Thursday, June 30, 2005

"The Lost Liberty Hotel"

Wonder where my wife and I will be vacationing next year?


and for the ones who want to see the land. Here

Yes this is 34 Cilley Hill Road New Hampshire. Home of the future Lost Liberty Hotel. My wife said if they build it we will trek there just to give them our business.
Good luck Logan Darrow Clements
Spotting the Libertarian.

I used to call myself a republican. Not for any one specific idea that they or I cherished, but because I sure the hell wasn't a democrat. The democrats had way to many views that were repugnant to me. I would throw out that most people find something their party does or think as bothersome to them and if you do not then you have quit thinking and should be ashamed. So for years I carried the title republican.

Then the internet hit. One by one the views the republicans put forth were shown to not be what I thought they were meant to be, but the same happened to the democrats also. Slowly I came to the realization that the parties were simply the disfunctional twins on the political stage of life. If one said yes the other would say no, then go the other way 4 years later.

I also started to look into what party did hold views closest to mine, and with the many parties out there I found many that fit pretty good. One that stood out was the libertarian party. While the basic views fit comfortably I did notice something about other libertarians. Most were loners. Not because of the size of the party in their area but because of the strength of their beliefs.

So when I read this article about winning elections I came across one section that gave a glimpse of how the libertarian view can grow.
Richard Prawdzienski of Oklahoma wrote an email to me which was the inspiration for this article. He said, "You can help the party by expanding on how to be known as the nice neighbor. I noticed that far too many Libertarians are loners. They don't join organizations and they don't become actively involved. They often state the organization is flawed.

"Examples: American Legion is fighting for a flag amendment therefore I will have nothing to do with them. ACLU won't fight for gun rights therefore I will have nothing to do with them. Boys Scouts won't allow gay leaders therefore I will have nothing to do with them. Churches preach discrimination therefore I will have nothing to do with them. NAACP pushes for social welfare programs therefore I will have nothing to do with them. Gay Groups are lead by the democrats therefore... NRA won't therefore... League of Women Voters won't therefore... The list goes on and on and on."

Richard makes an excellent point. After all, don't we say the same thing to people when they are choosing between the Libertarian Party and our competitors? Why reject us because you disagree about only one or two things and go to a party where you disagree with half of what they are doing?

Besides, the most effective place to change something is from the inside. It is possible to join an organization and only work towards the goals you share with them. Meanwhile you can influence those who are going in the wrong direction to maybe spend a little more of their efforts on the good stuff. There is no leadership more effective than simply Doing. When you Do Something positive, by your actions alone you are urging others to follow you.
He is right on so many levels. The number of times I have heard a libertarian say they quit something because of this view or that view are to numerous to count. Their leaving simply reinforces the view of the libertarian as a loner and not a team player.

So for all the libertarians out there why aren't you getting involved? Then I realized I should ask that question to myself. I can not find an answer in myself.

Maybe it is time for me to start hitting the open town meetings and seeing what I can do. Change starts with one person with an idea.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Second amendment spam?

I made the mistake once of using my home address to email someone with a question about the second amendment. It has been so long ago that I have forgotten who it was.

The result has been that every month or so I get one of those letters sent out by someone who wants to bring our attention to the latest political threat. The emails with about 40 recipients listed. Nothing that bothers me, but it does mean my address is out there.

I have always kept my home email address clean. Hell virgin clean would be a better way of saying it. But today I got an email that upset me for several reasons.

The first was the fact that someone harvested off an "urgent" email my address. That is simply bad play.

The second was the email header.

Now you would think that "Alert" would have some meaning. Not to the SAF. Now who is the SAF? It is a group called the Second Amendment Foundation. One of the many fighting for our second amendment right to get SPAM!!!!!

So what was this Alert? Gun seizures, mass roundups, or maybe the ultimate alert. The Hillary thing getting elected.

Nope. Here it is in all of its glory. The SAF alert to end all alerts.

That's right people. The alert sent from the SAF using a harvested email address is for a credit card. Since I know without a doubt that I have never signed up for any alerts I am saddened that the first contact I have with this 2nd amendment group is credit card spam.

Now maybe, just maybe, someone inserts a header based on where the email was harvested. But NO!!!! This one came right from the base email that the SAF uses. I checked the core properties of the email.

So right now I am very disappointed with the SAF for pimping out an alert to push credit cards, and using an email address that I know had to be harvested.

So now I guess I will wait for the flood of second amendment viagra emails, followed by offering to make my "barrel" even bigger.
Souter under siege DAY 1

With the news of an attempt to use Eminent domain seizure to take his house the actions of a few show how far apart ones with power are from us.

Now I have read this letter several times, and laughed every time, and I did not see one item. A threat of violence.
A message seeking comment from Souter was left at his office Wednesday morning. The court has recessed and Souter was still in Washington, one of his secretaries said.

A few police cruisers were parked on the edge of Souter's property Tuesday.

"It was a precaution, just being protective," said Lt. Mark Bodanza.
So if Souter is in Washington then what are they protecting.

Ooooh! Of course. He is one with power. With a snap of his fingers and a bewitched twitch of his nose cops appear to protect his property.

The people in the Kelo case have no police protection. If anything the police will be their to remove them. The police should not be there unless it is standard for when he is there. Anything else shows how the little people are treated differently then the big people.

This image shows Souters future.
V for Vendetta

Been noticing some talk about a new movie coming out later this year. Based on a comic book it seems to have what it takes to be big.

Set against the futuristic landscape of totalitarian Britain, V For Vendetta tells the story of a mild-mannered young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman) who is rescued from a life-and-death situation by a masked vigilante known only as “V.” Incomparably charismatic and ferociously skilled in the art of combat and deception, V ignites a revolution when he detonates two London landmarks and takes over the government-controlled airwaves, urging his fellow citizens to rise up against tyranny and oppression. As Evey uncovers the truth about V’s mysterious background, she also discovers the truth about herself – and emerges as his unlikely ally in the culmination of his plot to bring freedom and justice back to a society fraught with cruelty and corruption.
As it is from the people who did Matrix I have high hopes for it.

The anti-establishment theme of movies may have a bright future due to the acts of our government.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. — Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German philosopher

Tuesday, June 28, 2005


Need something fun to do this weekend? Want a family bonding experiance? Want to strike a blow for freedom? Then this is the information you need.

Go have some fun people.
In a good mood all of a sudden

I have been rather gloomy the last few days. The KELO crime case has clouded my thoughts.

But today I read something that made me laugh out loud and made me have a little hope for revenge and justice.
Press Release
For Release Monday, June 27 to New Hampshire media
For Release Tuesday, June 28 to all other media

Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.

# # #

Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC

Phone 310-593-4843
I would easily throw a few hundred in to help this cause.

So smile people. The governors, justices and other thieves need to look out. The people are coming back with a plan, and an eviction notice in hand.

Monday, June 27, 2005

Rocky Top Brigade Membership Update

Our humble group seems to be growing by leaps and bounds. So once again South Knox Bubba has another update of the membership rolls. So drop by and give them a once over and enjoy.

Another fine example of the city using their rules and not their brains to act..
It took five years of tender loving care to create a native prairie in the middle of Minneapolis.

It took about 15 minutes for the city to mow most of the waving grasses and flowers to stubble.

The prairie around the YWCA at 2121 E. Lake St. in south Minneapolis was cut because an eagle-eyed city inspector noticed that the grass was higher than the 8-inch maximum allowed by city ordinance.

The same inspector -- and the mower contracted by the city -- apparently didn't see the substantial sign in front of the Y that explained these tall grasses were intended. This was natural prairie, created because it's environmentally friendly and because it was a wonderful teaching lab for city kids.

"Why Don't We Mow?" the sign reads in large letters. In smaller letters there's an explanation of the landscape. "... A mature prairie is a showcase of beautiful grasses and flowers. Prairies take up to three years to mature."
You have my permission to take a moment to laugh at the mindless activities of this government and its continuing war against 8 inch plus grass*.

*Grass over 8 inches is the prime cause of premature balding, tax evasion, and voting democrat.

Remember. Only you can stop 8 inch grass.
Supreme Court Quote fest

Over at Volokh Conspiracy they asked for the best Supreme court quotes. Here are a few that stood out.
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

Justice Jackson in West Virginia Board of Education vs. Barnett (1943).

"The utmost possible liberty to the individual, and the fullest possible protection to him and his property, is both the limitation and duty of government." Budd v. People, 143 U.S. 517, 551 (1892) (Brewer, J., dissenting).

"[T]he concept of privacy embodies the 'moral fact that a person belongs to himself and not others nor to society as a whole.'" Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians &Gynecologists, 476 U.S. 747, 777, n. 5 (Stevens, J., concurring).
There are many more but when I was looking through them I came across a grouping by George Sutherland. His stood out due to the recent happenings and I want to bring your attention to some of what he said.
Justice Sutherland dissenting in Associated Press v. NLRB, 301 U.S. 103, 141:
For the saddest epitaph which can be carved in memory of a vanished liberty is that it was lost because its possessors failed to stretch forth a saving hand while yet there was time.

Sutherland in Blaisdell: "A provision of the Constitution, it is hardly necessary to say, does not admit of two distinctly opposite interpretations. It does not mean one thing at one time and an entirely different thing at another time."

Justice Sutherland for the Court in Adkins v. Children's Hospital:
To sustain the individual freedom of action contemplated by the Constitution is not to strike down the common good, but to exalt it; for surely the good of society as a whole cannot be better served than by the preservation against arbitrary restraint of the liberties of its constituent members.

Justice Sutherland, dissenting in New State Ice v. Liebmann:
The principle is imbedded in our constitutional system that there are certain essentials of liberty with which the state is not entitled to dispense in the interest of experiments.

Justice Sutherland, dissenting in Blaisdell:
If the provisions of the Constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned.
" vanished liberty is that it was lost because its possessors failed to stretch forth a saving hand " could easily be a quote from today as so many of the limits placed on the government by the constitution and it's amendments are being hammered by the supreme court.

The best one came from Thomas in the recent kelo case that is causing so much turmoil in myself and others out there. One short line that is the best roundup of the whole Kelo ruling and what its aftermath will be.
From Thomas in Kelo: "Obliterating a provision of the constitution, of course, guarantees that it will not be misapplied."
That pretty much sums up what the supreme court is doing today.

I am going to try not to hit on Kelo to much. I keep getting upset at the supreme court and Kelo is the shit frosting on the cake they have served us. So I direct you to Say Uncle and Volokh for all of your Kelo issues.

Sunday, June 26, 2005

Amateur gun smithing

Here is a link that shows what demand for an object will create. A true Wile E. Coyote School of Gunsmithing (WECSOG) firearm.

[War on Guns]
Technical help here

There is a streaming online radio station that I listen to and a problem that I have had in the past has popped up again. Asking any computer savvy people if they know what to do.

The station has a Click here to listen live!! button on it's streaming page. Now until yesterday I could click and listen with no troubles, but now I get a rather strange popup that occurred in the past with another radio station. I gave up on that station, but really liked this one and pissed that my computer decided to "change" itself for some reason.

Anyone have an idea on why this pops up. The small window that did open when the station plays has a QuickTime look about it, but not sure if that is the problem.

Yes I am using windows and that is likely the trouble but I want to know what a .pls file is and why my computer does not like this station.

Maybe I need to download WimAmp, but I really hate to install anything on my computer.

When I do download it this is what I get
That is when opened in notepad
Making it all up

Several of the supreme court justices have made statements that we need to look outside our borders for how we judge ourselves and make decisions in the highest court.

Now I have nothing but distrust for the UN, but they can not do anything without the support of useful idiots in our country. Seems we have 5 of them in the SC
The land policy of the United Nations was first officially articulated at the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I), held in Vancouver, May 31 - June 11, 1976. Agenda Item 10 of the Conference Report sets forth the UN's official policy on land. The Preamble says:

"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."
Now if that is not bad enough you need to know that we our representative voted for this. He also found that the following was just fine to agree to.
Recommendation D.1

(a) Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means of...achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits of development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.

(b) Land is a scarce resource whose management should be subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation.

(d) Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements....
Here is more for your reading pleasure.

This part stood out to me.
subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation
We already have this. Codes officials checking our properties for the right hedge hieghts, if our wells are the proper depth, and if we cut our grass enough.

Now do I think the SC is in cahoots with the UN. Nope. The UN is sitting back and watching the useful idiots do their work for them. I guess the supreme court has forgotten what countries constitution that are supposed to work with.
[Henry Lamb]

Saturday, June 25, 2005

Go and read this tale


and Ouch
It doesn't require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires to people's minds. — Samuel Adams American Patriot

Friday, June 24, 2005


Can we work with the system? When it is broken the first thing you do is try to fix it, but everytime the libertarian ideal has tried the courts failed us.
On further reflection, it appears to be generally a bad policy to challenge any law with which we libertarianish folks disagree, even though we are right. We keep getting shot down when we take it all the way to the highest court in the land. Act locally.
so what is to be done. Regretfully I see in the future more heavy handed dealings with the public. More land grabs and more profits for the big business interests.

I also see a lot of this happening in the future

People will be pushed and people will break, and then people will die. Say Uncle says we should avoid things like this as no one wins. I agree.

What is the next step? Hell if I know. I can't afford a bull dozer.
Girls are evil and the supreme court

Sounds like a strange post title but hear me out. A rather simplistic way of describing something but at the base level it works.

Heartless Libertarian posted on the supreme courts ruling and his question is a good one.
What I really fail to get about the Supreme Court is how they can find rights not mentioned anywhere in the text of the Constitution (abortion, sodomy), often going through amazing legalistic gymnastics and contortions to justify them, and yet when it comes to things that are plainly written in the Constitution-freedom of speech (BCFRA) and property rights, they can go through similar contortions to deny the plain meaning of the text.
what the problem is for people trying to figure out this mess is the point of view. When we look at the problem we see these words in the constitution.
'nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.'
On the surface it is plain and simple. The problem is that the SC does not see this. Follow this link to Find Law and notice that the numbers scattered throughout their break down of this law.
''The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says 'nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.' This is a tacit recognition of a preexisting power to take private property for public use, rather than a grant of new power.'' 160 Eminent domain ''appertains to every independent government. It requires no constitutional recognition; it is an attribute of sovereignty.'' 161 In the early years of the nation the federal power of eminent domain lay dormant, 162 and it was not until 1876 that its existence was recognized by the Supreme Court. In Kohl v. United States 163 any doubts were laid to rest, as the Court affirmed that the power was as necessary to the existence of the National Government as it was to the existence of any State. The federal power of eminent domain is, of course, limited by the grants of power in the Constitution, so that property may only be taken for the effectuation of a granted power, 164 but once this is conceded the ambit of national powers is so wide- ranging that vast numbers of objects may be effected. 165 This prerogative of the National Government can neither be enlarged nor diminished by a State. 166 Whenever lands in a State are needed for a public purpose, Congress may authorize that they be taken, either by proceedings in the courts of the State, with its consent, or by proceedings in the courts of the United States, with or without any consent or concurrent act of the State. 167
Each one of those numbers is a whole court case and a ruling. FindLaws article included only 29 so figure there are many more.

So when the supreme court views a case they do not look at the one sentence in the constitution but whole books full of case laws based on the latest cases, then they make their decision. The problem with that is you get one crappy ruling you end up with bad ruling over and over again.

There is an infamous image going around the web and it shows simply why bad rulings will compound a belief until it is far from whatever was intended.

So when I look at the ruling from the SC I see a "Girls are evil" sort of logic. One mistake built on another until we lose our rights and all logic is destroyed. If the SC took the time to read the constitution instead of books full of questionable rulings then so many of our rights would be protected instead of sold to the largest big box store.

By the way. Girls truly are time and money but I would not want to live without them.
My thoughts

On the surface Georgia is taking a stand with the backing of Georgia law, but will it standup in court
Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker said Thursday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling on private property rights will not affect state homeowners because of protections in the state constitution.

Baker, in a statement released to media, said the Georgia Constitution and more than 100 years of state court precedent prevent condemnation for private purposes.

"Fortunately for Georgians, our state constitution and state judiciary have consistently held that condemnation for private purposes is not acceptable under state law, a position that will be unaffected by today’s federal court ruling," Baker wrote.
It is nice he is saying that state law protects you but I worry about another SC ruling.

In a recent ruling the SC seems to say that Federal laws win over state laws when it comes to interstate commerce.
"Congress' power to regulate purely activities that are part of an economic 'class of activities' that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce is firmly established," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.
So if Wal-Mart or some other company wants your land could they simply say that the protection that georgia law gives you means squat? If the Raich ruling destroys states rights then a company has the power to force the state to seize your land with the backing of the federal and supreme courts.

These two ruling may become an unkillable hydra when it comes to their effects on society.
Watch out!! He has a set of Audi Keys.

I just hope the poor TSA goon agent did not fear for his life when he came across this WMD.
''I'm leaving Dallas on a Sunday and at security it's the usual stuff -- shoes off, laptop out. My carry-on bag goes through the X-ray machine and I hear the infamous 'bag check!''' Mr. Rau recalled.

Here we go, he thought. ''A screener says, 'Sir, is this your bag?' And I say, 'Yeah, and I need a private room if you're going to go through it,' '' he recalled telling the screener.
At the Dallas checkpoint, the contents of his bag were dumped on the table. ''They pull out my car key,'' he said.

''What's this?'' an inspector asked.

''My car key,'' Mr. Rau said.

Mr. Rau drives an Audi. Audis now come with stylish ignition keys designed to house the key inside a holder, preventing rips and wear on pocket liners. You push a button on a flat two-inch shaft and the key slides out.

As he demonstrated it, Mr. Rau could see the word forming in the minds of the screeners, now three, on his case: switchblade.

''Now the bells are ringing,'' he said. After running the key through the X-ray machine three times, the security committee reached a conclusion. ''Well, sir, that's a switchblade style, and that's a prohibited item,'' Mr. Rau said he was told. ''We're going to have to confiscate that.''

Paperwork, of course, was required. His driver's license and other identification papers were photocopied.
My mom always said "Don't run around the house with keys like that, you could put an eye out"
Coming to a city near you.

One of the many things we as a semi-free people enjoy is the ability to address our government on any subject. Unless you have a crap load of money you will have troubles in Washington addressing anyone, the ability still exists in most towns.

That is except Yelm Washington.
Mayor Adam Rivas won't let the public address the City Council if he even thinks they might mention the unmentionable.

Residents say it's censorship, but the city says it's just trying to protect itself if a legal battle brews over Wal-Mart's plan to build in this small town about 15 miles southeast of Olympia.

Residents have been able to say less and less about Wal-Mart at council meetings during the past five months.

"Initially we couldn't use the term 'Wal-Mart,' so the code word became 'big-box stores,'" said Gregory May, who heads up a Wal-Mart opposition group in Yelm. "They then just announced they would no longer accept any comments about Wal-Mart or big-box stores."

Some citizens are stunned that they've been silenced by the people elected to represent them.

"My issue was about traffic concerns. I knew enough to use the word 'Wal-Mart' at the very end, so I wouldn't be told to sit down," she said.
Ah! The old "shut up and sit down" form of public debate.

Now maybe, just maybe, the meeting were being hijacked by rather loud individuals that caused all business to stop for their own little pet peeves.

Nope!. Seems this city council makes up the rules as they go along.
In April, it unanimously approved a motion banning the word "moratorium." That was in response to citizen requests that the council enact a moratorium on big box stores so the city's staff could review the city's decade-old zoning.
And when a group was considering building a NASCAR track in Yelm, the council wouldn't allow public comment, even though an application was never submitted.
There is just so much wrong with this story. Any open meeting is not really open if the council decides what can be talked about and what is forbidden. This is a prime example of what a little tyrant can do to a town.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is no force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist."
Another brick in the wall

The Supreme court has ruled that states have no rights and now you have lost a lot of yours.

Say Uncle is covering this and he is ashamed of the government. I am also.

Hide your guns, buy lots of ammo, encrypt your data, and prepare. The future just got very dark.
Satire at its best

Sometimes it is good to rub the noses of politicians in their own mess to attempt to teach them a leason. Odds are they will not learn anything, but D.C. Council member Carol Schwartz is giving it a good try.
With a wink and a smirk, D.C. Council member Carol Schwartz (R-At Large) introduced legislation yesterday to ban alcohol in the District.

Schwartz, the leading opponent of a proposed smoking ban in District bars and restaurants, applied the same arguments made by anti-smoking activists to defend an alcohol ban

Imitation may be considered flattery, but Schwartz's tongue-in-cheek comments showed it can also be used as a political skewer.

"People are still free to drink at home -- for now," she said as she introduced her bill, the Worker Occupational Safety and Health Amendment Act of 2005, Part II. "I'm just legislating that liquor cannot be served in bars, restaurants and nightclubs because I don't want it to be served. I will allow teas, sodas and milk -- for now. And if the drinkers insist on drinking alcohol -- and they will -- they can just step outside on sidewalks with their flasks and drink."
Like smoking opponents, she characterized her booze ban as protecting the health of workers and citizens. She read off a litany of drunken driving and domestic abuse statistics that showed drinking is bad for one's health.

"We all know that bartenders and waitstaff are constantly harassed by drinking customers. Bouncers are even beaten up by drunks. I care about these workers and their safety," Schwartz said, while her colleagues chuckled and hid their faces in their hands.

"Yes, I come to you a changed woman," Schwartz said, her voice oozing sarcasm. "It had just never occurred to me that I could simply choose to ban a legal choice for consenting adults in a private place where the public does not have to go and where workers do not have to work.

"I'm also now looking at some other legal choices to ban -- like driving or sex -- for they, too, can be dangerous to your health and the health of others."
After making her point to the people there, not the politicians, she withdrew the bill.

I almost wish she had not withdrawn the bill. Force the commitee to vote on the carbon copy bill and defend their vote. Let them squirm under the limelight for a bit.

The nannies strike again.
[Ravenwood's Universe]

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

Thich Quang Duc


I did not even know his name until a few minutes ago. I was writing the post below this one and when I went to find a link to what he did I came across his name.

42 years ago this month he did something that is hard to define. Was it the ultimate act of Civil disobedience? Was it an act of a religious fanatic? Was it simply a sign of the times? I guess everyone has their own opinion on what he did, but we can almost all agree that his act shook the world to its core. When in a country that people died daily in numerous horrible ways his one singular death stood out.
On June 11, 1963, Thich Quang Duc, a Buddhist monk from the Linh-Mu Pagoda in Hue, Vietnam, burned himself to death at a busy intersection in downtown Saigon, Vietnam.. Eye witness accounts state that Thich Quang Duc and at least two fellow monks arrived at the intersection by car, Thich Quang Duc got out of the car, assumed the traditional lotus position and the accompanying monks helped him pour gasoline over himself. He ignited the gasoline by lighting a match and burned to death in a matter of minutes. David Halberstam, a reporter for the New York Times covering the war in Vietnam, gave the following account:

I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning human flesh; human beings burn surprisingly quickly. Behind me I could hear the sobbing of the Vietnamese who were now gathering. I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think…. As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him.
There are many images of the Vietnam war that are more well known, but none deliver a message as much as his does.

I simply decline to post an image of the event. The main link goes to a google search with enough shots to satisfy any interest you might have of the act.
I don't think he understands
Civil disobedience
A deliberate peaceful violation of particular laws, decrees, regulations, ordinances, military or police orders, and the like. These are usually laws that are regarded as inherently immoral, unjust, or tyrannical. Sometimes, however, laws of a largely regulatory or morally neutral character may be disobeyed as a symbol of opposition to wider policies of the government.
So now that I have that out of the way I can start the post.

I dropped by American RealPolitik and his last post was one that left me shaking my head in disbelief. The subject was about Russell Kanning, the New Hampshire resident who went and got himself arrested in an act of Civil disobedience at the airport. He planned it all out, he let people know he was going to do it, and then he went and got arrested. So why does this person breaking the law bother Gregory Markle so much?
The problem I have with Kanning's self-martyrdom is that is was a cheap stunt
Wow. Sorry that everyone cannot be a Thich Quang Duc, but it is a start.

Then he goes on to hammer Kanning some more.
Well, the punishment should fit the crime. Obstruction of security officials work, intent to cause a civil disturbance, public jackassery, being a complete moron without a license...that sort of thing. Kanning's wife states that "what he was trying to get across is that people need to be able to travel with dignity." Well, frankly, a more dignified way to travel would be to show them your damn ID, actually be taking a trip rather than intentionally causing a disturbance, and taking the fucking bus if you have a problem with the restrictions imposed on airline travel!

Wow. Just short of the standard "toe the line or get out of my damn country" chant.
If I were an airline security official and some jackass showed up to take a flight with nothing more than a Bible and a copy of the Declaration of Independence and refused to show his ID...he'd be in line for cavity search because I'd assume he was some sort of lunatic simply because of his actions.
Nothing like the threat of a cavity search to keep the masses inline.
The problem is that you can't just "go back" and in order to go forward requires some changes. If it really bothers you that much to identify yourself to get on a flight or that you might be searched for weapons, I'd suggest psychotherapy and maybe something medicinal for your paranoia.
"go back"!!?! The actions of our government seems to say that if we dig a big enough hole we will be safe. I personally do not want to be buried in the name of security.

The fact that you end the post with the sad and over used chant of mental instability is just short of Godwin's law.

Take the time to read about the history of Civil disobedience and understand that every large social change started small somewhere. Gregory Markle is a prime example of one of the best freedom quotes out there.
Gun bloggers unite. You have nothing to lose but your brass.

Say Uncle got together with The Truth Laid Bear and created a Gun Blogger Community. Right now the number of members is increasing daily and if you consider yourself a gun blogger then contact Say Uncle.

The Gun bloggers site has a feed of the latest posts by members and the posts most linked to in the last 5 days. A good way to get a feel of the hot button topics out there.
Two takes on the patriot act.

Two videos have come to my attention this week that touch on the subject of the patriot act. These videos are on totally opposite sides of the spectrum.

We have Penn and Teller and their show BullShit. No subject is to sacred to be taken on, and when they are done the subject will seem a little different to you. So when I first heard they had taken on the patriot act I knew I wanted to see that one, and they did not let me down at all. Crooks and Liars have the episode and even if you only want to watch it for a laugh I would recommend it. (Video NSFW)

The next video is from The Daily show (streaming link). Now I enjoy having the ability to watch our politicians at work, to see them grandstanding for the camera simply reinforces my views of them. . They show just a few minutes from a house armed service committee and to say that Senator Sensenbrenner activities was shameful would be a restrained comment. If this is the way that Washington deals with things then we need to fear our politicians more then the patriot act.

So we have a humorous one that shows in simple terms the troubles with it, then we have a politician showing why politicians should NEVER have the powers they do have.
The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. — Edmund Burke (1784).

Gun bans don't disarm criminals, gun bans attract them. — WALTER MONDALE

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Does anyone have Anarchangels email address? For about the last 4-5 days his site has been locking my computer up. It started the same day he had the team infidel photos shooting the computers. I'm not sure if he added a search assist or some ads but his site is killing my computer. I had to shut my computer down three times while trying to see if he had an email posted.

I'm not sure if he knows there is a conflict with his site. Is anyone else having this problem?
The rule of law is shameful is many cases

Stupid citizenry, wise leaders is a good read. Here is a small bit of it.
On June 6th, I made the small gesture of going to the Bloomington City Council meeting in support of a large group of people representing bars and fraternal clubs that are suffering big losses of revenue due to the Bloomington smoking ban
Those I went to support... residents, citizens of Bloomington, finally got to speak at ONE A.M., I was told later. The 40 people who waited all that time to speak... NO... to beseech, to plead, to beg their elected officials, were then PERMITTED to tell their tragic stories of business, job and income loss to themselves and their businesses.
The root of smoking bans has nothing whatsoever to do with health. It's about power, about force, about coercion... it's about a few people being able to control how the rest of us may live. Each of us may try to convince others that our position is the correct one. When someone... ANYONE... chooses to FORCE others to their position RATHER than convincing them, they are violating the rights of those individuals
This is worth reading.
Oops! ..I did it again

No not Britney Spears, this time it is the TSA. A personnel favorite of mine that represents everything wrong with the War on Terror Freedom.
Air travelers who have been concerned about the government collecting their personal information from airlines now have a second source to worry about: commercial data brokers.

The federal agency in charge of aviation security revealed that it bought and is storing commercial data about some passengers _ even though officials said they wouldn't do it and Congress told them not to.
So they said they would not do it and congress said not to, but that did not stop them or even likely slowed them down.

The TSA is out of control, hell most of the government is out of control. They ignore their own words, and ignore congress. When a government agency has no restriction imposed or self imposed there is going to be victims. That is you and I. I can say honestly that I am not surprised. The TSA says one thing and then does another is standard fare for them.
When you disarm your subjects, you offend them by showing that either from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either conclusion will induce them to hate you.


Monday, June 20, 2005

Marlin 336

My baby brother had a friend who owned what he called a POS Marlin in 30.30. It had not worked for a good while so with broken stock and all he sold it to my brother for 50$.

My brother called and asked me if I could figure out how to take it apart properly and fix it. Since I do not claim any smithing skills I told him I would do what I could. I went online and found this GIF breakdown of the 336 model. I emailed it to him and then went to look at it.

The first thing I noticed was that the "little door thingy" that closes the hole where you load the ammo was way loose and out of position. I found later by looking at the diagram that it is called the loading spring. With it being out of position that was pretty much the main problem.

The next day he took the diagram and started to tighten screw number 27, labeled "loading spring screw". He said the second he turned it the spring started to slide back into place. 5 full turns of the screw later and the rifle was fixed.

My baby brother called me this afternoon with "I love you Gunner". Seems that when older brother spots the broken item right away baby brother gets pretty impressed.

I kind of felt sorry for his friend. He sold a good rifle that required only a simple twist to make well. But my brother is happy. He now has a Marlin 336 in 30.30, scoped and all it needs to be prime is a new stock. The scope is a cheap generic and the rings are mounted on a rather strange looking see through mount. For him it is a prize.

Another rifleman is born
Quotes of the day

Maybe it is just the mood I am in but here goes

"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
H.L. Mencken

bending one unjust law is a small thing when it comes to protecting ones family
Rance Burghess
"Heart of gold"
Only two small mentions

I sat for a few minutes before I started writing this. I was bothered because of the story and I was not sure how to put it into words.

The story about the scum who raped the dog is running all around the net and it is sick. It is the way the story is written that upset me.

9 paragraphs and in everything they talk about the dog and the horror of the situation, it is the fact that in the story they mention something else only one time in the article is what bothers me.
A Campobello teen is accused of raping one neighbor's dog and another neighbor's two little girls. Now the dog has died and charges against the teen have been upgraded.
Two girls molested but they feel that the big story is the dog. To hell with the dog.

We as a society have really fallen off the edge of reason when the big story is the poor damn dog and not the young girls. I wanted to write a letter to the reporter and call he a narrow sighted hack but there was no credit given for this story.

The words under the photo in the article says this
Cory Williamson, 17, is in jail accused of raping his neighbor's dog; and is awaiting trial on charges of molesting a 3-year-old girl and the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl.
That seems to say he is in jail because of the dog, but was out awaiting trial on the molesting charges. So the rape of a dog and you stay in jail, but molest a couple of young girls and you get out to commit other crimes. A dog has a greater impact then a girl.

Our priorities are screwed up when the news service feels the dog is a bigger story then the girls.

The life of an animal never trumps the welfare of a child in any story.
Carnival Of Cordite

Technogypsy is hosting the 18th Carnival of Cordite.

I now know I will never buy Skiing magazine, support the Science Fair board in mASSachusetts or support causes backed by the AMA. Reading the idiocy this week did not perk me up any.
Open mouth, insert foot

That's what comes to mind when I first read this article by Jim Duffy.
The San Diego County Fair represents a time when friends and families, residents and visitors can come together and celebrate the many things that we love about our county. It is a place where people from all walks of life come together and celebrate the character, depth and prosperity of our community. The rides, food and fun at the fair give all San Diegans the unique opportunity to enjoy quality family time.

For our public safety officers, it is also a time where our families can enjoy the safe haven we have helped build. Unfortunately, the law enforcement community has been put into a situation where it is no longer safe for us to include our families in this time-honored tradition.

In spite of state and federal laws that give law enforcement officers the discretion to carry a firearm off duty, the San Diego County Fair board is has now prohibiting officers from visiting the fair if they are carrying a concealed firearm when not on duty. This presents a number of potentially dangerous scenarios for our officers and their families; so much so that the law enforcement community has decided to boycott the San Diego County Fair.
Because there are bad people who do not like cops then they should have the right to carry while no one else does. I guess the idea that people in general have problems and could become victims do not cross his mind.
The law enforcement community is calling on the San Diego County Fair board to revise its policy regarding concealed firearms for peace officers so that all San Diegans can enjoy the food, fun and quality family time at the San Diego County Fair.
So the next time someone says that police do not want special rights you have my permission to laugh in their face.

"Victim disarmed zones" are a way of life if you have a permit to carry. Those damn little signs telling everyone that the people inside are unarmed is a sign of shame. What is worse is that many whole states are victim disarmed zones, and the way California does NOT give out permits makes it one large victim camp. Now the police are upset that they are going to be treated like one of the masses. The horror.

If he is trying to create sympathy he has failed miserably.

He can be emailed here.
Pet peeve

There is one thing that bothers me when people talk about "rights". Not the rights themselves but the where they come from.

You see I am a bit of a purist.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Now most people like to comment about rights and quote the constitution. I feel that is in error for many reasons. The constitution is not a rights giving document.

endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights
For me this is the most important line in the declaration of independence. It proclaims that we have rights. We have them because they are ours from birth and cannot be removed. We did not get them from the magna carta, we did not get them from any paper written by man. They are ours. I almost feel in life that politicians should have tattooed on the top of their hands the words "unalienable Rights" so they can be reminded of them. Gloves would suddenly come into fashion in Washington.

Now for many the word "creator" may be offensive if they are not religious, or polytheistic. Big deal. If you want creator to be nature, and evolution its process, then believe it and be happy, if you want "creator" to be a multi-armed deity who formed you from clay then be happy. But have the courtesy to not try to destroy something so important over a supposed slight.

Now this phrase seems to limit our rights on the surface. I'm not to sure about that mostly. My mom had a saying that I had all the right to swing my arms around, but the rights to swing my arms stopped at the end of your nose. At that part I was stepping into the area where you have the right to have a "pursuit of Happiness". Man cannot be happy if someone else feels his rights trump yours. So these unalienable Rights do have limits, and they should be self imposed.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Now this is a point of contention for me. People argue about rights and they mention constitutional rights. For me there are no constitutional rights. Not one.

The constitution is the document that "instituted" our government. If you read the constitution it does not go into rights and such, what it does is define the range and limits of the new government they were organizing. The duties and responsibilities of the government are well defined. This is regretfully where so much confusion comes into play.

Many who were there to sign the constitution were worried, and rightfully so, that the constitutional government they were creating would take our rights away. They refused to sign it until certain amendments were added that listed certain rights that were never to be infringed. Historically that was an error on their part. Filtered through the decades people now have the bad habit of looking at the constitution as a rights giving documents because of the amendments. Something the constitution was never supposed to do and didn't.

If you read the amendments they are written telling the government what rights are never to be touched. The amendments are there to limit the government even more, not to give us a right.

I have always felt that the Amendments should not have been attached to the constitution but should have been a document of equal powers that existed alongside it. By hooking them together they opened the gates for the dilution of the ideals of freedom. Now the document that simply organizes our government and was supposed to be the leash to keep it under control has morphed into something it was not to be, a rights giving document.

The idea that rights and a constitutional government are one and the same bother me a lot. You hear people talk about their "constitutional rights" when in fact we have no liberties given by the constitution. What should be said is that we have "constitutionally protected rights", but they are not "constitutional rights.

So then we get to the most important section.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
So are we up to this point? I guess that is up to a persons individual breaking point. Our liberties have been diluted to the point that most people will allow a lot of infringement before they "break". For some the national ID card is the breaking point, for others they may wait until all parental rights are removed, "for the good of the children of course" before they start acting. What I have noticed is that there is more and more talk about that breaking point being seen on the horizon and people are worried.

The constitution is a good document, but for me the words that define freedom and why we enjoy them are all based in the declaration of independence.

Friday, June 17, 2005


I get a lot of the quotes I post from Keep and bear arms. This one just blew me away.
It is difficult to maintain the illusion that we are interpreting a Constitution, rather than inventing one. — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Scalia, in his minority dissenting opinion in Nebraska vs. Carhart
People. We are screwed.
Bragging about Pork

The machine of Washington is greased with one thing. You may feel it is money and to a point you are right, but it is the usage of money that is the important part. The money in Washington that keeps things moving is pork. The small amendments added to bills to bring home the bacon to your home district.

I went to local representatives Bart Gordon's website to contact him to thank him for voting against the .50 caliber export ban and I took a glance at his press releases. Those total waste of effort that serves the "look at what I did" attempt.

I saw what can easily be describes as a festival of pork barreling.

March 2005
Gordon Secures $50,000 For Livingston Courthouse Square Renovation Project (March 22, 2005)
Gordon Secures $100,000 For Woodbury Greenway (March 21, 2005)
Gordon Secures $100,000 For Lewisburg Greenway (March 21, 2005)
Gordon Hosts Middle Tennessee Open Meetings (March 18, 2005)
Gordon Secures $200,000 For New Macon Welcome Center (March 18, 2005)
Gordon Secures $200,000 For Eagleville Greenway (March 18, 2005)
Gordon's Meth Bill Heads To House Floor For Consideration (March 17, 2005)
Gordon Secures $500,000 For New Rutherford County Visitors Center (March 17, 2005)
Gordon Secures $4.5 Million For La Vergne/Smyrna Greenways (March 16, 2005)
Gordon Secures $500,000 For Bridge Across Old Hickory Lake (March 15, 2005)
Gordon Secures $500,000 For North Tennessee Boulevard Project (March 14, 2005)
Gordon Secures $400,000 For New Interchange Along I-65 (March 14, 2005)
Gordon Secures $400,000 For Shelbyville Greenway (March 10, 2005)
Gordon Secures $250,000 For Springfield Greenway (March 10, 2005)
Stones River Greenway To Get Additional $9 Million (March 10, 2005)
Gordon Secures $2.5 Million For New Putnam Rail Trail (March 10, 2005)
Gordon To Get $665,000 For Gallatin Greenway Project (March 10, 2005)
TTU's Bell Joins Gordon In Fight Against State's Meth Problem (March 3, 2005)

So in the month of March alone he brought home 19,865,000$ in pork barrel projects. That will buy a crap load of votes.

Many will come back with the sad reply that some communities simply could not afford to have a welcome center, or the vitally needed visitor center. Hell communities have risen and fallen on the simple fact of how pretty their damn walking trails are. If a community feels that they "need" a trail then sell bonds to finance it, but why is Gordon spending my taxes to buy votes in this city? Because he is a politician.

The horrible thing is that I live in the district he serves so I will benefit from his free giving nature. He just gave 500,000$ to a road project for the school my sister goes to, my own city got 4,500,000$ from him for Greenways.

So I should be happy my city is going to get the Benjamins. I'm not. Bart Gordon and the whole lot of them in Washington are nothing but Pork Pimps. We whore our votes for what he gives us. He's the pimp daddy for central Tennessee.
A Tennessee clean sweep

An attempt by gun grabbers banners to keep .50 rifles from being exported to civilians was voted down.
WASHINGTON -- The National Rifle Association and its allies in the House beat back an effort Thursday to restrict gun manufacturers' exports of high-powered, .50-caliber rifles that can bring down jet airliners from a mile away.

By a 278-149 vote, the House killed an amendment by Rep. James Moran to block .50-caliber exports to civilians. He said the guns are dream weapons for terrorists.

"These are unparalleled weapons, and I'm not trying to restrict them in the United States," said Moran, D-Va. "I just don't want them sold by arms dealers."
Nice. An attempt to ban guns to others when it mostly fails here.

So Keep and Bear Arms had a link to where you can find out what your representatives voted. Here is how mine voted

Democrats -- Cooper, N; Davis, N; Ford, N; Gordon, N; Tanner, N.

Republicans -- Blackburn, N; Duncan, N; Jenkins, N; Wamp, N.
So my representatives all voted against it. Will have to contact each of them to say thanks.

Thursday, June 16, 2005

This turns my stomach

They are talking about the prisoners in Cuba.
The administration has argued it has the right to hold the prisoners as long as the war on terrorism continues.

Delaware Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden asked Deputy Associate Attorney General J. Michael Wiggins whether the Justice Department had "defined when there is the end of conflict."

"No, sir," Wiggins responded.

"If there is no definition as to when the conflict ends, that means forever, forever, forever these folks get held at Guantanamo Bay," Biden said.

"It's our position that, legally, they can be held in perpetuity," Wiggins said.
They have expanded what is terror to arrest gang members in the East and to charge Casinos in Vegas. The war on Terror is now the "Forever War" of fiction.

"Perpetuity". What a horrible word to be used by our government.
This is to funny.

Would you like a wash and rince with your beatdown?
An armed robber brandishing a revolver and some tough talk entered Blalock's Beauty College demanding money Tuesday afternoon.

He left crying, bleeding and under arrest, after Dianne Mitchell, her students and employees attacked the suspect, beating him into submission.

Mitchell tripped the robber as he tried to leave and cried aloud "get that sucker" as the group of about 20, nearly all women, some wielding curling irons, bludgeoned him until police arrived.
He is still in the hospital. The firearm he had was unloaded. D'ooh!
The truth is rather shaky

Good news people. Certain powers in the patriot act have been removed.
Advocates of rewriting the USA Patriot Act are claiming momentum after the House, despite a White House veto threat, voted to restrict investigators from using the anti-terrorism law to peek at library records and bookstore sales slips.
Bad news. While some where able to get the vote together to remove these small powers they Senate has decided to try to expand it in other areas.
This comes close on the heels of a closed-door session of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on June 7, which approved legislation reauthorizing and expanding the PATRIOT Act. The expanded bill would make it even easier for the FBI to obtain subpoenas for records, and grants law enforcement officers 'administrative subpoenas,' which essentially allows the bureau to write and approve its own orders.
The term "administrative subpoenas" can best be translated as "we will redefine what due process means for our own usage"

So the small good news may be just the crumbs they feed us while they shaft us in other places. Keep your eyes open on this one people.

The main article has one section that is not a lie, it is stretching the truth.
'The Justice Department said in a letter to lawmakers that as of March 30, federal investigators had not used the Patriot Act to obtain library or bookstore records but that the authority provides "an important tool for investigating and intercepting terrorism."
It is true they had not used the power to obtain them, it is true that they used the powers to attempt to obtain them.
On June 8, 2004, an FBI agent stopped at the Deming branch of the Whatcom County Library System in northwest Washington and requested a list of the people who had borrowed a biography of Osama bin Laden. We said no.

We did not take this step lightly. First, our attorney called the local FBI office and asked why the information was important. She was told that one of our patrons had sent the FBI the book after discovering these words written in the margin: "If the things I'm doing is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal. Hostility toward America is a religious duty and we hope to be rewarded by God."

We told the FBI that it would have to follow legal channels before our board of trustees would address releasing the names of the borrowers. We also informed the FBI that, through a Google search, our attorney had discovered that the words in the margin were almost identical to a statement by bin Laden in a 1998 interview.

Undeterred, the FBI served a subpoena on the library a week later demanding a list of everyone who had borrowed the book since November 2001.
But after sitting down and thinking about the situation the librarians decided to fight. I honestly do not think the FBI was ready for a bunch of librarians to resist.
For our trustees, this sense of responsibility to protect libraries as institutions where people are free to explore any idea ran up against their desire to help their government fight terrorism. But they were resolute and voted unanimously to go to court to quash the FBI subpoena. Fifteen days later, the FBI withdrew its request(see note at bottom).
So the Justice Department letter is truthful on the surface, they did have to delve into some Clintonesque speech to not lie.

The movement in Washington to change the Patriot act is good, but like all things in Washington I feel they will throw us some crumbs, declare victory, pat themselves on the back, and get re-elected. In otherwords SSDD.

A subpoena is not a request, a request can be ignored. A subpoena is a demand with the power of the government behind it.

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Who are the bad guys?

An "artist" did an online album of images of Bush and firearms. Well with an honest citizen doing his duty for the fatherland he was turned in. The result was the SS, I mean the secret service, showing up at his work to ask him the standard questions. But what they call standard I found funny and sad.
The agents started out with 'easy' questions, like my name, address, what I did at my job, etc. Then they started asking if I've ever been under psychiatric or psychological care or counseling. They asked me to sign a medical release form so they could contact local hospitals and health care providers and confirm my answers. They asked if I belonged to any organizations. When I said no, they specifically asked if I belonged to the NRA. They then began to ask me to explain each picture, and what I meant by them. I did so.
Yep! Have to watch out for those NRA types.
After about 45 minutes, one of the agents said (paraphrased from memory, not an exact quote) "Let me be frank" I'm having difficulty seeing these pictures as "art". You're a publisher, and a systems administrator. How do you suddenly become an 'artist'."I pointed out that not all art is created formally by trained elites, and that there are plenty forms of artistic expression like this, such as stencil and graffiti art. .
I asked the agent "what can I do to give you insight into where I am coming from. I don't think my pictures represented a threat, and never intended them that way... they were social and political commentary on the incident in Chicago, and on the police state in the mentality that has pervaded our culture." The agent then said something that REALLY confused me. He said "You could "retract" them". I asked what he meant -- "Remove them from online? replace them with a statement saying I don't advocate violence against the president? what?" Both agents resounded to this specific question, with a generalized yes" that would be a good step.
IÂ’ll admit it. I was very freaked out. The first thing I did when I got back to my desk was delete the pictures from Flikr. Then I deleted my LiveJournal account, because in it, I talk a lot about politics, and how unhappy I am with the Bush regime.
I would like to say that they did not pressure him to remove the images, but when they are the ones that brought up the fact that he could "retract" them then I say they did intimidate him.

Good work guys. Another win for the system.
Awesome start to a post

I've seen some good posts lately on the web, but when one starts like this you just know it's going to be good.
I'm Not Dead Yet
Then he mentions the hit men, prison, federal agents, and all the other good ingredients for a great post.
A former client of mine wants me dead. At least that is what the federal prosecutor told me yesterday in a late afternoon phone call. My client is reaching out for hit men in his new home, a federal prison.
Of course, he made the mistake of writing home to his mother to tell her about it all. The letters were intercepted.
So stay alive Norm.
A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
And no one can talk to a horse of course
That is, of course, unless the horse is the famous Mister Ed Gay.

I feel so sorry for this horse. The trama he suffered will scar him for life.
A student at Balliol College was arrested and detained in custody for a night after he verbally abused a police horse early on Monday morning. Sam Brown, a third year English student, had his fingerprints taken and was released with a fine of £80 following the incident which took place on Cornmarket Street.

Brown was fined for “causing harassment, harm or distress”, after he repeatedly called the officer’s horse “gay”.
Poor equine.
Following the crowd.

It is the latest fashion to blame everything on Bush.

If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one to hear, does it make a sound that we can blame Bush for? If a train leaves Boston traveling 100 mph and another train leaves New Jersey traveling at 100 mph, how can we blame Bush for their dangerous speed?

It is getting to the point that I do not want to bring up Bush's name because even being near the unwashed anti-Bush crowd is embarrassing. Their own actions, and odor, probably has been helpful in many ways for Bush. So understand why I feel like taking a bath when I do call Bush and his administration blind fools.

How long should America stand by an ally? What if this ally, who Bush and his cohorts just love because of the War on freedom Terror, starts killing his own people in the town square? Do we dump him like a hot potato with a press release saying "He's a dictator and we want nothing to do with him"?

Not our current administration. What they do is go out of their way to hinder an investigation into the Massacre.
Defense officials from Russia and the United States last week helped block a new demand for an international probe into the Uzbekistan government's shooting of hundreds of protesters last month, according to U.S. and diplomatic officials.

British and other European officials had pushed to include language calling for an independent investigation in a communique issued by defense ministers of NATO countries and Russia after a daylong meeting in Brussels on Thursday. But the joint communique merely stated that "issues of security and stability in Central Asia, including Uzbekistan," had been discussed.

The outcome obscured an internal U.S. dispute over whether NATO ministers should raise the May 13 shootings in Andijan at the risk of provoking Uzbekistan to cut off U.S. access to a military air base on its territory.
That must be some airbase to be worth hundreds of executed people. Maybe we can talk him into executing a few hundred more and we will get better housing or even PX facilities.

Now I would normally have the view that the internal issues of other countries are best left to them to deal with. We should have no say in investigating crimes in other countries, just as I feel other countries should but the hell out of issues here. But for me it is the reason our country is not getting forceful that bothers me. We got forceful with Iraq and Afghanistan, we even got forceful with Kosovo. But now that we want that airbase, we need that airbase, we turn a blind eye to the piles of dead bodies.

Bush and his people are not looking to good to me right now.

Now I have to go and wash the hippy smell off me.
Sometimes a person has to exercise personal judgement and take the chance of being mistaken, or stop calling himself or herself free.


Tuesday, June 14, 2005

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. — George Washington
Weapons of choice

David Codrea brought up an interesting point when it comes to the talk of the gun grabbers. It is the term Weapons of choice. Seems everything is a weapon of choice.
“Smith & Wesson is the handgun of choice among America’s criminals.”

We know this because Steve Bailey of The Boston Globe tells us so. The columnist berates the gun maker for not pursuing an agreement hatched between its former British owners and the Clinton administration to ward off lawsuits by imposing draconian restrictions on firearms dealers.
The Chief must be on to something, because the Consumer Attorneys of California not only back him up, but narrow down the model, claiming “The TEC-9 is the assault weapon of choice among criminals.”

Except the San Francisco Chronicle tells us “AK-47s have emerged recently as ‘the gun of choice’ among San Francisco’s gang-bangers.”

And that’s not the only dissension in the ranks. According to Legal Affairs magazine, “In the 1990s, manufacturers increased production of nine-millimeter handguns — the gun of choice for murderers.”
Now even the Buffalo News has a "criminals weapon of choice" listed in their article. Showing the firearms used in Buffalo they mention that the reason it is used so much is that it is so cheap.


But if you look at what the other firearms are you will notice that the others in 2004 are three S&W calibers. Not cheap in my view. I wonder if they know how bad they look when they throw out titles like that without any real knowledge of the subjects?

Monday, June 13, 2005

The small print is what kills you.

Now normally in a movie I root for the good guys. It is the base nature of myself that I want good to win and evil to lose. Sometimes what is defined as evil is vague and hard to define.

An example is the movie "Wall Street" with Martin Sheen and Michael Douglas. Michael Douglas played the character of "Gordon Gekko". Now I like the subtle usage of a cold blooded lizard as his last name. In it he gives a speech that I consider one of the best several lines in a movie ever spoken.
"The point is, ladies and gentlemen, greed--for the lack of a better word--is good. Greed is right; greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all its forms--greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge--has marked the upward surge of mankind, and greed--you mark my words-- will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the U.S.A."
Greed creates profit and direction, and yet today it is used as a four letter word by so many. Ones who are oblivious to the fact that they normally work for companies whose greed for profits keep them in a job with all of the benefits that come with it.

So after watching that movie I came to the conclusion that it was a simply sad attempt to attack something that works so well for this country, capitalism and the greed.

So when I was reading this post on The Free Liberal about the pirate like nature of Brazil and pharmaceutical drugs one thing jumped out at me and like so often today I ended up mad at our own government.
Brazil - endeavoring to become a socialist paradise under its current president, former union leader and avowed communist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva - provides a HillaryCare-type of system in which the government provides free HIV treatments to all its citizens. And socialized health care of that kind is, naturally, expensive.

So on June 1st, Brazil's lower house approved a bill suspending patents on AIDS-fighting drugs. The bill's sponsor declared, "Constitutional protection for patents is not absolute, but subordinate to social interests." And a deputy for the Workers' (of the World, Unite!) Party added, "Patents have to be suspended if they're harming public health." Both lines could easily have been lifted right off the pages of "Atlas Shrugged."
So they have decided that international laws are in the way so to heck with them. If a company knows that whatever it makes will be stolen by other governments then why will it invest in it? It wouldn't waste it's time, and because of that greed people are alive.

Now piracy aside it is what our government did that bothers me so much.
Of course, like every good crook, the Brazilians have found a way to justify and rationalize their piracy. See, there's a clause in the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement, which both Brazil and the U.S. have signed, commonly known as TRIPS. As Drug Industry Daily explains, TRIPS "allows a developing country to temporarily ignore drug patents to bring affordable drugs to its population in times of health emergencies."
So what does it say in the TRIPS section of the WTO charter that allows that? I went and found this about the rights that a patent holder has and international eminent domain.
Article 31
Other Use Without Authorization of the Right Holder

Where the law of a Member allows for other use (7) of the subject matter of a patent without the authorization of the right holder, including use by the government or third parties authorized by the government, the following provisions shall be respected:
(b) such use may only be permitted if, prior to such use, the proposed user has made efforts to obtain authorization from the right holder on reasonable commercial terms and conditions and that such efforts have not been successful within a reasonable period of time.
Sounds like eminent domain. They will make some proposals, and if you do not like it they take it anyways. Our government has just opened the door for foreign countries to have eminent domain over our patents, our ideas. Mental theft using the power of the state.

So why should a company invest years and millions into something earth shaking when the WTO laws would allow other countries to "borrow" it if the social need exists. Greed is movement even if you do not like the word, legal theft by a government is a death sentance for everyone not saved by items not invented becuase of TRIPS

Sunday, June 12, 2005

There is more?

We live in a sound bite generation. I cannot count the number of songs that I know a only a little of from all of the commercials on TV where only one line per song is sung. Regretfully the same is also true for many when it comes to the documents that helped define modern freedom and rights.

For example everyone knows this famous line.
give me liberty or give me death!
The problem is that most do not know that it is part of something bigger. The soundbite generation may never know the depth of knowledge they are missing because of MTV and modern education.

So with that in mind I now post for your reading enjoyment the rest of the story.
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
His words today for me have meanings that chill me. He stands before the house and addresses them with this ominous warning.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight!
He tells of the colonies attempts to right what was wrong. He tells of the government ignoring them and dismissing them. His words could be echoing in the halls of Washington right now. For years we have petitioned and shown the villainous nature of the laws passed today. We are dismissed by the government as chicken littles even as they gather into their gnarled hands more powers daily.

When good men try their best to right a wrong civilly and they fail then what is next? My thoughts are dark lately as they should be.

To damn lazy

I'm a solid firearms enthusiast. I can't afford to be a proper gun nut, but I can hope. The news is filled with a solid effort to ...