He called Christmas day, which was rather nice. Between last I heard about a month ago and now, kind of breaks down like this:
In a new base, he can't say where.
Doing something, he can't say what.
No showers, because the prefab unit being shipped in from wherever the hell they get them from was part of a shipment that go hijacked.
But the do have a field kitchen, so not eating MREs all the time.
No space for anything, so "don't send anything else right now".
And busy as hell, which means not enough sleep.
So cold(it's kind of chilly there right now), smelly and tired, but alive and kicking.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
On the subject of boobs,
since Kim brought it up, I'll throw out the following:
I like them.
Pleasing size depends entirely on how they fit the lady in question.
I think that women who get Stetson-size implants, like those on the next-to-last photo in Kim's post, are either making a fortune stripping or have rocks in their heads. Possibly both.
Ladies, if you decide to get a boost, or have a touch of some other cosmetic surgery done because it makes you feel better, you go right ahead. But: if you think that big boobs are required for beauty, you're wrong; or if some male of the species hints- or flat-out says- that you need to get a boob job to make him happy, then you should remove yourself from his presence immediately, because jackass sometimes tends to rub off on you.
And now, having been invited to visit some friends for New Years, no posting barring something I just can't pass up(arrests, illustrations of the above or other big news) till after the first.
I like them.
Pleasing size depends entirely on how they fit the lady in question.
I think that women who get Stetson-size implants, like those on the next-to-last photo in Kim's post, are either making a fortune stripping or have rocks in their heads. Possibly both.
Ladies, if you decide to get a boost, or have a touch of some other cosmetic surgery done because it makes you feel better, you go right ahead. But: if you think that big boobs are required for beauty, you're wrong; or if some male of the species hints- or flat-out says- that you need to get a boob job to make him happy, then you should remove yourself from his presence immediately, because jackass sometimes tends to rub off on you.
And now, having been invited to visit some friends for New Years, no posting barring something I just can't pass up(arrests, illustrations of the above or other big news) till after the first.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Note to self:
do not screw with the blog template when just home and tired.
Blogroll, etc., will return when I have time to put things back together properly
Blogroll, etc., will return when I have time to put things back together properly
I just can't pass up this dirtbag lawyer story
found here, and all over the local airwaves. Short version: lawyer found guilty by the state bar association of various unethical things, including exchanging sex with a client for legal work. He was just on the air saying that he 'blamed his enemies for causing these charges to be prosecuted against him'(well, duh! as my daughter used to say) and that 'he will ask the state Supreme Court to impose a penalty less drastic than disbarring'. Again, what clown caught in something like this hasn't asked for a less drastic penalty? Seems to be a shortage of lawyers caught in such things willing to say "I screwed up bigtime, and I deserve the fullest penalty."
Oh, hell, I can't let it go: this is a LITERAL case of a lawyer screwing his client.
Oh, hell, I can't let it go: this is a LITERAL case of a lawyer screwing his client.
First off, here's what part of my little pecan tree looked like
after the ice stopped forming:
The ice on top of the husks there is about 1/2" thick. I thought I was going to lose a couple of branches off it, but it held.
Second, I've got to show you the neat flashlight I got for Christmas
My parents ordered it from somewhere. It's a grand total of 1.5" long, 1.25" wide and about 9/16" thick. Two leds on the front instead of bulbs
and a crank on the side to charge it
It says one minute cranking will give about five minutes of light, which seems about right. Not something for a primary emergency light, but damn handy to stick in a glove compartment or console or whatever.
The ice on top of the husks there is about 1/2" thick. I thought I was going to lose a couple of branches off it, but it held.
Second, I've got to show you the neat flashlight I got for Christmas
My parents ordered it from somewhere. It's a grand total of 1.5" long, 1.25" wide and about 9/16" thick. Two leds on the front instead of bulbs
and a crank on the side to charge it
It says one minute cranking will give about five minutes of light, which seems about right. Not something for a primary emergency light, but damn handy to stick in a glove compartment or console or whatever.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Is there no end to the stupidity of the globular warmering
idiots?
There is a poetic justice to this of course. It is conservatives who are giving us the candidates who steadfastly refuse to have the nation take steps that could slow the pace of climate change, so it is appropriate that they should bear the brunt of its impact.
The important thing is that we, on the higher ground both actually and figuratively, need to remember that, when they begin their historic migration from their doomed regions, we not give them the keys to the city. They certainly should be offered assistance in their time of need, but we need to keep a firm grip on our political systems, making sure that these guilty throngs who allowed the world to go to hell are gerrymandered into political impotence in their new homes.
So this clown thinks that A: it's us Globular Warmering Deniers who'll be flooded or droughted out because of us notworshipping at the Alter of the Goreacle believing in their Holy Cause and B: if their dream for the future were to come about, we'd simply stand quietly while the True Believers 'gerrymander us into political impotence'.
Got news for you, guy: First, your dream ain't coming true. Second, if some oddball circumstance did cause us to have to move, you need to remember two things:
We would not stand for being 'gerrymandered into impotence' in our new homes, and(a big one) if you think we'd leave our arms behind when we moved, then you have even fewer working brain cells than I thought. Just try kicking up into line: you won't like the result.
And isn't it just like a tolerant, fair-minded 'progressive' to plan on keeping political opponents from actually having a say in things?
Added: Just found this at Michelle Malkin: check out the other good progressive things this nitwit is involved in.
There is a poetic justice to this of course. It is conservatives who are giving us the candidates who steadfastly refuse to have the nation take steps that could slow the pace of climate change, so it is appropriate that they should bear the brunt of its impact.
The important thing is that we, on the higher ground both actually and figuratively, need to remember that, when they begin their historic migration from their doomed regions, we not give them the keys to the city. They certainly should be offered assistance in their time of need, but we need to keep a firm grip on our political systems, making sure that these guilty throngs who allowed the world to go to hell are gerrymandered into political impotence in their new homes.
So this clown thinks that A: it's us Globular Warmering Deniers who'll be flooded or droughted out because of us not
Got news for you, guy: First, your dream ain't coming true. Second, if some oddball circumstance did cause us to have to move, you need to remember two things:
We would not stand for being 'gerrymandered into impotence' in our new homes, and(a big one) if you think we'd leave our arms behind when we moved, then you have even fewer working brain cells than I thought. Just try kicking up into line: you won't like the result.
And isn't it just like a tolerant, fair-minded 'progressive' to plan on keeping political opponents from actually having a say in things?
Added: Just found this at Michelle Malkin: check out the other good progressive things this nitwit is involved in.
And one last thing from Tim Blair before I go:
Communists still control-the-news hypocrites:
There was no time to switch from the €22 (£16) "rich man's dish" to a more modest platter of kippers, because Sahra Wagenknecht had already been caught on camera in the act of betraying her own political ideals.
So the photogenic MEP for Germany's Left party set about trying to destroy the evidence of what happened that night in the Strasbourg restaurant Aux Armes in a manner that has sent ripples of scorn across Germany.
...
According to Uca, the photographs of Wagenknecht cracking into her lobster had been erased from the camera when it was returned to her the following day.
...
clearly embarrassed Wagenknecht - who was brought up on the works of Marx and Engels, joined the East German communists in 1989, and allegedly mourned the fall of the Berlin Wall - has admitted both to eating the lobster, and erasing the pictures.
But she defended her actions.
"I don't do anything that I say others shouldn't do," she told the daily TAZ. "On the contrary, I'm fighting for a society in which everyone can afford to eat lobster."
As to why she erased the pictures? "I didn't like them," she said.
Let's see, miserable communist acting like a miserable communist; is anybody surprised?
There was no time to switch from the €22 (£16) "rich man's dish" to a more modest platter of kippers, because Sahra Wagenknecht had already been caught on camera in the act of betraying her own political ideals.
So the photogenic MEP for Germany's Left party set about trying to destroy the evidence of what happened that night in the Strasbourg restaurant Aux Armes in a manner that has sent ripples of scorn across Germany.
...
According to Uca, the photographs of Wagenknecht cracking into her lobster had been erased from the camera when it was returned to her the following day.
...
clearly embarrassed Wagenknecht - who was brought up on the works of Marx and Engels, joined the East German communists in 1989, and allegedly mourned the fall of the Berlin Wall - has admitted both to eating the lobster, and erasing the pictures.
But she defended her actions.
"I don't do anything that I say others shouldn't do," she told the daily TAZ. "On the contrary, I'm fighting for a society in which everyone can afford to eat lobster."
As to why she erased the pictures? "I didn't like them," she said.
Let's see, miserable communist acting like a miserable communist; is anybody surprised?
This just in:
Intellectuals have large holes in head. Or will as soon as the Taliban gets hold of them.
Right now I'm visiting my parents and hadn't planned on doing any blogging, but I saw this when checking some sites and just couldn't not comment on this crap:
I wonder where he stands on the pointed question that Amis recently put to his impeccably liberal audience at the ICA: 'Do you feel morally superior to the Taliban?' (Only about a third raised a hand to say they did, a nice demonstration of relativist liberal guilt.)
That's bad enough. There's also a slight problem with the response:
Eagleton lets out a sharp laugh. 'I certainly hope I am morally superior to people who believe in slaughtering innocents. But what I object to is the dangerous fudging of the line between the Muslim world and the Taliban, and the easy moral superiority that leaves us blind to our own crimes, or the crimes done in our names. It is an obvious point, but one still worth making, that it was our own barbarism and colonialism in the Middle East that has helped to create these situations in the first place. Amis and Hitchens have become perversely silent on the crimes of Western civilisation. Western civilisation has produced enormous advances, but not to see the darker side of that, not to see the barbarism of the West, and not to see that at a time when we are killing thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems extraordinarily naive.'
Couple of points in this: First, I don't think it matters one damn bit what the U.S. or Britain did x years ago; the fact is our influences would have spread no matter what. In the past, did varous things done cause problems with various muslim or muslim-influenced countries? Yes. Does that justify a bunch of self-detonating neolithic goatherds blowing up people in the name of God? Hell no. Nice excuse, and it makes a lot of people feel better because they can blame their own country(if you're western) or outside influences(if you're a perpetual-victim muslim) for the problems, but not realistic. Lots and lots of Busddhists and others affected by, for instance, the British Empire in past years but you don't see a lot of them running around screaming "Death to those who insult whatever!" And, as I said, Coke and jeans and movies and whatever would have been spreading and causing problems for medieval-minded nuts even if our only contact with a country had been selling movies and books and whatever.
Second, the 'but not to see the darker side of that, not to see the barbarism of the West, and not to see that at a time when we are killing thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems extraordinarily naive.' crap. That sounds an awful lot like "We're blowing up and shooting terrorists and islamist murderers, and that's just as bad as blowing up people in the market. Or torturing and murdering kids in school. We're just as bad as they are!" Which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit. From a clapped-out bull. As someone put it in a different reference, when innocents have died from Israeli military actions, it's been accidental, something they work hard to prevent; when it happens from Hamas & Hizballah and Co., it's what they're trying to do, and if you can't see that difference, then you have great big rocks in your head. And a really sick outlook on life.
I have what will apparently be a big surprise for Mr. Eagleton: given a choice, we wouldn't be there. I don't know anybody who actually wants to have troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, or a number of other places. Given a choice, we'd let them sink or swim on their own, and considering the dependance most of these places have on the west for an awful lot of things it'd mostly be sink. Which would let a lot of people salve their conscience by moaning about how "The rich countries are not helping these people!", etc. But the people in charge- in some cases the people who were in charge- wanted to control us, still do in some cases, and that we like even less. So we had to act.
Which means we've got friends and family in uniform in places they'd rather not be, doing work they'd rather not do. And we have to listen to people blame us for the fact that people like Ahmadinnerjacket would like to kill everyone in Israel, and for that matter most of the rest of the non-islamic world. But then, the latter would be true no matter what. We're what the wahabi nutcases blame for islam not ruling the world, so sooner or later we'd have been their target for terrorism, no matter what happened in the past.
Right now I'm visiting my parents and hadn't planned on doing any blogging, but I saw this when checking some sites and just couldn't not comment on this crap:
I wonder where he stands on the pointed question that Amis recently put to his impeccably liberal audience at the ICA: 'Do you feel morally superior to the Taliban?' (Only about a third raised a hand to say they did, a nice demonstration of relativist liberal guilt.)
That's bad enough. There's also a slight problem with the response:
Eagleton lets out a sharp laugh. 'I certainly hope I am morally superior to people who believe in slaughtering innocents. But what I object to is the dangerous fudging of the line between the Muslim world and the Taliban, and the easy moral superiority that leaves us blind to our own crimes, or the crimes done in our names. It is an obvious point, but one still worth making, that it was our own barbarism and colonialism in the Middle East that has helped to create these situations in the first place. Amis and Hitchens have become perversely silent on the crimes of Western civilisation. Western civilisation has produced enormous advances, but not to see the darker side of that, not to see the barbarism of the West, and not to see that at a time when we are killing thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems extraordinarily naive.'
Couple of points in this: First, I don't think it matters one damn bit what the U.S. or Britain did x years ago; the fact is our influences would have spread no matter what. In the past, did varous things done cause problems with various muslim or muslim-influenced countries? Yes. Does that justify a bunch of self-detonating neolithic goatherds blowing up people in the name of God? Hell no. Nice excuse, and it makes a lot of people feel better because they can blame their own country(if you're western) or outside influences(if you're a perpetual-victim muslim) for the problems, but not realistic. Lots and lots of Busddhists and others affected by, for instance, the British Empire in past years but you don't see a lot of them running around screaming "Death to those who insult whatever!" And, as I said, Coke and jeans and movies and whatever would have been spreading and causing problems for medieval-minded nuts even if our only contact with a country had been selling movies and books and whatever.
Second, the 'but not to see the darker side of that, not to see the barbarism of the West, and not to see that at a time when we are killing thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems extraordinarily naive.' crap. That sounds an awful lot like "We're blowing up and shooting terrorists and islamist murderers, and that's just as bad as blowing up people in the market. Or torturing and murdering kids in school. We're just as bad as they are!" Which is, to put it bluntly, bullshit. From a clapped-out bull. As someone put it in a different reference, when innocents have died from Israeli military actions, it's been accidental, something they work hard to prevent; when it happens from Hamas & Hizballah and Co., it's what they're trying to do, and if you can't see that difference, then you have great big rocks in your head. And a really sick outlook on life.
I have what will apparently be a big surprise for Mr. Eagleton: given a choice, we wouldn't be there. I don't know anybody who actually wants to have troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, or a number of other places. Given a choice, we'd let them sink or swim on their own, and considering the dependance most of these places have on the west for an awful lot of things it'd mostly be sink. Which would let a lot of people salve their conscience by moaning about how "The rich countries are not helping these people!", etc. But the people in charge- in some cases the people who were in charge- wanted to control us, still do in some cases, and that we like even less. So we had to act.
Which means we've got friends and family in uniform in places they'd rather not be, doing work they'd rather not do. And we have to listen to people blame us for the fact that people like Ahmadinnerjacket would like to kill everyone in Israel, and for that matter most of the rest of the non-islamic world. But then, the latter would be true no matter what. We're what the wahabi nutcases blame for islam not ruling the world, so sooner or later we'd have been their target for terrorism, no matter what happened in the past.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
And I have to note another post
at Thirdpower's place:
Anti Gunner- "What shortcoming are you Gun Nuts trying to compensate for?"
Pro Gunner- "I am compensating for the fact that I can't throw a rock at 1000 feet per second."
Anti Gunner- "What shortcoming are you Gun Nuts trying to compensate for?"
Pro Gunner- "I am compensating for the fact that I can't throw a rock at 1000 feet per second."
Peace on earth, etc., is temporarily suspended this day
to mention the new guy at CeaseFire PA. Who is denying, whining(death threats from us gun nuts, of course: check the comments), and CFPA is engaging in Reasoned Discourse about him.
Just wonderful, isn't it?
Just wonderful, isn't it?
Monday, December 24, 2007
On this Christmas eve
there's two things I'd like to post. The first has been around a while, but it deserves to be up again:
The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.
Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
Transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling lights in the tree I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.
My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.
In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know, Then the
Sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.
My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,
A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.
A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
"What are you doing?" I asked without fear,
"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"
For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift,
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts..
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light
Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."
"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,
That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.
My Gramps died at ' Pearl on a day in December,"
Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers."
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ',
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red, white, and blue... An American flag.
I can live through the cold and the being alone,
Away from my family, my house and my home.
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat .
I can carry the weight of killing another,
Or lay down my life with my sister and brother..
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."
"So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right"
"But isn't there something I can do, at the least,
"Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son."
Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,
"Just tell us you love us, and never forget.
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.
For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled.
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us."
The other is some song lyrics. If you've never heard this by Trace Adkins, you ought to look it up:
Arlington
I never thought that this is where I'd settle down,
I thought I'd die an old man back in my hometown,
They gave me this plot of land, me and some other men, for a job well done,
There's a big white house sits on a hill just up the road,
The man inside he cried the day they brought me home,
They folded up a flag and told my mom and dad, we're proud of your son
[Chorus:]
And I'm proud to be on this peaceful piece of property,
I'm on sacred ground and I'm in the best of company,
I'm thankful for those thankful for the things I've done,
I can rest in peace, I'm one of the chosen ones, I made it to Arlington
I remember daddy brought me here when I was eight,
We searched all day to find out where my granddad lay,
And when we finally found that cross,
He said, "son this is what it cost to keep us free" Now here I am,
A thousand stones away from him,
He recognized me on the first day I came in,
And it gave me a chill when he clicked his heels, and saluted me.
[Repeat Chorus]
And everytime I hear twenty-one guns,
I know they brought another hero home to us
We're thankful for those thankful for the things we've done,
We can rest in peace, 'cause we are the chosen ones,
We made it to Arlington, yea dust to dust,
Don't cry for us, we made it to Arlington
Enjoy your family and friends, remember those at the sharp end of the spear, Merry Christmas to you.
The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.
Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
Transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling lights in the tree I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.
My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.
In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know, Then the
Sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.
My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,
A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.
A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
"What are you doing?" I asked without fear,
"Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!"
For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift,
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts..
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light
Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."
"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,
That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.
My Gramps died at ' Pearl on a day in December,"
Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers."
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ',
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red, white, and blue... An American flag.
I can live through the cold and the being alone,
Away from my family, my house and my home.
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat .
I can carry the weight of killing another,
Or lay down my life with my sister and brother..
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."
"So go back inside," he said, "harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right"
"But isn't there something I can do, at the least,
"Give you money," I asked, "or prepare you a feast?
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son."
Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,
"Just tell us you love us, and never forget.
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.
For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled.
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us."
The other is some song lyrics. If you've never heard this by Trace Adkins, you ought to look it up:
Arlington
I never thought that this is where I'd settle down,
I thought I'd die an old man back in my hometown,
They gave me this plot of land, me and some other men, for a job well done,
There's a big white house sits on a hill just up the road,
The man inside he cried the day they brought me home,
They folded up a flag and told my mom and dad, we're proud of your son
[Chorus:]
And I'm proud to be on this peaceful piece of property,
I'm on sacred ground and I'm in the best of company,
I'm thankful for those thankful for the things I've done,
I can rest in peace, I'm one of the chosen ones, I made it to Arlington
I remember daddy brought me here when I was eight,
We searched all day to find out where my granddad lay,
And when we finally found that cross,
He said, "son this is what it cost to keep us free" Now here I am,
A thousand stones away from him,
He recognized me on the first day I came in,
And it gave me a chill when he clicked his heels, and saluted me.
[Repeat Chorus]
And everytime I hear twenty-one guns,
I know they brought another hero home to us
We're thankful for those thankful for the things we've done,
We can rest in peace, 'cause we are the chosen ones,
We made it to Arlington, yea dust to dust,
Don't cry for us, we made it to Arlington
Enjoy your family and friends, remember those at the sharp end of the spear, Merry Christmas to you.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Kevin's been working on one of his serious pieces,
and it's up here. It begins:
Welcome to another of my patented dissertation-length essays. (Consider yourselves forewarned.) This one is about perception and propaganda; about conviction, communication, conversion. It is, to some extent, about a documentary film, but more it is about government, about war, about politics, about history.
It's largely concerned with a '2005 Sundance Film Festival award-winning documentary' film. Considering the kind of things that's been Sundance award winners, you can probably guess the slant. Long piece, very much worth going through.
I'll just note part of a comment by Markadelphia:Reality is what you make it, Kevin. There are many people in the world who want peace. Someday they may succeed. What if it happens? As long as people believe that war is inevitable, it will be. Ever read On War by Clausewitz?
Two things about this bother me. One is the 'reality is what you make it' noise. The other is the standard-issue 'many people want peace, what if they succeed?' stuff. I've mentioned before having known a number of 'peace at any price' people, and I suspect Markadelphia fits that mold. Peace over freedom, peace over anything. I tend to not know if they're simply well-wishing people who don't want to see some things, or if they're actively deluding themselves. I want peace, surely; I don't know much of anyone(outside the enemy) who doesn't. I also want freedom; and if we say "We'll do anything for peace, including giving up parts of our freedom", we're screwed. I do think anyone who advocates that is, intentionally or not, on the side of the enemy. If they want the peace of slaves, they can have it, I and mine do not want and will not accept it.
Welcome to another of my patented dissertation-length essays. (Consider yourselves forewarned.) This one is about perception and propaganda; about conviction, communication, conversion. It is, to some extent, about a documentary film, but more it is about government, about war, about politics, about history.
It's largely concerned with a '2005 Sundance Film Festival award-winning documentary' film. Considering the kind of things that's been Sundance award winners, you can probably guess the slant. Long piece, very much worth going through.
I'll just note part of a comment by Markadelphia:Reality is what you make it, Kevin. There are many people in the world who want peace. Someday they may succeed. What if it happens? As long as people believe that war is inevitable, it will be. Ever read On War by Clausewitz?
Two things about this bother me. One is the 'reality is what you make it' noise. The other is the standard-issue 'many people want peace, what if they succeed?' stuff. I've mentioned before having known a number of 'peace at any price' people, and I suspect Markadelphia fits that mold. Peace over freedom, peace over anything. I tend to not know if they're simply well-wishing people who don't want to see some things, or if they're actively deluding themselves. I want peace, surely; I don't know much of anyone(outside the enemy) who doesn't. I also want freedom; and if we say "We'll do anything for peace, including giving up parts of our freedom", we're screwed. I do think anyone who advocates that is, intentionally or not, on the side of the enemy. If they want the peace of slaves, they can have it, I and mine do not want and will not accept it.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Dammit, the Curse™ retains power!
Kim, you miss Chicago cold and snow and wind, get your ass about 200 miles north: we got it for you.
It's about 25 outside right now, and I'm listening to the sounds offriggin' idiotsdistressed motorists who can't get up the hill outside, and who thing that giving it just a little more gas will do it. Which means they wind up sideways, front or back wheels against a curb, cursing and wondering why they can't move.
Sequence of events:
Day begins in the upper 30's.
Light rain begins.
Temperature drops about eight degrees very quickly.
Rain turns to snow, mostly melts when hits street. For now.
Wet on streets turns to slush, snow continues with wind direct from Arctic Circle pushing it.
Slush starts freezing.
Streets now largely filled with people either creeping along, blocking traffic and getting stuck on hills or people who think they can drive just like the pavement was just wet. The latter class of fool includes those who think four-wheel drive means 'traction no matter what'. Kind of like the idiots sliding sideways on the street outside.
Streets are going to be flat nasty when I head to work in the morning, but there'll be very little traffic, so shouldn't be too bad. In the meantime, I think I'll stay inside stretch out under the nice wool blanket tonight.
Assuming someeffing idiottroubled motorist doesn't slide into the driveway and hit something.
It's about 25 outside right now, and I'm listening to the sounds of
Sequence of events:
Day begins in the upper 30's.
Light rain begins.
Temperature drops about eight degrees very quickly.
Rain turns to snow, mostly melts when hits street. For now.
Wet on streets turns to slush, snow continues with wind direct from Arctic Circle pushing it.
Slush starts freezing.
Streets now largely filled with people either creeping along, blocking traffic and getting stuck on hills or people who think they can drive just like the pavement was just wet. The latter class of fool includes those who think four-wheel drive means 'traction no matter what'. Kind of like the idiots sliding sideways on the street outside.
Streets are going to be flat nasty when I head to work in the morning, but there'll be very little traffic, so shouldn't be too bad. In the meantime, I think I'll stay inside stretch out under the nice wool blanket tonight.
Assuming some
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Range day
Just some general practice today, including taking the scattergun out for some practice. A while back I found a load that seems to duplicate the performance of the Hornady reduced-recoil buckshot that I keep in it for social purposes, which makes practice a lot less expensive.
I've read a lot of arguments between 'round in the chamber, safety on' vs. 'magazine loaded, chamber empty'. I keep mine same as Xavier: mag loaded, chamber empty, safety off. I'll add that I check the chamber to make sure it's empty, close the slide, then load the mag, then pull the trigger to drop the hammer. The last does two things: releases tension on the hammer spring and unlocks the slide. I still have to grab it and rack the slide to load, but I don't have to worry about pushing the slide release. I thought a lot about it, and decided that if I'm awakened by the sound of a window or my door breaking I want as few buttons/switches to deal with as possible. No warranty, your opinions may differ. I specify the sitting condition of the shotgun because I specifically practiced today as though I were grabbing it: in the condition above, me standing in roughly the same relation I would have to it if I'm in bed, grab, rack, aim & fire. For some reason I hadn't done it that way before, and I wish I had: definitely adds to the realism of the drill.
I've mentioned quite a while back that I prefer the reduced-recoil loads for this, but it's been a long time so I'll cover it again. I very much agree with "Use the most powerful gun you can shoot consistently and accurately" as a guide. In a different situation I might well choose a 3" magnum load, something that'll make a charging grizzly reflect on the folly of his last action. However...
The longest range I can see firing in a home defense situation is about thirty feet, and that means the reduced-recoil ammo should have plenty of power to stop a two-legged attacker. Also, have you ever fired a 3" mag buckshot load? The recoil is bloody awful, so I'm willing to trade some power for faster recovery and more accurate repeat shots(if needed). This also means that I can fire twenty or twenty-five rounds in practice and my shoulder still works after. I had an injury a few years back, and there are limits to how much pounding it can take.
The shotgun, about two boxes of .45 through the pistol and some other general shooting. Definitely a nice part of the day.
I've read a lot of arguments between 'round in the chamber, safety on' vs. 'magazine loaded, chamber empty'. I keep mine same as Xavier: mag loaded, chamber empty, safety off. I'll add that I check the chamber to make sure it's empty, close the slide, then load the mag, then pull the trigger to drop the hammer. The last does two things: releases tension on the hammer spring and unlocks the slide. I still have to grab it and rack the slide to load, but I don't have to worry about pushing the slide release. I thought a lot about it, and decided that if I'm awakened by the sound of a window or my door breaking I want as few buttons/switches to deal with as possible. No warranty, your opinions may differ. I specify the sitting condition of the shotgun because I specifically practiced today as though I were grabbing it: in the condition above, me standing in roughly the same relation I would have to it if I'm in bed, grab, rack, aim & fire. For some reason I hadn't done it that way before, and I wish I had: definitely adds to the realism of the drill.
I've mentioned quite a while back that I prefer the reduced-recoil loads for this, but it's been a long time so I'll cover it again. I very much agree with "Use the most powerful gun you can shoot consistently and accurately" as a guide. In a different situation I might well choose a 3" magnum load, something that'll make a charging grizzly reflect on the folly of his last action. However...
The longest range I can see firing in a home defense situation is about thirty feet, and that means the reduced-recoil ammo should have plenty of power to stop a two-legged attacker. Also, have you ever fired a 3" mag buckshot load? The recoil is bloody awful, so I'm willing to trade some power for faster recovery and more accurate repeat shots(if needed). This also means that I can fire twenty or twenty-five rounds in practice and my shoulder still works after. I had an injury a few years back, and there are limits to how much pounding it can take.
The shotgun, about two boxes of .45 through the pistol and some other general shooting. Definitely a nice part of the day.
I hate political speeches and polls both
with a passion. On polls, Kim has this today, which covers a big chunk of why. I confess I don't know what a regression analysis is, having had little math beyond the basic four functions that I paid attention to, and the math isn't the big reason I so dislike polls; that comes from noticing over the years how the media weenies can breathlessly tell you the alarming news of the latest poll in the same breathless tones as they did the previous one, which gave the opposite result.
Lots of the political crap I just ignore at this point, so far as candidates. I mean, what have we got? On the R side, Giuliani and Romney are hoplophobes who really like the idea of the government telling us how to run our lives in various ways(Romney claiming the health-care scheme he signed just before leaving office is a 'free-market' way to deal with the problem really pisses me off). Huckabee has shown himself to be a jerk of the first water who shouldn't be allowed in the White House at all, let alone near the Oval Office. Ron Paul... it's kind of amazing. I had a chance to catch him on the Glenn Beck show a couple of nights ago, and it broke down into two sections:
A: He'd cover some point and I'd think "Yeah! Damn right!"
B: He'd hit some point and I'd be sitting there saying "Are you retarded or stoned, you idiot?"
Anyone who actually believes that if we retreat from anything defined as 'the muslim world' the terrorists will leave us alone- and will also then leave Israel alone- is de facto out of his damn mind. Overall, Ron Paul is another 'put a shock collar on him that goes off if he approaches the Oval Office doors' politician.
Thompson has some stuff in his background that I'm not fond of, but he seems to have some pretty good stands on some very important things, at this point I'd just about have to vote for him. There are a couple of others, Duncan Hunter, who would, I think, be pretty good, but have virtually zero chance of being elected.
On the D side, we've got a bunch of socialists who don't have either the integrity or courage to admit what they are, some worse than others. When Obama refused to salute the flag, that bypassed his gun-fearing wussiness by a BIG step: no way in hell I'd vote for him after that, it reveals too much about him. Clinton, hell, I can't type long enough to cover all the reasons why it would be better for the country if she were abducted by Bigfoot and disappeared into his honeymoon cave. The others are just about as bad as Clinton & Obama, except they don't have her baggage of Bill Clinton drooling over the thought of having access to the Oval Office again.
I told my kids in 2000 and 2004 that I had some real problems with George Bush, but the alternative was just too dangerous to consider. I'm really damn sick of having to plan my vote on "Which of these clowns is going to be less dangerous to the country over the long run?"
Lots of the political crap I just ignore at this point, so far as candidates. I mean, what have we got? On the R side, Giuliani and Romney are hoplophobes who really like the idea of the government telling us how to run our lives in various ways(Romney claiming the health-care scheme he signed just before leaving office is a 'free-market' way to deal with the problem really pisses me off). Huckabee has shown himself to be a jerk of the first water who shouldn't be allowed in the White House at all, let alone near the Oval Office. Ron Paul... it's kind of amazing. I had a chance to catch him on the Glenn Beck show a couple of nights ago, and it broke down into two sections:
A: He'd cover some point and I'd think "Yeah! Damn right!"
B: He'd hit some point and I'd be sitting there saying "Are you retarded or stoned, you idiot?"
Anyone who actually believes that if we retreat from anything defined as 'the muslim world' the terrorists will leave us alone- and will also then leave Israel alone- is de facto out of his damn mind. Overall, Ron Paul is another 'put a shock collar on him that goes off if he approaches the Oval Office doors' politician.
Thompson has some stuff in his background that I'm not fond of, but he seems to have some pretty good stands on some very important things, at this point I'd just about have to vote for him. There are a couple of others, Duncan Hunter, who would, I think, be pretty good, but have virtually zero chance of being elected.
On the D side, we've got a bunch of socialists who don't have either the integrity or courage to admit what they are, some worse than others. When Obama refused to salute the flag, that bypassed his gun-fearing wussiness by a BIG step: no way in hell I'd vote for him after that, it reveals too much about him. Clinton, hell, I can't type long enough to cover all the reasons why it would be better for the country if she were abducted by Bigfoot and disappeared into his honeymoon cave. The others are just about as bad as Clinton & Obama, except they don't have her baggage of Bill Clinton drooling over the thought of having access to the Oval Office again.
I told my kids in 2000 and 2004 that I had some real problems with George Bush, but the alternative was just too dangerous to consider. I'm really damn sick of having to plan my vote on "Which of these clowns is going to be less dangerous to the country over the long run?"
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
There have been bits & pieces about the Japanese 'justice' system
published and broadcast over the years; this is the most recent thing I've seen on it.
Not a good situation at all.
According to Valentine's testimony, hospitals and doctors were contingent on him signing a confession, in Japanese (which he could not read), that the police had not hurt him. He refused. The interrogations continued for 10 days.
According to the U.N., this sort of thing is not all that unusual. The U.N. Committee Against Torture recently criticized Japan (CAT/C/JPN/CO/1, May 18, 2007, Sections 15(c) and 17) for "the lack of appropriate and prompt medical care for individuals in police custody," and for "undue delays in provision."
I've heard of other cases like this. It's a nasty one-two: if you don't sign a confession you don't get to see a doctor or legal counsel(assuming they'll let you see a lawyer at all), etc., and if you do you're guilty and off to prison.Not a good situation at all.
Once again we are reminded that the Clintons and their team
have little regard for the truth:
The National Archives is withholding from the public about 2,600 pages of records at President Clinton's direction, despite a public assurance by one of his top aides last month that Mr. Clinton "has not blocked the release of a single document."
The 2,600 pages, stored at Mr. Clinton's library in Arkansas, were deemed to contain "confidential advice" and, therefore, "closed" under the Presidential Records Act, an Archives spokeswoman, Susan Cooper, told The New York Sun yesterday.
All things considered, there should be a bunch of people in that group with third-degree burns on their ass from their pants so frequently bursting into flame.
The National Archives is withholding from the public about 2,600 pages of records at President Clinton's direction, despite a public assurance by one of his top aides last month that Mr. Clinton "has not blocked the release of a single document."
The 2,600 pages, stored at Mr. Clinton's library in Arkansas, were deemed to contain "confidential advice" and, therefore, "closed" under the Presidential Records Act, an Archives spokeswoman, Susan Cooper, told The New York Sun yesterday.
All things considered, there should be a bunch of people in that group with third-degree burns on their ass from their pants so frequently bursting into flame.
When son mentioned 'tired' and 'not much sleep'
it reminded me of some of Bill Mauldins' cartoons. Like this one:
I swear, except for tools and equipment, nothing changes
I swear, except for tools and equipment, nothing changes
In the latest example of "Oops, wrong address!"
we go to Minneapolis; Rosenberg has a good rundown of the mess, just scroll down through the posts. What I'll note here is a couple of bits from this article:
But minutes after a SWAT team entered the house about 12:30 a.m., things went awry. The homeowner, a father of six, thinking the intruders were burglars, fired at them through a bedroom wall. He hit two officers, one in the back and one in the head, but both were uninjured because they were wearing protective armor. Police shot back, but did not hit him.
After police interviewed Khang's family, it became clear they had no connection to the case, Huffman said. But the address listed on the warrant was the one police had gotten from the informant.
"This house was part of a package of very credible information that resulted in other successful enforcement actions," she said. "This was the end of a chain of things, and there was no reason to question the credibility of the information."
Gee, an informant giving a wrong address. Who'da thunk it?
It's been said before: when you do no-knock warrants, there is no room for error. Not in a wrong address, not in failing to check what an informant says. An honest citizen hearing his door smashed in in the night is going to assume it's bad guys and react accordingly, and the police will have no room to say "Well, he shouldn't have shot at us/failed to roll over and wet himself/scared us, then we wouldn't have killed him!" They will anyway, with great indignation, but it's bullshit. Especially when things like this turn up:
. . . . well, it's finally gone public: when the MPD SWAT cops kicked in the door of the house, owned by Vang Khang, lived in by Vang Khang, his equally Hmong wife, and their six little kids, they thought that they were raiding a black street gang.
But minutes after a SWAT team entered the house about 12:30 a.m., things went awry. The homeowner, a father of six, thinking the intruders were burglars, fired at them through a bedroom wall. He hit two officers, one in the back and one in the head, but both were uninjured because they were wearing protective armor. Police shot back, but did not hit him.
Hours later, police officials were apologizing to the homeowner, Vang Khang, admitting that they had erred based on bad information from an informant.
Sound familiar?After police interviewed Khang's family, it became clear they had no connection to the case, Huffman said. But the address listed on the warrant was the one police had gotten from the informant.
"This house was part of a package of very credible information that resulted in other successful enforcement actions," she said. "This was the end of a chain of things, and there was no reason to question the credibility of the information."
Gee, an informant giving a wrong address. Who'da thunk it?
It's been said before: when you do no-knock warrants, there is no room for error. Not in a wrong address, not in failing to check what an informant says. An honest citizen hearing his door smashed in in the night is going to assume it's bad guys and react accordingly, and the police will have no room to say "Well, he shouldn't have shot at us/failed to roll over and wet himself/scared us, then we wouldn't have killed him!" They will anyway, with great indignation, but it's bullshit. Especially when things like this turn up:
. . . . well, it's finally gone public: when the MPD SWAT cops kicked in the door of the house, owned by Vang Khang, lived in by Vang Khang, his equally Hmong wife, and their six little kids, they thought that they were raiding a black street gang.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)