Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Elders and Technology

Over at Time Goes By -- What it's really like to get older, Ronni Bennett is asking "where are the older people in advertising?"

Well, to some extent, she's right. Too often, elders are seen only advertising incontinence aids, OTCs, nututional supplements, and other products targeted to the elderly. If they are used in commercials aimed at a more general market, they are often used to represent the "old-fashioned" ways - out of touch with the way things are done today.

I thought I'd add some photos showing elders interacting with technology,



carrying on in demanding jobs, despite some health issues,



and clearly relating to people of all ages.

Mandates

I never remember encountering this word until sometime in the 60s. According to Wikipedia, a mandate is a:
traditional Chinese concept of legitimacy used to support the rule of the kings of the Zhou Dynasty and later the Emperors of China. Heaven would bless the authority of a just ruler, but Heaven would be displeased with an unwise ruler and give the Mandate to someone else.
The Mandate has no time limitations, but a performance standard.
Since that time, Americans have used that word to justify changing the executive branch, if necessary, by force. This is contrary to our American system - unlike the Chinese system (and most other political systems on the planet), we regularly change governmental horses. We don't have to find some astrological portents to signal that a change is needed. Every 2-4 years, we get a chance to voice our dissatisfaction with the people in charge.

In the American system, revolution is seldom needed or justified. Use of this inappropriate and dumb term should be eliminated in America. Save its use for those political systems in which the people have no way to change their leadership.

Like Saudi Arabia. Or Iran. Or Cuba.

The Cheney-Pelosi Tiff

I really like the David Limbaugh blog. His guest blogger, Tom Scerbo, skewers the self-righteous Democrats who feel entitled to savage Bush, Cheney, and all the conservatives as quasi-Hitlers, but react with outraged indignation when even mild rebuke is given - however civil:
Precisely what did Dick Cheney -- the public servant who Democrats may, with impunity, stoop to any depths to slander -- say to make House Speaker Nancy Pelosi so indignant? Well, he issued his assessment of the Democrats' legislative proposals to emasculate our current offensive in Iraq.

Cheney said, "Al Qaeda functions on the basis that they think they can break our will ... " and cause us to "quit and go home. ... That's their fundamental underlying strategy. ... If we adopt the Pelosi policy ... we will validate the strategy of Al Qaeda. I said it, and I meant it."

What's wrong with that statement? If Cheney believes the Democrats' cut and run policies will benefit Al-Qaeda, doesn't he have an obligation to warn us? Not according to Pelosi, who said Cheney was questioning her patriotism.

Not once did Cheney suggest the Democrats were unpatriotic. He said, "I didn't question her patriotism. I questioned her judgment." Likewise, President Bush recently made clear that he didn't view the Democrats' proposals to withdraw from Iraq unpatriotic.

The Meaning of War for the US

I am a Baby Boomer (I really hate that phrase - it doesn't quite fit the grey hair). In my 20s, like many of my generation, I signed petitions, attended mass rallies to end the war, and generally postured and lectured my elders about the need to end war forever.

Then the war actually did end. And into the vacuum of resistance, the Viet Cong poured. And slaughtered innocent civilians. And destroyed the South's economy. And imposed "re-education", a euphemism for "tortured until you would have shot your own mother as a traitor".

Initially, I interpreted the take-over as vindication of my pacifist beliefs. If the South couldn't hold out by themselves, they didn't deserve to rule.

Then, things happened. I changed. I grew, as my experience deepened. Eventually, I came to recognize my part in the betrayal of democratic ideals in Vietnam. For that, no apology can ever make up for my actions. The only thing that can help is to speak the truth, loud and often.

Curmudgeonly & Skeptical, points to a posting that addresses the issue of a seemingly endless and pointless war. It's a post by a military man, who points out that:
Most countries don’t get the choice of whether or not to lose their wars - it is imposed upon them. Almost uniquely in human history though, we’ve made a recent habit of picking fights we eventually decide not to win. As we spin up to do it one more time, it’s important that we carefully weigh our choices against the potential outcomes, with those consequences in turn weighed against the likelihood of their occurrence.

Because as tempting as it might be for some to see Mr. Bush lose his little war, it doesn’t end that cleanly. In order for him to lose, someone or something else has to win. And just because things are bad now does not mean that they can’t get worse.
The full post is here.

The anti-war left sometimes acts as though all combatants will lay down their arms, and beat their swords into plowshares. Sure, some will.

But, especially in the case of Middle Eastern countries, eager to regain what they consider their rightful place in the world (you think the US was arrogant with their "USA, USA" chants - wait until you get sick of "Allahu Akbar" - endlessly shouted in your face), winning this war would be just the beginning.

I've spent time this school year re-reading Winston Churchill's "The Gathering Storm". It's a chilling behind the scenes story about the prelude to WWII. Nick by nick, Hitler inserts tiny blades into the European carcass. When they don't react, or initially protest, then withdraw, he becomes emboldened. Just as a thug on the street tests your response to see whether you'll make a good target; those who response defensively are left alone. Those who show fear and a disinclination to fight back are selected for the next step.

It's not that I want a fight. It's not that I want a world empire or world domination.

It's just that the other side does. And, will continue the fight, on a thousand fronts, against innocent civilians, until we squarely face the bully, and bump back.

It may take quite a few years. It may take more than 1 showdown. The lesson may need to be repeated several times. But failure to continue may very well lead to unimaginable horrors. Do we really want another Rwanda? Or many?

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Guard the Borders Blogburst

Sutton Withheld Exculpatory Evidence In Border Patrol Trial

By Darnell McGavock of Independent Conservative

As far as major finds in how badly the case of former US Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean was not only messed up, but intentionally tipped towards their conviction, legal experts say this is the biggest! The defense says that a document from the Department of Homeland Security confirms that two supervisors were on the scene the day an illegal immigrant drug smuggler claims he was shot in the butt. The defense is just finding out about this document, that US Attorney Johnny Sutton’s office had and did not reveal to them during the trial. This was all reported on CNN show Lou Dobbs Tonight last night. I’ve YouTubed the video and you can watch it below.



Why did Sutton’s office withhold exculpatory information?

Ramos and Compean said they never filed a report because supervisors were there. Sutton claimed otherwise in court. Their version of the story has now been verified and once again we see another obvious lie from the mouth of Johnny Sutton.

Jeffrey Toobin, CNN Senior Legal Analyst says this news is potentially major, as opposed to other news he does not feel is as impacting to changing the outcome of the case. Toobin says this moves things into a “new category” that may cause a new trial. Lou Dobbs says that Johnny Sutton “lied” when he said he had no choice but to offer immunity. And World Net Daily has found more information about illegal alien drug smuggler Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila still running dope into our country, after being given medical treatment at US taxpayer expense. This offense was gagged by the judge and the family of Ramos and Compean still refuse to even talk about it, for fear that Johnny Sutton will come after them.

We need and I mean NEED a full Congressional investigation of this entire case right now. We also need to know who in our government knew what, when and what orders they gave to Johnny Sutton and/or the judge. We need to know every single detail related to President George W. Bush involving this matter. It’s time to stop reading and start writing your congresspeople. We now have more than enough information to not simply be suspicious about this case, we know these men were setup!

Monday, February 26, 2007

For Once, It's Accurate

There's a certain word that I have long hated - it's a word that's often used to describe women, that begins with "B". Many, many young people have used it in everyday conversation - funnily enough, it's as often used against males as females by them.

Ace of Spades has a very funny story about a store that uses the word - appropriately, as it happens.

For, I have little trouble with the word used for its original purpose - to describe a female dog. It reminds me of a precious moment in 2nd grade, when my best friend used it correctly, but to swooning by the teacher. She was showing pictures of the latest offspring of her beloved dog, a cocker spaniel she referred to as "a sweet little ------".

Sunday, February 25, 2007

It's Not What You Think

Some of the complaints from the ROP (Religion of Peace) have another agenda. Check out the story on Little Green Footballs for an example of what I'm talking about.

The stated motivations and the real motivations are not the same.

Saturday, February 24, 2007

Beautiful in So Many Ways



The woman pictured is a former Miss Canada. She was working on her first record release, when she took a detour.

Nazanin Afshin-Jam, the woman in the picture, took up the cause of another Nazanin - that one Nazanin Fatehi is the woman originally condemned to death for stabbing a man trying to rape her.

Yeah. It puts the issues of sexual harassment in proper perspective, doesn't it?

Afshin-Jam used her influence with the Iranian government to win Fatehi's release. But, you probably didn't see her in the headlines. I doubt she even rated a footnote in the press.

They were busy with more important celebrities.



Story courtesy of Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review.

3 Years Old Forever



I was updating my blog. As the page was loading, I caught a glimpse of the memorial above.

We all try to keep children out of harm's way. We may spank them for dashing into the street, but that's our way of trying to ensure that they couple the spanking with the danger of streets.

We immunize them against common childhood illnesses. We make them stay inside when it's too cold, and feed them vitamins to keep them healthy.

We even bring up difficult subjects - such as not talking to strangers, and "good" touches" vs. "bad" touches.

Sometimes, its hard to anticipate all the dangers that an unwary child may encounter. But, generally, in the arms of parents, they can rest easy.

Not Dana Falkenberg. Her parents couldn't have anticipated that a short plane ride would be the last of her young life.

Their side: kill an innocent, and think it of no consequence.



Our side: serve and protect. To the end.

3 Cheers for Australian Men!



The above photo was brought to my attention by Cinnamon Stillwell, who is a founding member of the 911 Neocon Group. Sort of sad to see that some foreigners can be more loving of America than some of the natives.

A Video You Won't Want to Miss

Via Classical Values I found a video that tackles the topic of:
The Worst Job in America
It isn't what you think.

Warning: The subject is important, and is treated in a serious way, but the language is, at times, raw. You are warned: NSFW.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Merck Vaccine Update

Perry, and MANY others, are still wrongly calling the HPV vaccine a "cancer" vaccine.

That's like calling sunblock a "cancer" cure - after all, it stops sunburn, which CAN lead to skin cancers, doesn't it? FoxNews.com reports
"When a company comes to me and says we have a cure for cancer,
Well, no, that's a POSSIBLE preventive of SOME cancers.

Assuming it works. Yeah, I know, the 411 is that it stops women from being infected with HPV strains that cause 70% of cervical cancers. But, I'm a little suspicious. There's a big difference between theoretical effectiveness and real-use effectiveness.

For example:

  • There's the widely known adage that nature abhors a vacuum. In scientist's lingo, an empty niche must be filled. Will another virus slip into the open slot?

  • Will the targeted viruses do what many viruses do, and mutate? Therefore rendering said protection invalid.

  • Will boosters be needed? Most vaccines need to be periodically updated. In fact, the suggested update will need to be scheduled just when those 11 and 12 year old girls are hitting their peak of sexual activity.

    And, FYI, MOST booster shots are not given. The now-vulnerable person is an adult, and decides to do what most 20-somethings do - spend the cash that could protect their health on wild times, living expenses, college costs, cars, etc.

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Mardi Gras

In our family, we have always celebrated Mardi Gras. It's a holiday that allows us to indulge our appetites, as a preparation for the denials of Lent.

This year, I feel the absence of my husband more than ever. I enjoyed the extra candy bar, a few drinks, and clearing out the fridge of high-calorie stuff. But it wasn't the same without him.

Fortunately, he'll be here next Sunday, for good. He'll be retired by then, and able to work in SC. We're both working to clear up loose ends before the reunion.

Maybe next year, we'll go to LA to see what the real Mardi Gras is like. It's not that far that we can't do it.

A Floating Memorial



This ship
was built using scrap steel from the World Trade Center.
The above quote comes from PC Free Zone, where I also found the photo.
The ship's motto? "Never Forget"

Monday, February 19, 2007

Guard the Borders

Today is the weekly Buard the Borders Blogburst. I have to mention the enormous amount of work that Heidi puts in to make this weekly event possible. If you enjoy these, please take the time to go to Heidi's site, and tell her how much you appreciate her hard work.

The Border Patrol Case: Who’s Pulling The Strings?

By Heidi Thiess of Euphoric Reality

Mexico.

That’s who.

Yes, you read that right. The latest information has uncovered the undue political pressure that Mexico put on our government, and how the White House easily caved. They didn’t even ask questions it seems. Here’s what happened:

After Aldrete-Davila was shot, he complained to someone who brought the “crime” to light (not his mommy, as Sutton has previously told us). That person contacted the Mexican government, which is currently in overdrive trying to portray a situation wherein the poor downtrodden people of Mexico are being brutally shot by cruel, evil Americans at the border - when all they want is a better life for their families. Wah. The Mexican government, seeing a golden opportunity to bring some pressure to bear upon the big, mean U.S. Border Patrol, immediately mobilized their diplomats to exert pressure on the American Consulate in Mexico City. The Consulate, in turn, contacted the State Department, who then informed the President. With me so far?

Bush then called in the Department of Justice and his old Texas buddy, the Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Alberto Gonzales called in his hired gun, Johnny Sutton, who then crafted a prosecution virtually from thin air. Sutton’s agenda was furthered immeasurably by Assistant U.S. Attorney Debra Kanof, who has previously shown no compunction about fabricating fraudulent cases, lying and suborning testimony in her cases, and manipulating the media. Kanof has played an integral part in undermining the integrity and fairness of the criminal proceedings in multiple cases, the most prominent being the Border Patrol case. And she has done so with impunity, under the direction of Johnny Sutton.

We were lied to (surprise, surprise) when we were told that the only reason this case came to light is because DHS uncovered evidence that Ramos and Compean tried to “cover up” their “crime”. That, as we now know, is a lie. What really happened is that the White House is kowtowing to political pressure from Mexico, no doubt aided by Bush’s own personal agenda to erase the border. This rotten, trumped-up case against Ramos and Compean goes all the way to highest levels of our American government. Donald Collins ventures to say that this case has all the potential of Watergateto bring down this Administration. I agree.

Why would there be pressure from Mexico to prosecute two distinguished Border Patrol agents long after they had tried to apprehend a fleeing drug dealer—whom they shot and wounded but who escaped, leaving his drug swag behind?

This story is just breaking and will doubtless be subject to amplification. But—

“In an interview with Grassfire.org’s Steve Elliott (see audio above, transcript below), Corsi explained that no action was taken for days following the incident at the border. In fact the agents’ actions were considered ‘normal’ and the reporting ‘acceptable’ until Mexico intervened. Says Corsi, ‘Then on March 4, 2005 the request came through from the Mexican Consulate to the U.S. consulate in Mexico demanding an investigation on the basis that the Mexican Consulate was bringing forth Davila and wanted the agents to be punished.’ [ Mexican Government Involved In Initiation Of Prosecution Of Agents Ramos And Compean]

Could this be another example of the Committee to Re-Elect the President? Remember how then Attorney General John Mitchell used the money raised by this committee as hush money for the burglars? The famous duo of Woodward and Bernstein then “followed the money” to bring down a Presidency!

What Corsi is saying suggests the same thing. Follow the money–the big money which big business has paid to keep our borders open–because the apparent motivation for this outrageous prosecution of these two Border Patrol agents is to intimidate all our Border Patrol agents from apprehending these illegal crossers. Obviously, Bush wants an open border, as does Mexico. [See Mexico demanded U.S. prosecute sheriff, agents| Documents show role of consulate in cases of Gilmer Hernandez and Ramos-Compean, WorldNetDaily.com, By Jerome R. Corsi, February 13, 2007]

Meanwhile, the mysteriously unavailable transcripts are starting to come out. The official transcripts are here, and LoneWacko has wisely cached them, in case they mysteriously go “missing”. Lou Dobbs’ staff, of CNN, has begun the arduous task of sifting through 3000 pages of documents, and it’s becoming very clear why the prosecution, together with a complicit court-room judge, have worked so long and hard to suppress these transcripts:

The nearly 3,000 pages of transcripts in the Ramos and Compean case show that even before the trial started, several key rulings went against the Border Patrol agents. For example, defense attorneys wanted to be able to talk about how dangerous the border region is where the agents encountered the illegal alien drug smuggler. It’s an area, of course, with a well-documented history of violent confrontations between drug cartels and law enforcement.

But prosecutors objected to that. And the judge agreed. She ordered defense attorneys to refrain from any mention of what she called the alleged dangerousness of the border between the United States and Mexico.

Another passage shows just how eager prosecutors were to grant immunity to Mexican drug smuggler Oscar Aldrete-Davila and throw the book at the Border Patrol agents. Assistant U.S. attorney Debra Kanof said to the judge, “… we basically had to beg him. He didn’t want to come and talk to us about this. And so we basically gave him blanket immunity for any drug or immigration crime that he might have been committing on that day.”

Agent Compean’s defense attorney pointed out how the government could have sought up to 40 years in prison for the drug smuggler. And an attorney for Agent Ramos said the drug smuggler “could be prosecuted for possession of some 700 pounds of marijuana, for smuggling it into the country, for illegally entering the United States. All of these actions are actions which the government apparently has chosen to forgive in order to obtain his testimony against these defendants, the agents.”

In fact, prosecutors sought to prevent defense attorneys from even disclosing that Aldrete-Davila was transporting 750 pounds of marijuana when he encountered the Border Patrol agents. The judge did allow those facts into evidence, but only on a limited basis.

Also, if case this case doesn’t make you sick enough, go read about one of Johnny Sutton’s other victims.

I asked the other day, who was paying Johnny Sutton to set-up our law enforcement officers in total crap cases? I thought maybe the drug cartels were paying him off, or maybe the Mexican government, since they’re always meddling in our national affairs. I knew this case smelled bad, but the stench of corruption goes all the way up to the White House. When I started covering this case back in August, I never dreamed the Bush administration was behind it all, driving the corruption in West Texas courts, where dirty attorneys collude with the worst criminal element in Mexico to attack American citizens! This is a betrayal of the worst kind.

This has been a production of the Guard the Borders Blogburst. It was started by Euphoric Reality, to educate the public about the vulnerabilities of our open borders during an age of global terrorism and the resultant threat to our national security and sovereignty. If you are concerned about the lapses in our national security and the socio-economic burden of unchecked illegal immigration, join our blog syndicate. Send an email with your blog name and url to admin at guardtheborders dot com..

"Global Warming Cult"

Ellen Goodman is solidly lined up with the Global Warming Cult - a group of conspiracy theorists that believe that only a dark conspiracy against "the truth about global warming" prevents the world from bowing down to the blackmail, completely trashing our economy, and frantically beating our chests in a liberal version of the old Catholic "mea culpa, mea culpa". Her "proof"? (thanks to Doug Patten, writing for Human Events - I initially forgot that citation - sorry, Doug).
Goodman refers to the gaps between what she calls "Republican science and Democratic science," and is amazed that "23 percent of college-educated Republicans believe the warming is due to humans, while 75 percent of college-educated Democrats believe it."
Well, I hate to bring up facts in a good red-state, blue-state rant, but has she considered that the college-educated Democrats are MUCH less likely to have majored in math, science, and engineering? And, therefore, the college-educated Republicans might actually know something about the science involved? And that might be the basis of their "belief" (hate to use that word - faith is something you believe, no matter what evidence is presented. Science, on the other hand, is a working assumption, based on evidence. It is readily thrown out, if the facts justify it).

Oops! There's that naughty "F" word - FACTS!

This was a surprise!

I found this quiz at Rhianna's.








gURL.comI took the "Retro Runway" quiz on gURL.com
My fashion is inspired by...
the '20s

Are you more tomboy than full out fashionista? Do you have a favorite pair of jeans that factor into every outfit? If so, the 1920s is the era for you. Known for shortened hemlines, wild times and a rebellious freedom, this decade shook up many general assumptions about gender. Read more...

Which fashion era do you belong in?

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Tech Support - the EARLY days

This YouTube video is in German, I believe. It is don't-be-drinking-anything-while-watching-it funny. It answers the question:
What did Tech Support do during earlier change-overs of operating systems?
Found on The Ironic Catholic. They've earned a spot on the blogroll, I think.

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Video supporting the Border Patrol Agents

On Tammy Bruce's website, I found a video from Rep. Tom Tancredo, urging people to send a message of support to the jailed Border Patrol agents. Browse through the many old posts I have regarding their conviction, and make your own judgement about whether they should be freed.

I hadn't really started looking at candidates for President in 2008 yet, but this video persuades me that this man deserves a look. If you go to his website, you can not only send a supportive message, but also take a look at the ONLY candidate who will go on record about illegal immigration.

What FUN!

I did something this week I've always wanted to, but never have.

In a phone call to my sister, who is in Cleveland, and suffering from the infamous Lake Effect Snow, I said:
The spring blossoms are just appearing here this week (in South Carolina)
It's a lot of fun doing that - the recipients of that information WANT to kill you, but are too far away to make any threats credible.

Here's a video from YouTube, showing the effects of the Valentine's Day Blizzard, which closed the schools and much of the city for several days. The heavy breathing on the video is due to the effort involved in lifting the snow. Each flake is relatively light, but, collectively, they are painfully heavy (particularly if it's what is called a "wet snow").

My husband took most of the day on Thursday, just trying to get his van free enough to get out of the driveway. That's the part of the North I REALLY don't miss.

Fighting Words

I found this YouTube video, which takes the song "Fighting Words" by Trace Adkins, and puts it to pictures of soldiers. I don't normally listen to country music, but I enjoyed this .

I especially liked the ending, where Trace says:
Son, the 1st Amendment protects you from the government, not from me
That's a fact about the Constitution that many have forgotten. If the owner of a media outlet declines to let you spew your drivel on HIS dime, you lose. You can't compel a private entity to let you "express yourself".

Similarly, the government can't force you to shut up. However, the average citizen doesn't have to listen to you, respect you, or endure your theatrical posings.

We have the right to walk away, thinking you a fool. We even have the right to use OUR 1st Amendment rights to call you a fool.

Finally, a few sensible words

I've been skimming the headlines about the recent shooting in a Salt Lake City mall, and am gradually coming to many of the same conclusions as Thomas Fleming, of Hard Right!. A short excerpt:
Political liberty cannot survive in a country in which public “debate” consists of statements made by dishonest law enforcement agencies, a lying and ignorant press corps, and the self-abusing white trash who infest the blogosphere.
In the days of the late Soviet Empire, they had a national newspaper, Pravda - the name meant Truth. The name, of course, was a joke - it was the official "truth" that the Soviet government wanted to spread - what we in the US call propaganda.

Too often, we are surrounded by - not news - but propaganda. Contrary to the Soviet experience, it is LESS likely that the propaganda is promoted by government. It is more often the role of newspapers, various TV media outlets, and all-too-many in the blogosphere to spread these slanted version of "truth".

Sometimes, the media outlets actually believe the "truth". They leap eagerly on the reports that verify their opinion, and publish them widely. This is true of many who unthinkingly spout the "data" about Global Warming or the Fact that the War on Terror is A Failure (which I DON'T believe). But, in all fairness, the dupes actually DO believe their own reports.

Sometimes, the media actively work to plant "information" they KNOW to be false. That appears to be the situation with the Rueters photographers, who used Photoshop to spread their lies.

Warning to all:
If the news source is not American, it really needs to be examined carefully for accuracy and bias. Most non-American news outlets do not work from our own American premise of a free press. The presses are owned by partisans.

Lastly, and most commonly, those that spread false "truth" are simply too lazy to do more than re-print the press releases of those with an agenda. They make no effort to find out the facts.

Great News!

Despite the frightening appearance of his feet, and the fact that they were totally numb for the first 24 hours, my grandson is home and recovering. It seems that he will be fine. Thanks to everyone who added their prayers for his recovery.

Friday, February 16, 2007

Family Crisis

I can't sleep. My grandson has been admitted to the hospital, with frostbite in his feet.

The school's bus was very late, leaving kids stranded in the cold. To make it worse, they failed to get him medical attention all day. AND, they never called the parents to let them know he was injured.

I've been searching the web, looking for information on frostbite. It's serious - he has no feeling in his feet. But, it's a case where they have to wait and see what the outcome will be. There's really no way to predict what will happen.

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Virtual Adoption?

I really don't know quite how I feel about this. The idea is that, for $40 a month, people can connect with an orphan online, yet allow their birth country to keep the children there, as opposed to leaving, as did Madonna's adopted child.

I suppose the idea is no stranger than the "adoption" of orphans, who then correspond with the sponsor once a month. And, because the orphan will have some regular contact with the person, via computer video hook-up, it may be of some benefit, as they will gain the chance to practice their English (a VERY useful skill in many 3rd World countries).

I tried Googling the group, but got little information - I'm a little skeptical of a high-tech solution that has no web presence. I'll check back on this in a few months - it may be that this effort is in the early stages. If I can't find any more about it in a few months - don't waste your money. I can't imagine that they would be legit.

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Guard the Borders Blogburst

By Heidi Thiess



We are still closely watching the Border Patrol case, especially after last week's explosive news that the DHS had lied to Congressmen who were looking into the case. Close on the heels of that shocking revelation, we noted that US Attorney Johnny Sutton, the prosecutor in this case, has lied openly and repeatedly about this case to the media. In an effort to counter Sutton's lies, here is one of his favorite public statements about Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean deconstructed:

"These guys did very serious crimes and once anybody who knows all the facts of this case — the fact that they shot at an unarmed guy 15 times, lied about it, covered it up, destroyed the evidence ... it's hard for me to imagine a prosecutor would look the other way," he said.

1. It has not been proven that the drug smuggler was unarmed. Sutton has been unable to prove it, yet he states it like it's a fact. Furthermore, two of the drug smuggler's own family members have made statements that he has been running drugs since he was 13 or 14 and has never smuggled drugs without being armed.

2. Compean and Ramos DID NOT LIE about shooting the drug smuggler. They didn't know that they had until almost a month later! And it's still not proven that Ramos is the one who shot the drug smuggler.

3. The DID NOT try to "cover it up". They verbally reported to their superiors that they fired their weapons.

4. They DID NOT destroy evidence. Sutton has been harping on this because he claims that the site of the shooting was a "crime scene" and that the BP agents knowingly altered the scene of the crime by picking up their shell casings. That is FALSE. The agents, including the agents that were with them at the time of the shooting, did NOT designate the area a crime scene, since they did NOT know that the drug smuggler had been shot.

5. In fact, far from lying about the incident or "covering it up", Ramos and Compean followed procedures exactly:
U.S. Border Patrol firearms policy specifically states that agents are prohibited from filing a report if a shooting incident takes place and that only an oral report to supervisors is required.

"Ensure that supervisory personnel or INS investigating officers are aware that employees involved in a shooting incident shall not be required or allowed to submit a written statement of the circumstances surrounding the incident," according to the firearms policy. "All written statements regarding the incident shall be prepared by the local INS investigating officers and shall be based upon an interview of the INS employee."

INS refers to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which oversaw the Border Patrol prior to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. The shooting policy has remained unchanged.

Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General documents obtained by the paper show that all nine agents on the scene at the time of the shooting - including two supervisors - knew shots had been fired.

Oscar Garcia, El Paso Border Patrol Union representative with Local 1929 and a firearms instructor, said that the Report of Apprehension or Seizure filed by Compean and Ramos on the day of the incident was accurate. Garcia stated that the agent's omission of the shooting in the drug seizure report followed firearms policy.

"Our own policy prohibits them from filing any report on the shooting incident," Garcia said. "The U.S. Attorney's assertion that they covered up the incident by not filing a report is ridiculous."

6. On Saturday, it was further revealed that two of the Border Patrol agents that had testified on behalf of the prosecution against Ramos and Compean also lied in their testimony during the trial.

Two Border Patrol agents who testified against two co-workers convicted of shooting a drug smuggler will be fired for changing their stories about events surrounding the shooting, according to documents obtained by the Daily Bulletin.

Sources inside the Border Patrol also say Oscar Juarez, a third agent who testified against Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, resigned from the agency last month shortly before he was to be fired.

All three agents gave sworn testimony against Ramos and Compean for the U.S. Attorney's Office, which successfully prosecuted the shooting case in March. The agents were given immunity in exchange for their testimony despite changing their accounts of the incident several times.

"When you give deals to witnesses like immunity, the government usually gets the testimony (it wants)," said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, a former judge and prosecutor. "This case is a perfect example."
What else is Johnny Sutton up to, besides being a bald-faced liar and coercing others to lie? As we've already reported in our previous coverage, he's an over-zealous prosecutor of American law enforcement officers who are doing their best to protect America and themselves from coyotes, drug smugglers, and the other criminals turning our borders into a war zone. Ramos and Compean are not Sutton's only victims:
A Texas deputy sheriff who fired shots at a fleeing vehicle after the driver tried to run him down faces 10 years in prison for injuring one of the passengers, a Mexican national being smuggled illegally into the United States.

The U.S. attorney, who won lengthy prison terms last year for two U.S. Border Patrol agents in the shooting of a drug-smuggling suspect, also prosecuted Edwards County Deputy Sheriff Guillermo F. Hernandez, who is to be sentenced next month.

The deputy's boss, Sheriff Donald G. Letsinger, said his officer -- who had been on the job for a year -- "followed the letter of the law" in defending himself in the April 2005 incident and questioned why the government brought charges.

"This is a fine young man, and I just don't believe he committed the wrong of which he was accused," Sheriff Letsinger said. "I have never had anything hurt me so badly as this prosecution. We've got to make this right."

Rep. Ted Poe, Texas Republican, called the prosecution and conviction of Hernandez, known to his friends as "Gilmer," "another example of how the federal government is more concerned about people [who are] illegally invading America than it is about the men who protect America."

"Once again, our government is on the wrong side of the border war," Mr. Poe said.

The deputy's Dec. 1 conviction has enraged his hometown of Rocksprings, Texas, population 1,250, where "Free Gilmer" signs have been posted. The Baptist church is paying the deputy's mortgage and others have come up with costs for the family's truck, propane and water bills. Hernandez, 25, and his wife, Ashley, have a 4-month-old daughter.

"The town is outraged that this has happened to our deputy," said the Rev. Albert Green, pastor at the First Baptist Church. "Those people were in this country illegally, and they tried to run him down. They were the criminals, but the prosecutors made our deputy out to be the criminal."

"I do not know a single person who doesn't feel Gilmer was prosecuted for doing his job," said Mr. Green, who is the deputy's pastor. "I do not know a finer, more well-behaved gentleman. He would not purposely or willfully hurt anyone."

U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, appointed in October 2001 by President Bush, said Hernandez fired shots at the vehicle as it sped away "knowing it was occupied with the nine individuals," at least seven of whom were illegal aliens -- some of whom later were called to testify for the government.

Hernandez was convicted after a jury trial in U.S. District Court in Del Rio, Texas, 75 miles southwest of Rocksprings -- found guilty of violating "under the color of law" the civil rights of Maricela Rodriguez-Garcia, a Mexican national.
Furthermore, those same illegals LIED about Hernandez shooting at them after they crashed their vehicle and fled on foot:
Sheriff Letsinger also said the Rangers and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents, using dogs and metal detectors, found four shell casings at the traffic stop site but none at the crash site -- discounting claims by two of the vehicle's occupants that Hernandez fired shots at them as they fled the vehicle.
Nevertheless, Sutton treated the testimony of illegals already proven to be liars as inviolable, while painting Hernandez as a "rogue cop" (sound familiar?) and has imprisoned Hernandez for doing his job. But it doesn't stop there. Sutton has a very dirty track record. In 2004, in an effort to protect one of his star witnesses - a Mexican informant - he covered up the informant's participation in 15 tortures and murders at the "House of Death" in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.

Apparently, no crime is too vile for Sutton when it comes to protecting his informants. Just as he protected the notorious drug smuggler Aldrete-Davila and provided him with taxpayer funded benefits such as a vehicle and a green card, so he has previously protected and paid off an informant that he KNOWS is a mass murderer. In fact, Sutton's office has gone to great lengths to conceal the heinous crimes of their informant and have moved him frequently to keep him away from other American law enforcement agencies, such as the DEA. Furthermore, Sutton has been involved in making huge payments in "hush money" to this informant - over $50,000 - which was disguised as a payment to a different informant who was already dead. Now Sutton has gone to his high-level contacts inside the Department of Justice (I've previously revealed his insider connections with Alberto Gonzales and George Bush) in order to shut down a DEA officer who is brought serious charges against Sutton for his complicity in covering up torture and murder.
Several sources within the Department of Homeland Security, the parent agency of ICE, confirmed that the informant Lalo was moved around frequently after DEA was forced to evacuate its agents from Juarez and the full extent of his – and the ICE agents’ and U.S. prosecutor’s – complicity in the murders became known to DEA.

“They (the ICE agents and U.S. prosecutor Juanita Fielden) couldn’t get rid of him (Lalo), so they tried to control him, and they moved him from place to place, to Albuquerque (N.M.) then to San Antonio (Texas), so no one could talk to him,” one source says.

Then, the first hints of the informant’s role in the murders in Juárez hit the media in the spring of 2004, and the cover-up went into full swing, according to sources. The problem is that the informant Lalo had leverage because of what he knew. He was demanding more money, sources indicate.

That’s what allegedly led one of Lalo’s ICE handlers, a high-level supervisor in El Paso, sometime between March and June of 2004, to put a payment through to him using a dead informant’s “source number,” which is a number assigned to all confidential sources in order to keep their identity concealed.

Although it is not clear how much money was given to Lalo through this means, sources indicate that it was discovered by someone at ICE headquarters in Washington, D.C. The sources add that because the payment required headquarters’ approval, the amount likely exceeded $50,000.

“The confidential informant (Lalo) said the government owed him money,” one source says. “They decided they better pay him or he would start talking.”

According to law enforcement sources, a high-level ICE supervisor in El Paso allegedly sent out the word to members of his staff that no one was to cooperate with any investigation into the informant’s role in the murders, or they would face discipline. Ironically, that supervisor has since been promoted, sources indicate.

To date, no one directly involved in overseeing the informant has been brought up on criminal charges, at least no such charges have been publicly announced. One field agent has been put on administrative leave, however. Law enforcers familiar with the case believe that Hispanic agent, unless he has documentation to prove otherwise, will likely be the only person set up to take the fall.

Any investigation into U.S. prosecutors in this matter, of course, would have to go through Sutton’s office – absent the appointment of a special prosecutor – or through the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which is under the charge of San Antonio native Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Given those realities, most law enforcers who spoke with Narco News believe that, absent intervention by Congress, nearly everyone involved will get a pass on the House of Death murders.

“If Sandy Gonzalez or I had done something like this, we’d be in prison,” says a former high-ranking DEA official who asked to remain anonymous. “When a U.S. attorney is incompetent, there are no sanctions. You have the Department of Justice that is supposed to control these U.S. Attorneys, but they don’t when it comes down to nut-cutting.”

As for Sandalio Gonzalez, he can’t believe justice is being sacrificed in this case, that some 15 murdered people are deemed expendable for the sake of salvaging careers and promoting political ambitions.

“If someone in Congress is not willing to take a stand on this, the nation as a whole loses some integrity in the process,” he stresses. “This isn’t about national security, spies or intelligence work, this is police work, right here. There are bodies out there.”
All the details of the above case are presented here. There is no crime too vile - not drug smuggling, not torture, and not mass murder - for U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton to overlook in order to further his career. How many lives does he get to destroy with impunity before he's held accountable? U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton is a despicable and incredibly corrupt individual. And because of his long-held and close ties with President George W. Bush, and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and other high-ranking Texas politicians in D.C., Johnny Sutton gets a free pass for crimes that would put any other American into prison for the rest of their lives! Who is paying Johnny Sutton for his crimes?


This has been a production of the Guard the Borders syndicate. It was started by Euphoric Reality to educate the public about the vulnerabilities of our open borders during an age of global terrorism and the resultant threat to our national security and sovereignty. If you are concerned about the lapses in our national security and the socio-economic burden of unchecked illegal immigration, join our blog syndicate. Send an email with your blog name and url to admin at guardtheborders dot com.

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Free Speech Around the World

On the Instapundit site, I ran across this reference to Google's double standard on freedom of speech. For a full account from the British man whose videos can no longer been seen on YouTube, Click Here. The man seems to be flummoxed; he speaks hesitatingly, and, several times, flounders around for his thoughts. I have to believe that he is devastated by the corporate denial of service.

For, that's what this is - a CORPORATE decision to remove his access. YouTube is NOT a public entity; they have the complete right to refuse his use of his service.

Which is not to say that I'm in agreement with the Google decision - feel free to contact them to urge re-instatement of his account. But, this is NOT a case of censorship - that's a decision by a government to repress speech or writing.

Other accounts of the action are at Slashdot, whose story about Google's actions is linked.

I'm hoping for a free-speech advocate (or foundation) to start up an alternative to Google's YouTube. Be warned, however, they will also likely host videos that exploit women, are incredibly gross, over-the-top incendiary, politically marginal - perhaps with doubtful conspiracy theories or mysterious plots. Of course, they will have the option to put limits on the content, but profitability is the alternative tug on their emotions.

A better suggestion may be for a free-speech foundation to host space for the rejected. With bandwidth getting so cheap, it couldn't cost that much. Of course, the videomakers will lose the access of YouTube - and the audience. They'll find their audience is like the PBS audience - limited, self-selected, and out of touch with the mainstream. Not unlike Nick Gisburne.

Sunday Catch-up

On Sundays, I have several destinations - church, home to clear up for the coming week, and Eternity Road, a blog that is hard to describe, but is best envisioned as a quiet chat with a philosophical friend. Fran Poretto was one of the first bloggers to encourage me to write, and is a place that I can visit, 'set' a spell, and get comfortable in my slippers.

For health and work reasons, I hadn't been checking in on Sundays. So I missed some gems, including the following:
A genius is a man of great intellect who can see the patterns in Nature that others miss. He is also guaranteed to be hopelessly incompetent with a hammer, a wrench, or a soldering iron. This has been proved by Science.

It's an old maxim that God must surely love the common people; after all, He made so many of them. If 'twere so, then God must love cockroaches, syphilis spirochetes, and federal regulations at least as much. Perhaps the logic needs some work.

When was the last time you heard anyone say "It's none of my business," without immediately saying "But..." ?
Click on the post title to check out a remarkable man's thoughts. Don't forget to check out the short fiction - well worth the time.

Saturday, February 10, 2007

Anna Nicole Smith

I'm sitting here crying. Yeah, crying.

Not because a celebrity died. Heck, we all die. But, because, for the first time in a long time, I've come to realize how I had a part in her death.

MY responsibility?

Yeah. All of ours.

Anna Nicole wasn't a very nice woman. She was loud, vulgar, and crude. She frantically sought the spotlight. When the attention shifted to others, she acted more and more outrageously to get the focus back on her.

So, why do I care?

Because I snickered and laughed at her trashy ways and booze-fueled antics. I formed a part of the audience that looked at another human being, one who was acting out her loneliness and neediness, and dismissed her. Saw right through her. Acted as though her pain was there for my amusement.

I never saw that lonely, love-starved person as someone who needed to feel loved. When her son died, she reached the end of her ability to cope.

Nobody cared.

Not even me.

Well, I shouldn't say that nobody cared.

God cared.

He loved her. Even when she was acting unlovable.

A few years ago, I stopped watching a lot of TV. I got tired of the gossip, the appeal to low tastes, the pseudo-news.

But, Anna Nicole was hard to miss. When I did see her, all I thought was, "What a mess." And I ignored her. Never said a prayer for her.

No human being is not worthy of a prayer. That's the basis of Christianity. We all are capable of redemption.

It's the job of Christians to help, not scorn. It's our job to see the need in the fallen, and to help them, if we can.

From The Salon, written by Cintra Wilson
The yellow press is in shock, as if it can't believe that the "tabloid life" of the woman Radar referred to as "gossip's golden goose" is actually over. Its members can't seem to wrap themselves around the idea that she isn't theirs to abuse anymore, or that somewhere under the nipple tape and lip gloss, a human being is dead enough, now, to deserve a few seconds of more than just token respect.
It's a sad commentary on our society when the most decent and humane send-off came from Playboy founder,
Hugh Hefner, at least, had some class, issuing a statement about how much Smith meant to him personally and to the whole "Playboy family.

I said this would happen

From From Breitbart.com:
GOTHENBURG, Sweden, Feb. 5 (UPI) -- A 26-year-old man in Sweden will face assault charges and abortion law violations after he allegedly slipped his pregnant girlfriend abortion pills.

The Local said that the unidentified man allegedly mixed some of the prescription pills into his girlfriend's food after learning she was pregnant, leading her to nearly suffer a miscarriage.

Once the woman ingested the pills, she required medical attention after becoming nauseous and starting to bleed.

The paper said the man will now face the charges in Vanersborg District Court in western Sweden's Vastra Gotaland County.
Just checked the archives, looking for that long-ago post - couldn't find it. Maybe I started a draft, but abandoned it.

I have long had some suspicions about the potential of this to harm women. Who's to say whether the person getting the drug over the counter is not going to administer it without the agreement (or even the knowledge) of the pregnant woman? Men have long tried to eliminate responsibility for pregnancy by persuading women to abort, coercing them to abort, and arrangiing "accidents" that terminate pregnancy.

One of the classic novels, An American Tragedy, adapted for film as A Place in the Sun, deals with a pregnancy undesired by the father of the child. He eliminates the problem by killing the mother.



How much simpler, and less likely to bring about investigation, to cause a miscarriage. If the woman isn't the suspicious type, the father may very well get away with it.

This was a surprise!

I found this quiz on Dappled Things. Haven't done one of these in a long time.















Katharine Hepburn

You scored 16% grit, 33% wit, 38% flair, and 23% class!

You are the fabulously quirky and independent woman of character. You go your own way, follow your own drummer, take your own lead. You stand head and shoulders next to your partner, but you are perfectly willing and able to stand alone. Others might be more classically beautiful or conventionally woman-like, but you possess a more fundamental common sense and off-kilter charm, making interesting men fall at your feet. You can pick them up or leave them there as you see fit. You share the screen with the likes of Spencer Tracy and Cary Grant, thinking men who like strong women.


Find out what kind of classic leading man you'd make by taking the
Classic Leading Man Test.

















My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
free online datingfree online dating
You scored higher than 99% on grit
free online datingfree online dating
You scored higher than 99% on wit
free online datingfree online dating
You scored higher than 99% on flair
free online datingfree online dating
You scored higher than 99% on class




Link: The Classic Dames Test written by gidgetgoes on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test

Monday, February 05, 2007

Guard the Borders Blogburst

DIRTY TEXAS POLITICS: PART TWO

UPDATES TO THE BORDER PATROL CASE

By Heidi at Euphoric Reality

All audio files pertaining to this Border Patrol update are archived at Euphoric Reality. They are interviews with Congressman Ted Poe and investigative journalist Dr. Jerome Corsi as conducted by Houston & Dallas radio talk show hosts Edd Hendee and Pat Gray for KSEV and KVEC radio.

Quite a lot has been developing over the past two weeks, since GTB published a list of highly suspicious inconsistencies in the prosecution's case against Border Patrol agents Compean and Ramos. Namely, the prosecution's case is unraveling. And none too soon, since both agents have been incarcerated in federal prisons since the first week of January, one in Ohio and the other in Mississippi, far from loved ones.

Before we get into the details of new evidence recently come to light, I need to submit a correction to my previous coverage, and an update.

CORRECTION: First, I cited the irregularity of the court being unable to finish the transcripts for the case in the six months since the trial. (Usually, transcripts are completed within a matter of days.) In fact, it has not been six months since the trial, but six months since the sentencing. It has actually been 11 months since the trial was completed in March of 2006. During that time frame, the court's reason for the unfinished court transcripts has been that "the court transcriptionist has been sick." I submit to you that after 11 months of "illness" - so ill as to make moving one's fingers feebly across a keyboard impossible - someone needs to get that poor transcriptionist a doctor!

UPDATE: I had previously reported that Congressman Michael McCaul, Chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Investigations, had failed to subpoena documents concerning the case, and refused to hold a hearing to review the case, which was within his purview. I noted that Michael McCaul is a former employee of U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton. Since then, McCaul has made public statements in Houston, TX, that under the auspices of his position as Chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Investigations he repeatedly (four times) requested to review the documents concerning the case, and for months, he was stonewalled. He said he trusted his fellow Republicans, including the DHS-IG Richard Skinner and the DHS chief Michael Chertoff when they gave him every assurance that he would be provided with the trial documentation. He admits he made a mistake to trust them, when he sent letters instead of issuing a subpoena.

Unfortunately, now that McCaul is no longer chairman of that committee it is too late. After the Democrats took control in January, he’s been told by Richard Skinner, the Inspector General: “You’re not the chairman anymore. You’re in the minority. You’ll have to get the information through an FOIA request.”


Meanwhile, the feds have continued to stonewall a group of concerned U.S. Congressmen who have repeatedly requested the documentation surrounding the case. Below is audio of Congressman Ted Poe, citing the delay tactics and the unprecedented behavior of US Attorney Johnny Sutton. As well, Poe has already submitted an emergency FOIA request.
Poe expressed concern that he is not sure the jury in the Ramos and Compean case got all the information the government had concerning the relevant facts of the case.

"When the government does backroom deals with criminals, like this habitual drug offender from Mexico, the public, and especially the defendants, have an absolute right to know what the deal was and how it came about," he said. "Maybe the jury heard it, and maybe the jury didn't hear it, but we will find out."

Many of the factual aspects of the case are now being disputed by investigators, including the ballistics investigation into the weapons fired and the round subsequently extracted from the left buttocks and right groin of the drug smuggler by a U.S. Army doctor.

"For all we know," Poe commented, "the drug smuggler seemed to be pointing back at the Border Patrol agents with what could have been something in his hand based on the ballistics reports I am seeing. U.S. Attorney (Johnny) Sutton says the guy was shot in the buttocks. Well, now we find out that that isn't exactly accurate. The guy was shot from 'cheek-to-cheek,' or maybe from the side of his left buttocks to his right groin. There's a big difference in those two statements. You don't have to be a ballistics expert to understand that the body was turned if the bullet went from one cheek to the other cheek, or from the left cheek to the right groin."

Poe repeated that his office was determined to get to the bottom of these investigative questions. "In the big scheme of things, let's assume that the Border Patrol agents violated policy. Assume they didn't file a report even though the law says that they were only required to file an oral report to the supervisor," he asked. "There was no requirement in this instance that they file a written report. Okay, let's discipline the Border Patrol agents, you bet. Let's give them three-day's suspension like the rules call for."

Poe questioned the judgment of U.S. Attorney Sutton, asking "why does the federal government here have a choice to prosecute a guy bringing in a million dollars worth of drugs or prosecute Border Patrol agents who were doing their job, yet the government chose to prosecute the Border Patrol? "Why is the federal government spending so many federal taxpayer resources prosecuting federal Border Patrol agents trying to stop drug smugglers, especially when it means making deals with drug offenders?" he continued. "That's the bigger question in my mind."

Poe agreed the prosecution would put a chilling effect on other Border Patrol agents.

"That's a war zone on the Texas-Mexico border," he said. "It's an undeclared war that's taking place. You have aggressive Border Patrol agents like Ramos and Compean, who are protecting the country, and yet they are vilified and prosecuted by our own government. The next time you have a similar situation with a different Border Patrol agent, the Border Patrol agent will hesitate before they put their life or their career in danger."

Poe called the Ramos and Compean case "the best news drug dealers have ever heard."
Additionally, it is noted that White House press secretary Tony Snow has repeatedly dismissed questions surrounding the Border Patrol case and has said several times that if one were to "read the transcripts", one would see that the agents were properly charged and convicted. According to Tony Snow (read The White House), the Border Patrol agents were "the bad guys". However, since then, it has become obvious that Tony Snow has himself not read the court transcripts for one very simple reason - they do not exist! Tony Snow was bluffing!

Furthermore, Tony Snow and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) have both said that the "legal system has worked" in this case, as will the appellate process. That's all well and good, except that the process is broken! Did you know that the defense attorneys cannot file an appeal until they have all the facts of the case in hand? That includes the non-existent court transcripts. The Border Patrol agents, currently incarcerated, are being denied their right to an appeal, because the Western Texas court refuses to complete the court transcripts!

Below I list seven major inconsistencies (in addition to the ones already documented in our previous coverage) in the tainted case U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton crafted against the Border Patrol agents. Dr. Jerome Corsi, the author of Unfit For Command, has done some deep investigative work on this case and has presented his factual findings in a series of articles published by World Net Daily. I understand that some readers typically dismiss WND coverage as being "too conservative", but I challenge anyone to read the findings and try to find holes in Corsi's investigation. I haven't found any yet.

Audio of a local radio interview with Dr. Jerome Corsi is included in an .mp3 file below.

1. Johnny Sutton has claimed over and over, both in public statements and in his infamous fact sheet, that the drug smuggler was unarmed. Sutton has failed to prove that, yet continues to assert it as a fact of the case. It is NOT! Nor is it reasonable to believe a life-long criminal over two law enforcement officers, especially when the criminal is contradicted by statements from his own family, and by the known behavior of smugglers in the area. It is not reasonable.

2. Sutton has claimed that the drug smuggler, Aldrete-Davila, could not be tied to the van full of $1 million worth of dope. He also has said that the BP agents were unable to identify him.
Sutton told WND "there was no way we could prosecute" Aldrete-Davila.

"Ramos and Compean could not identify him," he said. "We found no fingerprints on the van, and he managed to escape, even though he had been shot in the behind by the agents."

Nevertheless, Sutton's office was able to track down Aldrete-Davila in Mexico and convince him to return to the U.S. to testify against Ramos and Compean. The bullet was removed from the smuggler's buttocks by a military physician in the U.S. so it could be introduced as evidence in the agents' trial.
How then, was Sutton able to later locate Aldrete-Davila in Mexico to offer him an immunity deal? If the drug smuggler could not be tied to the crime of smuggling drugs, how then could he be tied to the shooting incident with the BP agents?

3. Sutton claimed in court that BP agent Ramos was guilty of shooting Aldrete-Davila in the buttock. However, the ballistics analysis has been flagged as inconclusive, and contrary to Sutton's statements does not prove that the bullet came from Ramos' weapon.
WND: So, Compean shot 14 times and missed everybody, but Ramos shot one time and hit the drug dealer in the buttocks?

Sutton: That's correct.

WND: Is Ramos that much better a shot than Compean?

Sutton: Ramos is a marksman.
The results of the ballistics tests were reported in a letter written by Joseph J. J. Correa, a Criminalist IV with the Texas DPS El Paso Laboratory, March 18, 2005, and addressed to Brian D. Carter of DHS in El Paso.
The letter states Correa examined one fired copper-jacketed bullet presented to him by Carter on March 17, 2005. The letter identifies the victim shot by the bullet as "Osvaldo Aldrete."

In the letter, Correa notes that he was asked to determine the manufacture of the firearm that fired the submitted bullet.
Correa could not positively identify Ramos's weapon as the one that fired the submitted bullet. His report concludes:
The copper-jacketed bullet was fired from a barrel having six lands and grooves inclined to the right. The manufacturer of the firearm that fired the copper-jacketed bullet is unknown, but could include commonly encountered models of .40 S&W caliber FN/Browning, Beretta, Heckler & Koch, and Ruger pistols.
Despite the impossibility of identifying the weapon the bullet was fired from - it could've been any number of pistols from FOUR major arms manufacturers - DHS agent Christopher Sanchez lied under oath in an affidavit filed by DHS March 15, 2005, with the U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas. Special agent Christopher R. Sanchez swore the following:
Ballistics testing confirms a government-issued weapon belonging to U.S. Border Patrol Agent Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos, a 96D Beretta .40 caliber automatic pistol, serial number BER067069M, fired a bullet (a .40 caliber Smith & Wesson jacketed hollow point) which hit the victim in the left buttocks while he was attempting to flee to Mexico.
4. Sutton repeatedly has said there was no evidence at the scene that would have permitted his office to investigate, find, and prosecute Aldrete-Davila. He has also repeatedly claimed that no fingerprints were found inside the van. I noted in our previous coverage that that was highly unlikely - even impossible. Now, a DHS memo reveals that eleven fingerprints were found inside the van. The memo also documents that no fingerprint search was conducted on the vehicle until a full month after the Feb. 17, 2005, incident! That indicates no serious effort on Sutton's part to identify the driver of the van (thus identifying the criminal) and as well, highlights egregious mishandling of the chain of evidence.

5. Sutton cannot keep his own lies straight. He has recently stated that a Mexican lawyer brought Aldrete-Davila forward, without revealing the drug smuggler's identity, but would not cooperate until immunity had been granted. However, according to Sutton's own previous statements, Aldrete-Davila was identified by his family and life-long friend BP agent Rene Sanchez.
DHS investigative memos make clear that Border Patrol agent Rene Sanchez in Wilcox, Ariz., identified Aldrete-Davila only days after the Feb. 17, 2005 incident, obtaining his information through family connections. Sanchez grew up with Aldrete-Davila in Mexico.

The information about Aldrete-Davila's identity was then passed on by Sanchez to DHS special agent Christopher Sanchez, who went to Mexico and found Aldrete-Davila.

This Christopher Sanchez is the same DHS special agent the DHS memo on the fingerprints says received the videotape of the El Paso Police Department fingerprint search on the drug smuggler's abandoned vehicle.
6. Sutton has claimed that Compean and Ramos attempted to "cover-up" the fact that they discharged their weapons and has made a big deal out of the fact that they policed their spent shell casings and filed fraudulent paperwork. However, that is not true. There were at least five BP agents on the scene that day, and all of them knew of the shooting. As well, Compean and Ramos made a verbal report to their supervisor. They did not file a written report.

7. The latest reports coming out of West Texas are that the agents actually present during the shooting incident do not match the agents presented by Sutton to the court as witnesses. I will update this allegation further as more information becomes available.

Finally, this week, despite the total lack of a court transcript, some long-awaited incident reports regarding the case were delivered to Congress but have been classified secret from the general public. The Congressional Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management, Investment and Oversight obtained the report after submitting an emergency Freedom of Information Act request for the documents.

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, said he will not review the classified documents until they are made available to the public. Poe expects a redacted version will be made available.

Lastly, if you are touched by the plight of these agents and would like to do something to help, a labor union, the National Border Patrol Council, is soliciting donations on its website.
All donations that are designated for Agents Ramos and Compean will be used to fund their legal defense and assist their families in their hour of need. Donations to the fund can be made by check payable to 'BPA Legal Defense & Relief Fund.' Checks should be mailed to: BPA Legal Defense & Relief Fund, P.O. Box 47208, Tampa, FL 33647.



This has been a production of the Guard the Borders syndicate. It was started by Euphoric Reality to educate the public about the vulnerabilities of our open borders during an age of global terrorism and the resultant threat to our national security and sovereignty. If you are concerned about the lapses in our national security and the socio-economic burden of unchecked illegal immigration, join our blog syndicate. Send an email with your blog name and url to admin at guardtheborders dot com.

Can someone help me out with the numbers?

I just had a thought - the HPV pushers have been pointing to the INCREDIBLE incidence of HPV in the female population. According to the pro-vaccine people, about 50% of the sexually active population has been exposed.

Naturally, most people reading those stats start sweating. Even if only 1% of the infected population gets cervical cancer, that's a heck of a lot of women who would die.

Right?

Wrong!

I just checked with Wikipedia (yeah, I DO take their information with a grain of salt, but, on basic topics, they're not bad).

ALL WARTS - THE KIND YOU USED TO GET ON YOUR HANDS, PLANTAR WARTS (OCCUR ON THE FOOT - I'VE GOT ONE NOW), AND ALL OTHER TYPES - THE ONES THAT OCCUR ON OLD PEOPLE - ARE CAUSED BY THE SAME HUMAN PAPILLOMA VIRUS!!!!

So, basically, you can ignore MOST, if not virtually ALL, of the hype about the dreaded incidence of HPV, and how the virus will lead to a decimation of the female population, due to cervical cancer.

Without breaking apart the stats into specifically genital-area infection, all the stats are USELESS!

Does anyone have a better breakdown of the numbers?

What's the hurry?

From
The Washington Times
Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, are being reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia. The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures.
"Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear to be seizures," said Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.
Following federal approval of the vaccine in July 2006, a storm of legislation was introduced across the nation that would make the vaccine mandatory in schools.
The same article is reporting lower stats than other sites – I'm generally reading 11K+ cases of invasive cervical cancer projected for 2007. That's a major jump, especially since the incidence of cervical cancer (US) has been declining for years.
The American Cancer Society estimates there were 9,710 new cases of cervical cancer in the United States in 2006.

I'm particularly unnerved about this:
Merck spokesman Chris Loder said the vaccine is effective for five years and the Whitehouse Station, N.J., drug maker is not sure how long afterward the vaccine will work. Critics point out that an additional booster shot may be necessary.
So, are they suggesting that a booster may be necessary? From my reckoning, it will need to be updated just when the girls are hitting the 16-18 year range – precisely when they are more likely to be having sex.

Therefore, vaccinate them early, because some girls are having sex at ages when their partners could be charged with stat rape. However, at the ages girls are more likely to have consensual sex, the vaccine MAY NOT WORK!

From the Merck site:http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil/gardasil_ppi.pdf
As with all vaccines, GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone who gets the vaccine.
Merck says that, even if previously infected with HPV, women should get the vaccine, since there's no way to know precisely which strain caused the positive response. On the Women to Women site, http://www.womentowomen.com/sexualityandfertility/gardasil-landing.asp
in contrast, they found that
trial subjects who had already had exposure to the four strains showed higher rates of cervical neoplasia (abnormal cancer cell precursors), raising questions as to whether the vaccine impairs immune response under such circumstances, or whether there were demographic factors at play, or both.
The evolutionary issue has to be considered – remember that old maxim, Nature abhors a vacuum?
How long will protection last? Will boosters be needed? Or worse, will elimination of just four out of over 100 viral strains create a niche for other strains to fill? Swimming in its own vast gene pool and with billions of human hosts at hand, HPV has quite a survival advantage. What will happen to the niche currently occupied by strains # 16, 18, 6 and 11, if they are eliminated through vaccination? Microorganisms enjoy an extremely short life-cycle relative to ours, giving them the evolutionary edge when it comes to developing resistance against the very drugs and vaccines (and pesticides) we employ to annihilate them.
Further, I don't entirely agree with adding the 2 strains of genital warts to the package. Wouldn't it have been more useful to protect against the remainder of the HPV strains that are said to be responsible for about 30% of cancers?
Where have all the young men gone? On another note, if our desire to protect women from cervical cancer is genuine, when would such a vaccine be ready for administration to men and, for that matter, when will boys and men be lined up to receive it? Some speculate that the reason protection is afforded against two genital wart strains by the vaccine is not simply because, as the company describes it, the presence of infection from the two strains can be a confounding factor in determining exposure to oncogenic strains, but because men worry most of all about the cosmetic impact of contracting genital warts, so having resistance to warts would lend cachet to having the vaccination.
Yeah, the unsightliness of those warts on the penis does inhibit women from rushing the guys into the sack. You have to look at the warts and say, wow, if he has that, what ELSE does he have?

The American College of Pediatricians opposes forcing HPV vaccination as a requirement for school attendance.
The American College of Pediatricians applauds the availability of HPV vaccine. We strongly oppose requiring students to obtain the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine as a requirement for public school attendance.
HPV is spread only by intercourse. Keeping children out of school because they have not been vaccinated with the HPV vaccine is a serious, precedent-setting action. It replaces parental medical decision-making with government regulation which should be reserved for the improvement of the general public health. HPV cannot innocently be “caught” in a classroom as measles or other vaccine preventable diseases can.
The College also addresses the need for boosters
Waning protection is an issue with almost every vaccine in existence.
From Merck's own site, something new. I know I've not seen this information before
GARDASIL* is a non-infectious recombinant, quadrivalent vaccine
Given many people's reaction to manipulating DNA, I think the public should be aware of this.

Sunday, February 04, 2007

More on HPV vaccine

I've been checking out what other sites have written since I posted, previously, about the executive order by Texas Governor Perry to mandate ALL girls in Texas be given the new vaccine.

First, most sites write about the "anti-cancer" vaccine. It isn't - it works against about 70% of the sexually-transmitted Human Papilloma viruses. 2 of them are suspected of causing SOME cervical cancers.

Texas Governor Ignores the Zealots is the all caps heading of Truthdig - Ear to the Ground site.

For a map of the US that shows where legislation has been introduced to MANDATE vaccination, click here. The legislation is being aggressively pushed by a group called Women in Government. What's really interesting is the following, from their site:
Most women will have HPV, but few will develop cancer.

and
Only HPV that persists can lead to cancer.
So, why are ALL girls in Texas being FORCED to be vaccinated?

Texas ORDERS all girls to be given herpes vaccine

I first thought I was on a news parody site.

But it's true. MSNBC reports, that, by executive order of Texas governor Perry,
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade — meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 — will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.’s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.
Perry is quoted as saying
the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.
Why did the governor mandate the vaccine?
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the country mandating Gardasil for girls as young as 11 or 12. It doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.
So, why are just girls being targeted?
A recent study found that 90 percent of cervical cancer cases could be eliminated if boys and girls got the vaccine. If only girls get it, just more than three quarters of cases would be eliminated.
This vaccine has NOT been studied long enough, something even the manufacturer admits.
Markman acknowledged that though doctors don't know how long the vaccine will remain effective and if or when booster shots will be needed, those questions will be answered. He noted the women in the original trial are being monitored to determine if the vaccine is still working. But another area doctor, Dr. Martin Myers, said it's "a little premature" to mandate the vaccine.

"This vaccine is an incredibly important milestone and making it compulsory will definitely increase the proportion of girls who are immunized," said Myers, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston and executive director of the National Network for Immunization Information. "But there's a difference between HPV and diseases like polio, measles and diptheria, which spread rapidly in classrooms."

Myers also cited concerns that the vaccine could cause women to stop going in for cervical screenings, which are still necessary because the vaccine doesn't cover all HPV strains.
One of the MANY troubles with this vaccine approach to protection is that the same girls who are susceptible to infection with HPV (sexually active) are also exposed to:
  • chlamydia
  • hepatitis
  • gonorrhea - many strains not curable by antibiotics
  • herpes - NOT curable
  • syphillis - many strains not curable by antibiotics
  • and PID, to just name a few
Not to mention pregnancy.

This whole situation stinks of cronyism, overkill, and over-reaching by the heavy hand of government. Parents are the ones who are in charge of their children's health, not the government. The effectiveness of this vaccine has not been studied long enough to impose it on anyone. Further, I can see that girls, who will be under the impression that they can have sex without consequences, will be more easily persuaded to engage in riskier sex practices (non-condom sex, multiple partners).

What's next, mandatory Depo-Provera shots?

But, it's (let's all chant it together)
FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!

I've written about the HPV vaccinations before.

For fun, read an imaginary conversation between Lisa Simpson and the Gov.

And TailRank has a round-up of many blogger's reactions.

Lies of the Left

This COULD be a lengthy post. But, I'll try to winnow it down to a reasonable length. The CA Parent Bribery 'Scandal' - the 1...