March 12, 2005

Guns+registration=confiscation

The Smallest Minority has a link to a story in Australia. Seems that the New South Wales Police did a "surprise weapons safety audit" of registered shooters...result? 43,000 weapons were confiscated and later destroyed.

One owner had over $3,000 worth of weapons confiscated, along with a $300. fine and $190. in court costs assessed.
His crime? The key to his gun safe was found on his key rack, and the safe was easily visible in his bedroom.

The GFW's are always saying that registration is just a safety measure to ensure that firearms are traceble and only owned by those legally entitled to do so, and that there would never be a time that confiscation of legal weapons would ever occur. Funny, thats what the Australian government told their gun owners too..and now thousands of firearms owners in Australia have found out the truth of that lie.

Forgetting the fact that LEGAL owners commit an extremly tiny fraction of gun related offences, which makes the tracebility argument moot, the second part of the reasoning is even more specious. Criminals will NEVER register anyway, thats why they are called criminals. The ONLY practical use of registration is for the convenience of the police when it's been decided that it's politically feasable to conduct a confiscation of said firearms (for the public safety, of course).

I will state for the record here that I don't own any weapons, and should they come to my home to confiscate the weapons I don't own, they had best be wearing the best body armor availible. I will turn my weapons/ammunition over....one bullet at a time.

Radical? If you call standing up for your Constitutional right to keep and bear arms radical, I guess it is.

Let them take the weapons and ammunition peacefully and fight them in court? IF it comes to the point that they do a house search to take weapons just because I am a registered firearms owner, it will be too late to take that course of action, and this will no longer be the country I know and love.

That is why I believe that any registration schemes must be fought from ever being enacted. Registration is only the first step in an incremental program to confiscate. The two may be separated by a period of years, or even decades, but as surely as the sun rises in the east, one will inevitably follow the other.

Responsible firearms owners must stay alert and fight any registration program from ever beginning. If they don't, sooner or later, they will no longer BE firearms owners.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 08:42 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Saddam, The UN, & Bribery

HERE'S an interesting little tidbit of information...Seems Saddam offered the head ot the UN Inspection team a $2 Million dollar bribe if he were to doctor his reports to the UN to "make them right".

The official did the right thing and didn't accept the bribe, and reported it to the Volker Commission. One does have to wonder though....how many of the Inspectors were offered bribe money, and did any accept.

And of course, the main question, WHY would Saddam have to bribe anyone IF he didn't have something to hide? I am more and more anxious to see if just maybe the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon just may be hiding some secrets that the world should know about..... Those truck convoys into Lebanon from Iraq prior to the invasion were carrying SOMETHING after all....and somehow, I just can't believe it was surplus foodstuffs for the beleagered Syrians occupying Lebanon.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:56 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Sometimes, Silence is Golden

A man took his wife to the rodeo and one of the first
exhibits they stopped at was the breeding bulls.

They went up to the first pen and there was a sign
attached that said: "This bull mated 50 times last year."

The wife playfully nudged her husband in the ribs
and said: "He mated 50 times last year."

They walked to the second pen which had a sign
attached that said: "This bull mated 120 times last year. "

The wife gave her husband a healthy jab and said:
"That's more than twice a week! You could learn a lot from him."

They walked to the third pen and it had a sign
attached that said, in capital letters: "This bull mated 365 times last year."

The wife, so excited that her elbow nearly broke her
husband's ribs, said: "That's once a day. You could
REALLY learn something from this one."

The husband looked at her and said: "Go over and ask him if it was with the same cow."

NOTE: The husband's condition has been upgraded
from critical to stable, and he should eventually make
a full recovery...

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:36 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

March 11, 2005

E-Bay Fun

It's long been E-Bay Auctions policy to not allow the posting of auctions for firearms or live ammunition of any type. I can almost agree with their position, since with the plethora of laws pertaining to such sales just in the US, much less the world, would make it an almost impossible task to remain legal in every area where they operate, and they don't need the headaches.

Having said that, E-bay has gone overboard in the other direction in their effort to protect themselves to the point of absurdity. and in a classic case of demonstrating absurdity by being absurd, an E-bay seller in Australia has put up this "auction". And you don't see the humor in it, I truly feel sorry for you.

He also put up another little visual to further make his point:

E-bay really does need to lighten up on the PC/GFW bit a little bit. I don't think that they need to sell weapons, but to disallow even the slightest referance to them to pull an aution as breaking the rules is, to put it mildly, ludicrous.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 11:28 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Union Rant # 467

My oldest and dearest friend was president of his Union local for 4 terms, and would have been re-elected had he not chosen to take a break from Union responsibilities for a while and concentrate on his real work.

We have often had some rather heated discussions about Unions in general over the years...well more like knock-down drag-out fights, but we have always managed to agree to disagree in the end and get back to the all important beer hoisting exercizes we were engaged in.

I sincerely believe that the Unions have become what they were created to fight...a managment structure that has it's own interests, not the workers, at heart.

I believe that this action by the AFL-CIO proves my point, and you can be sure that I'll be filing the information away for the next time the Beer Swilling Lushes Debating Society gets together.

Take note of the reason WHY the AFL-CIO has decided to release a fourth of their wage slaves skilled office technicians. Ask yourself, what would the Union have done to any company that would have released that percentage of workers due to TRUE budgetary need?

No, the Union has decided that it was going to cut back on their member services/recruitment activities and utilyze the money to go into the National Legislative business instead. Their main beef being the Presidents proposed partial privatization of Social Security...After all, should the sheeple get a taste of economic independence, they may just start wondering if the Union dues they have been paying are really worth the services they have been getting.

After all, membership has fallen drastically in recent years...Union demands having closed down the businesses where their members worked. Yes, the Union got their members the highest wage/benefits packages that could be extorted from Management, regardless of the economic realities of supply and demand.

It didn't matter that those packages only helped the workers for as long as it took for the company to move operations offshore to retain economic viability, after all, the Union could use that movement as propaganda to prove just how EVIL management was in convincing their other members of other companies to fight for THEIR new packages in the next negotiation, with the Union skimming the cream off the top in dues and fees.

Of course in the end, the Unions are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs, but the officials at the top have already ensured their own nests have been feathered and made safe from economic stress, so why should they care?

The Union plans to increase it's political action funding to $45 million from it's current rate of $32M and cut it's organizing efforts by $15 million to pay for it.

Take a look at that sentence and see if you saw the same disconnect I did.....

A. "organizing efforts" is union speak for getting new members to grow the Union and providing services to them. In other words, the Union has become an unelected political Party, instead of a protection group to it's members.

B. The Union is making a $15 Million dollar cut to fund a $13 Million dollar effort...seems they believe that their average dues paying member won't notice the disparity, and/or they may just assume that the sheeple won't care if they did notice, who are THEY to question the ones on high?.... my question would be just how many of the top officials are in on the split of that $2 million difference?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 03:29 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

March 10, 2005

Iraq News

Pictures From Iraq That Are Too Shocking & Graphic for The Mainstream Media
(And just don't fit their "quagmire" meme)

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:53 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Bad Day

When you see this on the way to work you might as well turn around and go back home because it is NOT going to be a good day!

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 05:38 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Eurabia?

I've heard some of the Moonbats on our shores decrying President Bush's stance towards Radical Islam; one of their main themes being "lets be more understanding and use the diplomatic,ala the nuanced European approach.

Well read here and see what has resulted from all that diplomacy and ask yourself if thats really the way we should go. The Dutch Reporter has his comments on the story and how it's playing out in the Netherlands also.

The Moonbats sound reasonable in their rhetoric, who wouldn't wish to utilize diplomacy over tough, nonnegotiatable stances, or in the most dire case,force of arms?

The one thing that the Moonbats have forgotten is, that for diplomacy to be effective, BOTH parties have to negotiate in good faith and stick with the terms that are negotiated. The Radical islamists, hell, even the "moderate" Islamists, have openly stated time and again that negotiation is merely a tool for furthur progress towards their ultimate goal of a total Muslim world.

In the West, most people look on religion as a part of life, if they even suscribe to a religion at all. Secularism is the norm for political life.
The heart of Islamic teaching is that religion is not just a part of life, but life is a tiny part of religion. Thus everything in life is dominated by this religion. As such, Islam is a system. It is a socio-political, socio-religious, socio-economical, educational, legislative, judicial, and militaristic system garbed in religious terminology.

In the Hadith, Mohammed was quoted as saying, "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with the exception of those spoken to reconcile two men that are quarreling, for a man to appease his wife, and in war, because war necessitates deception."

The Muslims of Islamic states, and many within the USA, have the tradition of a worldview that divides humanity into two opposing halves. Dar al-Islam, House of Islam, is the zone where Islam rules. The other side is the war zone that is called, Dar el Harb, House of War. This worldview dictates that war will continue between these two sections of humanity until the supremacy of Islam is fully established throughout the earth.

So here we have a religion that has a world view of being at war with any not of the faith, and it's founder STATING that deception in war is not only accepted, but NECESSITATED by the conditions of war. The Moonbats would have you believe that the war is a spiritual, not a physical, one.
But what does the Koran say?

So when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters, wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush…. (Koran 9:5)

The only punishment of those that wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut-off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisoned…. (Koran 5:33)

Yep! Sure sounds "Spiritual" to me! The moonbats would say that there are violent passages in the Bible as well, and they would be correct. The DIFFERENCE is that, at least since the Reformation, Christians have been more secularized and take the Bible for allegory, in practice, if not in professed belief.
(and no don't try to point to the "Troubles" in Ireland as an example that I'm incorrect, those were always political/socioeconomic troubles; divided by religeous lines, not over religion itself)
Muslims, on the other hand, have never had a reformation of their own, (hard to have religious questioning in a culture where the very act of asking if there was a different interpretation can result in you being killed as an apostate!)and take the Koran as the literal truth and way of living in all spheres of human life.
It is not a religion that encourages dissent or new interpretation easily. In fact, should Islam achieve it's general goal of world domination, the three major sects would take to continuing the conflict between themselves until only the "One, TRUE Islam" would remain. They only work together in reasonable harmony today because they perceive each of the other sects as only misguided, but redeemable, and needed in the fight against the Infidel.

Within Islam there is the principle of "Al Takeyya." The term means, "prevention". This principle permits Muslims to lie at their discretion whenever they interpret that it is expedient for the influence of Islam or their personal protection and well-being. They justify lying by using the following verse as a springboard for expanded applications of Al Takeyya.

"Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done to guard (Takeyya) yourselves against them, guarding carefully. And Allah cautions you against His retribution. And to Allah is the eventual coming."(Koran 3:27)

Imam Abu Hammid Ghazali says: "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible." (Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, amana publications, 1997, section r8.2, page 745)

Note that Al-Ghazali is one of the most famous and respected Muslim theologians of all time.

In other words, it is permitted to allow the Infidel to appear to be your friend
(you can negotiate "peace" treaties)
until the time is right and the strength is sufficient to attack and destroy him.
This would seem to negate the validity of any treaty that a Muslim might make.

Yes, even in the the Western world, a "trust but verify" attitude should be taken regarding any treaties between disagreeing nations, but the Western world doesn't have the tradition of using treaties as an instrument in the furthurance of war. Never forget that this is not so in the Muslim world.

For those that still insist that Islam is a religion of Peace, and it's only a "few" extremists that are engaged in this war, I would ask you to take note of something.

In Islam, if a deed,action, or sometimes even a personal opinion, is deemed unacceptable to Islam, a "Fatwa", or judgement will be issued against the offender(s) by the Imam of the sect that considers the offense unacceptable. In many cases, it is a sentence of death to be carried out against the offender(s) by any true believer that has the opportunity to do so.

Name ONE Islamic religious authority to have made a Fatwa against any group that has carried out anti-Western terrorist acts. Make it easier, name the ONE Islamic authority that has issued a Fatwa against those that planned and helped carry out 9/11....Surely such an act would merit some sort of a ruling to distance it from Islam? Remember, under Islamic creed, it is permissable to lie to engender peace, if there is no other way...Still no Fatwa, they won't even go so far as to lie to shield Islam. Tacit approval at least there?

Rather, follow the old Roman adage that "If you wish Peace, prepare for War".

Being adequatly prepared for war has stopped more wars from occurring than all the feel good rhetoric about Harmony among Nations and the Brotherhood of Man has ever done. It's sad that it is the way of the world, but it is the reality.

Ignoring that fact is "sticking your head in the sand", and yes, that last is for you, Wanda.

Update: Never underestimate the power of the Internet! It seems that the Spanish Islamic Commission announced today that they were going to issue a Fatwa against Osama Bin Ladin and recommend that Spanish Imams condemn terrorism in sermons in their Mosques on Friday.

I wonder if they read me? LOL

I was bothered by one little addendem in the article:
The Commission has also drawn up a document designed to 'thank the Spanish people and the government for their attitude towards Muslims' since last March 11, in particular for not taking 'disproportionate' measures similar to those which the Sept 11 attacks sparked in the U.S.

I do not believe that we took "disproportionate measures" here. I have to wonder if this isn't a litle "diplomatic bone" to allay some of the heat that has come down on Muslims in Spain in the last two weeks? Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I can't help remembering that it is an Islamic tenant that:"When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible." I would think that giving the impression of being allied against terrorism would be a "permissible goal", even as they continued to engage in it. Also falling under the "self-protection" lying exception also allowed Muslims.

Take it with a grain of salt, but it's still a positive step, if it's done in sincerity.
Trust, but verify. Moniter as we go.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 04:00 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

A Good Story

A group of Americans, retired teachers, recently went to France on a tour.

Among them was Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83.

When he arrived in Paris by plane and took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on at French Customs, the customs officer asked sarcastically, "You have been to France before, monsieur?"

Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously. "Then you should know enough to have your passport ready."

The American replied, "The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it."

"Impossible. Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in
France!"

The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he
quietly explained.

"Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in '44 to help liberate
this country, I couldn't find any Frenchmen to show it to."

This is a true story, 'Nuff SAID.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 01:23 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Posting

No, or light posting today, WHY? I just don't feel like it!

Update: Well, maybe just this one post, it's important. This article outlines some of the results if the GFW's Utopian Gun Ban in Britain™. Hmmmm....violent crime rate has risen 69 percent since 1996, with robbery rising 45 percent and murders rising 54 percent. I thought that if "guns were illegal it would stop violent crime"? Thats what all the GFW's trying to abrogate my 2nd Amendment rights keep telling me. Those "Unintended Consequences" of a "feel good" policy are a BITCH, aren't they? In the four years PRIOR to the ban, armed robberies had fallen by 50%. It was allowable to defend oneself at the time....could there be ANY connection? And in case you think that results of the British experiment is an anomoly, go google the crime stats in Canada and Australia, where they have tried to severely restrict or totally ban firearms in the same manner. I won't post those results here, you GFW's would just say my pick would be biased; do it for yourselves, with an open mind and no preconceptions, and I KNOW that the facts will show you that I am correct in asserting that MORE guns = LESS violent crime.

The number of privately owned guns in the United States rises by about 5 million a year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The number of guns owned by Americans is at an all-time high, fast approaching 300 million.

Meanwhile the FBI reports that in 2003 the nation’s violent crime rate declined for the 12th straight year to a 27-year low.
Sure seems to be a connection there to me! Lets look into it just a little further...

As usual, most of the states with the lowest violent crime rates are those with the least gun control, including those in the Rocky Mountain region, and Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont in the Northeast. The District of Columbia and Maryland, which have gun bans and other severe restrictions on gun purchase and ownership, retained their regrettable distinctions as having the highest murder and robbery rates.

Yeah, I'd say there was a connection. I'm gratified that Indiana is a "shall issue" state, but I would wish to make it an unrestricted "free/concealed carry" state, like Vermont...Licensing is contrary to the language of the 2nd. Amendment; the granters of a license can all too easily take it away, thats "abridgement" in MY dictionary

Thanks to Kim duToit for the link.

UPDATE 3/10/05: What is the British Governments reaction to the rise in violent crime? Why, to start banning REPLICAS of guns and knives for teenagers! OF COURSE! Gee what insightful policy! /sarcasm off.
Anyone want to lay odds on when the meltdown will be complete?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:18 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

March 09, 2005

Fisk Fisk Fisk

Liberal Utopia has a FANTASTIC fisk of a New York Times memorandum. If you need to have a good laugh, go read it, but be warned, remove any liquids from the area of your keyboard before you do, the management™ assumes no responsiblity for drink-doused equipment!

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 12:13 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

March 08, 2005

Another Quiz....stop me before I test again

I am 19% Idiot.

I am not annoying at all. In fact most people come to me for advice. Of course they annoy the hell out of me. But what can I do? I am smarter than most people.

Take the
Idiot Test
@ FualiDotCom

To paraphrase what Acidman said, I already was aware of my ability, but I let that 19% have free reign frequently.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 11:46 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Gasoline Prices

Here's yet another warning of the higher gasoline prices yet to come.

Funny, I thought we went to war with Iraq to get cheap oil? Or are the Moonbats of the Anti-American Left wrong YET AGAIN?

The price of gasoline is a complicated issue, but I do have some ideas on the matter of how we can help ease those costs.

1. BUILD MORE REFINERIES. We have all our eggs in one very small basket. At one time we had more than 150 large scale refineries, in the last twenty years we have gone down to 20 major facilities. and there hasn't been a new one built in that time. A major terrorist attack on just a few of those facilities could paralyze this country for a far longer time than the attack on the WTC did.

2. DRILL MORE DOMESTIC WELLS We have major reserves here in the US that haven't been anywhere near completly explored. Open up Anwar; there is an estimated 30 year supply at our current levels of consumption just in that one field. It's insane that we don't utilize it.

3. STOP MULTIPLE FORMULATIONS OF GASOLINE We are currently using upwards of 15 different formulations of gasoline to comply with regulations in different parts of the country. This is costly to do, as a refinery has to be readjusted for each formulation, resulting in a week or more loss of production in switching between formulations, not to mention the costs incurred in making the physical switchover. Decide on the best compremise formulation that suits the country best as a whole and stick with it. At most, have only two or three formulations. There have been many cases where there has been a spot scarcety in one area of the country and a glut in another, and we can't equilize the needs due to differences in the formulations.

4. ENCOURAGE RESEARCH IN ALTERNATIVE FUELS President Bush has been the first one to actually earmark federal monies for this type of research, but even his additions are modest, to say the least. There is no physical reason that we couldn't switch to an almost 80% Hydrogen economy within ten years, at the state of the technology today. What we need is the political will to foster such a move. New technology will only increase the attractiveness of alternative fuels.

5. BECOME MORE POLITICALLY AWARE Many of the Moonbats laud their political representatives as the champions of the environment, but take a
closer look at the policies that those representatives have championed, and you will see that, for the most part, those policies have increased the costs of production without any significant gain in helping the environment, and as is the case with Senator "Splash" Kennedy, an alternate (wind turbine) energy production plant was blocked in the Cheasepeak Bay because it just might ruin the view from his compound. (as an aside, just HOW does a trust fund baby that has never worked a real job in his life and has a lackluster academic/legislative achievment record become a hero of "the little guy"? Try to join him in his compound and see how much he REALLY cares about you!)

6. SHOW THE TAXES PAID ON EACH GALLON OF GASOLINE Most people would be truly astounded at just how much they are paying. Those taxes may be necessary to fund roads, transportation programs, etc. etc., but it is only fair that the public KNOWS just how much they are actually paying for those goals.

Without accountability, there is no oversight, and without oversight, the possibility of fraud and graft is all too high. You can't hold someone accountable if you don't even know just how much he is taking from you.

I'm sure there are other actions to be taken as well, but thats my rant....for now.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 10:59 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Another Hit out of the park by Mark Steyn

As always, Mark Steyn combines humor and plain common sense to bring light into the darkness of international Real-politic.

His target of opportunity this time is Bashar al-Assad, the dictator of Syria. And, as usual, the target is properly trounced.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:45 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

George Soros

George Soros has come into the news again. It seems that one of his foundations donated $20,000 to Lynne Stewart's defense fund. A jury found Stewart guilty on five counts of defrauding the government, conspiracy, and providing support for terrorism. She faces sentencing on July 15, 2005; she may receive up to a 30 year prison sentence, which, at her age, may well be a life sentence.

I would defend that Mr. Soros's right to contribute to any cause he deems worthy, but I would ask you, gentle readers, to start investigating the causes that he does deem worthy, and take that into account when you learn that he is championing an issue or a political candidate. It just may be that it's not an issue or candidate that would serve your best interests as a free and independant citizen.

Update: Well it didn't take long to find another Soros story of "backing the wrong horse".
This time, he is applauding the Spaniards as having the correct approach to dealing with terrorism.

Let's see...The US gets hit and responds with tough actions, and hasn't been hit again, either here at home, or on foreign soil, and it seems at first look to be changing an entire region of the globe to a more democratic bent; Spain experiences a major terrorist attack and retreats to the homeland, and has experienced several terrorist events since....Seems to me that Mr. Soros is incorrect in his assertion that the US has just engendered more terrorists, but thats just my opinion. I prefer to deal with facts and results rather than feelings and "everyone knows memes" as Mr. soros does.

Just for curiosities sake, I wonder just how much Mr. Soros stands to lose if the countries of the ME really do go democratic? Is it monetary loss, or just the loss of his idiological compatriots?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 09:28 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

INSURRECTION !

I've been reading in a nymber of blogs about the possibility that soon the FEC would start monitering the content of our blogs and apply the BCRA regulations to them in regards to political speech.

Some (mostly on the Left, surprise surprise) say there is nothing to worry about, unless you've set your blog up to be a campaign tool for a particular candidate or party; others seem to think that the jackbooted thugs are pounding on the door.

I am in the middle on this one. I don't think the thugs are at the door quite yet, but setting the precedent will surely lead to that coming to pass. The right of every citizen to openly speak his mind on political issues WHENEVER and WHEREVER he wishes is the most precious freedom we have. It's only equal is the right we have under the 2nd Amenment to bear arms to protect that freedom of expression. Lest we require the use of the right to bear arms, we'd damn well better prevent any limiting of our 1st Amendment rights from occurring in the first place.

The Camel's nose is in the tent, I believe that we must prevent him from entering. Consequently I have decided to join the McCain-Feingold Insurrection. It's far better to fight a tyrany as a proposal rather than once it's become entrenched.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 07:51 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Legitimizing Illegals

Slaglerock has a great post up concerning the state of Maine issuing drivers licenses to illegal aliens, accepting documentation that would be insufficiant to citizens.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 07:24 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Italian "Reporter" Idiocy

Even the Italians are questioning the views expressed by that paragon of journalistic virtue(/sarcasm 0ff),Giuliana Sgrena.

It is Ms. Sgrena's contention that the US government ordered the execution of Ms. Sgrena and her compatriots after she had taken her leave of her insurgent Islamofacist kidnappers.

There at least two major problems with Ms Sgena's contentions:
First, the Italians had kept the hostage release deal secret, not informing the Americans. Second, they had not informed the Americans that she had been released and was heading for the airport.

Given those conditions, how could it be that she was deliberately targeted? EVEN given the unlikely event that the US would be so afraid of her writing that they would wish to do away with her?

1) They would have no reason to target her, being unaware of any ransom deal.
2) They would have no way to target her, being unaware that she was where she was when she was there.

Apparently, (in her own mind) Ms Sgena is the only one who can disseminate "the truth" of what is actually occurring in Iraq, and that "fact" led to the ordering of her execution prior to her being able to disseminate that truth.

She stated that the the vehicle she and her rescuers were hit by over 400 rounds by a machine gun; that she "scooped handfulls of bullets off of the seat"... Yet only one occupant of the vehicle was killed and Ms. Sgena was only wounded in the leg. Pretty sorry excuse for an "execution"! I for one have much more faith in the capabilities of our servicemen in the execution of their duties. (pun intended)

Anyone familiar with any type of firearms would know that staement to be a bald faced lie on the face of it. bullets that fly in such a hailstorm would have turned the vehicle and ALL the occupants into Swiss cheese, and any bullets entering the car wouldn't have magically stopped and fell onto the seats. And I have another question...IF the intent was to execute Ms. Sgena, why was she treated by the US and sent out on the next availible flight? Surely it would have been simple to simply ensure that every occupant of the vehicle was dead after it had been rendered immobile?

And while the cowed inhabitants of Eunichistan may like to believe that we would target journalists to prevent embarrassing "facts" to be made public, only the most inane of our own Moonbats would suscribe to such a position.

All you have to do is read any MS publication in the US to know the idiocy of such an allegation. If such a thing could be proven beyond any reasonable doubt; it would lead to a public uprising not seen since the halycon days of the 60's, and most likely the impeachment of the administration.

I am a supporter of the administration, and I would certainly believe that impeachment would be the only proper option in such an event. My loyalties lie with the Constitution, not any particular set of Politicians.

Let's recap...Communist Journalist is held hostage by the people that she holds up as the heroes in the Iraq conflict. Her (Italian) government may or may not have paid a ransom for her release, but in any case, a deal is brokered and Ms. Sgena is released by her captors to agents of her government. (according to US soldiers) The vehicle they were going to the airport in approached a military checkpoint at a high rate of speed and in a highly erratic manner, and didn't stop when ordered to by the soldiers manning the checkpoint. The soldiers fired on the vehicle, killing the driver and wounding Ms. Sgena. Now Ms. Sgena is claiming that they were assailed in a virtual hail of bullets, and that it was an intentional attempt to execute her.

Anyone that looks at this incident objectively must conclude that either:

A. Ms Sgena was correct, the US had a Sooper Sekrit™ way of determining her status and location,and wished to execute her for her views; and was capable enough to intercept her with no prior knowledge of her release, but incapable enough to finish the job.

OR

B. Ms Sgena is a raving Moonbat of the highest order that doesn't let little things like facts and logic interfere with her political agenda/idiology.

I know which scenerio seems more likely to me, or am I blinded by my own idiological bent?

UPDATE: Courtesy of the AP, here are two pictures of the car that Ms. Sgena says was "caught in a hail of gun fire", and from which she "scooped up handfulls of bullets bullets off the seat"

Those must have been some of the new sooper sekrit magic bullets™ that the US Army has been issueing..."handfulls of bullets" on the seat, and yet NO BULLET HOLES in the body work. WHERE can I get some of this Ammo?

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 02:26 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

March 07, 2005

Random Rumbleings

If you want to reasonably have no fear of speaking your true thoughts, you must have an equalizer to ensure that you can defend your beliefs. Bravado is all well and good, indeed, a healthy ego is necessary in being competant to defending oneself, but bravado will only carry you so far. In the end you also need a means to back up the bravado.

In the United States, we do this by living under a system of law where all are judged equally, and by allowing free citizens the means to defend themselves against those that would disregard the law. In the end, true freedom is only achieved, and maintained, by those willing to fight for it, at the cost of their own life, if need be. The Rule of Law is the equalizer, and the Second Amendment is the gaurentor of the rule of law.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 11:12 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

1 What a great illustration for your comment! Way to go! Must pirate photo...

Posted by: ZiPpo at March 08, 2005 07:44 PM (P7XXv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

State of the State, Netherlands

The Dutch Report has an interesting Poll on the state of the satisfaction of the Dutch people with how the way things are going in their country. The results are, to say the least, revealing and discouraging at the same time.

It certainly puts to rest the meme from some of our homegrown Idiotarians that everyone in Europe is so much "better off than we are". The mere fact that Dutch emigrations are at the highest levels since 1954 should be the final nail in the coffin of that particular meme.

The destination country for the largest number of emigres is Australia. A yearning for wide open spaces and opportunities for personal achievment and the perception of the availibility of those two factors are the main reason for Australia and New Zealand being the most popular destinations.

The reason most cited for leaving? The feeling that the massive influx of Muslim emigres to the Netherlands has reduced the public safety, and that the government has contributed to the problem.

Posted by: Delftsman3 at 10:47 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)

Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.2639 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2571 seconds, 64 records returned.
Page size 89 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.