Kowabunga

Google maps is capable of showing detailed images at the street level of people and cars, including license plates. I find this disturbingly invasive to find such capabilities on the Internet. Here's a couple of links to try (originally reported on Drudge):

map1
map2

You can use the directional arrows to move along the streets and even turn 360 degrees and zoom in on objects or people.

The new feature is called "Street View." It's not limited to San Francisco, either. Check out New York.

Admittedly, the zoom feature provides better resolution in San Francisco than it does in New ork, at least from what I have played around with.

As a techie I find it interesting technology. However, this raises serious privacy concerns. do we really want this level of intrusion into our every day lives?

Tags:

Google street view privacy

Posted by Sqotty at 6:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

The Big Dubya's popularity with me is taking a bit of a nose dive over the McKennedy Amnesty bill, more properly known as the Immigration Reform Act of 2007.

It is being reported that Bush has said that any reference to this legislation is scare-mongering and empty rhetoric. He has also said that the immigration system is in need of reform.

Earth to Dubya: the immigration system is in need of enforcement!

One of the biggest problems with the proposed legislation is that it will begin temporary "Z" visas to illegal aliens the day it is signed into law. It also requires that only about half of the fence (or wall, barriers, etc) be completed. These so called visas for illegals will be available BEFORE even that little bit of border security is completed. Add to that the fact that the documentation that can be used to "prove" that an illegal alien was in country prior to January 1, 2007, are easily counterfeited and you have a system designed, by intent, to allow millions more illegal aliens to be on the path to permanent residency than the 12+ million already here.

When Ronald Reagan authorized the first amnesty program in 1986, there were provisions in it that specified that our borders would be secured so has to eliminate the influx of aliens across our borders. The borders were never secured. The amnesty was also supposed to be a one time deal, and the proof required to receive legal status was far more stringent, including having to be able to prove that any given individual had resided in the U.S. for more than five years.

Whether or not we implement a program to put the over 12 million illegal aliens currently living within the United States is one thing. It may be the right thing to do. Hard to say, and my crystal ball is not currently working. However, doing so without first securing our borders, North as well as South, is to court an additional influx of aliens intent on participating in the proposed program.

Legal immigration has always been a part of our nation's history, as well as playing a significant role in its future. The legal path places many hurdles in the path of those who seek to come here, including criminal background checks and health checks.

With the advent of millions of people entering our country illegally, bypassing these checks, we suffer increased crime rates as well as a resurgence of diseases that had previously been eradicated from the United States, including tuberculosis.

I don't have a problem with establishing a guest worker program, or even granting "Z" visas to illegal aliens wishing to stay here if first we secure our borders before any such visas are issued, and second, that they pass ALL security, criminal and health checks that people who have sought entry to our country have had to undergo.

My two cents, for what it's worth.

Tags:

Bush Immigration Reform Illegal Aliens Amnesty

Posted by Sqotty at 6:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Comrade Chavez, one of my "favorite" people to write about is in the news again. He is now threatening to shutdown yet another broadcaster in Venezuela. From FoxNews:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez defended his decision not to renew the license of a popular opposition-aligned television network and warned Tuesday he might crack down on another TV station, accusing it of trying to incite attempts on his life.

Chavez said his refusal to renew the license of Radio Caracas Television, which went off the air at midnight Sunday, is "a sovereign, legitimate decision."

He said another station Globovision - one of the few channels that is still harshly anti-government - had encouraged attempts on his life and could also face sanctions.

"I recommend (Globovision) take a tranquilizer, that they slow down, because if not, I'm going to slow them down," Chavez said in a speech.

The claim came about as a result of Globovision broadcasting a retrospective of its 53 year broadcast history in which they ran some footage of the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II.

Chavez has been ranting that opposition broadcasters have been attempting to incite violence by broadcasting "capitalistic poison." CAPITALISTIC POISON? Well, I suppose when you are communist dictator, anything that espouses liberty would be considered poisonous.

It is probable that Comrade Chavez is, by claiming that broadcasters are inciting violence, attempting to shutdown all opposition media within Venezuela. He can use these same claims to throw broadcasters and anchors into prison.

At one point on Tuesday, opposition supporters gathered at the offices of the Organization of American States where they chanted "this is a dictatorship."

I think they've got it right.

According to Comrade Chavez, the enemies of Venezuela has a name. From Reuters:

"Enemies of the homeland, particularly those behind the scenes, I will give you a name: Globovision. Greetings gentlemen of Globovision, you should watch where you are going," Chavez said in a broadcast all channels had to show.

Other broadcasters in Venezuela are very concerned over this trend and rightfully so. RCTV was the oldest and biggest broadcaster in Venezuela. If comrade shut them down with the wave of a pen, what is to prevent him from doing the same to the smaller broadcasters?

Let's face it, if you live in a country where you cannot freely express an opposing opinion without fear of retribution or incarceration, then you are not free.

Tags:

Venezuela Chavez Globovision

Posted by Sqotty at 4:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

American al-Qaeda Gadahn is in the news again, delivering threats and ultimatums to the U.S. From FoxNews:

"Your failure to heed our demands ... means that you and your people will ... experience things which will make you forget all about the horrors of September 11th, Afghanistan and Iraq and Virginia Tech," he said in the seven-minute video.

The demands include removing all troops and spies from Islamic nations, the release of all Muslims currently held in prisons (I am assuming that includes those convicted of crimes other than terror related acts) and abandoning Israel.

Gadahn is the first person to be charged with treason in over 50 years. Assuming he is ever captured, he will face the death penalty.

Since he has taken up arms against the U.S., is he still considered a citizen?

Tags:

al-Qaeda Gadahn War On Terror

Posted by Sqotty at 6:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Cindy sheehan, who abandoned her family and destoryed her marriage in order to protest the war in Iraq and consort with totalitarian dictatotors like Castro and Chavez, has announced that she is retiring from the Anti-War movement.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Check out the report on Foxnews.

Tags:

Sheehan Moonbat

Posted by Sqotty at 6:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Today is the Centennial of John Wayne's birth. Happy Birthday, Duke!

The John Wayne's first big role was The Big Trail, made in 1930. But it wasn't until his role as the Ringo Kid in Stagecoach that he achieved stardom, and deservedly so. I can't compare the two pictures as I have never seen The Big Trail, however I have seen Stagecoach numerous times and it is one of my favorite movies.

Westerns made up the bulk of John Wayne's motion picture career, which is one reason when people think of the American West they instinctively envision the Duke sitting tall in the saddle. War movies, predominantly World War II films, were his second largest genre of pictures. In between them all were some romantic comedies, adventure films and a few cop films.

Perhaps his best works, where the Duke excelled, were the ones that I think of as character studies: Stagecoach, The Searchers, She Wore A Yellow Ribbon, The Quiet Man, True Grit and The Shootist, which was the Duke's last film.

Tags:

John Wayne Duke

Posted by Sqotty at 11:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

I have yet to figure out how the editorial staff at the Red Star Tribune could be so wrong about things so often. Today's installment form the Paper of Surrender concern's former President jimmy Carter's statement about the Bush administration being "the worst in history." At least in regards to foreign policy and standing in the world community. This coming from a one-time loser who had the absolute worst administration, whose policies, both foreign and domestic, were such failures that he was ousted after four overly-long years in office.

A little comparison is in order.

During the Carter years, the U.S. economy stagnated under double-digit inflation. At that time, interest rates, both on loans and on deposits were sky high. The two are directly related and tightly intertwined. The more expensive it is to borrow money, the higher resulting interest rates.

Carter hamstrung the nuclear energy industry by pushing an agenda that resulted in laws being passed that eliminated the industry from being able to reprocess spent fuel rods. This resulted in the mess we are in today where power plants are stuck stockpiling the radioactive waste instead of shipping them to other reactors that could use the waste to generate more energy.

He also reinstated draft registration, which has set the stage for the possibility for implementing a draft, eliminating the all-volunteer military and setting it back to the Vietnam era and forced conscription of recruits. Bad idea.

Perhaps Carter's biggest failure is in regards to Iran. He failed to support one of our closest allies in the Middle East - the Shah of Iran. When the Shah was deposed and replaced by radical Islamists, Iran became an anti-Western totalitarian theocracy. The fall of Iran was followed by the embassy hostage crisis which Carter failed to resolve due to his ineptitude.

President Bush, on the other hand, inherited from his predecessor, an economic recession and failed economy. The economy continued to flounder and sink after terrorists struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands of people and causing massive destruction.

Under Bush, America responded to the terrorist attacks by invading Afghanistan and removing the repressive Taliban regime, co-sponsors and protectors of al-Qaeda, perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks.

The American economy prospered under a series of tax cuts, which also resulted in increased tax revenues. Unemployment fell to lows not seen since before the .COM bubble, and remains low even today.

The Bush Administration correctly perceived that Saddam Hussein was a threat to stability in that region, as well as being a co-sponsor of terror. Iraq had been used as a safe haven for terrorists to meet and plan. Hussein also had chemical weapons that he continued to hide from the Dunsels sent by the United Nations to inspect. Hussein was also directly responsible for the murder of over 500,000 Iraqis during his rule. Kidnappings, rape and torture were the rule of the day. Iraq routinely fired on U.S. and other allied aircraft that were patrolling the skies in accordance to the Gulf War cease fire agreement.

It is clear to me that given the historical facts, it is the Carter Administration that is "the worst in history."

Tags:

Bush Carter Iraq Dubya Foreign Policy

Posted by Sqotty at 7:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Today marks the 30th anniversary of the premier of the movie Star Wars. It's hard to believe that it's been that long already.

Some six months prior to its release, I ran across the novelization by George Lucas (actually, it was written by Alan Dean Foster) in a bookstore, thought it sounded good and gave it a read. I still have this first printing of the novel on my bookshelf.

I was living in Fresno at the time, wrapping up my senior year of high school, and looking forward to moving to San Diego. The movie, when it premiered, was in limited release and not available where I was living. The closest theater it was playing at was in San Francisco. I couldn't figure out what the hub-bub was all about, or why anyone would drive 4 hours to go see a movie. People did. I know, because I knew some who did exactly that (I was not on that list).

It was probably early July before I finally did see Star Wars at the Valley Theater (I think that was the name) in San Diego. It was situated near Fashion Valley shopping center near the mission district. I learned what the big deal was. The film rocked! It was action, adventure, thrills and chills, with a little romance thrown in. It was fun!

It was a ground-breaking science fiction film, with state of the art special effects (which look primitive compared to what the special effects gurus at ILM now do with computers) and visuals that this adventure film seem truly out of this world. The costumes were interesting and simple in their design, which was part of their attraction. The props were modeled after military surplus, predominantly of WW2 German vintage. The cantina scene with aliens galore was a make-up artists dream gig.

People wanted to be Luke Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, Princess Leia or Darth Vader. And at the Cons (science fiction conventions), they were.

Stars Wars quickly became THE SF film to beat all SF films. It was the new Star Trek. It was a pop culture phenomenon.

About a year after its premier, it was still going strong in the theaters. I saw it seven times during its original run in the course of a year. I knew a lot of people that saw it far more than that, including a couple of gals who went to see it every week, racking up over 50 viewings during the first year of its release, something that was unprecedented in film, and I believe it to be a record unsurpassed by anything (Raiders of the Lost Ark came close, though).

Over the 30 years since its premier, Star Wars has resulted in five additional films (original reports were that Lucas planned on three trilogies or nine films in total), television specials, books, comic books, games and a plethora of mass-marketed toys. Not to mention numerous fan clubs, including the 501st Legion.

It has also been the inspiration for many fan made films, with Hardware Wars being an early entry, and the famed Troopers, a spoof of the reality cop shows still enjoys a popular following.

Tags:

Star Wars

Posted by Sqotty at 5:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

It looks as though the Star Tribune is changing its name to the Surrender Tribune, as it rails against the probable capitulation by the Democrats in Congress on setting conditions of surrender to terrorists in regards to funding our Armed Forces currently operating in Iraq. So far, the attempts made by the Party of Surrender to force a timeline for withdrawal, as been vetoed, and they do not have the support to over ride the vetoes.

From the Strib:

What a joke the Democratic majority in Congress risks becoming. On Tuesday, as nine more American soldiers were dying in President Bush's failed Iraq war, the Democrats were caving to Bush and agreed to pass a supplemental war appropriation with no meaningful strings attached. Will the challenge to Bush's Iraq policy mandated powerfully by last fall's congressional election come to such a pitiful, mewing end? It should not.

Although things have not gone anywhere near as well in Iraq as any of us would like, there are a number of reasons why this is so, beginning with the hard-left, including John Kerry, voting against the $86 Billion in funding for equipment the troops on the ground needed. Especially body armor.

The hard-left Democrats, in their rush to pull our troops from Iraq are short-sighted, and only prove that they are willing to do anything to discredit President Bush, even if it means handing Iraq over to terrorists and thugs.

Things could have gone better in Iraq. We all know this. We should never have trusted and negotiated with Muqtada al-Sadr, the leader of an armed militia that has been fueling sectarian violence since 2004. 20-20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it doesn't mean squat in the long run, and we don't have a time machine capable of sending people back to correct the mistakes.

As for having received a "mandate" in 2006, that is hardly the case. If they had received such a "mandate" from the American people, there would be no problem in achieving the votes needed to override a presidential veto.

Members of Congress have done the job the American people expected of them. They've given Bush the war money he needs, but he rejected it. The ball is in his court. He can accept a timeline for ending American involvement in the war, or he will get no funding, and the Pentagon can begin withdrawing from Iraq sooner rather than later. The American people simply will not agree to continue funding a war without end.

Actually, this is half-true. They've voted to grant the funding only with conditions that UNCONSTITUTIONALLY shifts power away from the executive to the legislative branches. Under our Constitution there is only one Commander-in-chief - the President.

Congress is expected to provide the funding that will adequately equip our troops to continue to do the job that is needed to assist our fledgling ally in securing liberty for its people. If we withdraw before that is accomplished, then it will send a signal to Muqtada al-Sadr, al-Qaeda and the terrorist networks, and the Mullahs of Iran that Iraq is now theirs for the taking. And the sacrifice our troops of made will be in vain.

If the hard-left continues to fail to provide the funding that will provide the equipment that will improve our troops ability to survive in the hostile environment, including the new v-shaped hauled combat vehicles that have proven more resilient at protecting our troops than the more vulnerable Hummer.

To claim that legislation that authorizes funding with a timetable for surrender, I mean withdrawal is the same as saying that there will be no funding provided.

Failure to properly equip our troops in the field the latest and best technology for them to accomplish their mission on the part of Congress means that more of our precious troops lives will be in greater risk. Their blood will be on the hands of the hard-left controlling Congress for their continued refusal to provide them with that which they need, and their mouthpieces in the media, including the Star Tribune.

Tags:

Iraq War on Terror al-Qaeda Muqtada al-Sadr Star Tribune

Posted by Sqotty at 5:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

FoxNews has a disturbing report about the attitude of U.S. Muslims and terrorism:

While nearly 80 percent of U.S. Muslims say homicide bombings of civilians to defend Islam can not be justified, 13 percent say they can be, at least rarely.

That sentiment is strongest among those younger than 30. Two percent of them say it can often be justified, 13 percent say sometimes and 11 percent say rarely.

Although the overall majority is against homicide bombings, there is a disturbing trend amongst those under 30 that believe such terrorist attacks are legitimate.

The terrorist groups always purport that their attacks are in "defense" of Islam, yet the truth does not bear this out. Whether looking at the attacks against the U.S. and its allies, or attacks in Israel, it all comes down to the same thing, and it ain't "defense" of Islam. It's about power and destroying those they, the terrorist organizations, perceive as a threat to their being able to re-establish a Caliphate.

That there is such a large segment of Muslim youth within the U.S. that think terrorism is okay, and homicide bombings are terrorism, is not surprising. This matches similar trends in other Western counties where tolerance and freedom of religion is the law of the land (funny that many Muslim countries do not reciprocate on that score), and the growing use of technology by terrorist groups to disseminate their propaganda and messages of hate.

The growing threat of homegrown terrorism is real, just as the British learned with the London transit bombings of 2005. It must be taken seriously, or we may not catch the next Fort Dix plot in time to avert a murderous attack.

With such a pool of radicalized youth available in country, it won't take much for al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups to incorporate such young radicals into their plots.

Tags:

al-Qaeda Terrorism

Posted by Sqotty at 6:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Looks like the McKennedy Amnesty For Illegals Act is heating up and is expected to be voted on in the coming weeks. Time to contact your Senator's if you haven't already. I'll be doing so via email tonight.

In general, I don't mind letting those here already stay if we first secure our borders and then take border enforcement seriously. If we do antoehr 1986, then in 20 years, we won't have 12 million illegal aliens to figure out what to do with, we will have 50 million illegals.

Whether or not it is unrealistic to deport the 12 million is also debatable. I believe we could, if we took it seriously. Is it the best way to handle the problem? Probably not. However, any legislation that allows illegal aliens to get on the path to U.S. citizenship is a bad solution. Letting them stay is one thing, giving them citizenship, howeer, is a whole 'nother ball of wax.

More later

Posted by Sqotty at 5:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Newt Gingrich spoke at the commencement ceremony for the graduating class at Liberty University on Saturday. Here is some of what he said (FoxNews):

"A growing culture of radical secularism declares that the nation cannot profess the truths on which it was founded," Gingrich said. "We are told that our public schools can no longer invoke the creator, nor proclaim the natural law nor profess the God-given quality of human rights.

"In hostility to American history, the radical secularists insist that religious belief is inherently divisive and that public debate can only proceed on secular terms," he said.

Gingrich also decried what he called judges' overreaching efforts to separate church and state.

"Too often, the courts have been biased against religious believers. This anti-religious bias must end," he said.

It is only fair to refer to the radical secularist as such as they refer to the mainstream Christian community as "Christian Fundamentalists" in attempt to form a misleading link between Conservative Christians and the Taliban. The difference is that radical secularism is a serious problem, especially when you look at their closed-minded, "holier than thou" attitude on many issues.

One point that Gingrich may have missed is that the hard-core Leftists that comprise the secular movement don't even understand or acknowledge good science on many issues, most specifically abortion, nor do they respect the Declaration of Independence, probably due to references to God and Natural Law.

It is certainly true that they are attempting to foster an environment hostile to Western religion, Christianity (and to a lesser extent, Judaism), belittling people for their views because of the beliefs that life begins at conception (shocker, but science agrees with this notion). They refer to people of faith as being weak minded -- Jesse Ventura said as much in a speech a few years back, and it has been echoed loudly by the radical secularists ever since.

It isn't the Christian Conservatives who are divisive in this nation - it is the radical secularists who are inherently divisive.

Tags:

Liberty University Gingrich Radical Secularists

Posted by Sqotty at 5:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
View blog reactions

This year is the Centennial of the birth of Robert A. Heinlein. As such, I have been going through a phase of reading and rereading a number of his works, so I thought I would share some of them with you.

Tunnel In The Sky is the story of survival in a wilderness, and learning about humanity at the same time. The central character is Rod Walker, a high school student, who along with a number of other students taking a class in Advanced Survival, are dumped on an uninhabited planet with instructions to survive. Recall would take place somewhere within 20 kilometers and within the next several days. Students could take any equipment and any weapon.

Rod, following the advice of his older sister, who is a captain in the Amazons, a military unit, follows her advice and takes no weapons other than a couple of knives. This pleases his teacher, Deacon Matson, who felt that carrying a gun made a person feel more secure and bold, and consequently less cautious.

The students are dropped individually on the target planet using the advanced gate technology. I think I see where the guys behind the movie and series Stargate got the idea for their technology. Some of the imagery Heinlein paints in the lead up to the story, and establishing his gate technology and immigration is rather interesting. many new colonies are settled by people traveling in and relying on 19th century technology as where they will be going there will not be electricity let alone running water, and they will have to rely on only what they can transport via Conestoga wagons. Heinlein uses this same mechanism for colonization in his novel, Time Enough For Love.

After the students are dropped off, they are permitted to team up into pairs. Rod looks around for his best friend, Jimmy, but does not see him. after a while, he does spot a critter, and keeps low in the grass to keep from being spotted. Latter, he spots a group of scavengers flying over a spot much like vultures, and he heads to higher ground and uses his binoculars to see what they were flying over. He sees the body of another student, Johan Braun, with his dog, both dead. Braun stripped of his gear, including the very powerful energy weapon, Thunderbolt. Braun did not even make it through the first day.

Rod almost fails on the first day when he is ambushed by another student, stripped of everything except his shorts and a knife he had hidden, and left for dead as well. Rod, recovering from being knocked out, manages to learn to survive with nothing more than the one knife until he meets up with another student, and they form up as a team, and also stumble upon Rod's friend Jimmy.

The plot becomes more interesting as the students figure out that recall time has elapsed without happening and realize that they are marooned on this strange new world, possibly for the rest of their lives.

The story is a look into human nature and man's ability to adapt and thrive in any environment as the students gather and develop into a functional colony.

Originally published in 1955, it is a highly readable book that will hold your interest to the very end.

Tags:

Heinlein Science Fiction Books

Posted by Sqotty at 1:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

A lot is happening on the immigration front, mostly bad. Hugh Hewitt has taken to labeling it McCain-Kennedy Amnesty 2.0, which is fairly appropriate. Not sure what I would call it, except that anything Ted Kennedy supports and thinks is good, has got to be bad for this country. And this is. Here's a clip from MyWay News on what it does:

The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and - after paying fees and a $5,000 fine - ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of households would have to return to their home countries first.

They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.

A new crop of low-skilled guest workers would have to return home after stints of two years. They could renew their visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time. If they wanted to stay in the U.S. permanently, they would have to apply under the point system for a limited pool of green cards.

There is a lot more to it than that, including to reports that the wall/fence has been cut and half and may be killed altogether.

Anything this loose on the handling of illegal aliens is bad, and amounts to amnesty. That is not something I would advocate as illegal aliens routinely use forged documents and harvest the Social Security numbers of working Americans in order to get jobs. That is not exactly law-abiding, and also leads to identify theft and bad credit ratings because of the illegal's activities.

This is something I currently have to deal with. It turns out an illegal alien has been using my social security number for sometime. I ma not HAPPY about that fact.

Now I learn they intend to grant them amnesty and let them stay.

Okay, it may be unrealistic to deport 12 million people, but to let them get off so easy for their criminal behavior is simply NOT RIGHT!

We must build a wall and secure our borders, north and south. After that, we can determine the best way to handle the growing problem of illegal aliens within our borders. Whether that means they are given a choice to go home and return as temporary workers or deport them and close the gates on those who violated our laws can be debated. But allowing them to stay and pay a $5,000 fine, which is way to little to discourage this kind of behavior, as they have violated more laws than just the manner in which they entered the U.S. , is plain wrong.

There may not be a perfect solution to the issue of illegal aliens within the U.S., but anything short of securing our borders first is a non-solution.

Tags:

Amnesty McKennedy McCain-Kennedy

Posted by Sqotty at 6:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

For those who still believe that these radical Islamo-Fascists hate and attack us because we are "over there," time to think again. From FoxNews:

Christians in a Pakistani town beset by pro-Taliban militants sought government protection Wednesday, the eve of a deadline for them to convert to Islam or face violence.

About 500 Pakistani Christians in Charsadda, a town in the North West Frontier Province bordering Afghanistan, received letters earlier this month telling them to close their churches and convert by Thursday or be the target of "bomb explosions."

Several Christians, a tiny minority in the predominantly Muslim country, have fled town and others are living in fear, community leaders said.

We all know that not all Muslims are radicalized like the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Jamas, the Islamic Brotherhood, and so on.

According to the report, local police seem to think that these threats are only a joke (some joke!) and not to worry about. They have, however, dispatched a couple of officers to stand vigil over the targetted churches. We'll see if it does any good.

It also reports that the Taliban has been growing in strength in Northwestern Pakistan, bombing shops that sell western films, among other threats.

As for the churches in Charsadda, I guess we'll see what happens there over the next few days.

Tags:

Charsadda Pakistan Taliban

Posted by Sqotty at 6:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

The DFL controlled Legislature here in Minnesota voted to increase the gas and other taxes, costing Minnesotans upwards of $500 per year (guesstimated, which means it will be more). Pawlenty has promised a veto, so it looks like it is time to contact your representatives and let them know they need to sustain it.

Although some of the taxes would be leveraged for roads and bridges solely, there is also a lot of the hoped for revenue would be used to support transit, a.k.a. the light rail boondoggle.

The estimates for revenue raised would be over $6 BILLION, which means the people of Minnesota will have that much less money to spend (or invest) as they choose, stifling economic growth in the state.

Tags:

Gas Tax Minnesota

Posted by Sqotty at 6:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

It look's as though Obama is doing his best to appeal to the ant-American hard-left that controls the Democratic Party. I suppose this should not come as a surprise. Here is what he had to say about President Bush on Sunday in Kansas City, from MSNBC:

"The day that this president steps down, the entire world will breath a sigh of relief."

Just to name a few of those who will breathe a sigh of relief: Fidel Castro, murdering dictator; Hugo Chavez, communist thug; Kim Jong Il, murdering dictator; Ahmadinejad, terrorist thug; Osama Bin Laden, mass-murdering terrorist thug; al-Qaeda, terrorist organization bent on the destruction of America; Muqtada al-Sadr, Jidist running death squads in Iraq; Syria, Communist China, and the list goes on.

Why would they breathe a sigh of relief when Bush steps down?

Easy - it means that the bad guys have won. At least they will if we elect someone like Barack "we give up" Obama, or any one else from the Party of Surrender.

It means that Iran will have a free hand to develop nuclear weapons and North Korea will be incentivised to continue building bombs that may soon be capable of hitting North America.

It means that Hugo Chavez will continue to seize the assets of private businesses while marching his country on towards communism, oppression and poverty for all.

It means that when Castro finally passes on to the nether-reaches of Hell, he will be replaced by someone that will keep the Communist status quo, rather than leading Cuba out of the darkness of the tyranny of Marxism.

It means that Muqtada al-Sadr will have gained the upper hand in Iraq, with his death squads, and the flegdling democracy will founder and fail.

Syria will continue to support Hezbollah and other terrorist groups operating in Israel and within the Palestinian Authority, preventing any chance of a lasting peace and two-state solution.

These reasons, and many more, are why electing anyone like Obama, or Hillary, is not only dangerous to America, it is dangerous to the world as a whole.

Tags:

Obama Anti-American

Posted by Sqotty at 5:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

This is a bit off of the beaten path for me, but I ound it interesting. Nudist Colonies are having trouble attracting young people to their way of life.

From Fox News:

"We don't want the place to turn into a gated assisted living facility," said Gordon Adams, membership director at Solair Recreation League, a nudist camp in northeast Connecticut that recently invited students from dozens of New England schools to a college day in hopes of piquing their interest.

The median age is 55 at Solair, where a yearly membership is $500 for people older than 40, $300 for people younger than 40 and $150 for college students.

If I were 20-something, why would I want to hang out with a bunch of people more than a generation older than me, the senior citizen crowd, in the buff. As my wife would say: "Ewww!" Come to think of it, I wouldn't want to do it even though I am in the 40-something crowd. I've never been one to run around in the buff to begin with anyway.

Once at a WesterCon, back in 1982, I was surprised that the nudists took over the hotel's swimming area and jacuzzi. I kept my swim trunks on. So did everyone else I was with. Fortunately, one doesn't see that at conventions anymore.

This ain't the '70s anymore. Nude beaches are also not the hot spots that they once were some 30 years ago either. Public nudity, aside from the "Bay to Breakers" race/party perhaps, ain't as popular as it once was.

Thank God! There are very few people I would want to see running around in the buff publically. and I have no doubt that I wouldn't be on anybody's short list either.

Having all of these nudist colonies becoming "assisted living for nudists" brings to mind images I would rather not have. Ewwww!

Posted by Sqotty at 6:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Al Sharpton, after receivingin some critisism over a statement he made in a recent debate, is now claiming he didn't say what he said, or maybe he didn't mean what he said. Maybe he his doing the Flipper Kerry Boogie.

From FoxNews:

"As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways, so don't worry about that; that's a temporary situation," Sharpton said Monday during a debate with Hitchens at the New York Public Library's Beaux-Arts headquarters.

youtube video available here:

That's a very bigoted statement to make about someone's religious beliefs, and coming from someone who purports to be a man of the cloth!

Sharpton is also one of those on the hard-left that castigated Imus for his on-air stupidity (which was a bigoted statement on the part of Imus) as well as the crucifixion of the Duke La Crosse players FALSELY accused of rape.

Sharpton, in an attempt at damage control, now claims:

"What I said was that we would defeat him, meaning as a Republican," Sharpton said. "A Mormon, by definition, believes in God. They don't believe in God the way I do, but by definition, they believe in God."

Perhaps what the (not so) Reverend Al Sharpton really means is that only Democrats believe in God, and that Republicans are nothing but godless heathens.

It is clear to me that Sharpton really meant what he originally said, "As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways…"

Last I checked, I believe in God, and I would vote for Romney.

Tags:

Sharpton Romney Mormon

Posted by Sqotty at 6:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

San Fran Nan is at it again, this time looking at suing the president should he use a signing statement on proposed legislation that would provide needed funding for the troops.

According to a report on the Hill:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is threatening to take President Bush to court if he issues a signing statement as a way of sidestepping a carefully crafted compromise Iraq war spending bill.

Pelosi recently told a group of liberal bloggers, "We can take the president to court" if he issues a signing statement, according to Kid Oakland, a blogger who covered Pelosi's remarks for the liberal website dailykos.com.

"The president has made excessive use of signing statements and Congress is considering ways to respond to this executive-branch overreaching," a spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said. "Whether through the oversight or appropriations process or by enacting new legislation, the Democratic Congress will challenge the president's non-enforcement of the laws."

It is a scenario for which few lawmakers have planned. Indicating that he may consider attaching a signing statement to a future supplemental spending measure, Bush last week wrote in his veto message, "This legislation is unconstitutional because it purports to direct the conduct of operations of the war in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the presidency."

The legislation that Bush vetoed last week was definitely unconstitutional as it put Congress in charge of the military, circumventing the President's ability to function as Commander in Chief, by requiring a withdrawal from Iraq if Congress decides they don't like how things are going. Bush, by communicating the fact that the bill was unconstitutional via a signing statement, was the correct way to communicate to Congress the reason the veto should be sustained.

The President is the only thing standing between the Democrats in Congress, who continue to extend their grab for power.

Currently, a number of Democrats running for the presidency, have made it clear that they would like to rescind the authorization for war in Iraq, a tactic that is gaining popularity with the Dems in Congress as a whole. How this would, or could, work is beyond me. So long as Bush is in the White House, such legislation would be vetoed, rightfully so, and the veto would be sustained as the Dems do not have enough support to override the veto. This tactic, even if it were to gain enough momentum in Congress now, would not have any chance of getting through before 2009. Hopefully, by then, we'll have been able to stabilize Iraq and it will become a moot point. But don't hold your breath.

The biggest thorn in Iraq continues to be al-Qaeda terrorists and the armed militias of such thugs as Muqtada al-Sadr. These militias act as death squads, inciting more violence. Iran is also a serious problem as it continues to funnel funding and materials to the terrorists and murderers. Syria is also a problem as it continues to serve as a gateway for terrorist recruits heading into Iraq.

As long as al-Qaeda continues to operate, and thugs like al-Sadr are allowed to maintain armed miltias, there will be problems in establishing a free and democratic Iraq. Eliminating these threats is the key to success, and closing the avenues of funding and materials is tantamount to continued success.

Tags:

Pelosi Veto Congress Iraq War On Terror

Posted by Sqotty at 6:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

A terrorist ring operating in New Jersey has been arrested; their plan to attack Fort Dix, posing as pizza delivery guys in order to kill as many soldiers as possible has been thwarted. This was a good day for America, and a bad day for the terrorists.

All six of the terrorists that were arrested are Muslim extremists. Their group had previously been infiltrated by an FBI agent based on a tip received by a clerk who converted a video tape to DVD format for the terrorists.

From Philly.com:

The investigation began more than a year ago, according to an affidavit from FBI agent John J. Ryan.

The tipster called the FBI on Jan. 31, 2006, and said that someone had brought a "disturbing" video to have duplicated.

"The DVD depicted 10 young men who appeared to be in their early-20s shooting assault weapons at a firing range in a militia-like style while calling for jihad and shouting in Arabic, 'Allah Akbar,' or 'God is Great.'"

My hat's off to the guy who tipped off the FBI. Thanks, Dude, whoever you are. I wish more people were like you.

Tags:

War On Terror Fort Dix

Posted by Sqotty at 7:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

The People of France have elected Nicolas Sarkozy as their new president. The conservative Sarkozy won a significant victory over his hard-left opponent, Royal, with over 53% of the vote versus 46% of the vote for the Leftist of France.

Sarkovy intends to push hard on his pro-market and anti-crime agenda, which will be good for France.

Meanwhile, the punks on the left rioted in Paris, throwing objects at police; firebombs were used against schools and community centers around the Essone region.

FoxNews has more, including pictures of cars that wre overturned in the riots.

Tags:

Sarkozy Royal France

Posted by Sqotty at 6:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

We received an email from SPC Amberson of Ziggurat Con and have been accumulating a mass of stuff to ship over for their event. One of our friends, Ralph, has also contributed to the package in the form of a new copy of the Great Delmuti, a card game from Steve Jackson Games.

If you are thinking of sending gaming stuff over, checkout KiloSeven and ship soon. I think we would all like to see this first ever gaming convention in a combat zone to be a success, so please show them your support!

Toys 4 Troops has a darn good write-up on the event and what can be done to help. Check it out!

Other sites to check:

Games=Life
Dork Things, creator of Dork Tower
LJ Con Central
Games To Troops

Tags:

Ziggurat Con Dungeons and Dragons rpg gaming Iraq

Posted by Sqotty at 8:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Yesterday we went to the "Living Green Expo" in St. Paul. It was something my wife convinced my to do as she thought it would be fun. Since it was going to be a lousy weather day and wouldn't get anything done, I figured what the hey. Besides, they were going to have a few workshops that fit into our long range plans, including composting and getting started with raising chickens.

The focus of the expo was "Global Warming" and ran as keynote Al "I Invented Global Warming" Gore's presentation/slide show "An Inconvenient Truth" which I conveniently missed.

The exhibitors ran the range from organic farming, including various products from milk, ice cream and cheese, to more conventional produce farming, as well as the folks running the workshop on raising chickens in the city with several of their birds.

Lots on composting and planting native plants in your landscapes as well as a number of home improvement folks.

There were also a number of organizations, including one on home schooling (which I stopped by and picked up info) and the Minnesota DNR. And yes, the expected anti-Bush zealots pushing bumper stickers and the like as well as the Communist, I mean Green, Party. Okay, is there really a difference between the two?

Both of the workshops we sat in on were interesting and informative. The focus on the getting started with chickens was for an urban setting (as opposed to rural setting) and contained valuable information on overcoming the hurdles that one faces when raising chickens in the city. Shocking, there are laws one has to follow, and you need to get a permit from the city, and approval of the majority of your neighbors. What was impressive is the number of people attending this workshop who are interested in raising chickens. Hopefully some of them will pursue it.

Overall, it was a good time, and educational. Gave me food for thought on raising chickens as well as some badly needed info on composting before I build our compost heap.

Tags:

Living Green Expo

Posted by Sqotty at 6:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

We were at a going away party at the Cruise a couple of weeks ago, and one of our friends posted this video of our daughter up onyoutube. No idea how long it will be up, at least through the end of May.

There is no doubt that she is getting her dancing skills from me and her looks from her mother.

Posted by Sqotty at 5:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Comrade Chavez of Venezuela, not content with nationalizing oil companies, is now making noises that he intends to confiscate private banks and the steel industry. The message he is sending is clear to me: don't invest in Venezuela, as you'll be a target for confiscation.

From myway.com:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Thursday threatened to nationalize the country's banks and largest steel producer, accusing them of unscrupulous practices.

"Private banks have to give priority to financing the industrial sectors of Venezuela at low cost," Chavez said. "If banks don't agree with this, it's better that they go, that they turn over the banks to me, that we nationalize them and get all the banks to work for the development of the country and not to speculate and produce huge profits."

As I understand the way banks operate, they use the money from their depositors (that would be folks like you and me) to loan to other people to finance their projects, whether it is for mortgages, business or consumer loans, etc. Part of the profits realized from the loans is used to pay the depositors for the use of their money. Interest is based on the amount of risk involved. If someone wants to borrow $200 Million dollars to build a new facility, and the company's revenues are miniscule, then there would be substantial risk involved. Okay, we know all of this. Apparently, though, Chavez doesn't.

Banking according to Chavez is: if you make a decent return on your investment, you are bad and not helping out your country.

As for the steel producers (Sidor is the main target), it looks like he is targeting them due to their selling Venezuelan steel overseas, where they can get a better price for their product than they can domestically, and then steel users have to rely on imported steel so that they can get a better price for their needs than using locally produced. It may be inefficient, but, hey, that's called capitalism. Buy low, sell high. Probably the local market price steel is kept low du to the imports from China making the price of locally produced steel uncompetitive, thus the need to export it to countries that will pay a price high enough to make operating steel mills profitable.

"Sidor has to produce and give priority to our national industries ... and at low cost," he said.

Of course Chavez, being a hard-core progressive, doesn't like capitalism, and wants to force the steel producers to sell at a price below the cost to produce, or force the construction industry to pay substantially more for the steel and thus raising the cost of construction.

Chavez is pushing hard to turn Venezuela into a communist country, doing it one piece at a time. As he has stated on many occasions, this is all part of his plan: to make Venezuela more like Cuba.

Tags:

Chavez Venezuela Socialism Communism Nationalization

Posted by Sqotty at 6:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

Wired Magazine reported yesterday that the Army is cracking down on blogging by soldiers. The report has also been picked up by FoxNews. The new rules, which are an attempt to silence milblogs, and people who receive and publish correspondence via email from the troops, now requires that soldiers provide any material to their commanding officer before it is published or sent out.

Milblogs during the last few years have been the main counter-balance to the anti-military bias of the Main Stream Media, putting the positive images of the ongoing operations in Iraq out for the world to see, not just the negative (this is not to say hearing about the massive terrorist attacks is unimportant, but to say hearing about the people of Iraq like our troops is just as important, as well as the good works they are doing in rebuilding the war torn country).

The new restrictions go beyond those who serve in uniform as it includes private contractors working for the military as well as the families and friends whom soldiers may correspond with. It may silence the culture of military bloggers as well as eliminate access to the many positive stories that come out of Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving us with little more than the limited (and negative) coverage provided by the anti-military Main Stream Media.

I understand that there are issues of security when dealing with citizen journalism. What the Military needs to remember that the troops they have are smart enough to realize that by publishing a blog incurs a certain level of responsibility to not disclose sensitive operational information. The kind of stuff that could get their head's shot off.

Instead of piling on more restrictions, the military should embrace milblogs as the publicity boon that they are.

Tags:

MilBlogs

Posted by Sqotty at 6:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
View blog reactions

Looks like the Party of Surrender is having difficulty getting it's plan for "Terrorist Victory Day" set into motion. President Bush rightfully vetoed the bill calling for withdrawal of troops from Iraq beginning Oct. 1, 2007. The Democrats also lack sufficient support to override the veto.

The end result is that the Liberal-Left has to wait before they can hand victory in Iraq over to the terrorists. Worse still, at least from the viewpoint of the Move On crowd, House Democrats will actually have to work with Republicans to draft legislation to provide troop funding in a bipartisan fashion, a foreign concept to the Liberal-Left.

It is probable that the next round of legislation for troop funding will incorporate a plan for the Liberal-Left, I mean Congress, to micro-manage military operations in Iraq in an attempt to both undermine the Commander In Chief and force a withdrawal if they don't get their way.

I think Nancy Pelosi and her crowd need to be reminded that there is only ONE Commander in Chief, not 536. And any plan that allows Congress to micro-manage military operations are not only a bad idea, it is constitutionally wrong!

Tags:

Iraq War On Terror Pelosi Veto

Posted by Sqotty at 6:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

As usual, the abundance of idiocy never fails to astound me. This time from the mail room of the Red Star Tribune:

I am saddened that most people say there were 32 victims of the Virginia Tech slayings on April 16. I do agree that Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people before taking his own life; however, Cho was a victim as well.

The writer goes on to reiterate some of what was known about Cho: that professors and students felt intimidated and threatened by him. But the writer focuses on the fact that Cho wore dark glasses and a hat to his classes, not on the writings he is reported to have written, dark pieces on murder and killing. Even some of his classmates figured out who the gunman was that day before it was revealed it was Cho.

Cho gave out many warning signs, all of which seem to have been overlooked by society. He threatened to kill himself, there was a temporary detention order issued, and he was placed in a mental health facility. With enough time in an inpatient facility, a professional should have been able to see there was something else going on.

Was Cho a crazed lunatic who thought of death every minute of the day and finally just snapped in a fit of rage and decided to kill 32 people before killing himself? No, Cho was a victim of an undereducated, underfunded society that lacks the resources and will to give him, and others like him, the help they need.

Warning signs are easy to recognize in the aftermath of a tragedy like the Virginia Tech Massacre. But to call this animal a victim of society puts the blame for what happened on society, not on the animal who pulled the trigger and snuffed out 32 lives in a rage of hatred.

To say Cho was also a victim is irresponsible at best; it provides some justification to the next animal who wants to go out in a rage of bullets. It is more accurate to say it is a sickening claim to say Cho was alos a victim.

Tags:

Seung-Hui Cho Star Tribune Virginia Tech

Posted by Sqotty at 6:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions

In spite of all of the violence that has been transpiring in Iraq as of late, there may be one bit of good news as it is being reported that Zarqawi's successor, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, has been killed by a competing Sunni faction. According to the piece on FoxNews, al-Masri's demise has yet to be confirmed by DNA testing.

Personally I hope it is true. However I am not going to hold my breath waiting for confirmation. It may be a couple of days.

"Preliminary reports said he was killed yesterday in Taji area in a battle involving a couple of insurgent groups, possibly some tribal people who have problems with Al Qaeda. These reports have to be confirmed."

Tribesmen in the western Anbar province have been fighting Al Qaeda for weeks and claim to have killed dozens of them.

On the other side of the coin, I am not sure how I feel about armed militia's running around shooting each other up. If they are serious about routing out the terrorists, as it seems that they are, why not join the Iraqi Army and wear the uniform of their country?

Tags:

al-Masri Iraq War On Terror

Posted by Sqotty at 6:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
View blog reactions