...maybe lax along our southern and northern borders, as is evidenced by the 12 million or so illegal aliens believed to be within the USA. Though the USA's border security may have it failures, there are both armed and unarmed officers who protect those borders. When trouble comes, they are ready for it, or prepare for it, they do not run away to hide. Could you imagine the United States' government receiving information stating that a dangerous criminal or a terrorist was headed toward the USA border from within Mexico or Canada, and then the border officials just closed down shop and ran away to hide.
I cannot really picture it, but that is pretty much what happens in Canada, seemingly on a fairly regular basis. That such is the case, was reported by Foxnews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215519,00.html
Take a look at what the report says, or view a quote from the report here:
"BLAINE, Wash. — Four Canadian border crossings were shut down Sunday as about 60 of Canada's unarmed border guards walked off the job after they were warned that a person classified as "armed and dangerous" may be headed into Canada.
The walkouts — permitted when the guards perceive threats to their personal safety — began mid-afternoon and stalled northbound border traffic for hours."
The reason such is the happening of course is because the Canadian border guards (or whatever they are called) are unarmed. Can you imagine that, it must make for a very secure yet friendly border, don't you think! Actually I think it is ridiculous that they are unarmed. What type of security do they provide for their borders in the event that a bad guy, or group of bad guys, wants to enter Canada - or for that matter depart Canada. It is a bad joke and the joke is on, or has been on the Canadian people. They may as well have paid the border guards to be a welcoming committee, they were certainly not providing any real security.
Now though, that seems to be changing. Canadian border guards are slated to start being issued firearms by 2007. This is good, or so it would seem to me.
"In August, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Canada's border guards will be armed starting in September 2007."
What I do not understand is why it will take so long to implement the arming of these officers. No I don't just mean that it will be a long time coming because it will only begin in September 2007, a year from now, but rather because it will apparently take 10 years to arm them all. What is the problem? Are guns to expensive, is the training to complicated, or is it a ludicrous politically correct manner of doing things by taking 10 years to do it?
"Harper said it would take 10 years to fully implement the plan. The government will have at least 150 officers with sidearms deployed by the end of March 2008, Harper said at a news conference at one of the border crossing south of Vancouver, British Columbia."
So wow, by next September they will start to arm, then by March 2008, they will have a whole 150 officers armed. Just look again at the first quote I used above. It said 60 Canadian border guards walked off of the job and only 4 border crossings were closed. How many border crossings will 150 armed officers cover? Maybe 9 in total! Amazing that anyone in the Canadian government would think this is the proper manner and time span in which to implement armed security for their nation's borders; and pretty gosh darned stupid too in my opinion.
Maybe we should have invaded Canada instead of Iraq, it would have been easier (SARCASM ALERT FOLKS - JUST IN CASE YOU DID NOT REALIZE I WAS BEING SARCASTIC). Actually what we really ought to do is supply the firearms and the training to the Canadian government for their border guards. It would help out on our own security, that is if they actually would try to prevent any bad guys from leaving Canada to do bad things in the USA.
This all kind of makes me wonder what would have happened this August when I last went up to Canada with my son. When the border guards made us get out of our car, then go inside for about a 5-10 minute question session, then sit around for another 10-15 minutes or so while they ran criminal history checks on us: WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED HAD WE COME UP AS ARMED AND DANGEROUS FELONS IN THOISE CHECKS? Would they have doffed their caps to us and told us to 'have a nice stay in Canada', or would they have politely told us, 'sorry the border crossing is closed, you have to leave now'? Simply mind boggling that they even bothered in the first place.
My advice to the Canadian Governments is: Get these folks some firearms and training, and get it for them fast SO YOU CAN REALLY HAVE SECURE BORDERS, AND PROTECT YOUR OWN PEEOPLE. Until they get them, have the Mounties or the Canadian military respond to any dangerous border crossing situations. The way it is now, I think it is sheer lunacy.
All the best,
Glenn B
Monday, September 25, 2006
First one nut calling president Buish the devil...
...now a nut of a different sort, but as far as I am concerned a nut nonetheless, apparently implying that Hillary Clinton is worse than the devil. This time instead of the insults coming from a foreign whack job, they come from someone who I am convinced in my personal opinion is a domestic one by the name of Jerry Falwell. As per this article: Jerry Falwell Says Hillary Clinton Could Fire Up Voters More Than the Devil Himself at Fox news>com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215439,00.html:
""I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate," Falwell, a leading conservative evangelist, said, according to a tape recording of the Friday prayer breakfast attended by several hundred pastors and religious activists.
The recording, first reported in Sunday's Los Angeles Times, was confirmed by someone who attended the conference, but not the breakfast, and has heard the tape.
"I hope she's the candidate, because nothing will energize my (constituency) like Hillary Clinton," Falwell said. "If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't.""
I have got to tell you, if Falwell's people would rather vote for Lucifer (if indeed there is such an entity, and I think they believe there is), or at least would not be compelled to vote for the candidate against whom Lucifer was riunning as much as they would be to vote for whomever ran against Mrs. Clinton, then I want no part of, what I believe to be, these religious weirdoes. What he is seemingly saying is that his constituency would be more compelled to vote Hillary's opposition than for Lucifer's opposition. Remeber that lucifer supposedly is the embodiment of pure evil for Christians. They would thus, as i see it according to his statement, prefer the ultimate evil over Mrs. Clinton.
My guess has to be that either they really do not believe in Lucifer as the embodiment of the ultimate evil, and therefore are not true to their own religious teachings, or they are just full of unfathomable hatred toward Senator Clinton, or Falwell is just spouting off more of his, seemingly to me, crazy rhetoric. The scary thing is that plenty of people who follow him probably do truly believe Satan (aka: Lucifer) is the embodiment of pure evil; and they would somehow prefer that than Hillary Clinton.
Maybe I am too middle of the road, but if there truly is a Lucifer, and if I truly had the option of voting for Hillary Clinton versusr McCain, as opposed to Lucifer versus McCain, or even Lucifer versus Clinton, as my only choices in an election - I would just abstain from voting. I cannot see myself ever voting for her, nor for a guy like McCain, nor could I ever see myself ever voting for pure evil, not even by way of over zealous use of hyperbole. I think that Jerry Falwell ought to be ashamed of himself, as ashamed of himself as Hugo Chavez should feel.
Of course, if the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan was to appear on the ballot, he would get my vote in a heartbeat. Realistically speaking, I can only hope Tancredo somehows comes in as the longshot.
All the best,
Glenn B
""I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate," Falwell, a leading conservative evangelist, said, according to a tape recording of the Friday prayer breakfast attended by several hundred pastors and religious activists.
The recording, first reported in Sunday's Los Angeles Times, was confirmed by someone who attended the conference, but not the breakfast, and has heard the tape.
"I hope she's the candidate, because nothing will energize my (constituency) like Hillary Clinton," Falwell said. "If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't.""
I have got to tell you, if Falwell's people would rather vote for Lucifer (if indeed there is such an entity, and I think they believe there is), or at least would not be compelled to vote for the candidate against whom Lucifer was riunning as much as they would be to vote for whomever ran against Mrs. Clinton, then I want no part of, what I believe to be, these religious weirdoes. What he is seemingly saying is that his constituency would be more compelled to vote Hillary's opposition than for Lucifer's opposition. Remeber that lucifer supposedly is the embodiment of pure evil for Christians. They would thus, as i see it according to his statement, prefer the ultimate evil over Mrs. Clinton.
My guess has to be that either they really do not believe in Lucifer as the embodiment of the ultimate evil, and therefore are not true to their own religious teachings, or they are just full of unfathomable hatred toward Senator Clinton, or Falwell is just spouting off more of his, seemingly to me, crazy rhetoric. The scary thing is that plenty of people who follow him probably do truly believe Satan (aka: Lucifer) is the embodiment of pure evil; and they would somehow prefer that than Hillary Clinton.
Maybe I am too middle of the road, but if there truly is a Lucifer, and if I truly had the option of voting for Hillary Clinton versusr McCain, as opposed to Lucifer versus McCain, or even Lucifer versus Clinton, as my only choices in an election - I would just abstain from voting. I cannot see myself ever voting for her, nor for a guy like McCain, nor could I ever see myself ever voting for pure evil, not even by way of over zealous use of hyperbole. I think that Jerry Falwell ought to be ashamed of himself, as ashamed of himself as Hugo Chavez should feel.
Of course, if the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan was to appear on the ballot, he would get my vote in a heartbeat. Realistically speaking, I can only hope Tancredo somehows comes in as the longshot.
All the best,
Glenn B
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Japan again...
...has come to the forefront in that they are becoming a practical nation with regard to their preparedness for what seems to be the threat of a major war in the not too distant future.
Back on August 24, 2006, I wrote the following in my blog titled: A Peaceful Country Prepares For War:
"The people of Japan have had good reason not to want to engage in military struggles ever again. They learned a lesson about the consequences of unfettered military at the end of WWII. It is a lesson that luckily the rest of the world has not had to learn in the same manner as has Japan. Japan was the only country to have ever been attacked by nuclear weapons. They paid a heavy toll for their aggression in WWII. They learned a lesson and learned it very well. For the past 61 years Japan has not developed a military capable of even defending itself."
Don't let what I wrote above be taken out of context, because in the same piece I also wrote the following:
"The Japanese are practical people in most respects. The one thing I do not believe they have been at all practical about for many years since WWII was the defense of their own nation from attack. They had an extremely limited military, they depended upon other nations too much. Now things seem to be changing. They are stocking up on defensive missiles. These are missiles that were developed to shoot other missiles out of the air. Those other missiles, the ones the Patriot missiles shoot down, they are not defensive in nature they are offensive, aggressive – they may well carry a nuclear warhead. North Korea is about to develop nuclear weapons, that is if they have not been successful at it already. Iran is developing its nuclear capabilities while snubbing its nose at the United Nations resolution that has forbidden it to do so. The Japanese are a smart people, and they long for peace, they have lived as a peaceful nation for 61 years. Yet they are smart enough to live by an old axiom: They who long for peace must prepare for war."
Now let me direct you this article Japan's quiet successor vows to restore army from News.scotsman.com @
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1410482006
According to the article:
"SHINZO Abe is planning a revolution in Japan which will see the return of a full-strength imperial army for the first time since the Second World War. "
Mr. Abe is the "certain" successor to the prime minister of Japan. It sounds like he has some clout, especially since the article states he won his election with about 2/3 of the vote. If he actually takes over as prime minister, he will be the first person born after WWII to have been elected to said position. He has some strong ideas about changing the way things work for Japan militarily. For instance, as per the same article:
"Instead, he spoke of revising the United States-imposed Constitution, which forbids Japan from having a full-fledged military, passing legislation to allow Japanese troops to be deployed overseas and making it possible for Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defence with the US."
He is an apparent hawk or at least wants to make it appear that way. This does not mean he is readying to start a war in the region, but it sure looks as if he wants Japan to be ready in case a war breaks out. Why the sudden change; my guess is essentially what I said in my earlier piece, Japan has realized they are bordered by enemies and potential enemies who would see Japan as a target of opportunity.
Japan remilitarizing is a dangerous move as far as other nations may see it, but one that assuredly will have Japan at least ready to defend herself if the need ever arises. With the U.S. military spread out the way it is now, and with the US military as the primary defender of Japan, who can blame them.
Read my earlier piece from August 24 @
http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/2006/08/peaceful-country-prepares-for-war.html
If you have read it already, reading it now may help to put things in perspective.
All the best,
Glenn B
Its not 'our' job, its 'their' job...
...and we are not going to help them do it, we are going to help the bad guys make 'their' job tougher by giving them a place to hide. In essence this seems to have been said a lot lately, but this time I refer to a recent incident of great sadness.
The 'our' to whom I refer in the above sentence is the city of Houston, Texas. The 'their' to whom I make reference is the federal government. The issue at hand is illegal immigration and the results of 12 million illegal aliens being in this country. One of those results, the sad incident at hand, was the alleged capital murder of Police Officer Rodney Johnson. Despite Officer Johnson's killing, allegedly by an illegal alien he had just arrested for driving without a license, the chief of police of the Houston Police department defended Houston PD's policy of not enforcing the federal laws against illegal aliens.
Chief Harold Hurtt had this to say, as per an article at Chron.com @ http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4208808.html
"If the government would fulfill their responsibility of protecting the border," he told reporters Friday afternoon, "we probably would not be standing here today."
If the federal government (I imagine this is the government to which he refers, unless in means the government of Houston or Texas, or maybe Mexico) actually went full force (within the realm of reason and legality) to enforce current Immigration and Nationality laws there is always the distinct likelihood that many illegals would still enter the United States over the southern border. I agree it then would have been less likely that the suspect would have killed the police officer, but certainly not impossible. Then again, if Houston, TX was not a haven for illegal aliens, in as much as the police refuse to help enforce federal immigration laws, then this also would have been much less likely to have happened. Hurtt takes the stand it is someone else's fault that this was able to take place, and therefore he shrugs off any responsibility of himself, his department or his city and state. That is a shame because it is a trend we have been living with for all too many years.
I remember, over the course of my still ongoing 27 year career in federal law enforcement, many arrests I made of suspected felons, and those suspected of misdemeanors, on state charges. Can you imagine that; the federal government, as part of its daily routine, has its law enforcement officers and agents making arrests for state, city, and other local governments like counties. Yet when it comes to returning the courtesy and cooperation, state governments often tell the federal government to pound sand if the violations involve illegal aliens.
An indirect result of such policies was the killing of Officer Johnson; it is a crying shame, and I mean that with all of my sympathy to the family and loved ones of the fallen officer. Yes the federal government should be doing a better job, but yes so too should the states, the cities and other local governments. As I seem to recall our nation is the UNITED States of America, not the discombobulated states of anarchy.
Bear in mind that neither of these failures, that of the feds, or that of the locals, was a direct reason that the officer got killed. They were indirect reasons though, reasons that may have been avoidable had their been better cooperation between the states and the feds, and had their been better anti-illegal alien policies in place across the board. These illegal aliens are interlopers, invaders of a sort. They come here to take what U.S. Citizens and legal resident aliens have, and they take it by illegal means. If an illegal has so little respect for our nation and its laws as to have his or first act on our soil be one that is a crime, then they will likely have little respect for any of our laws after that. Just look at this one suspect in this case. He is the almost the perfect example of that first act of illegality, though if he at first entered the United States illegally is in question. What did he do illegal. I can tell you at least a few things:
He committed an illegal act prior to 1999, as per the article:
"Quintero was deported as an illegal felon in 1999, following a charge of indecency with a child, Brown said."
So he may not have entered illegally the first time round, but he was deported for a crime. What does he do next illegally in the USA; well as far as we know he entered the US illegally after deportation.
Then he follows the course of what so many others have done illegally, he allegedly continues to commit crimes. What were those crimes, well here are just the few we know of:
He allegedly gets a job, this would be illegally as he has no right or privilege to work within the USA.
He allegedly drives without a license.
He allegedly kills a police officer.
He allegedly fires another shot at the tow truck driver thereby allegedly attempting another murder.
There are some other crimes listed in the article too.
It is about damned time that people get their heads out of their asses and realize that illegal aliens coming into our country has to be our number one concern domestically, and that this problem is directly part of our national security issues. It must also be one of the driving forces behind our votes on election day this November, and it should be a driving force during the presidential elections 2 years from now. If the politicians for whom you are going to vote are not all for a strong enforcement of our Immigration laws, strong enforcement of our national boundaries, removal of illegal aliens from within our borders, a policy of no amnesty or anything like it for illegal aliens, a policy of reasonable legal immigration, strong enforcement of national security, and for a complete revamp of our immigration and nationality laws then you absolutely are wasting your vote.
Don't let Officer Johnson's death have been in vain. Do something about it by helping to rid our nation of this scourge of 12 million illegal aliens. Vote for a secure USA.
All the best,
Glenn B
The 'our' to whom I refer in the above sentence is the city of Houston, Texas. The 'their' to whom I make reference is the federal government. The issue at hand is illegal immigration and the results of 12 million illegal aliens being in this country. One of those results, the sad incident at hand, was the alleged capital murder of Police Officer Rodney Johnson. Despite Officer Johnson's killing, allegedly by an illegal alien he had just arrested for driving without a license, the chief of police of the Houston Police department defended Houston PD's policy of not enforcing the federal laws against illegal aliens.
Chief Harold Hurtt had this to say, as per an article at Chron.com @ http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4208808.html
"If the government would fulfill their responsibility of protecting the border," he told reporters Friday afternoon, "we probably would not be standing here today."
If the federal government (I imagine this is the government to which he refers, unless in means the government of Houston or Texas, or maybe Mexico) actually went full force (within the realm of reason and legality) to enforce current Immigration and Nationality laws there is always the distinct likelihood that many illegals would still enter the United States over the southern border. I agree it then would have been less likely that the suspect would have killed the police officer, but certainly not impossible. Then again, if Houston, TX was not a haven for illegal aliens, in as much as the police refuse to help enforce federal immigration laws, then this also would have been much less likely to have happened. Hurtt takes the stand it is someone else's fault that this was able to take place, and therefore he shrugs off any responsibility of himself, his department or his city and state. That is a shame because it is a trend we have been living with for all too many years.
I remember, over the course of my still ongoing 27 year career in federal law enforcement, many arrests I made of suspected felons, and those suspected of misdemeanors, on state charges. Can you imagine that; the federal government, as part of its daily routine, has its law enforcement officers and agents making arrests for state, city, and other local governments like counties. Yet when it comes to returning the courtesy and cooperation, state governments often tell the federal government to pound sand if the violations involve illegal aliens.
An indirect result of such policies was the killing of Officer Johnson; it is a crying shame, and I mean that with all of my sympathy to the family and loved ones of the fallen officer. Yes the federal government should be doing a better job, but yes so too should the states, the cities and other local governments. As I seem to recall our nation is the UNITED States of America, not the discombobulated states of anarchy.
Bear in mind that neither of these failures, that of the feds, or that of the locals, was a direct reason that the officer got killed. They were indirect reasons though, reasons that may have been avoidable had their been better cooperation between the states and the feds, and had their been better anti-illegal alien policies in place across the board. These illegal aliens are interlopers, invaders of a sort. They come here to take what U.S. Citizens and legal resident aliens have, and they take it by illegal means. If an illegal has so little respect for our nation and its laws as to have his or first act on our soil be one that is a crime, then they will likely have little respect for any of our laws after that. Just look at this one suspect in this case. He is the almost the perfect example of that first act of illegality, though if he at first entered the United States illegally is in question. What did he do illegal. I can tell you at least a few things:
He committed an illegal act prior to 1999, as per the article:
"Quintero was deported as an illegal felon in 1999, following a charge of indecency with a child, Brown said."
So he may not have entered illegally the first time round, but he was deported for a crime. What does he do next illegally in the USA; well as far as we know he entered the US illegally after deportation.
Then he follows the course of what so many others have done illegally, he allegedly continues to commit crimes. What were those crimes, well here are just the few we know of:
He allegedly gets a job, this would be illegally as he has no right or privilege to work within the USA.
He allegedly drives without a license.
He allegedly kills a police officer.
He allegedly fires another shot at the tow truck driver thereby allegedly attempting another murder.
There are some other crimes listed in the article too.
It is about damned time that people get their heads out of their asses and realize that illegal aliens coming into our country has to be our number one concern domestically, and that this problem is directly part of our national security issues. It must also be one of the driving forces behind our votes on election day this November, and it should be a driving force during the presidential elections 2 years from now. If the politicians for whom you are going to vote are not all for a strong enforcement of our Immigration laws, strong enforcement of our national boundaries, removal of illegal aliens from within our borders, a policy of no amnesty or anything like it for illegal aliens, a policy of reasonable legal immigration, strong enforcement of national security, and for a complete revamp of our immigration and nationality laws then you absolutely are wasting your vote.
Don't let Officer Johnson's death have been in vain. Do something about it by helping to rid our nation of this scourge of 12 million illegal aliens. Vote for a secure USA.
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, September 23, 2006
A Failed Assasination Attempt Against the President...
...of Venezuela, by the USA, and coming in the near future would not surprise me in the least; but of course if there is one it will have been staged - at least this is my hypothesis.
If you have not yet realized it, the president of Venezuela Hugo Chavez is, at least in the opinion of some sane people, an ultra leftist kook. His recent speeches, at the United Nations and at the church in Harlem, NY, revealed a side of him to the world that he probably would have been better off suppressing in front of the cameras. Yet I am happy he made those speeches as they probably rob him of virtually all credibility in the eyes of normal people. This man, the same one who allegedly has sent large numbers of his political opponents to die before firing squads, who allegedly squashes democracy in his own country on a daily basis through fear and violent retribution, who allegedly has virtually destroyed the economy of Venezuela by eliminating the middle class and now having only two classes rich and very poor, had the temerity to call the president of the United States of America el Diablo (among other things). This man, who is an ally of Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria, would try to have people believe he is a seeker of freedom! It is outrageous to say the least.
Well, while he allies himself with our enemies, while he may be an ultra leftist kook, while he slams our president - it does not mean he cannot form plots to control others, and to keep himself in control while attempting to garner support for his twisted idea of him being a good leader. His speeches, I think, were just one of these attempts. In the speeches I see the possibility of another such plot being formed or even starting to be carried out toward the end of garnering Chavez more support from ultra leftist USA hating whackos. Do you see it too. While it may not actually happen, it would not surprise me if we were made to think that someone has tried it.
What I am speaking to are Chavez's claims that since he made those speeches in which he called President Bush the devil, he has repeatedly said that his 'friends' have warned him that President Bush may try to have him killed. He said it here in the USA, now he repeated it today in Venezuela:
"Some worried friends over there have called me (to say) that because I called him the devil they have condemned me to death," Chavez said without elaborating further on his sources.
"But they won't kill me. I have faith in life," he said. "I know how to take care of myself and the Lord will protect me and you all will protect me," he told a cheering crowd in eastern Venezuela where he was visiting a group of state-funded agricultural cooperatives. (from FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215368,00.html
Can't you see it already. This is what I imagine is coming: Sometime in the near future, we are going to turn on the news to learn about an alleged but failed assassination attempt against Hugo Chavez. All the evidence that will be gathered will point in only one direction - to the Whitehouse and president GWB. The thing is though, this will all have been fabricated by Chavez and his cronies.
Of course this is all hypothetical on my part, but I believe there is a chance of this happening from how Chavez seemingly has been setting the stage. If he can pull it off, then much of the rest of the world will further condemn the USA and president Bush, much of the rest of the world will see Chavez as the next Fidel Castro, much of the rest of the world will have fallen further into a pit of lunacy. Of course, he will not even have to pull it off convincingly if he really tries this. He would just have to make us wonder, was there really an assassination attempt - and this can be accomplished by staged minor injury to him, that appears to have been the result of an assassination attempt. The media circus to follow will do the rest.
If I am right in my hypothesis, my guess is also that this will happen in the not too distant future. I would say shortly before the general election day in the USA. So it would probably come in October sometime, or maybe very early November. It would be my guess Chavez would hope this to have the effect of causing the left and center to vote against the right in massive numbers. I think it would have another effect, just showing that the man is more nutty than even I had suspected before he visited the UN; and quite possibly causing a landslide victory for the right.
Time will tell if any of this comes to be, or if it was just a poor gues on my part. Probably just a poor guess on my part as I am not much of a conspiracy theorist; but then again, I sort of see it as a possibility nonetheless...
All the best,
Glenn B
If you have not yet realized it, the president of Venezuela Hugo Chavez is, at least in the opinion of some sane people, an ultra leftist kook. His recent speeches, at the United Nations and at the church in Harlem, NY, revealed a side of him to the world that he probably would have been better off suppressing in front of the cameras. Yet I am happy he made those speeches as they probably rob him of virtually all credibility in the eyes of normal people. This man, the same one who allegedly has sent large numbers of his political opponents to die before firing squads, who allegedly squashes democracy in his own country on a daily basis through fear and violent retribution, who allegedly has virtually destroyed the economy of Venezuela by eliminating the middle class and now having only two classes rich and very poor, had the temerity to call the president of the United States of America el Diablo (among other things). This man, who is an ally of Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria, would try to have people believe he is a seeker of freedom! It is outrageous to say the least.
Well, while he allies himself with our enemies, while he may be an ultra leftist kook, while he slams our president - it does not mean he cannot form plots to control others, and to keep himself in control while attempting to garner support for his twisted idea of him being a good leader. His speeches, I think, were just one of these attempts. In the speeches I see the possibility of another such plot being formed or even starting to be carried out toward the end of garnering Chavez more support from ultra leftist USA hating whackos. Do you see it too. While it may not actually happen, it would not surprise me if we were made to think that someone has tried it.
What I am speaking to are Chavez's claims that since he made those speeches in which he called President Bush the devil, he has repeatedly said that his 'friends' have warned him that President Bush may try to have him killed. He said it here in the USA, now he repeated it today in Venezuela:
"Some worried friends over there have called me (to say) that because I called him the devil they have condemned me to death," Chavez said without elaborating further on his sources.
"But they won't kill me. I have faith in life," he said. "I know how to take care of myself and the Lord will protect me and you all will protect me," he told a cheering crowd in eastern Venezuela where he was visiting a group of state-funded agricultural cooperatives. (from FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215368,00.html
Can't you see it already. This is what I imagine is coming: Sometime in the near future, we are going to turn on the news to learn about an alleged but failed assassination attempt against Hugo Chavez. All the evidence that will be gathered will point in only one direction - to the Whitehouse and president GWB. The thing is though, this will all have been fabricated by Chavez and his cronies.
Of course this is all hypothetical on my part, but I believe there is a chance of this happening from how Chavez seemingly has been setting the stage. If he can pull it off, then much of the rest of the world will further condemn the USA and president Bush, much of the rest of the world will see Chavez as the next Fidel Castro, much of the rest of the world will have fallen further into a pit of lunacy. Of course, he will not even have to pull it off convincingly if he really tries this. He would just have to make us wonder, was there really an assassination attempt - and this can be accomplished by staged minor injury to him, that appears to have been the result of an assassination attempt. The media circus to follow will do the rest.
If I am right in my hypothesis, my guess is also that this will happen in the not too distant future. I would say shortly before the general election day in the USA. So it would probably come in October sometime, or maybe very early November. It would be my guess Chavez would hope this to have the effect of causing the left and center to vote against the right in massive numbers. I think it would have another effect, just showing that the man is more nutty than even I had suspected before he visited the UN; and quite possibly causing a landslide victory for the right.
Time will tell if any of this comes to be, or if it was just a poor gues on my part. Probably just a poor guess on my part as I am not much of a conspiracy theorist; but then again, I sort of see it as a possibility nonetheless...
All the best,
Glenn B
Something else to do on a Saturday...
It is always a good thing to have something which can keep you busy, to occupy your time, to distract your mind from places that it should not wander, to keep you from doing things you should not do, to help keep you focused, to help you lead an interesting life (I prefer an interesting life despite it being a curse at times), to keep your mind active, to keep your soul at peace, and to show your children that there really is something besides just hanging out with friends, sending instant messages to friends on the Internet, and MTV.
What I am talking about are chores, hobbies and other such pursuits. getting your kids interested in doing chores (not an easy task), and getting them interested in hobbies (sometimes an easier task), and getting them interested in other pursuits, say like sports is a good thing. I am not big into athletic sports, especially not spectator athletic sports; and I am not really talking about them at all. When I say sports I mean things in which you or your kids participate. I got both of my children into athletic sports at an early age. My daughter, now 21, roller blades for exercise and for stress relief. That is a good thing. I wish she did some more, but it is okay. My son is into roller hockey. Only seasonal but that is okay too.
I also got my kids involved in shooting. This is a sport, though not necessarily athletic. Please do not confuse athletic sports versus sports in general. While athletic sports include the obvious sports like swimming, baseball, soccer, football, hockey, running, weight training, judo and so forth; non-athletic sports include such things as poker playing, horse racing (non-athletic for us as opposed to the horses), falconry, hunting, fishing (though these last two can be quite the test of your athletic endurance) and shooting, among others. There are plenty of things you can do to occupy your time and the time of your children. It helps keep folks active, and out of trouble when taught correctly by parents, and even more so when the parent regularly participates with the children.
Other things that are great time fillers are hobbies. Things like stamp collecting, coin collecting, treasure hunting with a metal detector, hiking, camping, photography, gardening, model building, writing, reading, wood carving, collecting in general, pet keeping, and so forth. Many of these are things that can be done alone, or by more than one person at once. The ones that can be done on a solo basis are great for parents, their kids, or other adults when they need some down time to relax but don't want to be just lazy. I recommend highly that each and everyone of you go out and get yourselves something to fill your down time.
I have been giving more of my down time to things like this lately. They have made me relax better, made me be uptight less, and have been an overall enjoyment to me. For example, yesterday and today I worked out in the garden. It was kind of dull work, but basic work, and was enjoyable just to keep busy and to do it alone. Later today I did some work on my pets. I keep reptiles, amphibians, and small mammals. My son is somewhat into this too, though not as much as me, though my guess is that when he is an adult he will delve into it much more. Even though I worked at cleaning all the tanks yesterday, today I decided to do more. I took an old terrarium, one which I had neglected for awhile (only plants in it), and decided to spruce it up. I tore out old dying plants, turned the soil, added composted soil from my compost pile, added some red worms and earthworms, replanted some of the old plants into it, and also put some new ones into it. Total cost of this was zero as I used only things on hand, including plants from my backyard. Then I enjoyed another hobby; I wrote about it here. I tend to combine my hobbies, and am not really a master at many of them, but I sort of enjoy being a jack of all trades or should I say hobbies.
I feel good about having done these things today. They may not be much in the scope of things, but they kept me busy throughout my morning and early afternoon. Now I can laze about at the computer, blogging, and enjoying a glass of wine. I feel even better when I see one of my kids doing something that interests them. Another day in Paradise; yes it most definitely is just that.
What I am talking about are chores, hobbies and other such pursuits. getting your kids interested in doing chores (not an easy task), and getting them interested in hobbies (sometimes an easier task), and getting them interested in other pursuits, say like sports is a good thing. I am not big into athletic sports, especially not spectator athletic sports; and I am not really talking about them at all. When I say sports I mean things in which you or your kids participate. I got both of my children into athletic sports at an early age. My daughter, now 21, roller blades for exercise and for stress relief. That is a good thing. I wish she did some more, but it is okay. My son is into roller hockey. Only seasonal but that is okay too.
I also got my kids involved in shooting. This is a sport, though not necessarily athletic. Please do not confuse athletic sports versus sports in general. While athletic sports include the obvious sports like swimming, baseball, soccer, football, hockey, running, weight training, judo and so forth; non-athletic sports include such things as poker playing, horse racing (non-athletic for us as opposed to the horses), falconry, hunting, fishing (though these last two can be quite the test of your athletic endurance) and shooting, among others. There are plenty of things you can do to occupy your time and the time of your children. It helps keep folks active, and out of trouble when taught correctly by parents, and even more so when the parent regularly participates with the children.
Other things that are great time fillers are hobbies. Things like stamp collecting, coin collecting, treasure hunting with a metal detector, hiking, camping, photography, gardening, model building, writing, reading, wood carving, collecting in general, pet keeping, and so forth. Many of these are things that can be done alone, or by more than one person at once. The ones that can be done on a solo basis are great for parents, their kids, or other adults when they need some down time to relax but don't want to be just lazy. I recommend highly that each and everyone of you go out and get yourselves something to fill your down time.
I have been giving more of my down time to things like this lately. They have made me relax better, made me be uptight less, and have been an overall enjoyment to me. For example, yesterday and today I worked out in the garden. It was kind of dull work, but basic work, and was enjoyable just to keep busy and to do it alone. Later today I did some work on my pets. I keep reptiles, amphibians, and small mammals. My son is somewhat into this too, though not as much as me, though my guess is that when he is an adult he will delve into it much more. Even though I worked at cleaning all the tanks yesterday, today I decided to do more. I took an old terrarium, one which I had neglected for awhile (only plants in it), and decided to spruce it up. I tore out old dying plants, turned the soil, added composted soil from my compost pile, added some red worms and earthworms, replanted some of the old plants into it, and also put some new ones into it. Total cost of this was zero as I used only things on hand, including plants from my backyard. Then I enjoyed another hobby; I wrote about it here. I tend to combine my hobbies, and am not really a master at many of them, but I sort of enjoy being a jack of all trades or should I say hobbies.
I feel good about having done these things today. They may not be much in the scope of things, but they kept me busy throughout my morning and early afternoon. Now I can laze about at the computer, blogging, and enjoying a glass of wine. I feel even better when I see one of my kids doing something that interests them. Another day in Paradise; yes it most definitely is just that.
Ballseye's Boomers: Mossberg M44
This is my first and only CMP rifle. For those of you not familiar with the CMP, it is the Civilian Marksmanship program. It is run by the United States government, and it sells things like rifles, surplus rifle parts and accessories to the public. Isn't that sweet. I think it is, because you get these things at a pretty good price.Folks I have to tell you, the cost of this rifle to me was a great bargain. My only regret about the rifle was that I did not by two or more of them, I think the limit was three. If I live long enough - I may learn something from my mistakes. I will admit when I first bought it, I was a little leery; I kind of wondered about how good a deal I could get on a used rifle from the U.S. government for only $75.00. Yes folks, you read that correctly - only $75.00. Of course there were a few added expenses but that was okay. There was shipping which raised the price to $94.96 total from CMP. Then there was the issue of needing to buy magazines for it as it did not come with a magazine. That was okay by me, even though the magazines went for about $30 each if I recall correctly. So with one magazine, the complete package was less than $130.00, and that is a great deal on a rifle in so good a shape especially considering the cost of them now, much higher than just a few years ago.
When I say so good a shape, I mean pretty much excellent. While not an unused rifle, it at some time or another had to have been arsenal reworked, it was in excellent shape. The bore is excellent, very distinct lans and grooves. The bolt is in excellent condition and operates smoothly and flawlessly. The rifle feeds, fires, extracts, and ejects every time; but what would expect from a quality bolt action rifle. The rear sight is a peep sight, the front sight is a post. Not the best combination, I really should find the correct front sight which would likely be a globe front sight of some type. The finish is Parkerized, and is laid on thick. As it is my only Parkerized firearm, I don't know if this is right or not, my guess is that is how they come when this finish is added. It is seemingly a durable finish. The wood is also very nice, oil finished from the look and feel of it. The trigger guard is the only non-metal part (besides the stock) that I can find, it is plastic. There were concerns that this would have turned brittle and cracked, but this is not the case with mine - it maybe a replacement put on at the arsenal. The magazines though after market production are great (again I got these after I bought the rifle, and not from the CMP). The rifle will fire .22 short, long and long rifle, and the magazines I purchased have an adapter allowing each of those rounds to be used. As for accuracy, this is a tack driver, its inherent accuracy is much better than my ability and I am no slouch, not by a long shot.
Just in case any of you are wondering why a U.S. arsenal would have rifles in .22LR caliber, they were for training purposes. Those rifles no longer being needed are then sold to the public. Sometimes you get a clunker, other times you get a really nice one. Their descriptions of the available rifles seem to be pretty much right on from what I have seen, and from what I have heard from others. The CMP also offers other rifles such as Garands in larger calibers. The CMP is invloved with national matches, gun clubs and so on. You can check out the CMP and what it has to offer at:
http://www.odcmp.com/
By the way, I just checked my paperwork on this one. I bought it in February 2001. The serial number is 101911. I never realized the last three of the serial number before, that makes it a little more special to me.
All the best,
Glenn B
Friday, September 22, 2006
Just another day in Paradise...
...like any other day for me.
Today is my Saturday, or it was supposed to be my Saturday since I worked Sunday through Thursday; but as it turns out I have to go into work tonight. That sort of sucks.
Still though, I did what many of us do on our Saturdays today. I woke up and did some chores around the house; this taking at least a couple of hours. Then I went outside and did some more chores around the house - like watering the garden, trimming bushes, mowing the lawn, raking leaves (oh goodie the fall is coming and so are the leaves, by the ton). I just had dinner with the wife, who was good enough to cook after she got home from work. I had a beer too; yeah I know I have to go to work, but that is still 3 hours off, and I had the beer well over two hours ago. I would have had ore, but I have to go to work.
Still it is another day in Paradise for me. One of the reasons I say this, is because a couple, or is it already a few, years back there was this tsunami. All I could think of was some guy on the beach, looking out at the sea, picking up a bottle of Heineken, and taking a sip while thinking "Just another day in paradise"; then the next thing he knew he was 20 miles out at sea with a coconut tree shoved up his whazoo. It got me to thinking I should not complain quite as much as I had been. I started to get better, granted maybe not all that much, but better nonetheless.
After that I thought of a couple of other reasons why I can just keep on saying its "Just another day in Paradise". One of the main reasons is that there are dirtbags out there who wish to either convert me or kill me; and they have not gotten me yet. Yes they are after me, heck they are after you too. No I am not paranoid; you see they tell us this repeatedly - the difference between you and me may just be that I believe them. I am talking about Islamists who want to destroy Christianity, Judaism, the west, and then the world - so that they can take over. I believe them, those whom say they want to destroy us, more than those who say Islam is the religion of peace, because of all the evidence out there lately. From what I have seen, Islam is anything but peaceful, and yes they want to kill us.
With that thought in mind, comes the next reason for me to say its "Just another day in paradise". That reason would be that there are people, from our country, and from others around the world, who realize the bottom line just as I do; and those other folks are willing to their part to prevent so called extremist Islamists from conquering the rest of the world. Many who do their part are young and strong, such as those in the military. My hat goes off to them. Some are not so young but are still ready to do what is right to stop the threat. Me for instance, and many others whom I know that are ready to fight if called upon. This is not brag, not macho BS, it is fact. I already have dome quite a bit through my job to help fight terrorism, and I will do more if need be. Others are likewise ready to do their parts.
Yet there is in Paradise, those who would say it is anything but Paradise. Those who would call Paradise a bad place, an illusion, an evil empire or whatever. These are the sheep, these are the ostriches who hide their heads in a hole in the ground and put their posteriors up in the air only to be hit in the rear. These are the cowards who are even too afraid to realize the truth that there are those who hate us as a whole, not just those of us who support our president. I believe, that many Islamists see it as this: If you are not part of Islam, then you are part of Islam's problem, part of Islam's enemy. It is about time that everyone who is on that list of the enemies of Islam, wake up, pull their heads out of the sand, and take a stance in order to protect our way of life, and even our lives.
That quote the Pope recently used, it was right as far as I can see. If you have any doubt then just look at the reaction to what he said. That was pure evil around the world, and that was all perpetrated by Islamists, the ones who want us dead. Wake up folks, arm yourselves, get ready to fight in self defense; make your elected officials know you want a solution, and that you want the only solution that will work, the defeat of an enemy that wants to destroy us, of an enemy pretending to be a religious group when all it really is, is something that wants to destroy Paradise for us all.
Today is my Saturday, or it was supposed to be my Saturday since I worked Sunday through Thursday; but as it turns out I have to go into work tonight. That sort of sucks.
Still though, I did what many of us do on our Saturdays today. I woke up and did some chores around the house; this taking at least a couple of hours. Then I went outside and did some more chores around the house - like watering the garden, trimming bushes, mowing the lawn, raking leaves (oh goodie the fall is coming and so are the leaves, by the ton). I just had dinner with the wife, who was good enough to cook after she got home from work. I had a beer too; yeah I know I have to go to work, but that is still 3 hours off, and I had the beer well over two hours ago. I would have had ore, but I have to go to work.
Still it is another day in Paradise for me. One of the reasons I say this, is because a couple, or is it already a few, years back there was this tsunami. All I could think of was some guy on the beach, looking out at the sea, picking up a bottle of Heineken, and taking a sip while thinking "Just another day in paradise"; then the next thing he knew he was 20 miles out at sea with a coconut tree shoved up his whazoo. It got me to thinking I should not complain quite as much as I had been. I started to get better, granted maybe not all that much, but better nonetheless.
After that I thought of a couple of other reasons why I can just keep on saying its "Just another day in Paradise". One of the main reasons is that there are dirtbags out there who wish to either convert me or kill me; and they have not gotten me yet. Yes they are after me, heck they are after you too. No I am not paranoid; you see they tell us this repeatedly - the difference between you and me may just be that I believe them. I am talking about Islamists who want to destroy Christianity, Judaism, the west, and then the world - so that they can take over. I believe them, those whom say they want to destroy us, more than those who say Islam is the religion of peace, because of all the evidence out there lately. From what I have seen, Islam is anything but peaceful, and yes they want to kill us.
With that thought in mind, comes the next reason for me to say its "Just another day in paradise". That reason would be that there are people, from our country, and from others around the world, who realize the bottom line just as I do; and those other folks are willing to their part to prevent so called extremist Islamists from conquering the rest of the world. Many who do their part are young and strong, such as those in the military. My hat goes off to them. Some are not so young but are still ready to do what is right to stop the threat. Me for instance, and many others whom I know that are ready to fight if called upon. This is not brag, not macho BS, it is fact. I already have dome quite a bit through my job to help fight terrorism, and I will do more if need be. Others are likewise ready to do their parts.
Yet there is in Paradise, those who would say it is anything but Paradise. Those who would call Paradise a bad place, an illusion, an evil empire or whatever. These are the sheep, these are the ostriches who hide their heads in a hole in the ground and put their posteriors up in the air only to be hit in the rear. These are the cowards who are even too afraid to realize the truth that there are those who hate us as a whole, not just those of us who support our president. I believe, that many Islamists see it as this: If you are not part of Islam, then you are part of Islam's problem, part of Islam's enemy. It is about time that everyone who is on that list of the enemies of Islam, wake up, pull their heads out of the sand, and take a stance in order to protect our way of life, and even our lives.
That quote the Pope recently used, it was right as far as I can see. If you have any doubt then just look at the reaction to what he said. That was pure evil around the world, and that was all perpetrated by Islamists, the ones who want us dead. Wake up folks, arm yourselves, get ready to fight in self defense; make your elected officials know you want a solution, and that you want the only solution that will work, the defeat of an enemy that wants to destroy us, of an enemy pretending to be a religious group when all it really is, is something that wants to destroy Paradise for us all.
How long before Israel again atatcks Hezbollah...
...probably depends upon whether or not Hezbollah starts to disarm. Right now, I would say chances of them disarming seem slim, if only because of the current rhetoric being spewed forth by Hezobollah leader: Sheik Hassan Nasrallah .
The following is from FoxNews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215146,00.html:
"Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Rahhal said Nasrallah would deliver a "landmark historic speech" addressing international calls for his group's disarmament and the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers in south Lebanon, which for years has been controlled by the militant group.
The U.N.-brokered cease-fire that ended fighting between the guerrillas and Israel on Aug. 14 calls for stripping Hezbollah of its weapons, but Nasrallah has been defiant."
The above quote sure makes it seem like Hezobollah has not been willing to follow the UN brokered ceasefire does it! Not that this comes as any surprise to me. When is the last time that that an Arabic or Islamic nation has followed the letter of such a UN agreement? Of course, as it goes right now, Israel is still pulling out of Lebanon. The Israelis are following the agreement as far as I am aware. The thing is, if Hezbollah breaks the agreement, then why should the Israelis keep following it? Maybe they will think like that in Israel too, and maybe that will lead to them going right back into Lebanon to kick some more of Hezbollah's butts - it would not surprise me at all.
As the war turned out, Israel met a fairly prepared, well trained enemy, on the enemy's home ground, and it worked out to a stalemate, or with Israel somewhat in the lead militarily. If they go in again, my guess would be they will be much better prepared to do so, and it will take time to prepare. Don't allow that to fool you though, I believe they will go back in one whole heck of a lot sooner if Hezbollah fires as few as one rocket again. If they fail to disarm, Israel may wait a while longer, but I would be willing to wager that they will go back in if there is no disarmament of Hezbollah.
I am anxiously awaiting the speech that Nasrallah is to give. Who knows, maybe Israel will send him a message via a missile attack as he makes any speech defying the UN brokered deal.
All the best,
Glenn B
The following is from FoxNews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215146,00.html:
"Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Rahhal said Nasrallah would deliver a "landmark historic speech" addressing international calls for his group's disarmament and the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers in south Lebanon, which for years has been controlled by the militant group.
The U.N.-brokered cease-fire that ended fighting between the guerrillas and Israel on Aug. 14 calls for stripping Hezbollah of its weapons, but Nasrallah has been defiant."
The above quote sure makes it seem like Hezobollah has not been willing to follow the UN brokered ceasefire does it! Not that this comes as any surprise to me. When is the last time that that an Arabic or Islamic nation has followed the letter of such a UN agreement? Of course, as it goes right now, Israel is still pulling out of Lebanon. The Israelis are following the agreement as far as I am aware. The thing is, if Hezbollah breaks the agreement, then why should the Israelis keep following it? Maybe they will think like that in Israel too, and maybe that will lead to them going right back into Lebanon to kick some more of Hezbollah's butts - it would not surprise me at all.
As the war turned out, Israel met a fairly prepared, well trained enemy, on the enemy's home ground, and it worked out to a stalemate, or with Israel somewhat in the lead militarily. If they go in again, my guess would be they will be much better prepared to do so, and it will take time to prepare. Don't allow that to fool you though, I believe they will go back in one whole heck of a lot sooner if Hezbollah fires as few as one rocket again. If they fail to disarm, Israel may wait a while longer, but I would be willing to wager that they will go back in if there is no disarmament of Hezbollah.
I am anxiously awaiting the speech that Nasrallah is to give. Who knows, maybe Israel will send him a message via a missile attack as he makes any speech defying the UN brokered deal.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, September 21, 2006
I was so amazed...
I wrote an email to Representative Rangel. I have to give credit where it is due, even if to the opposition.
here it is:
To The Honorable Representative Charles Rangel,
Dear Representative Rangel,
I lived in New York City for many years, although never as a member of your district. I now live in XXXXXXXXXX, NY in VVVVVVVV county, again not a member of your district. Of course, being a New Yorker, I am pretty familiar with you from news reports. I will admit our politics are not often the same; yet I have to hand it to you for your statements today about Hugo Chavez attacking our president.
Despite the fact that you and president Bush do not often see eye to eye on political matters, it was extremely commendable how you stepped up, in such a fine outstanding show of patriotism, to defend president Bush against that attack. Today sir, you showed your true colors: red, white and blue, and I am proud to call you the HONORABLE Representative from harlem, IT WAS A TRULY NON-PARTISAN PIECE OF PATRIOTISM ON YOUR PART. From one loyal American to another, thank you sir.
If you are interested, I wrote a piece for my blog, about just this, today @ http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/
here it is:
To The Honorable Representative Charles Rangel,
Dear Representative Rangel,
I lived in New York City for many years, although never as a member of your district. I now live in XXXXXXXXXX, NY in VVVVVVVV county, again not a member of your district. Of course, being a New Yorker, I am pretty familiar with you from news reports. I will admit our politics are not often the same; yet I have to hand it to you for your statements today about Hugo Chavez attacking our president.
Despite the fact that you and president Bush do not often see eye to eye on political matters, it was extremely commendable how you stepped up, in such a fine outstanding show of patriotism, to defend president Bush against that attack. Today sir, you showed your true colors: red, white and blue, and I am proud to call you the HONORABLE Representative from harlem, IT WAS A TRULY NON-PARTISAN PIECE OF PATRIOTISM ON YOUR PART. From one loyal American to another, thank you sir.
If you are interested, I wrote a piece for my blog, about just this, today @ http://ballseyesboomers.blogspot.com/
Politicians never cease to amaze me...
... and today I was amazed more than usual by one of them. I am referring to Congressman Charles Rangel, the congressional representative for Harlem in New York City (or at least the rep for part of Harlem). The Honorable Representative Charles Rangel is pretty far to the left on all issues political. He is not anyone for whom I would be likely to vote if he were to run in an election where his was among the candidates from which I could choose. Yet today, even though I know of his very left leaning stance, or maybe I should say because of that hard left lean, he absolutely amazed me, and yo will note I just called him honorable.
As I was reading this article, Chavez Repeats 'Devil' Comment at Harlem Event, at FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214973,00.html
I read the following:
"As Chavez spoke in Harlem, U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel railed against the Venezuelan leader for choosing his New York congressional district to launch an attack on the president of the United States.
"You don't come into my country, you don't come into my congressional district and criticize my president, " Rangel said from Capitol Hill.
He added that "it would be crazy to think that Americans do not feel offended" by Chavez's remarks."
Yes that absolutely floored me with amazement. You see, at just about every chance the Representative Rangel gets, he seems to slam President Bush and his administration for something. Though it may happen sometimes, Congressman Rangel does not often see eye to eye with the current president. This applies, as far as I am aware, on issues like education, poverty, minimum wages, the war in Iraq, gun control, and so on - they just seemingly do not agree. So when (and may I take this one liberty when referring to an honorable congressperson) Charlie gave the president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, hell for calling our president el Diablo, among other nasty criticisms he made of our president, well I have just got to say way to go Representative Rangel. You sir are an honorable man indeed when you defend your president against a big mouth like Chavez who comes here only to stir the pot for his own political gain.
Congressman Rangel, I am proud to call you honorable sir! Today, despite your political difference with the Bush administration, you did the right thing and stood up to this interloper from another nation. Who knows, maybe if you ever run in my district, I may vote for you yet.
By the way folks, what Congressman Rangel did, despite his differences with President Bush, is called an act of patriotism. What guys like Harry Belafonte did, what guys like Danny Glover did, I think that is called grand standing and rabble raising; and it may possibly even be called sedition by some. As far as I am concerned, in my opinion, they were a disgrace to the United States of America no matter how you feel about our current president. On the other hand, Congressman Rangel showed his true colors:, red, white and blue; and I salute him for it!
All the best,
Glenn B
Twisted Valor...
...well maybe and maybe not. Maybe the guy I am about to tell you about was not trying to do anything valiant at all; maybe he is just an out and out nut case, maybe just a criminal, maybe it was truly heroic, maybe he was valiant, maybe he was not involved at all. I guess time and the courts will tell, when and if judgment is passed on him.
This story, one I found at the website of 1010 WINS @
http://1010wins.com/pages/86443.php?contentType=4&contentId=209358
centers around a house in Suffolk County, New York. Reportedly, it is the house that a man, a husband and father of a 2 year old girl, allegedly tried to burn down. It is the house reportedly in which a group of convicted sex offenders had been residing. Apparently the man lived near to this house and was not happy that there were so many (number not disclosed in the article) of sex offenders living under the same roof.
"Suffolk County prosecutors say he was upset there were so many sex offenders under one roof and he began preparations in August to get rid of the house and those living in it. Police say he even di dtest burns behind his own home."
I can understand this man having feelings of fear because sex offenders were living near to his home, this especially in light of the fact that he has a 2 year old daughter. Some sex offenders apparently often repeat the same types of crimes over and over again; yet we do not know if that is the case with those in this story. Still I guess it is enough, having them live near you when you have young children, to make you fear them. I guess it is also enough to spur you to take some sort of action (legally) to get them out of your neighborhood, though I am not necessarily in agreement with taking such action. I say I do not necessarily agree because I figure they have served their time, and they have to live somewhere once out of jail. I am all for the death penalty for certain sex crimes, such as the rape of a child; yet, we don't even know the extent of their offenses. (I wonder if the father in question knew of what type of sex crimes they had been convicted.) These guys may have had nothing to do with children. I am making no excuses for them or their crimes mind you. I am geting to the point though, that no matter what they had done, I have to question the alleged actions of the suspect in question.
Do the prior offenses of these convicted sex offenders give the father, or anyone else, any right, legal, moral, ethical or otherwise, to try to murder them by burning down their house with them supposedly in it? Even if these reported sex offenders had all been previously convicted of offenses against children, as much as I would hate them for it, as much as I despise such criminals and their crimes, does it give anyone the right to try to murder them. I think not. I think though that such crimes should be dealt with in a different manner by the law in the first place. The death penalty for the first offense of rape or anal or oral sodomy of a child, 25 years to life for other sexual molestation of a child that included fondling of sexual organs of the victim or forcing the victim to fondle the molester, and I believe that before release from prison the guilty should be forced into intensive corrective therapy. In a case of second offenses, I believe that the death penalty would be in order; and I don't care that the offender is found mentally competent or not. Our children need to be protected, but it needs to be done through the law, not through someone self appointing him or herself as police, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner.
I can understand the fear of the father that may have pushed him to do this alleged act; though I think those fears will prove to have been, if he is found guilty, magnified beyond rationality. Of course, had the father been able to have armed himself and his wife with handguns, and had they been able under the law to use them in a reasonable defense of their home under a Castle Doctrine, and had they not had to fear legal reprisals if they had done so justifiably, well maybe he would not have been driven to take these alleged actions; but then New York State is an anti gun state, and pretty much a state that does not care for its citizens to be reasonably able to defend themselves even in their own homes. This may have lent to any irrationality that may possibly have contributed to the alleged actions of the father.
One thing I really do not understand in all of this was the reported actions, or seemingly to me, the untimely actions of the police. According to the article, it seems the police were well aware of the fathers alleged intentions before he took the alleged action to burn down the house.
"Suffolk DA Thomas Spota said an undercover detective met with (name removed by me, GRB), who revealed his murderous plot while being recorded on video and audio tape. Spota said the video shows the defendant explaining that he intends to start the fire on the side of the house."
Now folks, you tell me, am I reading too much into that quote. Does it not say that an undercover police officer met with the suspect? Does it not say that the police recorded both on audio and video, the suspect revealing his plot to the undercover officer? Does it not say that the recording was of the defendant explaining his INTENT. This would mean the recording was made before he did the alleged act, wouldn't it? If the article is reporting this correctly, then the police had more than enough to arrest the suspect right then and there, or so it seems to me. Yet, what did the police do. Well, to me, it appears they let him go on with his life until he allegedly tried to kill the occupants of that house by allegedly starting a fire there.
I know sex offenders can be scum, and I think of them as less than dog poo in many cases. Yet it does not give anyone the right to murder them, nor does it give the police the right to ignore a murder plot against them until after the act allegedly has been committed; and it sure seems to me that this is what happened! What if the guy had targetted the wrong house from the get go? What if the guy had to get his fill of courage from a bottle before allegedly going out to burn down the house, and then in a drunken stupor had gone to the next house over. No matter how much you may despise sexual predators, think about the consequences that could have played out by the police allowing him his freedom after they became aware of the alleged plot and had things gone just a bit differently. It could have been your house burning.
This man is innocent until proven guilty; I imagine he will have his day in court, probably many days. The police are innocent until proven guilty too of any wrongdoing. Yet, this article sure makes one think about what the heck was going on in the minds of the police; and of course in the mind of the suspect. Doesn't it?
All the best,
Glenn B
This story, one I found at the website of 1010 WINS @
http://1010wins.com/pages/86443.php?contentType=4&contentId=209358
centers around a house in Suffolk County, New York. Reportedly, it is the house that a man, a husband and father of a 2 year old girl, allegedly tried to burn down. It is the house reportedly in which a group of convicted sex offenders had been residing. Apparently the man lived near to this house and was not happy that there were so many (number not disclosed in the article) of sex offenders living under the same roof.
"Suffolk County prosecutors say he was upset there were so many sex offenders under one roof and he began preparations in August to get rid of the house and those living in it. Police say he even di dtest burns behind his own home."
I can understand this man having feelings of fear because sex offenders were living near to his home, this especially in light of the fact that he has a 2 year old daughter. Some sex offenders apparently often repeat the same types of crimes over and over again; yet we do not know if that is the case with those in this story. Still I guess it is enough, having them live near you when you have young children, to make you fear them. I guess it is also enough to spur you to take some sort of action (legally) to get them out of your neighborhood, though I am not necessarily in agreement with taking such action. I say I do not necessarily agree because I figure they have served their time, and they have to live somewhere once out of jail. I am all for the death penalty for certain sex crimes, such as the rape of a child; yet, we don't even know the extent of their offenses. (I wonder if the father in question knew of what type of sex crimes they had been convicted.) These guys may have had nothing to do with children. I am making no excuses for them or their crimes mind you. I am geting to the point though, that no matter what they had done, I have to question the alleged actions of the suspect in question.
Do the prior offenses of these convicted sex offenders give the father, or anyone else, any right, legal, moral, ethical or otherwise, to try to murder them by burning down their house with them supposedly in it? Even if these reported sex offenders had all been previously convicted of offenses against children, as much as I would hate them for it, as much as I despise such criminals and their crimes, does it give anyone the right to try to murder them. I think not. I think though that such crimes should be dealt with in a different manner by the law in the first place. The death penalty for the first offense of rape or anal or oral sodomy of a child, 25 years to life for other sexual molestation of a child that included fondling of sexual organs of the victim or forcing the victim to fondle the molester, and I believe that before release from prison the guilty should be forced into intensive corrective therapy. In a case of second offenses, I believe that the death penalty would be in order; and I don't care that the offender is found mentally competent or not. Our children need to be protected, but it needs to be done through the law, not through someone self appointing him or herself as police, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner.
I can understand the fear of the father that may have pushed him to do this alleged act; though I think those fears will prove to have been, if he is found guilty, magnified beyond rationality. Of course, had the father been able to have armed himself and his wife with handguns, and had they been able under the law to use them in a reasonable defense of their home under a Castle Doctrine, and had they not had to fear legal reprisals if they had done so justifiably, well maybe he would not have been driven to take these alleged actions; but then New York State is an anti gun state, and pretty much a state that does not care for its citizens to be reasonably able to defend themselves even in their own homes. This may have lent to any irrationality that may possibly have contributed to the alleged actions of the father.
One thing I really do not understand in all of this was the reported actions, or seemingly to me, the untimely actions of the police. According to the article, it seems the police were well aware of the fathers alleged intentions before he took the alleged action to burn down the house.
"Suffolk DA Thomas Spota said an undercover detective met with (name removed by me, GRB), who revealed his murderous plot while being recorded on video and audio tape. Spota said the video shows the defendant explaining that he intends to start the fire on the side of the house."
Now folks, you tell me, am I reading too much into that quote. Does it not say that an undercover police officer met with the suspect? Does it not say that the police recorded both on audio and video, the suspect revealing his plot to the undercover officer? Does it not say that the recording was of the defendant explaining his INTENT. This would mean the recording was made before he did the alleged act, wouldn't it? If the article is reporting this correctly, then the police had more than enough to arrest the suspect right then and there, or so it seems to me. Yet, what did the police do. Well, to me, it appears they let him go on with his life until he allegedly tried to kill the occupants of that house by allegedly starting a fire there.
I know sex offenders can be scum, and I think of them as less than dog poo in many cases. Yet it does not give anyone the right to murder them, nor does it give the police the right to ignore a murder plot against them until after the act allegedly has been committed; and it sure seems to me that this is what happened! What if the guy had targetted the wrong house from the get go? What if the guy had to get his fill of courage from a bottle before allegedly going out to burn down the house, and then in a drunken stupor had gone to the next house over. No matter how much you may despise sexual predators, think about the consequences that could have played out by the police allowing him his freedom after they became aware of the alleged plot and had things gone just a bit differently. It could have been your house burning.
This man is innocent until proven guilty; I imagine he will have his day in court, probably many days. The police are innocent until proven guilty too of any wrongdoing. Yet, this article sure makes one think about what the heck was going on in the minds of the police; and of course in the mind of the suspect. Doesn't it?
All the best,
Glenn B
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Voter ID!
Did I forget to mention, in my blog just previous to this one, that the article I quoted also said the House of Representatives is also trying to make it so that voters must be able to identify themselves as citizens to help reduce voter fraud. It is about time. Despite all the anticipated objections about how difficult it would be for some people to get photo ID showing themselves as citizens, I say why not make them produce what they need to get a U.S. passport, or a social security card, and then give them a photo voter ID card, one that also includes a fingerprint. It would be a very good thing indeed. Then we at least would not have to worry too much about 12 million illegal aliens trying to vote fradulently to disrupt our elections. Yes it would be good indeed.
Someone out there besides me...
...must have been emailing, mailing, and telephoning complaints into their senators and congressmen. I say so because I just read this at FoxNews.com:
"WASHINGTON — The House voted Wednesday to require Americans to show proof of citizenship in order to vote, and the Senate moved to build a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border as Republicans sharpened attacks on illegal immigration before the midterm elections.
The 228-196 House vote on a new photo ID plan and the Senate's consideration of the fence were both part of a get-tough policy on illegal immigrants that Republicans have embraced after Congress' failure to agree on broader legislation that would set a path for undocumented workers to attain citizenship." (found at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214757,00.html)
Yes folks, it appears as the time get closer and closer to that magic day called election day, those in the Senate who seek our votes have decided to change their tune somewhat, and apparently are moving closer toward voting for the 700 mile border fence that the House of representatives has been seeking all along. Hopefully this will not compromise other get tough on illegal alien legislation that was sought in the house bill. We not only need the fence, we need tougher immigration laws targeted at preventing illegal aliens from overrunning out borders, we need tougher laws and tough enforcement of laws to get the illegals out of the country, and we need more sensible laws about legal immigration, laws that are fair and equitable to those of all friendly nations, and not just laws that allow millions of illegal alien Mexicans to somehow get preferential treatment mainly because they came here in violation of our laws in greater number than others due to the ease for them to enter along our southern border.
Don't stop hammering your elected officials in Congress with those emails, letters, and phone calls though, because you surely don't want them to grant any sort of amnesty to those whose first act on our soul may well have been a crime in that it was their illegal entry into our. We need to get rid of the illegal aliens, not keep them here and reward them with citizenship. Then we need to reward those immigrants who came here legally with citizenship, and we need to reward those still waiting to come with legal entry into our great land. Folks we should want those who wait to come here legally to come here, and we should want to get rid of those who are way to willing to commit a crime to do so. It just makes darned good sense.
"WASHINGTON — The House voted Wednesday to require Americans to show proof of citizenship in order to vote, and the Senate moved to build a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border as Republicans sharpened attacks on illegal immigration before the midterm elections.
The 228-196 House vote on a new photo ID plan and the Senate's consideration of the fence were both part of a get-tough policy on illegal immigrants that Republicans have embraced after Congress' failure to agree on broader legislation that would set a path for undocumented workers to attain citizenship." (found at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214757,00.html)
Yes folks, it appears as the time get closer and closer to that magic day called election day, those in the Senate who seek our votes have decided to change their tune somewhat, and apparently are moving closer toward voting for the 700 mile border fence that the House of representatives has been seeking all along. Hopefully this will not compromise other get tough on illegal alien legislation that was sought in the house bill. We not only need the fence, we need tougher immigration laws targeted at preventing illegal aliens from overrunning out borders, we need tougher laws and tough enforcement of laws to get the illegals out of the country, and we need more sensible laws about legal immigration, laws that are fair and equitable to those of all friendly nations, and not just laws that allow millions of illegal alien Mexicans to somehow get preferential treatment mainly because they came here in violation of our laws in greater number than others due to the ease for them to enter along our southern border.
Don't stop hammering your elected officials in Congress with those emails, letters, and phone calls though, because you surely don't want them to grant any sort of amnesty to those whose first act on our soul may well have been a crime in that it was their illegal entry into our. We need to get rid of the illegal aliens, not keep them here and reward them with citizenship. Then we need to reward those immigrants who came here legally with citizenship, and we need to reward those still waiting to come with legal entry into our great land. Folks we should want those who wait to come here legally to come here, and we should want to get rid of those who are way to willing to commit a crime to do so. It just makes darned good sense.
Hugo Chavez may have been right...
...about one thing he mentioned in his speech at the United Nations as reported by FoxNews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214709,00.html
Now before you get your panties all twisted into a wedgie, and start to think that I am agreeing with his ultra leftist/communistic anti-American rhetoric, that is not it at all. The thing I agree with on, whole heartedly by the way, is that he reportedly said 'the UN is deceased'. Beyond that I sure don't agree with him on all that much. If it is deceased then it must be not more than a useless carcass, and I say let's get rid of it. There is, in that light, one other thing on which I agree with him. I agree with him that the UN was formed to put the post WWII world into a check and balance sort of system, to reign in the USSR (for those of you who failed history lessons that would be the Soviet Union, the country now replacing that one on the security council is Russia) and China in our view, and to do likewise with us in their views. That is not necessary in the same way it was back then. So I think we ought to give him what he wants. We should let all the little countries, all the medium countries , and all the big countries in the UN have equal votes. Then we should pull out and evict there butts from the USA. Along with that of course would be our ceasing to fund anything to do with the UN. It would be fun to watch them squabble in squalor in a country like Haiti as opposed to squabbling in the posh luxuries of which they are afforded in New York City. Really now, it is time for us to get out of it, and to get it out of the USA. We need to tell the UN to take a hike.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214709,00.html
Now before you get your panties all twisted into a wedgie, and start to think that I am agreeing with his ultra leftist/communistic anti-American rhetoric, that is not it at all. The thing I agree with on, whole heartedly by the way, is that he reportedly said 'the UN is deceased'. Beyond that I sure don't agree with him on all that much. If it is deceased then it must be not more than a useless carcass, and I say let's get rid of it. There is, in that light, one other thing on which I agree with him. I agree with him that the UN was formed to put the post WWII world into a check and balance sort of system, to reign in the USSR (for those of you who failed history lessons that would be the Soviet Union, the country now replacing that one on the security council is Russia) and China in our view, and to do likewise with us in their views. That is not necessary in the same way it was back then. So I think we ought to give him what he wants. We should let all the little countries, all the medium countries , and all the big countries in the UN have equal votes. Then we should pull out and evict there butts from the USA. Along with that of course would be our ceasing to fund anything to do with the UN. It would be fun to watch them squabble in squalor in a country like Haiti as opposed to squabbling in the posh luxuries of which they are afforded in New York City. Really now, it is time for us to get out of it, and to get it out of the USA. We need to tell the UN to take a hike.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
The insanity continues, more on the Pope...
...the quote that he made, and the reactions of Muslims and others round the world.
I just read an article over at CNN @
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/19/pope.defense.reut/index.html
in which we learn that some world leaders believe he was sincere in his apology, yet most Muslim leaders, at least those quoted, seem to think he owes more to the believers of Islam in the world.
Now I ask you to analyze exactly what the Pope did that then resulted in riots by Muslims gone berserk, destruction of property again by Muslims gone berserk, burning people in effigy again by Muslims gone berserk, calls for the destruction of the west and Christianity again by Muslims gone berserk but also apparently by those who also appear quite calm and deliberate, the killing of 2 or three people (the nun, her body guard and I believe a hospital worker in the hospital in which the nun was killed) suspected to have been done by Muslims in retaliation for the Pope quoting those words he uttered. In essence, if he did anything wrong at all, is was to have most likely been that he inadvertently insulted a group of people. Even if the perceived insult - for that is probably only what it really is as I doubt an insult was meant purposefully - had actually been a purposeful one, does it deserve the reaction(s) it has received around the world?
Let me give you a few quotes from the CNN article to which I have provided a link above:
"Italian media said an al Qaeda group in Egypt called for the German-born pope, who is 79, to be punished by strict Islamic Shariah law for insulting their religion."
Yes you got it. The Pope said something, while in his own domain, under the protection of the Vatican, under the protection of Italy, and certain whackos want to try the Pope by strict Shariah law, or the law of the Q'oran, because of an insult. Well that maybe all well and fine if you are a Muslim who believe in that stuff; I prefer to believe in a law that is just and righteous for all based upon law not religion.
Now, lest you think the above type of statement was made only by extremists/terrorists like al Qaeda, and that it could never really come to fruition, here is another such quote calling for the arrest of the Pope, it is from the same CNN article:
"Workers at Turkey's Directorate General for Religious Affairs, or Diyanet, petitioned for the arrest of the pontiff when he makes a scheduled visit to Turkey in November."
Hmm, let's see, are those guys whacko extremists or terrorists. It appears not, in fact it appears they are part of the Turkish government! Yet they are petitioning for the arrest of the Pope should he visit Turkey as planned. See a pattern forming yet? Maybe you do, but I'd wager not the one of which I am thinking.
Here is yet another quote from the world of Islam, again from the same CNN piece:
"In Iraq, where an effigy of the pope was burned Monday, parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani called his apology "inadequate and not commensurate with the moral damage caused to Muslims' feelings.""
Can you imagine that, the Pope's apology was not sufficient when compared to the amount of moral damage it did to the sensitivities of Muslims - it hurt their feelings and this guy is implying a better apology would make them feel better. Oh give it a break, and I say this because the pattern continues, well maybe more than one pattern continues, but certainly the one of which I am thinking; and in addition the pattern of over reaction on the part of Islamists.
Again, yet another quote from the world of Islam, also from the CNN article:
"The grand mufti of the Palestinian territories, Sheikh Mohammad Hussein, said the pope must make "a personal and clear apology to 1.5 billion Muslims in this world for the insult caused by his lecture. ...""
Again talk of insults against Muslims. Remember now that the so called insult, whether real or perceived, whether intended or unintentional, has resulted in what amounts to, in my opinion, maniacal over reactions on the part of Muslims throughout much of the world. The over reactions were those I outlined above, as well as these quoted statements from the Muslim world. Have you guessed what pattern I see that keeps recurring that is really crazy?
Just in case you have not yet guessed it, here is one more clue from that CNN article, another quote but this one reportedly from the president of the 'mostly' Catholic country of Slovenia:
"The president of mostly Catholic Slovenia, Janez Drnovsek, said on his Web site that Muslims were justifiably upset and that the pope should be big enough to learn from his error."
That’s it. If you don't see the pattern yet, I give up, I'll break down and tell you. The pattern is that everyone who was quoted, and quite conceivably all of those who are rioting and destroying things and calling for the victory of Islam over the rest of the world, are all seeking the Pope to make amends for what he said. Yet, not one of them has been quoted as saying that the Muslims - who have over reacted by going berserk, by destroying property, by killings, by calling for the destruction of Christianity and the west, by calling for the rule of Islam over all - should be prosecuted under the law, or owe anyone any sort of recompense let alone an apology! This fact makes this whole affair nothing more than lunacy fired by religion, as I see it!
When are the people of the non-Muslim world going to realize that Islam, at least much of it, is apparently hell bent on being the enemy of the rest of the world. There was no justifiable reason for all of the riots, the property destruction like firebombing of churches, or the killing of that nun and her associates. But even some who are not Muslims somehow believe the Pope owes more of an apology and apparently also believe that Muslims owe no one anything, This is madness in my opinion. Evil was not perpetrated by the Pope, at least nothing intentionally, and nothing derving of the reaction it got. Yet evil was committed by Muslims in reaction to what he said, and people want to blame it all on the Pope. I tell you this is a form of madness that has seeped into every aspect of society in the world. We feel apologetic when they go berserk, when they destroy property and lives because of an insult! This is something that many Muslims are using as a quite effective tool to defeat us, our own feelings of guilt, or passiveness, that lead some of us to believe that if we leave them alone, they will be nice to us. What a big and possibly fatal mistake that could become for us.
Surely, not all the followers of Islam are bent on the destruction of the non-Islamic world, but enough of them are, as evidenced by these recent disruptions, and by those after the Mohammed cartoons, to absolutely convince me that we are on the brink of the end of our world as we know it. The fuse has been lit folks, there is no putting it out before it hits the powder kegs. You can try to hide your head in a hole in the ground, but if that is the way you choose, it makes your cowardly posterior a better target. Did I just say cowardly, yes I did, and I meant it. Those who say nothing, and those (Muslim and non-Muslim) who keep on appeasing the violent Islamists, are little more than timid children hoping that the boogeyman will not hurt them. Well in this case people, the boogeyman is quite real, quite nasty, and he hates us vehemently. Those who appease these animals or who just do and say nothing need to wake up to the realization that the shit has already hit the fan, and a lot more of it is headed our way.
My hat goes off to those who oppose these beasts, who realize this is a fight to the death, a fight for our survival. This too goes for Muslims and non-Muslims alike. You see it isn't just the west and Christianity that the violent extremist Muslims wish to destroy, it is also any other Muslim who does not bow to their extremely strict manner of beliefs. Did I hear someone say Islamo-Fascists? I could not agree more; there are an awful lot of them out there.
Be vigilant, stay prepared, be ready for the fight for your life. I believe it is coming all to soon.
Stay safe,
Glenn B
I just read an article over at CNN @
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/19/pope.defense.reut/index.html
in which we learn that some world leaders believe he was sincere in his apology, yet most Muslim leaders, at least those quoted, seem to think he owes more to the believers of Islam in the world.
Now I ask you to analyze exactly what the Pope did that then resulted in riots by Muslims gone berserk, destruction of property again by Muslims gone berserk, burning people in effigy again by Muslims gone berserk, calls for the destruction of the west and Christianity again by Muslims gone berserk but also apparently by those who also appear quite calm and deliberate, the killing of 2 or three people (the nun, her body guard and I believe a hospital worker in the hospital in which the nun was killed) suspected to have been done by Muslims in retaliation for the Pope quoting those words he uttered. In essence, if he did anything wrong at all, is was to have most likely been that he inadvertently insulted a group of people. Even if the perceived insult - for that is probably only what it really is as I doubt an insult was meant purposefully - had actually been a purposeful one, does it deserve the reaction(s) it has received around the world?
Let me give you a few quotes from the CNN article to which I have provided a link above:
"Italian media said an al Qaeda group in Egypt called for the German-born pope, who is 79, to be punished by strict Islamic Shariah law for insulting their religion."
Yes you got it. The Pope said something, while in his own domain, under the protection of the Vatican, under the protection of Italy, and certain whackos want to try the Pope by strict Shariah law, or the law of the Q'oran, because of an insult. Well that maybe all well and fine if you are a Muslim who believe in that stuff; I prefer to believe in a law that is just and righteous for all based upon law not religion.
Now, lest you think the above type of statement was made only by extremists/terrorists like al Qaeda, and that it could never really come to fruition, here is another such quote calling for the arrest of the Pope, it is from the same CNN article:
"Workers at Turkey's Directorate General for Religious Affairs, or Diyanet, petitioned for the arrest of the pontiff when he makes a scheduled visit to Turkey in November."
Hmm, let's see, are those guys whacko extremists or terrorists. It appears not, in fact it appears they are part of the Turkish government! Yet they are petitioning for the arrest of the Pope should he visit Turkey as planned. See a pattern forming yet? Maybe you do, but I'd wager not the one of which I am thinking.
Here is yet another quote from the world of Islam, again from the same CNN piece:
"In Iraq, where an effigy of the pope was burned Monday, parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani called his apology "inadequate and not commensurate with the moral damage caused to Muslims' feelings.""
Can you imagine that, the Pope's apology was not sufficient when compared to the amount of moral damage it did to the sensitivities of Muslims - it hurt their feelings and this guy is implying a better apology would make them feel better. Oh give it a break, and I say this because the pattern continues, well maybe more than one pattern continues, but certainly the one of which I am thinking; and in addition the pattern of over reaction on the part of Islamists.
Again, yet another quote from the world of Islam, also from the CNN article:
"The grand mufti of the Palestinian territories, Sheikh Mohammad Hussein, said the pope must make "a personal and clear apology to 1.5 billion Muslims in this world for the insult caused by his lecture. ...""
Again talk of insults against Muslims. Remember now that the so called insult, whether real or perceived, whether intended or unintentional, has resulted in what amounts to, in my opinion, maniacal over reactions on the part of Muslims throughout much of the world. The over reactions were those I outlined above, as well as these quoted statements from the Muslim world. Have you guessed what pattern I see that keeps recurring that is really crazy?
Just in case you have not yet guessed it, here is one more clue from that CNN article, another quote but this one reportedly from the president of the 'mostly' Catholic country of Slovenia:
"The president of mostly Catholic Slovenia, Janez Drnovsek, said on his Web site that Muslims were justifiably upset and that the pope should be big enough to learn from his error."
That’s it. If you don't see the pattern yet, I give up, I'll break down and tell you. The pattern is that everyone who was quoted, and quite conceivably all of those who are rioting and destroying things and calling for the victory of Islam over the rest of the world, are all seeking the Pope to make amends for what he said. Yet, not one of them has been quoted as saying that the Muslims - who have over reacted by going berserk, by destroying property, by killings, by calling for the destruction of Christianity and the west, by calling for the rule of Islam over all - should be prosecuted under the law, or owe anyone any sort of recompense let alone an apology! This fact makes this whole affair nothing more than lunacy fired by religion, as I see it!
When are the people of the non-Muslim world going to realize that Islam, at least much of it, is apparently hell bent on being the enemy of the rest of the world. There was no justifiable reason for all of the riots, the property destruction like firebombing of churches, or the killing of that nun and her associates. But even some who are not Muslims somehow believe the Pope owes more of an apology and apparently also believe that Muslims owe no one anything, This is madness in my opinion. Evil was not perpetrated by the Pope, at least nothing intentionally, and nothing derving of the reaction it got. Yet evil was committed by Muslims in reaction to what he said, and people want to blame it all on the Pope. I tell you this is a form of madness that has seeped into every aspect of society in the world. We feel apologetic when they go berserk, when they destroy property and lives because of an insult! This is something that many Muslims are using as a quite effective tool to defeat us, our own feelings of guilt, or passiveness, that lead some of us to believe that if we leave them alone, they will be nice to us. What a big and possibly fatal mistake that could become for us.
Surely, not all the followers of Islam are bent on the destruction of the non-Islamic world, but enough of them are, as evidenced by these recent disruptions, and by those after the Mohammed cartoons, to absolutely convince me that we are on the brink of the end of our world as we know it. The fuse has been lit folks, there is no putting it out before it hits the powder kegs. You can try to hide your head in a hole in the ground, but if that is the way you choose, it makes your cowardly posterior a better target. Did I just say cowardly, yes I did, and I meant it. Those who say nothing, and those (Muslim and non-Muslim) who keep on appeasing the violent Islamists, are little more than timid children hoping that the boogeyman will not hurt them. Well in this case people, the boogeyman is quite real, quite nasty, and he hates us vehemently. Those who appease these animals or who just do and say nothing need to wake up to the realization that the shit has already hit the fan, and a lot more of it is headed our way.
My hat goes off to those who oppose these beasts, who realize this is a fight to the death, a fight for our survival. This too goes for Muslims and non-Muslims alike. You see it isn't just the west and Christianity that the violent extremist Muslims wish to destroy, it is also any other Muslim who does not bow to their extremely strict manner of beliefs. Did I hear someone say Islamo-Fascists? I could not agree more; there are an awful lot of them out there.
Be vigilant, stay prepared, be ready for the fight for your life. I believe it is coming all to soon.
Stay safe,
Glenn B
Monday, September 18, 2006
The Sane World Owes the Pope Bigtime...
...if only all of us would open our eyes, and see the truth.
As is now common knowledge, sometime over the past few days, the current Pope quoted some Byzantine king on what said king believed about Islam, in essence, being a violent religion, that soought to spread itself by the sword. In that regard the quote also, in essence, stated that nothing but evil came about from the teachings of Mohammed through the Q'uran.
What happened next seems only too typical of the followers of the religion that calls itself the religion of peace; and that which happened was not peaceful. There were riots around much of the Islamic world. There were burnings in effigy of the Pope and others. There were calls for jihad against Christianity and the west. There were calls for the utter destruction of the west. There were people blaming this all on George W. Bush, oth in the Islamic world and in the world of the political ultra leftists in the USA. There were churches that were firebombed or torched. There was other property damaged. There were at leasat two people, and I think three, who were killed in alleged retaliation for the words the Pope quoted. All of these actions, with the exception of blaming it all on GWB, was carried out by Muslims, or suspected of having been carried out by Muslims. Islam is not, as I see it, a religion of peace. It appears much more to me to be a religion of fanticism driven by a hatred of anything not Islamic or of anything that questions or criticizes Islam or its prophets.
So what is for which we owe a big debt of gratitude to the Pope. Well his statement brought on all of this furor from many of the followers of Islam. His statement was the so called catalyst, really just an excuse though, for the rioters to go berserk, to bring out their nature. For that is exactly what they have done. The words he quoted were the excuse that the Islamists used to riot, destroy property, burn people in effigy, call for the destruction of Christianiy, the destruction of the west, the killing of the pope, and the destruction of St. Peter's Basilica - among other things. His quoting someone else were what they used as an excuse to show the rest of the world their true makeup.
I am very happy the Pope did not apologize for the words he uttered. He gave his apology very carefully, and said in essence that he was sorry if any one was offended. Too bad the Pope did not also then add that the Islamists of today, who took these heinous actions, put more truth into those words he quoted that anything that he could have ever said in his lifetime. What has been done, in relation to the quote made by the Pope, was absolutely evil as I see it.
Why it is that everyone who is not a Muslim does not see this, why it is that the so called moderate Muslims do not see this, why it is that some people want to blame the Pope for the destruction and death done by Islamists? It is all beyond me! Wake up folks, the sky really is falling, the end of the world as we know it is quite possibly just around the corner, the enemy is at the gates and the gates are crumbling, and heck they already have their spies within them. To quote a somewhat famous rock band, Credence Clearwater Revival:
"I hope you have got your things together, I hope you are quite prepared to die."
Me, I am a man of peace, I love a peaceful life. Yet, I have my things together. If it comes to it, I am quite prepared to die to defend my country and her Constitution. I would rather live and be able to continue to enjoy my liberties and freedoms in peace, but don't let anyone who would try to take those liberties and freedoms from us believe even for a moment that my love of a peaceful life means I will defend them any less. I will fight for them, to the death if need be, you can bet on that. To quote The Grateful Dead:
"God damn, well I decalre,
have you seen the like?
Their walls are built of cannon balls,
their motto is "Don't Tread On Me"
And it is about time we remember that, and start living up to it.
All the best,
Glenn B
As is now common knowledge, sometime over the past few days, the current Pope quoted some Byzantine king on what said king believed about Islam, in essence, being a violent religion, that soought to spread itself by the sword. In that regard the quote also, in essence, stated that nothing but evil came about from the teachings of Mohammed through the Q'uran.
What happened next seems only too typical of the followers of the religion that calls itself the religion of peace; and that which happened was not peaceful. There were riots around much of the Islamic world. There were burnings in effigy of the Pope and others. There were calls for jihad against Christianity and the west. There were calls for the utter destruction of the west. There were people blaming this all on George W. Bush, oth in the Islamic world and in the world of the political ultra leftists in the USA. There were churches that were firebombed or torched. There was other property damaged. There were at leasat two people, and I think three, who were killed in alleged retaliation for the words the Pope quoted. All of these actions, with the exception of blaming it all on GWB, was carried out by Muslims, or suspected of having been carried out by Muslims. Islam is not, as I see it, a religion of peace. It appears much more to me to be a religion of fanticism driven by a hatred of anything not Islamic or of anything that questions or criticizes Islam or its prophets.
So what is for which we owe a big debt of gratitude to the Pope. Well his statement brought on all of this furor from many of the followers of Islam. His statement was the so called catalyst, really just an excuse though, for the rioters to go berserk, to bring out their nature. For that is exactly what they have done. The words he quoted were the excuse that the Islamists used to riot, destroy property, burn people in effigy, call for the destruction of Christianiy, the destruction of the west, the killing of the pope, and the destruction of St. Peter's Basilica - among other things. His quoting someone else were what they used as an excuse to show the rest of the world their true makeup.
I am very happy the Pope did not apologize for the words he uttered. He gave his apology very carefully, and said in essence that he was sorry if any one was offended. Too bad the Pope did not also then add that the Islamists of today, who took these heinous actions, put more truth into those words he quoted that anything that he could have ever said in his lifetime. What has been done, in relation to the quote made by the Pope, was absolutely evil as I see it.
Why it is that everyone who is not a Muslim does not see this, why it is that the so called moderate Muslims do not see this, why it is that some people want to blame the Pope for the destruction and death done by Islamists? It is all beyond me! Wake up folks, the sky really is falling, the end of the world as we know it is quite possibly just around the corner, the enemy is at the gates and the gates are crumbling, and heck they already have their spies within them. To quote a somewhat famous rock band, Credence Clearwater Revival:
"I hope you have got your things together, I hope you are quite prepared to die."
Me, I am a man of peace, I love a peaceful life. Yet, I have my things together. If it comes to it, I am quite prepared to die to defend my country and her Constitution. I would rather live and be able to continue to enjoy my liberties and freedoms in peace, but don't let anyone who would try to take those liberties and freedoms from us believe even for a moment that my love of a peaceful life means I will defend them any less. I will fight for them, to the death if need be, you can bet on that. To quote The Grateful Dead:
"God damn, well I decalre,
have you seen the like?
Their walls are built of cannon balls,
their motto is "Don't Tread On Me"
And it is about time we remember that, and start living up to it.
All the best,
Glenn B
Oh Willie tell me it ain't so,...
...please tell me it ain't so.
As per FoxNews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214340,00.html
Willie Nelson was "...issued misdemeanor citations for possession of narcotic mushrooms and marijuana..." I wonder, what does that do to this guy's image as one of the best of Country/Western music? Probably sells more albums for him. Oh well, I don't condone it. Then again, I guess his using this stuff, if in fact he does use it, doesn't make his music any better or worse. I still like him for his tunes, but I wish he would clean up his act if these charges wind up being upheld.
As per FoxNews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214340,00.html
Willie Nelson was "...issued misdemeanor citations for possession of narcotic mushrooms and marijuana..." I wonder, what does that do to this guy's image as one of the best of Country/Western music? Probably sells more albums for him. Oh well, I don't condone it. Then again, I guess his using this stuff, if in fact he does use it, doesn't make his music any better or worse. I still like him for his tunes, but I wish he would clean up his act if these charges wind up being upheld.
The frequency of E. coli outbreaks and...
...the outrageous numbers of illegal aliens in this country from Mexico has me wondering is there a link between these two stats. It is already considered factual knowledge that the outbreaks of bed bugs across the USA is linked to the populations of illegal aliens in areas where the outbreaks occur. It does not take all that much imagination to wonder if illegal alien populations and E. coli outbreaks are linked.
If you recall, over the past several years the numbers of E. coli cases have seemingly risen in good number; so to has the population of illegal aliens, especially those from Mexico. Now think about where the E. coli outbreaks occur, not as in what areas have the people who get infected, but in what kind of places do the tainted food products which spread E. coli originate. They originate in places that food is processed, or in agricultural settings. Granted, many illegal aliens work in agricultural and meat processing jobs. From personal experience, I can tell you that the hygiene standards in countries like Mexico are not anywhere near our own. I have seen first hand, Mexican field laborers harvesting lettuce, vomiting on the lettuce, taking the soiled head(s) of lettuce and throwing them into the box along with the clean ones. I saw this on several occasions in my 4 years as a Border patrol Agent. It disgusts me today as it did back then. I have also seen these same type of field workers with smelly dirty hands, right after they did the dirty toilet thing, and they did not clean before resuming work picking produce that could have become your dinner that week.
Now as per an article I saw at Foxnews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214310,00.html
"The FDA and California Department of Health Services planned Monday to work toward tracing the infected greens to individual farms. The inquiry will review irrigation methods, harvest conditions and other practices at farms possibly involved."
They state somewhere else in the article that this outbreak could be related to fouled irrigation water. I wonder what substance it is that fouled the water, could it be human waste? Where oh where did that come from? Nowhere does the article state, and at no time have I heard any suggest this could be due to lack of hygiene on the part of illegal alien field workers. My bet is that if they find one human at a farm who is carrying this germ or somehow else spreading it, they will stop looking if the guy is anything other than an illegal. If the first guy is an illegal, I would bet they keep looking until they find it on someone who is here legally, just to be politically correct in favor of illegal aliens.
Of course, I could be wrong in my hypothesis, and that is all it is, that this outbreak or others have been caused by illegal aliens with horrendous hygiene, but I'd be willing to bet on it, just a little anyhow, that is if betting were legal. Since it isn't legal, and since I am a U.S. Citizen, I'd also GUESS that if I did gamble illegally, I'd be arrested. If only I were an illegal alien, I might get away with it.
Best regards,
Glenn B
If you recall, over the past several years the numbers of E. coli cases have seemingly risen in good number; so to has the population of illegal aliens, especially those from Mexico. Now think about where the E. coli outbreaks occur, not as in what areas have the people who get infected, but in what kind of places do the tainted food products which spread E. coli originate. They originate in places that food is processed, or in agricultural settings. Granted, many illegal aliens work in agricultural and meat processing jobs. From personal experience, I can tell you that the hygiene standards in countries like Mexico are not anywhere near our own. I have seen first hand, Mexican field laborers harvesting lettuce, vomiting on the lettuce, taking the soiled head(s) of lettuce and throwing them into the box along with the clean ones. I saw this on several occasions in my 4 years as a Border patrol Agent. It disgusts me today as it did back then. I have also seen these same type of field workers with smelly dirty hands, right after they did the dirty toilet thing, and they did not clean before resuming work picking produce that could have become your dinner that week.
Now as per an article I saw at Foxnews.com @
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214310,00.html
"The FDA and California Department of Health Services planned Monday to work toward tracing the infected greens to individual farms. The inquiry will review irrigation methods, harvest conditions and other practices at farms possibly involved."
They state somewhere else in the article that this outbreak could be related to fouled irrigation water. I wonder what substance it is that fouled the water, could it be human waste? Where oh where did that come from? Nowhere does the article state, and at no time have I heard any suggest this could be due to lack of hygiene on the part of illegal alien field workers. My bet is that if they find one human at a farm who is carrying this germ or somehow else spreading it, they will stop looking if the guy is anything other than an illegal. If the first guy is an illegal, I would bet they keep looking until they find it on someone who is here legally, just to be politically correct in favor of illegal aliens.
Of course, I could be wrong in my hypothesis, and that is all it is, that this outbreak or others have been caused by illegal aliens with horrendous hygiene, but I'd be willing to bet on it, just a little anyhow, that is if betting were legal. Since it isn't legal, and since I am a U.S. Citizen, I'd also GUESS that if I did gamble illegally, I'd be arrested. If only I were an illegal alien, I might get away with it.
Best regards,
Glenn B
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Global Warming, Hurricanes, & the Experts...
...on such things are a topic that just sort of popped into my head while driving to my office today. Truth be told, the subject of hurricanes popped into my head because I was listening to the news on 1010 WINS a local NYC news radio station. They mentioned something about Hurricane Helen changing into a category 2 storm, but I think said it posed no threat to the mainland USA. Go figure.
What is it you ask about that I am telling you to go figure? Well I am thinking we should all try to figure out just what is happening with all the talk of global warming, and the claimed effects it is to have on our planet. That is of course if global warming is in fact a real thing. I am not saying it is or it isn't, I think we don't know enough yet about it to say so. Yet there are folks out there who claim to know all about it, and who claim it is or very well could be our doom, and who know beyond a doubt (at least in their own minds) that mankind has caused global warming.
Those very same experts were all tickled pink when Al Gore came out with whatever it was that he came out with upon the subject of global warming. They were all tickled pink when they claimed the polar ice caps are melting. They were all tickled pink when we had all those hurricanes last year (I think it was a record season for number of hurricanes, or at least for number of them at a certain storm intensity). Immediately upon reaching the end of the hurricane season last year, the experts got to jabbering about how we would likely face even more hurricanes this year because of the intensified or continuing global warming. Their predictions were for massive destruction from the predicted storms. They said not only would there be more such storms, but that the intensity would likely increase. Anyone else remember this: they were blabbing about it often enough that I imagine someone else other than I actually heard them.
Well low and behold, here we are in the middle of September; and at the risk of bringing down the wrath of the hurricanes upon our friends down south, or even up here in the northeast, allow me to say the season is almost over, and as I recall we have not been hit by one hurricane this year. As a matter of fact, all of the hurricanes so far this year have pretty much petered out without much more than some extra rain in some areas. I also seem to remember that this was one of the coolest summers I can recall in many years. What is going on, what will the scientists, the politicians, the religious ultra right, the foreseers of doom and gloom, and the whacko environmentalists (note I said whackos because I believe there are also rational environmentalists) have to shove in our faces next year. Well, if we get plenty of hurricanes they will say it is due to global warming, or that global warming is due to man's sins (in the case of the weird holy men). If not, and if next year is like this one, they may make up something else to try to scare us all into falling under their control. Of course they may already try to come up with some new convoluted reason(s) about why we had few hurricanes this year. They may even try to convolute their own global warming theory that supported the guess more big hurricanes would hit us this year than last; they may say this was an outcome of global warming that caused an expected pause and hurricanes will be cyclical every other year - who knows.
Bear (no pun intended, and you are about to understand why I just said no pun intended) in mind that these same so called environmental experts have told us all about the plight of the polar bears. They have told us the ice does not form early enough in the fall, and melts too soon in the spring to allow polar bears access to their hunting grounds on the ice packs. They have told us that the polar bears are getting stranded at sea when the ice melts suddenly, causing them to drown (and wasn't it the same experts who for years have shown us nature films of polar bears, and magazine articles about them, in which they tell us that polar bears can swim for days if need be). Well whatever, now these same self proclaimed experts are saying that the downfall of the polar bears may actually come about because their testicles are shrinking! What is it they will come up with next? As I said - go figure. By the way, if you look hard enough you will find a blog I did on just that subject a couple of weeks ago.
Me I am not falling for it. I am not moving off of Long island to high ground yet. Right now I think the worry about global warming is possibly a real one, but I think blaming a worldwide, decades maybe even centuries long (so far), weather phenomenon on mankind may be stretching it a bit; and I think the sudden doom we are told we may face is a bit far fetched. I also wonder if it was due to man that the earth warmed up after the last ice age? Were there pundits back then claiming this was the case. Oh no that’s right, back then they blamed it on the gods of the sky, the weather, the north wind and so forth - nowadays the whackos don't believe in god so they blame it on mankind. I guess they need a scapegoat. Oh well, maybe that is what it comes down to after all. Finding a problem, then finding someone to blame it on instead of trying to correct it. Anyhow, before I go jump off of a building or anything silly like that (kids, please understand I am only joking in a certain way, its called sarcasm, and I will not be jumping off of a building because that probably would be very dangerous), I am going to enjoy the warmer winters, that is if they really are warming up. Then again, you could have fooled me that the weather has been all that much warmer lately. Oh well, that's it for now, I've got to go grab a sweater, its chilly in here.
All the best,
Glenn B
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Just how sick can people get...
...to make them want to do anything like of what three young men have been accused?
Reportedly three men were accused sexual assault after allegedly attempting to dig up a woman's corpse to have sex with the corpse. See the article at FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214125,00.html
There are truly some unbelieveable or truly bizzare aspects to this case, and I do not mean simply that these young men allegedly wanted to sexually put it to a corpse. Look again at the charge with which they were charged; it was later dropped, but please explain to me how anyone could within the realm of reason be charged with assaulting, or attempted assault, of a corpse. Maybe I just don't get it - in fact I really do not get it at all - so please explain that one to me.
The next thing that is a bit weird is that there is no charge for necrophilia (or attempt of such) in Wisconsin. So these guys will wind up being charged with destruction of property or some other lessor crime than I would imagine necrophilia would be. If it was me as prosecutor, and if the allegations were upheld by sufficient evidence, I would have already charged them with every imaginable crime of which they could be charged to include: criminal trespass, burglary, criminal possession of burglars' tools, destruction of property, conspiracy to commit all of the above.
Finally the other seemingly weird thing about this was that they allegedly were not even going after a fresh corpse, which is, i imagine, probably even weird among those who actually practice necrophilia. The woman reportedly was killed on August 27, and these guys allegedly were trying to dig her up to have sex with her on September 2. Remembering there are 31 days in August, this was then at least part of 7 days that she had already been deceased, and I would imagine a few days after she was buried. If these allegations are true, just how sick are these guys?
I think they all need mental examinations if the allegations are found to be supported by fact and evidence. I think a search of each of their residences and places of business may well be in order to seek out any further evidence of this alleged crime and any others along the same lines. I think if they are convicted, their pictures should be posted on milk cartons to scare children away from strangers. Yeah, I know they are not charged with any crimes against children, but they would sure be guys I would want to scare my children away from for sure if they are guilty.
Hopefully they were not really attempting to dig up the corpse of the departed lady in order to attempt some sort of perverse sexual acts. Hopefully this is a misunderstanding. Hopefully the youth of our nation is not as sick or perverse as it would have to be to do something like this. Yet my guess is the police have some sort of evidence to indicate this is what they were doing, otherwise why arrest them on sexual assault charges in the first place no matter how weird those charges seemed to me.
One final 'hopefully': Hopefully, and understand these are my hopes, if they actually did this, they will be put in jail for as long as the law allows on as many charges as the law allows. I say this last one because if they are indeed guilty under the law, then as I see it, they don't belong out in normal society cause folks, stuff like that, it ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.
All the best,
Glenn B
Reportedly three men were accused sexual assault after allegedly attempting to dig up a woman's corpse to have sex with the corpse. See the article at FoxNews.com @ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214125,00.html
There are truly some unbelieveable or truly bizzare aspects to this case, and I do not mean simply that these young men allegedly wanted to sexually put it to a corpse. Look again at the charge with which they were charged; it was later dropped, but please explain to me how anyone could within the realm of reason be charged with assaulting, or attempted assault, of a corpse. Maybe I just don't get it - in fact I really do not get it at all - so please explain that one to me.
The next thing that is a bit weird is that there is no charge for necrophilia (or attempt of such) in Wisconsin. So these guys will wind up being charged with destruction of property or some other lessor crime than I would imagine necrophilia would be. If it was me as prosecutor, and if the allegations were upheld by sufficient evidence, I would have already charged them with every imaginable crime of which they could be charged to include: criminal trespass, burglary, criminal possession of burglars' tools, destruction of property, conspiracy to commit all of the above.
Finally the other seemingly weird thing about this was that they allegedly were not even going after a fresh corpse, which is, i imagine, probably even weird among those who actually practice necrophilia. The woman reportedly was killed on August 27, and these guys allegedly were trying to dig her up to have sex with her on September 2. Remembering there are 31 days in August, this was then at least part of 7 days that she had already been deceased, and I would imagine a few days after she was buried. If these allegations are true, just how sick are these guys?
I think they all need mental examinations if the allegations are found to be supported by fact and evidence. I think a search of each of their residences and places of business may well be in order to seek out any further evidence of this alleged crime and any others along the same lines. I think if they are convicted, their pictures should be posted on milk cartons to scare children away from strangers. Yeah, I know they are not charged with any crimes against children, but they would sure be guys I would want to scare my children away from for sure if they are guilty.
Hopefully they were not really attempting to dig up the corpse of the departed lady in order to attempt some sort of perverse sexual acts. Hopefully this is a misunderstanding. Hopefully the youth of our nation is not as sick or perverse as it would have to be to do something like this. Yet my guess is the police have some sort of evidence to indicate this is what they were doing, otherwise why arrest them on sexual assault charges in the first place no matter how weird those charges seemed to me.
One final 'hopefully': Hopefully, and understand these are my hopes, if they actually did this, they will be put in jail for as long as the law allows on as many charges as the law allows. I say this last one because if they are indeed guilty under the law, then as I see it, they don't belong out in normal society cause folks, stuff like that, it ain't normal by any stretch of the imagination.
All the best,
Glenn B
Ballseye's Boomers - Ruger Mini 14
Here is a case of a gun I sold that I sometimes kind of, sort of, wish I had not sold, but am still happy I sold it. Go figure, but here is the scoop on this one, particularly the one I had that is shown in the picture.
I was quite eager to purchase a semi-automatic rifle in a readily available caliber, and it was a toss up between something in .223, 7.62x39 or .308. I decided on the .223 if only because I could get ammunition really on the cheap, as in free at that time. I decided on the Ruger for a few reasons. It was made in America, I had a couple of other Rugers firearms, my experience with Ruger had been a good one (no problems with my other Rugers), Ruger had a fine reputation even if the Mini 14 got somewhat mixed reviews.
Well when I got mine some years back, I immediately took it home and cleaned it. I noted a few disturbing things. The disturbing things were a lot of machine marks inside the receiver, and a lot of seemingly sloppy welds. Then it was off to the range. I fired up a lot of ammo. I had a few jams, heck I needed something to whack the bolt handle to open it a few times, it did not extract and eject, leaving expended shell casings in the chamber at least a few times. More cleaning and different ammo and it worked better. Then I looked at my targets, where were the bullet holes. On one target, as I recall, I hit it about 5 times, this was out of many, many more shots. I adjusted sights and fired away, and after many such adjustments I got it sighted in as good as it would get. The big problem was shooting from any sort of a rest, doing so threw off my groups big time if I had sighted in the rifle from a no rest position.
I was not impressed and I had shot many a Ruger Mini 14 on my job with much better results. They were all blued steel, this one was stainless; they were all manufactured at least 10 years earlier, my new one was current (for then) production. I called Ruger, they said send it in. I had second thoughts, I sold the gun. The guy who got it loved it. Go figure!
The Ruger Mini 14 is loved by many and hated by many, my experience can illustrate why some hate it, the experience of the guy who bought it from me can illustrate how some love it. It is apparently a decent design even if not one of the most inherently accurate rifles out there. These rifles usually group good enough out to about 125 maybe 150 yards; some further. Therein I think lies a problem, it is in my opinion different - vastly different - in quality control from one to another. I could be wrong on that, but from all the feedback I have heard on them, that is my guess.
It has been years since I have shot or owned one. It maybe time again to try one out, probably this time in .223 again (only because 7.62x39 has proven difficult ammo to buy recently). Maybe I'll get a good one to satisfy me, or maybe I'll just have to sell it again. If anyone wants to make a donation let me know.
All the best,
Glenn B
Good friends are nice, and work stinks...
...and a wise man once said that the only good job was a windy one - if you get my drift.
I was essentially called into work on Friday, though I had other plans for the day and was going to take it off. (By the way this had me forget to blog yesterday but as you can see I am up and at it very early, at 0600, today on a Saturday.) A big stink had been made about something or other on Thursday afternoon in my office, and it fell to me to get it corrected even though I had not done anything to cause it by either my action or inaction. I cancelled an appointment I had for the day, a door installation but heck it rained all day so it wwould not have been good to get done anyhow. Then I completely forgot about another responsibility I had for Friday. Well that is I forgot about it until I got home from work late Thursday night. Then I remembered I had a shipment arriving on Friday for which I had to sign. In fact someone would have to be home to receive it if only because of the sontents of the package I would be receiving.
Thinking quickly on Friday morning, I wrote a note to the deliveryperson. I asked that the deliveryperson bring the package to my neighbor in the next house over and deliver it to her, or otherwise if possible to leave it in my garage. Since I figured it would require a signature, I signed the note. I left it taped onto my door so the delivery person would see it, it was a regular sized piece of computer paper, pretty big.
Then after I left home in a hurry to make it to my office, I remembered I had not asked my neighbor if she would accept the package. I called her quickly. I explained my situation with the package and being required to go to work on a day I had planned to be off. I told her what was to be inside the package. She agreeed to accept it nonetheless, and told me that is what good friends are for. Well, since my family and I moved into our current home about 12 years ago, I have not had to many social friends. We see the neighbors socially every now and then, that has been about it for me except a long distance friendship or two that I have. This lady though, my neighbor, is a true friend.
While a neighbor accepting apackage may not sem like a lot to you, it was a big deal for me, and could have been the same for the contents of the package. You see one thing I failed to mention to you above, but I did not fail to mention to my neighbor, was what the package was to contain - live critters. She did not even ask what kind, I guess ebcause she knows I keep snakes, lizards, tortoises, frogs and the like. She has no love for those creatures, yet she agreed to take them in until I arrived home. Very nice of her indeed. She is a good friend if only because 'It is a friend indeed who helps a friend in need.' (Did I just coin a new phrase?)
As it turned out, when my son got home from school, he found the package on our front doorstep, wrapped in plastic. I doubt the delivery person ever went to my friend to deliver the package, something I have to bring up with the delivery service, you know those folks who have all those brown trucks. Oh well, it makes her a friend nonetheless for sure. Nice to have good friends.
It wound up that the 7 snakes in the package seemed to be none the less for having been left on opur doorstep. It was a mild day in the seventies with no sun since it had been raining all day so they did not bake had they might have if left there on a hot summer's day. Even though my neighbor apparently did not take them, she would have left them in her garage, I owe her for the offer. Yes it is nice to have real friends.
All the best,
Glenn B
I was essentially called into work on Friday, though I had other plans for the day and was going to take it off. (By the way this had me forget to blog yesterday but as you can see I am up and at it very early, at 0600, today on a Saturday.) A big stink had been made about something or other on Thursday afternoon in my office, and it fell to me to get it corrected even though I had not done anything to cause it by either my action or inaction. I cancelled an appointment I had for the day, a door installation but heck it rained all day so it wwould not have been good to get done anyhow. Then I completely forgot about another responsibility I had for Friday. Well that is I forgot about it until I got home from work late Thursday night. Then I remembered I had a shipment arriving on Friday for which I had to sign. In fact someone would have to be home to receive it if only because of the sontents of the package I would be receiving.
Thinking quickly on Friday morning, I wrote a note to the deliveryperson. I asked that the deliveryperson bring the package to my neighbor in the next house over and deliver it to her, or otherwise if possible to leave it in my garage. Since I figured it would require a signature, I signed the note. I left it taped onto my door so the delivery person would see it, it was a regular sized piece of computer paper, pretty big.
Then after I left home in a hurry to make it to my office, I remembered I had not asked my neighbor if she would accept the package. I called her quickly. I explained my situation with the package and being required to go to work on a day I had planned to be off. I told her what was to be inside the package. She agreeed to accept it nonetheless, and told me that is what good friends are for. Well, since my family and I moved into our current home about 12 years ago, I have not had to many social friends. We see the neighbors socially every now and then, that has been about it for me except a long distance friendship or two that I have. This lady though, my neighbor, is a true friend.
While a neighbor accepting apackage may not sem like a lot to you, it was a big deal for me, and could have been the same for the contents of the package. You see one thing I failed to mention to you above, but I did not fail to mention to my neighbor, was what the package was to contain - live critters. She did not even ask what kind, I guess ebcause she knows I keep snakes, lizards, tortoises, frogs and the like. She has no love for those creatures, yet she agreed to take them in until I arrived home. Very nice of her indeed. She is a good friend if only because 'It is a friend indeed who helps a friend in need.' (Did I just coin a new phrase?)
As it turned out, when my son got home from school, he found the package on our front doorstep, wrapped in plastic. I doubt the delivery person ever went to my friend to deliver the package, something I have to bring up with the delivery service, you know those folks who have all those brown trucks. Oh well, it makes her a friend nonetheless for sure. Nice to have good friends.
It wound up that the 7 snakes in the package seemed to be none the less for having been left on opur doorstep. It was a mild day in the seventies with no sun since it had been raining all day so they did not bake had they might have if left there on a hot summer's day. Even though my neighbor apparently did not take them, she would have left them in her garage, I owe her for the offer. Yes it is nice to have real friends.
All the best,
Glenn B
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Slowly but surely...
...the site traffic has picked up a bit for this blog. I have had 183 page visits to date, with 490 page views, from at least 4 continents, and 8 countries, to include: Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Jordan, Tunisia, the United Kingdom, and of course, the United States. My blog is getting about 8 page visits a day recently (from different people), but that is up from what had been only 3. Some folks have spent a few seconds looking, and some others well over a 1/2 hour per visit. That is encouraging.
Hopefully word of my rants will spread and more folks will become readers. If anyone has any suggestions, please feel free to leave them in the comments section. Thanks for visiting, hope you are enjoying what you see here.
All the best,
Glenn B
Hopefully word of my rants will spread and more folks will become readers. If anyone has any suggestions, please feel free to leave them in the comments section. Thanks for visiting, hope you are enjoying what you see here.
All the best,
Glenn B
Have you wondered why I prefer Foxnews.com...
...and why I make more references to news material I have found at FoxNews.com than to other news organizations such as CNN? In fact I think almost all of my references since I started this blog have come from Fox. Well there is a reason dear readers, and I will explain by a comparisson between articles I just read about the passing of ex-governor of Texas Ann Richards.
CNN reports on her death here:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/14/richards.obit/index.html
According to CNN she was quick witted, which maybe she was, and to this so called quick wittedness, CNN attributes the following statement that she made about former president George Bush (the older one folks not the current one):
"Poor George. He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth. "
As seems to be the norm for the left, they readily attack their opponents with rhetoric of no particular value other than maybe that it gets a snicker or a laugh, or wins a vote from an ultra lib. Ann Richards was, in my opinion, often irreverant when there was no call for such; but she was more than that, she was an effective politician too.
Despite the fact that she was a sweetheart of the Democrats' party, it is rather interesting to consider that CNN reports on what she did for a living once she left political office, after having served in various positions since about the mid 1970s through her last political spot as the governor of Texas for 4 years from 1991 to 1995. According to the same CNN article:
"She never ran for office again and spent the next years working as a consultant and commentator and serving on corporate boards."
It is rather funny how CNN reports on this without really reporting, at least in this article, about what she got done as a politician. She was best known not as a quipping comedian, nor as a corporate leader; she was best known as a politician. Why would they so readily let the world know that once she left office she went and did what many conservatives do, find employment in the dreaded (at least by ultra leftists) corporate world, that is without giving her much, if any, credit for what she accomplished whilem in political office? Pretty much the only other things the CNN article mentions are some other quippy quotes from her, the fact that she had overcome alcoholism, and some other things about her "unconventionality", and personal life. It is kind of strange, as I see it, that these are the type of things which CNN decided to report upon regarding her.
Although the CNN article does not tell much more about her than mentioned above, FoxNexs.com does tell a little about her actual politics here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213731,00.html
What the FoxNes.com articles points out is that she was a "...champion of women and minorities". As far as I recall she did her best to open the Texas state government to those of all ethinic backgrounds which I guess is how it should be since we are a multi-ethnic nation. A quote relative to this was also in the Fox article. I wonder why CNN made no such mention, because as I remember it is one of the things for which she was most well known and most well respected in the world of Texas politics.
She did many things along the lines of firsts in Texas government. The FoxNews.com article points some of them out in this paragraph:
"As governor, Richards appointed the first black University of Texas regent, the first crime victim on the state Criminal Justice Board, the first disabled person on the human services board and the first teacher to lead the State Board of Education. Under Richards, the fabled Texas Rangers pinned stars on their first black and female officers." (From the same Foxnews.com article linked above.)
The FoxNews.com article also went on to list several ofhter things she had accomplished or tried to accomplish while she was in Texas political office. Much of that is to be found in this paragraph, also from the same article from Fox to which I gave the above link:
"She also polished Texas' image, courted movie producers, campaigned for the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico, oversaw a doubling of the state prison system and presided over rising student achievement scores and plunging dropout rates."
She was a darling of the left, and even well liked, or at least well respected by many of the right. So why is it that an apparently (at least as i see them) left leaning news organization such as CNN does not give her, what I believe, is her due and talk about her real political achievements? Why is it a right leaning (or is it really a fair and balanced news organization) like FoxNews.com actually talks about her political achievements in some detail? I just don't get it, unless Fox really is fair and balanced. Do you? You know, maybe those on the far left will say it is some sort of a right wing conspiracy, and that would give me a laugh, but at the same time be so typical.
While CNN does give a few more quotes that she made during her lifetime, they leave out this one (at least in the CNN article to which I linked above), one that FoxNews.com had in its article:
" "I did not want my tombstone to read, 'She kept a really clean house.' I think I'd like them to remember me by saying, 'She opened government to everyone." "
She lived, she died, and even though I did not agree with much of her politics I must admit she did a lot in her service to the people of Texas. That is how she wanted to be remembered. FoxNews.com gave her the respect that I believe she deserved; while CNN, in my opinion, did not. Go figure. Now you know, or at least have an example of, why I prefer FoxNews.com.
All the best,
Glenn B
CNN reports on her death here:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/14/richards.obit/index.html
According to CNN she was quick witted, which maybe she was, and to this so called quick wittedness, CNN attributes the following statement that she made about former president George Bush (the older one folks not the current one):
"Poor George. He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth. "
As seems to be the norm for the left, they readily attack their opponents with rhetoric of no particular value other than maybe that it gets a snicker or a laugh, or wins a vote from an ultra lib. Ann Richards was, in my opinion, often irreverant when there was no call for such; but she was more than that, she was an effective politician too.
Despite the fact that she was a sweetheart of the Democrats' party, it is rather interesting to consider that CNN reports on what she did for a living once she left political office, after having served in various positions since about the mid 1970s through her last political spot as the governor of Texas for 4 years from 1991 to 1995. According to the same CNN article:
"She never ran for office again and spent the next years working as a consultant and commentator and serving on corporate boards."
It is rather funny how CNN reports on this without really reporting, at least in this article, about what she got done as a politician. She was best known not as a quipping comedian, nor as a corporate leader; she was best known as a politician. Why would they so readily let the world know that once she left office she went and did what many conservatives do, find employment in the dreaded (at least by ultra leftists) corporate world, that is without giving her much, if any, credit for what she accomplished whilem in political office? Pretty much the only other things the CNN article mentions are some other quippy quotes from her, the fact that she had overcome alcoholism, and some other things about her "unconventionality", and personal life. It is kind of strange, as I see it, that these are the type of things which CNN decided to report upon regarding her.
Although the CNN article does not tell much more about her than mentioned above, FoxNexs.com does tell a little about her actual politics here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213731,00.html
What the FoxNes.com articles points out is that she was a "...champion of women and minorities". As far as I recall she did her best to open the Texas state government to those of all ethinic backgrounds which I guess is how it should be since we are a multi-ethnic nation. A quote relative to this was also in the Fox article. I wonder why CNN made no such mention, because as I remember it is one of the things for which she was most well known and most well respected in the world of Texas politics.
She did many things along the lines of firsts in Texas government. The FoxNews.com article points some of them out in this paragraph:
"As governor, Richards appointed the first black University of Texas regent, the first crime victim on the state Criminal Justice Board, the first disabled person on the human services board and the first teacher to lead the State Board of Education. Under Richards, the fabled Texas Rangers pinned stars on their first black and female officers." (From the same Foxnews.com article linked above.)
The FoxNews.com article also went on to list several ofhter things she had accomplished or tried to accomplish while she was in Texas political office. Much of that is to be found in this paragraph, also from the same article from Fox to which I gave the above link:
"She also polished Texas' image, courted movie producers, campaigned for the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico, oversaw a doubling of the state prison system and presided over rising student achievement scores and plunging dropout rates."
She was a darling of the left, and even well liked, or at least well respected by many of the right. So why is it that an apparently (at least as i see them) left leaning news organization such as CNN does not give her, what I believe, is her due and talk about her real political achievements? Why is it a right leaning (or is it really a fair and balanced news organization) like FoxNews.com actually talks about her political achievements in some detail? I just don't get it, unless Fox really is fair and balanced. Do you? You know, maybe those on the far left will say it is some sort of a right wing conspiracy, and that would give me a laugh, but at the same time be so typical.
While CNN does give a few more quotes that she made during her lifetime, they leave out this one (at least in the CNN article to which I linked above), one that FoxNews.com had in its article:
" "I did not want my tombstone to read, 'She kept a really clean house.' I think I'd like them to remember me by saying, 'She opened government to everyone." "
She lived, she died, and even though I did not agree with much of her politics I must admit she did a lot in her service to the people of Texas. That is how she wanted to be remembered. FoxNews.com gave her the respect that I believe she deserved; while CNN, in my opinion, did not. Go figure. Now you know, or at least have an example of, why I prefer FoxNews.com.
All the best,
Glenn B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)