Saturday, May 27, 2006

I'm So Tired of Illegal Alien News 24/7

I'm almost ready to throw up my hands and say to heck with it. Lets send buses and vans down to Mexico to pick up every mother's son and drag 'em up north whether they want to come or not. And while we are at it lets put our National Guard on Mexico's southern border. Mexico's southern border is better guarded than ours is. Lets help Mexico's economy by allowing them to ship out every poor person so they only have rich people left. Except for the few peons they will need to clean their toilets. Lets ignore the fact thet terrorists can come across the border just as easily as a "Migrant Worker".

then there is this: - by Sher Zieve -
Senate Bill Destroys Illegal Immigration Reform

The new Senate version of the "Immigration Reform Bill" not only expands illegal immigration (and not just from Mexico) but, places even more constraints on the US Border Patrol. The Dodd-Specter Amendment to the bill now REQUIRES that Mexico be consulted about any proposed building of a US-Mexico Border fence. US citizens no longer have a voice or vote on the matter.

Not only have these apparently lunatic Senators (who are now part of the "Open Borders" crowd) decided that they no longer report to the US citizen-voters but, they have made the determination that "we-don't-need-no-stinkin'-borders".

Pressure from Mexico worked on the US Senate. Not surprisingly, Mexico's President Vicente Fox is said to be very pleased with the US Senate's version. Is Fox to be our next POTUS? Looks like US citizens may no longer even have to vote.

The Senate bill almost doubles the H1B visas; from 65,000 per year to nearly 1,150,000. It also includes a stipulation for a 20% increase annually. It "forgives" illegals who have stolen Social Security cards (can anyone still say "Amnesty"?). Note: US citizens found guilty of identity theft go to jail. The Senate bill states that illegals must be given "prevailing wages". Note: US citizens are not entitled to this stipulation. Illegals of Hispanic heritage are to be given a "path to citizenship", while they remain in the US. Despite false arguments to the contrary, they are being placed at the front of the line, ahead of others who have already been waiting for years.

There are too many insane provisions that are pro-illegals and anti-US citizens, included in the bill, to list here. But, you may view them at:

Have we finally lost our country to a group of fanatical US Senators who no longer listen to "we the people"? It would appear so.

Thank you Sher Zieve for asking that question - How many Voting Americans like the answer??? How many will be more careful next time they vote?

Technorati Tags -

Friday, May 26, 2006

Phat Mommy on "Save the Internet!"

I have not done ANY research on this subject. I will say. "I'm going on gut feeling here". That and a bit of knowledge of history. When I first heard about this program to "Save The Internet" I was reminded of what George Putnam (Check Bio here) has continually said about Hegelism. - Manufacture a problem where none exists, Fill the people with fear about it and then come riding in on a white charger with the solution. -

Shannon of Phat Mommy fame has this bit to say (Plus more at her site!) about the target="_blank">"Save The Internet" business.

When I first read the Save the Internet campaign, I admit it sounded logical to me. I mean, gosh, those big evil corporations are going to prevent little ol' me from reading my favorite blogs! No one comes between me and my blogs, people. But after a little more research, I'm not convinced anyone is trying to prevent me from accessing anything. And I'm definitely not convinced that government regulation is the answer.

Let's try to put the issue in plain English. Net neutrality is the concept that everyone should be equal in cyberspace. You can just as easily and freely visit The's of the Internet and you can the Mommy bloggers. The telecom and cable companies that own the pipelines over which internet info travels would like to offer faster delivery to those companies that are willing to pay a premium for it. That means could pay Comcast to push it's web site through at a faster rate. Result? You get a better experience at Amazon's site. If the technology is available, why shouldn't telecom companies profit from it? I may be missing something, but I have yet to see even a hint that some web sites would actually be blocked. Slower, relative to other sites, possibly, but not blocked.

By instituting regulations, Congress could actually hinder the development of new and exciting Internet technologies that we are not even aware of yet. Not to mention pave the way for {shudder} taxation.

prying1 sez: Go visit Shannon and leave a comment. Before they block her site by passing legislation to "Save The Internet"...

Technorati Tags -

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Just in Time For Memorial Day!

What is a Vet?

Sergeant Allen - A 25 year old Iraq veteran posts this question with an answer that might make you tear up a bit. - You have been warned.

- From Contact Right - What is a vet? -

Please post a bit on your blog and pass on this link - And don't forget to say "Thank you!" to a vet this weekend. (What the heck. Why not every day?)

Hat tip to Cary Cartter of I'm Thinking of the "O" Word...


I thought I'd bring this up again -

Jordan Leigh has written a beautiful and moving song for our fallen soldiers and dedicated it to her brother Kenneth Schall who died while serving in Iraq. Listen to her song:

Soldier, I Thank You

I previously posted More on this song and Jordan Leigh here

Thanks again to Cary Cartter for the link to the beautiful song! I get some of my best posts from him!

Technorati Tags -

Blogging About Hoaxes

Recently (like in the past year plus since I started blogging) I've seen quite a few times where a story hits the wires, Bloggers jump on it, hours or days later it turns out to be a hoax.
The Little Red Book story: A college student was investigated by the Department of Homeland Security for requesting Mao Zedong's Little Red Book on interlibrary loan. The story traveled around the world. The student later admitted it was a little red lie.

The Toy Doll, Hostage of Terrorists was a good one that didn't last long. An Islamic militant website posted a picture of a soldier being held at gunpoint. This had people going for a while until a spokesman for Dragon Models USA Inc. showed it was one of their Cody dolls.

CBS had their fake National Guard memos. More recently these was the Iran/Jews/Yellow Ribbon news that went through a couple cycles before being knocked down. The Jessie MacBeth Video story has caused many Mea Culpas from bloggers who ran with it. It was of a supposed U.S. Army Ranger and Iraq War Veteran that claimed he murdered indiscriminately in Iran. (see previous post)

Now we have an ABC News story that broke yesterday that says: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, is under investigation by the FBI, which is probing corruption in Congress, ABC News reported on Wednesday. - It was debunked shortly after it broke.

What gets me is the ABC news page is still up without an update or link showing the story to be false. - Anyone passing by while websurfing could see the story and not realize it is false. - Then take it home and blog with it. - Making them appear to be the fool.

I always hated seeing news stories with "Alleged" or "Suspected" when they have a picture of the guy with his hand in the cookie jar. - Now I understand why. - Stories can change midstream.

We have a story of a woman who was offered money for her baby by a couple of women. She allegedly turned them down and the couple of women are now suspected of stealing the baby from her.

I feel there is more to this story than the dribble of news we have so far. But if I post my real thoughts I might be subject to a lawsuit so...

The main point of this post is to tell other bloggers to be careful out there. Even the big boys get fooled. If you do post on a story that turns out to be bogus then update on the original post and maybe even write a separate "I'm Sorry" posting. Being transparent in your humanity will only cause people to trust you and your blog even more.

Technorati Tags -

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Jessie MacBeth Story False & Leads to Dave Tikk's Comment

OK - Jessie MacBeth is a phony and a LIAR!

Who is Jessie MacBeth you say?

- Michelle Malkin has the story - quote - He's the latest cause celebre of the anti-war Left -- a "former Army Ranger and Iraq war veteran" who accuses his fellow troops of committing a litany of atrocities against innocent civilians.

--- A 20 minute film produced about him and shown on the Internet has been pulled - No explanation on the page left behind - but it had this phony lefty liar saying,

- "By my hand alone . . . almost 200 people were taken out by me. That's just a rough estimate. A lot of them at close range . . . they would actually feel the hot muzzle of my rifle on their forehead . . . we'd do stuff that would scare them first . . . beat 'em up or kick 'em or hit the wife . . . slaughtering 30-40 people a night sometimes, women and children . . . I was trained, you know, in all the Ranger school, 18 months of that crap . . . I got disappointed in my country . . . but I didn't say anything because I would have been locked up." ---

There's just one problem: According to Department of the Army spokesman Paul Boyce, there is no record of "Jessie MacBeth," a.k.a. Jesse Adam MacBeth, having served in either the Rangers or the Special Forces -- or in any part of the Army at all. Boyce told me Tuesday that a check on MacBeth's credentials came up empty. "At a minimum, this appears to have been concocted" and "some sort of hoax," Boyce said. Special Operations Command and the State Department have been alerted. - end quote -


Being known for 'digging a little deeper' I thought I'd check out what the lefties were saying about "Jessie MacBeth". - Googled with quotes and clicked on the first hit up. - Which brought me to "Dahr Jamail's Iraq Dispatches" who has, at the time of this posting, not updated to show the Jessie story to be bogus. Will he??? I wrote and gave him the link to Michelle's article.

Well from there I wandered about Jamail's blog for a bit, found a very lengthy and verbose article on Democracy in Iraq and came across this comment concerning the post and other comments. Dave Tikk answered the usual talking points continually found on so many lefty blogs so I thought it worth bringing to the light of day.

The following one liners are culled by Dave from other commentor's words.

- quote -

First, I appreciate the website posting my views as they seem different then most others on here. Please know my comments are part of what I hope are a 2 way street in learning from one another. I am sitting in the Persian Gulf trying to make sense of all this, especially those of you who are critical of what is happening in Iraq with respect to America's involvement. Below I will post some responses to the above comments to allow you to see how the other side thinks with the hope that some of you will respond back so that I may better understand you.

-"It seems to me that the United States has gone from being an exporter of democracy and freedom, to becoming the pimp of so-called democracy and freedom."

I say to this; If not the US then who? The former Soviet Union? Their system failed. How about the Iranians? They too have a failing economy. How about we let the Iraqi's do it themselves? They allowed Saddam to rule them for the last few decades and he killed between 1 million - 6 million of his own people. The US is the only country in the world that has both the ability and guts to go into a place like Iraq, arrest the murdering dictator and kill two of his equally evil sons and then make an attempt at securing the country so they may have a free election. Granted, not all this was done perfectly but I fail to see anyone else, except for a few coalition countries, making the attempt. The alternative was to allow Saddam to go on doing what he was doing. Again, we found no WMD, but aren't killing several million of your own people a WMD?

-"Jeffersonian? Hardly. But get a few people to get purple on their fingers, wave it in front of a camera, broadcast it on CNN, and ......voila!!! you've got Bush-style "democracy.""

To this I say; I understand there is a slant of propaganda from the US Press by doing this, but let's not forget, this is the same press that shows a car bomb, an IED, or a suicide bomber and calls it a "National Insurgency". Media call those isolated events "a quagmire of chaos". Sorry, several million more voted then the few thousand that blow things up. I take this as lessen for both sides. Don't believe what you see on the news. They will sensationalize anything to make their ratings look good. They are not sensationalizing voting or car bombers for our benefit, but for their own pockets.

-"It is shameful how Americans have forgotten, or perhaps never knew, what the word means. They don't know, or perhaps never knew, what "freedom" means."

I have just one comment here. How many people tried to defect to Iran, France, North Korea, China, Iraq, Cuba, or any African Country in the last 50 years because they were seeking freedom? Several million tried to enter the US because they all know where true freedom is. What they fail to see is that freedom comes at a cost and is hard work. The US system is not nearly perfect and has huge gaps in consistency at times, but it is the best thing out there, otherwise why do we have so many trying to cross our borders?

-"Not all are asleep to the growing lies and corruption that are destroying the fabric of all our forefathers stood and fought for. I believe a breaking point lies ahead and the real face of the Bush people will be exposed."

Who are you talking about? 52% of those who voted voted for the President. The other rest either didn't vote or voted for someone else. The "real face of the Bush People" belongs to more then 50% of the country. What "fabrics" are you referring to that our fore fathers stood and fought for? Religious freedom? Freedom of the press? Freedom to pursue your dreams? News flash.....There was none of this under Saddam and if someone like Zarquawi (forgive my spelling, no offense intended) is allowed to flourish, he will chop your head off unless you do exactly what he says you should do. Please enlighten us all on what freedoms the Iraqis had before the US showed up.

-"Bush's quote, "the survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands," indeed has several interpretations. To me the statement sounds like a threat - an echo of the "either you are with us or against us" rhetoric."

You are exactly correct. This is a threat and one I hope we all back up. Because what you forgot was "those that are against us", fly fuel and passenger laden aircraft into buildings and kill people in America's back yard. North Korea, Iran, and China would like nothing better then to set up "indoctrination camps" in downtown America and do it at the expense of your head on a block if you don't attend the "meeting". People in those countries who would do us harm deserve to be talked with first, and when they don't listen, fail to give and take, and start blowing things up in Washington, DC, and New York, we (America) needs to make some threat and then, if required, back up those threats. Iran, China, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union all noticed the strength and precision of the US Military and will be more then happy to step up to the political forum to discuss our differences rather then resort to military action, terrorist acts, conventional war, or nuclear war.

-"Bush's statements sound to me as if he is threatening the citizens of the US if they do not support the war in Iraq."

Again, 52% of the voters voted for him. The entire US Military is volunteer. No one defects to Cuba. These things happen because no one feels threatened. If you feel threatened then I would say you are either misinformed or have no back bone so get out and vote for someone who doesn't threaten you.

Ok...I'll shut up now. Please give me constructive criticism on my thoughts. I only ask you base them on facts and with the intent to make the world a better place....Dave

Posted by: Dave Tikk at February 1, 2005 08:50 AM - end quote -

Unfortunately Dave Tikk's only contact point was an email address that is no longer functioning - He does mention sitting in the Persian Gulf on February 1, 2005 - Doing a Google Search on the name comes up with one hit, the page this was pulled from... Which makes me think the name was a pseudonym. The name might very well be phony!

Hmmmm. - Jessie MacBeth is a phony!
Hmmmm. - Dave Tikk uses a pseudonym (Phony???)!

One from the left. - One from the right.

Which one would you trust with your wallet or car keys?

Better yet. Which would you trust with your life?

I'll take the one that was sitting in the Persian Gulf thank you.

Technorati Tags -

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

The Essential President Bush

The Anchoress has a post that is must reading for both the left and the right.

A much-esteemed, long-neglected friend sent an email this morning, which was delightful to receive. At one point he mentioned this post from yesterday and wrote: I think (President Bush) has lost his bearings. But then, so did Moses from time to time, it's quite understandable.

That made me wonder a little - has President Bush lost his bearings, or have we? Is it President Bush who has broken faith with "his base" or have they?

When I read my friend's line, I thought of a line from Pride and Prejudice, in which Elizabeth Bennett says in new appreciation of Mr. Darcy, "In essentials, I believe, he is very much what he ever was."

From this the Anchoress goes on to take us down memory lane. It is only a few years out of our recent past and she shows how soon we forget.

Thanks Anchoress!

Hat Tip to Okie on the Lam

Technorati Tags -

Monday, May 22, 2006

Tony Snow and Helen Thomas

Found this cartoon through Google Blog Search / Tony Snow (see post below dated Friday, May 19, 2006 re: Tony Snow and the tar baby) and thought it was pretty funny. With permission freely given from the cartoonist, Ken McCracken, I present it here. (Might need to right click and view image - Sorry -)

I also found this exchange on the - White House Press Briefing page dated May 19, 2006 - which I can only assume was between Helen and Tony (He calls the questioner "Helen" and it is in the same genre of questions she has been asking for 3 years)

- Quote -
Q The new Italian Prime Minister says that the President's invasion of Iraq was a grave error. As the new kid on the block, can you give me the latest rationale the U.S. has for invading Iraq?

MR. SNOW: There has only been one rationale, as you know, Helen, and this that Saddam Hussein had resisted -- what is the proper number, 17 United Nations resolutions -- and had refused repeatedly to permit weapons inspectors to do their work, and consistent with that. And also we had cited other concerns in terms of democracy and human rights. That case has never changed.

Also the case laid out and voted by the United States Senate --

Q He finds that as a justification to invade a country where we had choke-hold sanctions, satellite surveillance --

MR. SNOW: Helen, I'm not going to get in another argument about the -- this is a three-year-old argument and you're trying to re-argue the case. The President made his case back then. The United States Senate voted overwhelmingly.

Q He did not make the case.

MR. SNOW: Well, in your opinion he didn't make the case. He made the case. He laid out his reasons.

Q He made the case, in your opinion?

MR. SNOW: Yes.
- End Quote -

prying1 sez: Second verse, same as the first.

Update - May 24, 2006 - Q The President apparently has gotten several messages, underground, back-channel and so forth, through intermediaries for direct talks with Iran. Surely he is not going to blow a -- speaking of opportunities with Iraq, this is an opportunity to talk directly to Iran. And why doesn't the President do it? And don't give me the -- I'm sure the three other allies and so forth would be very happy if we talked directly to Iran.

MR. SNOW: Well, if you don't wish me to answer the question, then I'll just move to the next questioner.

Q I want you to answer after I've told you what my premise is. (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: This from Secretary of State Helen Thomas. The position has always been clear. We are not going to divide --

Q If elected I will serve. (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: Boy, that's going out everywhere today. ....

Technorati Tags -

Sunday, May 21, 2006

Bored At Work - Funny Video Clip

This is a pretty funny 10 second clip on Google Video entitled "Bored at Work". - What cracks me up is no one looks up from their desks. -

Click here for the Bored at Work Video!

Technorati Tags -

Yellow Ribbons on Jews in Iran?

Red Ribbons on Christians in Iran?

True or False?

update = false!

Hat tip to Hugh Hewitt - Iran passed a law concerning a dress code so people are not allowed to wear western clothing. Evidently the dress code part of the story is true but the color coding for religions is questionable. ran a story with the title, "A colour code for Iran's 'infidels'" has posted updates on the story casting doubt on the report.

Original Story (first link) says: - The law mandates the government to make sure that all Iranians wear "standard Islamic garments" designed to remove ethnic and class distinctions reflected in clothing, and to eliminate "the influence of the infidel" on the way Iranians, especially, the young dress. It also envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public. The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognize non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean).
Religious minorities would have their own colour schemes. They will also have to wear special insignia, known as zonnar, to indicate their non-Islamic faiths. Jews would be marked out with a yellow strip of cloth sewn in front of their clothes while Christians will be assigned the colour red. Zoroastrians end up with Persian blue as the colour of their zonnar. It is not clear what will happen to followers of other religions, including Hindus, Bahais and Buddhists, not to mention plain agnostics and atheists, whose very existence is denied by the Islamic Republic.
- End Quote -
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (second link) says: - Israeli politicians are sounding some very dire notes, but as far as I know, no one's independently confirmed this morning's story in the National Post yet. Neither Stephen Harper nor John Howard had heard anything about it until today. And a friend of mine with contacts in Iran says he can't find anyone who thinks it's true. Liberal Catnip links to a report from Montreal radio quoting one expert as saying it's false.

On the other hand, Amer Taheri's story in the post this morning (which accompanied the main article that everyone's linking to) is awfully detailed to have been made up out of whole cloth. Taheri is a credible reporter, and he has oodles of contacts in Iran, so it's hard for me to believe he could have been suckered here. There's certainly no dispute that the Majlis did pass a law this week mandating a national Islamic dress code (which is bad enough); the question is whether that law carries any special requirements for non-Muslims.
- end quotes -
At the time of this blogpost it seems it is still unconfirmed...

prying1 sez: It may be a trial balloon by the nutter that runs Iran designed to instill fear into the hearts of Jews, Christians and Zorastrians. It may have been the Post's sources were guessing what might happen under the new dress code. It may have been put out by expatriates of Iran in an attempt to show the world that Iran is not a fun vacation spot.

I'm going to hold off comment until the truth come out except to say I think the idea is pretty nasty. I'm hoping it is not true.

UPDATE: YNET NEWS dot COM SAYS FALSE - Iranian officials adamantly denied on Saturday reports claiming that the Muslim state was passing a law that would require minority members to identify themselves with various colored armbands ? and, reminiscent of the Holocaust, Jews would be forced to wear yellow badges.
Representative of Iran?s 25,000 Jews in the nation?s parliament, Maurice Motamed, the only Jewish MP there, told the western press that the report dealt a severe blow to the Jewish image in Iran. ?I was there when they discussed the law, and it was about the dress of Iranian Muslim women. Restrictions for minority or other religions were not mentioned,? Motamed said.
~~~~~ - end quotes -

Technorati Tags -