which was entirely about conditions on the border with Mexico. Bloody disgusting, including the fact that a lot of this crap the major medial flat will not cover.
One of the worst was a U.S. Representative from Texas who was talking about how we can trust the president of Mexico and we NEED to give them more than a billion dollars in money and equipment- including surveillance equipment- so they can deal with things on the border, because- among other things- 'there will never be troops sent to the border'. I just found this on the transcript at Beck's site:
SHERIFF: I want to ask the congressman who is he representing, President Calderon or his district here in Laredo, Texas where we haven't received any resources at the local level to be able to combat the problems on the border.
CONGRESSMAN CUELLAR: Well, first of all, let me say this, Mr. Sheriff. What we're looking at is you have got more money than you've ever gotten in the past and we've got to keep in mind that the border will be patrolled by the border patrol and by the federal agencies. We will work with the local law enforcement and we represent, but your job is to be a county sheriff, not a U.S. congressman, which is a big difference. My job is to look at the big picture. Your job is to look at the smaller picture, and I will do my job as long as you do your job.
You'd have to have heard the tone of voice and attitude of the Congressman to understand just how bad this was. I listened to it, and I was so pissed I couldn't even remember the bastards name. Absolutely infuriating. And, it seems, typical of far too many of those clowns in DC.
Either the Emperor's "Lamppost, rope, politician: some assembly required" or my gift box idea. We've got to get the attention of these idiots somehow
Friday, November 09, 2007
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Maybe someplace like San Francisco
these clowns would get something like the French response, but most other cities? I don't think so.
If we are not careful, we may see something similar coming from the estimated 13 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, most of them Hispanic, who are increasingly vilified in the media, forced further into the underground by spineless politicians and not given any chance to legalize their status by a pusillanimous U.S. Congress.
A couple of things here. In a few places, like OK, the politicians are doing something; just not what you want. And an awful lot of that 'pusillanimous' Congress tried to kiss up to the illegals; that didn't work because the people back home basically said "You pass this and your ass is on the street." I repeat, in some places that play the 'sanctuary city' game you might get away with the 'intifada' bullshit, but most other places your rock-throwers and arsonists will be in jail. Assuming the people whose cars are being burned don't shoot them.
And if you think people are being nasty and unkind and vilify the illegals now, what the hell do you think will happen if the illegals start rioting and throwing rocks and burning?
Friggin' idiot.
If we are not careful, we may see something similar coming from the estimated 13 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, most of them Hispanic, who are increasingly vilified in the media, forced further into the underground by spineless politicians and not given any chance to legalize their status by a pusillanimous U.S. Congress.
A couple of things here. In a few places, like OK, the politicians are doing something; just not what you want. And an awful lot of that 'pusillanimous' Congress tried to kiss up to the illegals; that didn't work because the people back home basically said "You pass this and your ass is on the street." I repeat, in some places that play the 'sanctuary city' game you might get away with the 'intifada' bullshit, but most other places your rock-throwers and arsonists will be in jail. Assuming the people whose cars are being burned don't shoot them.
And if you think people are being nasty and unkind and vilify the illegals now, what the hell do you think will happen if the illegals start rioting and throwing rocks and burning?
Friggin' idiot.
Jimmy Carter:
The gift that keeps on giving
Lamentably, I killed your cat while trying just to sting it. It was crouched, as usual, under one of our bird feeders & I fired from some distance with bird shot.
There're just too many possibilities, the mind boggles...
Lamentably, I killed your cat while trying just to sting it. It was crouched, as usual, under one of our bird feeders & I fired from some distance with bird shot.
There're just too many possibilities, the mind boggles...
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
So now, not only is the developed west eeevillle,
our enviroweenie screaming for biofuels is starving the pore & hongry around the world. It says so in the Guardian, so it must be true!
To borrow from somebody, "I love the screaming of hippy enviroweenies in the morning. Or any other time."
Get the last paragraph:
If the governments promoting biofuels do not reverse their policies, the humanitarian impact will be greater than that of the Iraq war. Millions will be displaced, hundreds of millions more could go hungry. This crime against humanity is a complex one, but that neither lessens nor excuses it. If people starve because of biofuels, Ruth Kelly and her peers will have killed them. Like all such crimes, it is perpetrated by cowards, attacking the weak to avoid confronting the strong.
Hehehehehe. And even better, it's that arch-idiot Monbiot doing the screaming and blaming. "It'll be worse than Iraq!" I'd say 'idiot', but that understates things by a considerable margin.
To borrow from somebody, "I love the screaming of hippy enviroweenies in the morning. Or any other time."
Get the last paragraph:
If the governments promoting biofuels do not reverse their policies, the humanitarian impact will be greater than that of the Iraq war. Millions will be displaced, hundreds of millions more could go hungry. This crime against humanity is a complex one, but that neither lessens nor excuses it. If people starve because of biofuels, Ruth Kelly and her peers will have killed them. Like all such crimes, it is perpetrated by cowards, attacking the weak to avoid confronting the strong.
Hehehehehe. And even better, it's that arch-idiot Monbiot doing the screaming and blaming. "It'll be worse than Iraq!" I'd say 'idiot', but that understates things by a considerable margin.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
There's supposed to be a hard freeze tonight
so I just picked some stuff and spread a couple of tarps over part of the garden. Predicted low is 30, with it warming up fairly rapidly after sunrise and then no freezing temps for a few days. So, hopefully, the tarps will protect what's covered and keep those plants going. It's worked before.
To give you an idea of how things have been producing, these are the habaneros I picked today and yesterday, with a few jalapenos thrown in
I'm told the best way to keep them long-term is to seed, slice them up and freeze them, so in the next couple of days I'll do that to most of these. Using the vacuum-sealer should help.
The tomatoes, I'm told, if placed in a paper bag and kept in a cool place will slowly ripen, so I'll give it a try.
To give you an idea of how things have been producing, these are the habaneros I picked today and yesterday, with a few jalapenos thrown in
I'm told the best way to keep them long-term is to seed, slice them up and freeze them, so in the next couple of days I'll do that to most of these. Using the vacuum-sealer should help.
The tomatoes, I'm told, if placed in a paper bag and kept in a cool place will slowly ripen, so I'll give it a try.
"...convicted the Met of breaching health and safety laws..."
for killing an innocent man.
Want your blood pressure spiking? Or depression moving in? Maybe both? Check that article out.
A jury at the Old Bailey convicted the Met of breaching health and safety laws by putting the public at risk on the day Mr de Menezes, an innocent electrician, was mistaken for a suicide bomber.
...
The trial judge, Mr Justice Henriques, said a "corporate failing" was to blame for the tragedy - leading senior MPs to say that as head of the Met Sir Ian should take overall responsibility and step down.
It was Sir Ian's personal decision to contest the case, which has cost the taxpayer £3.5 million, despite "overwhelming" evidence of a series of blunders by his force.
...
Think about that a minute. Not "You effed up and killed an innocent man, and must be held responsible", or "Improper use of deadly force", but "breaching health and safety laws". Damn.
And in a way this sums up some of the socialist garbage we're dealing with, too:
Mr Justice Henriques, who fined the Met £175,000 and ordered it to pay £385,000 costs, said: "There was a serious failure of accurate communication which has not been explained."
He said a heavy fine would have resulted in a loss to the public purse and reduction in essential policing.
Because God forbid the agency actually get some kind of spanking it might pay attention to: it would cost the government money! Sounds a little like the crap we hear after a botched SWAT raid on the wrong home or on a bad tip gets someone injured or killed: "The officers followed department policy in their conduct, so there will be no action taken against them." Because God forbid we actually hold them accountable for screwing up in one or more ways and injuring/killing/destroying the home and life of someone.
I know I'm jumping around a bit here; I'm just so damn sick of crap like this.
Want your blood pressure spiking? Or depression moving in? Maybe both? Check that article out.
A jury at the Old Bailey convicted the Met of breaching health and safety laws by putting the public at risk on the day Mr de Menezes, an innocent electrician, was mistaken for a suicide bomber.
...
The trial judge, Mr Justice Henriques, said a "corporate failing" was to blame for the tragedy - leading senior MPs to say that as head of the Met Sir Ian should take overall responsibility and step down.
It was Sir Ian's personal decision to contest the case, which has cost the taxpayer £3.5 million, despite "overwhelming" evidence of a series of blunders by his force.
...
Think about that a minute. Not "You effed up and killed an innocent man, and must be held responsible", or "Improper use of deadly force", but "breaching health and safety laws". Damn.
And in a way this sums up some of the socialist garbage we're dealing with, too:
Mr Justice Henriques, who fined the Met £175,000 and ordered it to pay £385,000 costs, said: "There was a serious failure of accurate communication which has not been explained."
He said a heavy fine would have resulted in a loss to the public purse and reduction in essential policing.
Because God forbid the agency actually get some kind of spanking it might pay attention to: it would cost the government money! Sounds a little like the crap we hear after a botched SWAT raid on the wrong home or on a bad tip gets someone injured or killed: "The officers followed department policy in their conduct, so there will be no action taken against them." Because God forbid we actually hold them accountable for screwing up in one or more ways and injuring/killing/destroying the home and life of someone.
I know I'm jumping around a bit here; I'm just so damn sick of crap like this.
More on the canaries in the mine
Found a link to this at Insty this morning, I'd suggest anyone who reads this go and read the entire article(and read Kim's take on it, too). It's about the resurgence of Jew hatred in Britain. Which is a flat amazing thing: aside from the usual groups of idiots, it's something I'd never have thought would flourish so over there.
Two places I'd like to quote here. The first:
But a subtler reason exists for Britain’s embrace of the new anti-Semitism. After the Second World War, the radical Left set out to destroy the fundamentals of Western morality, but its campaign played out very differently in America and Britain. In America, it resulted in the culture wars, with conservatives, many churches, and sensible liberals launching a vigorous counterattack in defense of Western moral values—and, as it happened, Israel.
Exhausted by two world wars, shattered by the loss of empire, and hollowed out by the failure of the Church of England or a substantial body of intellectuals and elites to hold the line, Britain was uniquely vulnerable to the predations of the Left. The institutions that underpinned truth and morality—the traditional family and an education system that transmitted the national culture—collapsed. Britain’s monolithic intelligentsia soon embraced postmodernism, multiculturalism, victim culture, and a morally inverted hegemony of ideas in which the values of marginalized or transgressive groups replaced the values of the purportedly racist, oppressive West.
That pretty much covers what a lot of the 'progressive'(i.e., commies without the integrity to say it) types wanted- and want- to do here. Makes me wonder, where would the world be if they'd succeeded?
The second:
Further, people across the political spectrum became increasingly unable to make moral distinctions based on behavior. This erasing of the line between right and wrong produced a tendency to equate, and then invert, the roles of terrorists and of their victims, and to regard self-defense as aggression and the original violence as understandable and even justified. That attitude is, of course, inherently antagonistic to Israel, which was founded on the determination never to allow another genocide of Jews, to defend itself when attacked, and to destroy those who would destroy it. But for the Left, powerlessness is virtue; better for Jews to die than to kill, because only as dead victims can they be moral.
This is EXACTLY what we're facing with the "Don't be judgemental" crap the 'progressives' are constantly trying to shove down our throats(unless you're judging someone/something non-pc, that is). And it covers very well the attitude of so many of the GFW clowns and 'peace at any cost' fools trying to destroy the 2nd Amendment. Long time ago I wrote about people I knew who truly believed that to resist an attack with violence made you morally as wrong as the attacker; as Kevin puts it, they see no difference between 'violent and predatory' and 'violent and protective'. Which, in this case, extends to 'if Israel didn't use violence, Peace would come'. Which is amazingly idiotic. If Israel didn't use violence to protect itself, it would cease to exist in a bloodbath that might make the ghost of Ghengis Khan shake his head in wonder. But that doesn't matter to the PAAC* weenies: what does is that Israel is bad for using violence in self-defense, and that- and the very existence of Israel- justifies terrorism and hatred of Jews in general. It's not moral equivalence: it's giving moral priority to murderers and rapists who destroy lives and attempt to destroy history as well.
To quote Quint, "It's enough to piss of the Good Humor man."
*Peace At Any Cost
Two places I'd like to quote here. The first:
But a subtler reason exists for Britain’s embrace of the new anti-Semitism. After the Second World War, the radical Left set out to destroy the fundamentals of Western morality, but its campaign played out very differently in America and Britain. In America, it resulted in the culture wars, with conservatives, many churches, and sensible liberals launching a vigorous counterattack in defense of Western moral values—and, as it happened, Israel.
Exhausted by two world wars, shattered by the loss of empire, and hollowed out by the failure of the Church of England or a substantial body of intellectuals and elites to hold the line, Britain was uniquely vulnerable to the predations of the Left. The institutions that underpinned truth and morality—the traditional family and an education system that transmitted the national culture—collapsed. Britain’s monolithic intelligentsia soon embraced postmodernism, multiculturalism, victim culture, and a morally inverted hegemony of ideas in which the values of marginalized or transgressive groups replaced the values of the purportedly racist, oppressive West.
That pretty much covers what a lot of the 'progressive'(i.e., commies without the integrity to say it) types wanted- and want- to do here. Makes me wonder, where would the world be if they'd succeeded?
The second:
Further, people across the political spectrum became increasingly unable to make moral distinctions based on behavior. This erasing of the line between right and wrong produced a tendency to equate, and then invert, the roles of terrorists and of their victims, and to regard self-defense as aggression and the original violence as understandable and even justified. That attitude is, of course, inherently antagonistic to Israel, which was founded on the determination never to allow another genocide of Jews, to defend itself when attacked, and to destroy those who would destroy it. But for the Left, powerlessness is virtue; better for Jews to die than to kill, because only as dead victims can they be moral.
This is EXACTLY what we're facing with the "Don't be judgemental" crap the 'progressives' are constantly trying to shove down our throats(unless you're judging someone/something non-pc, that is). And it covers very well the attitude of so many of the GFW clowns and 'peace at any cost' fools trying to destroy the 2nd Amendment. Long time ago I wrote about people I knew who truly believed that to resist an attack with violence made you morally as wrong as the attacker; as Kevin puts it, they see no difference between 'violent and predatory' and 'violent and protective'. Which, in this case, extends to 'if Israel didn't use violence, Peace would come'. Which is amazingly idiotic. If Israel didn't use violence to protect itself, it would cease to exist in a bloodbath that might make the ghost of Ghengis Khan shake his head in wonder. But that doesn't matter to the PAAC* weenies: what does is that Israel is bad for using violence in self-defense, and that- and the very existence of Israel- justifies terrorism and hatred of Jews in general. It's not moral equivalence: it's giving moral priority to murderers and rapists who destroy lives and attempt to destroy history as well.
To quote Quint, "It's enough to piss of the Good Humor man."
*Peace At Any Cost
Monday, November 05, 2007
Also from Huffman, the 'one question'
you can ask the GFW's who want to argue with you:
My "one question" is this:
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
There are three possible answers to this question.
- "I don't know." In which case my response is, "Come back to the debate when you can answer 'Yes' or 'No'."
- "No." In which case my response is, "Then you should be advocating the repeal of ALL gun control laws and I don't want to hear a single anti-freedom word from you on this topic again."
- "Yes and here is my demonstration."
I have researched this fairly extensively and I can't find the data to support a “Yes“ answer. I have asked a lot of people this question and I haven't yet heard a "Yes" answer demonstrated. In October of 2003 the CDC released a study on this topic and couldn't come up with a "Yes" answer either. I'm not the slightest bit worried someone will be able to come up with a defensible "Yes".
I've been thinking about the Jew-hating peace activists
and I flat do not understand this*. White-supremacists masquerading as something else I would understand, they'll try most anything to get their crap out. But people who are members of longtime 'peace' groups going along with them? Or actually helping them out?
What makes this even more idiotic to me is that lots of people of jewish descent belong to these groups, some of them actively practicing their faith; that they would have one damn thing to do with this garbage is enough to make your brain uncurl.
There's a reason Joe Huffman made it his 'Jews in the attic' test: the saying that Jews are the canaries in the coal mine goes back a ways. So how the hell can supposedly intelligent, tolerant people have a hand in this crap?
*Couple of years ago I read a piece by someone, a rabbi I think, who said he was going to stop using 'anti-semite' or 'anti-semitism' in referring to some groups, they hate Jews and he was going to say it flat out from now on. I think I'll follow his lead.
What makes this even more idiotic to me is that lots of people of jewish descent belong to these groups, some of them actively practicing their faith; that they would have one damn thing to do with this garbage is enough to make your brain uncurl.
There's a reason Joe Huffman made it his 'Jews in the attic' test: the saying that Jews are the canaries in the coal mine goes back a ways. So how the hell can supposedly intelligent, tolerant people have a hand in this crap?
*Couple of years ago I read a piece by someone, a rabbi I think, who said he was going to stop using 'anti-semite' or 'anti-semitism' in referring to some groups, they hate Jews and he was going to say it flat out from now on. I think I'll follow his lead.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
'Peace Activists' my ass,
they're on the other side.
In this case, a University of Oregon peace organization called Pacifica Forum, which was founded and is led by a retired professor and a retired administrator from that university, is marking Kristallnacht with two days of speeches and conferences this weekend conducted by Mark Weber director of the Holocaust denial group Institute for Historical Review. Weber, the former editor of the National Vanguard, the main publication of the neo-Nazi National Alliance Party, has spent the past 30 years as a professional advocate of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism. His opening lecture on Friday is entitled: "Free Speech vs. Zionist Power". Advertisements for the event feature the image of a snake in the shape of a Star of David with the legend "The Israel Lobby: How Powerful Is It?" November 9 marks the 69th anniversary of Kristallnacht, which is considered by many historians to be the beginning of the Holocaust.
Really shouldn't be surprised by this crap. After all, clowns like 'Queers for Palestine' run around screaming and yelling for the death of everyone in Israel, never mind that the Palestinian Authority is rather, ah, 'harsh' with homosexuals. And they tend to flee to Israel where, while they might be frowned on, nobody has a government plan to kill them. But that doesn't count, the evil Joooos are the cause of it! They're certain!
Other links of interest on this subject here, , here, here. Oh, and Zionists are responsible for Darfur, too!
Found through the Random Nukes man.
In this case, a University of Oregon peace organization called Pacifica Forum, which was founded and is led by a retired professor and a retired administrator from that university, is marking Kristallnacht with two days of speeches and conferences this weekend conducted by Mark Weber director of the Holocaust denial group Institute for Historical Review. Weber, the former editor of the National Vanguard, the main publication of the neo-Nazi National Alliance Party, has spent the past 30 years as a professional advocate of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism. His opening lecture on Friday is entitled: "Free Speech vs. Zionist Power". Advertisements for the event feature the image of a snake in the shape of a Star of David with the legend "The Israel Lobby: How Powerful Is It?" November 9 marks the 69th anniversary of Kristallnacht, which is considered by many historians to be the beginning of the Holocaust.
Really shouldn't be surprised by this crap. After all, clowns like 'Queers for Palestine' run around screaming and yelling for the death of everyone in Israel, never mind that the Palestinian Authority is rather, ah, 'harsh' with homosexuals. And they tend to flee to Israel where, while they might be frowned on, nobody has a government plan to kill them. But that doesn't count, the evil Joooos are the cause of it! They're certain!
Other links of interest on this subject here, , here, here. Oh, and Zionists are responsible for Darfur, too!
Found through the Random Nukes man.
Reason #379 why the UN should be considered
the enemy:
“20. Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right”. There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.“ Emphasis mine.
Found this through this post at Volokh Conspiracy, which concludes with this:
It's rather telling that the UN's American defenders fail to directly address an indisputable fact: U.N. Human Rights Council's subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights has endorsed a report denying the existence of a human right of self-defense, and the subcommission, pursuant to the report, has declared that all national governments are required by international human rights law to implement various gun control provisions--provisions which, by the UN's standards, make even the gun control laws of New York City and Washington, DC, into violations of international law because they are insufficiently stringent.
Think of the fact that people are being literally enslaved in Darfur- assuming they survive the rapes and other attacks- and the UN sits around talking. Forever. And has screaming fits when someone suggests sending the people being attacked arms and trainers, because that 'would perpetuate the cycle of violence', as if people defending themselves is on the same level as the actions of the rapists and slavers and murderers.
But we should just hand our affairs over to these people and renounce our sovereignty; after all,(in chorus, now) "It's for the CHILDRENN!"
“20. Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defence is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right”. There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defence is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.“ Emphasis mine.
Found this through this post at Volokh Conspiracy, which concludes with this:
It's rather telling that the UN's American defenders fail to directly address an indisputable fact: U.N. Human Rights Council's subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights has endorsed a report denying the existence of a human right of self-defense, and the subcommission, pursuant to the report, has declared that all national governments are required by international human rights law to implement various gun control provisions--provisions which, by the UN's standards, make even the gun control laws of New York City and Washington, DC, into violations of international law because they are insufficiently stringent.
Think of the fact that people are being literally enslaved in Darfur- assuming they survive the rapes and other attacks- and the UN sits around talking. Forever. And has screaming fits when someone suggests sending the people being attacked arms and trainers, because that 'would perpetuate the cycle of violence', as if people defending themselves is on the same level as the actions of the rapists and slavers and murderers.
But we should just hand our affairs over to these people and renounce our sovereignty; after all,(in chorus, now) "It's for the CHILDRENN!"
Friday, November 02, 2007
Yes, I AM aware that I have a problem,
thank you very much(It's a sickness, I can't help myself!). Just ignore that part.
The week before the big gun show in Tulsa I posted this on AIM and their constant efforts to ruin my financial standing. Biggest gun show in the world a few days away, all kinds of stuff to look for... yes, dammit, I ordered one. Set aside some of the show funds and made a call. And a couple of days later the Brown Truck of Happiness people delivered it
I've read a couple of model designations, I'll just us 2A1 here: it's the #1 MkIII Lee Enfield, reengineered to fire the 7.62x51mm Nato cartridge(.308 for short). 12-round magazine, otherwise externally it's pretty much identical to the original. Different steel in the bolt, receiver & barrel, different bolt head for the rimless cartridge.
I just clicked on the link in my previous post, and it's no good anymore, looks like they sold out of these fast. They'd advertised these as 'shooter specials', the wood being more beat-up and/or more repairs than the stuff they'd previously had but the metal being in the same condition. For a hundred bucks, I figured worth a try: I've dealt with AIM before.
The 'more beat-up' consisted of lots of little dings- hardly unusual in a milsurp rifle- and two repairs. See the two lighter-colored vertical pieces on the left?
A very well-done repair. There's one more like this on the right, done with darker wood; you have to look for it to find it. And that's it. The metal has that painted finish the Indians kept from the Brits, only this looks like something done with a spray can by a kid in a hurry to finish a model airplane. But the action is tight- I don't think it was fired much- and the bore is spotless. It came with what I call a 'halfway' grease job: it was greased for storage but not the 'block of grease with a gun inside' you see from a lot of Brit firearms, so not a big problem cleaning it up enough to try out.
I mentioned the action was tight, the trigger was also a touch, not 'rough' but not polished either. Again, I think it was carried a lot and shot very little. And the sights were WAY off to the right. I discovered and corrected that at the indoor range, and when went to the outdoor range the other day tweaked the sights to dead-on and tried it at 100 yards with some South African ball I had. I forgot my rests(always something, dammit) and this thing didn't do its best off one of the sandbags I borrowed. All shots in the black, but not good grouping. So I looped-up using the sling I'd stuck on(a 1907 model) and fired with it, elbows on the bench and left forearm against the bag and got this for five rounds:
The one centered in the bull was a called flyer(ignore the .22 holes), the other four went into less than 2". It did about as well on another before I gave up on shooting for best groups, the wind was gusting and those little sights were starting to give my eyes problems.
That's better accuracy than I was hoping for out of this. I think a little polishing to smooth the trigger(it broke cleanly if a touch heavy) would help a bit, but hardly necessary for a shooter(no, I won't leave it alone). Got to say, a good deal for the price.
The week before the big gun show in Tulsa I posted this on AIM and their constant efforts to ruin my financial standing. Biggest gun show in the world a few days away, all kinds of stuff to look for... yes, dammit, I ordered one. Set aside some of the show funds and made a call. And a couple of days later the Brown Truck of Happiness people delivered it
I've read a couple of model designations, I'll just us 2A1 here: it's the #1 MkIII Lee Enfield, reengineered to fire the 7.62x51mm Nato cartridge(.308 for short). 12-round magazine, otherwise externally it's pretty much identical to the original. Different steel in the bolt, receiver & barrel, different bolt head for the rimless cartridge.
I just clicked on the link in my previous post, and it's no good anymore, looks like they sold out of these fast. They'd advertised these as 'shooter specials', the wood being more beat-up and/or more repairs than the stuff they'd previously had but the metal being in the same condition. For a hundred bucks, I figured worth a try: I've dealt with AIM before.
The 'more beat-up' consisted of lots of little dings- hardly unusual in a milsurp rifle- and two repairs. See the two lighter-colored vertical pieces on the left?
A very well-done repair. There's one more like this on the right, done with darker wood; you have to look for it to find it. And that's it. The metal has that painted finish the Indians kept from the Brits, only this looks like something done with a spray can by a kid in a hurry to finish a model airplane. But the action is tight- I don't think it was fired much- and the bore is spotless. It came with what I call a 'halfway' grease job: it was greased for storage but not the 'block of grease with a gun inside' you see from a lot of Brit firearms, so not a big problem cleaning it up enough to try out.
I mentioned the action was tight, the trigger was also a touch, not 'rough' but not polished either. Again, I think it was carried a lot and shot very little. And the sights were WAY off to the right. I discovered and corrected that at the indoor range, and when went to the outdoor range the other day tweaked the sights to dead-on and tried it at 100 yards with some South African ball I had. I forgot my rests(always something, dammit) and this thing didn't do its best off one of the sandbags I borrowed. All shots in the black, but not good grouping. So I looped-up using the sling I'd stuck on(a 1907 model) and fired with it, elbows on the bench and left forearm against the bag and got this for five rounds:
The one centered in the bull was a called flyer(ignore the .22 holes), the other four went into less than 2". It did about as well on another before I gave up on shooting for best groups, the wind was gusting and those little sights were starting to give my eyes problems.
That's better accuracy than I was hoping for out of this. I think a little polishing to smooth the trigger(it broke cleanly if a touch heavy) would help a bit, but hardly necessary for a shooter(no, I won't leave it alone). Got to say, a good deal for the price.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Ammo Day is a'comin'!
The poor whiny illegals and supporters lose another round
They'd filed to try to prevent HB 1804 from taking effect today, and that was thrown out by the judge. The rest of the lawsuit still hangs around, but the law is in effect. To the accompaniment of the usual whining and howling and "How can you people be so unfeeling and cruel?" bullshit.
"We are people from all faith traditions, denominations," Sanchez said. "Our faith will bring light to this moment of social darkness."
And- of course- you've just GOT to link the war to this:
Bishop Edward J. Slattery of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Tulsa said a prayer in Spanish for the crowd.
"I was asking that God forgive our sins from all over the world, especially with wars," Slattery said afterward. "I asked that we resort to charity and love."
And further statements of moral superiority:
The Quran teaches that people should give food and greetings to both people you know and those you don't know, said Priscilla Reem Khader, who is Muslim.
"As Americans, we have a moral duty to care for all mankind," she said. "Everything we have, including this land, is from God and ultimately, everything belongs to him."
Unspoken was the apparent belief that 'caring for mankind' means 'trash your culture for the sake of being nice to lawbreakers'.
Then we have general fearmongering:
He's unsure how HB 1804 will affect him and is concerned.
"I do worry about the how the bill will affect me because I'm Hispanic. The bill is going to affect every Hispanic person,” Montoya said.
Ah, here's a clue Mr. Montoya: it won't affect you unless you're here illegally. So either calm down or get the hell out, whichever is applicable.
And, of course, you also have to have the nazi references and "We're a'skeered!" notes:
On the other side of the argument, the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Religious Leaders accused the Tulsa mayor, police chief and Tulsa County Sheriff’ Department, as well as state Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, of “ethnic cleansing.”
“We are afraid of your words. We are afraid of your actions,” said Miguel Rivera, president of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders. “If this bill goes into effect midnight tonight, it will be open season on Latinos.”
Again, dumbass, only if you are here illegally, or helping illegals break more laws. Which, considering your actions and words, the latter is almost certainly the case.
There's lots of "The children don't know why their parents are scared" and so forth("It's for the CHILDREENNN!"), and some "We will show our political power!" threats. About what you'd expect from the illegal enablers, including the obligatory "We will serve the Lord by helping people break this law!" crap from the usual suspects. Base is, this law is in effect, and from reports it caused a lot of illegals to move out of the state even before today. Which I consider a good thing. So we'll see what happens next.
"We are people from all faith traditions, denominations," Sanchez said. "Our faith will bring light to this moment of social darkness."
And- of course- you've just GOT to link the war to this:
Bishop Edward J. Slattery of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Tulsa said a prayer in Spanish for the crowd.
"I was asking that God forgive our sins from all over the world, especially with wars," Slattery said afterward. "I asked that we resort to charity and love."
And further statements of moral superiority:
The Quran teaches that people should give food and greetings to both people you know and those you don't know, said Priscilla Reem Khader, who is Muslim.
"As Americans, we have a moral duty to care for all mankind," she said. "Everything we have, including this land, is from God and ultimately, everything belongs to him."
Unspoken was the apparent belief that 'caring for mankind' means 'trash your culture for the sake of being nice to lawbreakers'.
Then we have general fearmongering:
He's unsure how HB 1804 will affect him and is concerned.
"I do worry about the how the bill will affect me because I'm Hispanic. The bill is going to affect every Hispanic person,” Montoya said.
Ah, here's a clue Mr. Montoya: it won't affect you unless you're here illegally. So either calm down or get the hell out, whichever is applicable.
And, of course, you also have to have the nazi references and "We're a'skeered!" notes:
On the other side of the argument, the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Religious Leaders accused the Tulsa mayor, police chief and Tulsa County Sheriff’ Department, as well as state Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, of “ethnic cleansing.”
“We are afraid of your words. We are afraid of your actions,” said Miguel Rivera, president of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders. “If this bill goes into effect midnight tonight, it will be open season on Latinos.”
Again, dumbass, only if you are here illegally, or helping illegals break more laws. Which, considering your actions and words, the latter is almost certainly the case.
There's lots of "The children don't know why their parents are scared" and so forth("It's for the CHILDREENNN!"), and some "We will show our political power!" threats. About what you'd expect from the illegal enablers, including the obligatory "We will serve the Lord by helping people break this law!" crap from the usual suspects. Base is, this law is in effect, and from reports it caused a lot of illegals to move out of the state even before today. Which I consider a good thing. So we'll see what happens next.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Glenn Beck has been pointing out what a bunch of
clowns are running Hasbro toys, along with the (now standard) 'America must not be celebrated' Hollywood weenies, on the subject of GI Joe. What the Hollyweenies & Co. are doing to him, that is. Instead of an American troop, it stands for Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity, taking orders from bloody damned Brussels. Ace had a post on this, which linked to a full explanation of the man whose face adorns that figure. I'm going to post a part of the article:
According to reports in Variety and the aforementioned IGN, the producers explain international marketing would simply prove too difficult for a summer, 2009 film about a heroic U.S. soldier. Thus the need to "eliminate Joe's connection to the U.S. military."
Excuse me for a moment, I've been trying to clean up my language but this calls for something other than polite words:
God DAMN these people. They will spend millions making piece of shit movies designed to make the U.S. look as bad as possible- movies they know will not make money here, which means they're intended to make most of their money in other countries, and consider the implications of that. They march around screaming about how horrible and fascist this country is and what morons and bloody-handed tools the troops are, AND claim to 'support the troops' while they do these things. And they have to go after the toys, too. Can't have the kids playing with 'a real American hero', it might make them think the troops aren't a bunch of baby-killing rapists.
Right now I'm ready for that 9.0 earthquake to take a large part of California, I'm so sick of this shit. Barring an earthquake or something else more suitable(too much collateral damage), I'll end with this from Ace's piece:
You need to get toys for Christmas? Make sure they don't come from Hasbro.
In other events happening about the time P/Sgt. Paige was making his mark, Trainer has a piece that notes a naval battle of huge significance as well:
"Hunter had to do something. The course he took now could decide the war. 'Come left,' he said, and Washington straightened out on a course parallel to the one on which she (had been) steaming. Washington's rudder change put the burning destroyers between her and the enemy, preventing her from being silhouetted by their fires.
"The move made the Japanese momentarily cease fire. Lacking radar, they could not spot Washington behind the fires. ...
"Meanwhile, Washington raced through burning seas. Everyone could see dozens of men in the water clinging to floating wreckage. Flag Lieutenant Raymond Thompson said, "Seeing that burning, sinking ship as it passed so close aboard, and realizing that there was nothing I, or anyone, could do about it, was a devastating experience.'
"Commander Ayrault, Washington's executive officer, clambered down ladders, ran to Bart Stoodley's damage-control post, and ordered Stoodley to cut loose life rafts. That saved a lot of lives. But the men in the water had some fight left in them. One was heard to scream, 'Get after them, Washington!' "
Sacrificing their ships by maneuvering into the path of torpedoes intended for the Washington, the captains of the American destroyers had given China Lee one final chance. The Washington was fast, undamaged, and bristling with 16-inch guns. And, thanks to Lt. Hunter's course change, she was also now invisible to the enemy.
Blinded by the smoke and flames, the Japanese battleship Kirishima turned on her searchlights, illuminating the helpless South Dakota, and opened fire. Finally, standing out in the darkness, Lee and Davis could positively identify an enemy target.
The Washington's main batteries opened fire at 12 midnight precisely. Her new SG radar fire control system worked perfectly. Between midnight and 12:07 a.m., Nov. 14, the "last ship in the U.S. Pacific Fleet" stunned the battleship Kirishima with 75, 16-inch shells. For those aboard the Kirishima, it rained steel.
In seven minutes, the Japanese battleship was reduced to a funeral pyre. She went down at 3:25 a.m., the first enemy sunk by an American battleship since the Spanish-American War. Stunned, the remaining Japanese ships withdrew. Within days, Yamamoto and his staff reviewed their mounting losses and recommended the unthinkable to the emperor - withdrawal from Guadalcanal.
As Platoon Sgt. Mitchell Paige and his 33 riflemen set about carefully emplacing their four water-cooled .30-caliber Brownings on that hillside, 65 years ago this week -- manning their section of the thin khaki line that was expected to defend Henderson Field against the assault of the night of Oct. 25, 1942 -- it's unlikely anyone thought they were about to provide the definitive answer to that most desperate of questions: How many able-bodied U.S. Marines does it take to hold a hill against 2,000 armed and motivated attackers?
But by the time the night was over, "The 29th (Japanese) Infantry Regiment has lost 553 killed or missing and 479 wounded among its 2,554 men," historian Lippman reports. "The 16th (Japanese) Regiment's losses are uncounted, but the 164th's burial parties handled 975 Japanese bodies. ... The American estimate of 2,200 Japanese dead is probably too low."
You've already figured out where the Japanese focused their attack, haven't you? Among the 90 American dead and seriously wounded that night were all the men in Mitchell Paige's platoon. Every one. As the night of endless attacks wore on, Paige moved up and down his line, pulling his dead and wounded comrades back into their foxholes and firing a few bursts from each of the four Brownings in turn, convincing the Japanese forces down the hill that the positions were still manned.
The citation for Paige's Medal of Honor picks up the tale: "When the enemy broke through the line directly in front of his position, P/Sgt. Paige, commanding a machine gun section with fearless determination, continued to direct the fire of his gunners until all his men were either killed or wounded. Alone, against the deadly hail of Japanese shells, he fought with his gun and when it was destroyed, took over another, moving from gun to gun, never ceasing his withering fire."
In the end, Sgt. Paige picked up the last of the 40-pound, belt-fed Brownings and did something for which the weapon was never designed. Sgt. Paige walked down the hill toward the place where he could hear the last Japanese survivors rallying to move around his flank, the belt-fed gun cradled under his arm, firing as he went.
Coming up at dawn, battalion executive officer Major Odell M. Conoley was the first to discover how many able-bodied United States Marines it takes to hold a hill against two regiments of motivated, combat-hardened infantrymen who have never known defeat.
On a hill where the bodies were piled like cordwood, Mitchell Paige alone sat upright behind his 30-caliber Browning, waiting to see what the dawn would bring.
The hill had held, because on the hill remained the minimum number of able-bodied United States Marines necessary to hold the position.
According to reports in Variety and the aforementioned IGN, the producers explain international marketing would simply prove too difficult for a summer, 2009 film about a heroic U.S. soldier. Thus the need to "eliminate Joe's connection to the U.S. military."
Excuse me for a moment, I've been trying to clean up my language but this calls for something other than polite words:
God DAMN these people. They will spend millions making piece of shit movies designed to make the U.S. look as bad as possible- movies they know will not make money here, which means they're intended to make most of their money in other countries, and consider the implications of that. They march around screaming about how horrible and fascist this country is and what morons and bloody-handed tools the troops are, AND claim to 'support the troops' while they do these things. And they have to go after the toys, too. Can't have the kids playing with 'a real American hero', it might make them think the troops aren't a bunch of baby-killing rapists.
Right now I'm ready for that 9.0 earthquake to take a large part of California, I'm so sick of this shit. Barring an earthquake or something else more suitable(too much collateral damage), I'll end with this from Ace's piece:
"When the Hasbro Toy Co. called some years back, asking permission to put the retired colonel's face on some kid's doll, Mitchell Paige thought they must be joking.
But they weren't. That's his mug, on the little Marine they call "G.I. Joe." At least, it has been up till now.
Mitchell Paige's only condition? That G.I. Joe must always remain a United States Marine.
I hope his estate is litigious. Maybe they can appoint Fred Goldman as their family advisor"You need to get toys for Christmas? Make sure they don't come from Hasbro.
In other events happening about the time P/Sgt. Paige was making his mark, Trainer has a piece that notes a naval battle of huge significance as well:
"Hunter had to do something. The course he took now could decide the war. 'Come left,' he said, and Washington straightened out on a course parallel to the one on which she (had been) steaming. Washington's rudder change put the burning destroyers between her and the enemy, preventing her from being silhouetted by their fires.
"The move made the Japanese momentarily cease fire. Lacking radar, they could not spot Washington behind the fires. ...
"Meanwhile, Washington raced through burning seas. Everyone could see dozens of men in the water clinging to floating wreckage. Flag Lieutenant Raymond Thompson said, "Seeing that burning, sinking ship as it passed so close aboard, and realizing that there was nothing I, or anyone, could do about it, was a devastating experience.'
"Commander Ayrault, Washington's executive officer, clambered down ladders, ran to Bart Stoodley's damage-control post, and ordered Stoodley to cut loose life rafts. That saved a lot of lives. But the men in the water had some fight left in them. One was heard to scream, 'Get after them, Washington!' "
Sacrificing their ships by maneuvering into the path of torpedoes intended for the Washington, the captains of the American destroyers had given China Lee one final chance. The Washington was fast, undamaged, and bristling with 16-inch guns. And, thanks to Lt. Hunter's course change, she was also now invisible to the enemy.
Blinded by the smoke and flames, the Japanese battleship Kirishima turned on her searchlights, illuminating the helpless South Dakota, and opened fire. Finally, standing out in the darkness, Lee and Davis could positively identify an enemy target.
The Washington's main batteries opened fire at 12 midnight precisely. Her new SG radar fire control system worked perfectly. Between midnight and 12:07 a.m., Nov. 14, the "last ship in the U.S. Pacific Fleet" stunned the battleship Kirishima with 75, 16-inch shells. For those aboard the Kirishima, it rained steel.
In seven minutes, the Japanese battleship was reduced to a funeral pyre. She went down at 3:25 a.m., the first enemy sunk by an American battleship since the Spanish-American War. Stunned, the remaining Japanese ships withdrew. Within days, Yamamoto and his staff reviewed their mounting losses and recommended the unthinkable to the emperor - withdrawal from Guadalcanal.
And the 'activists' continue
to work at helping illegal aliens violate the law. Specifically, in trying to keep House Bill 1804 from going into effect. From The McCarville Report:
The law, which takes effect Thursday, has sparked intense fear in the Hispanic community that families will be separated, several speakers said."We're asking for a moratorium on all raids, arrests and deportations until such a time as our Congress assumes the responsibility of an immigration law that is just and comprehensive," said the Rev. Victor Orta, president of the American Dream Coalition. (emphasis mine)
Got that? Not just a hold on this particular law, but ALL 'raids, arrests and deportations'. Until- they hope- the clowns in Congress can sneak an amnesty bill through.
Then, as of Monday the 29th:
A federal lawsuit challenging the law, which goes into effect Thursday, was refiled last week. It added eightillegal alien lawbreakersundocumented residents who plan to testify that they will face eviction from their landlords unless they provide legal identification, such as a social security card, as required by the new law. The other plaintiffs include the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and two churches.
Just gotta love it. "Your Honor, if this law goes into effect, these people who are here illegally will be evicted from their dwelling, just because they're illegal. And that's not right! It's not fair!"
And, of course, the author of the bill, along with anyone who supports it, is an evil racist. Doesn't matter that it says 'illegal aliens', they know who you mean...
I can't find the article right now, but the Attorney General has asked the challenge currently filed to be tossed because 'nobody in the suit can show they've been harmed'. Personally, I'd think a better statement would be: "Your Honor, these people are here to claim that enforcing our laws is 'bad', and that criminals- people who snuck into this country illegally- should be able to sue to prevent the law from being enforced. We ask you to throw this suit out on the basis of idiocy and that criminals shouldn't be allowed to come into our courts and say "We don't like your laws, and we don't want to obey them, so leave us alone!"
We're hearing lots of things about how 'people are worried, there are concerns about families being torn apart,illegalsundocumented workers are leaving for fear of being deported' and on and on. Know what? I Don't Care. I'm sick to death of being told I'm a racist for wanting the damn law enforced. I'm sick of being told that people here illegally deserve special considerations when they commit more crimes. I'm sick of crap like this:
Advocates for immigrants say the vast majority of the undocumented people in the U.S. are hard workers who are just trying to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads.
They also say that many of the people pushing the hardest for immigration reform describe themselves as Christians yet seem to be lacking the compassion for which Jesus is known.
They wonder whether the real motive behind measures such as HB 1804 is racism.
I'm sick of a bunch of clowns claiming "We are true Christians" saying they'll help these illegals break the law and daring the cops to do anything about it. Yeah, Christ said a lot about "Thou must aid politically correct criminals in their transgressions", didn't he?
Add to it that all too many of these clowns who think multiple-murderers who happen to be illegals deserve special considerations also tend to be people who think our troops are somewhat subhuman, and a serious amount of disgust has entered my life.
The law, which takes effect Thursday, has sparked intense fear in the Hispanic community that families will be separated, several speakers said."We're asking for a moratorium on all raids, arrests and deportations until such a time as our Congress assumes the responsibility of an immigration law that is just and comprehensive," said the Rev. Victor Orta, president of the American Dream Coalition. (emphasis mine)
Got that? Not just a hold on this particular law, but ALL 'raids, arrests and deportations'. Until- they hope- the clowns in Congress can sneak an amnesty bill through.
Then, as of Monday the 29th:
A federal lawsuit challenging the law, which goes into effect Thursday, was refiled last week. It added eight
Just gotta love it. "Your Honor, if this law goes into effect, these people who are here illegally will be evicted from their dwelling, just because they're illegal. And that's not right! It's not fair!"
And, of course, the author of the bill, along with anyone who supports it, is an evil racist. Doesn't matter that it says 'illegal aliens', they know who you mean...
I can't find the article right now, but the Attorney General has asked the challenge currently filed to be tossed because 'nobody in the suit can show they've been harmed'. Personally, I'd think a better statement would be: "Your Honor, these people are here to claim that enforcing our laws is 'bad', and that criminals- people who snuck into this country illegally- should be able to sue to prevent the law from being enforced. We ask you to throw this suit out on the basis of idiocy and that criminals shouldn't be allowed to come into our courts and say "We don't like your laws, and we don't want to obey them, so leave us alone!"
We're hearing lots of things about how 'people are worried, there are concerns about families being torn apart,
Advocates for immigrants say the vast majority of the undocumented people in the U.S. are hard workers who are just trying to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads.
They also say that many of the people pushing the hardest for immigration reform describe themselves as Christians yet seem to be lacking the compassion for which Jesus is known.
They wonder whether the real motive behind measures such as HB 1804 is racism.
I'm sick of a bunch of clowns claiming "We are true Christians" saying they'll help these illegals break the law and daring the cops to do anything about it. Yeah, Christ said a lot about "Thou must aid politically correct criminals in their transgressions", didn't he?
Add to it that all too many of these clowns who think multiple-murderers who happen to be illegals deserve special considerations also tend to be people who think our troops are somewhat subhuman, and a serious amount of disgust has entered my life.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
.22's are weird
in their choices of ammo. I think a lot of them are far more picky than centerfires. Not only whether the round will cycle a semi-auto properly, but in accuracy: I've mentioned before shooting rifles that got better groups with inexpensive ammo than high-dollar target or match ammo.
What brought this up(again) is a trip to the range today. Just for the hell of it I stuck a box of the Aguila SSS in to try on a couple of rifles. This stuff is loaded subsonic and has a long, 60 grain bullet instead of the standard 40 grain. To keep the length correct they make the case short; weird looking round. And whether a rifle or pistol shoots it worth a damn depends on the whim of the gun. Some shoot it quite well, and others will keyhole the bullet at 25 yards: the rifling on many does not spin the bullet fast enough to stabilize.
I've now found two of mine that shoot it well: the Martini Model 12, which will put the things into 2.5-3.5" groups at 100 yards, and my Remington 512. At 50 yards this rifle hits dead-on with Federal Champion and gives about 1" groups or a touch better. It put five rounds of the Aguila 3.5" low and 2" right at that range, but the group- including a flyer I have to call my own- was 1.3". Take out the flyer, .7". Not bad at all.
For pests and small game this round, assuming your gun will shoot it well, ought to be a killer: with the weight and shape it should penetrate very well on larger critters. But you'd probably have to zero specifically for it, as that weight and velocity means it'll have a different point of impact than pretty much everything else.
What brought this up(again) is a trip to the range today. Just for the hell of it I stuck a box of the Aguila SSS in to try on a couple of rifles. This stuff is loaded subsonic and has a long, 60 grain bullet instead of the standard 40 grain. To keep the length correct they make the case short; weird looking round. And whether a rifle or pistol shoots it worth a damn depends on the whim of the gun. Some shoot it quite well, and others will keyhole the bullet at 25 yards: the rifling on many does not spin the bullet fast enough to stabilize.
I've now found two of mine that shoot it well: the Martini Model 12, which will put the things into 2.5-3.5" groups at 100 yards, and my Remington 512. At 50 yards this rifle hits dead-on with Federal Champion and gives about 1" groups or a touch better. It put five rounds of the Aguila 3.5" low and 2" right at that range, but the group- including a flyer I have to call my own- was 1.3". Take out the flyer, .7". Not bad at all.
For pests and small game this round, assuming your gun will shoot it well, ought to be a killer: with the weight and shape it should penetrate very well on larger critters. But you'd probably have to zero specifically for it, as that weight and velocity means it'll have a different point of impact than pretty much everything else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)