The Benghazi scandal (one cited by Obama as “phony”) keeps getting worse and worse. Jake Tapper – one of the few mainstream media reporters actually working this story – has uncovered compelling evidence of a massive CIA coverup. One of the facts revealed: there were dozens of CIA operatives on the ground in Benghazi when our ambassador and three others were killed.
Dozens.
For whatever reason, the CIA seems to be in a flat-out panic about keeping a lid on whatever those CIA operatives were doing. There's lots of speculation about that, but (as yet) no hard facts.
Phony scandal? Sounds to me much more like a phony president...
Friday, August 2, 2013
What Is Happening to My Country, Part 499,823...
Wisconsin law, we're told, prohibits the “possession” of wildlife. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was told about an animal shelter that had a fawn, and they confirmed this through covert surveillance.
So far, nothing really awful.
If you were a DNR employee responsible for handling this situation, what might you do? The obvious thing would be to knock on the door of the animal shelter and ask them why they have a fawn. Had the DNR done this, they would have discovered that the fawn was due to be sent to a wildlife rehabilitation facility the next day. That would have been, one supposes, the end of the story.
But that's not what the DNR did.
Instead, they created, in effect, a SWAT team comprised of 9 DNR agents and 4 deputy sheriffs, all heavily armed. They descended upon the animal shelter in a convoy of cars to conduct a surprise raid. They captured the fawn, tranquilized it, then took it away to be euthanized.
This sort of grotesque over-reaction is very disturbing, and it's happening more and more frequently. When I was a child, such an event would have been unthinkable – and any bureaucrat who perpetrated such an atrocity would be out on his or her butt in short order. The DNR is defending its actions, not punishing the people who executed the fawn.
And what the hell is the DNR doing with heavily-armed agents, anyway?
The trajectory of heavily-armed, over-numerous, out-of-control government thugs is a positively terrifying one – it's the trajectory of a proto-fascist state. We need to rein this in ... if we can. There are only two ways to do this that I know of: via the ballot box, or via the gun. The ballot box isn't working very well so far...
Doom. I hear the drums of doom, and they draw ever nearer...
So far, nothing really awful.
If you were a DNR employee responsible for handling this situation, what might you do? The obvious thing would be to knock on the door of the animal shelter and ask them why they have a fawn. Had the DNR done this, they would have discovered that the fawn was due to be sent to a wildlife rehabilitation facility the next day. That would have been, one supposes, the end of the story.
But that's not what the DNR did.
Instead, they created, in effect, a SWAT team comprised of 9 DNR agents and 4 deputy sheriffs, all heavily armed. They descended upon the animal shelter in a convoy of cars to conduct a surprise raid. They captured the fawn, tranquilized it, then took it away to be euthanized.
This sort of grotesque over-reaction is very disturbing, and it's happening more and more frequently. When I was a child, such an event would have been unthinkable – and any bureaucrat who perpetrated such an atrocity would be out on his or her butt in short order. The DNR is defending its actions, not punishing the people who executed the fawn.
And what the hell is the DNR doing with heavily-armed agents, anyway?
The trajectory of heavily-armed, over-numerous, out-of-control government thugs is a positively terrifying one – it's the trajectory of a proto-fascist state. We need to rein this in ... if we can. There are only two ways to do this that I know of: via the ballot box, or via the gun. The ballot box isn't working very well so far...
Doom. I hear the drums of doom, and they draw ever nearer...
“Bioprotector” – Modern Snake Oil...
Every once in a while I'll stumble across a manufacturer whose chutzpah just takes my breath away. This happened to me yesterday when I happened across the “Cell Phone Bioprotector” on Amazon (while looking for some RG6 cable!). The manufacturer's page is here.
Basically this product is a thin disk of some coppery-looking material (might even be copper) with a radial slot cut in it. It appears to be about the size of a quarter. The idea is that you stick it on your cell phone, and presto! you are magically protected against EMF.
This is pure bullshit on several levels.
First of all, to the best of my knowledge there is no credible science supporting the idea that EMFs generated by cell phones can cause any harm. There is good reason to be careful here, mainly because of the inverse square law and the cell phone's frequent proximity to the brain. However, many modern humans, especially those living in large cities, are routinely subjected to EMFs vastly stronger than those generated by cell phones – and there isn't any evidence that even those EMFs cause any problems. So this product is fighting a phony war.
Secondly, the product claims to do its job without interfering with the cell phone's operation. This is, a priori, a crazy claim. If the product actually did reduce EMFs, it would, by definition, be interfering with the cell phone's operation – since the cell phone's entire job is to generate EMFs (to carry your phone call).
Thirdly, there's no way that a passive metallic (or at least, conductive) disk is going to reduce EMFs in any meaningful way. Certainly not in the “elliptical” personal protection zone claimed by the manufacturer. It's sort of like claiming that a magnet the size of a quarter attached to your car's bumper will protect the occupants against injury in an accident. The real world doesn't work that way – only the world of magic does.
This company is preying on the gullibility of the technically illiterate in a shameless and contemptible fashion. But I don't know which is worse – the owners' shamelessness, or the ignorance of those who are buying their products...
Basically this product is a thin disk of some coppery-looking material (might even be copper) with a radial slot cut in it. It appears to be about the size of a quarter. The idea is that you stick it on your cell phone, and presto! you are magically protected against EMF.
This is pure bullshit on several levels.
First of all, to the best of my knowledge there is no credible science supporting the idea that EMFs generated by cell phones can cause any harm. There is good reason to be careful here, mainly because of the inverse square law and the cell phone's frequent proximity to the brain. However, many modern humans, especially those living in large cities, are routinely subjected to EMFs vastly stronger than those generated by cell phones – and there isn't any evidence that even those EMFs cause any problems. So this product is fighting a phony war.
Secondly, the product claims to do its job without interfering with the cell phone's operation. This is, a priori, a crazy claim. If the product actually did reduce EMFs, it would, by definition, be interfering with the cell phone's operation – since the cell phone's entire job is to generate EMFs (to carry your phone call).
Thirdly, there's no way that a passive metallic (or at least, conductive) disk is going to reduce EMFs in any meaningful way. Certainly not in the “elliptical” personal protection zone claimed by the manufacturer. It's sort of like claiming that a magnet the size of a quarter attached to your car's bumper will protect the occupants against injury in an accident. The real world doesn't work that way – only the world of magic does.
This company is preying on the gullibility of the technically illiterate in a shameless and contemptible fashion. But I don't know which is worse – the owners' shamelessness, or the ignorance of those who are buying their products...
Free Obamaphones, in Apparently Limitless Quantity...
Jillian Melchior is a reporter for National Review Online (NRO). Without trying hard, and without any deception at all (in fact, quite the opposite), she acquired three free “Obamaphones”.
Just imagine what a deceptive, dishonest person might do. The 20 or 30 phones reported in some stories seems quite plausible, especially when you read the details of how the program is run.
Billions of taxpayer dollars are being fraudulently spent annually on these phones. Who benefits? Two companies that are big supporters of the Democratic Party in general, and Obama in particular.
Surprised? What rock have you been hiding under?
Just imagine what a deceptive, dishonest person might do. The 20 or 30 phones reported in some stories seems quite plausible, especially when you read the details of how the program is run.
Billions of taxpayer dollars are being fraudulently spent annually on these phones. Who benefits? Two companies that are big supporters of the Democratic Party in general, and Obama in particular.
Surprised? What rock have you been hiding under?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)