases like this. Not only is the 'science' of your movement under heavy scrutiny (and it doesn't stand up all that well to some of it); it is also very bad when a known CCP country makes a law as blatant as this one.

If it was simply about the environment, at least the helicopters would run on water or something, no?
Reason for doubt


Well I'm finally home so maybe tonight or tomorrow I can get back to 'regular' blogging. (heh)

Seems the Democrat(ic) party is in a big hurry to lose a war (hell any war) and Bush is actually standing up to them (surprise).

Nancy Pelosi (not one to jump in the middle of 'foreign affairs' aka the Iran hostage situation) tries to defend her trip to Syria.

And since when does the Greatest Island Nation in History(TM) decide to HOPE for the release of their military men/women?

Monday, April 2, 2007

I was going to wait until I went home to post again (hoping maybe Thai would post) but seems I'll be here another day. My little one has strep so we are staying another night (she missed school today so we just stayed here).

My trip home from vacation was mostly uneventful. It started raining about 40 miles from the interstate and rained the first 112 miles I was on there. I stopped at exit 77 and ate at 'The Old Timers Restaurant'. Not sure what the name of the town is, but if you are ever that way, stop and eat. It was great food and very friendly and nice service.

It rained briefly in Montgomery too, but after that it was smooth sailing. I did goto the beach Sunday morning and get some shells for lil bit, but I didn't get a chance to go by PBR and check it out. I had planned on going by there Sunday morning, but the rain and the way I was feeling put a damper on that.

Hopefully next time I can visit there and maybe all the PBR people won't flake on us :)


 Recently played a few games on Caldera (warzone) and then... Lots of luck in this one, but satisfying