Monday, September 24, 2007
olberman to bush: your hypocrisy is so vast
click here
Olbermann to Bush: ‘Your hypocrisy is so vast’
A reaction to Thursday’s press conference: the president was the one who interjected Gen. Petraeus into the political dialogue in the first place
So the President, behaving a little bit more than usual, like we would all interrupt him while he was watching his favorite cartoons on the DVR, stepped before the press conference microphone and after side-stepping most of the substantive issues like the Israeli raid on Syria, in condescending and infuriating fashion, produced a big political finish that indicates, certainly, that if it wasn’t already – the annual Republican witch-hunting season is underway.
“I thought the ad was disgusting. I felt like the ad was an attack not only on General Petraeus, but on the U.S. Military.”
“And I was disappointed that not more leaders in the Democrat party spoke out strongly against that kind of ad.
“And that leads me to come to this conclusion: that most Democrats are afraid of irritating a left-wing group like Moveon.org or more afraid of irritating them, than they are of irritating the United States military.”
“That was a sorry deal.”
First off, it’s “Democrat-ic” party.
You keep pretending you’re not a politician, so stop using words your party made up. Show a little respect.
Secondly, you could say this seriously after the advertising/mugging of Senator Max Cleland? After the swift-boating of John Kerry?
But most importantly, making that the last question?
So that there was no chance at a follow-up?
So nobody could point out, as Chris Matthews so incisively did, a week ago tonight, that you were the one who inappropriately interjected General Petraeus into the political dialogue of this nation in the first place!
Deliberately, premeditatedly, and virtually without precedent, you shanghaied a military man as your personal spokesman and now you’re complaining about the outcome, and then running away from the microphone?
Eleven months ago the President’s own party, the Republican National Committee, introduced this very different kind of advertisement, just nineteen days before the mid-term elections.
Bin Laden.
Al-Zawahiri’s rumored quote of six years ago about having bought “suitcase bombs.”
academia
rense.com
Ivy League Students Actually
Getting Dumber In College
New York Sun
9-22-7
Students at many of the country's most prestigious colleges and universities are graduating with less knowledge of American history, government, and economics than they had as incoming freshmen, with Harvard University seniors scoring a "D+" average on a 60-question multiple-choice exam about civic literacy.
According to a report released yesterday by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, the average college senior at the 50 colleges and universities polled did not earn a passing grade.
"At the most expensive colleges, they actually graduate knowing less," the executive director of the Jack Miller Center at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, Michael Ratliff, said. "Colleges and universities are not directing students to the courses that would educate them. We want to know whether after getting $300 billion to do their work, universities are actually educating their students."
At universities such as Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Duke, and Berkeley, seniors scored lower on the test, available here, than freshmen, living proof of the broadening relevancy of the old Harvard adage that the university is a storehouse of knowledge because "the freshmen bring so much and the seniors take away so little."
The average foreign student studying in an American college learned nothing about the country's history and its civic institutions, according to the study.
The low scores indicate a looming crisis in American citizenship, officials at the institute said yesterday, as students who increased their knowledge of American history in college were more likely to register to vote and to participate in civic activities as adults.
The study, titled *"Failing Our Students, Failing America,"* was conducted by researchers at the department of public policy at the University of Connecticut. The exam was distributed to 14,000 college seniors at 50 institutions of higher education across the country. The researchers hand-picked 25 "elite" schools, and randomly selected 25 schools from all four-year American colleges and universities to poll. The multiple-choice questions were written by specialists in each field.
A professor of American history at Columbia University, Eric Foner, said that a multiple-choice exam testing factual knowledge of history could exaggerate student ignorance of American history.
"The study of history has changed enormously," Mr. Foner said. "It's become much more broad and diverse. The study of facts about particular battles has diminished, but maybe students are in a better position to answer questions about the abolition of slavery."
Some of the questions in the exam were strictly factual, asking students to identify which battle ended Revolutionary War, or the dates when President Lincoln was in office. Other questions tested their understanding of different forms of government, or of the basic theories of philosophers such as Plato.
"History has a pragmatic value," Mr. Foner said. "You are acquiring skills that are desired by employers - an ability to write, analyze material, and produce your own point of view."
The chairman of the history department at Princeton University, Jeremy Adelman, said that providing students with a foundation in American history and governance should not be the sole mission of any institution of higher education.
"You have to ask what is the social function of the university?" Mr. Adelman said. "If you're in chemical engineering, why study history? Should we require students to study history? I don't think if you polled the history department faculty there would be unanimity on the question." Students at Princeton are required to take one history class, he said. The course does not have to be in American history.
Less than half of the students who participated identified the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" as a line from the Declaration of Independence. Many of them identified its source as "The Communist Manifesto," or said that it was an inscription on the Statue of Liberty.
Cornell and Princeton spokeswomen said the institutions would not comment on the report. A Harvard spokesman did not return a call for comment. A spokeswoman for Yale pointed out that history is the most popular major at the college, and that last year, 3,586 students out of about 5,200 students registered to take a history course.
The Intercollegiate Studies Institute was founded in 1953 with William Buckley Jr. as its president. Its mission is to cultivate the values of democracy and of a free society among American college students. This is the third year that the institute has issued the report on civic knowledge among American college students.
Ivy League Students Actually
Getting Dumber In College
New York Sun
9-22-7
Students at many of the country's most prestigious colleges and universities are graduating with less knowledge of American history, government, and economics than they had as incoming freshmen, with Harvard University seniors scoring a "D+" average on a 60-question multiple-choice exam about civic literacy.
According to a report released yesterday by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, the average college senior at the 50 colleges and universities polled did not earn a passing grade.
"At the most expensive colleges, they actually graduate knowing less," the executive director of the Jack Miller Center at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, Michael Ratliff, said. "Colleges and universities are not directing students to the courses that would educate them. We want to know whether after getting $300 billion to do their work, universities are actually educating their students."
At universities such as Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Duke, and Berkeley, seniors scored lower on the test, available here, than freshmen, living proof of the broadening relevancy of the old Harvard adage that the university is a storehouse of knowledge because "the freshmen bring so much and the seniors take away so little."
The average foreign student studying in an American college learned nothing about the country's history and its civic institutions, according to the study.
The low scores indicate a looming crisis in American citizenship, officials at the institute said yesterday, as students who increased their knowledge of American history in college were more likely to register to vote and to participate in civic activities as adults.
The study, titled *"Failing Our Students, Failing America,"* was conducted by researchers at the department of public policy at the University of Connecticut. The exam was distributed to 14,000 college seniors at 50 institutions of higher education across the country. The researchers hand-picked 25 "elite" schools, and randomly selected 25 schools from all four-year American colleges and universities to poll. The multiple-choice questions were written by specialists in each field.
A professor of American history at Columbia University, Eric Foner, said that a multiple-choice exam testing factual knowledge of history could exaggerate student ignorance of American history.
"The study of history has changed enormously," Mr. Foner said. "It's become much more broad and diverse. The study of facts about particular battles has diminished, but maybe students are in a better position to answer questions about the abolition of slavery."
Some of the questions in the exam were strictly factual, asking students to identify which battle ended Revolutionary War, or the dates when President Lincoln was in office. Other questions tested their understanding of different forms of government, or of the basic theories of philosophers such as Plato.
"History has a pragmatic value," Mr. Foner said. "You are acquiring skills that are desired by employers - an ability to write, analyze material, and produce your own point of view."
The chairman of the history department at Princeton University, Jeremy Adelman, said that providing students with a foundation in American history and governance should not be the sole mission of any institution of higher education.
"You have to ask what is the social function of the university?" Mr. Adelman said. "If you're in chemical engineering, why study history? Should we require students to study history? I don't think if you polled the history department faculty there would be unanimity on the question." Students at Princeton are required to take one history class, he said. The course does not have to be in American history.
Less than half of the students who participated identified the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" as a line from the Declaration of Independence. Many of them identified its source as "The Communist Manifesto," or said that it was an inscription on the Statue of Liberty.
Cornell and Princeton spokeswomen said the institutions would not comment on the report. A Harvard spokesman did not return a call for comment. A spokeswoman for Yale pointed out that history is the most popular major at the college, and that last year, 3,586 students out of about 5,200 students registered to take a history course.
The Intercollegiate Studies Institute was founded in 1953 with William Buckley Jr. as its president. Its mission is to cultivate the values of democracy and of a free society among American college students. This is the third year that the institute has issued the report on civic knowledge among American college students.
hobbits are real
ok so hobbits are real. but my question is this- how did j.r. tolkien know about it?
click here
Yes, it's a Hobbit. The debate that has divided science is solved at last (sort of)
• Scientists shed new light on disputed skeleton find
• Bone analysis supports distinct species theory
• James Randerson, science correspondent
• The Guardian
• Friday September 21 2007
The painting is of a male Homo floresiensis, the "hobbit", discovered on Flores, indonesia. returning from a hunt.
It was the most astonishing anthropological find of a generation - a diminutive new species of human that apparently shared the planet with us until 13,000 years ago.
But the discovery of the fossilised "Hobbit", as she quickly became known, has provoked a long-running and sometimes acrimonious debate among scientists: was she really one of a race of mini-humans or was she merely one of us, but with a brain-shrinking disease?
Now scientists have analysed fossilised wrist bones that were part of the original discovery in 2003 but had not been looked at in detail. They say they prove the Hobbit really was a distinct and previously unknown type of human, and not just an abnormally small member of our own species.
That analysis has revealed significant differences between the bones and human or Neanderthal equivalents. At the same time there are crucial similarities with older species of human and living apes such as chimps and gorillas. The researchers say this puts paid to the idea that Homo floresiensis could be a "normal" human being with a brain-shrinking disease called microcephaly or some form of dwarfism.
The Hobbit was remarkable because of where it was found and when it was supposed to have lived. Its existence alongside modern humans 13,000 years ago is more than 15,000 years after the Neanderthals died out and more than 140,000 years after modern humans evolved in Africa.
"What we are beginning to realise is that our recent evolutionary history is much more diverse than we realised," said Matthew Tocheri of the Smithsonian Institution, lead author on the paper in Science that describes the wrist bone analysis. "It's a little shot to our over-inflated modern human egos."
For some though that interpretation is just too incredible. Robert Martin at the Field Museum of Chicago argued in a paper last year that the Hobbit's grapefruit-sized brain was simply too small compared with its body to be a scaled-down human species. He also said that tools found with the fossils were too advanced to have come from a creature with such a small brain. Meanwhile, Robert Eckhardt at Pennsylvania State University argued last year that Flores, the Indonesian island on which the Hobbit was found, was too small to support a population of hunter gatherers without immigration from other islands. That would mean it was not genetically isolated and so could not have evolved into a separate species. He criticised other researchers' willingness to get caught up in the hype and sniped that, "critical faculties were suspended on the part of many people".
Even the bones themselves have not escaped the intellectual tug of war. Almost as soon as H floresiensis hit the public consciousness in 2004, they were taken - some say borrowed, some say "hijacked" - by a researcher who was not involved in the original find.
But proponents of the separate species hypothesis say that evidence is stacking up in their favour. "I think slowly but surely the facts are coming out," said Dr Tocheri. His own analysis shows that the wrist bones of H floresiensis are not like ours or Neanderthals'. "Even if you are not trained as an anatomist, I think it is clear that the bones look very similar to what we see in living chimps and gorillas today, as well as earlier hominin fossils like Australopithecus - or Lucy," he said, "The wrist evidence is definitely a smoking gun ... I would say that it is proof that it is not a modern human - microcephalic, normal or otherwise."
Crucially, the shape of the wrist forms very early in a baby's development in the womb, in the first three months. Genetic problems leading to small brains or dwarfism tend to hit later or after birth. "It would be extraordinary if a pathology could revert three wrist bones to this morphology," said Chris Stringer, an expert on human evolution at the Natural History Museum. "To have three bones which show this complex of features really does add to the case that this is a distinct and very peculiar human-like creature."
He is open to the possibility that it might yet turn out to be a small-brained human, but he thinks the tide is turning in favour of it representing a much more primitive and distinct species.
"There is a lot at stake. One group of people are going to be 100% wrong in what they have said, which is a situation that is rare in science," he said. "It will be a fascinating test case for science. Will the people who turn out to be wrong hold their position to the bitter end regardless of the evidence that accumulates?"
"As good scientists, we should all be pleased to have new data, even when it proves us wrong, but also being human beings it doesn't always work that way. We have human flaws like everyone else," added Prof Stringer.
Critics of the separate species explanation, however, show no sign of conceding. "If the evidence provided by the wrist bones is so important, why was it not part of the original description and diagnosis of the new species?" said Dr Eckhardt. "The answer is that the wrist bone evidence is not important in and of itself, but rather as a last ditch effort to save the supposed new species by finding some new "unique" feature."
"This is an exercise in the presentation of misleading ideas in an obfuscatory manner. In that sense, then, their paper is far from a model of how science should be done."
Body of evidence
September 2003 'Hobbit' discovered by Indonesian and Australian team on the island of Flores, in Indonesia. It is also called Ebu, after a local legend about a small waddling creature with a big appetite.
October 2004 The findings of a skull and partial skeleton are published in Nature. The team classify the metre high creature as a new species, Homo floresiensis
February 2005 A computer generated model of the skull suggests it did not have an abnormal brain.
October 2005 Australian scientists announce the discovery of more bones including another jaw bone. These confirm the creature's diminutive size, but the haul does not include a skull.
May 2006 Researchers claim the Hobbit's brain is far too small to be microcephalic.
August 2006 Another study claims that Flores is too small to have supported a population without immigration from other islands - so they could not have evolved in isolation.
more people to lose more rights
click here
VETERANS DISARMAMENT ACT TO BAR VETS FROM OWNING GUNS
By Larry Pratt
September 22, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
Hundreds of thousands of veterans -- from Vietnam through Operation Iraqi Freedom -- are at risk of being banned from buying firearms if legislation that is pending in Congress gets enacted.
How? The Veterans Disarmament Act -- which has already passed the House -- would place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the federal gun ban list.
This is exactly what President Bill Clinton did over seven years ago when his administration illegitimately added some 83,000 veterans into the National Criminal Information System (NICS system) -- prohibiting them from purchasing firearms, simply because of afflictions like PTSD.
The proposed ban is actually broader. Anyone who is diagnosed as being a tiny danger to himself or others would have his gun rights taken away ... forever. It is section 102(b)(1)(C)(iv) in HR 2640 that provides for dumping raw medical records into the system. Those names -- like the 83,000 records mentioned above -- will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.
No wonder the Military Order of the Purple Heart is opposed to this legislation.
The House bill, HR 2640, is being sponsored by one of the most flaming anti-Second Amendment Representatives in Congress: Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). Another liberal anti-gunner, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), is sponsoring the bill in the Senate.
Proponents of the bill say that helpful amendments have been made so that any veteran who gets his name on the NICS list can seek an expungement.
But whenever you talk about expunging names from the Brady NICS system, you’re talking about a procedure that has always been a long shot. Right now, there are NO EXPUNGEMENTS of law-abiding Americans’ names that are taking place under federal level. Why? Because the expungement process which already exists has been blocked for over a decade by a "funds cut-off" engineered by another anti-gunner, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).
So how will this bill make things even worse? Well, two legal terms are radically redefined in the Veterans Disarmament Act to carry out this vicious attack on veterans’ gun rights.
One term relates to who is classified a "mental defective." Forty years ago that term meant one was adjudicated "not guilty" in a court of law by reason of insanity. But under the Veterans Disarmament Act, "mental defective" has been stretched to include anyone whom a psychiatrist determines might be a tiny danger to self or others.
The second term is "adjudicate." In the past, one could only lose one's gun rights through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court -- meaning conviction after a trial. Adjudication could only occur in a court with all the protections of due process, including the right to face one's accuser. Now, adjudication in HR 2640 would include a finding by "a court, commission, committee or other authorized person" (namely, a psychiatrist).
Forget the fact that people with PTSD have the same violent crime rate as the rest of us. Vietnam vets with PTSD have had careers and obtained permits to carry firearms concealed. It will now be enough for a psychiatric diagnosis (a "determination" in the language of the bill) to get a veteran barred ¬for life ¬ from owning guns.
Think of what this bill would do to veterans. If a robber grabs your wallet and takes everything in it, but gives you back $5 to take the bus home, would you call that a financial enhancement? If not, then we should not let HR 2640 supporters call the permission to seek an expungement an enhancement, when prior to this bill, veterans could not legitimately be denied their gun rights after being diagnosed with PTSD.
Veterans with PTSD should not be put in a position to seek an expungement. They have not been convicted (after a trial with due process) of doing anything wrong. If a veteran is thought to be a threat to self or others, there should be a real trial, not an opinion (called a diagnosis) by a psychiatrist.
If members of Congress do not hear from soldiers (active duty and retired) in large numbers, along with the rest of the public, the Veterans Disarmament Act -- misleadingly titled by Rep. McCarthy as the NICS Improvement Amendments Act -- will send this message to veterans: "No good deed goes unpunished."
© 2007 Larry Pratt - All Rights Reserved
VETERANS DISARMAMENT ACT TO BAR VETS FROM OWNING GUNS
By Larry Pratt
September 22, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
Hundreds of thousands of veterans -- from Vietnam through Operation Iraqi Freedom -- are at risk of being banned from buying firearms if legislation that is pending in Congress gets enacted.
How? The Veterans Disarmament Act -- which has already passed the House -- would place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the federal gun ban list.
This is exactly what President Bill Clinton did over seven years ago when his administration illegitimately added some 83,000 veterans into the National Criminal Information System (NICS system) -- prohibiting them from purchasing firearms, simply because of afflictions like PTSD.
The proposed ban is actually broader. Anyone who is diagnosed as being a tiny danger to himself or others would have his gun rights taken away ... forever. It is section 102(b)(1)(C)(iv) in HR 2640 that provides for dumping raw medical records into the system. Those names -- like the 83,000 records mentioned above -- will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.
No wonder the Military Order of the Purple Heart is opposed to this legislation.
The House bill, HR 2640, is being sponsored by one of the most flaming anti-Second Amendment Representatives in Congress: Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). Another liberal anti-gunner, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), is sponsoring the bill in the Senate.
Proponents of the bill say that helpful amendments have been made so that any veteran who gets his name on the NICS list can seek an expungement.
But whenever you talk about expunging names from the Brady NICS system, you’re talking about a procedure that has always been a long shot. Right now, there are NO EXPUNGEMENTS of law-abiding Americans’ names that are taking place under federal level. Why? Because the expungement process which already exists has been blocked for over a decade by a "funds cut-off" engineered by another anti-gunner, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).
So how will this bill make things even worse? Well, two legal terms are radically redefined in the Veterans Disarmament Act to carry out this vicious attack on veterans’ gun rights.
One term relates to who is classified a "mental defective." Forty years ago that term meant one was adjudicated "not guilty" in a court of law by reason of insanity. But under the Veterans Disarmament Act, "mental defective" has been stretched to include anyone whom a psychiatrist determines might be a tiny danger to self or others.
The second term is "adjudicate." In the past, one could only lose one's gun rights through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court -- meaning conviction after a trial. Adjudication could only occur in a court with all the protections of due process, including the right to face one's accuser. Now, adjudication in HR 2640 would include a finding by "a court, commission, committee or other authorized person" (namely, a psychiatrist).
Forget the fact that people with PTSD have the same violent crime rate as the rest of us. Vietnam vets with PTSD have had careers and obtained permits to carry firearms concealed. It will now be enough for a psychiatric diagnosis (a "determination" in the language of the bill) to get a veteran barred ¬for life ¬ from owning guns.
Think of what this bill would do to veterans. If a robber grabs your wallet and takes everything in it, but gives you back $5 to take the bus home, would you call that a financial enhancement? If not, then we should not let HR 2640 supporters call the permission to seek an expungement an enhancement, when prior to this bill, veterans could not legitimately be denied their gun rights after being diagnosed with PTSD.
Veterans with PTSD should not be put in a position to seek an expungement. They have not been convicted (after a trial with due process) of doing anything wrong. If a veteran is thought to be a threat to self or others, there should be a real trial, not an opinion (called a diagnosis) by a psychiatrist.
If members of Congress do not hear from soldiers (active duty and retired) in large numbers, along with the rest of the public, the Veterans Disarmament Act -- misleadingly titled by Rep. McCarthy as the NICS Improvement Amendments Act -- will send this message to veterans: "No good deed goes unpunished."
© 2007 Larry Pratt - All Rights Reserved
the atzlan movement
click here
The Colonization of America Continues
In Oregon, and elsewhere, the influx of Mexican immigrants has caused the public schools to adopt a new technique in teaching students. That technique is to simply adopt Mexican public school curriculum:
Some Oregon high schools are adopting Mexico's public school curriculum to help educate Spanish-speaking students with textbooks, an online Web site, DVDs and CDs provided free by Mexico to teach math, science and even U.S. history.
The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.
Similar ventures are under way in Yakima, Wash., San Diego, Calif., and Austin, Texas.
"Students come to us with such complex issues," said Tim King, director of Clackamas Middle College and Clackamas Web Academy, where a virtual course using Mexico's learning materials got started this week.
"We've had to change in order to fit into each school scene, become more complex and open ourselves up to new situations."
What Mr. King actually means is that his schools have had to become less American and more Mexican to deal with the influx of Mexican children - children who apparently intend to remain Mexicans no matter how long they stay in the U.S. or how much money American taxpayers lavish on their education. Mr. King's statement perfectly sums up the looming danger of America's current immigration mess: immigrants are arriving, both legally and illegally, in such numbers that it is America that has to change to accomodate them, and not the reverse.
Open borders advocates, of course, don't want to hear about this. If you point it out you are a racist, a bigot, a xenophobe or a vigilantee, according to President Bush and his cadre of open-borders sycophants. Of course, for them, America is just a "proposition nation" with no unique culture or demography to be defended. Indeed, to achieve the America they want, the old one must be destroyed. Ordinary Americans, increasingly, are looking around the towns and communities and realizing that their country is being transformed into an alien land, without their consent. Stories like this for Oregon demonstrate how bad the situation is becoming - and highlights the need to bring a complete halt to all immigration, both legal and illegal. Now.
The Colonization of America Continues
In Oregon, and elsewhere, the influx of Mexican immigrants has caused the public schools to adopt a new technique in teaching students. That technique is to simply adopt Mexican public school curriculum:
Some Oregon high schools are adopting Mexico's public school curriculum to help educate Spanish-speaking students with textbooks, an online Web site, DVDs and CDs provided free by Mexico to teach math, science and even U.S. history.
The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.
Similar ventures are under way in Yakima, Wash., San Diego, Calif., and Austin, Texas.
"Students come to us with such complex issues," said Tim King, director of Clackamas Middle College and Clackamas Web Academy, where a virtual course using Mexico's learning materials got started this week.
"We've had to change in order to fit into each school scene, become more complex and open ourselves up to new situations."
What Mr. King actually means is that his schools have had to become less American and more Mexican to deal with the influx of Mexican children - children who apparently intend to remain Mexicans no matter how long they stay in the U.S. or how much money American taxpayers lavish on their education. Mr. King's statement perfectly sums up the looming danger of America's current immigration mess: immigrants are arriving, both legally and illegally, in such numbers that it is America that has to change to accomodate them, and not the reverse.
Open borders advocates, of course, don't want to hear about this. If you point it out you are a racist, a bigot, a xenophobe or a vigilantee, according to President Bush and his cadre of open-borders sycophants. Of course, for them, America is just a "proposition nation" with no unique culture or demography to be defended. Indeed, to achieve the America they want, the old one must be destroyed. Ordinary Americans, increasingly, are looking around the towns and communities and realizing that their country is being transformed into an alien land, without their consent. Stories like this for Oregon demonstrate how bad the situation is becoming - and highlights the need to bring a complete halt to all immigration, both legal and illegal. Now.
slaves are always disarmed
click here
Nickel Ranttm:
Fight Crime: Shoot Back!
by Edgar J. Steele
September 23, 2007
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia.
Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ...the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
---Tench Coxe (Feb 20, 1788)
My name is Edgar J. Steele. This is a Nickel Rant.
If you have been allowed the privilege legally to own a gun, relish it. You may not possess it much longer. Notice that I made no mention of any "right" to gun ownership.
In fact, you may already have lost it and not know it. You may well risk being arrested and imprisoned at any moment on "illegal" weapons charges.
Do you honestly think that there is one single gun-owning American who is not at risk? There are over 20,000 illegal weapons laws on the books in America. For example, if you have been convicted of a misdemeanor in which you could have served more than two years in jail under the maximum sentence, you cannot own a gun. Trespass on government land and lose your privilege to own a gun.
He seemed like such a nice man...
"He seemed like such a nice man, too," your neighbors will be heard saying in the background, as the TV cameras pan over what will be described by the racially- and sexually-ambiguous anchorman as your "armory," your "cache" of weapons (perhaps 2 pistols, a shotgun, a couple of rifles and a few hundred rounds for each, a modest assemblage at best by North Idaho standards). "Fully armed and ready for a war that never came, Mr. White will be arraigned Thursday..."
It can't happen to you, you say? If you lived in New Orleans a couple of years ago, they took your guns without giving any reason whatsoever.
The Need for Guns Explained
Let me explain something about guns - and consider that this comes from somebody (me) viewed as a rank amateur by friends who are true gun aficionados:
I need a shotgun for crows and other predators, else we would have no smaller birds hereabouts.
I need a "bush rifle" with a scope for coyotes spotted at a distance, else we would have no chickens, cats or other small domestic or farm animals.
I need a .22-caliber rifle to dispose of the random raccoon that also kills my children's cats and relishes the occasional chicken.
I need a rifle with open sights in a decent-size caliber to put down the occasional suffering horse or other farm animal or to quickly dispatch a steer or pig destined for the freezer.
I need a 30.06 or better hunting rifle (preferably one with and one without a scope) in case the increasingly-rare black bear or not-so-rare mountain lion decides to visit my back yard yet again.
I need a .45 caliber handgun to carry when out and about on the back acreage, just in case.
Lessee now, that's 6 long guns and one handgun, plus ammunition with which to practice (use it or lose it - shooting is not like riding bicycles).
And I'm not even a hunter, like virtually everybody else I know around here.
Mind you, I have nothing against hunting, nor should you if you eat Big Macs or wear a leather belt. I just don't happen to care for tramping around in the cold and the wet in the early-morning hours, risking life and limb to bring home something for the freezer that, when cut and wrapped, won't fill even the swinging door shelves and then tastes flat, metallic and stringy ("gamey," is how it is put). I prefer grain-fed beef and sleeping in, thank you very much. Hunters need lots more paraphernalia, including different rifles in different calibers and configurations.
It's kind of like skiing, which once quite literally was my life during the winter when I wasn't actually working. I'll spare you the reasons, but I needed eight pairs of skis, of varying lengths, flexibility, sidecut, etc., just to handle all conditions I might encounter. Frankly, twice that number would have been nice, but I didn't let myself get carried away.
So much for bare necessity beyond the threat from other human beings.
Two-Legged Predators
I also need at least four pistols for self defense, pistols that I actually carry on my person.
But, then, I and my wife and even my little children get genuine death threats from the Chosen, after all. (Not Israelis and not Zionists, notice, but American Jews - my investigators identified a couple of them, though the FBI then did nothing.)
I need a belt-holstered, large-caliber .45 that will put somebody on the ground if I manage to hit them only in the hand, for example. I need a lighter 9 mm for a fanny pack so that it isn't so obvious to all the girly boys when I go out for an evening. I need another 9 mm for my desk drawer, within reach at this very moment in case someone comes bursting in downstairs while I write this. I need a small pistol that fits in my bathrobe pocket when I answer the door late at night. And others, such as the one in my bed's headboard, too.
Pistols are necessary, but not as important as long rifles. I once read that pistols should be used only to fight your way to where you keep your rifle. Not a bad way to put it.
So, if they ever come and arrest me for anything and lay out all my rifles and pistols on the dining table, together with the ammunition, imagine the scene. "Fully armed and ready for a war that never came, Mr. Steele will be arraigned Thursday..." See how that happens? If I, or anybody who actually knows guns, actually wished to prepare for those TV-announcer-described "wars," we would be putting up hundreds of weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition.
In fact, if I didn't have any guns, how on earth would I even get by out here?
Wherever Guns are Outlawed, Only Outlaws have Guns
Living in the city is no different, what with street gangs armed to the teeth with truly illegal weapons. Only the law-abiding, unarmed citizen is at risk in that environment. Recall the scene from Crocodile Dundee, wherein Mick says to the thug, "Pshaw, that's no knife. Now this...this is a knife," as he pulls out his foot-long blade and chases off the would-be muggers.
If criminals knew that American girly boys all were armed with weapons they knew how to use, things would be very different on the streets of America's cities. But, then, in far too many cities, we don't have even the privilege to carry weapons, do we?
Australia banned private handgun ownership a few years ago and crime statistics promptly shot through the roof. Law-abiding citizens began to defend themselves with swords, so they banned them, as well. Next, I suppose they will ban handheld rocks in the Land of Oz.
Rights vs. Privileges
Used to be, gun ownership was a right, not a privilege.
That was when the US Constitution was considered to be more than simply a "damned piece of paper" (to quote America's Buffoon-in-Chief, George Bush).
That was when the Second Amendment still carried some weight with congressmen and courts.
That was when America still was inhabited by real men, not the sheepish girly boys now allowing her transformation into a corporate dictatorship.
Sane Enough to Kill for America
Larry Pratt just brought to my attention a very disturbing piece of legislation with his article entitled "Veterans Disarmament Act to Bar Vets from Owning Guns," now being introduced simultaneously in the House and the Senate. This odious little piece of girly-boy foot stomping will make it illegal for any veteran diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) ever again to own a gun, despite any evidence whatsoever that such makes them the least bit at risk.
Have you ever been prescribed anti-depressants or, even, mild mood enhancers like Valium? Guess what your diagnosis was to support that prescription. Yep. Almost certainly PTSD. Ever told your doctor about being stressed out over bills you are having trouble paying, including his? Guess what he wrote into your chart. The Act described by Pratt provides for all those supposedly private medical records that the government has been collecting to be reviewed. You are about to become a criminal for having something with which to scare off predators with any number of legs.
This is how gun control is being enacted throughout America by stealth. This essentially means that ALL veterans will be disarmed and forbidden from owning guns. That is clear. What isn't so clear is the massive number of other Americans who will be caught up by this legislation.
I'll bet that you didn't hear about that NRA Director stating that assault rifles and rifle magazines holding more than five cartridges should be outlawed, either, did you? Incidentally, the term "assault rifle" now includes all semi-automatic rifles, which is about 99% of all rifles in existence in America today.
Get Counseled, Lose Your Guns
I recently attended a legal CLE (Continuing Legal Education) seminar at which a lawyer/psychologist panelist noted that a great many people attending domestic counseling now are forbidden from owning guns by virtue of merely having participated in counseling sessions. Domestic counseling now is becoming mandatory in most states for all accused of the mildest form of "domestic disturbance," not to mention each and every separation/divorce action, counseling that eventually will strip participants of the privilege of gun ownership.
The Usual Suspects
Consider the move afoot in both the Jewish-controlled mental-health and legal fields to classify anti-Semitism as a mental disorder. Being called anti-Semitic justified imprisonment and death in the old Soviet Union taken over by Bolsheviks (that's Jew to you, and American Jew, at that). That is coming to America, too, but first such "mentally-deranged" people will be stripped of our right to defend ourselves.
He Says Oil, You say Zionist, I Say Jew
Now that the Iraq war properly is being viewed as for the benefit of Israel, with oil being the old cynical reason, it is time to tell the full truth. America's "War on Terrorism" is for the protection and benefit of Jews. No, not all Jews, of course, but so many that the difference is one without a distinction. That is why America, the world's second-largest Jewish stronghold, is doing Israel's bidding, of course. Come on, you know it is the truth. What's more, I know you know it, even if you claim otherwise. Have some integrity and admit it.
That's the whole point of America's stealth gun confiscation, being promoted and enforced by Jewish politicians, Jewish media barons, Jewish psychologists, Jewish lawyers and Jewish judges. To benefit and protect Jews, of course, as they tighten their stranglehold upon America and the common man. I know it. Soon you will, too. Already, at least you suspect it, don't you? Please have the integrity to admit that much.
New America. An idea whose time has come.
My name is Edgar J. Steele. Thanks for listening. Please visit my web site, www.ConspiracyPenPal.com, for other messages just like this one.
-ed
Copyright ©2007, Edgar J. Steele
Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate both the written and audio version of this Nickel Rant among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. The audio version of this Nickel Rant may also be freely used in its entirety by for-profit broadcasting entities, but is not to be included in any recorded format which then is sold to others. The audio version may be rebroadcast, either live or archived on the Internet, either copied or linked directly to my web site, profit and nonprofit alike, so long as it is used in its entirety. In fact, I encourage any and all radio hosts to use it freely. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.
Nickel Ranttm:
Fight Crime: Shoot Back!
by Edgar J. Steele
September 23, 2007
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia.
Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ...the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
---Tench Coxe (Feb 20, 1788)
My name is Edgar J. Steele. This is a Nickel Rant.
If you have been allowed the privilege legally to own a gun, relish it. You may not possess it much longer. Notice that I made no mention of any "right" to gun ownership.
In fact, you may already have lost it and not know it. You may well risk being arrested and imprisoned at any moment on "illegal" weapons charges.
Do you honestly think that there is one single gun-owning American who is not at risk? There are over 20,000 illegal weapons laws on the books in America. For example, if you have been convicted of a misdemeanor in which you could have served more than two years in jail under the maximum sentence, you cannot own a gun. Trespass on government land and lose your privilege to own a gun.
He seemed like such a nice man...
"He seemed like such a nice man, too," your neighbors will be heard saying in the background, as the TV cameras pan over what will be described by the racially- and sexually-ambiguous anchorman as your "armory," your "cache" of weapons (perhaps 2 pistols, a shotgun, a couple of rifles and a few hundred rounds for each, a modest assemblage at best by North Idaho standards). "Fully armed and ready for a war that never came, Mr. White will be arraigned Thursday..."
It can't happen to you, you say? If you lived in New Orleans a couple of years ago, they took your guns without giving any reason whatsoever.
The Need for Guns Explained
Let me explain something about guns - and consider that this comes from somebody (me) viewed as a rank amateur by friends who are true gun aficionados:
I need a shotgun for crows and other predators, else we would have no smaller birds hereabouts.
I need a "bush rifle" with a scope for coyotes spotted at a distance, else we would have no chickens, cats or other small domestic or farm animals.
I need a .22-caliber rifle to dispose of the random raccoon that also kills my children's cats and relishes the occasional chicken.
I need a rifle with open sights in a decent-size caliber to put down the occasional suffering horse or other farm animal or to quickly dispatch a steer or pig destined for the freezer.
I need a 30.06 or better hunting rifle (preferably one with and one without a scope) in case the increasingly-rare black bear or not-so-rare mountain lion decides to visit my back yard yet again.
I need a .45 caliber handgun to carry when out and about on the back acreage, just in case.
Lessee now, that's 6 long guns and one handgun, plus ammunition with which to practice (use it or lose it - shooting is not like riding bicycles).
And I'm not even a hunter, like virtually everybody else I know around here.
Mind you, I have nothing against hunting, nor should you if you eat Big Macs or wear a leather belt. I just don't happen to care for tramping around in the cold and the wet in the early-morning hours, risking life and limb to bring home something for the freezer that, when cut and wrapped, won't fill even the swinging door shelves and then tastes flat, metallic and stringy ("gamey," is how it is put). I prefer grain-fed beef and sleeping in, thank you very much. Hunters need lots more paraphernalia, including different rifles in different calibers and configurations.
It's kind of like skiing, which once quite literally was my life during the winter when I wasn't actually working. I'll spare you the reasons, but I needed eight pairs of skis, of varying lengths, flexibility, sidecut, etc., just to handle all conditions I might encounter. Frankly, twice that number would have been nice, but I didn't let myself get carried away.
So much for bare necessity beyond the threat from other human beings.
Two-Legged Predators
I also need at least four pistols for self defense, pistols that I actually carry on my person.
But, then, I and my wife and even my little children get genuine death threats from the Chosen, after all. (Not Israelis and not Zionists, notice, but American Jews - my investigators identified a couple of them, though the FBI then did nothing.)
I need a belt-holstered, large-caliber .45 that will put somebody on the ground if I manage to hit them only in the hand, for example. I need a lighter 9 mm for a fanny pack so that it isn't so obvious to all the girly boys when I go out for an evening. I need another 9 mm for my desk drawer, within reach at this very moment in case someone comes bursting in downstairs while I write this. I need a small pistol that fits in my bathrobe pocket when I answer the door late at night. And others, such as the one in my bed's headboard, too.
Pistols are necessary, but not as important as long rifles. I once read that pistols should be used only to fight your way to where you keep your rifle. Not a bad way to put it.
So, if they ever come and arrest me for anything and lay out all my rifles and pistols on the dining table, together with the ammunition, imagine the scene. "Fully armed and ready for a war that never came, Mr. Steele will be arraigned Thursday..." See how that happens? If I, or anybody who actually knows guns, actually wished to prepare for those TV-announcer-described "wars," we would be putting up hundreds of weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition.
In fact, if I didn't have any guns, how on earth would I even get by out here?
Wherever Guns are Outlawed, Only Outlaws have Guns
Living in the city is no different, what with street gangs armed to the teeth with truly illegal weapons. Only the law-abiding, unarmed citizen is at risk in that environment. Recall the scene from Crocodile Dundee, wherein Mick says to the thug, "Pshaw, that's no knife. Now this...this is a knife," as he pulls out his foot-long blade and chases off the would-be muggers.
If criminals knew that American girly boys all were armed with weapons they knew how to use, things would be very different on the streets of America's cities. But, then, in far too many cities, we don't have even the privilege to carry weapons, do we?
Australia banned private handgun ownership a few years ago and crime statistics promptly shot through the roof. Law-abiding citizens began to defend themselves with swords, so they banned them, as well. Next, I suppose they will ban handheld rocks in the Land of Oz.
Rights vs. Privileges
Used to be, gun ownership was a right, not a privilege.
That was when the US Constitution was considered to be more than simply a "damned piece of paper" (to quote America's Buffoon-in-Chief, George Bush).
That was when the Second Amendment still carried some weight with congressmen and courts.
That was when America still was inhabited by real men, not the sheepish girly boys now allowing her transformation into a corporate dictatorship.
Sane Enough to Kill for America
Larry Pratt just brought to my attention a very disturbing piece of legislation with his article entitled "Veterans Disarmament Act to Bar Vets from Owning Guns," now being introduced simultaneously in the House and the Senate. This odious little piece of girly-boy foot stomping will make it illegal for any veteran diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) ever again to own a gun, despite any evidence whatsoever that such makes them the least bit at risk.
Have you ever been prescribed anti-depressants or, even, mild mood enhancers like Valium? Guess what your diagnosis was to support that prescription. Yep. Almost certainly PTSD. Ever told your doctor about being stressed out over bills you are having trouble paying, including his? Guess what he wrote into your chart. The Act described by Pratt provides for all those supposedly private medical records that the government has been collecting to be reviewed. You are about to become a criminal for having something with which to scare off predators with any number of legs.
This is how gun control is being enacted throughout America by stealth. This essentially means that ALL veterans will be disarmed and forbidden from owning guns. That is clear. What isn't so clear is the massive number of other Americans who will be caught up by this legislation.
I'll bet that you didn't hear about that NRA Director stating that assault rifles and rifle magazines holding more than five cartridges should be outlawed, either, did you? Incidentally, the term "assault rifle" now includes all semi-automatic rifles, which is about 99% of all rifles in existence in America today.
Get Counseled, Lose Your Guns
I recently attended a legal CLE (Continuing Legal Education) seminar at which a lawyer/psychologist panelist noted that a great many people attending domestic counseling now are forbidden from owning guns by virtue of merely having participated in counseling sessions. Domestic counseling now is becoming mandatory in most states for all accused of the mildest form of "domestic disturbance," not to mention each and every separation/divorce action, counseling that eventually will strip participants of the privilege of gun ownership.
The Usual Suspects
Consider the move afoot in both the Jewish-controlled mental-health and legal fields to classify anti-Semitism as a mental disorder. Being called anti-Semitic justified imprisonment and death in the old Soviet Union taken over by Bolsheviks (that's Jew to you, and American Jew, at that). That is coming to America, too, but first such "mentally-deranged" people will be stripped of our right to defend ourselves.
He Says Oil, You say Zionist, I Say Jew
Now that the Iraq war properly is being viewed as for the benefit of Israel, with oil being the old cynical reason, it is time to tell the full truth. America's "War on Terrorism" is for the protection and benefit of Jews. No, not all Jews, of course, but so many that the difference is one without a distinction. That is why America, the world's second-largest Jewish stronghold, is doing Israel's bidding, of course. Come on, you know it is the truth. What's more, I know you know it, even if you claim otherwise. Have some integrity and admit it.
That's the whole point of America's stealth gun confiscation, being promoted and enforced by Jewish politicians, Jewish media barons, Jewish psychologists, Jewish lawyers and Jewish judges. To benefit and protect Jews, of course, as they tighten their stranglehold upon America and the common man. I know it. Soon you will, too. Already, at least you suspect it, don't you? Please have the integrity to admit that much.
New America. An idea whose time has come.
My name is Edgar J. Steele. Thanks for listening. Please visit my web site, www.ConspiracyPenPal.com, for other messages just like this one.
-ed
Copyright ©2007, Edgar J. Steele
Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate both the written and audio version of this Nickel Rant among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. The audio version of this Nickel Rant may also be freely used in its entirety by for-profit broadcasting entities, but is not to be included in any recorded format which then is sold to others. The audio version may be rebroadcast, either live or archived on the Internet, either copied or linked directly to my web site, profit and nonprofit alike, so long as it is used in its entirety. In fact, I encourage any and all radio hosts to use it freely. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.
massive surveillance admitted
click here
Massive Surveillance Net Keeps Track of Americans' Travel -- Even the Size of Hotel Beds
ROCCO PARASCANDOLA
Newsday
Monday September 24, 2007
The Bush Administration has been collecting detailed records on the travel habits of Americans headed overseas, whether you fly, drive or take cruises abroad -- not simply your method of transit but the personal items you carry with you and the people you stay with, according to documents and statements obtained by the Washington Post.
They even keep sometimes keep track of what books you read. For as long as 15 years.
In a terrifying front-page article Saturday, the Post outlines the latest in US government surveillance.
According to officials, the records are intended "to assess the security threat posed by all travelers entering the country. Officials say the records, which are analyzed by the department's Automated Targeting System, help border officials distinguish potential terrorists from innocent people entering the country."
The new details suggest a much broader net than that. The details of the program were revealed when a group of activists requested copies of records on their travel and found so
"The Automated Targeting System has been used to screen passengers since the mid-1990s, but the collection of data for it has been greatly expanded and automated since 2002, according to former DHS officials," the Post said.
"The federal government is trying to build a surveillance society," said John Gilmore, a civil liberties activist in San Francisco whose records were requested and then first revealed in Wired News. The government, he said, "may be doing it with the best or worst of intentions. ... But the job of building a surveillance database and populating it with information about us is happening largely without our awareness and without our consent."
According to Wired, passengers pulled aside for extra screening are those most likely to enter the record books. Gilmore had been pulled aside and border patrol officials took notes of his belongings. Read about the document collection at the Identity Project here.
Homeland Security officials defended the program.
"I flatly reject the premise that the department is interested in what travelers are reading," DHS spokesman Russ Knocke told the paper. "We are completely uninterested in the latest Tom Clancy novel that the traveler may be reading."
According to the Post, "The DHS database generally includes 'passenger name record' (PNR) information, as well as notes taken during secondary screenings of travelers. PNR data -- often provided to airlines and other companies when reservations are made -- routinely include names, addresses and credit-card information, as well as telephone and e-mail contact details, itineraries, hotel and rental car reservations, and even the type of bed requested in a hotel."
The millions of travelers whose records are kept by the government are generally unaware of what their records say, and the government has not created an effective mechanism for reviewing the data and correcting any errors, activists said, the paper said.
The activists alleged that the data collection effort, as carried out now, violates the Privacy Act, which bars the gathering of data related to Americans' exercise of their First Amendment rights, such as their choice of reading material or persons with whom to associate, according to the report.
meone had written a note about their flashlight carrying the symbol of a marijuana leaf.
Massive Surveillance Net Keeps Track of Americans' Travel -- Even the Size of Hotel Beds
ROCCO PARASCANDOLA
Newsday
Monday September 24, 2007
The Bush Administration has been collecting detailed records on the travel habits of Americans headed overseas, whether you fly, drive or take cruises abroad -- not simply your method of transit but the personal items you carry with you and the people you stay with, according to documents and statements obtained by the Washington Post.
They even keep sometimes keep track of what books you read. For as long as 15 years.
In a terrifying front-page article Saturday, the Post outlines the latest in US government surveillance.
According to officials, the records are intended "to assess the security threat posed by all travelers entering the country. Officials say the records, which are analyzed by the department's Automated Targeting System, help border officials distinguish potential terrorists from innocent people entering the country."
The new details suggest a much broader net than that. The details of the program were revealed when a group of activists requested copies of records on their travel and found so
"The Automated Targeting System has been used to screen passengers since the mid-1990s, but the collection of data for it has been greatly expanded and automated since 2002, according to former DHS officials," the Post said.
"The federal government is trying to build a surveillance society," said John Gilmore, a civil liberties activist in San Francisco whose records were requested and then first revealed in Wired News. The government, he said, "may be doing it with the best or worst of intentions. ... But the job of building a surveillance database and populating it with information about us is happening largely without our awareness and without our consent."
According to Wired, passengers pulled aside for extra screening are those most likely to enter the record books. Gilmore had been pulled aside and border patrol officials took notes of his belongings. Read about the document collection at the Identity Project here.
Homeland Security officials defended the program.
"I flatly reject the premise that the department is interested in what travelers are reading," DHS spokesman Russ Knocke told the paper. "We are completely uninterested in the latest Tom Clancy novel that the traveler may be reading."
According to the Post, "The DHS database generally includes 'passenger name record' (PNR) information, as well as notes taken during secondary screenings of travelers. PNR data -- often provided to airlines and other companies when reservations are made -- routinely include names, addresses and credit-card information, as well as telephone and e-mail contact details, itineraries, hotel and rental car reservations, and even the type of bed requested in a hotel."
The millions of travelers whose records are kept by the government are generally unaware of what their records say, and the government has not created an effective mechanism for reviewing the data and correcting any errors, activists said, the paper said.
The activists alleged that the data collection effort, as carried out now, violates the Privacy Act, which bars the gathering of data related to Americans' exercise of their First Amendment rights, such as their choice of reading material or persons with whom to associate, according to the report.
meone had written a note about their flashlight carrying the symbol of a marijuana leaf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)