Thursday, November 02, 2006

9-11 Conspiracy Theories Refuted

I have seen numerous persons buying into the Conspiracy theory that states that the 9-11 attacks were the result of a massive conspiracy set into motion by the Bush administration. As such I am going to take some of the most prevalent questions and endeavor to answer them using logic and A LOT of research. The questions will be listed in RED. There are two main lines of thought regarding 9-11 conspiracies. The first I will address is the idea that 9-11 occurred by permission or government allowance. The second ideology being that the US government actively participated in an attack on US interests culminating in the resulting chaos at the WTC, Pentagon, and Shanksville, PA.

1. 9/11 could have been prevented but the leaders of America decided to let it happen.

There is no question that 9/11 could have been prevented. That doesn’t mean that it was allowed to happen. If your car were to be stolen while you are sitting at your PC reading this, should your insurance company assume that you intended to allow it to be stolen? You could have prevented it by sitting guard at your car 24 hours a day. The problem with this plan is that while you are standing guard over your car your house is now not protected. There is more to this huge country then just 4 planes, and 3 buildings. We could set up all kinds of protection for one building but that leaves the rest of the nation open for attack. The government failed to protect it citizens in the WTC, but that doesn’t mean that a choice was made to allow such an attack to occur. Something to bear in mind between the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA; the US government receives THOUSANDS of tips regarding terrorist activity and threats per day! The fact is just before 9-11 every major terrorist organization was asked to flood the agencies I listed with even more false threats. Why? To put it simply, it would increase the volume and there by reduce the amount of time available to investigate each threat.

2. Air traffic control had to know that these planes were going the wrong way, yet no military planes intercepted them.

Part of my training to become a firefighter included learning about how to address ARFF fires. ARFF (Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting) is a science all on its own. Part of that training included going into an airport tower. There are so many planes being tracked it is hard to believe it is even possible. (To give you an idea of how close these planes land and take-off see the picture below, courtesy of Google Earth) Anyhow due to the volume of air traffic it would be difficult to recognize a change in direction on one plane for some time. Secondly, the hijackers intentionally waited till they were clear of any major airports. This was so that their altered flight plan would not be immediately recognize. As far as military planes escorting these guys it takes time to scramble these military aircraft and then it takes time to get them to the area. Finally, hind sight is 20/20; if we knew then what we know now we would have planes sitting on the tarmac 24 hours a day 365 days a year. But we didn’t know then what we know now. Additionally, the terrorists had deactivated the transponders on the planes. This caused them to literally disappear from the screens of the air traffic controllers.

Note the small amount of space between these two landing planes.

3. 9/11 was allowed to happen to instill fear in the American population, resulting in them being easily controlled.

This statement is lacking something quite important, benefit. The benefit of being able to control a nation is not gained in such a manner. If you were to control a nation and get the populous to agree to relinquish more of their income to taxes, then maybe. That hasn’t happened, nor has it been attempted; at least not by the Bush administration. It is the Democrats who have pushed the most for increased taxation.

4. 9/11 was allowed to happen so the US government could justify war in the Middle East.

The war in the Middle East has been a massive burden on the US economy and has not proved to be of any fiscal benefit. The non-fiscal benefits include the reduced number of Iraqi civilian deaths, the fact that there has not been another successful attack on US soil, and the reality is that numerous nations who once sponsored terrorism, i.e. Libya, openly denounced terrorism and ceased all support of these cowardly organizations. To those who point to oil as the reason we went to war you should look at the following. America went to war in Iraq, for failure to abide by UN Resolution 1441. UN Resolution 1441 includes the following resolutions which were not adhered to by Iraq.

UN Resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990,
UN Resolution 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990,
UN Resolution 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990,
UN Resolution 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991,
UN Resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991,
UN Resolution 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991,
UN Resolution 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991,
UN Resolution 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991,
UN Resolution 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995,
UN Resolution 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999,
and UN Resolution 1441 (2002) of 8 November 2002

Other UN Resolutions that Iraq failed to adhere to include
UN Resolution 1373 (2001) of 28 September 2001,
UN Resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001,
Three others were also not adhered to by Iraq; I was however, unable to find their reference numbers prior to releasing this article.

In order for the US government to have allowed this to happen in an effort to justify war in the Middle East, this plan would have had to have been implemented back in 1990. The US was already in Iraq in 1990 after Hussein invaded Kuwait. Why set this plan in motion when you are already there. Additionally a lot of faces moved through the White House throughout this time, do you believe that this conspiracy spanned all of this time and it never leaked out? Of course not, that would be absurd.

The UN Security Council approved the use of force in Iraq on eleven separate occasions culminating in sixteen different UN Resolutions. If you draft and ratify a resolution that is to be viewed as the stance of the UN Security Council and all fifteen members have stated that they support action, you can hardly refer to any action explicitly defined in said resolution as “unilateral”. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the branch of the United Nations charged with maintaining peace and security among nations. While other branches of the United Nations only make recommendations to member governments, the Security Council has the power to make decisions which member governments MUST carry out under the United Nations Charter. The UNSC is pretty much a useless entity if it passes laws that are not intended to be enforced. For the record the UNSC is made up of fifteen countries, consisting of five permanent seats and ten temporary seats. The permanent five are France, Russia, China, the United States and the United Kingdom. These five permanent members hold veto power. The ten temporary seats are held for two-year terms. This means that on at least eleven occasions all five of the permanent members of the UNSC, even France, elected to ratify rather then veto resolutions that supported forcibly addressing the failure of Saddam Hussein to comply. This includes UN Resolution 1441, the final resolution agreed upon before the US went to war with Iraq which stated that this was “a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations.”

Finally the general public is misinformed as to what a WMD is, and the presence of terrorists in America. First, regarding WMDs, the general populous thinks WMDs are anthrax, and nukes. While it is true that these do constitute WMDs, so do salmonella* and influenza**. WMDs have been found in weaponized form in Iraq since the beginning of the war. Just not the big three everyone was expecting, Nuclear, Anthrax or Smallpox, and VX gas. As a side note, in June of 2006, the national Ground Intelligence Center, released a report detailing the weapons of mass destruction that had been found in Iraq, including pre-1991 sarin*** gas and mustard agent****. The report stated that, "While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.

*Salmonella typhimurium (Used by the terrorist organization "Rajneeshee" in Oregon in 1984, resulting 751 casualties)

**Influenza (claimed 21 million lives, over 20% of the world’s population, from 1918 to 1919)

***Sarin (Used by the terrorist organization "Aum Shinrikyo" in Japan in 1995, resulting 7deaths and over 200 casualties)

****Mustard Agent (Used in multiple wars by and against multiple nations. This classification of chemical agent is in the highest risk class set forth by the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. The effects can be seen in the photo below, courtesy of Wikipedia)

Mustard agent burns on a soldier during World War I.

The remaining questions are posed by those who believe that the US government actively participated in the 9-11 attacks on the WTC, Pentagon, and Shanksville, PA.

5. The twin towers and other neighboring buildings were detonated and did not fall due to the impact of the "flying objects".

Those persons who make this “Conspiracy theory” statement are not considering, physics, engineering, and especially the effects of fire on a structure’s integrity. I am a firefighter; I study the effects of fire and heat on structural members in order to stay alive at my job. I take this subject quite seriously. I watched 343 of my brothers die in that building and I know that I would have done same. I also know that a building struck by an airplane weighing 833,000 lbs is being shock loaded with a massive amount of weight. This shock loading will invariably destroy a great number of the structural members that are load bearing and required in order for the structure to have a chance to remain standing. I also work as a pyro-technician and can tell you from the videos of the buildings collapsing that they begin to collapse in what is called a “pancake” collapse at the fire floors. First, the fire floors are where it would be logical for a damaged building to collapse. It would have been impossible for any person to have been able to plant explosives at these locations prior to the planes striking the towers without the explosives being destroyed in the impact, and it would have been equally impossible to plant explosives afterwards. The people jumping out of the building were jumping for a reason; do you think someone could have gone into those areas? No, they couldn’t. Even with full fire gear, a person would not be able to survive planting explosives with synchronized timing devices or wiring back to a remote location because of the extreme temperatures.

6. Why is it that Madrid's Burning Building Stands and yet the World Trade Center Falls?
Reference the following site for more information regarding this theory.

First, the Madrid building was not struck by a 747. That alone says enough, but I will continue. The Madrid fire was a simple fire that gutted the entire building. A fire that was fueled by normal office things that are designed to be fire resistant and thus do not evolve into complete combustion. The less complete the combustion is, the less heat is released. Liquid fuels combust better. Why, because solids do not burn. Believe it or not wood does not burn. Wood and all other solids go through a process called pyrolosis. Pyrolosis is the decomposition of a solid material when heat is applied to that material. That decomposition gives off gasses that are flammable. Liquids go through a similar process called vaporization. Less energy is required to cause vaporization then is required for pyrolosis. As such, more energy is expended to pyrolize a solid. This expended energy would have been turned into heat had it been a liquid fuel rather then the typical office materials that burned in Madrid. Jet fuels are not just liquid fuels but they are fuels that are chemically engineered to burn completely and cleanly evolving into more heat then other fuels. The more completely something burns the less smoke it produces. As a result the less smoke there is, the more oxygen is available to feed the fire, and thus combustion reaches even hotter temperatures. The web site above does not give the whole story about the Madrid fire. That building was only 32 stories tall. The weight of 32 stories, sitting on supports that had not been impacted by an 833,000 lb jet, and had not been exposed to a primarily liquid fuel source, is very different from the weight of 110 stories that HAD been impacted by an 833,000 lb jet, after which it was exposed to liquid fuel sources!

For the record the WTC was designed to withstand the impact of a 707. Many people think of this and surmise that the 747 is only a little bigger then a 707. This is absolutely wrong. A 707 weighs 673,000 lbs less. Meaning one 747 impact is equivalent to more than FOUR 707 impacts simultaneously.

I made a mistake and I want to ensure that all information given is as accurate as possible. The WTC buildings were not hit by a 747, they were struck by a Boeing 767, whose weight is 450,000 lbs. This makes the 767 only about 3 times as big as a 707's 160,000 lbs. This is still well beyond the design specifications for the WTC towers.

7. The first tower was not hit by a hijacked commercial jet but some sort of missile.

There is no evidence of this whatsoever. The fact is there are hundreds of witnesses who have always stated that they witnessed a plane and not a missile of any kind strike the WTC. Additionally, video footage of the first plane striking the first tower refutes this idea. There is also the matter of a plane and it’s occupants who had to disappear from the face of the earth, and all of the radio traffic and cellular calls that emanated from the first plane to strike the WTC.

8. The second tower was not hit by a hijacked commercial jet but a jet resembling one.

There is no evidence of this whatsoever. Again, there are hundreds of witnesses who have always stated that they witnessed a plane and not a missile of any kind strike the WTC. Additionally there are a host of videos who show this to be an inaccurate statement. There is still the matter of a plane and it’s occupants who had to disappear from the face of the earth, and all of the radio traffic and cellular calls that emanated from the second plane to strike the WTC.

9. The Pentagon was not hit by a hijacked commercial jet but a bomb or was detonated internally.

Again eye witness reports and video footage show this statement to be made in error, and to be not just flawed but undeniably inaccurate. There is still the matter of a plane and its occupants.

10. The people who are said to have perished on those planes aren’t real people and were never on any planes.

The following is a link to a site that lists all of the victims of 9-11. It includes names, pictures, home cities, employers, ages, and can be listed in order by each of these categories. If you select to list by location you can pull up information on each person on each of the planes.

11. The destruction of the World Trade Center and surrounding buildings was planned internally within the US government.

The answer to this is laid out in my responses to numbers 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Also the number of people who would have had to be involved in this kind of an operation and the ensuing cover-up would have been so vast and massive that it would have been impossible to even consider this plausible. Consider the baggage handlers who recall loading the planes. Now open this up onto a grand scale. How many people would have had to be in on this? How could the government find people willing to participate without anyone saying they wouldn’t? The number of sadistic people it would take to carry out something of this nature would preclude it from being possible to cover up.

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Benedict Arnold Lives

Benedict Arnold, a name which lives in infamy. Benedict Arnold, the name most recognized as synonymous with treason. He is best known for plotting to surrender the American fort at West Point, New York, to the British during the American Revolution for £20,000 and a brigadier's commission. He is however, hardly the only name on the list of American Traitors. He is also not the only person willing to surrender those things which are strategically imperative to national security for his own personal gain.

In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. (Source Wikipedia)

The Libby/Novak Connection

Consider Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and his decision to leak information about a US CIA covert operative, Mrs. Valerie Plume. His leak of information included her name, her rank, and her husband's name and political position of US Ambassador. This information was sufficient enough to breach her covert status, jeopardize her life, jeopardize any operation that she was currently a part of, any operation that she was previously a part of, and negate her ability to participate in any other operation hence forth. Robert Novak, a reporter, put into print the intelligence leak from Mr. Libby. This set into motion a situation that caused Mrs. Plume's abilities, as a CIA operative, to hereafter be impotent.

Arnold was willing to surrender West Point, and destabilize the strategic security of the nation for monetary and political reasons. The Libby/Novak connection is despicable for the same reason. For Libby, releasing information about Plume would cast doubt on the legitimacy of a report presented by former US Ambassador Wilson and husband to Valerie Plume, political reasons. For Novak, jeopardizing lives and national security was simply for increased readership and notoriety (which results in increased readership), monetary reasons. His penalty thus far has been the notoriety he desired and nothing more.

The IIP Act of '82

For the record the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (Pub.L. 97-200, 50 U.S.C. §§ 421-426) is a United States federal law that makes it a federal crime to intentionally reveal the identity of an agent who one knows to be in or recently in certain covert roles with a U.S. intelligence agency. There are a number of things that were considered to be the impetus for passage of this act, one of them being the 1975, assassination of then CIA Athens station chief Richard Welch, in front of his wife, by the Greek terrorist group "November 17" after his identity was revealed in several listings by a magazine called CounterSpy.

HIPAA Vs National Security

Anyone who works in the medical field knows about HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). This act is simply a patient confidentiality act. Novak risked the lives of American CIA operatives AND American national security as a whole, and has faced no penalty. If I tell someone that John Q. Patient has herpes, I face up to $250,000 per person I tell and 10 years imprisonment.

National Intelligence Estimate

Today we find ourselves in a similar situation. A government official has leaked portions of the
classified NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) report. This report centers around national security and terrorism. It is deplorable that this modern day Benedict Arnold would leak this for any reason but it appears that the reasoning here was simply to affect the upcoming mid-term elections. This is evidenced by the selective nature of the leaked information. Add to this a reporter whose desire for self advancement supersedes your right to safety from terrorism, your right to life, your right to liberty, and your right to the pursuit of happiness. I fully believe in Freedom of the Press, but with freedom comes responsibility. I have the freedom to own a gun but not the freedom to fire it at the mailman; I have the freedom to drive a car but not the freedom to drive on the wrong side of the street. If I elect to ignore the responsibilities that come with those freedoms I expect that those freedoms will be taken away from me. I expect that I will face the consequences of my actions.

George W. Bush was put over a barrel by this leak and in order to quell the circulation of false truths and half facts has elected to declassify all items contained within the NIE Report that do not jeopardize national security. The investigation into this leak will hopefully find this traitor to the American people. It should also include consequences for the reporter who was willing to cost the lives of Americans for more readers.

Mr. Arnold, England, the Gallows

After Mr. Arnold became aware that his traitorous plans had been uncovered he fled to the British. He knew that what faced him if captured by American troops was the same fate as Maj. Andre, Arnold's co-conspirator. What awaited Arnold was to be the gallows, a death fitting a spy, a traitor. Arnold lived out the majority of the rest of his life in London, mistrusted by the British and eventually in poverty. He was never able to return to America where he had once been a war hero. To this day there is a monument, known as "the Boot Monument" which is dedicated to his heroism during the battle of Saratoga, where Arnold was wounded in the foot. The Monument does not bear his name*. When Benedict Arnold was leading the forces of the King against his former compatriots in Virginia, it is reported that among his prisoners was a certain plucky and witty officer, who, in answer to Arnold's question, "What will the Americans do with me if they catch me?" replied, "They will cut off the leg which was wounded when you were fighting so gloriously for the cause of liberty, and bury it with the honors of war, and hang the rest of your body on a gibbet!"

Crime and Punishment

For those who choose to risk so much of others for personal gain, I say step up and accept your fate. Though the Gallows are no more, Cell Block "D" awaits. If you find a means in which to slither away across our border, more power to you. However, prepare yourself, as you are no more welcome here then Bin Laden himself. You no longer may call this land home nor may you stain the word, by calling yourself an American. You are hence forth a man with no land. Stay gone Benedict! Stay gone!

***The dedication on the back of the "Boot Monument" reads as follows "…In memory of the most brilliant soldier of the Continental Army who was desperately wounded on this spot the sally port of BORGOYNES GREAT WESTERN REDOUBT 7th October, 1777 winning for his countrymen the decisive battle of the American Revolution and for himself the rank of Major General."***

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Is a firefighter's work worth so little? 400 years to equal 5 months for a pitcher

It is reprehensible that a firefighter or police officer has to work two full time jobs to support his or her family! I am a firefighter/EMT for the Houston Fire Department, the third largest fire department in America. At a second year firefighter's salary, I would have to work for FOUR HUNDRED YEARS (400 years) to equal what Roger Clements will make for playing the remaining part of this season (5 months). There is no excuse! This week I will work 138.5 hours for 2 different fire departments, and I will be off work for only 29.5 hours. I typically work 96 hours a week. I have a 3 month old son and can't spend time with him because the city doesn't feel we deserve to make enough money to support our families on one income. As such either I must work two or more jobs, or my wife must work instead of being a stay at home mom. The city government isn't the only one to blame. The tax payers don't want to spend the extra money. They figure "the service is already there, and will always be there, so why pay more for it". My department made 550,000 Fire and EMS calls in 2001, and this number has increased every year since, especially after Katrina and Rita. Have I not put myself in enough jeopardy, seen enough blood, spent enough time injured, or been to enough firefighter funerals to have earned a decent wage for my work? Evidently, I have not. If you do not agree that your civil servants are under paid then please tell me why we haven't earned it? Tell me why I haven't earned it?

Which one are you?

Gen. Dula's letter to the University of Washington Student Senate Leader.
Jill Edwards is one of the students at the University of Washington who did not want to honor Medal of Honor winner USMC Colonel Greg Boyington because she does not think those who serve in the U.S. Armed services are good role models. I think that this response is an excellent and thought provoking response.
General Dula is a Retired Air Force Lt Gen (3 Star Gen).
Gen. Dula's letter to the University of Washington student senate leader.
To: Edwards, Jill (student, UW)
Subject: Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs
Miss Edwards, I read of your 'student activity' regarding the proposed memorial to Col Greg Boyington, USMC and a Medal of Honor winner. I suspect you will receive a bellyful of angry e-mails from conservative folks like me. You may be too young to appreciate fully the sacrifices of generations of servicemen and servicewomen on whose shoulders you and your fellow students stand. I forgive you for the untutored ways of youth and your naïveté. It may be that you are, simply, a sheep. There's no dishonor in being a sheep - - as long as you know and accept what you are.
Please take a couple of minutes to read the following. And be grateful for the thousands - - millions - - of American sheepdogs who permit you the freedom to express even bad ideas.
Brett Dula
Sheepdog, retired
By LTC(RET) Dave Grossman, RANGER,
Ph.D., author of "On Killing."
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always, even death itself.
The question remains:
What is worth defending?
What is worth dying for?
What is worth living for?

- William J. Bennett - in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November
24, 1997 One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:
"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident."
This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep. I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me, it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf." If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.
Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours. Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports, in camouflage fatigues, holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa." Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero? Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed, right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into "warriorhood", you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference. There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.
There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: Slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself. Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke- Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision. If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
For example, many police officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs . Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying a weapon. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"
Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them. Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones were attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"
It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up. Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear, helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.
Gavin de Becker puts it like this in "Fear Less", his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling." Denial is a save-nowpay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level. And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are a warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself..."Baa."
This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from "sheephood" and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

"If It Weren't For The United States Military"
"There Would Be NO United States of America"

Where were you when the world stopped turning?

In my little mind I know of two Americas. There is “Pre 9-11 America”. When terrorists hadn’t been a major thought since Pan Am Flight 103 Crashed over Lockerbie, Scotland, December 21st. 1988. When “tornado” drills were a regular occurrence. For those who don’t remember or weren’t old enough to remember, Tornado drills were what they called it when your elementary school teacher would have you hide under a desk, against a wall. Head down, butt up, and you would use your hands to cover the back of your head. One day, only a year or two ago, I was soaking up a little History Channel and I saw kids doing one of these drills and I realized it wasn’t about tornados. These drills were fall-out and nuclear attack readiness drills. This was what we were to do if those “Commie Ruskies” ever made their move. Bear in mind I was in elementary school in the early 80’s. (Be nice, cracks about my age will make me cry) This was when the Russians were still the bad guy. Enter movies like Red Dawn (A movie my mother once called the “scariest movie” she’d ever seen). In those days and for a long time after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, the fear we had was mostly from conventional war. It was conventional, in that it was country vs. country; even if those countries used unconventional weapons.

Enter Osama, Yousef, and KSM. Suddenly we have a whole new America. One we call “Post 9-11”. In this new America the weapons are only somewhat conventional. The enemy however is anything but conventional. The enemy doesn’t attack our military infrastructure. Instead the enemy attacks our lives and our sense of well being, by attacking unarmed civilian non-combatants. In reality it wasn’t just a new America, but a new world followed. Suddenly the whole world found out how susceptible it was to a problem though of as primarily confined to Israel. We all saw the light. Some have put their blinders back on; some have chosen to create fantasies of conspiracy in the White House; but everyone, the complacent, the imaginative, and the vigilant alike remembers where they were and what they were doing.

I have heard people speak of how they remember exactly where they were when President Kennedy was assassinated. I understood the words but I didn’t realize the intensity of emotion that had to accompany such a vivid mental timestamp. My first experience with this was when the Challenger blew up. I remember it like it was yesterday, but I was too young to attach the emotion to the memory. After 9-11, I came to a new understanding of this memory & emotion phenomenon.

What about you? Where were you; what were you doing, when the world stopped turning? I want to know because your answers build a snapshot, a frozen moment in American time, when the whole world as we knew it changed forever.

Interactive blog - Most embarrassing moment

Today, I am gonna take a page out of someone else's playbook. I recently subscribed to a blog for a lady named Suzanne. Her blog, by the way, is awesome! One of the things that she does on occasion, that I really enjoy, is what she calls an "Interactive blog". In essence it is an audience participation kind of thing. Below is one of my most embarrassing moments. Once you are done shaking your head; click "Add Comment" at the bottom of the page and enter your most embarrassing moment. Don't be shy, this is all in fun. So here goes... GULP...

During my younger years I had a certain amount of difficulty keeping sober. I often would arrive at school... altered. One day a friend of mine came up to me and was laughing and pointing at me. I had no idea what was so funny. He then proceded to tell me of my activities during first period the previous day. (mind you, we were walking to first period when I was getting this tid-bit of information) As he expalined to me the previous day had not been all that different from the norm at first. During class I would often hold my head about 4 inches above my desk, looking directly at it repeating the word "Man, man, man, man..." over and over because I liked the way it sounded when it echoed off of the desk back at me. (This is embarrasing to admit now, sadly it gets even worse) My teacher in that class (I'm now sure he was a stoner), was pretty animated and playful in his teaching style. Students would often joke with him in ways that most teachers would get upset about. Well one student told the teacher that if he didn't pass, or something like that, he (the teacher) would wake up with a horses' head in his bead. An allusion to the mafia's manner of sending a message that you are going to die. Here is where it gets bad. About 40 minutes later the class was taking a quiz, I wasn't because the teacher knew... "What's the point?" Anyhow in the middle of this quiz I sit up, and having misheard the earlier statement of the student, I proclaim quite loudly, "HORSES DON'T HAVE HANDS!!!!!" After electing to bestow this pearl of wisdom I proceded to fall from my seat and roll on the floor laughing uncontrollably. No one even knew what I was talking about till I was able to wipe the tears from my eyes and stop laughing long enough to point out the "Idiot" who thought he was going to "put a horses' hand in the teacher's bed". This story was from my first junior year... enough said?

Now it's your turn... Don't be scared, let's see what you've got!

By the way the blog for the lady that I got the idea of the interactive blog from can be found here>>>

91 Octane or Saki... There is no replacement for displacement!!!

I have had my fill of little children in 4 cylinder Civics revving on me like they are in a real car. Then they get destroyed at the green only to pull up at the next light and rev at me again like maybe this time I'll forget which pedal is the gas. So just for fun I have compiled a list of things that are an indication that your car might run on Saki and rice. If these apply, then when you hear American Muscle rumble up next to you... sink in your seat like you will end up doing anyway and keep that right foot in check... Or you WILL get embarrassed, AGAIN!!! Some of the following are other people's observations the rest of them are my own. To certain people, I don't want to hear a word about #22!!! lol

1. You have more exhaust decibels than your engine has horsepower
2. You have aftermarket FRONT wheels for racing but stock rear wheels
3. You put your automatic car in neutral at every stoplight in order to roll it back and try to fool other people into thinking you have a manual transmission
4. Your mod list includes shifter handle, MOMO steering wheel, exhaust tip, 400 pounds of electronics, more neon than a strip club, DVD player, mini disco-ball, no REAL engine parts yet you yank out the rear seat for weight savings
5. If your rear spoiler is taller then you are and the 1970 Plymouth Daytona Superbird has a smaller spoiler than your car
6. You installed spacers on your STOCK wheels and tires to get them to stick out past the fender
7. You see cars like yours in a Shriner's Parade for Children and clowns are driving them
8. You bring an empty Maxwell House coffee can with you to compare size when you shop for an aftermarket exhaust system
9. You claim you lost the race because you had a passenger in the car
10. You claim you lost because you missed a shift with an automatic transmission
11. You have more stereo WATTS than engine TORQUE
12. Your tailpipe extension fell off during a quarter mile race and you went three tenths of a second faster due to weight savings.
13. You spent $5,000 on the engine and you can not out run a stock Camaro, Firebird, or Mustang
14. You think Nitrous Oxide or a turbo on your Hyundai Sonata puts you in the same performance league as the Chevy Corvette
15. You think the Del Sol is a sports car
16. If your four cylinder has a dual exhaust system installed
17. If you think that 180 horsepower and 185 lb/ft of torque are impressive for a car
18. If you have stickers on your car for parts that you could not point out or dont even have
19. If you estimate that your cars HP gains after a mod by the sound cause you don’t need no stinkin’ dyno
20. If you've ever bought a 1" to 6" exhaust adapter
21. If you do any mod to your mom's 4 door Accord Wagon
22. You tell everyone about how you lost the cop because of your "driving skills"
23. You drive a $20,000 import with $10,000 in mods, and still live with your parents
24. You've spent more on graphics and decals, for parts you dont have, than you have spent on gas all year
25. Your car only sounds like you're going 90mph
26. You upgraded to the "big bore" 2 inch exhaust
27. You think "displacement" is something that happens to homeless people
28. You brag about overtaking a Yugo just before the finish line
29. You can reach back and defrost the rear window by hand
30. You think its funny to race anyone, anytime, and already know that you will lose
31. Your little sister is the only one impressed with your car
32. You rev on school busses to impress the girls with braces
33. You rev on people in electric wheelchairs to impress the girls with dentures
34. You drill holes in your muffler to make it louder
35. Your dad is embarrassed because you bought a car with less displacement than his lawnmower

There's No Replacement for Displacement


I Too Fear No Terrorist!

I recently read a commentary on people who are willing to allow a little intrusion in exchange for increased safety from terrorism. The author of this commentary was clearly passionate about the topic and also seemed to have done his homework. I took exception however because the tone was almost contempt or condescension towards anyone who was willing to make such sacrifices. An excerpt from the commentary, entitled “I Fear No Terrorist...” is below in italics.
“I am NOT afraid of terrorism... For good reason... I live in the middle of the country... Landlocked in a small town... There are so many idiots that walk around, afraid of terrorism, who will never even come close to being in danger... They just love to rally together behind what is viewed as a common enemy... It's herd mentality, coupled with America's superiority complex... We cannot be the land of the free, and the home of the brave while legislating away our privacy, and cowering in the face of terrorism... We encounter far greater preventable threats on a daily basis and never bat an eye...”
The author then went on to list examples and premature death rates for these examples. Included were Automobile accidents (costing over 40,000 deaths, 3.5 million injuries, and 150 billion dollars annually), Smoking (costing 340,000 to 540,000 deaths annually), and obesity (resulting in approximately 300,000 deaths annually). Clearly, an American is far more likely to die as a result of one of these, then they are from a terrorist attack. The author then cited financial reasons for why these differ from terrorism. While I understood his logic there were factors that were overlooked. My response is below.

I Too Fear No Terrorist!
I do not fear terrorism, I do not fear terrorists. That said I do not underestimate them either. I live in Houston, Texas, and I can assure you that we are a target due to our having one of the largest medical centers in America, and the largest oil refinery sector in America. Many people have taken the mentality that we need not fear terrorists because they haven't successfully completed an attack on American soil since 9-11. What few understand is that this is the case because of the measures that have been taken. I can tell you first hand that terrorists do indeed walk among us. I am a fireman. I have had extensive training in emergency response to terroristic bombings, counter terrorism awareness, weapons of mass destruction... You name it; the list goes on and on.
The general public are misinformed as to what a WMD is, and the presence of terrorists in America. First, regarding WMDs, the general populous thinks WMDs are anthrax, and nukes. While it is true that these do constitute WMDs, so do salmonella* and influenza**. WMDs have been found in weaponized form in Iraq since the beginning of the war. Just not the big three everyone was expecting, Nuclear, Anthrax or Smallpox, and VX gas. I will let that speak for itself.
Now, many people don't appreciate the amount of effort that has been put into ensuring that there not be another major terrorist incident on American soil since 9-11. As a result of the relative quiet, the public has grown complacent and feel secure in their lives. The fact is terrorists do walk among us and are awaiting the opportunity to exploit our complacency. In Houston, I have personally responded to two calls in-which terrorist plans have been thwarted. One was due to investigation, and the other due to my training.
The first was a HAZMAT scene where a man had stolen 30 pieces of construction equipment. These devices were for x-raying pipe. Each of these devices contains a small amount of radioactive material. This man was carrying 30 stolen nuclear devices in his pick-up truck! His home was later found to have bomb making materials. It is clear his intent was to create a “Dirty Bomb”. Fortunately, someone was dedicated enough to maintaining our safety to catch this before it became newsworthy.
The second incident was a direct result of your tax dollars paying for my anti-terrorist education. During a particularly busy day at the station we were dispatched to an assault call. It appeared to be a bread and butter assault call when we arrived. A couple of brothers had gotten into a fight. No big deal, aside from the fact that their dorm room stunk horribly. While the brothers were speaking with the police and the EMTs I noticed two twenty gallon containers through an open bedroom door. Each was about two-thirds full of what looked like urine. I advised my captain who contacted the fire marshal. Though gross and possibly a health hazard, 30 gallons of urine are more of a threat then you might expect. This urine can be processed into urine nitrate, a highly potent explosive booster. I am unaware of the details regarding what else was found in their dorm but I do know that they were both charged, convicted, and are serving long sentences for whatever it was that their plans were.
Some people would say that I had violated their rights. For the record, I legally did not. When emergency personnel are summoned to a location, that location becomes the property of the responding emergency agency. In other words if you have a fire at your home it becomes the fire departments home till the department releases it back to you. As such, I breached no law in looking around. Even still some would say that even with the legal right, I had no ethical right to look around as I did. To them I say, “You are dead wrong!” I do not support full intrusion with no limitation to invasion of privacy, but I do recognize that there are occasions where it is in the best interest of the nation and its people that the ability to investigate deeply, be there. Had I not been lucky, these two college students, here on student visas, could have killed a number of people. It is better to stop a murder then to solve one!
Finally, in answer to your statements on obesity, smoking and automobile accidents, you have a valid point in the comparative risk. It is true that you are far more likely to die from anyone of the things that you mentioned then from a terrorist, even if the terrorist organizations were to complete five more WTC attacks. You missed the mark, however on the point that you were trying to make. When you conduct an experiment you must have a control to compare to. For example, if I want to see the difference in how a plant grows with fluorescent lights and with incandescent lights, I must use identical plants, in identical pots, watering them the identical amount of water, at the same time everyday. In your statements you have too many variables. The most important of these being that if someone chooses to smoke and it causes them to die prematurely they made that choice. If someone chooses to eat far too much and it causes them to die prematurely they made that choice. When you get behind the wheel you know the potential risk of driving, yet you choose to do so. Though we have the choice to stay home and hide in our houses we can take a number of risks into consideration but in the end most people are relatively safe in their travels and at work. I work one of the most dangerous jobs there is but I have the option to weigh the risk versus the benefit when I put on my gear. A person sitting at their desk filling paperwork doesn’t get the choice to weigh the risk of life or death from that plane outside of the window. When terrorism is brought into the equation you aren’t just talking about numbers. You are also talking about one person making the risk benefit choice for another. This is where terrorism diverges from obesity, smoking, or driving.
As a side note I feel little difference in the way that I view drunk drivers and terrorists. Both, groups are self important individuals who are willing to risk taking the lives of others for their own reasons, be it religious, or simply I don’t want to pay for a cab. I bear no respect for either of these.

*Salmonella typhimurium (Used by the terrorist organization "Rajneeshee" in Oregon in 1984, resulting 751 casualties)
**Influenza (claimed 21 million lives, over 20% of the world’s population, from 1918 to 1919)

Christianity vs. Atheism

There are people that believe Christianity is the worst thing to befall the world, ever. This thought ideology primarily revolves around the crusades, the deaths associated with the crusades, and various other times where people misinterpreted God's word and killed, claiming that they did so in God's name. This is obviously untrue but these incidents did happen and those responsible did believe that they were doing God's will. This is similar to the Islamic fundamentalists of today.Let's examine the atrocities that Anti-Christians attribute to Christianity. Bear in mind there is a distinct difference between Christianity and religion.There are three standout examples of religion gone awry; again these are examples where people used God’s name, not where God instructed people to do what they did. The first would be the Crusades of the Middle Ages, then The Spanish Inquisition, and finally the burning of witches in Salem and other places as well. Scholars estimate that The Crusades of the Middle Ages cost from 58,000 to 133,000 lives. The most realistic figure for the Spanish Inquisition puts the total killed from AD1480 to AD1808 at 31,912 people. Finally, records indicate that the number of “witches” killed may be over 30,000. Some argue that records don't tell everything and suggest that maybe even 100,000 were killed. (I would argue that just because these events took place in a "Christian" nation does not mean they were a cause of Christianity, but let's just forget that for now, for argument's sake.)These three events, totaling over 264,000 killed, are thought to be the largest atrocities perpetrated by one or another form of "Christendom". However, they pale into insignificance in comparison to the consequences of atheism.According to University of Hawaii political scientist Rudolph J. Rummel, the total number of people, intentionally killed in all of human history is estimated to be about 284,638,000. Of that number, 151,491,000 were killed during the past 100 years. The single largest killer in all of human history is, by far, atheistic Communism (i.e. The Russian Bolsheviks) with a total of 110,000,000 over 1/3 of all of the people ever killed! If we add to that number just two other regimes where religion of any sort was strongly discouraged, Nazi Germany and Nationalist China, the number rises to 141,160,000. Almost 50% of all the killings in human history were committed in the past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or strongly discouraged religion.

Before someone advises me that Hitler was in fact a theist and not an atheist, I am aware. His obsession however, was with German nationalism, not the teachings of Jesus Christ, and his religious beliefs reflected this. Most scholars and historians believe Hitler to be a mixture of the Christianity of the Roman Empire and old-school odinism, but his focus for the nation was Nationalism and not permitting religion to interfere with Germany’s government.
When the murders of history are tallied up, it is very clear that atheism is the most dangerous philosophy ever embraced by humanity. Sadly atheism is a belief in nothing and people actually choose to try to embrace that nothingness. When they do we see what the result is…

How one defines them self

People shouldn't deem it necessary to define themselves by their choice to get high. If you get high, so be it, but to wear clothes that advertise it only shows that your choice to get high is more for the attention then for anything else. You don't see pedophiles wearing shirts that say "can I be alone with your 5 year old son?" Well, except Michael Jackson, j/k. They don't because they don't want the attention. Screen names & Email addresses like "PookySmoke'n'" are prime examples of people who only get high because they feel it makes them look cool. There are better ways for a person to define who they are. How empty a person's life truly must be if that is the only thing they can think of to define themselves.


Lay, Skilling, and Fastow should not serve time in prison. That would only make the former employees they screwed have to support them even further through taxes. These men should be required to return to work, however they should be capped at a 25,000$ a year income. Their assets should all be liquidated and the funds produced put back into the pensions of those who lost as a result of their actions. Whatever money they make above 25,000$ should also be put toward the debt they have brought upon themselves. They should be on house arrest till the debt is paid off, or they die. That isn't house arrest in one of their mansions either, that is house arrest in the apartment they can afford to live in and still keep food on the table for 25,000$ a year! Why should we support them? Make them repay their own debt!

An Insurgent's Bullet

Damn it if facts aren't always getting in the way of the opinion's of the uneducated

The following is an excerpt of a communication between myself and yet one more person who refuses to investigate before he opens his mouth. To those of you who are throwing around numbers of "Innocent civilians" murdered by US and coalition forces, and how horrible and ineffective we have been over there, try using facts. By the way "George Bush stole the 2000 election", "Bush is wrong cause I don't like him" and "Bush is wrong cause he mispronounces nuclear" are not facts they are, opinions. If you are unsure of the difference between fact and opinion then you can try the following.

A, Use a dictionary, or
B, CNN might be hiring.

The following communication included responses from multiple persons on both sides of this issue. I elected only to include my arguments and the arguments of the individual who initiated this debate. My comments are in yellow and his are in red. I have taken certain things I felt were important and made them bold, they were not in bold print in the original communication. "Yagloo", the initiator of the post, is British and has told me that he considers his political views to be "progressive Marxian anarchist". I "ChrsMcA" am American and consider myself a moderate conservative, and have NO political party affiliation. Finally an excerpt from an article written by Steven Cass is included in italics. The site that this communication occurred on allows people to vote on weather they agree or disagree with the initial post. At the time of this post the votes were 28 in favor 45 opposed. I am not surprised that the majority of votes were in opposition but I was appalled and shocked that there were so many supporters of the sickening position taken by this individual.

yagloo says:
Recent american/UK operations in Iraq were a terrible attrocity. The amercan/UK military has killed over 10 times as many innocent women and children as Saddams lackeys did in his entire reign, Iraq remains in ruins, virtual civil war and the proposed new constitution will leave it a theocracy.
The 'troops' are all directly responsible for this continued and pointless slaughter and are no better than common murderers. When they signed up of their own free will they did not gain some magical absolution for their crimes. Every one of them had the moral responsibility to defect, desert or work to sabotage the war effort from within. Every one of them who did not do this deserves not our support but an insurgents bullet.
ChrsMcA says:
Yagloo you are clearly one who considers himself an intellectual... you are in fact an embarrassment to mankind as a whole. I am pleased to know this as it is clear that there is no point debating any topic with you as it would be akin to debating with a rock... a small rock at that.

For those of you who do not need to be forcibly removed from the gene pool, the following was written by Stephen Cass an expert on Iraq and Saddam, who lives in San Francisco. Not exactly taking the popular opinion in his area but the true one none the less.

"My sixteen years of study of Iraq, doctoral work on Saddam, and time spent in the Middle East make no difference. I am daily condemned by the mantra that the US is taking "hundreds of thousands" of civilian lives in Iraq-- and that my support makes me an accomplice to murder.

For my own part, I am embarrassed to watch the daily "Showdown with Iraq" news graphics that turn human suffering into a Steven Segal movie. I know that what is at stake are precious human lives. I know that many who oppose the war do so out of deep respect and concern for human life.

Let me say that there are those supporting the disarmament of Saddam who do so for the same reason.

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

By contrast, taking at face value Iraq's Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf's recent claims of total Iraqi civilian deaths since the start of the campaign we are left with the tragedy of 38 civilian deaths daily since the start of the war.

In other words, even accepting the Iraqis own numbers and the highly-suspect assertion that all were caused by US weapons, and discounting the numbers of humanitarian organizations, the civilian death toll has, in fact, fallen since the start of the war. Indeed, it has fallen precipitously.

One civilian death is rightfully a tragedy-- not only for the Iraqis, but for Anglo-American efforts to disarm and remove Saddam with minimal loss of life. Yet it is more of a tragedy that a hundred thousand civilian deaths under Saddam are treated as a rounding error-- or worse, a politicized, uncomfortable, and therefore ignorable fact.

For those who would question my math, I point out that at least I have tried to apply math to the claims made for and against the war. I agree that lives cannot be treated as numbers in a balance, but it is the protestors who have moved the argument on to that playing field. For indeed, they accept that Saddam is evil, but believe that his disarmament is more evil because-- in the now familiar phrase-- it will kill hundreds of thousands of innocents."

At the very minimum the daily death toll in Iraq has dropped by nearly 50%. Where were your protests for Iraqi civilians when those "hundred of thousands" were being slaughtered during the past two decades? Probably trying to learn how to spell "progressive Marxian anarchist" your political definition of your self, this can be abbreviated to simply fool.
chrsmca says:
Come to think of it I have got an idea. Being as you have obviously never been in the military but know the mindset and the heart of those who are (you're psychic I'm sure), Al Qaeda is looking for the radically foolish. You qualify. You should call up Osama, and ask for a job. I bet he is hiring. In fact I hear that suicide bombing is beautiful this time of year. You could be like a suicide bomber test pilot. But if crying about how horrible the world is without getting that involved is your thing then I have an alternative that requires no training. Those poor innocent Iraqis that are being killed by the terrorists, who are in agreement with your every view I am sure, and by the heathen US & UK militaries, are in need of human shields. I would have the utmost respect for you if you volunteered for that. Of course I am sure that it is easier to stay at home and point fingers then to actually do something.
yagloo says:
You twist the figures by including the iran-iraq war. And of course the deaths have fallen since the beginning of the war - they were enormous at the beginning because of the bombings. Oh, and the claims of Iraqs information minister wouldnt be biased at all towards making his government look like it was doing a good job. ^ - Any good derived from deposing sadam is far outweighed by the consequences of the war.
Chrsmca says:
First off, Genius, the daily death toll in Iraq prior to the war was higher than it has been during the duration of the war, not the death toll has lowered during the duration of the war. Maybe I should draw you a picture. Second the claims of the Iraqi information minister were inflated to incite persons like yourself to jump on the idea that so many innocent civilians are being killed by US & UK forces. Finally the numbers aren't twisted, the 500,000 referred to are in fact not military, but civilians who died during the Iran-Iraq war, including and excluding them is where the 70 to 125 came from as opposed to 38 per day now. So your argument of American's killing 10 times as many innocent civilians is a completely fabricated number. But why use facts when you can lie to prove a point.

"yagloo said:
^ - Any good derived from deposing sadam is far outweighed by the consequences of the war."

70 to 125 civilian deaths per day under Saddam primarily during peace time > 38 per day during A WAR... evidently the scale you use to show how something outweighs something is broken. Probably operator error.


yagloo says:
As for good outweighing the bad, the insurgency will likely continue for a good 15-20 years, vigilantes are likely to kill far more than sadams police, and huge damage has been done to the infrastructure - which america has catagorically stated it will not repair.

Chrsmca says:
"huge damage has been done to the infrastructure - which America has categorically stated it will not repair."???
Which America are you talking about? The one who is rebuilding their telecommunications systems? Or maybe the one who is rebuilding Iraq's water systems? Maybe you mean the America who is repairing, updating and installing new sewage treatment facilities! Yeah that must be the America you are referring to. Or is it the America who is repairing the Iraqi oil wells and pipelines that Saddam ordered destroyed, so that Iraq has a strong industry after the war. Of course there is always the America that is rebuilding and training Iraq's military, Iraq's police, Iraq's firefighters, Iraq's EMS personnel, and Iraq's government officials, not to mention, working to rebuild Iraq's construction market by using more and more Iraqi contractors. Oh and don't forget the transportation infrastructure including airport repairs and road repairs that are ongoing due to constant IEDs. We won't think less of you if you don't have a legitimate argument, you don't need to fabricate one for us!

by the way I know this first hand. My brother-in-law is working on telecom, father in law sewage treatment municipal plumbing. My fire department is training Iraq's firefighters, Iraq's EMS, and Iraq's ARFF (Airport Rescue Firefighters). Oh and I read, watch and listen to multiple, legitimate news sources, not just left wing, conspiracy minded, print anything to incite anger and fear news mediums.

"As for good outweighing the bad, the insurgency will likely continue for a good 15-20 years, vigilantes are likely to kill far more than Sadams police"
Yagloo we have already gone over this. If the daily death toll is still lower DURING A TIME OF WAR, than it was DURING PEACE TIME, there is an increase in the people living as a result of our presence. If this goes on for 20 years with no change for the better, the death toll still will not reach the 20 year death toll of Iraqi civilians under Saddam's reign.

These are facts, but as is your style, you have yet to allow facts or truth of any kind; to get in the way of a half educated opinion, based on your two omniscient news mediums.
Once again facts and reality have gotten in the way of an uneducated opinion, backed by made up statistics. It's like they say 89.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot. I rarely comment on the individual in the manner that I have here, I allowed my frustration of dealing with the deceitful and the unwilling to think or research to get the better of me.

Gay Marriage

The following was in response to a satirical post regarding gay marriage which belittled any person who was opposed to it as though there was in fact no legitimate argument and those opposed must be blind faith fools. My response is below in italics.

I will try to avoid my usual rant... lol. But there is something I would like for you to consider on this topic. I am personally opposed to gay rights. However, I can set that aside and would in fact be able to tolerate "civil unions". Here is the point often missed by the liberals who call those opposed to gay "marriage" homophobic. A civil union is a binding contract set forth between two persons and the government. A marriage is not dissimilar to a civil union with one major exception. Marriage is not a secular and legal institution, which happens to be recognized by theology. It is, in fact, the other way around. Marriage is a theological institution recognized by government. As such the only entity that should be permitted to define marriage is the church not the government, & not the courts. Governmental authority and the religious authority are two independent entities that recognize one another. Police officers and firemen recognize one one another's jurisdiction and authority, but that doesn't mean that a police chief can determine that the fire dept. can't use water to fight fire cause he has seen C.A.F.S. and likes it. It would still be the responsibility of the FD to select a method of extinguishment. A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage is nothing more than a police chief (the central government) telling his patrolmen (local politicians & judges) that they aren't firemen (clergy), so don't try to run the fire department. Allowing gay marriage is indeed offensive to me as it conflicts with my biblical belief that homosexuality is wrong as is clearly stated in Leviticus.

Let it be known that I am just as opposed to divorce, as I am to gay marriage. Fifty-five hour marriages are ridiculous. I am far from a model citizen or a model Christian but I am not the standard of truth.

p.s. Truth be told in my personal opinion I am opposed to gay civil unions as well as gay marriage, but I will not fight civil unions as they are a secular union set forth by the government and as such the government has the right to set its own parameters by which it operates, just as the church should have the same right.

By the way thanks for the congrats on my son! We are both so excited words can't even begin to scratch the surface of how we feel! If this argument seems a little scattered it is cause it is midnight and I am trying to type one handed with Christian in my arms... lol


This was written to a firefighter, so for those who aren't firefighters allow me to explain a couple of things. 1st, when on the scene of a fire the property is in fact the full property of the on scene fire department until they release that scene. If you call the fire department to your home for a smell of smoke the fire department fully owns your home till they release it to you. This is where the police recognize the fire departments authority.

And C.A.F.S. stands for Compressed Air Foam System. C.A.F.S. is a relatively new tool in firefighting and it is quite effective but it is not the end-all way to fight fire. Sometimes water is the best tool, sometimes C.A.F.S., sometime dry chemical, it is all dependant on what resources are available and what the situation dictates

Katie McAllister

Christopher you never stop amazing me. That was very well written. Thank you for tonight. I am still hurting but its helped some. I know that in time I will be ok. I love you to death. God bless you.


I must say that I did NOT read this whole thing cause I am trying to cook dinner, but I must say you write very well. Anyways, I guess we all have our very own opinion about life in general and all that falls under that catergorey. Anyway...I think that Gay men and women have hearts and have feelings like every other human alive (well most of us anyways) and I think that if they want to call what they have a marriage or by God do it....then more power to them! Who am I or you to tell these people that it is wrong for them to be in love or live a life such as you and me. I do not understand why christians say that gay men and women are not "right". What is right? They go to church, the believe in God, they want to be allowed in to the peraly gates. God created all of us, did he not? I think it is funny how we can forgive a man that has killed because he is NOW a man (or woman) of God, but we think that same sex relationships are meant for hell...correct me if I am wrong, but did God not create the murdered and the Gays??? Gay ppl do not choose to be the way that they are, trust me. They did not choose to be ridiculed and shot at and made fun of and kicked around. Why do so many ppl live there life unhappy?? Because they want to come out and admit that they are gay, but our society will not allow that to happen, so they continue to live in fear and in depression. My best friend whom is gay was almost KILLED by a man who was offended that he looked at him, when he walked up behind him in the dark. I would have done the same thing if I would have heard someone behind me in the dark, but I probably would not have spent the next week in a hospital bed waiting for Kidneys to heal and my face to go back down either. All of that to say that as Christians we need to stop nbeing so damn judgmental.....Gay people happen to be people too who happen to deserve to love the same way hetorosexuals do!!!!!!!!


It is unfortunate that people always assume that anyone who is opposed to "gay rights" hates gay people and must be a war monger who loves to go gay bashing. In point of fact my bible says to love thy neighbor as thy self, this includes gay people and I do, it does not say support the wrongs they choose to practice. For the record the bible does say that homosexuality is wrong and as such it is contrary to the biblical principal to support it. The bible is true or false and picking and choosing the parts that support your views doesn't work. For the record I have no respect for anyone who would attack a person, or kill a person, for looking at them be they gay, straight, or undecided. that to is wrong and that person would not be ok in my book cause they got saved. I would love them and still recognize that people are responsible for their actions and so they can be loved all the way to jail. I am offended that you would judge me for asking only that biblical principal be adhered to, and then tell me not to be so damn judgemental. I never at any point said that gays didn't deserve the right to drive, the right to walk, the right to breathe, or otherwise, I said they should not be entitled to enter into a thoelogic institution as part of a theology that clearly states that homosexuality is wrong. I would really like for you to call me so that we can discuss this as it is clear that you failed to comprehend the full concept of my statement.


Rob Hitchcock

Time to address a couple things not mentioned.

First off, very well thought out arguments Chris.

Secondly, one of the founding philosophies of law for most nations including our own is that individuals should be free to do as they please provided that they are not harming themselves or others. Hence, you have outrage over seatbelt laws--who cares if you aren't harming anybody and, at least, putting only yourself at comparable risk in the event of an accident where you might likely be injured anyway? The issue that most have with gay marriage, other than tax entitlements (I'll address that later), is the "harmlessness" of it all. Now, if are to believe that the commandments of the Bible are for our own good, then why is a digression from traditional religious marriage harmful?

As Christians, it is our job to feed the Word to people and let them decide for themselves whether or not they want to accept it. Now, aside from the argument already mentioned (that I support) that gay 'marriage' is offensive because it is a mockery of what God had originally set up for man and woman, I could care less what unbelievers do.

Proverbs 23:17- Let not thine heart envy sinners: but be thou in the fear of the LORD all the day long.

What I AM concerned about it how gay marriage affects Christians; and it does.

Gay marriage is indicative of a pro-gay society that not only accepts, but embraces a sin. The marriage aspect of it muddies the water of Biblical truth and worldly truth, and we can already see in some dioscies (sp?) that gayness is getting supported in the mainstream chruch. This can only lead to an even greater lack of reverence to what God says, and more of a slant toward what man says. Secondly, gay marriage seems to provide the open door for the white picket fence lifestyle that many gays in our day and time have yet to see. Essentially, a healthy and equal medium of social equality with straight marriages...or, in the viewpoint of say, a teen or adult struggling with same sex issues, a way out. This is the greatest harm that gay marriage can do to Christianity. This once again shows man's wisdom taking significance over God's...and rather than seeking church or believer-related support for struggles such as these, one who deals with homosexual issues would be more inclined to 'accept himself' and go on with the opportunity for equal lifestyle than turn to help from God. Honestly, if eating lobster were still a sin in our day and age, it would be much harder to abstain from it :) in light of the fact that Pappas Grill cooks some kickass lobster. Hopefully I'm getting my point across.

As for taxes, this is where I agree with the liberals. In most cases, only same-sex marriage can provide the benefits of insurance and tax breaks that come hand in hand with straight married couples. Even civil unions don't usually provide this. And so long as 'marriage' is the only way to obtain these tax breaks, then Constitutionally, gays, blacks, mexicans, etc should all be entitled to 'marriage'. Marriage and the state having a union such as this is an example of how a lack of separation of church and state is a very unhealthy thing. I believe that people living under the same roof and sharing income, married or not, should be entitled to equal tax breaks. Unfortunately, a marriage document is usually the only way to obtain it. And no matter what way you slice it, it is discrimination at this point. I would rather have God's laws upheld and the Constitution not upheld, but I would most prefer to have both be upheld. The solution? Don't make a "marriage" the only way to obtain equal tax breaks. If this happens, the gay marriage supporters simply have no case whatsoever, other than pride. But that's not much of a case.


Precisely! In Matthew 22 when Christ is asked which is the most important commandment in the law he gives 2 responses. First love God, second love thy neighbor as thyself. I do indeed love the person, it is only the act that I abhor. As such I would not want to deprive someone of the financial rights that they should have under the law. The government has the opportunity to create, within a same-sex constitutional ammendment, a legal institution that would offer the same fiscal benefits and rights without imposing the misinterpretation of the law, by a few judges, on the whole of Christianity.


Why do so many support or oppose Bush blindly?

The following was posted on Myspace. I felt it wrong to not respond, and my comments are below. I am not one to say something and hide. If you disagree and have facts to back you then my email address is listed below. If you simply disagree cause CNN said Bush is the bad guy and you haven't elected to research why, then please do not waste your's and my time.

RE:EB? I feel bad cause half my friends list wont understand
***See note below***
> One night, George W. Bush is tossing restlessly in his White House bed.
> awakens to see George Washington standing by him. Bush asks him,
> what's the best thing I can do to help the country?"
> "Set an honest and honorable example, just as I did," Washington advises
> then fades away.
> The next night, Bush is astir again and sees the ghost of Thomas
> moving through the darkened bedroom. Bush calls out, "Tom, please! What
> the best thing I can do to help the country?"
> "Respect the Constitution, as I did," Jefferson advises and dims
> from sight.
> The third night sleep is still not in the cards for Bush. He wakens to
> the ghost of FDR hovering over his bed. Bush whispers,
> "Franklin, what is the best thing I can do to help the country?"
> "Help the less fortunate, just as I did," FDR replies and fades into the
> mist.
> Bush isn't sleeping well the fourth night when he sees another
> figure moving in the shadows. It is the ghost of Abraham Lincoln. Bush
> leads, "Abe, what is the best thing I can do right now to help the
> Lincoln replies, "Go see a play."

What is even more sad is that the author of this little piece is evidently unaware of a few facts. This is however typical of those who elect to attack Bush for doing as the country at large requested. First, the "I cannot tell a lie" story, regarding George Washington has been proved to be legend and in fact nothing more. Second, it has also been shown that FDR's "New Deal" was one of the least effective programs in U.S. history, and his "Tennessee Valley Authority" has been shown to be a fiscally irresponsible program that was exceedingly inefficient. These programs were only lauded as a result of an uneducated population, and propaganda. The New Deal did have a huge beneficial impact on morale and in turn individual financial stability. Currently we live in a more fiscally aware nation. As such financial propaganda of this sort would be transparent and thus ineffective. Especially if prioritized over protection of the nation. This explains why Bush has selected to be hated by so many. Bush has not chosen to yield to pressure and give in on subjects he feels are in the nation’s best interests. His life would indeed be far easier if he were to sway back and forth with every wind of doctrine that passes through the halls of the White House. He has elected instead to stay his course though far more difficult and at his own peril, to better protect the United States.
E.B. I understand that you are opposed to G.W. Bush and I have no problem with that as we all have the right to our opinion. However, as I have often found regarding your posts on Myspace, you unfortunately elect not to use your own intellectual capacity to research the uneducated pieces that you choose to post. I know you to be rather intelligent, so why would you, as so many Americans do in this day and age, allow yourself to be controlled by propaganda, and an openly biased media? I in no way want to give the impression that I support Bush and the Republican Party blindly, as I DO NOT. I have in fact found myself in a position where I can no longer in good faith support either political party. I am simply appalled at the number of Americans who choose not to educate themselves and elect to oppose Bush OR support Bush blindly. We have so many resources at our disposal to educate ourselves and we elect to rely on forwarded emails. Rather than perpetuate the problem, why not use the intellect that you possess and create your own original argument? Were you to do that, I would then likely find it far more difficult to pick your argument apart, as there may in fact be something present that is often over looked... Facts!

Katrina… is anyone willing to accept the reality?

Tonight New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin will be interviewed on 60 Minutes. During the interview, a correspondent pointing out flood-damaged cars still on the streets of New Orleans devastated Ninth Ward will receive this reply from Mayor Nagin. “You guys in New York can’t get a hole in the ground fixed, and its five years later. So let’s be fair”. Between this and the “Chocolate City” remarks, I would be embarrassed beyond words to have to call this man my mayor.

This has prompted me to disseminate a little information regarding the Katrina Disaster in New Orleans… Oh yeah and also Mississippi and Alabama. Yep as you may recall New Orleans is not the only place that caught a little wind and water.

1. The levees (no bombs… just physics)

The Army Corps of Engineers designed the levees but the New Orleans government changed the designs to increase the sellable property near a select few of the levees (specifically near the 17th street and London Ave. levees). The areas with the amended designs are the places where the levees failed. The levee amendments were instituted in an effort to increase sellable property. The design amendments were submitted by New Orleans civil engineers and approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. The Army Corps of Engineers have since accepted responsibility for these amended levee designs, called “I” levees, but in reality only bear a portion of the blame. Had their original design not been altered in an effort to make the city money, had the bottom line not been more important to the city of New Orleans than the safety of its people, we would not likely be where we are today. Also of note, construction of flood gates similar to those that protect the Netherlands was halted and eventually scrapped due to a 10 year legal battle brought about by the environmental organization, Save Our Wetlands. Below are cross sections of the original levee design and the “I” design. Note that the failure of the “I” design was a result of the lack of weight and counter pressure due to the shortened earth berm. The failures were in the end caused by the pressure of the water against an insufficient levee at the top and by water getting under the levee system causing it to become unstable.

*** See notes below ***

Had all levees been built according to the original specs (pre-New Orleans civil engineer amendments, and pre-Save Our Wetlands lawsuit) the damage to New Orleans would have been far less severe.

2. Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco’s too little too late

Many people have made reference to a “delayed” or “sluggish” federal response. This must be a reference to the National Guard's delayed deployment. You should know that it is unlawful to send American military into a state without the state requesting the resources. In this case, granting permission for entry of those resources. It is widely known but often overlooked, that the federal government offered a multitude of personnel to assist in the rescue efforts but the governor of Louisiana did not respond to these offers until 3 days after Katrina made landfall. Governor Richardson of New Mexico even went so far as to have 200 National Guard personnel called to duty the day after Katrina made landfall, at which point the Guardsmen sat, awaiting Governor Blanco’s permission to enter as a humanitarian force. This was not a federal shortfall but an error on the part of the state and municipal governments.

3. Congress’ hands too busy pointing fingers to help

Many people have fallen into the typical pattern of anything that goes wrong is G. W. Bush’s fault. Following the initial disaster of Katrina congress showed its true colors, a band of over paid party puppets. The people who consider themselves our leaders, led by spending more time pointing fingers and name calling than getting their hands dirty actually helping. Bush chose to do something that shocked me. Clearly he believes in the idea that the buck stops here. He easily could have pawned this off on those truly responsible but instead he chose to shoulder the blame. Why? Because if the whole world is unified that it's his fault then they can quit all the red tape B.S. and finger pointing and actually try to fix the problem. Think about it. If he wanted this thing to point away from him it would have. Just like if Bush had wanted for WMDs to be found in Iraq, they could have been. So in essence people often blame him for being a poor president for his being willing to take responsibility for problems even when they weren't a result of his actions, and for being honest and not hiding what mistakes he does make.

4. Warnings unheeded

People actually said that they didn’t think they needed to leave because the president hadn’t told them to. The fact that every channel on TV and Radio warned people to leave isn't enough? GW has a country to run, that is why Louisiana has a governor, and New Orleans has a mayor. Maybe some people hadn't seen the news but there is a little WAR going on over seas and the president has that little matter to deal with. As such there are other people who have a responsibility to handle matters such as this. Not the least of which being the local municipalities and the state government. These entities did nothing. New Orleans didn't need Bush to know, they should already have known, and they did know. Why do you think the levees were there in the first place? Because New Orleans had already been hit by numerous major hurricanes, especially in 1915 and 1965. The arguments that Bush is responsible because he didn't warn people and didn't know of the impending destruction would be like saying that the mayor of Los Angeles is at fault every time that there is a home invasion in Compton. The Mayor has 6 million people to worry about he can't stand guard at your house! In the same manner Bush isn't responsible to govern New Orleans. Again, that is why New Orleans has a mayor and a city council. That is why Louisiana has a governor.
5. Giuliani vs. Nagin…

Mayor Ray Nagin has had the audacity to compare himself to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, and sufficient intellectual lack to not even realize how far short he will fall. Following 9-11 Mayor Rudolph Giuliani was seen on every television set in America handing water to firemen. Nagin? Nope. Following 9-11 Mayor Rudolph Giuliani was seen on every television set in America holding crying widows. Nagin? Nope. Following 9-11 Mayor Rudolph Giuliani was seen on every television set in America leading his city back to greatness before the dust had even settled. Nagin? Nope. In point of fact it was DAYS after Katrina had made landfall that Nagin popped his head out from under the rock he had been hiding under and he did so only to point fingers. Nagin actually had New Orleans citizens in need of immediate medical evacuation from the Superdome, and chose instead to use the first available busses to evacuate perfectly healthy businessmen, in New Orleans for a conference. These businessmen were staying in a hotel! No they did not have power and all of the amenities but they were safe and in a much better situation then those in the Superdome. Many people died because of the delay in available busses, while Nagin worked to ensure that the first busses were used for safe passage of wealthy businessmen out of the city. Nagin comparing himself to Giuliani would be like me comparing my sprinting abilities to Carl Lewis.

6. The Rescue effort… flack jackets for firemen?

What? Flack jackets and bullet proof vests? No, couldn’t be. Is it possible that a substantial portion of the delay in response was simply that many of the victims were exploiting the misfortune of others? Indeed, that is very much a part of the delay. The safety of emergency response personnel was paramount and as a result aid was often delayed because of the actions of many of the victims. Spelling out “Help” with rocks and then shooting at rescue personnel is not going to speed things along. Steeling a rescue boat, while being used to try to rescue someone from a partially collapsed house, to make a beer run and then destroying the boat and it’s equipment is only going to slow response. These aren’t isolated incidents. Many of the people who went to serve the people of New Orleans and try to help were assailed on a regular basis. Clearly there is an attitude of self importance and self indulgence that permeates many of the people who failed to heed the warnings to leave. This is further evidenced by the fact that there are still over 110,000 unemployed Katrina evacuees in the Houston area. I would like to make it clear that I in no way am indicating that there aren’t good people from New Orleans, but I think it says something when the murder rate in the city of Houston went up by over 33.3 percent since August of 2005 while the population only increased by only 2.2 percent. You can cut it anyway you want to but that is a clear indication of why there was such a delay even after the mayor and governor got their act together enough to allow aid into Louisiana.

*** NOTES ***
*** Drawings are not to scale and are only intended to illustrate an engineering defect. ***
*** As a side note, it is interesting that the parks and recreation department (responsible for maintaining the levees) spent a great deal more money to enhance Louisiana’s gaming sector (the Casinos) rather than making reparations to known weakened or damaged levees. ***