But... here's number three (in-a-row). I don't consider myself a racist, but I do consider myself to be informed. I've been following a website called World Net Daily (WND.com) for several years now, because they seem to keep us aware of subjects which the mainstream media apparently wants the general public to remain ignorant. Of course for the last 15 months, the BIG continuing news story has been the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.
For those of you who may have been off the planet during that time, here's the story in a nutshell -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin, a 17 year old black youth, was walking back from a store inside a gated community in Sanford, Florida. The gated community utilizes the "Neighborhood Watch" style of security, as opposed to the services of a professional security company.
A member of the NW, a man named George Zimmerman, was driving around the area when he spotted Martin walking through the community, up close to the houses. Martin was not known to Zimmerman as a resident thereof, so he observed Martin's progress into the community, and called 911 (there had been 8 burglaries there in the preceding 14 months, and Zimmerman thought that Martin's proximity to the houses was "suspicious"). After speaking with a police dispatcher, Zimmerman thought it prudent to exit his vehicle and follow Martin on foot, even though the dispatcher had said, "We don't need you to do that."(Understand that a dispatcher is not a sworn police officer, and as such has no authority to do anything but advise, suggest, and recommend to people calling in.)
At some point during the "following", there was a physical confrontation between Zimmerman and Martin, during which Martin was shot and killed. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, the state had weak-to-no facts to support their prosecution for murder or even manslaughter, and he was declared not guilty by "a jury of his peers". Significant portions of the black American community from coast-to-coast and border-to-border were upset by the verdict, and their emotions ran from disappointed to violent, law-breaking outrage (from acts of vandalism, to assaulting "white people", to invading and pillaging a WalMart in Oakland CA). The feeling seemed to be that a black man still can't get "justice" in the southern United States.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, back to the subject of "racial tensions", and how WND.com figures into that subject. Recently I have noticed that WND has - almost daily - reported articles on "The Knockout Game" (where roving gangs of blacks assault random whites for no reason and beat them senseless), other forms of black-on-white violence, black mobs taking over shopping malls, etc. This raised the question in my mind, "Is WND simply reporting that which the mainstream media chooses not to release to the public, or are they actually promoting and surreptitiously supporting and encouraging racial tensions?" The fact that it even raised that question for me, is an indication that WND seems to have an agenda - the problem is determining exactly what that "agenda" is. Is it accurate and honest reportage, or attempting to incite racial separation?
We know that the mainstream media either glosses over - or totally ignores - stories that have a racial undercurrent, using phrases like "Eight Youths Attack Elderly Woman" while ignoring racial identification of the either party. This is (ostensibly) designed to minimize the identification of non-whites and whites, as perpetrator or victim in an attempt to smooth over whatever existing rift may exist between the races. On one hand, that's admirable... but, on the other hand, it is not informing people that one race may have valid reasons for distrusting those of a different race. Regardless of their reasoning, I see such reporting as inarguable media bias. Manipulating the news in order to support a political viewpoint is biased reporting.
The Zimmerman-Martin case is an excellent example of what happens when the people involved are identified by race. A (white) Hispanic man kills a black teenager, is tried in and declared guilty by the media, but found not guilty by the court, and there is rioting. A black man (or group of blacks) kills a white person, and - unless that white person is a member of Congress or among the super rich - it goes on page 8 of the Podunk Times, and is never even considered for national media coverage. Why is this? Could it be because black-on-white crime is so commonplace that it isn't considered newsworthy, or is it someone's idea of supporting improved race relations... by simultaneously violating the people's right to know?
I'd like to get comments from whoever visits this blog regarding their personal take on this situation. Go the the WND website ( www.wnd.com ), once or twice a day for several days and follow their race-based reporting, then let me know how you interpret their "style". Do they seem to be even slightly racist... or is it just that they are willing to maintain a higher degree of honesty in their reporting? Somebody please let me know their thoughts, so that perhaps I can consider adjusting my own one way or the other.
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Friday, July 12, 2013
Time Magazine Says "It's Racist For Cops to Prepare For Riots After Zimmerman Verdict"
For the benefit of those of you who have been off the planet for the last year or so, the "Zimmerman" is George Zimmerman (a "white-hispanc"), who is being (feebly) prosecuted for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin (a black teen). There have been rumblings - from somewhere - that if Zimmerman is not convicted there will be racial unrest in Sanford, Florida - if not the entire universe.
Although their decision to prepare IS "race-based" it IS NOT "racist". Black Americans have a long history of "playing the race card" based upon their "victim" status. In the past - prior to 1960 - some of it was fully-justified. That deck of "race cards" has long-since been exhausted.
However, preparations in and around Sanford, Florida to quell rioting is not solely race-based - it is also based upon the historically documented reactions of black Americans to any action taken against any member of the "black community". In their eyes, blacks can do no wrong. If they DO commit a crime it is "whitey's fault" for having something they wanted. If Trayvon Martin had killed George Zimmerman, there would be a black mob outside the court, demanding Trayvon's release. He would have been justified in killing Z for having the audacity to question his presence in a gated community of which he was not a resident. What a racist thing for Z to do!
OJ Simpson murdered two people in cold blood, but he was not found INNOCENT. He was found "not guilty". Why? Because LA did not want an re-enactment of the Rodney King incident, or the LA riots of the mid-1960s, it was a political decision rather than a legal one. Black Americans (especially when a high-profile case is being tried in a large metropolitan area) are - perhaps naturally - inclined to side with the black person - whether victim or perpetrator. That inclination may also be based upon the history of blacks with our system of justice, inasmuch as they were not always fairly tried - especially in our southern states.
Regardless of the reasons, black Americans have a HISTORY of violent reactions when things don't go their way. It would be foolish for law enforcement to ignore that fact. It is that history which necessitates the expectation of - and preparations for - race-based violence, if Z IS NOT convicted. Such preparations are based upon history. If the Chinese, Mexican, Arab or Caucasians had such a history, there would be the VARY SAME preparations being made! Are the people at Time Magazine too stupid to understand that? Do they not see the potential for their remarks to FUEL such an incident... or is that their PLAN? Violence in the streets makes GREAT news, and sells lots of magazines!
The good news? I'm not certain that there is any - other than the fact that Sanford FL is NOT a "large metropolitan area", and unless agitators come from outside the community, the chances of rioting by the black population fail to appear realistic to me. Most blacks are as law-abiding as any other racial group - but THEY aren't the one's that get the national publicity! THEY aren't the one's getting arrested and filling our prisons! THEY also aren't the one's that will get involved in a riot of any kind... unless the facts surrounding the riot are "beyond a shadow of a doubt"! That's my 2¢ worth.
Although their decision to prepare IS "race-based" it IS NOT "racist". Black Americans have a long history of "playing the race card" based upon their "victim" status. In the past - prior to 1960 - some of it was fully-justified. That deck of "race cards" has long-since been exhausted.
However, preparations in and around Sanford, Florida to quell rioting is not solely race-based - it is also based upon the historically documented reactions of black Americans to any action taken against any member of the "black community". In their eyes, blacks can do no wrong. If they DO commit a crime it is "whitey's fault" for having something they wanted. If Trayvon Martin had killed George Zimmerman, there would be a black mob outside the court, demanding Trayvon's release. He would have been justified in killing Z for having the audacity to question his presence in a gated community of which he was not a resident. What a racist thing for Z to do!
OJ Simpson murdered two people in cold blood, but he was not found INNOCENT. He was found "not guilty". Why? Because LA did not want an re-enactment of the Rodney King incident, or the LA riots of the mid-1960s, it was a political decision rather than a legal one. Black Americans (especially when a high-profile case is being tried in a large metropolitan area) are - perhaps naturally - inclined to side with the black person - whether victim or perpetrator. That inclination may also be based upon the history of blacks with our system of justice, inasmuch as they were not always fairly tried - especially in our southern states.
Regardless of the reasons, black Americans have a HISTORY of violent reactions when things don't go their way. It would be foolish for law enforcement to ignore that fact. It is that history which necessitates the expectation of - and preparations for - race-based violence, if Z IS NOT convicted. Such preparations are based upon history. If the Chinese, Mexican, Arab or Caucasians had such a history, there would be the VARY SAME preparations being made! Are the people at Time Magazine too stupid to understand that? Do they not see the potential for their remarks to FUEL such an incident... or is that their PLAN? Violence in the streets makes GREAT news, and sells lots of magazines!
The good news? I'm not certain that there is any - other than the fact that Sanford FL is NOT a "large metropolitan area", and unless agitators come from outside the community, the chances of rioting by the black population fail to appear realistic to me. Most blacks are as law-abiding as any other racial group - but THEY aren't the one's that get the national publicity! THEY aren't the one's getting arrested and filling our prisons! THEY also aren't the one's that will get involved in a riot of any kind... unless the facts surrounding the riot are "beyond a shadow of a doubt"! That's my 2¢ worth.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Racism - Preserved And Fed By Government And Media For Political Profit!
The "legal" separation of the races that compose the USA, technically ended in 1968. Unfortunately, some folks couldn't reject a concept that their daddies, and their daddies daddies (etc, etc), had held onto as the single social indicator that they themselves were not on the bottom rung of the ladder of success. That personal philosophy justified individual racism... int their minds. However, without "racism" - real or
imagined - the minorities in our country would no longer be able to complain about
their role as "victim". There has been social discrimination since the beginning
of the human race, and it will continue to exist through at least a
couple of more generations. It is the humanized version of the old saw -
"birds of a feather...". There are weak personalities (and minds), black,
white, brown, etc., that cannot let go of their personal prejudices,
whether they have any basis in reality or not.
The evil and dreaded "N" word is no longer PC... but NOTHING has been said about the derisive terms "honky, whitey, ofay, cracker, etc." Apparently, racism is a single-edged sword that only cuts one way, and MUST be wielded only by the Caucasians of our country. The Black Panthers and the "Nation of Islam" LOVE whitey... don't they? (<-- p="" sarcasm="">
Blacks are not genetically designed in such a way that they are prejudice free, but they have overworked the "racial victim" role, and they have done so with the full support of our government. OPEN-ENDED WELFARE is our government's design to keep blacks (and "po' white trash") dependent upon the government. If the government can keep people dependent upon them for supplying their basic (and MANY more-than-basic) needs, then the recipients will sacrifice their freedoms to maintain the continuous flow of those freebies. Welfare does NOT give the recipient a "hand up"... it is a foot on the back of the recipients neck - a tool of oppression and compliance. We have 5th and 6th generation welfare families in this country - they have turned welfare into THE FAMILY BUSINESS! Welfare should only be a "bridge" between dependence and independence, between consumption and productivity, and between indolence and industriousness.
I was raised with a work ethic - which, simply stated was, "If you don't work, you don't eat!" I still recall the lesson of Aesop's fable, "The Grasshopper and the Ant", and today Americans are almost 50% GRASSHOPPERS, and unemployment grows daily. What will happen when there are more people living off the labors of others than there are people actively laboring? There are only so many Congressional Seats (seats of PRIVILEGE, who vote their own raises, and can exempt themselves from any law that is deemed detrimental to them - like Obamacare).
My attitude is that "What's fair for one, should be fair for ALL". My attitude DOES NOT entitle our elected officials to vote on their own pay raises, or to exclude themselves from any law that applies to the public at large. Pay raises and benefit packages should be by public referendum, and the laws that effect one MUST have the same effect upon ALL! That's my 2¢ worth...
The evil and dreaded "N" word is no longer PC... but NOTHING has been said about the derisive terms "honky, whitey, ofay, cracker, etc." Apparently, racism is a single-edged sword that only cuts one way, and MUST be wielded only by the Caucasians of our country. The Black Panthers and the "Nation of Islam" LOVE whitey... don't they? (<-- p="" sarcasm="">
Blacks are not genetically designed in such a way that they are prejudice free, but they have overworked the "racial victim" role, and they have done so with the full support of our government. OPEN-ENDED WELFARE is our government's design to keep blacks (and "po' white trash") dependent upon the government. If the government can keep people dependent upon them for supplying their basic (and MANY more-than-basic) needs, then the recipients will sacrifice their freedoms to maintain the continuous flow of those freebies. Welfare does NOT give the recipient a "hand up"... it is a foot on the back of the recipients neck - a tool of oppression and compliance. We have 5th and 6th generation welfare families in this country - they have turned welfare into THE FAMILY BUSINESS! Welfare should only be a "bridge" between dependence and independence, between consumption and productivity, and between indolence and industriousness.
I was raised with a work ethic - which, simply stated was, "If you don't work, you don't eat!" I still recall the lesson of Aesop's fable, "The Grasshopper and the Ant", and today Americans are almost 50% GRASSHOPPERS, and unemployment grows daily. What will happen when there are more people living off the labors of others than there are people actively laboring? There are only so many Congressional Seats (seats of PRIVILEGE, who vote their own raises, and can exempt themselves from any law that is deemed detrimental to them - like Obamacare).
My attitude is that "What's fair for one, should be fair for ALL". My attitude DOES NOT entitle our elected officials to vote on their own pay raises, or to exclude themselves from any law that applies to the public at large. Pay raises and benefit packages should be by public referendum, and the laws that effect one MUST have the same effect upon ALL! That's my 2¢ worth...
Monday, July 1, 2013
THIRD PARTY POLITICS - is it finally TIME? The Government Serves the People...
Some people see the citizen-government
relationship as it SHOULD BE (the government is the servant of the people) not as it really is (the government is the servant of big business and big money). And, if the
Demoncrap socialists are successful in the 2014 Senatorial mid-terms, and succeed
once again in 2016, we are totally effed. We need a conservative voter
uprising! No Black Panthers with clubs at the polling places. Politically-balanced voting machine certification, politically balanced
vote counters, and NO SEIU INVOLVEMENT, NO UNION POLL WATCHERS, and NO DEAD, COMIC BOOK/CARTOON CHARACTERS, or
NON-CITIZEN voters casting ballots.
A VIABLE Third Party is the only way to give voters a real choice, since Demoncraps and Republicants are no longer opposite sides of the same coin - they are both on the edge of the political coin. There has been no distinguishable difference between their platforms in almost three decades. Yet, in order to be viable, a 3P candidate must have a NATIONALLY RECOGNIZABLE name (in a positive sense). There are only a handful who meet that standard. Allen West and Sarah Palin are two names that immediately come to mind, with Utah Senator Mike Lee coming in at a close third. (Senator Lee has shown the courage to vociferously - and publicly - speak out against several of Obama's UN-American - engineered for the continued failure of our country - schemes.)
There will be many who refuse to give up their "straight party ticket", and vote as they have done all their adult lives, without regard for what is best for the continued survival and successful growth of our nation. There will still be the "What's in it for me?" voter, the single-issue voter, and the low-to-no-information (politically unconscious) voter swayed by "pie-in-the-sky" promises. These conditions will be difficult to overcome, and I'm not sure We the People are quite ready for a Third Party... but we damn-well SHOULD BE!
A VIABLE Third Party is the only way to give voters a real choice, since Demoncraps and Republicants are no longer opposite sides of the same coin - they are both on the edge of the political coin. There has been no distinguishable difference between their platforms in almost three decades. Yet, in order to be viable, a 3P candidate must have a NATIONALLY RECOGNIZABLE name (in a positive sense). There are only a handful who meet that standard. Allen West and Sarah Palin are two names that immediately come to mind, with Utah Senator Mike Lee coming in at a close third. (Senator Lee has shown the courage to vociferously - and publicly - speak out against several of Obama's UN-American - engineered for the continued failure of our country - schemes.)
There will be many who refuse to give up their "straight party ticket", and vote as they have done all their adult lives, without regard for what is best for the continued survival and successful growth of our nation. There will still be the "What's in it for me?" voter, the single-issue voter, and the low-to-no-information (politically unconscious) voter swayed by "pie-in-the-sky" promises. These conditions will be difficult to overcome, and I'm not sure We the People are quite ready for a Third Party... but we damn-well SHOULD BE!
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Edward Snowden - American Hero or American Traitor?
Edward Snowden, as a result of his own actions, is at present living the Tom Hanks movie "The Terminal", in Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport. If he has provided anyone outside the USA with classified information regarding techniques and technology, he is indeed a TRAITOR. If he has only disclosed the fact of US spying - which is an activity engaged in by ALL countries, and ALL countries are aware that it is a global practice - then he is not a traitor - just something less than a "hero". His status right now is a bit muddy in my mind. My initial impression when he leaked the story in the USA was, "Hero!", because I believe that We the People have the right to know when our OWN government is spying upon us. Our government is the servant, not the master! For the Obama administration, it adds just one more "end-run" to the never-ending succession of circumventions of our Constitution! But, I digress from my topic...
However, Snowden then began his World Tour of Countries Which Are Not Amicably Disposed Toward The United States of America. Undoubtedly, these countries were well-aware that they were being spied upon by each other and the rest of the world, which made me wonder if he was giving away information that would be SEVERELY damaging to the international and intelligence efforts or the USA.
"Embarrassing information" is not a BFD - embarrassment is basically a "no foul-no harm" condition. Our biggest embarrassment is Barack Obama and the merry band of Commies he appointed to powerful agency offices and his cabinet. It demonstrates OUR inability to make good, sound decisions. However, his inability (or is it disinterest?) to perform his Constitutional duties as POTUS - to the benefit of the We the People - is MUCH more dangerous. Obama and his co-conspirators are working to the DETRIMENT of our nation. Why is there such a hue and cry for Snowden's head, when those in government who are calling for Snowden's punishment are EQUALLY GUILTY of treasonous acts against the interests of the United State of America? Perhaps a few politicians in D.C. had plans of making some "political hay" by releasing similar information themselves during the 2014 Senate race, and Edward Snowden spoiled that opportunity for them. Regardless of any future plans for the information, the "leakage" did create a distraction from the scandals plaguing the Obama administration (Benghazi, Patient Affordable Care Act [aka: Obamacare], IRS, Fast and Furious, drones, etc... Our nation was established on less than 20 sheets of paper - Obamacare alone is now at more than 20,000 pages, including associated regulations, weighs about 24 pounds, and is a stack of paper 7'3" high). What's wrong with THAT picture?
By comparison, Edward Snowden is a relative minnow when compared to the Moby-Dick whale composing the inner-circle of the Obama administration! Punishing ONE traitor(?), should necessitate punishing ALL traitors!
However, Snowden then began his World Tour of Countries Which Are Not Amicably Disposed Toward The United States of America. Undoubtedly, these countries were well-aware that they were being spied upon by each other and the rest of the world, which made me wonder if he was giving away information that would be SEVERELY damaging to the international and intelligence efforts or the USA.
"Embarrassing information" is not a BFD - embarrassment is basically a "no foul-no harm" condition. Our biggest embarrassment is Barack Obama and the merry band of Commies he appointed to powerful agency offices and his cabinet. It demonstrates OUR inability to make good, sound decisions. However, his inability (or is it disinterest?) to perform his Constitutional duties as POTUS - to the benefit of the We the People - is MUCH more dangerous. Obama and his co-conspirators are working to the DETRIMENT of our nation. Why is there such a hue and cry for Snowden's head, when those in government who are calling for Snowden's punishment are EQUALLY GUILTY of treasonous acts against the interests of the United State of America? Perhaps a few politicians in D.C. had plans of making some "political hay" by releasing similar information themselves during the 2014 Senate race, and Edward Snowden spoiled that opportunity for them. Regardless of any future plans for the information, the "leakage" did create a distraction from the scandals plaguing the Obama administration (Benghazi, Patient Affordable Care Act [aka: Obamacare], IRS, Fast and Furious, drones, etc... Our nation was established on less than 20 sheets of paper - Obamacare alone is now at more than 20,000 pages, including associated regulations, weighs about 24 pounds, and is a stack of paper 7'3" high). What's wrong with THAT picture?
By comparison, Edward Snowden is a relative minnow when compared to the Moby-Dick whale composing the inner-circle of the Obama administration! Punishing ONE traitor(?), should necessitate punishing ALL traitors!
Saturday, June 22, 2013
EX-BORDER PATROL AGENTS GET AT LEAST 30 YEARS
Thus read the headline on the Yahoo News AP article by Julie Watson this morning, and here's the deal...
"Two brothers who worked as Border Patrol agents were sentenced to at least 30 years in prison each for smuggling hundreds of immigrants into the United States, crimes that the judge termed a threat to national security." "...Judge Houston said he gave the severe sentences to deter other agents who have been entrusted by the American people to protect the border. The judge called their smuggling operation "disgusting."
How about we sentence Janet Napolitano, Eric Holder and His Highness Barack I to the same prison terms? THEY permit such actions by NOT ENFORCING our immigration laws, and by discouraging BP Agents from doing so. THEY are complicit in the "crimes that the judge termed a threat to national security", and THEY are the primary "agents who have been entrusted by the American people to protect the border." THEY are the ones who want not only to PERMIT illegal aliens to remain in the country, but the ones who wish to REWARD them for violating our laws.
Why is our "National Guard" being dispatched to the middle east, when the NATION is here? Shouldn't the "National Guard" be directly involved in guarding the nation, as the name implies? And it seems to me that the Border Patrol Agents in general, must be a bit confused. Seven years ago two BP Agents were imprisoned for DOING their job (the Compean and Ramos injustice), and now two more imprisoned for doing what the administration now claims is the right thing to do! Talk about a "mixed message". And now - according to the latest version of the "Immigration Bill" - the government wants to hire 20,000 more BP Agents to do exactly WHAT? Ignore people entering the country illegally?
Obama, Holder and Napolitano are the BIGGEST threats to national security, if one considers that We the People are those who COMPOSE "the nation", and each day the administration nibbles away a bit more of the Bill of Rights... while Congress sits quietly doing nothing to stop them.
"Two brothers who worked as Border Patrol agents were sentenced to at least 30 years in prison each for smuggling hundreds of immigrants into the United States, crimes that the judge termed a threat to national security." "...Judge Houston said he gave the severe sentences to deter other agents who have been entrusted by the American people to protect the border. The judge called their smuggling operation "disgusting."
How about we sentence Janet Napolitano, Eric Holder and His Highness Barack I to the same prison terms? THEY permit such actions by NOT ENFORCING our immigration laws, and by discouraging BP Agents from doing so. THEY are complicit in the "crimes that the judge termed a threat to national security", and THEY are the primary "agents who have been entrusted by the American people to protect the border." THEY are the ones who want not only to PERMIT illegal aliens to remain in the country, but the ones who wish to REWARD them for violating our laws.
Why is our "National Guard" being dispatched to the middle east, when the NATION is here? Shouldn't the "National Guard" be directly involved in guarding the nation, as the name implies? And it seems to me that the Border Patrol Agents in general, must be a bit confused. Seven years ago two BP Agents were imprisoned for DOING their job (the Compean and Ramos injustice), and now two more imprisoned for doing what the administration now claims is the right thing to do! Talk about a "mixed message". And now - according to the latest version of the "Immigration Bill" - the government wants to hire 20,000 more BP Agents to do exactly WHAT? Ignore people entering the country illegally?
Obama, Holder and Napolitano are the BIGGEST threats to national security, if one considers that We the People are those who COMPOSE "the nation", and each day the administration nibbles away a bit more of the Bill of Rights... while Congress sits quietly doing nothing to stop them.
IMPEACH THEM ALL!
Thursday, June 13, 2013
"Major" Nidal Hasan asks for a further 3 month delay in his trial for premeditated murder at Fort Hood, TX!
His trial was set to begin last month when Hasan, 42, requested to go
to trial acting as his own attorney. He initially told the court he
would be able to proceed with no delay, but he asked for a three-month
delay just minutes after presiding judge Col. Tara Osborn granted his
request.
Hasan has since told the court he targeted soldiers who were preparing to deploy to Afghanistan.
Hasan has said he will attempt to justify the killing of 13 people on post in 2009 with a “defense of others” strategy. Those "others" are the Taliban!
To paraphrase Sun Tzu, "The ally of my enemy is my enemy." Hasan murdered - in cold blood - 13 unarmed American soldiers, and wounded 32 others! His "defense of others" claim makes him also guilty of treason, by taking arms against the U.S. protect an enemy. As Ben Franklin once said regarding legal proceedings, "A person who represents himself has a fool for a client."
This particular fool has already had 3½ YEARS of delays, and is being allowed to make a mockery of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, under which he will - someday perhaps - be tried. My attitude is quite basic - TRY HIM AND FRY HIM! If you think that's barbaric, so be it, but the facts are quite simple -
1. Civilian police responded to a call (maybe the MP's didn't know what to do) at the Fort Hood Army Installation.
2. When they arrived at the scene, they were fired upon by the only person in the vicinity with firearms.
3. Police returned fire, seriously injuring their attacker.
4. When the opportunity presented itself, they surveyed the room and found 45 people shot, 13 of whom were dead.
5. The person firing upon the police was "Major" Nidal Hasan. Inasmuch as there was no other person in the immediate area holding weapons or firing upon police, Hasan was arrested. He was charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder, and 32 counts of attempted murder... MORE THAN 43 MONTHS AGO!
6. He apparently has not denied the charges, but his "defense of others" is nothing less than an admission of guilt. Basically, he is saying, "I did it, but I should be forgiven because I did it in the defense of others." How many Taliban were under attack in that room on 9 November 2009? Oh.. none? Using Hasan's reasoning, we should now kill ALL Muslims, wherever we find them, because the Taliban are Muslims, and the Taliban kill Americans. How monumentally STUPID is that line of reasoning? Yet the Army is entertaining Hasan's request. Proof positive that, "A person who represents himself has a fool for a client."
While incarcerated awaiting trial, Hasan has violated Army regulations by growing a beard. He could be tried under the UCMJ for that, while his other trial date is pending resolution. He should have been reduced in rank to that of E-1, and all pay and allowances forfeited. Was he? No. Instead, Hasan has accumulated over $248,000 in pay and allowances during that period! This is TAXPAYER MONEY - and IT CONTINUES TO ACCRUE IN HIS ACCOUNT TODAY!
Maybe Obama will make him a "Senior Adviser on Islamic Protective Affairs", so he can invoke "Executive Privilege", and not be tried at all. God save us from our own stupidity and the insanity of Political Correctness!
Hasan has since told the court he targeted soldiers who were preparing to deploy to Afghanistan.
Hasan has said he will attempt to justify the killing of 13 people on post in 2009 with a “defense of others” strategy. Those "others" are the Taliban!
To paraphrase Sun Tzu, "The ally of my enemy is my enemy." Hasan murdered - in cold blood - 13 unarmed American soldiers, and wounded 32 others! His "defense of others" claim makes him also guilty of treason, by taking arms against the U.S. protect an enemy. As Ben Franklin once said regarding legal proceedings, "A person who represents himself has a fool for a client."
This particular fool has already had 3½ YEARS of delays, and is being allowed to make a mockery of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, under which he will - someday perhaps - be tried. My attitude is quite basic - TRY HIM AND FRY HIM! If you think that's barbaric, so be it, but the facts are quite simple -
1. Civilian police responded to a call (maybe the MP's didn't know what to do) at the Fort Hood Army Installation.
2. When they arrived at the scene, they were fired upon by the only person in the vicinity with firearms.
3. Police returned fire, seriously injuring their attacker.
4. When the opportunity presented itself, they surveyed the room and found 45 people shot, 13 of whom were dead.
5. The person firing upon the police was "Major" Nidal Hasan. Inasmuch as there was no other person in the immediate area holding weapons or firing upon police, Hasan was arrested. He was charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder, and 32 counts of attempted murder... MORE THAN 43 MONTHS AGO!
6. He apparently has not denied the charges, but his "defense of others" is nothing less than an admission of guilt. Basically, he is saying, "I did it, but I should be forgiven because I did it in the defense of others." How many Taliban were under attack in that room on 9 November 2009? Oh.. none? Using Hasan's reasoning, we should now kill ALL Muslims, wherever we find them, because the Taliban are Muslims, and the Taliban kill Americans. How monumentally STUPID is that line of reasoning? Yet the Army is entertaining Hasan's request. Proof positive that, "A person who represents himself has a fool for a client."
While incarcerated awaiting trial, Hasan has violated Army regulations by growing a beard. He could be tried under the UCMJ for that, while his other trial date is pending resolution. He should have been reduced in rank to that of E-1, and all pay and allowances forfeited. Was he? No. Instead, Hasan has accumulated over $248,000 in pay and allowances during that period! This is TAXPAYER MONEY - and IT CONTINUES TO ACCRUE IN HIS ACCOUNT TODAY!
Maybe Obama will make him a "Senior Adviser on Islamic Protective Affairs", so he can invoke "Executive Privilege", and not be tried at all. God save us from our own stupidity and the insanity of Political Correctness!
Thursday, May 2, 2013
Media Personalities Hackneying Phrases and Creating Previously Non-existent Words
I listen to quite a bit of radio when out driving in the car, or even sitting at my keyboard as I am now. The first part of my title for this post is something of which most of us are painfully aware, although we may not all be familiar with the term "hackney/hackneyed/hackneying". Quite simply put, when a phrase becomes "hackneyed" it has been made trite or banal though overuse. In other words, we have tired of hearing it! One of my most unfavorite (if they can create words, so can I) of these is the wearying overuse of the phrase "At the end of the day..." - which I just heard "America's National Treasure" use on the radio. At the end of the day, I could just scream, "Are you talking heads incapable of turning a phrase?" Just for a change of pace, why not try throwing out an occasional, "When all is said and done...", or "When the dust settles...", or "As the sun begins to set on...", or tell us how "The bottom line is..."? Better yet, how about just a simple "As I see it...", or "The outcome of this situation will/may/should be...". I am fully aware that most of those recommended phrases have themselves become hackneyed, but if they all would be frequently interspersed by broadcast personalities, they would not be nearly as noticeable.
Fox News Radio is particularly bad for hackney and creation. The personalities on Fox are apparently lexicographers (by network acclamation), and are therefore permitted to create new, non-existent words for the English language. Recently the popular non-word seems to be "political strategerist". THERE'S NO SUCH WORD AS "STRATEGERIST"! What was wrong with using the dictionary defined word of "strategist"? Did it sound too mundane? Were there not enough letters in it to emphasize the importance of this critical occupation (sarcasm)? Does a "strategerist" do something other than analyze, recommend and implement strategy... as does a strategist?
Call it one of my (many) "pet peeves" if you like, but there is something inherently wrong about anyone who uses the English language as the means of earning a living, using that language incorrectly. To me, it's virtually impossible to ignore. It's like seeing a Volkswagen Minibus attempting to navigate the slalom course at a Sports Car Club of America rally. For the most part, our beloved "Talking Heads" are not uneducated people., so why are they so cavalier in their use of the English language?
Fox News Radio is particularly bad for hackney and creation. The personalities on Fox are apparently lexicographers (by network acclamation), and are therefore permitted to create new, non-existent words for the English language. Recently the popular non-word seems to be "political strategerist". THERE'S NO SUCH WORD AS "STRATEGERIST"! What was wrong with using the dictionary defined word of "strategist"? Did it sound too mundane? Were there not enough letters in it to emphasize the importance of this critical occupation (sarcasm)? Does a "strategerist" do something other than analyze, recommend and implement strategy... as does a strategist?
Call it one of my (many) "pet peeves" if you like, but there is something inherently wrong about anyone who uses the English language as the means of earning a living, using that language incorrectly. To me, it's virtually impossible to ignore. It's like seeing a Volkswagen Minibus attempting to navigate the slalom course at a Sports Car Club of America rally. For the most part, our beloved "Talking Heads" are not uneducated people., so why are they so cavalier in their use of the English language?
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Horrendous Boston Marathon Bombings - Courtesy of "Religion of Peace"?
According to our soulless leader, BHO, Islam is a "religion of peace", and we should embrace them as members of our loving world family of religions. On the other hand, WND reported today that (fair use applies)...
"A source within Iranian intelligence services told WND the Islamic regime was behind them and to look for trails through Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
The source said the bombs were planted near the end of the race so that the horrific images of the blasts would be captured by all the media there and be replayed over and over throughout the world.
A senior commander of the Islamic regime had warned less than two months ago that terrorism was coming to America.
The source for today’s information blamed the Islamic regime for the Boston attack and pointed to the collaboration of the regime’s Quds Forces with Hezbollah and elements of al-Qaida with links to individuals in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. He said that under Quds Force guidance, Hezbollah recruited Sunni terrorists allied with al-Qaida factions in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, who then entered the U.S. for terrorist activities.
The information has been shared with U.S. officials.
But until the FBI and other U.S. agencies complete their investigations, all information regarding the bombings must be considered with great caution and any conclusions would be premature.
If the source is correct, however, then three individuals will likely have had a hand in planning and preparing for the attack:
In the aftermath of the Boston bombings, FARS News Agency put out a piece headlined, “Obama in deep trouble if Boston bombing was by Salafis (ultraconservative Sunni Muslims).”
FARS said one reason that Obama has not linked the Boston bombing to al-Qaida is that his administration wants to show it has defeated al-Qaida and any mention of the terrorist group would undermine his position.
FARS, as with the earlier warning by Jazayeri, denounced Obama’s decision to help the opposition in Syria and hinted that the Boston attack is related to al-Qaida and the hardcore Sunnis. It concluded that Obama would likely not name them as the guilty party to save face."
(If you are surprised by the above information, please raise your hand. In fact... raise both your hands [as if in a gesture of surrender] since you have obviously surrendered your brain to our left-wing administration.)
It's time to "connect the dots of believability"...
"A source within Iranian intelligence services told WND the Islamic regime was behind them and to look for trails through Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.
The source said the bombs were planted near the end of the race so that the horrific images of the blasts would be captured by all the media there and be replayed over and over throughout the world.
The source for today’s information blamed the Islamic regime for the Boston attack and pointed to the collaboration of the regime’s Quds Forces with Hezbollah and elements of al-Qaida with links to individuals in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. He said that under Quds Force guidance, Hezbollah recruited Sunni terrorists allied with al-Qaida factions in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, who then entered the U.S. for terrorist activities.
The information has been shared with U.S. officials.
But until the FBI and other U.S. agencies complete their investigations, all information regarding the bombings must be considered with great caution and any conclusions would be premature.
If the source is correct, however, then three individuals will likely have had a hand in planning and preparing for the attack:
- Mustafa Badr Al Din, the brother-in-law and cousin of the dead terrorist Imad Mugniyah, who now serves as Mugnyiah’s replacement as the military leader of Hezbollah and who also serves as the deputy of Qasem Soliemani, the head of the Islamic regime’s Quds Forces.
- Mohammad Ali Hamadei, on the FBI’s most-wanted list, a Hezbollah operator responsible for operation and infiltration of forces into America who was based in New Mexico with a Latin American passport and who was also seen last year in England.
- Talal Hamieh, the head of Hezbollah’s External Security Organization responsible for operations outside of Lebanon. He has been in Mexico collaborating with drug cartels to raise funds for Hezbollah cells and facilitates the transfer of arms and terrorists into the U.S.
In the aftermath of the Boston bombings, FARS News Agency put out a piece headlined, “Obama in deep trouble if Boston bombing was by Salafis (ultraconservative Sunni Muslims).”
FARS said one reason that Obama has not linked the Boston bombing to al-Qaida is that his administration wants to show it has defeated al-Qaida and any mention of the terrorist group would undermine his position.
FARS, as with the earlier warning by Jazayeri, denounced Obama’s decision to help the opposition in Syria and hinted that the Boston attack is related to al-Qaida and the hardcore Sunnis. It concluded that Obama would likely not name them as the guilty party to save face."
(If you are surprised by the above information, please raise your hand. In fact... raise both your hands [as if in a gesture of surrender] since you have obviously surrendered your brain to our left-wing administration.)
It's time to "connect the dots of believability"...
- In an act of unprecedented ignorance, BHO (with the enthusiastic assistance of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and Secretary of State John Kerry) has granted members of Islamic countries special, privileged, front-of-the-line treatment in matters of VISA issuance and immigration.
- Shrapnel deploying bombs in public places are a favorite destructive tool of the Islamic terrorists.
- Paraphrasing one of the tenets of the Qu'ran, it says (essentially), "Convert the infidels or put them to the sword." (That is a figurative "sword", not a literal sword. Any weapon used to murder the non-repentant infidel will suffice. Islam gets the maximum "return on investment" from a bomb.If you are a non-Muslim, or even a Muslim deemed to be apostate in practice, you are that infidel.)
- Islamists have a history of murdering the innocent - a long history of doing so in Israel, and a shorter, more recent history of doing so in the USA (World Trade Center bombing in 1993, and the Twin Towers bombing in 2001). They have also killed and/or made prisoners of tourists and journalists around the world.
- BHO admitted to "his Muslim faith" during an ABC television interview.
- A TWO MONTH WARNING by a senior commander of the Islamic regime that, "terrorism was coming to America", apparently went unheeded by federal law enforcement agencies.
- The original "person of interest" in the Boston Marathon bombing. 20 year old Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, is being deported back to Saudi Arabia next week. Why is he being deported? His student visa is still good. Could he have done something more than "witness" the explosion? Will we ever be told the truth about his role in this massacre? The State Department claims it is to avoid embarrassment to the Saudis. If he did nothing wrong then where is the "embarrassment" factor? Is this just the latest in the long line of government coverups? The administration does not want the bomber to be a Muslim - they're hoping for a white, Christian, right-wing radical to be charged.
Friday, March 22, 2013
"Universal Pre-School" is the Government's Plan...
In his State of the Union address, President "Screwtape" Obama said he wanted to
“make high-quality preschool available to every child in America” and
“make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind.”
The public education system, along with institutes of "higher learning", has been co-opted by the radical left. This is not anything new, inasmuch as the teachers of today were taught by yesterday's left-wingers (or those teacher's who taught the teachers of yesterday's left wingers). I believe it began in the late 1960's - when the so-called "anti-establishment drug and free-love" sub-culture of the 1960's (or at least those who weren't too stoned to pass their finals) were awarded their teaching certificates. Most of these left-wing liberal-"progressives" went directly to teaching in the public system, many at the K-6 level, and some at the 7-12 level. What's wrong with that?
The public "educational system" has been replaced with the Federal Indoctrination System, replete with revisionist history (history retold the way the left wishes it had been), political correctness, studies of aberrant sexual behaviors now deemed "normal" by the government, marginalization of Christianity, and other left-wing absurdities. To effectively indoctrinate a body of people, you must begin the process of indoctrination as early in their lives as possible. In "teaching" children in grades K-6, the process is simplest. The political minds of children ages 5-11 are essentially "dry sponges" ready to absorb any liquid in which they are immersed. Whether it be the purest of spring waters, or the liquid waste from the sewers of political belief. "Common Core" education, being forced upon us by the federal government, is the most blatant transference of liquid waste to date.
The goal of Common Core education is absolute and total indoctrination of the youth of America into the belief that all people should achieve the same rewards for their labors - regardless of education, experience, competence, employment status, or difficulty and/or hazards involved in the performance of those labors. Quite simply put, those slackers who elect to do nothing, should be able to have the same standard of living as those who work 40-80 hours per week. That is the socialist mindset that currently governs and indoctrinates the children of our Republic.
The federal government is not the solution to any educational/social problem - it is source of the problem. "Project Head Start" has been in existence for 50+ years, at the cost of trillions of tax dollars, yet the accomplishments of those who have had access to the program, are no better than those who did not have access. Wasteful effort? Obviously.
Education should be controlled at the state level, not the federal level. State boards of education should determine the content and conduct of the learning process for our children. Our educational emphasis should be on the 3R's, not on "Heather Has Two Mommies" - history, not homosexuality, math not Muslims, and science not (left-wing icon) Sol Alinsky.
Our founders gave us a Constitution designed to benefit those who made the effort to become self-sufficient through apprenticeship (training), self-motivation, and hard work. Our Constitution also was designed to limit areas of our daily lives in which the federal government could involve itself, and - regarding those areas where involvement was permitted - it places further restrictions upon how deeply the government may involve itself. Our founders saw the potential for abuse of power by any governing body, and took steps to minimize the possibility that the federal government could someday seize all power from the people. They insured, through our Constitution that necessary means of recourse would always be available to the citizens, in the body of the Second Amendment - which contains the phrase "shall not be infringed".
Sadly, the Constitution is only as good as the people's will to protect and defend it - and there is some question over whether We the People yet possess that will. The administration "end-runs" the Constitution at every opportunity, circumventing it's original intent, ignoring the requirements of government therein, and constantly chipping away at the people's Bill of Rights. The circumstances under which such flagrant violations of the Constitution will end is not yet clear. The "checks and balances" are not working as they were designed - Congress rubber stamps the malfeasance (bordering upon treason) of the administration, and the Federal Court system only fails to support their inaction when a blind man can see the criminality.
An "Oath of Office" is only an oath when it is sworn to by people of honor. There is little-if-any honor in the Federal District of Columbia, so that part of the "Oath of Office" where they swore to "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic..."
The public education system, along with institutes of "higher learning", has been co-opted by the radical left. This is not anything new, inasmuch as the teachers of today were taught by yesterday's left-wingers (or those teacher's who taught the teachers of yesterday's left wingers). I believe it began in the late 1960's - when the so-called "anti-establishment drug and free-love" sub-culture of the 1960's (or at least those who weren't too stoned to pass their finals) were awarded their teaching certificates. Most of these left-wing liberal-"progressives" went directly to teaching in the public system, many at the K-6 level, and some at the 7-12 level. What's wrong with that?
The public "educational system" has been replaced with the Federal Indoctrination System, replete with revisionist history (history retold the way the left wishes it had been), political correctness, studies of aberrant sexual behaviors now deemed "normal" by the government, marginalization of Christianity, and other left-wing absurdities. To effectively indoctrinate a body of people, you must begin the process of indoctrination as early in their lives as possible. In "teaching" children in grades K-6, the process is simplest. The political minds of children ages 5-11 are essentially "dry sponges" ready to absorb any liquid in which they are immersed. Whether it be the purest of spring waters, or the liquid waste from the sewers of political belief. "Common Core" education, being forced upon us by the federal government, is the most blatant transference of liquid waste to date.
The goal of Common Core education is absolute and total indoctrination of the youth of America into the belief that all people should achieve the same rewards for their labors - regardless of education, experience, competence, employment status, or difficulty and/or hazards involved in the performance of those labors. Quite simply put, those slackers who elect to do nothing, should be able to have the same standard of living as those who work 40-80 hours per week. That is the socialist mindset that currently governs and indoctrinates the children of our Republic.
The federal government is not the solution to any educational/social problem - it is source of the problem. "Project Head Start" has been in existence for 50+ years, at the cost of trillions of tax dollars, yet the accomplishments of those who have had access to the program, are no better than those who did not have access. Wasteful effort? Obviously.
Education should be controlled at the state level, not the federal level. State boards of education should determine the content and conduct of the learning process for our children. Our educational emphasis should be on the 3R's, not on "Heather Has Two Mommies" - history, not homosexuality, math not Muslims, and science not (left-wing icon) Sol Alinsky.
Our founders gave us a Constitution designed to benefit those who made the effort to become self-sufficient through apprenticeship (training), self-motivation, and hard work. Our Constitution also was designed to limit areas of our daily lives in which the federal government could involve itself, and - regarding those areas where involvement was permitted - it places further restrictions upon how deeply the government may involve itself. Our founders saw the potential for abuse of power by any governing body, and took steps to minimize the possibility that the federal government could someday seize all power from the people. They insured, through our Constitution that necessary means of recourse would always be available to the citizens, in the body of the Second Amendment - which contains the phrase "shall not be infringed".
Sadly, the Constitution is only as good as the people's will to protect and defend it - and there is some question over whether We the People yet possess that will. The administration "end-runs" the Constitution at every opportunity, circumventing it's original intent, ignoring the requirements of government therein, and constantly chipping away at the people's Bill of Rights. The circumstances under which such flagrant violations of the Constitution will end is not yet clear. The "checks and balances" are not working as they were designed - Congress rubber stamps the malfeasance (bordering upon treason) of the administration, and the Federal Court system only fails to support their inaction when a blind man can see the criminality.
An "Oath of Office" is only an oath when it is sworn to by people of honor. There is little-if-any honor in the Federal District of Columbia, so that part of the "Oath of Office" where they swore to "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)