On FFDO's*, Pistols, Holsters, TSA Regs, and holes in aircraft.
Check out the link on how you can discharge the FFDO firearm, given holster design and TSA regs mandating how/when you can have the weapon available for use.
For what it's worth, I hate what we've created to address the terrorist threat in the skies. It's so inept it's laughable.
- We refuse to concentrate assets on the most likely suspects.
- We hire the least competent types of staff to "screen" out potential threats.
- We saddle both these staffers and the front-line troops (aircrews) with asinine regs. Like the man said, the Captain is the Captain of the whole airplane, not just the cockpit. My flight defense training culminated with a full-blown fist fight OUTSIDE the main cockpit door. It was pretty realistic, too. Even with all the padded gear, my left forearm was numb for two weeks after using it to ring the "assailant's" bell. I want to be packin' heat from before push to
after block in no matter what I'm doing in between.
- We put more effort into discouraging these last-line-of-defense individuals from carrying firearms than into making sure the defense is so massive it deters the threat (TSA wants the airborne struggle to be a fair fight. I don't believe in fair fights.)
- We engineer a gun holster that is so frickin' hard to put on and use that it makes the firearm more dangerous to the user than it does to the assailant.
I'm amazed MORE pistols haven't gone off while putting them on/taking them off.
I don't believe I've ever met anyone who has ever worn a military uniform who believes in the concept of "a fair fight" for anything more serious than a sporting trophy.
Life and death fights aren't supposed to be fair, fer cryin' out loud, they're supposed to be won.
I wanted you to be the first to know that some Canadian conservative bloggers are being sued by the fellow who Mark Steyn has called "Canada's most sensitive man" -- serial "human rights" complainant Richard Warman.
The suit names:
• Ezra Levant (famous for the YouTube video of his confrontation with the Canadian Human Rights tribunal after he published the "Mohammed Cartoons")
• FreeDominion.ca (Canada's answer to FreeRepublic.com)
• Kate McMillan of SmallDeadAnimals.com
• Jonathan Kay of the National Post newspaper and its in-house blog
Richard Warman used to work for the notorious Human Rights Commission, which runs the "kangaroo courts" who've recently charged Mark Steyn with "flagrant Islamophobia".
Richard Warman has brought almost half these cases single-handledly, trying to get websites he doesn't like shut down.
He's also sued libraries for carrying books he doesn't approve of.
PLUS Richard Warman wants to ban international websites he doesn't like from being seen by Canadians.
Sites like yours.
The folks named in his new law suit are the very bloggers who have been most outspoken in their criticism of Warman's methods.
>WE NEED YOUR HELP!
The Canadian Human Rights Commission says "freedom of speech is an American concept" they refuse to recognize.
Some Canadians DO believe in freedom of speech, and take our inspiration from our great American neighbors.
I for one "pledge my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor" to the cause of free speech.
I vow to battle Richard Warman and his leftist supporters whatever it costs.
Thank you in advance for anything you can do to support our cause.
Warman’s not just suing me. He’s suing some of the biggest names in the Canadian blogosphere – from Kate McMillan of Small Dead Animals to Kathy Shaidle of Five Feet of Fury (or, Five Feet of Furry, as the lawsuit says on page 2), to Free Dominion, the largest conservative chat site in Canada. Warman’s goal is breathtaking in its chutzpah: he wants to muzzle the Canadian conservative Internet. It’s not just his goal – it’s the goal of the CHRC itself, and its friends at the Canadian Jewish Congress, who have stated their goal is to “tame” the Internet – or at least those voices they disagree with. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if the CJC was bankrolling Warman’s lawsuit – they’ve done joint legal work together before, and Warman’s number one defender is on the CJC’s legal committee. The CJC hates conservatives, and this would be a way for them to do damage to the conservative blogosphere without taking the political flak for it.
Freedom of speech is not only a Canadian value, its principle has been upheld by several Canadian Supreme Court decisions. Do the googling -- I found too many to link, but there's a nice recap of the law here.
Warman's take on free speech is like Stallone's take on handgun ownership: It's *my* right -- not yours."
So countersue. Swear our harassment complaints. Bring heat to bear. Don't just talk about it.
by Mike S on April 9, 2008 12:33 PM
I realize that a full-on resistance is the right way to go here, but I'm a weasel. For those of you under threat, isn't it also worth considering setting up a blog or website on American soil and letting them have both barrels anonymously? Anything this Yank can do to aid and abet...
I don't think politicians have any idea how hard it is to silence a voice on the internet.
Well, that whole "Freedom of Speech" thing, that's an American construct. Naturally, it has no weight in Canada.
BTW, has anyone seen my nobles? They wanted me to sign something.
by King John on April 9, 2008 1:22 PM
I'm convinced that the CHRC subsists nose to ass with Warman and vice versa. Neither can justify their existence without the other's very real malfeasance. Mutually they wantonly and willfully set out to destroy lives and livelihoods. If their actions were to be thoroughly investigated, multiple charges could and should be laid against most if not all involved in this nightmarish fiasco.
by grant on April 9, 2008 1:22 PM
I'm convinced that the CHRC subsists nose to ass with Warman and vice versa. Neither can justify their existence without the other's very real malfeasance. Mutually they wantonly and willfully set out to destroy lives and livelihoods. If their actions were to be thoroughly investigated, multiple charges could and should be laid against most if not all involved in this nightmarish fiasco.
by grant on April 9, 2008 1:25 PM
Well, that whole "Freedom of Speech" thing, that's an American construct. Naturally, it has no weight in Canada.
BTW, has anyone seen my nobles? They wanted me to sign something.
by King John on April 9, 2008 1:27 PM
And, the Great Hall Echo proves to be no respector of boundaries!
The InstaMan wonders why we don't make counter-claims and file our own nuisance human rights complaints. His brain probably cannot compute the fact the complainant and the investigator are often the same person. The situation is literally too Kafkaesque for an honourable man to grasp at first glance.
There is also at least one case of a human rights claim being dismissed because it had been submitted using both sides of the page instead of being single-sided. Problem is the submission was sent by fax... It was either Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant who called it the first two-sided fax in history.
What? re: the fax not allowed on paper written on the back of? Well perhaps if it was not 'clear' and 'readable', even so, wouldn't a quick photocopy with a blank white sheet of paper behind each page have fixed that in a jiffy...and produced a one sided source doc to fax and a copy to boot?
Hey KAT from MIS... Long time no see at ITM.
~leap
by ldd on April 9, 2008 2:38 PM
Hey. I still read there. Just don't post as often. working, reading and posting here kind of uses up my time a bit. But nice seeing you again!
by kat-missouri on April 9, 2008 2:44 PM
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the complete English text of which may be found here, states in Article 2:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion; b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association. [emphasis added]
As I read the document, the Charter is as fundamental a document to Canadian law as the Constitution is to the laws of the United States.
Which means that plaintiffs in this suit are seeking to deprive Canadians of fundamental rights, which the courts are forbidden from doing. The Canadian courts should dismiss this suit with prejudice, on the grounds that it fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted.
by Blake Kirk on April 9, 2008 2:44 PM
Blake-
From my brief look at Canadian documents, there are loopholes large enough to drive a skidder(for our north of the border friends) through. You think we've got a problem nailing things down because of our famous "rubber clause"....
I still can't figure out if there is any recourse for collecting costs in a successful defense....
by TBinSTL on April 9, 2008 2:57 PM
Of course this is serious stuff, but if ANY of this mess screws up the Stanley Cup Playoffs I am coming north of the border and knocking a few heads!
by Bilbeach on April 9, 2008 3:40 PM
Bilbeach - I think you're safe. There might well be a very polite governmental overthrow should hockey be impacted.
Americans should look upon this mess up here as a warning - covet your freedom of speech. I'm surprised that more blogs weren't named. Perhaps Warman is saving them for the next round - mine included?
One very important point that some of the other Canadian commenters' have missed, is that sec. 13.1 of the Human Rights Act is that the 'bar' is set pretty low, much lower than a criminal proceeding as far as burden of proof and court proccedure.
As hard as it is to comprehend, TRUTH is not a defense. FACT is not a defense. Once called before the HRC, you are ASSUMED guilty, and, as far as previous cases have gone, (100% conviction) No amount of supporting defensive evidence seems to affect the outcome. If you are brought before the HRC, you are pre-judged GUILTY before the trial or hearing, even starts.
Remember, 100% conviction, no appeal.
As for Warman, he used to work for the HRC, then resigned to work along side them as a 'professional' plaintiff. He, along with current officers of the HRC have been proven to plant 'hate' messages on targeted websites and then use their own planted posts as 'evidence' of hate, whereby using those 'proofs' to bring those sites to task at the HRC. 100% conviction-rate.
Freedom of speech, wot?
Please, please help support the bloggers! They are on the front lines of a very important fight we all need to support.
Thank you!
P.S. All those bloggers have really awesome content, so go pay them a visit!
Well, it was bound to happen. Hot Air reports that some guy named Sam Stein over at the Huffington Post is implying that Bellavia, in comparing Tiger Woods as a hero for children to Sen. John McCain's heroism in withstanding five years of imprisonment and torture in Hotel Hanoi is somehow making a subtle racist comment. Of course, the commenters over at the HuffPo (loser central) went crazy about the terrible McCain Supporting Racist.
Some other ..person... at some place called Hotline also posts a similar comment. Of course, they are, as Hot Air notes, "treading lightly" on the subject by merely suggesting that, in today's political atmosphere, maybe its not a good idea to ever mention the name of a person of a different race or ethnicity in comparison to a person that isn't because any idiot can decide to construe it, in the name of politics, as racism.
I cannot even say how incensed I am over even the implication that Bellavia's comments were racist. At first, I thought that it was so ignorant it was not worth a reply, but I read the foolish comments in the posts, attempted to post a reply with refuting information and then realized I was unable to do so. Thus, I am posting here.
I am also incensed over the fact that idiotic conflation of such non-events to real racism, cheapens and degrades the continuing struggle against real racism in this nation. These two, Stein and the Hotline (not Hot Air) character, along with several commenters, make reference to Obama's speech on racism being "timely" in reference to this alleged racism. In fact, their comments did more to damage any possible good or truth that Obama's speech might have done.
Having attended the Vets For Freedom event in Kansas City, heard Bellavia's speech about real heroes vs. the paper heroes America puts on pedestals, read his book honoring the men he fought with (of all ethnicities and races) and listened to many other speeches by these men and women, the idea that Bellavia was making a racist remark or could be construed to do so is preposterous beyond belief.
Bellavia's speech was slightly abbreviated in order to move the event along and introduce McCain. In this event, he mentioned that Tiger Woods would not be the "hero" that he taught his children to look up to. He would teach them to look up to men like McCain. He introduced McCain as "the real 'Audacity of Hope'".
Bellavia has given a similar speech all along the Vets for Freedom tour. In Kansas City, his speech regarding the same theme, included noting various athletes and Hollywood stars from Tiger Woods to Tom Cruise, among several, that people call "heroes" when, in fact, he served with real heroes and was on tour with some real heroes. It is a theme that has been repeated many times among those who have served, their families and those who support them as on this blog: America has lost its way when choosing its "heroes" and it shows in our continued selfishness, our unwillingness to sacrifice in a greater cause and our total absorption with all things "me".
Sam Stein has very likely never read Bellavia's book, House to House. While it is a book about war, it is not a book about hate. It is a book about love for the brothers that Bellavia served and bled with in the Battle for Fallujah. It is about the love and honor that he feels for those who he served, who died in that battle and later. he never mentions the race, color or ethnicity of these men, though he calls them by name and their names sometimes gives their heritage away along with several pictures of his unit included in the book. They include black, white, Hispanic, Asian and many other nationalities and ethnicities. These men were not colors or races to Bellavia, but brothers. He calls them "heroes" and they are more so than a Woods, Obama, Clinton, Cruise, Spears or any other whom the shallow would deem "heroes" for their alleged "struggles" to overcome things that have little to do with sacrificing all for another.
Bellavia's heroes are men like 1Lt Edward Iwan, Japanese-American, who led Bellavia's platoon and who died in Fallujah November 12, 2004 having taken over the gunner's position in a Bradely fighting vehicle, surrounded by insurgents on every side firing AK-47s, sniper rifles, heavy machine guns and RPGs. Iwan was cut down by just such an RPG. Bellavia continuously referred to Iwan as a great leader who took care of his men to the end.
At the end of his book, Bellavia lists the 41 men from his unit who gave the ultimate sacrifice in order of the date of their death. They are a true representation of America's "melting pot" with names like "Khan", "Kennedy", "Eckhart", "Martinez" and many more. Bellavia wants people to remember these men and honor their sacrifice.
Stein and the other fellow, posted only a small snippet of the actual event in order to make this implications. I note that he did not bother to post any other video or pictures from the event that clearly shows the many men and women of many races and ethnicities that were part of the "Vets on the Hill" event. These men and women had served in the military as Bellavia had and were there for the same reason: to insure that those who had fought, were fighting and those who had sacrificed, had their voices heard. They want to insure, as LTC Steve Russell (ret) has said, that their sacrifices were not simply "remembered" by names chiseled on a black stone wall, but would be "honored" by a lasting memorial of freedom and democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Those attending, those of the many races, ethnicities and genders, knew exactly what Bellavia was speaking of when he compared a "hero" for children like Tiger Woods to a real hero who had sacrificed much for his nation like McCain and the many who had served in the past and present. Tiger, Bellavia has previously noted, is a fine man who has made much of his talents and often gives much back to communities like free golf clinics for the young and underprivileged, charitable events and various foundations. He is an excellent example of how to be a self made man who knows how to give back in recognition of the advantages he had been given.
But, if you are going to tell your children about "heroes", "sacrifice" and "love of country" who are you going to tell them about?
Try Mike Mansoor, Navy Seal, Medal of Honor recipient, who have his all for his country and for the men he served with when he jumped on a grenade.
Obama was not completely wrong. There is racism in this country, though not institutionalized and rarely raising its head publicly. I know what racism looks like. I had an unpleasant and unfortunate experience last week when someone made a comment that was neither ambiguous, subtle nor misconstrued, though it was under their breath and in the company of people they thought were "like minded" for some unknown reason. That person now knows it is unacceptable and intolerable, not only by me, but those in our group.
This egregious and scurrilous attack on Bellavia, however, makes me very upset. What good has Sam Stein done to equate, no, lower the issue of real racism to comparison with this non-event? I'll tell you, he has done no good. In fact, the construing of these comments to "racism" actually provides people cover when confronted with real, subtle and unsubtle, racism. He has done nothing, but provided a place for every half-wit with a political ax to grind, who see our soldiers as nothing but jack booted oppressors, and dislikes McCain, the Iraq war, and various other angst and neurosis, a place to vent their ugliness and idiocy.
Sam Stein owes Bellavia an apology, in public (since he made it that way).
The term *hero* has been bandied about so much over the past couple of decades that it's lost much of its original connotation, just as the term *racist* has been watered-down by overuse.
I don't walk through certain sections of Trenton because some of the inhabitants have spread the word that any white face appearing on their turf will be shot. I have *friends* in that neighborhood, but I won't visit them -- not because I'm a prejudiced SOB, but because it would be suicide for me to do it. My friends don't want me to visit because their homes would get firebombed -- the gang-bangers figure any black family receiving white visitors are informants.
Now that the Dems don't have a faux military hero as their nominee, they're embarking on a strategy to trivialize and debase real military heroes like McCain and Bellavia, either by insinuating that they're racists, like the yahoos in kat's post, or like Jay Rockefeller in his recent comments that McCain just dropped laser guided bombs from 30,000 feet without considering the human toll of the destruction below.
by fdcol63 on April 9, 2008 7:23 AM
Huffington Post is just a bunch of zealous morons, especially Mrs Huffington herself. Sometimes I just want to stuff my pointy highheel shoe right up their A$$, they would be burping leather for a month.
Racist, yea say "boo" and they think you are stating a racist quote. They are the ones who are racist, just like Sharpton. Idiots....
by Rita on April 9, 2008 7:32 AM
Heh. Someone whizzed in Rita's Wheaties® this morning!
Hero - A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life.
Athlete - A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as strength, agility, and endurance, that are necessary for physical exercise or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts. Professional Athlete - same as above - except for MONEY.
I think they have been wizzing in my Wheaties for some time now :)
I just cannot stand when those people dripple lies and attack a person who has served his country with honor and distinction. We just need to stand up and fight that kind of rhetoric; and with pointy highheel shoes just for an extra jolt :).....
by Rita on April 9, 2008 10:58 AM
Since when did comparing sports heroes to war heroes become an issue of race? What a load of crap.
I'm waiting for Tiger to come out and announce that it's a load of crap too, as he's done in the past when the race card has been forced into play. He recognizes a true racial slur versus a comparison of hero status.
Crap, I tell ya. Crap.
by AFSister on April 9, 2008 11:17 AM
While I think the last thing that David Bellavia is, is a racist. The "Tiger" thing wasn't well thought out. don't get me wrong, no one is on target all the time.
One of Huffington's commenters said that if it wasn't meant to be an insult, he didn't get the point. That's where I find myself in this. Sure John McCain should be admired for his service (no one needs to tell Princess Crabby that....). But, to be frank, there is nothing wrong with young people admiring Tiger Woods. He's naturally talented, he works hard & has achieved his successes legitimately.
John McCain doesn't need us to tear down other people to build him up.
It wasn't about "McCain" v. "Woods", it was "war hero" v. "athlete", "sacrifice of mind, body and life" v. "sacrifice of free time to practice".
Now, you're right, Woods is a good example of perseverance, goal setting and achievement with the extra of giving back to the community. That's a nice example for kids to look up to. But, I wouldn't call him a "hero" and if I was trying to inspire kids about doing the right thing or sacrificing something for a greater cause, it would be McCain or the men with Bellavia I would point to, not Tiger.
Here's an interesting little peek into the head of an officer...
...who is so self-centered that she can't see the forest for the trees. And was dumb enough to put it in email. Which, since she is a below-the-zone (BZ, i.e., selected ahead of her peers) is an example of you may be smart and talented, but you can still be dumber'n a rock. I'm going to let the words speak for themselves... and then I'll post the rebuttal that went out.
Yes, this note went out, and yes, this officer exists - though I'm suspecting when she's moving around now, she covers her nametag. I'll have another post on a different aspect of this on Monday. She's griping about the fact that here she is, all special, and the Captains who weren't selected BZ will get this bonus she refers to, while she won't, because... she'll outrank them. She wants her bonus and her early promotion, too. Else she's being... punished. Heh. Interesting concept of duty - and a profound ignorance of the significance of her BZ selection. Which she'll get schooled on later. Hey, at least she'll get the pay - I was frocked to Major six months early - all the responsibilities, none of the pay...
What I find more disturbing than the whining of this Captain is that her mentors, presumably senior Lieutenant Colonels or Colonels, are encouraging them to... whine like a Private, vice pointing out what you'll see in the response.
I removed the names, hers has been spread all over the inside of a good chunk of the Army, no need to pile on here.
THE LETTER FROM CJ
Subject: BZ to MAJ - CPTs Bonus (MILPER 07-237)
Good morning, fellow BZers~
After discussing this MILPER message with my mentors and other BZers, I have decided that we should all do something about it. I hope you don't mind that I emailed you and took a few moments out of your day.
I don't know about each of you, but this bonus really makes me angry. We are being punished financially by the Army for being better than our peers. We won't pin until sometime next year; probably May-July and our peers will get $25-35,000 and get pinned in October. I don't know about you, but 4 months of MAJs pay isn't equal to a $25,000 bonus in my eyes.
If the bonus was for YG 2000-2004, I wouldn't even worry about it.
But we are YG99 and our peers, the ones that haven't worked as hard as us, are getting rewarded.
So, why am I emailing you and bitching? Well, my mentors all agree that we are getting screwed. And, they all think that we should all first contact our IG, then, write to our Congressmen. My COL thinks that might make an impact. It may not change anything, but it is worth a try.
The 82nd Division IG has already contacted the HRC IG and they told him it is all about the money. There is a shocker! They said there are already a bunch of IG complaints about the message, so let's beat them up more. Just so you know, there are 177 of us on the list. If all 177 of us took the money, they would pay out close to $5 million. That's about 3 new Humvees, 2 new tanks OR ½ an aircraft. I think we are worth it.
Again, if this means nothing to you and you just think I am whining, hit delete and go on with your day. But, if you are pissed like me and want to do something about it, let me know.
Have a great day and congratulations on your promotable status!!
V/R~
CJ
Hey, CJ, I'm a little annoyed, and I didn't hit delete. You put it out in email to the world, so I'm sharing it.
Now comes the spanking.
Well, actually, you'll have to go to the Extended Entry/Flash Traffic to catch the schooling.
Let me open by saying I heartily dislike CPT (P) S.
First, because she has 'CPT(P)' in her signature block.
Second, because she's preaching about how unfair life is while soaking in her own light at an ROTC position at Xxxxxxxxxx University. I spent my entire time as a Captain in MTOE assignments ... in Korea, 10th Mountain (twice), and Fort Polk (TDA ... but 11 rotations per year ... in 'nowhere Louisiana').
Captain time in ROTC at Xxxxxxxxx University? Yeah ... she has a whole lot to complain about.
And third, because of this line (among the many): 'we are being punished ... for being better than our peers'. 'Better'? Near as I can tell, you have the no Respect, no Loyalty, no sense of Duty, no Honor, and no sense of Selfless Service ... if that is 'better than your peers', then I truly fear for your Year Group.
Here are my thoughts.
BREAK. BREAK.
To the authors -
For a bunch of BZ'ers, your math and strategic thinking skills are sub-standard. And you have a real Values crisis. Let me provide some mentoring.
These two email strings validate some of the most terrible things that have been said about BZ Officers over my twenty+ years ... that BZ Officers have a false sense of entitlement, that BZ Officers are arrogant, and that BZ Officers are elitist (in the Paris Hilton sense of the word).
BZ Officers absolutely deserved to be selected BZ. However, for every Officer who was selected BZ, there are three other Officers who were equally deserving ... Officers with the exact same level of performance, and the exact same level of potential. Any BZ Officer who doesn't know that in his or her heart doesn't deserve to be BZ.
The differences between you and that Officer to your left who wasn't selected is art and serendipity ... you worked for Ernest Hemingway, while the Officer to your right worked for a Senior Rater who couldn't write very well; your former Brigade Commander sat on the Board; the Board was looking for a particular skill set, and HRC assigned you to that position two years ago; the Officer to your left had a personality conflict with his Rater in 2005. Did any of you complain about the inherent unfairness of that process after you were selected BZ? No? I didn't think so.
Y'all would've had my absolute respect if en masse you had written to the 'Army Times' about how you felt the BZ-selection process was unfair to the Officer to your left ... but you didn't do that.
Instead, you want to write to the 'Army Times' and your Congressman about the unfairness of the CSRB process. You've earned my disdain. And so have the 'mentors' who are encouraging this Pity Party.
Here is your Retention Bonus. Historically, BZ Officers have significantly out-performed their peers in terms of selection to senior commands, and the ranks of Colonel and General Officer. I don't have the exact numbers, but these figures are in the ball-park: although BZ rates run about 5%, fully 40% of all Battalion Commanders were BZ to MAJ or LTC; and the number of Officers BZ to MAJ or LTC who are NOT selected for Battalion Command is extremely low, probably less than 10%. With the advent of masked O3-and- below OER's and universal CGSOC (CGSOC was a huge discriminator to BN CMD ... In my YG, only 1 of 23 Signal Officers selected for BN CMD was non-resident), I think those percentages will be even higher.
Your CSRB bonus is Battalion Command. And why is that important?
Well, since these emails seem solely focused on money (and not Army Values), I'll reply in terms of $$$ (as much as that disgusts me).
Last year, every single Former Signal Battalion Commander (FSBC) in the zone was selected for O6. Every one. Only one non-FSBC was selected, and he was a former Centrally Selected Division G6. Do you know how much more money a COL makes than a LTC? Do you know how much money a retired O6 makes compared to a retired O5? Do you how much money that adds up to over the course of a thirty or forty year retirement? A hell of alot more than $25K.
In 2006, Vernon Wells received a signing bonus of $25.5 million from the Toronto Blue Jays. In January 2007, Bob Nardelli abruptly resigned as chairman and chief executive of Home Depot after only six years at the helm ... the Atlanta-based company said Nardelli would receive a severance package worth roughly $210 million.
Here's a thought, write to the 'Army Times' about that.
Number of Signal General Officers on Active Duty who were not Battalion Commanders... Zero (0).
Number of Signal General Officers on Active Duty who were never selected BZ ... Zero (0).
Your CSRB is an EXPONENTIALLY better chance than your peers to lead and mold the Army of 2015 and beyond. Apparently, you think that opportunity is worth less than a check for $25K in 2007. Or, you think that the promotion board simply recognized your glowing superiority. You should be absolutely ashamed of this conversation ... except shame would require Values that I don't think you possess.
One of the biggest challenges for a BZ Officer is that they start to believe their own press, and pretty soon, we have Terrell Owens in Battalion Command. The vast majority of General Officers are deeply, deeply humbled by their position ... they fully recognize how many truly outstanding, equally deserving Officers were simply not selected to be General Officers. You've been in the Army less than 10 years, and you've already lost all sense of humility. Woe to the Army of 2015.
'Well, my mentors all agree that we are getting screwed'. Go ask MAJ Ed Murphy about how he got screwed. Oh, that's right, you can't ...because he's dead ... he was killed in the line of duty in Afghanistan. Go ask his widow about how MAJ Murphy got screwed.
Y'all can compare notes.
'I think we are worth it.' I think you are worth exactly thirty pieces of silver.
That Lieutenant Colonel said it better than I would have.
I should add - most BZ officers I know are stand-up people. and not sniveling self-absorbed babies.
with the hearty humility earned from multiple non-select notices from being "not educationally qualified", i hereby propose an elegant solution thus:
"here's yer 25k. BZ selection revoked. next assignment revised: report immediately to Johnston Atoll for unaccompanied tour; duties as assigned for Morale Support Officer (those basketballs at the gym don't hand themselves out)."
btw, in my personal experience, almost all of the BZ dudes i have met have been great guys who had crystal clear understanding of the serendipity involved in such process and nevertheless were truly great warriors... not that i was hanging out with many of them, but would gladly share a beer at the Club with them.
by MajMike on March 28, 2008 8:46 AM
One more reason why I was glad to only be an NCO....and why some folks give officers a bad name even though there are good ones out there.
And yet sadly.. (with a bit of lateral thinking and Googling skills) according to AKO white pages, this rear echelon whiner got her O-4 for real since this mess hit the net.
by OlafTheTanker on March 28, 2008 10:08 AM
In today's America, everyone's a victim competing to see who's the biggest victim of them all.
by fdcol63 on March 28, 2008 10:29 AM
I fear for the future of my beloved Signal Corps. To the responding LTC, all I can say is "YOU ROCK, SIR!"
by SFC D on March 28, 2008 11:44 AM
*chuckle*
My guess is that there's a crusty old NCO somewhere in this Princess's limited sphere of influence....encouraging her to "right the terrible wrong she's been done".
Classic.......
by R Jewell on March 28, 2008 11:53 AM
Carrie, after reading this, I have a question for you. How does this individual suck their thumb? Please consider their cranial-rectal status, STUCK. This would explain the crappy outlook and style in writing. Just a thought.
With this circulating about, this LTC may have done more to help the Army of 2015 than this two-bar Captain over cammie (BZ over wine) might have done over her time to hurt it.
Semper Fi, LTC!
Semper Fi!
(I just can't bring myself to say "HUA!" just yet...but this LTC inspires the consideration.)
She's married to a Major too...$ + $ =$$$. My God, what was she thinking when she sent this out?
They must be getting a blog s-storm at Campbell because her bio and e-mail address have been taken down from the ROTC Cadre page. (Google's cache still shows it). I feel bad for her CO and the other officers in her unit.
If you want to see what a professional O-3 is capable of putting into an e-mail go read the note of thanks that Coast Guard H-60 pilot LT Brian McLaughlin wrote to his ship-driving colleague LT James Terrell on the CGC Munro after the recent Alaska Ranger rescue in the Bering Sea. It's at www.uscg.mil/cgjournal/ - It's a good read.
Firget the S-storm CJ is weathering... Can you imagine what it must be like for her husband these days? The silence that erupts when he walks into the O-Club?
Like the man said... "I Pity the Fool!"
by AW1 Tim on March 28, 2008 6:50 PM
As a (retired) Signal Corps officer, I'm just glad that the 2000lb bomb that landed on that jack@$$ Captain was delivered by a Signaleer. I'd love to know who that was...
As far as the original note that precipitated the response...what can you say? Utter stupidity.
by LongTabSigO on March 28, 2008 8:41 PM
It's one thing being stupid and self-absorbed. It's another putting it in writing and another still going against the social flow and marketing your stupidity.
Great fun watching the green on green wordfare firefight.
I declare the LTC the winner by every possible criteria.
As for the whiney wench, there are greener pastures for those with her skill set and ATTITUDE as a political correctness Human Resources diversity bully out in the civilin workforce. Don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out!
She just set back the progress of women in the military by a number of years.
I hope her detaching OER notes the discredit she has brought upon her command and her service, so that future promotion boards do not repeat this mistake.
by John S. on March 28, 2008 11:42 PM
Well, my mentors all agree that we are getting screwed. And, they all think that we should all first contact our IG, then, write to our Congressmen.
Methinks the damosel confuseth the term "mentor" with "sycophant."
As possibly do the *mentors*. Which may be the crux of the matter...
Dammit went to put the rubbish out this morning and couldn't... damned snipers! If i'd had a wife and daughter I would have sent them like Slick Willie.
Was late for class but it was ok, the lecturer was trapped in the admin building... snipers.
Bus was delayed so they sent us LAV's. Damned snipers on the bridge again.
So, we find that another powerful man has succumbed to the temptations of power and wealth.
And another woman is shackled to her politician husband as he confesses on national television how much he's let down his family.
Ah, would that he'd thought of that earlier - but it seems one of the diseases of power is a belief that those rules are for the other guy. You know which other guy - the ones you put in jail for breaking (or, in this case providing the service you took advantage of) the laws, etc.
Personally, I think he should resign. If his wife and daughters want to forgive him, fine, he doesn't need to be Governor to be forgiven... It's not like the party in power in the state is going to lose that power (nor should they, for this is a personal failing) and if the people of New York want to "forgive" him, so to speak, let him "run for redemption."
While I also think President Clinton should have resigned/been let go for baldly lying to the public and the special prosecutor regarding l'affaire Lewinsky (though perhaps not for the affair itself), this is a fundamentally different proposition.
The Senator Craig situation is a little different, although I think he should have honored his announced intent to resign.
Yes, I do think things like this are corrosive, in small ways, to the fabric of society. Just another cut here and there, especially as the mighty seem to escape consequences the mass of us would not.
At least Governor Spitzer has acknowledged what he did. Senator Craig is on rather weaker ground. I hope his constituents send him packing when next given the opportunity.
Much is expected from those to whom so much is given.
And just once, just once, I would love to see the stony-faced humiliated woman step to the microphone and say "You sorry b@st@rd. How *dare* you put me in this position!" and storm off.
As a prisoner of the Democratic party in NY, I have to say that from what I know of the man and having seen how he reacts to criticism, we may have to storm the castle to drag him out by his hair.
I hold him in much more contempt than Larry Craig, because he used to be the chief prosecutor for NY and I can just imagine the glee and pure joy that would have been in his voice if he had managed to sink his claws into a Republican who found themselves in the spot he is in.
I'm looking into recall rules in NY this week.
by Jon The Mechanic on March 11, 2008 6:26 AM
Meh...Sex Scandals in politics are nothing new. I'm not going to get too worked up about this one. The guy is clearly a hypocrite, however. Sadly, this has became the standard for politicians and not the exception.
Considering today's environment of very limited privacy, 24/7 media coverage, and polarized partisan opposition research, I personally think that someone who does something like this has 2 other behavioral traits instead of the hubris to think he won't get caught:
1) A fetish for the adrenaline rush of the danger of getting caught.
2) A deep-seeded self-destructive desire, wherein he actually wishes to be caught.
by fdcol63 on March 11, 2008 7:30 AM
"Deep-seeded" or "deep-seated"? I get confused.
by fdcol63 on March 11, 2008 7:32 AM
Well, if the seed was stuck somewhere deep, it ain't no more. I bet you'll find it somewhere shallow at the Mayflower's rubbish heap.
As I see it, it is not the salacious acts themselves that cast these powerful men into trouble, but the breaking of other dead-serious laws, while in the pursuit of such libertine acts.
Our 41st President got himself impeached for Perjuring himself before Officials of the Court - PERIOD.
The New York Governor is now in a pickle for at least two things:
1) Interstate Trafficking and Solicitation of Prostitution and Debauchery. Title 18 Part I Chapter 117 Section 2421, Transporting and individual across state lines for the purpose of engaging in prostitution is forbidden. That AMTRAK ticket between NYC and Union Station should plainly put that in evidence.
2) Structuring Transactions. Title 31 Section 5324 of the U.S. Code, strictly forbids cloaking the untented purpose of bank transaction for the purpose of evading reporting requirements to the IRS. This apparently was done by the chief enforcer of law in the State of New York.
by Boquisucio on March 11, 2008 8:56 AM
John,
The (dis)Honorable Senator Craig is not expected to run for re-election. His current term expires in 2009.
My opinion - Regardless of what he actually did in the airport, his clear in-ability to honorably and honestly handle an embarrassing situation disqualifies him from service. Pugnacious stupidity, indeed!
By not resigning, he deprives our current Republican governor of appointing the Lt Gov. (also Republican) to fill the seat and thus holding "incumbency" in the next election.
The Lt Gov. twisted the legislatures arm into approving a 1-year property tax relief, in exchange for a 20% increase in the sales tax...then assessed property values ~doubled! Now we have the same or higher property tax and the increased property tax.
Nathaniel
by NBAllen on March 11, 2008 10:17 AM
"Standing by my man" I can understand to a certain extent in cases of an affair. As awful and painful as it must be for the wife, arguments can be made about falling out of and into love, of sudden self-revelation and regret, and of having let a situation slowly get out of hand. I personally would probably leave a husband who has repeatedly cheated on me to face the press himself, but I can see why some women wouldn't.
But in this case... wow. The message he has sent her is--"You can't satisfy me sexually; I'd rather do it with a possibly disease-carrying stranger than with you." And yet she still stands there next to him to continue to be shamed? WOW! I've been accused of undercutting and underestimating/underselling myself, but I have enough self-respect to not allow a man who has made a fool of me continue to use me in front of the entire world.
Just seeing a picture of the two of them makes me feel so dirty I need a shower.
I wasn't aware that George H.W. Bush was impeached. Perhaps you mean 42?
by XBradTC on March 11, 2008 11:44 AM
Ooops my bad. Didn't meant to imply that the 40th's V.P. was a compulsive liar.
by Boquisucio on March 11, 2008 12:45 PM
A few months back they had a fun situation in China. At a live television event for the upcoming Olympics the wife of one of the bigwigs came up to the microphone. There was some puzzlement because she wasn't scheduled to speak but hey, she's the wife of a bigwig and a pretty heavy hitter in her own right so...
So, she makes a nice little statement thanking everyone for attending the event and then proceeds to detail the affair she just found out her husband was having. Wouldn't give up the microphone until she'd had her say either.
Sounds like a great lady to me.
by KCSteve on March 11, 2008 12:52 PM
The problem this case has is the NY Gov is the person who takes the oath to execute the law of NY State. Its also likely that any prostitute who is charging over $5,000 an hour has connections to organized crime. So is the NY Gov (and as the attorney general before) not going after certain organizations due to their ability to expose his illegal activities? This "victimless" crime suddenly has real victims if justice was denied by his inactions as Gov or AG because others knew what he was doing.
Infidelity does not make you a bad leader. It just makes you a bad husband.
That being said.... our leaders are held to a higher moral, ethical, and legal standard than the general public. So is the military. When you hold a public office, you represent your people, and I'm pretty sure his people don't want to be viewed as accepting of adultery. This is the same reason I stepped down as a Sunday School teacher when I was going through my divorce. My actions did not support the Bible or God's teachings, and I knew that once the church found out, they would ask me to step down, so I quit on my own. It was the right thing to do, and even though I really miss teaching Sunday School, I still stand by that decision.
Clinton should have stepped down as president over his infindelity, (Monica, Jennifer, and a couple others I can't remember), and so should Spitzer and Craig.
by AFSister on March 11, 2008 8:18 PM
"Infidelity does not make you a bad leader." AFSister, I have to strongly disagree. Infidelity means that you are willing to break an Oath for a little pleasure. Since when are oath-breakers trustworthy?
by Russ on March 11, 2008 11:56 PM
Taking an oath is only a small portion of being a great leader.
There are many people who hold leadership positions who are terrible leaders. How many of us have worked for bosses we consider to be unworthy of the position? Does that automatically make them an adulterer? No.
Not any more than being an adulterer makes you a bad leader.
There are many qualities that come with being a good leader. Keeping promises (or not breaking oaths, as you put it) is only one of those qualities.
There are no perfect leaders who possess all of the qualities that make a great leader, but there are excellent leaders who possess many of the qualities that make a great leader. Look at Reagan- he met Nancy while married to another woman and he became what many people consider to be one of the greatest presidents ever.
by AFSister on March 12, 2008 11:42 AM
I wonder where Hillary would be today if she had done it...stepped up to the mic and told Willie Jeff just that.
Which constituency would have supported her? The single moms? The feminists? The traditional family types?
I wish she had. What kind of a message did she send by taking the cr*p her husband dished out?
If you *knew* the fact that LeftenantCornet Windsor was on the ground in Afghanistan was being with-held (and for good reason, it seems to me) and yet you just had to run with it...
Well, the term a$$hat comes to mind.
Good criminey, the entire Brit press can keep their yaps shut, and you go all funny in the pants breathlessly destroying OPSEC.
That was one of the most unrelievedly stupid things to do, from this blogger's perspective. Others may have more lenient views.
Of course, the bump in traffic you got from that one post (and the revenue associated with same), probably dwarfs my entire lifetime traffic - to include that I've not yet had.
Still.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Knowing the difference is the difference between wearing your little-boy shorts or your adult pants.
I'm with you, John. Whoever broke the story fits in the a$$hat category with me. We did NOT need to know it, and Prince Harry and his unit NEEDED to have the info held close. If Drudge broke it, he's a jerk.
Going to have to do a considerable climb to get up to the a$$hat territory; Drudge's post was from down where the pond slime would have pooped on it as it came up.
Prince Harry, what is there to say? Well done, sir, most well done.
...
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he today that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day. (IV, iii)
by htom on February 29, 2008 3:50 PM
John,
Great work on that dipstick. He has no judgment whatsoever. You should have a wider audience.
by JimC on February 29, 2008 3:50 PM
htom - if that's what Drudge did, catch it up off Australian media, meaning the Brit media was going to slip off the leash... then yeah, not quite so bad.
Still, the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
And Drudge never answers my emails, either. [pout]
And I have a lot of sympathy for Harry. He obviously found a great deal of satisfaction in his deployment, having been so frustrated to be denied the opportunity to deploy to Iraq. And I have no doubt it expanded his horizons to be in such close quarters with people from such different backgrounds than his...
Really unnecessary. My understanding was that the Australian media reported it in January, but it caused barely a ripple, and didn't show up on any Jihadi websites, etc. After Drudge posted it, all sorts of exhortations and warnings went out on Jihadi sites. Near as I can tell, Drudge is single-handedly responsible for them having to pull Harry out.
Australia? I was referring to an actual pond, with actual slippery slimes living on the bottom, under the a$$hats. What they write about in Oz, I got no idea. Sorry.
From an on-line member of a forum I belong to --
Re: Prince Harry Outed
I, and his brother officers and colleagues serving with him out here in Helmand in the British/NATO/ISAF forces bloody well care.
Personally, I think it appalling that some ego-centric journalist - who at the end of the day has a right to freedom of speech ultimately protected by the very people willing to put their lives on the line for others - has so blatant a disregard for the individual, and such lack of understanding of the situation in their rabid chase for a scoop that they would do this.
Many of us have known he was here. None chose to break faith with a comrade. I think that speaks volumes. And yes, I am writing this from Helmand. So actually know what I am talking about.
by htom on February 29, 2008 4:33 PM
Your corrections are a lot faster and better than Drudge's!
When the news broke yesterday that Harry was in AFG, I was happy to hear it, and surprised that the Brit's would let it be known.
It all makes sense now, and yes, Drudge is a poopyhead for releasing information the British government wanted sealed.
SMACKAYOCHEEK, Drudge!
by AFSister on February 29, 2008 11:11 PM
I think I mentioned, over at Lex's place, that if Mr. Drudge got slapped, and said something like, "Thanks! I needed that!", well, I could put up with that.
However, Matt takes what should be public knowledge, see Lewinsky, and really makes it public.
After all, where would drug addled/sex addicted icon JFK be were Drudge around during his Presidency? Not to mention attempted Castro assasination brother RFK?
As far as Prince Harry is concerned, I’m certain the Taliban, on reading Drudge, immediately attacked all British forces in Afghanistan in order to kill the Prince!
I’m really disappointed when blogs I’ve read and supported for lo these many years, seem to lose all semblence(sp?)of rationallity and common sense."
Sure, the Talibs didn't rush right over and make a special effort because of Drudge.
But once they knew which unit he was in, and that he was there... were *I* a Talib commander, I would have made an extra effort to score the "Spare" of the House of Windsor.
If I didn't know, I wouldn't make any special efforts.
Like it or not, the Prince *is* a special target.
The Prince's presence in Afstan was a legitimate OPSEC concern. We maintain the same kinds of silence about unit and HVT deployments - hence, you don't read about the President and others really juicy targets being in Iraq or Afghanistan until after they've arrived - so you can't do any planning to do anything to take advantage of it.
What "need to know" on the part of the public was there of Prince Harry's deployment? That wouldn't have been served just as well by revealing it when he returned?
If you equate Harry in Afstan with Monica on her knees, I freely admit I don't see the connection.
And just because Drudge has done well in his career, doesn't mean he hasn't done something boneheaded.
And I get to comment on that. For the same reason I commented on Dan Rather.
I didn't call for a boycott of Drudge. I just said, on this issue, "asshat."
And I stand by that assessment.
I get *lots* of kewl stuff via work and contacts that I don't publish here - stuff which would not cost me my clearance and which would garner me some traffic.
But I run some filters. Filters other's don't. And they have more traffic than I.
That's the business, and since I'm not in business, I *really* have that luxury. And I know that.
Drudge in your hypothetical of Kennedy, and the actual of Clinton, is an example of brining insight into the character of the "most powerful person on earth" and, btw, didn't endanger anyone's life or the lives of those around them (unless you subscribe to the more fevered anti-Clinton fantasies).
In the case of Prince Harry, that's simply not true. While it *does* tell us something of Harry's character, and gives us insight of what his fellow warriors think of him - it was nothing that wouldn't have waited until his return.
Like I said up in a post that went up today (Sunday, 2 March) just because the Internet exists, doesn't mean that everything has to be posted on it, right now.
So, the American Family Association sends out an alert to a reader of the Castle I'm not a subscriber to that organization's mailings - hey, you guys gotta pull your weight somehow, right?
So, Bob forwards it to me. An excerpt (the full bit, with the pictures, is available via the link above).
The National Park Service, a branch of the federal government, has joined the Veterans Administration in establishing anti-Christian bigotry as public policy. The NPS has censored “God” from a key display of America 's Christian heritage in Washington .
The reference is an engraving of "Laus Deo," which is Latin for "Praise be to God," on the east side of the 100-ounce aluminum cap atop of the Washington Monument .
Since the actual inscription on the cap is unviewable atop the 555-foot stone column, the NPS created a replica which is on display in the white-colored obelisk of marble, granite and sandstone.
Now “God” has been removed from the plaque containing information about the Washington Monument . In 2000 the plaque read:
APEX OF THE MONUMENT Reproduction The builders searched for an appropriate metal for the apex that would not tarnish and would act as a lightning rod. They chose one of the rarest metals of the time, aluminum. The casting was inscribed with the phrase, Laus Deo, (Praise be to God).
The NPS censored the last sentence from the latest plaque, which now reads:
CAP OF THE MONUMENT Reproduction The builders searched for appropriate metal for the cap that would not tarnish and would act as a lightning rod. They chose one of the rarest metals of the time – aluminum.
So, I poke around a bit, and I can't find any truly good reason for this to have been done on purpose, yet, well, there it is.
So, I pop off a note to the NPS with a polite equivalent of "WTHeck, over?"
Shockingly, surprisingly, I've still not had a response today. Hey! Don't they know I'm a.... BLOGGER(!) good golly gee?
And I've chatted with their boss's boss's boss?
Heh. They're bureaucrats, they're not worried about me. Of course, could be their server is down from the volume of slag that was probably wending their way.
So, I pulled up the Rolodex and emailed Doug, Nancy's legislative director, and sent him the alert, with a note.
It was a short note.
How ludicrous do we let it get?
Doug promptly dumped it off to Nancy's Chief of Staff (who probably snagged a wandering intern...)
Anyway, that resulted in this:
We’re pinging NPS. We got a standard press release, but we’ll ping harder.
I replied:
Can I have the press release? Might as well flog them with their own words while you bring the fundament of the government to bear...
Oooo. I like that line.
So, Doug dutifully sent along the press release - which shows that they're reacting to the crashing waves of indignation... and blinking in the bright lights.
Subject: National Park Service Explores Methods to Make Replica of Washington Monument Capstone Visible From All Angles
National Park Service
News Release
Release Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
For Immediate Release
Bill Line, Toni Braxton 202 619-7400; David Barna 202-208-6843
National Park Service Explores Methods to Make Replica of Washington Monument Capstone Visible From All Angles
Washington, D.C. – In recent days, it has been brought to the National Park Service’s attention that a replica aluminum capstone representing the top of the Washington Monument that is on display on the Monument’s 490-foot level has not been fully visible to the public.
As a result, the National Park Service is exploring methods to make the replica capstone visually accessible from all angles so that all visitors may be able to see and read both the replica capstone and any related interpretive material in display cases that would be situated near the replica capstone.
Currently, the replica capstone is oriented in a display case on the 490-foot level to mirror the position of the actual aluminum capstone sitting outside and on top of the 555-foot, 1/8-inch obelisk. In its current position, this replica aluminum capstone is visible on three sides, with the fourth side currently not visible to visitors.
Additionally, the National Park Service will provide new interpretive information that will feature all of the capstone inscriptions in full, giving visitors the opportunity to fully understand the display.
“We appreciate this information being brought to our attention and we agree that the public should be able to learn as much as possible about the monument,” said National Mall & Memorial Parks Superintendent Peggy O’Dell. “This was clearly an oversight in this exhibit and we will take measures so all visitors are able to see this exhibit.”
-NPS-
Snerk. Draw your own conclusions. But this, boys and girls, demonstrates the utility of being nice to your local representative, even one not of your particular suasion. That doesn't mean you aren't critical, argue forcefully, etc. But at least in my case, being a *polite* squeaky wheel, who doesn't just carp but also makes policy suggestions from an informed perspective - well, let's just say that good manners accomplishes more than spittle-flecked ranting - at least in this case. And that's resulted in email and phone access with good people trying to do their best - and now and again, managing to influence things more than once every two years.
Just sayin'.
As for the NPS - shift the cap so it's point-on, and put back the original words, and I think you're golden. That or a double mirror.
There ya go, what more exploring d'you need? Even though I'm a consultant by trade - no charge.
You're a soldier, you just completed the longest deployment of any unit in the GWOT Long War, 22 months, you're home, and you're thinking you'll take advantage of some of that GI BIll money you've earned, right?
After all, you're a National Guardsman, who just spent more time in a combat zone than any Regular unit, and you'd like to finish up that degree, right?
Wrong. Your orders are one.day.short of the required amount of time on active duty (no matter if it's hot duty or not) to qualify. One... day. Mebbe it's *not* on purpose. But based on how I say Guardsmen and Reservists treated during my career, my nose is twitching.
Well, no point in having spent the time building the blog to what it is and to have gained the access to people I've gained and *not* use that access.
So, I forwarded that article to Congresswoman Nancy Boyda, my federal representative. Actually I sent it to her staff with this note:
The Lieutenant in the article is exactly correct. We routinely used to do what he describes to them for that purpose... which in peacetime is at least understandable.
In wartime, it's inexcusable.
Please pass this to *my* Representative and ask her to moot this about the HASC.
I had a response in about 15 minutes.
Consider it done. I’ll ask the staff director of the Military Personnel subcommittee about this tomorrow. Unbelievable. I think it’s also ridiculous that soldiers are getting discharged for a “pre-existing” personality disorders after returning from a deployment, thus denying them the opportunity to seek mental health care.
The Minnesota delegation is already on this, I'm just attacking it from within the committee structure. There may be regulatory guidance that forced this. It may be a more venal attempt to save money. Regardless, it's going to get looked at, and drug out into the open, where the leadership can take whatever action they deem needful.
A smart Army PAO once told me about how the Army looks at "getting out the message" - and he observed that more often than not, the Army's target for public information was Congress, and they weren't going to take blogs seriously until we showed we could influence... Congress.
Okay. Army PAO is getting ready to have a global conference.
Lessee, I got this note back from Congressional Staff... and a couple of weeks ago, I had a chat with the President.
This could get interesting, especially since that's a standard practice in lot's of areas. How many sets of TDY orders get cut for 179 days? A friend of mine's daughter has made several trips to the ME with the Air Force, and they're always doing that, although I believe it has something to do with the duty status of the assignment rather than the VA benefit.
Keith and I were talking about this late last week. He asked me if I knew why 6 month tours are 179 days instead of 180. I had no idea. He told me that benefits start kicking in at 180 days and that it's "always" been done this way. Doesn't make it right, at all... but like John said, this is not abnormal Army behavior. It's a disgusting display of disrespect, but not out of character, unfortunately. I hope to hell you/they/we get this fixed.
by afsister on October 8, 2007 3:30 PM
Outstanding, John.
Nothing warms my heart like seeing a higher-up use his powers for good, rather than for OPR padding or politicking.
/salute
by TheNewGuy on October 8, 2007 5:12 PM
It's like they are running the army on "Burger King" part time employee rules. If you work more than 38 hours a week you get benefits. So, they typically work them 36 1/2 or something close so they get all the hours and pay no benies.
The Army/DoD or whoever should be held accountable the same way the state NGs were held accountable for similar "screw-over the Soldier" tactics like 5-day orders. When I started out working for the Guard supporting the installation for Annual Training support, they'd cut 5-day orders EACH WEEK, so they didn't have to pay for the weekend and put you on Tricare, etc. They stopped that practice the next year. That wasn't just wrong, it was against NG Regulations, and someone squealed.
by Captain Tony on October 9, 2007 9:29 PM
Way to stay on top of the important issues John....Bravo!
Of course, he's got some more time in court coming... as a defendant in some tort cases.
However... in related news, Duke University announced it had reached an undisclosed financial settlement with the three former lacrosse players falsely accused of rape last year.
Hmmmm.
Duke suspended Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and Dave Evans after they were charged with raping a stripper at an off-campus party. The university also canceled the team's season and forced their coach to resign.
"We welcomed their exoneration and deeply regret the difficult year they and their families have had to endure," Duke said in a statement announcing the settlement. "These young men and their families have been the subject of intense scrutiny that has taken a heavy toll."
The players' families racked up millions of dollars of legal bills in their defense, and appear likely to file a lawsuit against Nifong.
The players said in a joint statement they hoped the agreement would "begin to bring the Duke family back together again."
"The events of the last year tore the Duke community apart, and forcibly separated us from the university we love," they said. "We were the victims of a rogue prosecutor concerned only with winning an election, and others determined to railroad three Duke lacrosse players and to diminish the reputation of Duke University."
I say there's some faculty who need to have some consequences, too. One can only hope that the players will find some manner to go after those immoderate denizens of the Ivory Tower.
John, from what I've read about this, Duke has been very careful to make sure that all university employees (including faculty) will not be held liable as part of the settlement. One commenter/author said that such a clause is "boilerplate" in the settlement form ususally used by universities.
It sucks that the gang of 88 won't be held legally liable, but on the other hand it sounds as if the young men got the cost of their defense back. I've seen too many stories where folks successfully defended themselves against unfounded charges, but ended up with nothing at the end of it.
Given the legal firepower and facts that they brought to the table, I doubt that any of the three left in a financial hole. I think that the hard part for the G88 is that I doubt that they have any protection for anything they say today (or ever) and that being quiet about the topic may be the hardest thing that they ever have to do.
Normally, I'm about attacking the message, not the messenger.
But, as I note, if you get stupid, I reserve the right to mock you mercilessly.
And publicly.
Someone doesn't like my site layout. Of course, there aren't really any ads here, per se, except some that are crediting people for work they've done or support they provide the site. '
But, apparently John Vickers, really doesn't care that much about the ads, I'm guessing he cares more, in a, ahem, negative fashion, about the content of the site.
At least that's what I infer from this polite, respectful email I got from him. Here is exactly how not to impress me with your intellect, wit, and rhetorical grandeur.
Hey, Stupid!
Change your homepage so one can read the articles without the bullsh*t ads. Just like stupid f*cking army guys. Do you need a f*cking comic book to understand how to do it d0uche bag, baby killer??
Cheers!
John
Dear John -
What ads?
There aren't any ads. There are some plugs for some organizations, and for people who have provided professional services to the site - but there isn't one, single, revenue-producing ad here.
And please, do send the comic book, but only if you can find something more inventive than this little display of potty-mouth.
Wanna compare grades and test scores? Maybe even salary?
However, If this is the best you bring to the game, don't waste your time, or mine. But I will give you credit for not dumping that trash in my comments.
Thank you for that. Feel free to never come back again. You aren't really the class of visitor I seek. Go to DU and hang with your buds.
Of course, I *am* assuming that the email is valid. If so, you sir, well, it's self evident what you are.
Snerk.
Cheers,
John
Update: Heh. He responded. Gotta give him credit - he's using a real email address.
No potty mouth this time - he's improving, and offering up a useful, if incomplete, observation.
Stupid,
Didn’t want to waste my time. As far as grades and tests scores, are you talking about GED scores??
Bye now!
Maybe you should check your web page again. It doesn’t display correctly
Well, since that was *almost civil* I responded, too.
I know it doesn't, a buried MT problem that MT and my part-time when he can get to it web monkey is trying to fix. And, yeah, it's probably something I broke, a genuine 1D10T error.
What browser are you using? Not everybody has that problem.
GED? You really don't know much about us baby killers, do you?
People paid me to go to college. And they paid for part of my grad degree. I had choices and prospects and I chose to do 20 years in the Army, and now I make quite a tidy living *plus* the pension, *plus* the disability. As Congressman Dennis Moore of Kansas notes, my share of the National Debt is 29K. Well, I paid my full share this year, and a bit more to cover part of your share, too.
Stupid people with no prospects should do more of that. They'd live in nicer houses.
But just what *is* the point of being such a jerk in an email?
Offer constructive criticism, fine. Potty mouth? What, my feelings were supposed to be hurt?
I was suddenly going to realize that my whole life was a sham?
Really, what *was* the point?
I'll give you this much, certainly - you used a real email address. Most people who drop by to for a drive-by poop-flinging don't.
Cheers,
John
And now, for a demonstration of Why I Have The Rulez - because in my email exchange with Mr. Vickers, I followed the Rulez. Which are back in force here, btw. I offiicially call off the dogs. Mr. Vickers responded to my last above:
I’m using IE7. And no, your feelings weren’t supposed to be hurt. I apologize for being an a$$ to you. It is just so disconcerting to see the bullshit going on in Iraq and Afghanistan . It makes me ashamed to have ever served in the military knowing that our troops are killing innocent people (‘collateral damage”) for no good reason. We could debate this issue, but what will be will be and it isn’t going to be a good outcome for the US . It is sad to see our “leaders” (a term used very loosely) not really give a shit about our troops and innocent lives wasted. It would be nice if their kids and family went to these places with weapons in their hands. It would be even better if the pieces of sh*t in Congress went themselves and fought for a month. This war would end real quickly. That would never happen because they are gutless turds. So the massacres continue. If only there were some enlightenment in this country.
Regards,
John
There's much to argue with, and a little that I can empathize with, but that would be a post for a different time.
The point of this post is... the Rulez. Why they're a good idea, and make this a calmer place. Which is why, among other things, readership is up, even if they are mostly lurkers.
As Marc Danziger, the Armed Liberal at Winds of Change remarked to me yesterday on the subject of "tone" in blogs - "When you walk into a party and there are people standing on the coffee table flinging dishes, yelling at each other, and other guests are egging them on... that draws a certain crowd. When you walk into a party and everybody has glass in hand and are chatting amiably and laughing and having a good time, that draws a different crowd."
We tried Animal House around here for a while. It didn't work. But I *don't* want the Stepford Wives blog-equivalent, either.
I suppose the douche bag provides him refreshment to ensure his usual elegance.
by Trias on May 5, 2007 4:42 PM
'Roid rage?
They shrunk both his now teeny tiny weenie and his brain?
Send him my way, we know how to deal with this sort but the language would make some of you blush (mainly with envy but I'm a 6th generation NCO and its a gift).
I dropped the guy a very polite email and asked him if, while he was dropping such noxious things around the internet via his work email, his boss knew what he was doing or if he owned that company himself since, either way, he showed an extremely poor taste in customer service savy.
Even gave him a link to this page.
Of course, I kind of ambushed him and put the subject as "Interested in your fitness program" with the first line a polite inquiry into his program before I got to the "and, do you think it's a good idea to write such garbage from your work email".
He emailed me back and said, "what are you talking about?"
I emailed him back and said, "You can't click a link?" to find the email you sent to a website regarding your problems with content and design?
I have to wonder, too--if he's got a problem with "army" (it's Army, moron) guys and "baby killers" (LOL), why does he even want to bother reading this site in the first place?
Seems to me like maybe you should add some more banners to the sidebar, John. Maybe a bunch of American flags and banners for more pro-military groups, so his little head will explode. ;-)
Sir, that is why I enjoy this blog so much. The rulez make the comments always (with the obvious fact that all who post here prefer decorum over dribble) enjoyable to read.
Other blogs and sites should follow. People too, truthfully.
As for why they do it? Make themselves feel superior. Figure, this generation (mine, those generation Y types and certainly those gen Xers) has had many things handed to them, and always consistantly praised for their efforts at everything, no matter the result. The moment they hit the real world, be that college or the job market, this warm, fuzzy blanket feeling suddenly stops. No more Mommy, Daddy, and Teacher telling you you're special and the best.
In order to make up for this loss of "specialness" they try to drag others down.
by Geo(AeroEng) on May 6, 2007 12:05 AM
Oh, c'mon, John, you know you love it when the Missus gets all righteously passionately angry. I don't call my Sweety's house Castle Bravo fer nuthin, ya know!
(and I actually advised the Sweety to get the ammo with the most revolting wound ballistics, and bought some for her that was even worse!)
Ps. Is it safe (to the gun) to use Cor-Bon +P+ ammo in a S&W 442?
Beth, if his little head exploded it wouldn't leave a mark big enough for a dust mite to lick clean.
He is probably sitting in his mother's basement,
nearsighted eyes glued to the screen and cackling with glee because he got a response...his existence, while denied by his mother, is validated in cyberspace.
by Cricket on May 6, 2007 7:19 AM
I started to write something, but I'm tired of this guy already.
Comic books? I like comic books. Sure, he can send all the comic books he wants. YOu know, guys like me who figure out, or did at one time, how to make life saving drugs tend to like comic books. As do brainy Chicks like BCR, the Uber-Brainy woman. Me and the hamster can always use more bedding down in Purgatory, well, mostly the hamster, after I've read it a half dozen times.
What's he doing dissin' comic books? Don't be making fun of comics anybody. That's a whole other set of ugly that'll ruin your life. Who wants a fan boy wearing Spock ears, home made Wolverine claws, and wearing all black x30 chasing you down the block? And with Spiderman 3 just released? Being turned black and blue by a sea of read and blue isn't much fun. Comics. The overly maligned art of moral story telling in the moral age. And its fans are wicked rabid.
John, if perchance this John Vickers of whom you speak happens to have a middle initial of "H", perhaps you might send me contact information, as he may well be someone of my past acquaintance and i may be able to prove useful in re-directing his views on the matter.
Having recieved a Boot to the head.(A response to John’s response in the H&I*)
PSA note to parents who read here at the Castle: it may be cheaper to buy from the big box store, but you’re not as likely to get an honest answer about the content from the clerk. It might be worth the extra 20% you might pay, 12 bucks or so, to get honest answers from the niche store clerk about content. Just like the explicit lyrics label the ESRB rating, when not covered by the price tag, doesn’t tell you near enough about what you’re buying. Ask around before you buy. Come here and ask if you’ve got nowhere else to go or nobody else you trust on it. Some of us Denizens are big juvenile delinquents who still watch cartoons, read comic books, and play video games. Some T rated games you’ll be utterly comfy with and others will cause you to break out the Crucifix and garlic.
Mostly I was just yankin’ your chain, Armorer. The Ferret hissing at The Bear and getting reminded why hissing at the Bear isn’t that smart a recreation. But there is a little more to it than that.
All true, well mostly. The target demo is skewing higher, like comic books. This is a Mature (M) rated game---so it’s audience isn’t 12-20 but 18-35. Maybe I’m still in the wrong with you since you’ve got Prodigal Son and PS’s Best Bud in mind, and, no, I didn’t link to the game as you’d just reach over the Internets and choke me, that’s to what the ESRB says about what an M game is. The same people interested in buying Pl@yB0y and other adult things are the target audience of the game and the party in question. And yet, this outrage is over goats and b00bies(PG-17 spelling), something maybe not that far removed from the toga party that inspired the toga party in the classic ‘Animal House’, and not nearly as bad as the lewd costumes and behaviour one can run into at anime or gaming conventions or even in rather pedestrian anime.
(more after the jump)
--ry
Exceptionally indulgent, artsy fartsy, and connected 20 somethings--- who the party was really for--- don’t need video games to do things this crass and stupid(P@ris H7lton for instance). If it shifts away from the game launch parties it’ll wind up somewhere else, as it always has. That other launch parties I’ve heard of, third hand I assure you as I’m not kewlpeople, are just as bad but nothing is heard of about them because no outrage industry group’s offended strikes me as hypocrisy. And this is just one big game launch party where someone noticed the dead goat but not the tens of other launch parties that’re just as troublesome from a moral living aspect.
A dead goat? Is that what it takes for people to pay attention to game content and what happens at parties? The outrage industry that is PETA working up to full honk is when we get all bent out of shape about marketing parties(where, as one recent party had game execs firing everything from glocks to sniper rifles in the Nevada desert while taking drinks served by bikini clad beauties, likely because the Outrage Industry didn't make noise about it.) and game content? That seems like a non-sequitor and uncritical thinking to gollum, but gollum is often wrong on matters social, not to mention plain odd. It just strikes me as the same faux outrage as that we experience over Imus. Sure it’s offensive. Sure it’s annoying and tempting of children to misbehave, as misbehaving is seen as kewl. But worthy of the level of scorn heaped on it? Ich kenne nicht.
This is sooo a niche activity and audience. We’re only talking about it because PETA and other animal rights wet blankets got upset. Not because any one really notices how whacked out these parties are whether it be for club openings, album or game launches; or the content in many of the games. Nobody even noticed the guns, booze, and bimbos extravaganza that was the industry introduction to the Marcinko title. Nobody said much at all about the launch party of $0.50’s launch of his atrocious, Thug Life glorifying game or the game itself(largely because it sold like piece o' crap it was). That’s annoying. Yes, we, the small number of gamers are to be the fall of Civilization as we know it. All because some marketing joker who’s likely never picked up a controller, but attended lots of parties for the rich and famous, decided to be fashionably outrageous and included t0pl3ss womins and a dead goat we will be ones who left The West open to the Scimitar. How horrible we are. We’re worse than NAMBLA.
I guess you could say my pique is that we’re kowtowing to the outrage industry. That’s never a good thing. Sure, they’re proll’y right this time. Maybe, since I think we’ve all gone to parties of one type or another that are racier than dead goats, offal, and b00bies since we broke the hallowed age 18 barrier---it’s an M rated game after all, the same as an R rated movie. But that just means they’ll feel better about throwing paint at someone, or trying to close down my local Kentucky Fried and the local to you Australian Outback sometime in the future (the wastards).
Yeah, it’s a bit much, a bit indulgent, and a bit done in bad taste even for a theme party based on the game---about a guy trying to kill Greek gods for the cruelty they show in tricking him into slaying his own family. But it is intended for the same aged audience as Pl@yb0y, slasher flicks, and racy beer commercials---not kiddies or even HS kids. If it does get parents to actually pay attention a bit more and, to look just beyond the ESRB rating when they buy for their kid then it’s a good thing. But pissed over a dead goat and b00bies, small potatoes, at a launch party is a bit of the hypocrisy I loath so much. I don’t agree with it, I’m not one for enjoying fashionably outrageous stuff in the first place (the game that spawned the party in particular, or art for that matter), and a sign of the industry getting way out there(as was the extravagance of the now cancelled E3)? Sure. But artists are always this weird and barely tolerable. I get annoyed when we jump in time to the tune called by the outrage industry instead of being smart about how we get annoyed at the gaming industry and its practices.
There’s worse stuff out there too. The game itself is a bit more troubling to this gamer than the party, particularly how many kids wind up playing the dang thing. The game is a blood orgy. This game is horrendously, gratuitously bloody and violent enterprise. The Wife is in love with an M rated series that deals with occult subjects that drive me from the room. The GTA series, while groundbreaking in open-ended story telling, is a macabre celebration of being sociopathic---but the people criticizing that are scolds, donchaknow, while protesting a dead goat is a fine moral stance (the cool celebrities who are part of PETA said so.). The content of much of the more recent games is much more bothersome to me than the avant garde party for the small number of ‘cool people’ that actually got invited---which I wouldn’t be surprised wasn’t much of a gamer crowd but a partier crowd staffed with celebutaunts and ‘artists’.
So, yeah, I hear ‘ya Boss(and a lot of other parents). It isn’t what you raise your kids to aspire to. But if you want to really see the problem of the industry rifle through someone’s game (or DVD) collection, and pay less attention to the party. It’s the right reaction….to the wrong target. –ry
(ry can be reached at Ultimatewhinner at aol dot com for questions about videogame content. I only check that one about once a week so be a little patient, please.)
Oh, and if I have to be fair and balanced, and can only criticize something if I criticize everything remotely related to it...
Well, tough noogies, smelly rodent, I don't have the time.
Just as a fisherman doesn't catch all the fish that swim by, nor the cop pull over all the speeders that whizz by, so to I will fire on targets of opportunity that meet the ROE. Others will escape.
Do I at least get credit for throwing off google and not setting off PG-17C with attrocious spelling?
Dang.
Still, wrong target. And Ferrets don't fly all that well. Our weight distro is off. So you can throw us like clay pigeons all you want. You'll still miss. *nyaaaaaa*
Oh, and righteous anger? I think you do that often enough. Even if you dont' get to use your big vocabulary.
by ry on April 30, 2007 9:28 PM
Grab you by your little tail and send you off spinning like an axe.
I've asked MNF-I for more info (via the good offices of CENTCOM PAO) on this issue, the detention of LTC Michael William Steele, then commanding the Camp Cropper detention facility in Iraq.
An Army statement listed these charges against Steele: "One specification of a violation of Article 104, aiding the enemy; one specification of a violation of Article 134, retaining classified material; two specifications of violations of Article 133, conduct unbecoming an officer, for relationships involving an interpreter and another Iraqi female; five specifications of a violation of Article 92, failure to obey lawful orders for wrongfully storing classified materials, improperly marking classified materials, failing to obey an order from a superior officer, possession of pornography and dereliction of duty as an approving official for the expenditure of government funds."
Army Knowledge Online identifies LTC William H. Steele as a Reserve Officer assigned to the 310th Military Police Battalion. If MNF-I chooses to answer a blogger request, I'll pass that along. From the charges alone, three scenarios come to mind.
1. The colonel is a horn-dog thinking with his small brain, and was doing so in a way that allowed the Iraqis access to classified material that the colonel was storing sloppily, the other charges stemming from discoveries incidental to the initial complaint. That's the charitable scenario.
2. The colonel is a horn-dog thinking with his small brain and was played by the Iraqis involved to get access to the data that he improperly handled, making it possible to get access. This one has potential damage beyond that to the colonel's reputation and career.
3. The colonel is a horn-dog thinking with his small brain *and* he's dirty, to boot.
The first one, if sustained, will likely get him slapped around, fined, and dismissed from the service, with prejudice. 2 and 3 will easily bring him to come live in the back meadow of Fort Leavenworth, where the Disciplinary Barracks is located. How long he remains a guest here will be a function of whether it's 2, or 3, and how much damage was done.
Update: In retrospect, especially considering the comments, I should have done something here that I was thinking about when I wrote the post, I left some things unsaid that I really shouldn't have.
I chose the numbers for the three possibilities not only because they increase in severity - but because they also *decrease* in likelihood. The list of charges looks padded (the "ham sandwiches" mentioned in the comments) and are stuffed with things probably discovered ex post facto during the investigation, and were added to ratchet up the pressure for an easy cop on whatever the real meat they're after is, i.e., to increase the chances for a plea bargain. This is why prosecutors pretty much would like virtually every human activity to be chargeably illegal in some context, so they do something like this to you to get you on something, even if their main case is weak, or they know they've got you but would rather you plead out than go to trial.
I've handled enough FOUO documention to know that you can get tripped up with *that* simply by forgetting to put it in your desk drawer and step out of the office.
In other words, if I were a betting man, I'd bet on the horn-dog angle, and the rest is there to pressure LTC Steele into rolling over.
Regardless, it isn't over until the Judge says it is, one way or another.
So I'll say it upfront - given they've gone to this level of effort, I'm guessing LTC Steele has had some "interpersonal relationship" judgement lapse, and that it's unlikely he sold out the troops.
..there's another evil thread in this story that they haven't picked up on (yet).
btw, i wonder how steve jordan is doing. nothing much being said on that topic.
by MajMike on April 26, 2007 9:59 AM
While I hate to read stuff like this, what at least gives me hope is that the perps will be punished. And by Iraqis, do you mean friendlies or insurgent supporting types? Improper conduct...leads me to believe the LTC has let his guard down?
Not good.
by Cricket on April 26, 2007 10:01 AM
Cricket - as yet, insufficient data for a meaningful answer.
..there's another evil thread in this story that they haven't picked up on (yet).
You mean the allegation about one of the females being the daughter of a detainee? If so, AoL picked up on it early this morning -- although they called LTC Steele an American official, rather than an American officer.
I wonder just how many of the Usual Moonbats will chime in and demand Steele be returned to duty because it was "only about sex..."
If he does, in fact, eventually PCS to the Disciplinary Barracks, being an MP -- rather, a *former* MP -- will not ease things during the Peer Acceptance Process...
"on behalf of {insert unit here}, i must apologize for your inadvertent detention. you were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. here's $5 for bus fare home."
coulda happened.
by MajMike on April 26, 2007 12:59 PM
Just a thought,
No...I can't even begin to comment, teeth clenching..
Richard
by Richard on April 26, 2007 1:02 PM
Richard: exactly.
and thus i shall refrain from further comment.
this could be a ham sandwich indictment, or it could be something more.
initial reports are rarely accurate in all particulars, and a healthy skepticism should probably prevail until/unless proven otherwise in Court Martial.
by MajMike on April 26, 2007 1:22 PM
When did "possession of pornography" become "conduct unbecoming an officer?"
I guess if they ask I'll say all the DVDs belong to my wife...
The pr0n being stored on a government computer, perhaps? Unknown at this time, and MNF-I has correctly deduced that I can be blown off... or at least responded to at leisure!
Actually, pornography is prohibited in Iraq (for soldiers) by orders. It is on the list of prohibited things when we send care packages. along with pork products. The government prohibits it. Not that it's not available in Iraq, but we are "culturally sensitive".
Remember the uproar a few Silly Seasons back when Piglet was banned in Britain for fear of "offending Muslim sensibilities"...?
Guess what? The Muttaween -- the religious policemen, not to be confused with The Religious Policeman (hurry up and finish that book so you can get back to blogging!) -- finally caught on that a cartoon pig was supposedly an instrument of the Peacock Angel.
Camper from Qatar Living recounts the tale, beginning (as is appropriate) at the beginning:
In Qatar there is only one decent bookshop (that happens to be a Saudi chain) that has a few shelves of English books. Shopping there is hit or miss - you don't go there to look for a title. You go there in the hope of stumbling upon something interesting.
The kids selection is not bad though. The other night we saw Disney's "My Very First Encyclopedia with Winnie the Pooh and friends". We grabbed it and thought it was exactly what we needed for our daughter - not only does she love Winnie the Pooh but she's also started taking a keen interest in nature.
And upon opening said Encyclopedia, camper discovered that Piglet had been blacked out. On every page. You'll get a small, painless lesson in current Middle Eastern events during camper's dissertation on why he found the censorship more disturbing than that which was censored.
This whole incident reminded me of a discussion with a friend from South Africa a few years ago. He was explaining kindness and mercy in Islam. He said that a even a pig, a creature which is seen as "despised" by Muslims, is a creature of God and should thus be treated with kindness and mercy. So while we should not eat it, that doesn't meant that Muslims are interested in torturing or trying to exterminate them... even if only with a brand new 3-inch black marker. If a pig was injured, it would be a Muslims duty to assist it.
One commenter wondered why the presence of Piglet in the bookstore was deemed offensive, but the presence of Mein Kampf was *not*...
The whole post is here. Don't forget the comments, either. Every now and then, it's nice to be reminded that Sensibility trumps Sensibilities -- and there are folks closer to the source than we are who don't want Wahhabism shoved down *their* throats, either...
BillT, you've been tagged with the "Six Weird Things" meme!
"I'm tagging: Sgt. B, Cassandra, Grim, Lex, Barb, and BillT... all of whom are definitely "characters" of the highest order. Which is just a nice way of saying they're weird, so this should be good!"
CAPT H sends: Colonel sacked for rebuke over visits to injured.
Sean Rayment, writing in the Sunday Telegraph:
A high-flying Army officer has been sacked for rebuking a senior commander who failed to visit injured troops in hospital.
Col Julian Clover, 43, was dismissed from his post as a staff officer at the Army's Land Command headquarters after clashing with his superior over the need for senior officers to visit troops injured in Afghanistan and Iraq at the Selly Oak hospital in Birmingham.
His sacking has sent shock waves through Land Command, the biggest Army headquarters in Britain, and has raised concerns that some senior officers are "out of touch" with the concerns of the rank and file.
There's more to the story.
Brig Bruce Brealey, 47, who had previously served in the Royal Artillery, was on a rota of senior officers who had been asked to visit Selly Oak hospital in November to check up on the soldiers' welfare and to deal with any complaints they might have. It is understood, however, that before he was due to travel to the hospital he delegated the visit to Col Clover, who at the time was an assistant chief of staff with responsibility for media operations at the headquarters.
After visiting the hospital, Col Clover had a meeting with Brig Brealey in which he expressed his view in a "forthright and uncompromising manner" that it was not acceptable for senior officers to delegate the responsibility of visiting injured troops to junior officers. The two officers were known by colleagues to have had a difficult working relationship.
Brigadier Brealy is referred to by a fellow officer as a "process man" whilst Colonel Clover has made a career in unconventional operations. A clash of personalities.
I'm no Brit, so I may be wrong, but I read this rather as Brigadier Brealy is a Stuffed Shirt Rule-bound Garret Trooper, while Colonel Clover is rather more results-oriented. I can see, being a Brigadier, how your schedule might be pretty full and it's hard to carve out the time to do things like that. Who knows what the travel time is to the hospital?
Of course, that's why you have a vehicle with a driver, and a cell phone, etc - and a laptop. No reason you can't work while in the vehicle going to and fro. And I suspect the hospital might just allow you some leeway in visiting hours, so you could go after work.
And, I suspect, this incident was merely the straw that broke the camel's back for the Brigadier, what with that unruly subordinate. The Brigadier undoubtedly has a story.
Absent any more information, however, I frankly don't care. Bad Brigadier. Sit, stay! You can't find time in your schedule to go visit soldiers? To show you actually care for soldiers - and make the hospital people know you care for soldiers, especially wounded ones? If you can't muster that kind of professionalism, then, in my book, you are unworthy of your commission.
Worse, the man's a Gunner. An Artilleryman. A Redleg (which no doubt was *some* of CAPT H's motivation for sending me the story).
Meaningless as it is, I shun you, sir. I call upon Saint Barbara to withdraw her patronage from you.
Unless you've got a far better reason than the story indicates. If so, I'm sure Saint Barbara will take that into consideration. However, if I hear of you suffering a horrible accident involving a barbecue gone wild... or something similar - well, we'll know Saint Barbara's opinion, won't we?*
This isn't about Colonel Clover - wronged or not. He's getting by on his 70K ($135K USD) salary just fine.
This is about the soldiers, wounded soldiers, you didn't have time for.
Yeah, that's awful. I can't help but contrast it with a story I recently read about the death of Corporal Dunham (held an enemy grenade on the ground under his helmet to protect his buddies and will be awarded the MoH Thursday). He survived long enough to be moved to Bethesda, but within hours he took a turn for the worse and it became apparent he was slipping away. The newspaper report I read indicated that the Marine Corps Commandant rushed to his bedside to award the purple heart before he died and his mother ended up sobbing on the Commandant's shoulder.
Now that's how a senior leader should be responding to the wounded and their families--he'd obviously dropped everything to be there in time.
It ain't nice to mess with Saint Barbara. I mind my short-fuze childhood experience. I advise the Brigadier to be careful around Bics, gas stoves and flour sifters until this is straightened out up there.
Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking
By Dana Yates, Daily Journal Staff
Belmont is set to make history by becoming the first city in the nation to ban smoking on its streets and almost everywhere else.
The Belmont City Council voted unanimously last night to pursue a strict law that will prohibit smoking anywhere in the city except for single-family detached residences. Smoking on the street, in a park and even in one’s car will become illegal and police would have the option of handing out tickets if they catch someone.
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image [sic] how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
I'm betting he said "Imagine" and the paper just spell-checked themselves into that corner.
Okay - let's do some imagining. First, let's change the quote a teensy bit.
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [fill in the blank] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
Alrighty then. Would not then, all these statements be true? Where *do* we draw the line.
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [drinking] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [drug use] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [gun ownership] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [vehicle ownership] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [bathtubs] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [fill in the blank] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [being overweight] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [unprotected sex] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [fast food] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
Go ahead, come up with your own. I've made this a Denizen post so Denizens can add to the post directly, not just via the comments.
Another dramatic, and meaningful step from the land of Fruits, Flakes and Nuts. Clearly a powerful message, like the Berkeley City Council voting to make Berkeley a Nuclear Free Zone.
“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against [Dihydrogen Monoxide] as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”
So let me add this up. No use of Scoresby (drinking) to get my partner ready for unprotected sex in a nuclear free zone, in a bathtub (Cialis…Cialis.com and drugs .. double hit) with a partner who needs to shed a few pounds… the bathtub in the back of my pickup (vehicle)?
I am a total nonsmoker. But this is a very bad nasty law, and I have neighbors who smoke outside because they don't want to reduce the value of their house.
I mean, come on...it is FRESH air, in the cold and rain someone is suffering to engage in their habit, so who is it gonna hurt? On the otter heiny, I detest the a&&hats who dump their car ashtrays out on the street while waiting for a light.
But then, what can you expect from a city 'near' the Bay?
I am a Belmont resident and avid NRO reader. I wonder how many people can say that? I watched the City Council meeting Tuesday night and thought "well, these jokers might have finally done something dumb enough to get our little town some national attention." The next morning, Drudge had the link. We get our 15 minutes of stupidity...
by NROer in Belmont on November 16, 2006 5:26 PM
There there. I know how rare a thing being a righty in a lefty state is, but it will pass.
*scarfing Mike and Ike's while guzzling Dr. Pepper*
by Cricket on November 16, 2006 8:01 PM
Heh...the lefties will find this a good la until someone takes this as a good reason to ban abortion and gay marriage.
"We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law against stinky dog farts as we can, I would like to make it illegal", said councilman Dave Warden...
Look out, Beth! They're coming for yer blog! (and yer dawg!)
When the smokers stop littering the streets with their butts, they can return to smoking on the street. I'm all for the 'live free or die' mentality, but I hate smokers.
My favorite line about second hand smoke....Diabolique with Sharon Stone. She is smoking when some dweebie guy comes up and starts whining about the danger of second hand smoke. "Second hands smoke kills!" She raises her perfect eyebrow, inhales deeply, exhales in his face....and deadpans, "Not reliably.".
I don't smoke. I won't kiss a man who smokes (three men have quit smoking in order that they may kiss me). I work for a home oxygen company.
That said.....people who harrass smokers *really* bug me. We shouldn't be legislating *healthy* behavior. If an adult wants to engage in some self destructive activity, that's your right. If you want to complain about the fumes...ban diesel buses and trucks. If you want to complain about the smell....ban those who wear too much cologne and perfume. If you want to complain about cigarette butts left on the street...ban gum and dog walkers (cigarette butts don't stick to my shoe and get tracked in the house). If you want to complain about the burden to our health care system....ban sweets and junk food, diabetes and heart disease cost more.
Besides, it's a slippery slope before they come for my chocolate.
Hey, NROer, I feel for you man. I was born in Solano County but I could see the way the state was going forty years ago and bailed out. Kind of a pity. I was a real Fourth Generation Californian and that was forty years ago. Damn sure weren't too many of us around.
But after going to high school in Berekely, and then trying the Jesuits for collage, I said I can't stand all this b.s. and dropped out and enlisted in the Marines.
Twelve hours later I was standing tall at the Marine Corps Recruit Depot at San Diego being infroduced to my Drill Instructor. It turned out the the methods of the Jesuits and Gunnery Sergeant J.A. Herrera were remarkably similar (with the exception of the rather more colorful language used by Gunnery Sergeants) but I sure learned a LOT in the twenty weeks I spent in boot camp and the Infantry School. What really surprised me the most, however, was how much my father had learned in that period.
The greatest lessons I learned in the Corps was the duty a leader has to be absolutely straight and honest with the troops at all times, and the absolute necesity that loyalty must go up the chain and down the chain.
And after watching California politics for nearly sixty years I've yet to find a California politician who comes even close in either respect.
by Marine6 on November 17, 2006 12:36 AM
My husband was recently in the hospital. Every few minutes there was an annoucement that "we are a nonsmoking property, both inside and out." So smokers can no longer go outside to smoke. However, at any time during the day, there are about 2o vehicles lined up in front of this establishment with motors running waiting for dismissed patients, putting tons of noxious and cancerous gases into the air. I suppose this is a case of your sin is worst than mine.
Bobbie
by Bobbie on November 17, 2006 1:19 AM
Howzabout Methane Gas?
Especially around Mexican restraunts and all night Bar B Que joints....
I am not a smoker, and find the habit distasteful and annoying, so bear that in mind when reading my comment... I have absolutely nothing against private establishments banning smoking on their grounds, inside their buildings, or inside certain areas of those buildings. They own the land/building, so it is their right to do with it as they please. However, banning smoking from all public places, including wide-open parks where the second-hand smoke can simply dissipate off into the world... that is just completely idiotic.
That said, I want a "smoke-break" for non-smokers created... I swear, for every hour of work I see out of the smokers around me, they spend 30 minutes on "break"...
Whoa, you're right there I think. Here's the problem with all of this stuff is that, I can understand the illegal drug use one, but only because of that one key word. Illegal. As stated by the federal government. Who still has yet to outlaw tobacco. Why can't these people try and take up like my man in Hazleton, PA and crack down on illegal [smoking deleted] aliens! Don't you love these city council types, I hope they don't plan on keeping their jobs next term, there are probably a lot more smokers than they realize, not to mention store owners, who may not like what they're up to.
PS where's the ACLU here? shouldn't they be stepping in, those friggin jerks!
I do not smoke and never have. To put it bluntly I think of it as a foolish and unhealthy habit. I fully support bans on smoking where i'm exposed to smokers fumes.
However I think smokers should be permitted to smoke amongst themselves and away from others as much as they want and have absolutely no support for a blanket ban. I am a law mimimalist I suppose.
Smokers who break the law with littering of butts etc really it's more to do with general littering and they should be treated accordingly.
I agree about the smoke breaks. All the smokers I have worked with waste a lot of time smoking at work and of course with the many bans in place it's even more time as they trudge downstairs puff puff in lonely existence fart arse about then trudge back upstairs again only to repeat the process the next time their addiction calls. It's time employers and non smokers rebalanced this issue.
It *is* interesting with the insertion of *drug use*. There already exisits a blanket ban on drug use.
SWWBO, Chief Catholic here at Castle Argghhh! has been all overthis.
So, the Pope has apologized.
CASTEL GANDOLFO, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday that he was "deeply sorry" about the angry reaction to his recent remarks about Islam, which he said came from a text that didn't reflect his personal opinion.
Over this:
In his speech on Tuesday, Benedict quoted from a book recounting a conversation between 14th century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II and an educated Persian on the truths of Christianity and Islam.
"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'"
Works for me - he's sorry that a bunch of ignorant punks took remarks out of context and got their panties in a twist.
Guess what? I'm sorry they're a bunch of ignorant punks, too. And I'm not just talking about the Imams and their congregations deep in the Muslim world who can be expected to have a profound ignorance of Christian and Western history and, fed by a sound bite secularist western media, only heard the remarks out of context, and then behaved in the (to my eyes) childish ways they have become so famous for... torching churches, tossing firebombs, the usual reaction of certain practioners of the religion of peace to words, any words, that might be perceived as... oh, I don't know, critical. Yet they look at you uncomprehendingly when you ask them about their criticism of, oh, judaism or christianity.
No, rather, I'm saving my greater contempt for the MSM and their reporting of he issue.
But I also like the fact that Benedict didn't apologize for the remarks, just expressed regret people got their panties in a twist.
Muslim reaction was mixed...
Mahmoud Ashour, the former deputy of Cairo's Al-Azhar Mosque, the Sunni Arab world's most powerful institution, told Al-Arabiya TV immediately after the pope's speech that, "It is not enough. He should apologize because he insulted the beliefs of Islam. He must apologize in a frank way and say he made a mistake."
What, quoting old dead white men to illustrate a point in how things have morphed over time is a mistake? Hmmmm, better check to see if this guy is on faculty at a Major University... He didn't make a mistake, he quoted from history to support a point. And if you aren't adult enough to work with that... okay.
There's no pulling the wool over the eyes of this academic, Mohammed al-Nujeimi, a professor at the Institute of Judicial and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, he got the point...
The pope does not want to apologize. He is evading apology and what he said today is a repetition of his previous statement," he told Al-Arabiya TV.
But the leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, takes a more laid-back approach,
But the leader of Egypt's largest Islamic political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, said that "while anger over the Pope's remarks is necessary, it shouldn't last for long."
Of course, why does he take a laid-back view? He senses victory in the long-term...
While he is the head of the Catholic Church in the world, many Europeans are not following (the church) so what he said won't influence them. Our relations with Christians should remain good, civilized and cooperative," Mohammed Mahdi Akef told The Associated Press.
Methinks he sees Europe as ready to accept dhimmitude, following a template laid down by Vichy France.
I think the irony is nearly overwhelming. Honestly, words nearly fail me - are these Musliim [deleted] for real? Sorry, excuse my redundant question - to the nun they've killed and the congregations they've left homeless by burning those churches, they are all too real alright! Well, as a (formerly) non-extremist Catholic I can honestly tell you, the over-reaction to the Pope's WORDS, following on from the treatment of that Danish cartoonist, has left me feeling extremely hostile toward Muslims everywhere and hoping that my church rises up to use it's far superior firepower to wipe this ugly blemish of a religion from the face of the planet! Yes, that's right, I, a non-hostile Catholic, has become so angered by these animals that I now hope they DO bring their f***ing Jihad here and get wiped out once and for all by my God-fearing, peaceful church. It's at times like this I actually get behind the likes of George Bush as the lesser of two evils. Whilst he doesn't represent MY religion, at least he'll try and protect me and my family from these vile, unhinged barbarians. I really hope it has come to the point that Christians the world over draw a line and finally stop pandering to these [deleted] - we never wanted violence or hostility, but they brought it. What is wrong with these people that they aren't happy until they have someone (e.g. Salman Rushtie, cartoonists, the Pope, country's and Presidents) to sentence to DEATH - they really are [deleted] and my only regret is that the Pope even tried to open discourse with these [deleted]. See the rewards for trying to pander to these violent wretches? He's got them threatening to send SUICIDE bombers into his f***ing home!! Seriously like, what is this like???? I'm too angry to type. [deleted]
Matt
[I edited Matt's comments to bring them more in line with my Rulez for commenting - which is message, not messenger, and no pointless (other than catharsis) personal attacks, or verbiage which lumps whole groups together inaptly - if you want to use high-shock-value words like "swine" and "scum" well and good - but be more specfic than simply "muslim" which, to my ears, cuts simply too large a swath. My space, my rulez. I think you *still* get a sense of Matt's anguish, and it's not diminished by the edits. -the Armorer]
by Matt on September 17, 2006 11:40 AM
While I appreciate Matt's frustration and anger, I would ask commenters to refrain from the "wipe the religion from the face of the earth" rhetoric and the whole lumping of the entire Muslim world into the word "scum". It is rather more complex than that - angry as you might feel about it at the moment.
Hi John,
Cheers for the input, put what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander - they lump us all in as 'infidels' and I think they're all scum. They want us all converted at the point of a sword, and I want them all impaled on that same sword. Bearing this in mind, I am not a good Christian, but a whole-heartedly angered human. What was done to that little old nun should be done to the animals that did it to her, and then to all that hold that this is the way to spread religion. Thanks anyway.
Matt
by Matt on September 17, 2006 12:15 PM
Matt - I don't necessarily disagree with you - but I've found over time if I turn down the heat, the debate stays focused.
I left in your points (and made clear where I removed things), I just removed some of the oily rags you had in there...
Something I keep running into over at GX@40 is 'reconciliation'. I don't think they get that, like a divorce, if one side isn't into getting back together it isn't happening. JP2 kissed the Koran. He gave it the utmost of respect. And yet they insult us all the time by playing as if we're a lesser religion. Sigh. So they get mad. We chide hyperactive religionists here for the similar actions for being childish. I'm willing to accept Moslems as equals, but only so long as they extend the same. You insult my religion you'd best be prepared for someone to fire back. You claim yours is the will of God then you'd best be prepared for someone else to explain why you're wrong and their religion's right(and in this case the appeal to Reason being in Catholicism).
Sheesh. Victimology. What is it good for?(Absolutely nothun'!)
by ry on September 17, 2006 11:33 PM
Define 'good, civilized and cooperative.' From their POV. We know from ours it means dhimmitude, but hey, these are Euroweenies.
Denmark ain't buyin' it.
They didn't like the Nazis and the Russians and the EU.
Heh.
by Cricket on September 18, 2006 12:09 AM
BAsically, they have to go thru a counter-Reformation like thing. They have to re-inject humanism and reason into the religion. they have to stop playing the victim. The Hindu did. They get along great. They're actually a well respected religion that gets less crap than most despite a *very* bloody past.
Co-respect is possible, but just not as long as one tries to play the victim all the dang time and goes appoplectic at every turn.
by ry on September 18, 2006 12:33 AM
I believe we should adhere to the Modified Golden Rule:
"Do unto others as they would do unto you. In spades."
Dang it. Why did Trias tag me with this what do you thing? Youse a cruel man Trias. Posting it here because Kats Place (middleground) is so serious, unlike Argghhh!
1) What scares me:
a) Losing my physical faculties, which Im already starting to do.
b) Losing my mental faculties (I know what youre thinking, but no, not yet.).
c) The idea that the inmates are running the asylum the world over.
2) People who make me laugh:
a) Pro-comedians(Bill Cosby, Billy Connley, Gabriel Iglesias)
b) People who do the same crap over and over with the expectation of a different result.
c) Myself. When you do as much stupid chit as I have you have to laugh.
d) My wife, Jess. How anyone so smart and so sophisticated can be so into silly stuff like Pokemon and the anime Fushigi Yugi just astounds the heck outta me.
3) Things I hate the most:
a) Elitism. This is the fastest way to piss me off in the world. That means much of the political left (since they seem to be so smug in believing that they are morally superior in just about every instance while those of us who disagree just arent capable of understanding their ideas.) and many comedians have lost me from the word go.
b) That I wasted 15 years of my life studying the wrong subject. Your vocation and avocation should be matched horses. Mine aint.
c) When my uber-liberal in-laws meddle or get that look when I take a stand contrary to theirs. You arent my parents and life would be so much simpler if you understood that and acted that way.
4) Things I dont understand:
(I dont think there are enough slots to list that which I dont understand, so Ill just go with the top four.)
a) Willful ignorance.
b) Braniacs who have nothing but contempt physical activity and jocks.
c) Elitism.
d) The Church of Oprah.
5) Things Im doing right now:
a) Thinking about whether the fuel budget can handle me driving up to Fowler to visit the VFW they have there.
b) Thinking about how to turn something The Armorer sent me last night into a meaningful blog post (impossible mission).
c) How Im going to get my professional life re-tracked and how Im going to get my grubby little hands on the materials (books, lectures, and ultimately some kind of certification) and the money to do so.
6) Things I want to do before I die.
a) Make Jess really happy for a really long time.
b) Be the son my Mom and Grandmother and Mrs. E raised me to be. Not there yet.
c) I should want to be more than a good husband, a good man, and a good son?
7) Things I can do:
a) Drive really long distances in a single sitting.
b) Distil hexane like theres no tomorrow.
c) Know the direction of the four points of the compass even at night. Decent skill to have.
8) Ways to describe my personality:
a) Vitreous.
b) Immature.
c) Misanthropic.
9) Things I cant do.
a) Convince my Wife to learn to drive.
b) Convince my Wife that firearms are not themselves inherently evil.
c) Convince my In-Laws that I really do know what Im doing more than a quarter of the time, and that they should leave Jess and I the hell alone.
10) Things I think people should listen to:
a) Bill Cosbys comedy album Bill Cosby: Himself
b) Amazing Grace played on the bag pipes at least once in their lifetime.
c) Yourself. You usually know whats best for you.
d) Detractors. Sometimes theyve got a point.
11) Things you should never listen to:
a) Grievance Mongers. They dont want justice. Theyre just narcissistic jerks who only want power for the sake of power.
b) Communists/revolutionaries. See above.
c) Guidance councilors. They may mean well, but these people usually havent a clue.
12) Favorite foods:
a) Pizza with chicken, Alfredo sauce, green onions, garlic, and a mix of mozzarella and other soft, white cheeses.
b) Coke-a-Cola.
c) Apple Fritters with milk. Easiest way to pacify me is to plop that down.
13) Things Id like to learn:
a) Chinese, Korean, and get my Japanese back up to par.
b) How to do literature searches well. Seems more like an art than a science, and Im not that artistic (with apologies to JTG. Autistic? Yes. Artistic? No.)
c) The true meaning of Grace.
14) Things I normally drink:
a) Filtered water.
b) Milk (2%, cant stand 1% and non-fat. Blech.).
c) Coke, sometimes with lemons or cherry flavoring, and typically straight, right out of the refrigerator out of the can. Ice waters it down and drives off the carbonation. Ick.
15) Shows I watched as a kid (I watched a lot of tv, are we only allowed three?).
a) Popeye the Sailor, right before and right after Mass on KTLA channel 5 with Chris van Patton as the host.
b) KTLA channel 5s weekend movies, hosted by Chris van Patton. Typically was either a war movie (like Tora! Tora! Tora!, Midway, or Battle of the Bulge) or the Godzilla movies of the 60s and 70s (Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster, Destroy All Mosters, stuff like that). Did sit thru Dr. Zhivago, once. Not easy for an 8 year old.
c) Robotech and Voltron on channel 13(3:30 and 4:00. Right before Mom would get home from working at Target in the inventory department(the docks)).
16) People Im tagging with this?
Nobody. Weve emberassed enough people for the week with this, doncha think?
The needling and other bullus chitus got so bad over a period of 2 hours that I had to walk out of Jess' grandparents 50th wedding anniversary party to keep myself from loudly going off on my father-in-law. These people don't play fair, ever. they don't believe anyone else but them ever knows what's right for anyone and in particular for their daughter. My gawd, when Jess told them I was working for the republican party here in Indiana back in '04 Jess' mother told Jess to throw me out of the house before I beat her, forced her to quit her career, and made her live barefoot and preggers because she heard Cameron Diaz lay it all on the line on Oprah. I kid you not.
Of course, she played the proper victim when I called her on that bullus chitus. CC'd an email containing what I said to the entire family while asking an old friend of mine(Mrs.E, my hs English teacher actually) asking if I was prone to moments of violence and instability. I kid you not.
It takes a severe act of will not to break a finger waved not more than 1/2" from my face during a 2hr lecture by Jess' father that my own Mother would never deign to give me. My temper is begining to wear thin with these people. Know what I'm sayin'?
Don't even ask what they said when Jess told them that The Armorer wanted to take them to a shooting range as a family and friends outing(they hates you John. Hatessssss. They think you're an evil influence who eggs me on in my violent and evil ways.).
And they wonder why I don't want to visit every Christmas, Spring Break, and summer vacation.
"It's getting cobwebs."
I'm working on it. There's an idea running around in my head, but I'm rather hesitant to write anything substantive. I took a nasty criticism hit when visiting my friend Least Weasel last weekend. He told me I didn't know chit and it showed(particularly wrt information operations)----himself a Ranger and Army Reserve vet who typically likes positive press for the military. So I'm a bit hesitant to do anything right now.
I'm tempted to loan a spare 'puter Jess and I have to Kat, but I don't really have the means to get it to her.
by ry on July 28, 2006 9:31 PM
What? Highly evolved West Coast Liberals hate me based on stereotypes and no real personal knowledge?
No!
Really, bring 'em out here, we'll turn them to the dark side.
Hey Barb, that's great! Did you tell him that he really missed out though? I mean, he didn't get to meet me. I feel bad.
Ry - Jess must really be something! Since I approach romance as a buffet....I skip the ones with any sort of baggage. Jess must be quite the catch for you to deal with in-laws like that. I wouldn't know of course since I strive not to be the girl you take home to meet the parents, lol.
Hey, Ry, you married into that family; your choice, you being presumably a grownup qualified to make decisions like that.
How would you feel if your own only genetic brother stormed into yer house when you weren't present, grabbed and stole all important records, threw out or stole all of your childhood memorabilia, and then sued you for being insufficiently competent as a trustee of your parents' estate?
JTG.
Yeah. I hears 'ya.
One of these days I'll have to buy you case of beer(I'll stick to rootbeer or coke) so we can compare brotherly induced scars and broken bones and grief and other misc. trauma(none of mine is legal, but there is a lot of it.). Hell, I'd buy you a case of beer just to meet a decent Southron(not knowing too many. ;) ).
But, in my defense, before we were married they didn't act like this, there were no hints of this. Before my PhD path started going south they didn't act like this. Both coincided with Jess and I moving 2000 miles away. Then it started and cranked itself up to what we have today. But, like Maggs says, Jess is special. She's worth all this and more. There's precious few things I'd kill man or beast for---but Jess most definitely is one, the highest on the priority list.
It just gets rather annoying and beyond annoying. I could live with it without complaint if they didn't fly false colours and then hoist the jolly roger. At that point my sense of fairness nerve gets trod on a bit hard and my temper flares(have I mentioned I'm of Irish extraction?).
But, I feel for 'ya JTG. I wouldn't wish that for anyone.
Maggs,
"I wouldn't know of course since I strive not to be the girl you take home to meet the parents, lol."
Heh. Any woman who teaches Cathecism can't be THAT bad.
Baggage. Well, everyone always has something. Always. And learning to live with it is a sign of maturity. Or didn't you watch Chasing Amy?
Brab,
"Ry - It would be fun to have a Denizens love-fest at the range for your in-laws. We won't even make them stand in for Barney."
Lake Osweego isn't that far from Seattle, but Indiana sure is.
"What? Highly evolved West Coast Liberals hate me based on stereotypes and no real personal knowledge?
No!
Really, bring 'em out here, we'll turn them to the dark side."
Sigh. What're trying to do? Make me life worse?
I'm not going to subject Jess to that because it'll turn into a real hatefest storm of emails and phone calls. Sorry Boss. Not happening. You're a lovable fuzzball and all, but I really don't need the grief of getting nasty phone calls and emails or Jess getting emails and phone calls from her Parentals demanding that we get divorced(again!).
Besides, the last time MIL came east she emberassed the hell out of me by insulting the waitress at me and Jess's favorite eatery(Logans Road House) by essentially calling the nice girl a hick.
I'm just happy leaving them in their neuvo riche semi-retirement and calling it a quiet, peaceful, uneventful day that won't come back to haunt me some day when I get called into some sort of family councilling thing with them in the near future(did I mention my FIL is a psychiatrist?).(Jess on the otherhand, wrt her attitudes about weaponry, is a WHOLE other story. ;) )
ANd I haven't heard back from KAt yet. Any chance we could get SWWBO to let Kat(she's kinda local for you guys right?) know there's the potential of a loaner 'puter?
by ry on July 30, 2006 11:52 PM
ry,
I hears you too. My mil thinks I am a spoiled rich brat from CA who somehow tricked her darling into marrying me and goes around saying it to anyone who will listen. We have been married for 20 plus years, have gone through hell and back together, despited dire predictions that we would be divorced within three years. Uh huh.
You did the right thing in moving away from that and believe me, there are some parents who don't know how to let go.
But they did something right...they had her and so you deal with it.
Sometime we should just kavetch about our inlaws.
Hang in there.
by Cricket on July 31, 2006 1:11 AM
Heck, Ry, I suffer from/enjoy the Celtic timprahmint, m'self! Scotch-Irish on Mom's side (lots of Marine uncles) and, I'm afraid, rather Sassenach on Dad's side. (Cold-blooded strategic-bombing AF types)
I do seem to have been reasonably fortunate in the genetic hand I was dealt; I got the Celtic sensibilites of Mom's family without the susceptibility to diseases (knocks wood) and the autistic tendencies of Dad's side without the Saxon nastiness.
I think I'm a genuine mix of the Scots and Irish, as I have "the long, narrow head of the priest-ridden race" (extremely dolichocephalic) and the bad teeth of the people from the Big Island.
Okay, then we just have a Castle Blogmeet near them, without you, sit next to them at a nice restaurant, and talk about guns. Lots and lots of guns. Especially the gurls.
JTG. You crack me up.
I blame Saint Patrick.
Yeah, I think I inherited the ability to reason(and un-reason) from my Gaelic background as well.
Still pushing Denizen Solidarity are we, John? Leave them be. Just because they suck doesn't me we all have to try and emulate the suckitude. I've already got the last laugh: Jess chooses to be with me and not them.
Nor am I the only Denizen with IL problems. There's someone else around here who would benefit from the innayouface to the ILs far more than I would.
I'm with Cassie and Cricket on this: sometimes it's best just to soldier on mostly stolidly, and then complain about it while devouring mass quantities of choklit every three to four years(in Gollumese that's every three months).
Heh. I hate piously sanctimonious field grade officers. Yeah, I know, that means I'm punching myself a lot.
Imagine this.
You are a holder of the Medal of Honor. On the advice of your superiors, you donate your Medal to a Divisional Museum, for safekeeping and preservation.
Over the years, you go visit the museum and you get the Medal and wear it for ceremonial occasions.
Then your age and infirmities put you in a position where you can no longer do that.
You're dying, and you'd like to wear your Medal again before you die.
And some piously sanctimonious field grade a$$hat says:
Tulbahadur Puns medal has been donated to the museum by his regimental association. We have a duty of care to ensure this medal is available to the public to see and it is secure.
As if, in the cosmic scheme of things, the "Public" truly gives a flying flip in this regard. My guess is, Major Davies, if you were to poll the public as they filter through the doors, they'd be aghast at your attitude.
I am.
I'm sure there are rules and regulations to be followed. I have no doubt of that. I used to be a US Army paid military historian with staff responsibility for what amounts to a regimental museum here in the US.
And I would have found a way to get that Medal back to the guy whose name is on the back of it. I might have had to do a little fundraising to go to the extreme of actually sending someone with it, to bring it back, but I would have moved heaven and earth to get that Medal (in this case, a Victoria Cross awarded to a Gurkha soldier) back to its named recipient.
In this case, Honorary Lieutenant Tulbahadur Pun, VC, of the 6th Gurkha Rifles.
Its a shoddy way for an old, dying man to be treated, after the part he played in our eventual victory. This man is one of only 12 VC winners still alive, so youd think hed be granted a little more respect and honour. I have e-mailed the Major at the museum with a link to this article and I will let you all know what his response, if any, is. Whilst I appreciate heritage being preserved, this all smacks of red tape, callous neglect and short memories. I simply can not accept that the logistics of reuniting Mister Pun with his medal one last time are unachievable.
In this country, when Sergeant Alvin York through poverty sold his Medal of Honor, a subscription drive was raised to re-purchase the Medal and restore it to him.
Surely something similar can be done (and I would argue Major Davies should be doing it) to grant Lieutenant Pun a chance to wear the Victoria Cross with his name on it.
Shame, Major Davies, shame for giving such a staff wallah bumf-driven reply.
Should you wish to share your thoughts with the museum on the subject: curator@thegurkhamuseum.co.uk
That's vile.
As vile as the NYT calling their imbedded photog "courageous".
by afsister on July 21, 2006 1:41 PM
Ok I'm going to have rework my email since "Dear base whallah and other remf's" probably isn't going to get a good a result.
Meanwhile Britain has managed to let more of it's VC's end up in private collections than the rest of the Commowealth combined. They're a bit late to start getting all precious now.
From a comment to the TSA post below. I just thought it should see the light of day.
The TSA really amazes me, they go out of their way to avoid charges of profiling and go overboard on other people. Travelling home on mid tour
leave I had my body armor and helmet with me as carry on luggage. At that point I had been in combat for eight months, with all that implies. I had been in firefights, I had used C-4, hand grenades, AT4s, and since this was 2003 (before EOD was a handy phone call away) had had to dismantle the occasional IED. You could imagine my shock and surprise when my gear popped hot for a wide range of explosive chemicals when it was scanned. I can understand this causing questions, but the Uniform, ID card, leave form, fact that I am pretty sure most of the public was aware that a war was in progress and the obvious lack of any amount of actual explosives should have made it easy... But no, two hours of explaining myself and a missed flight later I was finally allowed through security...
That is the same mentality that roasted the CMOH awardee trying to board an aircraft at PHX. As I recall they were concerned the medal could be used as a weapon.
The bright side of this story though is at least they didn't have to do a full cavity search to insure that the C4 residue was not a result of you concealing it in your body somewhere.
TSA stands for "Terminally Stupid Activity" anyhow.
First thing up in the mailbox this morning. My first reaction? Exactly the one of my emailer: WTF?
MSIG/OPREP-3 SIR/21-06/1STMARDIV//
SUBJ/SERIOUS INCIDENT REPORT 21-06//
REF/A/MCO 5740.2F//
NARR/REF A IS MCO ON SIRS//
POC/SGT CASTILLO/1STMARDIV CASOC/DSN 365-5006//
RMKS/1. AT APPROXIMATELY 1200 20060503, WHILE ESCORTING THE BODY OF SGT MILLS, LEA R. (OIF 05-07 USMC DECEASED) FROM DOVER AFB TO THE FINAL RESTING PLACE IN GULFPORT, MS, SGT STOCK, CPL BIGALK, CPL SCHADEBURG WERE STOPPED BY TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (TSA) IN THE PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AND TAKEN INTO SMALL ROOMS SET ASIDE FOR SEARCHES.
THEY WERE FORCED TO REMOVE THEIR BLUE DRESS UNIFORM BLOUSES, BELTS, AND SHOES. THE SECURITY PERSONEL SCANNED ALL THE ITEMS AND ALSO PATTED DOWN THE MARINES. TSA ALSO TOOK SGT STOCK'S SHOES OUT TO THE X-RAY MACHINE AND THEN DIDN'T RETURN THEM; HE WAS INSTEAD REQUIRED TO FIND THEM HIMSELF.
ALL THE MARINES SAID THEY FELT HUMILIATED BY THIS TREATMENT. THE MARINES HAD ORDERS IN HAND THAT TASKED THEM TO SERVE AS OFFICIAL CASUALTY ESCORTS. SGT STOCK WAS CARRYING SGT MILLS PERSONNEL EFFECTS, AND CPL SCHADEBURG WAS CARRYING THE FLAG FROM SGT MILLS' CASKET. THESE ITEMS WERE IN HAND AND IN PLAIN VIEW.
2. MAJ SHAFFER, KEITH E., STAFF SECRETARY, 1STMARDIV
3. VICTIMS
A. SGT
A. CPL
A. CPL
B. STOCK, JOHN C.
B. BIGALK, AARON J.
B. SCHADEBURG, JASON A.
C. XXX XX XXXX [SSN Deleted]
C. XXX XX XXXX [SSN Deleted]
C. XXX XX XXXX [SSN Deleted]
D. 3RD AABN. 1ST MARDIV
E. WHITE/MALE/XXXXXXXX [DOB deleted]
E. WHITE/MALE/XXXXXXXX [DOB deleted]
E. WHITE/MALE/XXXXXXXX [DOB deleted]
F. GULFPORT, MS
4. N/A
5. PAO HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. LOCAL & NATIONAL MEDIA COVERAGE POSSIBLE BUT NOT ANTICIPATED.
6. NO.
7. INVESTIGATION IN PROGESS. SUBSEQUENT REPORTS WILL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED.
8. SGT. STOCK, CPL. BIGALK, AND CPL. SCHADEBURG HAVE NOT DEPLOYED ISO OIF.
Now, bare of information, that just begs questions. So, what'd I do? First up, I called Pendleton PAO. That's dumb, it's Sunday, they're not open. I could call the duty spokesman, but, let's do some checking, first. So, now that the coffee is really down the hatch and processed, I check the dates. Okay - over a week old. I'm probably pretty late to this and others are *all* over it. So, while I'm in the cyber-area, I check the DTIC Press Release site and see if the casualty name is legit. It is. Off to Google. "TSA Mills Marine" that ought to do it. And what pops up on that? The middle of the Blogosphere. Not the big buys, but the middlin' to small ones - you know, guys like us.
The one "MSM-equivalent?" The Marine Corps Times, which has a pretty even write-up.
The trio had to go through the terminals security in order to reach their flight that would take them to Houston and make sure that Mills body was properly placed on the airplane. While their uniforms likely would trigger the metal detector, they had figured they would be able to zip through the screening process and get on with their business.
Wearing the blues, the metal detector is going to go off, said Sgt. John Stock, a mechanic, who was accompanied by Cpls. Aaron Bigalk and Jason Schadeburg.
But as the Marines went through the initial screener in their dress blues, they were stopped by several TSA agents. Each was told to remove their dress uniform blouse, belt and black dress shoes, which were scanned by the detector, as the agents scanned them with hand-held detecting wands.
They had me take off my shoes and ran them through the screening, Stock said, speaking by phone May 5 from Gulfport, where the men are helping with Mills family and funeral support. We all got searched.
Then they were taken to a nearby room, where TSA workers patted them down.
At one point, Stocks shoes disappeared, leaving him to frantically search for them and retrieve them from a TSA agent. Separated from their belongings, which included the flag that they bore that would drape Mills casket for the rest of the journey home, they worried about getting to the gate in time to ensure his safe placement in the airplane.
Time, it seemed like a half-hour, clicked by. I was like, hey, we need to be on the tarmac, Stock recalled. It just took longer than it should have had to take.
The agents said nothing to explain why all three were singled out for additional search and the Marines didnt protest. We were just trying to get there as quick as we could, he added.
In all, it was a humiliating experience that left them angry.
It looks like over-zealous following-of-rules, with a lack of judgement on the part of individuals. I've said this before to hoots of derision, and this case is similar to one we covered last month, Leave No Man Behind, Ever, but the fact is, TSA *shouldn't* have auto-exclude groups of passengers. Just as they *should* have auto-include groups of passengers, as they do - just perhaps not inclusive enough.
The TSA is obviously aware of the remains that are passing through the transportation system. There are in fact, procedures in place to facilitate the movement of remains and escort teams. I would bet, based on what I've dug up, the Marines (and hopefully, by extension, *all* the services) are now working on some form (if it doesn't exist already) of expediting credential that is hard to fake, because troops in Class A uniforms and low-quarter shoes aren't going to get through the metal detectors without setting them off.
Say what you like about the utility of searching little girls and grandmothers - but the fact is that the bad guys are watching. And they've shown themselves completely capable of using innocents as bombs-carriers. And well before the current unpleasantness. Remember this? The point being, the bad guys will flex and adapt. And if they thought they could use a casket... that would be a big bang. My point is not that TSA is doing a great job or not - evidence indicates plenty of problems, and they really shouldn't trumpet their successes - but that the processes need to be under constant modification and change - if they are to have any deterrent effect at all.
Nature of who I am and what I was, I watch the screening process at airports - for the precise mental exercise of "How would I test that, in order to try to defeat it." I am pleased that now and again, changes have been made that would have caught me, were I to try something like that. Guess what - that's what terrorists do, when intel gathering on a target. Which is why truly random and seemingly random changes, though they inconvenience the people who pass through, are good. Lemme tell ya, it's a real pain when they do a 100% ID vehicle check at the Fort, especially on the Monday after I went shooting Saturday and still have ammo, though no weapons, in the trunk. They note it, ask some questions, note that everything else is in order, and let me go. As it should be.
What's my point? The TSA should explain the reasons and make a public statement (if only on their website). They have, rather, chosen to ignore it and hope that it will go away.
No, they shouldn't tell us (nor should the Marines) what, if any, changes are being made. They should just make them. And slap that inspector in Philly on the back of the head.
This makes me want to go through the FFDO (Federal Flight Deck Officer) program. I already did a full day of cocpkit defensive training with the company I fly for, including a full-scale, no-holds-barred (literally) fistfight in the cockpit and aft cabin mockups at the end of the day (those pads, helmet and cup really helped). You do the same thing in Albuquerque but you also get to shoot a shiteload of ammo, not to mention keeping the pistol for your personal use at the end of the week-long program. The ID docs you get are impressive-looking and I'd love to loan them to any and all servicemembers escorting remains.
Good lord luva duck, where do we get such people? And it's not all the troops' fault; they're taught and/or reinforced in that behavior by their supervision, of this I am sure.
Anyway, having that card is nice..."Why yes, Officer Twinkles, I do in fact have a GUN in my possession. Big motherf*@&er, too. And it's loaded, because it's supposed to be. It's part of my job. By the way, any problem with me escorting this Marine to the ramp SO HE CAN MAKE SURE HIS BUDDY'S CASKET IS RENDERED THE PROPER RESPECT AS IT GOES UP THE CONVEYOR INTO THE AFT HOLD?!?"
While I sympathize, if you're making me go through all that shit, I'm glad they making everyone else do it too. No exceptions. IT's really bad security to have exceptions.
And frankly, I REALLY hope they are making our congress critters and families do it too, and twice on Sundays. And I hope anybody in the TSA going through off duty gets it thrice with no one believing them.
by Fred on May 15, 2006 3:58 PM
Poor Bloodspite. Good on 'ya for getting your way. We empathize on the lonliness. One, is always the lonliest number.
Some people just revel in having power and pushing people around when they can. The Tweedles seem like the type.
I know there are Rulez, and we should obey the Rulez. BUt sometimes some discretion is necessary. Said the same about how to deal with Fred 'MotherF-----' Phelps and I say it again now.
The difference between a good LEO and a jerk with a badge is knowing when to apply discretion.
by ry on May 15, 2006 11:23 PM
The TSA really amazes me, they go out of their way to avoid charges of profiling and go overboard on other people. Travelling home on mid tour leave I had my body armor and helmet with me as carry on luggage. At that point I had been in combat for eight months, with all that implies. I had been in firefights, I had used C-4, hand grenades, AT4s, and since this was 2003 (before EOD was a handy phone call away) had had to dismantle the occasional IED. You could imagine my shock and surprise when my gear popped hot for a wide range of explosive chemicals when it was scanned. I can understand this causing questions, but the Uniform, ID card, leave form, fact that I am pretty sure most of the public was aware that a war was in progress and the obvious lack of any amount of actual explosives should have made it easy... But no, two hours of explaining myself and a missed flight later I was fially alllowed through security...
by Flip on May 16, 2006 4:51 AM
Ok, slightly lighter story, but still on topic.
Coming out of Phoenix enroute to MCRDSD, guy ahead of me in line in blues (hope that he was NOT having the above duty, they didn't deplane a casket in SD, at any rate). So he puts the cover and shoes in the bin, and the guy manning the gate says, "buttons" and so he takes off his blouse. He's standing there in his tee shirt, all hard body, And the gal behind me says, loudly, "OK by me if he just keeps going!".
That Marine blushed SO much, I could see the red wash up under his high and tight! I almost giggled at him, but the poor guy had enough problems.
by Karla (threadbndr) on May 16, 2006 6:02 PM
Good thing Princess Crabby wasn't there. She'd have been screaming (waving a $20 in the air) "Take it off! Take it *all* off!"
Update: Andi has seen it and says "YOU DON'T WANT TO MISS THIS. If you do not have tears in your eyes, and you are not committed to boycotting Hilton over this, nothing will move you." She reports that the segment airs about 40 minutes into the program (see below for times).
Jim Mayer, the wounded Vietnam veteran and friend of Fran O'Brien's co-owner Hal Koster who encouraged Hal to begin the free dinners for wounded troops will be on CNN tonight. Andi reports in an email:
I know it's late, but I just got the word that Jim Mayer is being driven to the CNN studio right now to do an interview with Glenn Beck that will run on CNN Headline News as follows:
TONIGHT on CNN Headline News with Glenn Beck at 7 p.m. [Eastern] and again at 9 p.m. and midnight. Jim Mayer is being taken to a studio right now to be interviewed remotely and will air later tonight.
I don't have Cable TV, so I won't be able to watch. If anybody who sees it can report, please let me know.Andi also adds that milbloggers are getting some significant appreciation for their work on publicizing the fight for Fran O'Brien's, and shares her thoughts about their impact:
While the email campaign didn't save the restaurant, it did let them know veterans and troops care a lot about this issue. The top three executives had to shut down their email addresses ... I'm sure costing their IT department some bucks and unnecessary headaches. Plus, a PR firm had to [be] involved. They don't seem too successful in squashing the negative press.
It's really nice when you can use your blog as a way to do something good and help those who deserve to be helped. I don't think milbloggers are finished with this story. We still need to help Hal and Marty get on their feet. I should learn more tomorrow night about how we can do that [after attending the Fran's Friday Dinner hosted in another DC hotel]. Thanks to everyone for all you've done already.
We are all often critical of the MSM for providing coverage on the "bad" stories about the war.
This is one of those bad stories. But this time, the victim isn't an Iraqi citizen, or an anti-war parent like Cindy Sheehan. This time the victims are a business that is pro-military, and our wounded soldiers.
Watch the video- and you'll see what I saw a few weeks ago at Fran's. You'll see a group of men and women soldiers, and their families, out having a good time with each other in a public place where they aren't stared at. A place they can go and safely, gently, reintigrate themselves into the public eye after devastating injuries.
The Hilton has screwed the pooch on this one, and FINALLY the MSM is taking note of it and making it into the big story we all knew it was.
by AFSister on May 12, 2006 8:18 AM
I continue to be amazed that no other DC restuarant has, even yet, stepped in to fill the vacuum.
During my 70's sojourn in The District there were any number of places that would jumped in at the first opportunity and reaped the benefits of all the positive PR resulting therefrom.
Mike
[This post will be up top all day, because I want to make sure everybody gets a chance to read it. New stuff comes in below here.]
And I mean it, people.
This would be a Cease and Desist order, except it would imply that I gave an "Execute" order.
While SWWBO and I appreciate the loyal support of our readers (and the cautionary advice, as well) there are limits to how I will conduct my blogspat with Debbie Schlussel.
I was bcc'd this note this morning, from someone who is trying to be *supportive* of SWWBO and I in our little blogspat with Ms. Schlussel:
Enjoy your tea today?
Maybe you and Joe Wilson could book passage on a ship for Niger. I hear the cake is yellow, like your spine.
Quit bullying my friends, Deb.
You want a war? You'll get a war. Only I fight by the old rules.
In other words, I always win.
You can take my life, but you'll never take my freedom.
The next time you threaten a lawsuit against one of my friends, your home address goes up on every jihad website from here to Tehran. Along with the Google Maps versions of 8X10 color glossies with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining each one.
Capiche?
I did *not* ask for this kind of thing, I do *not* endorse this, and I'm telling you if this is how you intend to show support for SWWBO and I...
Don't.
This.isn't.support. While it may have been satisfying to send, and you may think it no lower than dropping the threat of a lawsuit every time a dog barks, as far as I am concerned, it *is* worse than the threat of a lawsuit. I don't fight my fights this way. I like a good rant, and clever invective - but I prefer reasoned argument and don't sink to this level. Sure, we're not as entertaining, but it also keeps the moonbat population down.
It's unacceptable conduct. I have no authority other than moral here - but I am mustering all of that that I have.
Do.not.do.this.again. Any of you. Ever. This is *not* the behavior I have built this space for. I don't tolerate that kind of stuff here, and I will not tolerate it being done in my name. In the post below about Mayor Bostick and his illegal holding on the money of the dead Marine, I told everybody to be polite.
Like this:
If you choose to contact the individuals or city, do so in a polite, civil manner. [Don't bother them, the message has been recieved] The Armorer does not approve of spittle-flecked rantings - especially at people who are only tangentially involved by association, and not direct action. For the record - be polite to the Mayor, too. Even if he does seem to be the villain here.
And later, this:
That doesn't mean we shouldn't gently and politely remind Mr. Mayor Bostick to follow through - and that means we need to follow-up. A gentle heat, that would be "simmer" on your blog-stove.
That is how it is done at Castle Argghhh!!!.
Capiche?
Because what you have really done is kill all the fun I was going to have with it. I had some nice graphics (all original artwork) that was going to play the satire and parody card.
Now they are going into storage. Because that's about the only way *I* have to cut this off at the knees.
For the record - I don't *ever* need that kind of support, and if I change my mind, I'll let you know.
That e-mail almost looks like the way that the ACLU tries to resolve a dispute.
Do what we want or your life is going to be hell. I know that you guys have more class than that. (I admit to having NO class at all, but I DO have discretion, which is the better part of valor.)
I have been enjoying your website for a long time but until now never felt a need to comment. Your whole response to this blogspat and those that would "support" you in such a ill-mannered way just reinforces why your site is my #1 read. (In addition to the gunporn) Rock on!
The proper way to handle the unhinged is to have fun with it, to be completely *un*serious. Clever uses of humor, sarchasm and the like.
by Masked Menace on May 5, 2006 9:42 AM
Well said John. Too bad these kind of things seem to always degenerate into lunacy because cooler heads never seem to prevail.
by JimC on May 5, 2006 9:44 AM
...although the irony of her demand to "Quit bullying" is quite entertaining.
by Masked Menace on May 5, 2006 10:24 AM
Masked Menace - just to be clear - that note was from a supporter of ours *to* Ms. Schlussel, and I've modified the post to remove any ambiguity on the subject.
sorry, left over freudian slip on "sent to the police" when I thought it was a threat from her.
by Masked Menace on May 5, 2006 11:36 AM
How shatter-prone, some Egos are!
To all gentle readers out there, this is by no means a feeble attempt of a Snerk; or a par-boiled attempt impugn someone's essence of being. It is just a humble observation from the back-water colonial Rican that I am.
To me, the vitriolic reaction and personal nature of the attack above, reflects upon its author, a hypersensitive and fragile sense of who he/she is. It denotes someone who is wholly dependent on the opinions of others, to valuate the person that lies within. That author leads a life wracked with fear and insecurity.
I would counsel whomever authored the above missive, to stand-back. Take a deep breath, and relax. Do this not out of kow-towing to any perceived aggressors, but out of an urgent necessity to get to know yourself. What are the root causes such hurt, that makes you perceive your world as if it is out to get you? I hope that once you answer this question, you may stop reacting to the world in fear and anger, and start embracing it with a bit more compassion, love and understanding.
The words and thoughts of others, are yours not to bear. By following the path that you are following, you only empower others to hurt you. Stop worrying about what others think of you, and this your hostile world, will become a Garden full of Japanese Peoneys in bloom. I beg of you, from one brother soul to another. - BOQ
by Boquisucio on May 5, 2006 11:41 AM
Something I said in another forum seems relevant here:
If you can't insult someone while calling them Sir / Ma'am and without using foul language then you need to work on your language skills.
by KCSteve on May 5, 2006 1:30 PM
(Looks up from digging digital trenches and filling digital sandbags for the comming blogwar.)
Who did what? Man, throw that individual outside the wire.
by ry on May 5, 2006 1:35 PM
The best support comes from those who watch your back from higher altitudes, making no sound at all...
John's a big boy, he can handle this... If he needs us, he'll let us know...
John calls me SWWBO because my blog is called She Who Will Be Obeyed.
I changed it from the Rumpole of the Bailey She Who Must Be Obeyed to be a little different.
*hands up* wait! It wasn't me I swear! I know exactly where I was on the night of...uh...wait a sec...oh ...your not the police ....whew..errr
Anyway in all seriousness good call Sir. Colourful invective and satire is almost always more gaunteed to get a rise out of someone than brute force. The whole "No one pays attention to a madman" sociological rule to be applied.
And I was looking forward to more images gosh darnit.
In other news I may be vacation St Louis for a more...warm...climate. Possibly South America. Nothing definite yet.
I really need to add yer damn E-mail to my laptop but I'm a lazy bastard sword.
As a Bona Fide Italophile, and The Castle's Romance Language Resident, it grates my sensible ears to hear that beautiful Tuscan Language corrupted by
Pseudo-Sicilian wannabes.
The word: Capice (pronounced cap-ish and not spelt Capiche), is used amongst friends, when the speaker wants to make a point clear. This form, however is used only informally, and amongst the uneducated. Spelling it Capiche, would render the "e" a strong vowel, making it sound: Cah-peek-eh (but that's another story).
In proper Tuscan, one should state: Mi hai capito? As in: Have you understood me?
However in a pissing fight, one would use another declination: Mi abete capito? As in: Have you (Sir), understood me?
Capice???
by Boquisucio on May 5, 2006 6:43 PM
Wasn't me or any of my better halves. Your response was great, John. Whoever sent it must not realize how civil we keep things around here, so it wouldn't appear that it was a very good friend of the Castle.
by AFSister on May 5, 2006 9:28 PM
They are a good friend, but not a regular hanger-outer, of the Castle.
Let that be clear.
We *like* this person. We just wish they hadn't done what they did the *way* they did.
The email was hyperbole. The target, however, is not known for her sense of humor, but rathe is known as a Raw Nerve Looking For A Place To Fire.
And the email was out of line for how the Armorer wishes the Denizens to act in Defense of the Realm.
"The email was hyperbole."
ry does hyperbole, but it *wasn't* me(unless I'm sleep e-mailing).
Of course it would be nice of La Schussel to not provide such oppurtinities for ry to employ hyperbole.
(goes back to setting the targeting stakes)
by ry on May 5, 2006 10:26 PM
Hear hear!!! Well done, indeed!! If this continued the moonbats would think this is the next Daily Kos.8787iii
by Rod Thorsen on May 6, 2006 1:22 AM
Oops sorry 'bout the 8787iii, this castle,s dennicat choose this time to explore my new keyboard. Wish she could spell better, but I'm sure the intent was pure.
by Rod Thorsen on May 6, 2006 1:28 AM
Rod - don't you *ever* even in jest, suggest this place could *ever* sink to Kos-level.
Moonbats usually steer clear of here, since it is open season on stupidity and the Denizen(ne)s have a field day...they just LOVE to play with their prey.
The mother of a U.S. Marine was grieving for her dead son when she found that his savings account had been claimed by the director of the funeral home.
It was money that he had no right to and despite a court ruling, the funeral director refused to pay. What's even more puzzling is that he's not just any debtor, he's the mayor of the small town and a member of a City Council that has financial responsibility for the city's budget.
Jason's body was returned to Colorado for burial. Records show that the funeral was paid, in full, by the Marines. But after closing out her son's accounts, Jason's mother realized that the probate court had sent the proceeds of Jason's savings account to the funeral home, which is run by Jim Bostick.
In addition to his duties as mayor and member of the Ft. Lupton City Council, [Jim] Bostick also owns two funeral homes. In his role with the city, he is heavily involved in overseeing the finances of the town.
Do take the time to read the *story thus far* which is seedier than it looks.
Indeed. Let's shine a little light in this corner of Colorado and see what scurries out.
If you choose to contact the individuals or city, do so in a polite, civil manner. [Don't bother them, the message has been recieved] The Armorer does not approve of spittle-flecked rantings - especially at people who are only tangentially involved by association, and not direct action. For the record - be polite to the Mayor, too. Even if he does seem to be the villain here.
Mayor Bostick - I'll be happy to post any reply to this you have that is more substantive than that you gave The Denver Channel's 7NEWS Investigator John Ferrugia (story linked above).
Oops. Immediate update. It seems that shining lights (and not from here, just having hit "post" two minutes ago...) had the mostly intended effect. But I really wish people would quit the whole death threat crap. Besides being criminal, it's just stupid.
FORT LUPTON, Colo. -- The mayor of Fort Lupton, who operates two funeral homes, has been afforded police protection after receiving death threats following a 7NEWS investigation that revealed he has refused to repay money illegally kept from the family of a U.S. Marine who died.
"I've been getting a lot of phone calls from a lot of different people, a lot of threats," said Jim Bostick, the mayor of Fort Lupton.
Bostick is worried about his personal safety and that of his business and he now admits he made a big mistake.
"It's my fault ... I will try to do whatever I can with Mrs. Sepulveda to get this issue put to bed," Bostick said. "As soon as I get the money, it's hers. I mean, fast. Because, you know, I can't keep putting up with the threats against myself and my family."
Well, I know that no Castle Denizens are yet involved in death threats. And none better be. I'll revoke your status.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't gently and politely remind Mr. Mayor Bostick to follow through - and that means we need to follow-up. A gentle heat, that would be "simmer" on your blog-stove.
Why? Because Bostick would appear to be a deadbeat.
While he may be sincere this time, Bostick claims he doesn't have the $7,500 a Weld County court said he owes Elis Sepulveda.
Sepulveda is the mother of a U.S. Marine who was killed in a car accident and brought back to Fort Lupton for burial. Jason Sepuldeva's savings were sent to Bostick's funeral home. It was money Bostick had no right to but he refused to return it.
"He was the person who received the money," said Magistrate Rebecca Koppes Conway. Conway assessed the judgment against Bostick in small claims court but can't force him to pay.
But lay off the City, folks. T'ain't their fault, and if the Mayor won't resign, one can hope the voters will fire him.
Several city officials are urging the Fort Lupton mayor to pay the Sepulvedas as soon as possible, hoping that the firestorm, which has nothing to do with city business, will subside.
As one official put it, "This has nothing to do with the Marines vs. Fort Lupton. This is about how Jim Bostick is doing his private business."
I wonder if the town can garnish his wages as Mayor?
by KCSteve on May 4, 2006 1:32 PM
Comrades,
Well, if I were someone who had placed money into escrow with one of "his nibs'" funeral homes to cover my eventual burial expenses, I'd be a tad inyerested in whether that money was still in a safe place.....
As to the mother, I'd advise her to simply file a lein against the Funeral Homw involved and ask the court to allow the Sheriff to claim such property and auction it off as will cover the money owed.
I had a similar situation with a photographer a couple of decades back. I had paid upfront for a LOT of images for calendars, and kept getting one excuse after another regarding when they might be delivered. I heard through friends that the photographer was planning on relocating out of state, so i had my attorney file suit in court and they ordered the Sheriff to sieze his cameras and darkroom equipment until he completed the contract. Worked like a champ...
respects,
AW1 Tim
by AW1 Tim on May 4, 2006 4:43 PM
This guy scans like a serious dead beat and con-man using his postion to hide behind the cops.
But thats the impression I get... from his behaviour.
Sue the ***. He owns TWO funeral homes, should be operating as an LLC and yet has done something criminal. Methinks a lawyer and a forensic bookkeeper should get in there ASAP to subpoena his books...and he should give the Sepulvedas the principle and interest.
by Cricket on May 6, 2006 11:41 PM
In reading the story, how dare he take a dead soldier's money to pay off debts that he owes. The forensic bookkeeper is sounding better and better all the time. He filed for bankruptcy, so it seems that he more than likely gambles or has some other vice...because no one has bumped him off the face of the earth.
I am in agreement of filing a lien, but since he has fiscal responsibility for a town, it seems to me that the extent of his liabilities should be fully known.
Scum.
by Cricket on May 7, 2006 7:30 PM
His mother should and hopefully she will press this issue further,she is justified in doing so.And this contemptible piece of shit has the nerve to waste tax payers money on his own personal safety?!self absorbed sob.he's the criminal here.Why are the cops securing him,they should be handcuffing and frog marching his ass off to jail!
WASHINGTON - Hurricane Katrina's latest fatality should be FEMA, the nation's disaster response agency, a Senate inquiry concluded in calling for a government overhaul to avoid future failures like those the devastating storm exposed.
Okay. Hey, I'm all for reducing non-functional organs of the Federal government (though I don't happen to think tossing FEMA is a rational solution). I have some perspective in this arena. My last job on active duty as a Military Support to Civil Authority (now DSCA, or Defense etc.) planner at 5th Army (now ARNORTH) in San Antonio. We worked closely with (really, *for* in a sense) FEMA when acting in our MSCA role.
One thing the Clinton Administration did *well* was put Jimmy Witt in charge of FEMA. One *huge* failure of the Bush Administration was devolving FEMA to an organ of Homeland Defense. The whole Homeland Defense construct is *still* dysfunctional, and that lays squarely at Bush's feet. FEMA is a shadow of its former self - with no bad cess to day-to-day FEMA employees in general, I know they are still struggling to make it work. The upper structure of the agency and the structure of it's over-sight agency is at fault.
In this, the panel has it correct.
The recommendations conclude that the Federal Emergency Management Agency is crippled beyond repair by years of poor leadership and inadequate funding.
That is this administration's fault - though that is ameliorated somewhat because they were focused on 9/11 style responses that they lost the bubble about the more common disasters... like hurricanes. So, what do the Senators recommend?
They call for a new agency the National Preparedness and Response Authority to plan and carry out relief missions for domestic disasters.
Okay. Really. I am *so* impressed. It just gets better.
The new authority would communicate directly with the president during major crises, and any dramatic cuts to budget or staffing levels would have to be approved by Congress. But it would remain within the Homeland Security Department and would continue receiving resources from the department.
Okay, at this point, I throw the bullshite flag. This is a perfect example of "Change is the Illusion of Progress."
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who led the inquiry by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the new authority would be "better equipped with the tools to prepare for and respond to a disaster."
She described FEMA as a "shambles" and said the change "will help ensure that we do not have a repeat of the failures following Hurricane Katrina."
Really? It will? Aside from the fact that DHS is busy trying to digest all those lessons from Katrina and implement changes, how is it going to make a huge difference?
It's not like the current FEMA employee base and structure won't be the basis of the "new" agency. Ya *really* gonna start from scratch? Nope. Didn't think so.
Unless you are *really* going to break the paradigm, this is simply taking a tire, scraping the "year" of "Goodyear" off, and painting on "rich" to make it a "Goodrich" tire.
An opinion shared by Homeland Defense, and, Michael Brown, the hapless director of FEMA during Katrina.
But the proposal drew disdain from Homeland Security and its critics, both sides questioning the need for another bureaucratic shuffling that they said wouldn't accomplish much.
"It's time to stop playing around with the organizational charts and to start focusing on government, at all levels, that are preparing for this storm season," Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke said.
Former FEMA Director Michael Brown, who resigned under fire after Katrina, said the new agency would basically have the same mission FEMA had a year ago before its disaster planning responsibilities were taken away to focus solely on responding to calls for help.
"It sounds like they're just re-creating the wheel and making it look like they're calling for change," Brown said. "If indeed that's all they're doing, they owe more than that to the American public."
Indeed, if that's all they got, can we get our money back for that study?
I'll go hunt up the recommendations and see if this is what it seems, or if it's just incomplete reporting on the part of the AP, missing the forest for the trees. I guess I owe the Senate *that* much.
Update: Here's the Exec Summary. No, I haven't read it yet.
Okay - I've read it. The AP did a singularly carp job of reporting.
I think it's evenly written and apportions blame all 'round, with pretty much nobody but the Coast Guard and some unnamed private firms getting a pat on the back.
The "Seven Foundational Recommendations" are a ringing condemnation of this and previous Administrations and Congresses.
The weaknesses laid out with recommended solutions are *not* new, nor did they suddenly appear because of the Bush Administration. The FEMA personnel I worked with in 1998-2000 (where we were focused on terrorism and Y2K) were aware of the flaws in the system - and the lack of money for dealing with them (and this was after Hurricane Andrew and similar other disasters)
These fissures were thrown into stark relief by the effects of the redirection of effort due to the focus on prevention of and response to 9/11-style events drained money from on-going efforts to improve and enhance response to large-scale natural disasters.
After a surface read, I like it. I can understand why DHS does not - much of what is being proposed is on-going, I know for certain in DoD. Northern Command, the DoD agency responsible for this is a new command, still standing up and getting organized - but will provide a full-spectrum headquarters to coordinate the DoD response, overseeing a JTF Headquarters that would come out of ARNORTH in San Antonio. The function of Defense Coordinating Officer, until recently an additional duty of Regional Training Brigade commanders, is moving to a permanently assigned active duty Colonel, with a reserve component Deputy, who will have a mixed civilian/military planning and execution staff, who will be aligned with and located with or close to, the FEMA Regional Headquarters. All of this is intended to streamline and enhance the DoD response capability. Similar things have occurred within Pacific Command, which has responsibility for Alaska, Hawaii, and the Pacific dependencies of the United States.
DHS no doubt does not wish to see another powerful department head created, and in fact think they've got this under control. Perhaps they do - but I've long thought that FEMA was under-graded so to speak, and so I am supportive of this direction.
Nice to see the Senate understands that they, along with the House, and the Administration, have been remiss in their duties themselves... though for the most part they only mention the Administration.
Bush messed up FEMA when he appointed Brown, a business associate, with no disaster response experience. FEMA is not an organization that can be effective under the leadership of someone who does not understand massive disaster response plans or the lack of them. That was Mistake Number One.
Mistake Number Two: Leading the American public to believe that the Federal government (read: FEMA, the President, and the military) are First Responders. That is, and always will be, bullshit. EVERY disaster plan across the States *requires*, and I mean REQUIRES, the local municipality (NOT the State, but the LOCAL municipality) to be self-sufficient for the first 72 hours following a major disaster. Now we do get advanced warning about things like hurricanes, so we (read: the military, Red Cross, Salvation Army, Southern Baptists) pre-position resources close to the expected disaster area in addition to running evac shelters. However, the local government is still required to conduct ALL immediate first responder actions and prepare damage assessment reports. These reports help the local government request assistance from the state government, who can then request federal assistance.
The reports are vital, because without them we (read: FEMA, the military, Red Cross, Southern Baptists, Salvation Army) have NO idea where the help is needed, or what kind of help is needed. It doesn't do any good to send supplies and manpower to areas we don't know enough about. In order to avoid wasting resources, we rely heavily upon the information garnered from the initial damage assessment reports.
The general public is NEVER exposed to this knowledge. They have NO idea what it takes to run a small or large disaster. In this era of the liberal ideology of "what does the government owe me", the expectation that the government will ride in on a white horse during hour 1 is rampant. Rampant and ignorant, all at the same time.
Disbanding FEMA, or further absorbing it into HLS will cripple our disaster response plan. I hope to GOD someone can talk some sense into these people and make sure they ignore this bandaid idea. Fix the upper management structure, and you will fix the problem.
by AFSister on April 27, 2006 9:34 PM
shite.
A perfectly good rant, ruined by using the acronym HLS for Homeland Security, instead of DHS. *groan*
It's the meds, I swear.
by AFSister on April 27, 2006 9:40 PM
AFSis, it ain't the meds. Western Civilization really is about to fall down about our ears, I do believe. Multiplication of alphabet bureaucrat agencies is not gonna slow the decline. This is one of the reasons why I have not yet quit drinking.
I worked too many contracts at military posts to fall for their 'new management' BS. I moved around enough I never got to participate in one of the fire drills but I worked with a lot of people who were wearing 'XXX' IDs on Friday and 'YYY' IDs on Monday because Y was brought in due to the poor job X was doing.
Although it occasionally did do some good - some of those regime changes came with raises (although once again I'll note that I never took part in one).
Have you done all you can for Fran O'Brien's and the family they've developed to support severely wounded troops?
Rumor has it there are still conversations going on between lawyers, so not all hope is lost. What we need right now is to help Hilton understand it is to their benefit to give Fran's enough time to find and establish a new home so that Fran's can make a smooth transition for the sake of the wounded soldiers, and for the employees and volunteers who have been trained in supporting the wounded and have established relationships with them. For example, Fran's employees were given cell phones and have been "on call" for anyone who needs a ride, an encouraging word, or anything else that can be offered.
Friday Night at Fran's isn't just a dinner, it's an entire community centered around that restaurant. The wounded know they can drop by on any day and find at least one person who cares and can "be there" for them. The night I was at Fran's, I watched one particular very young wounded soldier spend a lot of time in the bar. I didn't know his story, but as several others I spoke with noticed, his body language made it clear he was having a tough time. I saw Hal Koster put his arm around him and talk to him. Other people I knew were vets and lived in the DC area also came up to him and put their hands on his neck as they put their faces close to his, making deep eye contact and earnestly talking to him. By the end of the evening he was clearly more relaxed, and even smiling a bit. The community had obviously recognized his need and rallied around him, lifting his spirits.
...what happens on Friday nights at O'Briens is more than the sum of its parts. Some people get that, most, lacking the opportunity to see it in person, don't. When I think of O'Briens, I don't really think first of Hal or Marty. My thoughts go to [Vietnam veteran, double amputee, and volunteer peer counselor at Walter Reed] Jim Mayer, and how he birthed and raised to maturity the universe that Fuzzy describes. By urging the 2003 and 2004 seriously wounded to follow through on making it better for the next person in a bed on Ward 57 [the amputee ward at Walter Reed], Jim created an ethic for this generation of amputees and seriously wounded. With all due respect to Hal and Marty, the dynamic that Fuzzy observed at O'Briens is largely the residue of this incredible young generation of volunteer military and Jim Mayer's singular efforts in bringing the wisdom and experiences of his life to the task of bettering and motivating this generation in their recoveries.
To be fair to Hal and Marty, everything came together at O'Briens. Jim. Hal. Marty. The families releasing pent up hospital frustrations. Life on a grand scale. A place to enjoy and start thinking about the future. Young men and women readying themselves for their next chapters.
If there is a clear victory from Iraq and Afghanistan, it is in the work Jim did in creating the conditions for these young men and women to succeed in life on that same grand scale. One of the places it is on display now is Fran O'Briens. In the future, the entire country will see the results of his handiwork in the careers and contributions of these young men and women. If there is a Medal of Freedom to be awarded by this administration for true success in the advancement of freedom, it will rightfully be awarded to Jim Mayer
Therefore, when I heard that Hilton managers hung up on Jim when he called, I shook my head at their ignorance. Hanging up on Jim Mayer. You can't even put that on a truck scale to weigh the level of stupidity. It underscores that there is a wide gulf in America between those heroes (like Jim Mayer) who teach by example, and those individuals and organizations which fail to grasp why they would need to listen.
Closing Fran's (even if they manage to reopen in six months) and having the dinners at various locations is certainly better than nothing, but it will cripple (ironic word) the Fran O'Brien's community. Soldiers' Angels Germany has more (scroll down). We have spent a lot of time focusing on what a loss the end of Fran's will be to the wounded, but it will also be a tremendous loss to our country, as anything that "replaces" Friday Night at Fran's will not have as extensive an impact on those who participate. And we will be much the poorer for it.
So, what have you done to support and save this community that has comforted the broken, inspired recovery, and developed tomorrow's leaders? Andi has your orders, and Laughing Wolf sets an example (more contact info here). Don't forget to sign the petition. Only four more days to save this amazing community...
Here's a thought for you high-powered business types out there, who have their cell phones surgically implanted. You know the type - the Cyborgs, with the glowing blue phones where their ear used to be...
OPSEC.
When you shout out your end of the conversation, *someone* might be listening. Someone who knows what he's hearing.
Like that contract for the Army your (firm) is bidding on. The one where you are competing with (firm). The one where your boss, (name redacted) who doesn't know policy from shinola, is screwing the pooch on. You know, the one where your Level of Effort is 2 man years, being billed on a multiple of 2.6, is going to get you creamed, because the competition is going to come in under that.
Yeah, you remember that conversation, right? The one on the shuttle to the airport? The one that if you had mentioned *my firm* I'd have been on-line in a flash, seeing who was working that contract, and then calling corporate legal, to make sure it was okay to pass on what I heard... and then passed on some *very* good intel. And, since I haven't been in this area since 2001, nor am I a corporate bigwig, I know that was not a clever little disinfo op.
Hope your flight out of Reagan was pleasant.
Just hope those guys from Northrup-Grumman (firm> aren't sitting in any seats around you.
Yer suffering from the ID10T fault.
Well, that's probably unkind. You're just completely clueless, like a lot of your wired bretheren, that when you start blabbering out loud in public, those of us who have no choice but to share your conversations may be taking notes.
Heh...that is so funny. Two years ago I was in SD on a shuttle and a very similar thing happened.
then there was the time I was on an airplane to somewhere and two people from a competing company were sitting next to me talking about a contract they were negotiating. I never said a word nearly the entire flight. Until the end, when we started chatting about passing drinks and they finally noticed me. The one guy asks me who I work for. Should have seen his face when I told him. Seems they got awful quiet the last 15 minutes of the flight.
It's even easier than you think to gain someone's data. Last Christmas, I was kicking up my heels in the local coffee shop, when in come Joe Yuppie and sits down behind me. He whips out his lap top and starts to furiously tap away using the cafe's free wireless. Ok. Well and good.
I get up to get a refill and take a glance while I'm returning to my seat and he's online at L.L.Bean's doing some christmas shopping.
Well, apparently he's unhappy with the website so he whips out his cell phone and calls customer service. Long conversation. Asks about thread counts on sweaters, where the wool comes from, etc. decides to buy. Orders a LOT of stuff.
Starts to give out his clothing sizes, but stops for a second. He stands up, looks around to see who'se in the cafe, and then sits down and starts to tell, in a normal voice, his name, address, credit card numbers, the names of those who are getting gifts and THEIR adresses, etc. He then gives them his cell number, his HOME number, and his workplace and phone number there. Finally, he repeats the order confirmation number. I was amazed and shocked, but not unprepared. I had taken the liberty to copy all of it down while he was talking.....
Well, initially I thought what fun it might be to order a bunch of stuff for him, say for example, women's unmentionables and have them shipped to his work address. etc. Maybe change the L.L.Bean order to some nice grey wool skirts instead of shirts. That sort of stuff. Sigh... I'm too honest, but I can think about it.
What I did do was to quickly write out a copy of everything he had talked about and as he was leaving, say goodbye to him, calling him by name. He turned around and looked quizzically at me, saying "do I know you?" I responded, "NO.. but I know a lot about you. Here's the list".
I gave him his data and told him he really ought to be more careful and less arregant about his personal data. I thought he was going to faint.
Last saw he was sitting down and staring at the paper I gave him. I hope he gets it, but I suspect not.
Since I'm about to get on an airplane - I found this story of interest:
The Transportation Security Administration bagged a terrorist in Los Angeles International Airport Tuesday, or so they thought. Daniel Brown's name came up on their no-fly watchlist, so they dragged him into interrogation and grilled him, despite the protestations of Brown and his fellow travelers, who swore they could vouch for him.
Yep. The bureaucrats of the TSA (and I'm a former government employee who still gets a check from the government, I'm inclined to offer the benefit of the doubt - but I've had better interactions with the IRS and VA than I have TSA...) kept us safe - by holding up (and, since he's on the no-fly list, by implication, saying he can *never* fly) Staff Sergeant Daniel Brown, USMCR. The flight they stopped him on?
His return home to Minnesota with his Reserve MP unit. From 8 months in Iraq.
Mind you - he had orders, ID card, and was traveling *with* his unit. The story doesn't say - but I'm betting he was in uniform, too.
Y'know, I don't mind a little zealousness. I really don't. What drives me to distraction is mindless adherence to guidelines as an excuse for the avoidance of a tenth-of-a-degree temperature rise in their cranial cavity caused by a little rational analysis and decision-making. It just drives me crazy when confronted with full-of-their-power drones who fail to avail themselves of the joys of synaptic activity.
So, how did Staff Sergeant Brown find himself on the list? On his previous flight *out* to Iraq, he was discovered to have gunpowder residue on his... wait for it... combat boots. You know, those things we wear to the range when qualifying before we... deploy. To a combat zone. But hey, I guess he can leave, we'll just make sure he can't come back. Good grief. Here's a tack the Brady Campaign can use to harass gun owners. Get 'em on the no-fly list because they... use their legitimately-owned implements. But I digress.
Yet another story of mulish government employees not properly trained, equipped, and supervised (since the supervision suffers the same deficits, that's not likely to offer much improvement anyway) isn't really a story, is it?
This is.
Ultimately, the TSA screeners figured out that Brown really was a Marine, and no threat to his fellow passengers, and let him board a later flight. When he deplaned at MSP, his unit's bus was waiting -- his fellow Marines in it.
Marine 1st Sgt. Drew Benson explained why. "We don't leave anybody behind. We start together, and we finish together." All 26 Marines waited for Brown -- even though their families were waiting for them at a scheduled welcome-home bash at Fort Snelling.
Brown's mother Terry was glad they did. "They all come back together... no matter what it takes and I think that's very important," she told WCCO-TV.
Good on 'em. Hand Salute to 1SG Benson and his Marines. Semper Fi!
The whole, sad story is here, with a tip of the hat to one of the people who feeds my habit, John S.
I love the outcome, and am outraged at the story. *morons*
by AFSister on April 20, 2006 7:34 AM
Dittos, Tigger-Sis. My mind boggles at the stupidity. Do you suppose the no-fly list had the ranks/services listed along with their names? That would just put the cherry on top of the whipped cream, wouldn't it?
These are the same morons who were going to take The Medal from Joe Foss because it has sharp edges. Apparently, this would be the perfect job for trained gorillas.
by JimC on April 20, 2006 10:11 AM
I can't wait to go through security tonight. I wonder what they'll think of my baggage.
It amazes me that we let illegals stroll across the border, but yet we have such stringent FAA guidelines now that you can't even crochet or do embroidery on airplanes.
"Don't you DARE bring out the needles, lady... but if you want to stroll across the border, let me hold your bags for you and put my coat down over that mud puddle we call the Rio Grande"
*morons*
by Were-Kitten on April 20, 2006 11:09 AM
I can't wait to go through security tonight. I wonder what they'll think of my baggage.
Were-Kitten, I knit and tat. I foresee that you and I will end up on a flight together, with our wooden needles and shuttles stuffed in our socks with size 80 thread, only to be told by some bureaucratic microbe that we could use the thread to strangle a flight attendant. Where is Jodie Foster when you need her?
So....anyone going to go to the Maryland Sheep and Wool festival next month?
Just asking.
by Cricket on April 20, 2006 1:20 PM
LOL!
Cricket, that's awesome. WK and Cricket, taking over the world, one strand at a time.... HA!
by Were-Kitten on April 20, 2006 2:52 PM
What the...? Had to make sure I wasn't reading The Onion.
by Toluca Nole on April 20, 2006 3:46 PM
Cheese Eating College Boy TINS:
One of the most emberassing moments of my life is because of TSA.
The Thanksgiving the year after 9/11 I went with Jess up to Oregon to have a weekend and dinner at her parents. Well, they wanted to take Jess shopping. Apparently, Jess's mom, weirdest kinda CAtholic I ever met, decided that her daughter needed man tempting sleepwear and they bought some(Jess don't need it. It's all about the present, not the wrapping paper.). The 'rents being the 'rents we get loaded down with about twice as much junk as we came with, or more appropriately, Jess gets loaded down with three time the amount of junk she came with. I pack everything of mine but a book into my suitcase and offer to take Jess' backpack, loaded to the brim, as my carryon so we don't get nailed for baggage fees.
So the backpach goes thru the x-ray machine, and it gets flagged. They have to dig thru it with me standing there in PDX, and at the time it was right where everyone can see you. So I'm standing there, and what does the guy pull out? The man trapping undies. Stupid underwire. So here I am, 6'0 and 200lb man with the guy asking if the man trapping undies are mine infront of about 300 people while he holds them about chest height and out in front of him in plain view.
I got the nickname the Easter Bunny for a reason. I blush the nicest shade of pink.
Okay, so it's not the Cheif's TINS(or polished delivery), but hey, it's better than nothing.
Thanks to Andi's World, the general manager of the Hilton in which Fran O'Brien's currently resides agreed to answer questions submitted by milbloggers. The results are in.
Despite Capital Hilton's statement that this was "just business," it's obvious it was bad business. Those with some training and skills in managing or analyzing businesses have been weighing in. Read about it here, here, and here.
There is still hope, though. Hilton has the right to make their business decisions and we have a right to respond as consumers. Here are some ideas for supporting the continuation of the Friday-night dinners and helping other companies who may see this understand what their customers expect from them:
Follow through on the threats that were made to the Hilton brand. The decision to toss Fran's was made at the local level. It was a badbusinessdecision [3 separate links], and the corporate offices are likely to recognize that. If they hear from you (#5 below) and see that they have lost you as a Hilton customer, there is still a chance they will intercede at the Capital Hilton.
Sign the petition. I don't think this will change the local hotel's actions, but it is part of getting corporate Hilton's attention.
Contact your congressional representatives, as Lex has long suggested [Clarification: I am not suggesting congress should be regulating Hilton's behavior on this, but that a congress member might be interested in drawing attention to this situation during an election year, etc.].
Write to Hilton's corporate offices. If you haven't yet written, or you contacted Doyle or Kelleher, you were dealing only with the local Hilton (Capital Hilton). Now is the time to take it to the corporate level (see Flash Traffic). We overwhelmed the Capital Hilton with email and phone calls; we can do it again at the corporate level.
Barring a breakthrough development, this will probably be my last Fran's post at the Castle--I'll include Fran's news in the H&I Fires. You can check Fuzzilicious Thinking for any other updates. - Fuzzybear Lioness
[Corporate Contacts for Hilton are in Flash Traffic below.]
Atish Shah - Vice President - Investor Relations
atish_shah@hilton.com
Linda Bain - Vice President of Group Communications
Linda.Bain@hilton.com
Madeleine Kleiner - Executive Vice President, Corporate Secretary and General Counsel
madi_kleiner@hilton.com
Hilton Corporation Board of Directions:
Donna Tuttle: Partner Elmore/Tuttle Sports Group West Valley City Utah (minor league sports franchises) : President Korn Tuttle Capital Group Los Angeles California John L. Notter: Chairman and President ; Westlake Properties Inc. Westlake Village California (hotel and real estate development company) John H. Myers: President and CEO ; GE Asset Management Incorporated ; Stamford Connecticut Benjamin V. Lambert: Chairman and CEO ; Eastdil Realty Company LLC New York (Real Estate investment bankers) Christine Garvey: Real Estate Consultant Santa Barbara California A. Steven Crown: General Partner ; Henry Crown and Company Chicago Illinois (real estate ventures) Sam D. Young: Chairman Trans West Enterprises ; Reno Nevada Peter M. George: Senior Vice President International Development ; Harrahs Entertainment, Inc. Las Vegas Nevada (hotel and gaming company)
I agree, Beth. The context of Lex's suggestion that you cotact your representative was that they might enjoy being seen as making a big deal about supporting the troops during an election year. I think he was looking at it more in terms of threats from representatives than that they would actually try to legally force Hilton to keep Fran's.
[Sorry for the possibly-excessive use of your generous posting privileges, John. But you know me well enough not to be surprised that I'm not gonna let up on this unless you tell me to. And then I'll just take it back to my place and hang onto it like a pitbull, haha!]
Lots happening on the "Save Fran O'Brien's" front.
Hilton's response has left Lex unimpressed and encouraging us to contact our congressional representatives, and Greyhawk swearing (scroll down) and issuing a call to arms. In the comments on Greyhawk's "swearing" post, Buzz Patterson is reaffirming that restaurant co-owner Hal Koster says there were no negotiations, contradicting Hilton's claims.
The story has also made it to the front page of the "City" section in the Washington Post, and now Michelle Malkin is onboard.
Update II: Hilton has repeatedly said that the eviction of Fran's had nothing to do with the Friday Dinners for wounded veterans. If we accept that at face value, it would make sense that they have plans for using the location in a new way, or have another customer in mind. This now seems highly unlikely. World Net Daily has an article quoting a regional spokesperson for Hilton:
Cole would not say specifically why the lease was terminated or what the hotel will do with the space after April.
"We don't have anything that we're definitely going to do with the space," she said.
The more I read, the less impressed I am with Hilton. [h/t Blackfive]
Update: more contact info courtesy of Buzz Patterson's comments at Blackfive. Remember, keep it civil (Lex's advice on tactics is very good).
A two-year tradition for wounded war vets is about to go by the wayside. A downtown DC steak house thats catered to injured troops every Friday night is about to close.
Fran OBriens landlord is forcing out the steakhouse of the same name.
We're not feeling very good about leaving and especially the Friday night dinner, OBrien said.
The short article and video confirm that the restaurant is being forced out, and though there are attempts to arrange something similar to the now-traditional "Friday Night at Fran's," it's very much up in the air.
I hesitate to make assumptions, but it's appearing more and more that Hilton has made a very poor business decision based on surface-level analysis of profit/loss (as Lex has theorized). And it's also becoming clearer that they have treated Fran O'Brien's very shabbily, possibly to the point of not negotiating in good faith. One email sent to Hilton sums it up pretty well:
All I ask is that you deal with the owners openly and honestly, not dissemble, lead them on, and then hit them with a two week eviction notice.
Apparently that has been too much to ask in this case.
To be fair, Hilton has said they want to find some way to continue an activity for the troops on their site. However, they are promising nothing at this point:
A Hilton hotel spokesperson says they are -- on some level -- hoping to keep the Friday night alive without Fran OBriens.
And if it's not the free Friday night steak dinner for injured veterans ... The same statement from the hotel concludes: "the Capital Hilton prides itself on its involvement and service to the community and will continue to support these organizations in the future."
I really think Hilton has missed a great opportunity here. Instead of forcing out Fran O'Brien's in an unprofessional manner that included assuring Fran's they were developing a new lease while they apparently had no intention of doing so and then giving them only three weeks to leave, they could have cooperated with Fran's and then publicized their "great civic-mindedness."
The story of what Fran O'Brien's has done and what it means to the wounded who participate is pure gold. The first time I saw a news report about it I cried. It was so wonderful to see the expressions and hear the laughter and words of the wounded who said that going to Fran's made them feel "normal" for the first time since their injuries. Cooperating with Fran's to ensure the restaurant's continued association with the hotel would have given Hilton the kind of PR that money can't buy...
The owners of Fran O'Brien's are expected to make an announcement of some type this morning.
--FbL
[The Armorer interjects: Hilton has the right to do what they wish with the space they control, within the context of contract law. In other words, absent some tortious malfeasance on their part, what they did was perfectly legal.
Just as what Fuzzybear Lioness and others have done is perfectly legal - which is attack both the decision and (this is more my problem) the shabby way in which this was done. Hilton wants to change their property, they should be able to. And if they were going to do that - why not just say so with enough time for the owners of Fran O'Brien's to make other arrangements, as Hilton seems not to have done?
That's the lesson learned here. In time of war, *especially* in the era of the Blog, messing with recovering wounded soldiers, however indirectly, can land you in hot PR water - and it didn't have to be that way, if a little Golden Rule had been applied to the issue. Make no mistake - this story has the legs it does not so much because of the restaurant - as it is the patrons on that night.
This is a Story That Should Never Have Been.
That said, I suppose those of us attending the Milblogger Conference ought to go do dinner there, eh?]
[FbL adds: I'll second what the Armorer says. I think that had Hilton handled the lease issue more professionally, this would hardly be a story: Fran's would be moving to a new location in the DC area with plenty of time to make the transition, and while people would lament the disruption, Friday Nights at Fran's would be likely be continuing at their new location while a few people might shake their heads at Hilton's lost opportunity.
Instead, many of us now have a lower opinion of Hilton for how they "negotiated" with Fran's, and will long remember the Hilton name in association with this event.
(And yes to the to the dinner suggestion--with healthy tips to the waiters who donated their labor on Friday nights and will soon be out of work.)]
Came by your site as I was looking for info on Fran's. Your publishing the information about our son, 2LT Leonard M. Cowherd III, back in May of 2004 was a great help to us during that awful time and it still helps to see that you are continuing the good work!
Is dangerous. For the same reason being a thin-skinned politician is dangerous. Or any Public Person.
I ran into some illustrative examples yesterday.
You see, I blog out my a$$. A Public Person who blogs and is a media maven told me so.
First up. If you blog or want to blog, read this. Why I Hate Weblogs. Written tongue-in-cheek, with bite. BTW, I scored "normal" on the quiz in Appendix A. The whole thing is good for keeping your perspective (which most of us lose doing this, at one time or another). The key to losing it is to keep in in-house, and not share it around with everybody.
Kinda like Gary Trudeau, vice Ted Rall. Heh. Were I Ted, I would have talked to my lawyer first, before soliciting advice from my readers. But at least he was smart enough to collect pledges, and not money. Too bad Ted isn't willing to put his own money where his mouth is, he prefers instead to redistribute it from his readers. But voluntarily. He didn't suggest that the government collect the funds for him and deposit them in his account, so that's progress, coming from a lefty like Ted.
We on the right have our own thin-skinned people. For the record, if you'd like to complain to me about something I've written, this is *not* the approach I recommend.
I read your post about my "whining" to the idiot rottweiler. Do you always blog out of your a$$? You have NO IDEA what I said to the idiot because he lied
and didn't post my e-mails to him. Why do you think he changed what he wrote and posted a "retraction"? I NEVER threaten to sue anyone over being offended. Believe me, his site, which I never before visited and won't again, is NOT worthy of my time and attention. I've been called a lot worse by more worthies and ignored it. But defamatory, LYING speech is NOT protected anywhere, much less so in your precious Denmark. I find it interesting that you are willing to write a blog entry, when you haven't a clue and you never read my e-mail. Like a true idiot . . . .
Debbie Schlussel
You know, she's right. I didn't know any of that. Nor, for the point I was making (see the blurb up early in yesterday's H&I that starts with "The Rottweiler") did I really need to. My point was simply that picking a fight with Misha, especially if that's the tone, just feeds the beast that is Misha's patented invective. Heh. That and the fact that I haven't really been all over supporting Denmark lately, but what the heck, she was on a roll.
Misha was, well, rather rude to her in his post. Okay, being mostly otherwise on the same team (or even if not, what the heck, honey gets more than vinegar) go tell him how hurt and annoyed you are and how inappropriate his comments were, and ask him to retract them and give him a chance to retreat gracefully. But toss invective at him? *That* helps. Not.
So, I responded.
Debbie -
1. Do you always email out your a$$? This email would seem to indicate yes, at least when you're annoyed. You should always reread and take a deep
breath before you send something like this.
2. If he never published your emails, I couldn't very well have read them, but that's a different issue.
3. My advice still stands. Whining at The Rottweiler just feeds him, basically the point of my post. I stand by what I said. Mistake, Debbie. None of which
has anything to do with the merits of your claim. A nice, measured email laying out your side of the story would go farther than "Do you always blog out of your
ass?" will. Just as I'm guessing a similar approach with Misha might have produced a slightly different response from him - but maybe not. He *is* the Rott, and that pretty much was the point of my post.
4. Small detail, I live in Kansas, not Denmark, I have no idea why you thought I might live in Denmark.
5. Your reading preferences are, of course, your right. I don't read him but once a week now either, mostly to see what the moonbats he attracts (in this
case, I'm not lumping you in, but if you were to continue in this tone, I might) but I do like a good rant, if only for variety. If you were to check any of the services that track such, you'll find that I'm not a prolific linker to him - though he was the first high-traffic blogger that linked to me, back in the days when I was getting started.
6. My blog entry, despite your personal angst over your tiff with Misha, wasn't really about you. It was about "Don't feed the animals, it just keeps them
hanging around." Now you're running around and kicking me in the shins.
So. Now my conundrum. Do I post your email and my response, or not?
Decisions, decisions. I'm of a mind to.
Obviously, we see what my decision was. In retrospect, my temper wasn't as under control as it might have been, either. I did edit the typos and for the PG-17C, btw. Mind you - I did edit my post, though perhaps not entirely to her liking.
I'll take the rest of the to the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry in the interest of my long-suffering dial-up customers.
Since Debbie is concerned about Misha not publishing the emails in her tiff with him, I will continue posting ours. She responded:
Gee, John, let's see. You said that I "whined about it" (his post). Since you haven't seen a single e-mail I sent him, how would you know that? In fact,
I did NOT whine at all. I merely demanded that he take down the two defamatory items, which he did, b/c he knew he'd be sued. Did I whine about the rest of the absurd, insulting post? NO. Did I ask him to take it down? NO. Did I threaten to sue him over it? NO. Did it hurt my feelings? Puh-leeze. I couldn't care less what he thinks. But I do care when my reputation is falsely attacked. In fact, his latest e-mail to me, unsolicited is a nice apology.
Unfortunately, it is complete bull excrement because he won't post it on his site, and has posted the exact opposite. It's all a complete lie, and the guy is a
coward. But it's working for him, since all the sheep believe him, and apparently you did, too, claiming I "whined about it."
Baaaah.
In fact, she's mostly correct up there, in that I haven't seen the whole email stream between her and Misha. This is the point where I actually went and edited the post.
She says:
I've been called a lot worse by more worthies and ignored it. But defamatory, LYING speech is NOT protected anywhere...
followed by:
NO. Did it hurt my feelings? Puh-leeze.
...in her response to me. This, plus the effort she's going to, tells me someones feelings may in fact, be hurt. Just a thought, though I suspect Debbie doesn't think I'm much capable of that. Anyway, trying to keep the focus mostly on what I meant by my post, and tossing out some "Hey, we're on the same side" let's close this out patter, I responded:
BTW - just to make sure I knew who I was talking with, I checked your blog. We have far more in common than disagreement.
But really, emails like this to guys like me doesn't help you, and only reinforces what guys like Misha think.
Sometimes, once you've gotten what you're after, it's better to just let it lie, even if it grits your teeth to do it.
How many other people did you send something like this to? Hopefully only me - otherwise you are potentially going to light up the aggregators, and not in a flattering light.
Of course, being a Media Figure, perhaps you're looking for some exposure, I dunno. But the tagline around Castle Argghhh! is, Wahabism Delenda Est.
In fact, we're Number 1 in Google for it.
I followed that up immediately with this:
Okay, yer pissed. I'll sign off with "Baaaah!"
But my point still stands - you're just making it
worse - unless of course, you want the bump in the
aggregators.
Cheers,
John
And Debbie, who is not offended or anything, comes back with this (and the conversation ends at this point, unless this post torques her enough to reopen it)
And your evidence that I "whined about it" is? . . . .
She hasn't seen the edits. She probably still hasn't. And I don't think she's really interested in it, either.
Bottom line:
1. If you blog, this stuff happens. Live with it.
2. If you do feel defamed and can't let it go, great. In this case, Misha *was* over the top. So be polite (you don't have to be nice, but be polite) and ask the offending party to take it down, or amend it. If you go for the Nuclear Option (lawsuit) right out of the gate, well, you might not like the result.
3. Don't go sending emails asking people if they blog out their a$$ and then spend electrons pointing out how you aren't offended easily. It just makes it worse.
Just sayin'. A polite "my side of the story" email would have made this a different post. I was still going to run with the "Why I hate Blogs" bit as advice for new bloggers and a reminder for old bloggers. But Rall and Schlussel's actions made this ripe for expansion.
Debbie - I'm mostly on your side politically, and see some merit in your argument regarding the whole Rott thing. But how about a little politesse?
Had a fella E-mail me his opinion on a story. Our points of view differ greatly. However he was polite about it, and once in a while we still swap E-mails.
Something that has always baffeled me about a lot of left leaning bloggers. Most Center/Right blogs understand the ideal of "We see your point. We understand your arguement. We just don't agree with it" and can do it Politely....while most left seem to stomp their feet and pitch tantrums. Just the view from my side o the street.
Wow. Really bad move on Schlussel's part, all the way around.
When I had that little dustup over Arkin (WaPo blogger/columnist), there were so many sites that linked to me that were full of trash and invective and inaccurate characterizations/info. I still encounter a new linker of that type every 5-7 days. When that happens, I reflexively hit "comment," and start to type. Then I look at the content again and realize commenting more won't accomplish anything productive--I've already responded to their general points within the very post they're usually linking, and ultimately it doesn't matter that a blogger who doesn't know me from Adam and doesn't have a grasp of the facts of the case wants to be rude and insulting (even slanderous).
I'm rather surprised and disappointed that Schlussel didn't take the same view here. Though bitty bloggers like me aren't even in the same universe as media figures like Schlussel, I think the same principal applies: it's not all about you. It's about the story and the ideas and the conversation. If someone spews what you see as nothing more than uninformed and cretinous invective, then you need to be secure enough in who you are and why you write to believe that he isn't worth your time. That old quote about the pig comes to mind...
[And none of the above is a reflection of my view of Misha... just looking at things from Schlussel's perspective]
Yea I saw she was a right side. I guess thats why I mentioned what I did. Sort of confused me by her reaction because it's not what I'm used to. I can name any number of bloggers I associate with who we don't agree, but we still respect each others views.
Her reaction just smites...of..well..tantrum throwing.
There are tantrum-tossers on both sides of the line, just as there are reasonable contrarians (and we're contrarians to the lib-leaners) there.
The Left has more flamers, I posit, because they generally post from emotion, rather than logic, and it fits perfectly with the only debating style with which they're familiar: the Carville Method--pick one point, repeat it ad infinitum and do it *loudly*. Since they don't often have facts to support their argument, they have to fall back on emotion--at least they're playing to their strength.
So, it could be worse. Just suppose you had Arianna Huffington for a groupie instead of Debbie...
*scrambling for the bunker, hastily donning kevlar enroute*
by cw4(ret)billt on February 15, 2006 10:56 AM
Why does she go to great lengths to say that she didn't threaten to sue him, and then say that he took them down because he knew he would be sued? How could he 'know' that unless she TOLD him that?
*throwing out boric acid 'sand' for her to play in*
As to the worthy Ms. Huffington, at least she allows for disagreements on her blog.
by Cricket on February 15, 2006 11:01 AM
Heh. The Huff allows Greg Gutfield, which makes The Post worth a periodic visit.
If DS is representative of our fans, hmmmmm.
I think I'll stick with Barb, AFSis, W-K, FbL, Punct, SWWBO, Flutterby (where's *she* been lately?), Kat, Maggie, and Cricket as a fan club.
Flutterby's going through Basic as a prep for WOC.
*grin*
She's got her sights set on flying Chinooks--I can already see her flying into Andrews AFB for a static display and taking pix of people taking pix of her...
by cw4(ret)billt on February 15, 2006 11:56 AM
I think I'll stick with Barb, AFSis, W-K, FbL, Punct, SWWBO, Flutterby (where's *she* been lately?), Kat, Maggie, and Cricket as a fan club. Did I miss anybody?
Expect incoming from Cassie.
And, on a semirelated note, I notice that Ted Rall didn't produce a single peep when Michelle Malkin raked him over the coals.
Heh. He sez he's not worried about a Coulter defense of "I was only funnin' " because Ann Coulter's not funny. Based on that criterion, Ann Coulter's got nothing to worry about a Ted Rall offense, either...
by cw4(ret)billt on February 15, 2006 12:06 PM
Teh GUtfield Drivebys. Funny stuff. ANd the comments threads for his posts are hilarious. Flame spewing liberals run full tilt into coolaid drinking cons commentors. It's like watching matter and anti matter run into each other.
You know though, sometimes blue-on-blue things like this are sometimes good (Like the formation of the Carnival of the RINO thing). We get to find out who has the goods and who doesn't.
by ry on February 15, 2006 12:17 PM
My grandmother always told me, when you find yourself in a hole, you should stop digging.
Pity most folks don't get that.
Frankly, I didn't read her post or Misha's, but your point was taken. You should have seen was written about me in 2004 When I had the temerity to write about Michael Moore in an unflattering way. Actually, that's being nice. The crazies had a field day and my mailbox was full of very explosive comments. I just laughed.
You're right, though, a lot of new bloggers can't always take it when they get a response to their comments that is rather insulting and sometimes old bloggers have gathered a following that they get all comfortable with and *boom* one day a fly in the ointment.
But, maybe Debbie was hurt more because she is a fellow right and a fellow right dished her up to the raving wolves?
Don't know, but, I standby my grandmother's advice.
Cassie won't be offended; John links to her at least two, three times a week.
by Cricket on February 16, 2006 4:35 PM
I think one is insane to have a blog. If one has a blog, anybody in the whole wide world gets to read what one types in the middle of the night, after having gotten all emotionally and intellectually exercised from reading blogs and other silly things on the InterWeb, and having drunk too much. I have a blog.
Sigh.
In my defense, may I say that you other people provoked me? The Donovan kept poking me, but the precipitating event was Amanda Baggs' having problems with the host of her previous blog, so that I had to sign up with Blogger to make smart remarks and silly comments on her blog.
I think of Jerry Pournelle being tossed off the Internet, before the Internet actually existed under that name, back in the 70s, for drunken late-night postings.
Well, I think she was right. Now that Misha's posted the letters, I think I can see that she did not whine once. She pissed, she moaned, she pitched a bitch, threw a fit, and lobbed insults of a quality that I associate with pubescent underachievers and teen dullards, but I don't see any whining. If I were you though, I'd ask her for an objective set of standards to definitively qualify whining just to be sure. Until I get that, I'd leave the whining attribution in place. Whining is in the eye of the beholder.
Obviously, someone was out of position when the Veep went hunting yesterday. Whether it was the Veep or the Victim, the Veep has ultimate responsibility as the trigger puller, unless the victim was behind some bushes taking a leak or something. I'll leave that for others to settle.
Owen Dyer, in an email to me, observed it was a good thing that Cheney was a Republican, and therefore hunting with fatcat corporate lawyers. If he'd been a Democrat, those would have been personal injury lawyers...
Go forth, Denizens, find the good, the bad, the ugly jokes. Find the Moonbat Howls at the Moon from the anti-gun, anti-Cheney, anti-anything-not-me crowd.
If you have posting privileges, slap 'em in here. If you don't, put 'em in the comments. Lets be a Cheney@TheRange clearinghouse!
For the record - after the investigation is over, based on whatever evidence is gathered and what the laws of Texas provide for - Cheney should suffer whatever consequences fall out from that. No more, no less. And no, a hunting accident is no more justification for confiscating weapons from law abiding citizens than car accidents are justification for banning car ownership.
Speaking of investigations, The Keystone Cops go Hunting.
CHENEY STATEMENT -- ON THE LICENSE, NOT THE SHOOTING [Byron York]
Vice President Cheney has not yet made a public statement about the incident in which he accidentally shot a fellow hunter in Texas Saturday, but his office has just released a statement about the issue of whether he had the proper license to be hunting quail:
It has been brought to the Vice Presidents attention by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department this afternoon that, although he had acquired a 125 dollar Texas non-resident season hunting license, he lacked a 7 dollar stamp for hunting upland game birds. To address any questions about the licensing:
-- A member of the Vice Presidents staff wrote a check for 140 dollars understanding that this would purchase a Texas non-resident season hunting license that would permit the Vice President to hunt quail in Texas. It appears now that the license itself cost 125 dollars, and an extra 15 dollars covered the cost of a Federal migratory bird stamp. The Vice President did not need the Federal stamp, as he already possessed one.
-- The staff asked for all permits needed, but was not informed of the 7 dollar upland game bird stamp requirement.
-- Because the requirement is new, the Department has informed us that it is issuing warnings, and the Vice President expects to receive one. He will take whatever steps are needed to comply with applicable rules.
-- In the meantime, the Vice President has sent a 7 dollar check to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which is the cost of an upland game bird stamp.
Sigh. Amateurs. In my case, that would be a literal truth when it comes to hunting in Texas. In the Veep's case, he's been let down by his staff, *and* Ms. Armstrong, on whose ranch the hunt was conducted (if it's done as a business, anyway). No, I *don't* expect the Veep to take the time to personally check on all these details - that's what the staff is for. But he *should* take the time to clear his target area.
Funny, Hillary and Teddy Kennedy are almost tied on the Hunting Trip to Texas.
And just for the loony left's POV on this one, I went to Democratic Underground, and had a good laugh at their comments. 574 since last night, and it provided a much needed laugh for me today.
by Jon The Mechanic on February 13, 2006 9:47 AM
Somebody pointed out that if this had happened with the veep from two administrations back, the headline would have been "Quayle shoots hunter".
Seriously, though, a lot of people out there are putting their love of Dick Cheney before their defence of the Second Amendment.
I've read conservative blogs today that said:
1. Getting peppered with birdshot is a common experience for birdhunters.
2. Shotguns aren't dangerous like rifles and pistols are.
3. This accident was not Cheney's fault, but Whittington's for not announcing his presence.
In fact this Armstrong woman hosting the shoot herself made claims 1+3 above.
The conservative blogger John Podhoretz rightly pointed out:
"Saying that, hey, people get shot all the time when they're out hunting and it's no big deal really isn't an argument you want to be making if you are a supporter of gun rights."
There were just 29 hunting accidents, with only two fatalities, in the whole state of Texas in 2005.
And gun accidents are ALWAYS the shooter's fault. Saying otherwise is grossly irresponsible and the GOP better drop it quick.
This Jonah Goldberg character, who appears to be some sort of rightwing blog celebrity, said: "If John Pod is right about the politics, then the best thing for Cheney to do is have the victim make a statement taking the blame and making a joke out of the whole thing."
Whittington should apologise to Cheney? The hunters need to set the party spinners straight on this one.
by OD on February 13, 2006 6:19 PM
Oh-oh. Bringing in the Blogfather... (We're Jonah's Military Guys. Yep, *that* Jonah).
I've taken the position that in the final analysis, Cheney is at fault.
That doesn't mean that Whittington isn't. The reason for the rule of 'announcing yourself' stems precisely from the nature of bird shooting.
Whittington got out of the line, didn't announce himself - and then *he* apparently flushed the bird that Cheney - whose turn it was, went for.
There's blame all 'round - but if you follow *all* the rules, people don't get shot.
As for the statistics - people *do* get showered with birdshot out hunting birds - if you are doing it in open order (well spaced line) and the birds flush from one end of the other. I rather think it isn't 'all the time', but I have to admit that while I know the general rules because I've had a license - I've never hunted birds.
And yes, those people trying to pooh-pooh the thing are being dumb. I've mostly agreed with JPod through the day, though I think he's a bit shrill on the subject.
But then there is a noticeable Blue State/Red State (regardless of left-right) twinge to the response, with non-hunting Blues of all stripes seeing this as nigh unto a horror, and hunting Reds of all stripes as seeing how it could happen.
If you were reading the *gun blogs*, vice the political blogs, you'd see that the Veep has not fared well, with guys like me leaving it at, "In the final analysis, Cheney was at fault" to rather more savage bites on Cheney's very targetable butt. We're pretty much in agreeement that Whittington is at fault, too. It's rather like blundering into the firing line on an open rifle range - while it's the responsiblity of the Range OIC to shut down firing, and of the shooters to make sure their lanes are clear - you still walked into an open range in violation of the rules.
I don't free the Veep from his culpability - but Whittington is at fault, as well.
Which is the source of some of Blue-state Jonah's comment.
The whole thing is stupid, and if everybody had been following the rules, never would have happened. A pox on all their houses in that regard.
Air Bear, Stormy - are you guys serious? So, apparently, with warnings as the standard LE response, you guys are rather extending things to where Cheney should be in jail.
No doubt, oh, for life?
C'mon - just because you apparently hate the guy doesn't mean a disporportionate response is in order.
Does it?
And what part of my assertion:
For the record - after the investigation is over, based on whatever evidence is gathered and what the laws of Texas provide for - Cheney should suffer whatever consequences fall out from that.
...was insufficient? That I didn't call for his immediate incarceration as a felon?
Which isn't really an option under the applicable statutes?
Unfortunately this whole thing continues to develop a life of its own. Cheney will receive a citation for the missing stamp, just as anyone in that position would. His staff blew that deal, but it's his resposibility to know the laws and permit requirements before he goes afield. I'm an avid wingshooter from the part of the world where this occurred and I can see how it could happen. That said, it should never have happened. It was a combination of mistakes made by both hunters that caused it. The ultimate blame lies with the shooter and Cheney has publicly accepted full responsibility. I'm sure both men are sorry this happened. Can you imagine how it must feel to have accidentally shot one of your friends? It must be a horrible feeling.
As I said in my post yesterday, former General-now-Colonel Karpinski pole-vaulted the shark. BTW - today *this* post will be the top post all day. H&I Fires will be underneath, and any new stuff will come in under that one.
"Near the town of Mahawil in southern Iraq, U.S. Marines uncovered a mass grave site holding the remains of some 15,000 Iraqis. They were slaughtered for taking part in the Shia uprising against Saddam in the early 1990s. Saddams agent responsible for conducting the mass killings was Mohammed Jawad Anayfas; the grave site is on land owned by him.
"In July 2003, Anayfas was captured by US forces and turned over to the Military Police Brigade under Karpinskis command. The Brigade Headquarters managed to lose his paperwork -- so instead of contacting her superiors, Karpinski ordered Anayfas set free [emphasis mine].
"Soon thereafter, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz came to Iraq and visited the Mahawil gravesite, where he was informed by Marine Lt. Gen. James Conway how outraged the local Iraqis were over Anayfas release. Visibly upset, Wolfowitz vowed Anayfas would be recaptured and tried as a war criminal. Anayfas is still at large and Karpinski received no reprimand.
"When confronted by the Iraqi public outcry -- for Anayfas was only one of several war criminals whose paperwork was lost and she released-- Karpinski proceeded to evade responsibility..." [again, emphasis mine].
"The Army's inspector general investigated four allegations against Karpinski: dereliction of duty, making a 'material misrepresentation' to investigators, failure to obey a lawful order and shoplifting. Only the shoplifting and dereliction of duty allegations were substantiated.
"A government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Karpinski was accused of shoplifting a cosmetic item [note: Air Force accounts say that it was a $22 bottle of perfume]from a shop [note: the BX] at a domestic Air Force base [note: MacDill AFB] while she held the rank of colonel. Karpinski didn't report her arrest for this misdemeanor on a later background check, the official said."
And she was promoted to Brigadier General shortly thereafter.
Somebody at the Pentagon is in serious need of a a$$kicking. A long, continuous, size-thirteen a$$kicking. And knowing how John feels about Dysfunction in High Places, he's welcome to relieve me when my leg gets tired...
Karpinski's reduction to Colonel, sadly, stems not from her role in Abu Ghraib (which was one of dereliction, along with a lot of minions in the chain), but was administrative. Because of the arrest and failure to report it, her promotion to Brigadier was legally null and void, as it was obtained under false pretenses*.
Unfortunately, I suspect both because of evidentiary issues as well as the publicity, a decision was made to *not* prosecute Colonel Karpinski for dereliction. Based on what she has presented thus far for a defense, absent any more info, *I* would vote for conviction. But then I'm something of a witch-hunter on this matter and don't think enough senior heads have rolled publicly, though I am aware of a few private career executions, albeit only by hearsay - which is why you don't see any names in this space.
But with her latest actions, she's taken on the role of a military Mother Sheehan.
I wondered why. Oh, I know why, she's in huge denial and trying to salvage her tattered reputation, so now she hangs out in her own little bubble of moonbats who feed her the line of soothing bullshite she so desperately needs.
Just to show that Karpinski *still* can't get it right - she was overheard shouting exultantly at the sky... "Cindy, You Magnificent Poltroon, I read your book!"**
Update: Fuzzybear Lioness provides this link to a nicely done look at how not only did Karpinski fail, but it would appear the senior leadership facilitated it by their own bad judgement.
*Those who follow the adultery convictions of General Officers will have noted the peculiar thing of one Major General getting a substantial fine and retired, and another Brigadier General getting a substantial fine *and* busted back to Colonel. This disparity (and, admittedly, some injustice) stems from the fact that in the first case, the prosecuted behavior occurred while the officer was a Major General. In the second case, it occurred while the officer was still a Colonel, and his promotion was therefore administratively set aside. Make no bones about it - the second guy, with the hit to his retirement pay, took a much bigger penalty for the same offense. But Sergeants go to jail for it, so... We let Generals off too easy, I think - because the senior leadership mistakenly believes that it looks bad to send Generals to jail. I disagree. A lot.
This article may not be new to most of you, but it describes (complete with source files) a very damning inspection/evaluation of Karpinski that occured before the Abu Ghraib scandal. It sounds lke a pure case PC and politics triumphing over integrity, mission, and the wellbeing of the Army.
I've said since the Abu Gharaib story first broke that EVERY commander and First Sergeant or Sergeant Major in the units involved should have faced a General Court Martial on charges of dereliction of duty. If they knew about the abuses and did nothing they were derelict, and if they did NOT know about it they were derelict.
The standard USED to be that a commander was responsible for EVERYTHING his (or her) unit did or failed to do. And commanders were held to that standard. Not anymore, evidently.
It's NEVER hard to get American soldiers to do things the right way. All you have to do is give them some decent leadership.
by blake.kirk on February 7, 2006 8:22 AM
In case you didn't peruse each link in the Rasmusen article, Karpinski continues to claim that the shoplifting incident is a total fabrication. Pentagon officials who "declined to be identified" were asked if there was, indeed, a police report from MacDill describing Karpinski's arrest for shoplifting--they answered that there was such a report but added that the Army would not release it in order to protect Karpinski's Right to Privacy.
There's more than one individual at the Puzzle Palace in serious need of a a$$kicking...
by cw4(ret)billt on February 7, 2006 8:28 AM
I don't even have the words to describe what I think of this woman, and the ones that do come to mind, I can't say, being a lady and all.
by AFSister on February 7, 2006 9:13 AM
As Bill says - there are a lot of heads that should get rolled out over this one. The number of ways all of this is bad is quite amazing to me.
Just let us know when you plan to rip that tape off so I can plug my ears.
Nothing like the sound of rippin hair, and screaming wimmins.
by jim b on February 7, 2006 1:54 PM
Ok, I was pretty steamed about all this too. But now that I have calmed down a little.........I don't want to go off half-cocked (down NC-17). Who actually heard Karpinski say this stuff? Is there video or audio? Who's vouching that this really happened? At least with Kerry and the Winter soldier crap we had documentation.
That said.......once we know it's true.....what can we do about it?
So, who was the MacDill IG at the time of her alleged arrest, and why is no one asking him or her these same questions?
Just asking cause I have not the admin insider knowledge that various stellar retirees do, and wish to know how this could be played out and if it would go in that direction?
by Cricket on February 7, 2006 2:05 PM
If she's retired, not much, Maggie. Else I'd get my toes smashed by hammers every now and then by irate uniformed heffalumps.
Cricket - The IG's secondary function is to investigate issues raised by the troops, to present his findings to the commander and to initiate any action the commander directs.
The IG's primary function is to keep his boss out of hot water.
by cw4(ret)billt on February 7, 2006 2:18 PM
Good Lord John!!!!!!!
I followed that link you gave me, downloaded the audio and had to listen for what seemed like two weeks (talk about torture!) to get to where she makes the accusation. But it is actually in there.
Thanks, I think.
Always have to be careful not to be drinking the KoolAid.
Maggie - No Kool-Aid served here. The house drink is the Margarita.
And Belgian ale, and the Hurricane, and hefe weissbier, and the Cosmopolitan, and Jack Daniels, and Shirley Temples for Ry.
No Kool-Aid, though.
by cw4(ret)billt on February 7, 2006 3:53 PM
I did not mean to imply that the Castle serves KoolAid, just that we are all pretty steamed and I wanted to get some facts. Now that I had to suffer through that woman's so-called testimony, I remember that my grandmother always warned me to be careful what I wished for.
Wish Jim would get here to take over the bar. I keep catching the trenchcoat on the keg and I'm running out of matches trying to light this camel...
WHOA! Down, ya dribbling dromedary! Stand still and stop spitting on the matches!
by cw4(ret)billt on February 8, 2006 8:55 AM
jim b ambers in and looks around the bar. Jeez people, what happened in here last night. Drop your pack bill, smoke em if you got em and clean up after that hump thing over there.
jim b trades his Fedora for a brain bucket (WW I style) hooks up his leggins and freshens up the sandbags on the bar. Now where is that ritamatic, and I need to order more chocolate for the emergency wimmins calming plan.
Looks like another pleasant valley Wednesday here in status symbol land.
by jim b on February 8, 2006 10:05 AM
Special of the day is Black Jack Daniels on the rocks.
jim b begins to mix more gas/oil stuff for the all terrain ritamatic.
Am I the only guy round here who refuels that thang?
by jim b on February 8, 2006 10:09 AM
Dougie MacArthur just shuddered. It's "puttees," not "leggings," lad...
Tsk. The Rainbow Division was called that because of the patch, not the proclivities.
by cw4(ret)billt on February 8, 2006 10:15 AM
Ahhh thanks for that update. However my dad was not in the 42nd Division he was in the 41st Division. Their patch was a rising sun later renamed setting sun in honor of the Japs.
They called them leggings.
Nice to remember 'back in the day' when gay meant happy and rainbow was not a gay sign.
Oh, dad called Dougie MacArthur, Dougout Doug. I am not sure he liked the guy.
by jim b on February 8, 2006 10:24 AM
MacArthur spent *years* trying to expunge that nickname. These days, the only people who still remember who "Dugout Doug" was are the Bataan survivors and the guys who worked the Pacific getting even for them.
My dad finally stopped spitting on the floor between saying "Dugout" and "Doug" last year--he's mellowing out, I guess.
by cw4(ret)billt on February 8, 2006 10:40 AM
Jim - since Neffi appears to be terminally feline-whipped now that he has a gurlfren', looks like yer the guy.
Whatcha got that will get through this tiny pipe to Concourse H at O'Hare?
We have a basket fulla them little jack black bottles and maybe we can compress a wine bladder outta one of them boxes of fantastic sam's wine boxes through to you...
By the way I think you made a mistake. You weren't suppost to be at O'Hare, you were suppost to being enjoyin a Wild Hair.
by jim b on February 8, 2006 11:22 AM
Better yet the chief is workin out a plan to hook up a pipeline to the gas powered ritamatic.... link it to a 5hp liquid pump and get a drink to you that way.
But I think maybe you better be forewarned sos you can attach some kinda faucet to your usb port so you can shut off the flow on your end.
Holymoly I was right. There is a picture of Pop's leggings ......... hang on I need a drink.
by jim b on February 8, 2006 12:22 PM
I'm not cleanin' up if anyone tries to make Patton's 'Armored Diesel'. Uh-uh.
by ry on February 8, 2006 12:26 PM
jim b wipes down the bar and plunks a quarter in the juke box.
The sounds of Don Ho drift though the lounge......Tiny bubblessssssssssssss
by jim b on February 8, 2006 1:01 PM
jim b wakes up on the bar in a deserted lounge ... again.... sighs .... shuts off the lights, wipes his drool up off the bar, and turns the open sign to closed as he exits and locks the door behind him.
by jim b on February 8, 2006 2:13 PM
And Grandpa T's puttees are there, too!
Looks like it's time to get BCR Labs working on the feasibility of containerless liquid transfer via tuned synchronic subetheric vortices.
Hey, John - Remember how *certain* items made it to DS/DS via SAM?
Okay let me guess ... some Army guy right. Dougout Doug. That's just the name dear ole dad gave him. However unlike bills dad, he didn't spit.
:-)
by jim b on February 8, 2006 4:26 PM
O'Hare International Airport is named for Lt. Cmdr. Edward "Butch" O'Hare, a World War II fighter pilot from Chicago known as one of the greatest heroes in naval history. O'Hare's incredible courage and effective leadership inspired Col. Robert H. McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune, to lead the charge to rename the Chicago-area airport (formerly named Orchard Field) in O'Hare's honor in 1949.
Now how would I know this guy he was a Nasal Aspirator?
by jim b on February 8, 2006 4:34 PM
C'mon, you were a member of the Navy Auxiliary otherwise known as Uncle Sam's Misguided Children.
Chicago is kinda cool in that their two major airports have mil-related names.
"Chicago is kinda cool in that their two major airports have mil-related names." Then you'll love driving the I-80/680 interchange in SF where the freeway interchange is named after ol' Mac.
by ry on February 8, 2006 6:30 PM
No, Ry, I won't. The patchouli-scent of the Moonbats is too overwhelming.
Butch's kid, Emmett, is following dad's footsteps these days, but he's wearing a green suit, not a blue one. Got his autograph on several dozen temporary helistop licenses back when I could bring the self-propelled portable radio to the local schools--cuz he was also Chief of NJDOT-Aeronautics...
I saw that earlier, and it made me so mad. She blames everything about Abu Ghraib on everyone else, and now has the gall to take part in something like this? The woman no longer deserves to serve and wear the same uniform as the men and women dying in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world.
"Near the town of Mahawil in southern Iraq, U.S. Marines uncovered a mass grave site holding the remains of some 15,000 Iraqis. They were slaughtered for taking part in the Shia uprising against Saddam in the early 1990s. Saddams agent responsible for conducting the mass killings was Mohammed Jawad Anayfas; the grave site is on land owned by him.
"In July 2003, Anayfas was captured by US forces and turned over to the Military Police Brigade under Karpinskis command. The Brigade Headquarters managed to lose his paperwork -- so instead of contacting her superiors, Karpinski ordered Anayfas set free [emphasis mine].
"Soon thereafter, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz came to Iraq and visited the Mahawil gravesite, where he was informed by Marine Lt. Gen. James Conway how outraged the local Iraqis were over Anayfas release. Visibly upset, Wolfowitz vowed Anayfas would be recaptured and tried as a war criminal. Anayfas is still at large and Karpinski received no reprimand.
"When confronted by the Iraqi public outcry -- for Anayfas was only one of several war criminals whose paperwork was lost and she released-- Karpinski proceeded to evade responsibility..." [again, emphasis mine].
"The Army's inspector general investigated four allegations against Karpinski: dereliction of duty, making a 'material misrepresentation' to investigators, failure to obey a lawful order and shoplifting. Only the shoplifting and dereliction of duty allegations were substantiated.
"A government official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Karpinski was accused of shoplifting a cosmetic item [note: Air Force accounts say that it was a $22 bottle of perfume]from a shop [note: the BX] at a domestic Air Force base [note: MacDill AFB] while she held the rank of colonel. Karpinski didn't report her arrest for this misdemeanor on a later background check, the official said."
And she was promoted to Brigadier General shortly thereafter.
Somebody at the Pentagon is in serious need of a a$$kicking. A long, continuous, size-thirteen a$$kicking. And knowing how John feels about Dysfunction in High Places, he's welcome to relieve me when my leg gets tired...
by cw4(ret)billt on February 6, 2006 10:46 PM
Indeed - that's worse than her own perfidy, to have those around her continue to hide her deeds and promote her beyond her ability. Helk, I can't figure out who she knows to have stayed in uniform at all for this long.
Can you say "welcome to the PC army. Obviously NOBODY wanted to write this POS a bad OER due to the fallall that would hit them for doing so. The result is that a piece of garbage gets fast-tracked up the ladder. And several SOMEBODYS in her chain should be forcibly retired for derilection.
by emdfl on February 7, 2006 6:20 AM
Bill, I have a size 13W boot that I want to get in a few licks also.
And nothing personal Bill, but John ( retired comissioned officer) and I (former MP) get our licks in before you, due to the direct taint from her inability to lead a boy scout troop out of a barn.
by Jon The Mechanic on February 7, 2006 9:26 AM
Jon - Wrong.
"Age before beauty."
by cw4(ret)billt on February 7, 2006 9:30 AM
When mentioning this "Colonel", the epithet THIEF should precede.
"THIEF" Karpinski. This slug needs to be reminded of her lack of HONOR!!!
Also, due to her position the punishment should really out weigh the crime. It is no wonder that Abu Ghraib went into the latrine, with such "Honorable" folks leading the show. Why isn't this THIEF sharing a room with Lindy?
Remember a former Secretary of the Army, who got caught stealing at an AAFEES? WTF?
What part of the linkages of Prohibition, The War on Drugs, and Banning/Restricting Guns doesn't this guy get?
Worried that measures to limit smoking don't go far enough, Elk Grove Village officials are considering banning the sale of cigarettes, apparently the first time that has been seriously proposed in Illinois, experts said.
Mayor Craig Johnson said the village would be hypocritical to consider a current proposal to restrict smoking in bars and restaurants without going after cigarettes themselves.
Heh. Note that the great waves of gun control legislation came in the country after waves of gun violence - which came after Prohibition, and the War on Drugs, as the criminals moved into to take over previously legal enterprises that the bulk of the population in fact, support, at some level or another, even if they won't go against the glitterati who speak about in favor of such measures.
Even Europe doesn't go to this level of insanity... do they?
Heh -- Mayor Johnson said almost exactly what I said when Washington put Initiative 901 on the ballot. It is hypocritical - but we they passed it.
As to Europe - it is mixed. France and Switzerland - smoke away. Italy - no smoking in public gathering places (like restaurants). Shocked the heck outta me when we arrived there.
In order avoid even the slightest taint of hypocrisy, he should announce that henceforth, Elk Grove Village will refuse to accept any federal, state or local funding which may have derived from taxes on tobacco products and, just to set a sterling example, Elk Grove will examine its books since the day of its founding and will return any such monies to their sources...
If cease fires in the name of peace actually produced peace the Middle East would be the most peaceful place on earth by now.
.
Mebbe it's just Clobbering Time.
.
Just sayin'
.
"The Iraqis don't want Saddam back - they want the
stability. But they want the stability without being
fed into industrial chippers."
.
-The Armorer, on Hugh Hewitt, 27 December 2006.
Project Valour-IT - Providing voice-activated laptops to wounded soldiers - 1,600 and counting! Click the graphic above for more information and to donate!
Every deployed military service member and veteran has one final, over arching mission: to come home as physically and mentally fit as possible. While we are quick to recognize that physical wounds occur in combat, we aren't always willing to look at our mental or emotional health, but it is imperative for completing the mission. By working together, we can make "coming home" a successful mission.
Please review the following mission information:
PTSD: Facts and Information
NCPTSD Fact Sheet: The Impact of Wars in Afghanistan and IraqReturning From a Warzone: Guide for Military Personnel for Transitioning Home
Families are part of the final mission and can assist in transition by being prepared with information:
Returning From a Warzone: Guide for Families on Transitioning Home
Where To Get Help
Dispensing Depleted Uranium for Truth, Justice and the
American Way!
Bill, the Rotorhead
Whatzis helicopter and why does it have a balloon on top?
Email Us!
Rude trash thrown out unread! (Yes, we're psychic) And all email sent us is presumed for publication unless you note otherwise. Not to worry, we hardly ever do that, except in the case of ranting trolls, and even then we'll give you warning.
Stories From the Front
Welcome to Castle Argghhh!
This site is in no way affiliated with the Department of
Defense, Department of the Army, the Department of the
Air Force, or the National Guard Bureau and nothing said herein should be considered to have any official sanction by those (or any other)
agencies. We're just retired warriors, fellas, and
all opinions expressed herein are mine or Dusty's or Bill's (and the odd guest-poster like Cassandra and the Wicca Pundit)
unless quoted from other sources. This site does *not* have
the Rumsfeld Gates Seal of Approval and we doubt he knows (or
cares) it exists! Though we *have* seen the Official Army Blog Training Brief, and we know that the *Counter-Intel* people know it exists... [Waving vigorously] "Hi fellas! How are ya?" However, we *do* know the blog is read at the White House. Because we got invited there. Kewl, huh?
The Following Castle Argghhh! Fighting Fusileers for Freedom! Support Project Valour-IT!
Legal Notice To Spammers
Unsolicited advertising. If you place, or cause an
agent to place, any unsolicited ads via any means, not
limited to so-called 'comment spam' or
'trackback spam' you are assumed to agree to
pay at the rate of $500USD per unsolicited URL. Contact
the site owner for remittance instructions. Attempts
will be made to collect this tariff, and a failure to
make payment will result in formal actions against the
advertising site.
Notable Quotes
"It's not difficult to understand why
somebody might pick up an AK-47 against us. Maybe we killed
his father in the first Gulf War, maybe in this Gulf War,
maybe he's just a dick.
~Sgt. Reginald Abram
Third Armored Cavalry Regiment in western Iraq.
Quoted in the Asia Times, Oct. 24"
Ex-Sgt Shep - a Canadian commenting on the deserters:
Time for these so-called "resisters" to go home and face the music. I don't want my tax dollars going to support these bozos who volunteered and then decided they didn't want to play by the rules they agreed to. I'd have a lot more time for them if they decided to make their stand without turning tail and without abandoning their oaths and their comrades (although I suspect their comrades are better off without them.)
We'll drive 'em to the border. You guys pick them up.
President Bush on terrorists in Iraq:
"They can't whip our militaries. What they can
do is get on your TV screens and stand in front of your
TV cameras and cut somebody's head off, in order to
try to cause us to cringe and retreat. That's their
strongest weapon." . . .
Joe Honan, Castle Afghan Correspondent Sez
Two things that were going through my mind were: Uncle Joe never went through this to bring his Luger back from the ETO, and what use was it voting for Republicans all my life if I can’t just mail a gun back from a war zone? Where are we, Canada?
Carrie Sez:
" Perhaps we should have another category of conservatives besides paleocons and neocons.
"Narcissocons" with the motto "We are always on our minds". If you happen to be one, you are not allowed to have or spend the older quarters because there's a MEXICAN EAGLE on the back. Oh the horror." . . .
Marc Danziger (Armed Liberal)
"As most of you know, I'm a liberal Democrat (pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-progressive taxation, pro-equal rights, pro-environmental regulation, pro-public schools) who supported and supports the war in Iraq. As I tell my liberal friends, "Did I miss the part where it was progressive not to fight medieval religious fascists?"
Princess Crabby on Iraq:
" Maggie said:
"If you believed an incident such as this could change your mind then
you really weren't supporting OIF/OEF for the right reasons." " . . .
Red Ensign Bloggers - Fighting to Keep Canada Free from
the Yoke of Excessive Political Correctness!