The Only Advertisement You Will Ever See On This Site!

Jackson's Computer Services

Let The Wife Take Care Of Your Computer Needs









A weblog about the politics and affairs of the old and glorious City of Albany, New York, USA. Articles written and disseminated from Albany's beautiful and historic South End by Daniel Van Riper. If you wish to make a response, have anything to add or would like to make an empty threat, please contact me.

Click on this link to add this site to your RSS feed.

January 30, 2013

A Tragic Death Wish

This year’s Martin Luther King march to my neighborhood in honor of the great victim of gun violence, and the recent virtual murder of Dr. King’s spiritual heir Aaron Swartz by federal authorities

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death... There is nothing, except a tragic death wish, to prevent us from re-ordering our priorities, so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

-Dr. Martin Luther King, Riverside Church NYC, April 4, 1967

Some time ago it became plain to me that we Americans are suffering from an epidemic of self-contempt. I see it in the people around me, the people I see and talk to every day, and I see it in nationally famous public figures. Many of the most powerful and influential people in this country absolutely drip self-hatred, and it affects their every action which in turn impacts everybody’s lives in the worst ways.

Flowers At Martin Luther King's Feet, Albany NY, 2013
Flowers At Martin Luther King's Feet, Albany NY, 2013

And I see this self-contempt all across the City of Albany, in the citizens and especially in the public officials that the voters return to office year after year, never imagining that they deserve better leaders. But also I see that same self-contempt in the suburban residents outside of Albany, trembling in their isolated houses terrified of anything different from what their TVs tell them is correct. We follow our leaders and our leaders follow us, and we are paralyzed with terror, afraid of each other.

Only recently have I come to understand that more than 40 years ago Martin Luther King saw this malaise of self-contempt, alarmed as the disease was beginning to take hold. All the way back in the 1960s he could see that our nation was “approaching spiritual death.” I can’t imagine the depth of his horror as he alone could perceive the “tragic death wish” that was keeping Americans silent before the degradations of “a recalcitrant status quo.”

Wreath For Dr. King
Wreath For Dr. King

Sure, today in the 21st Century the epidemic is blaringly obvious and I can see it all around me. But who the hell am I? I’m no Dr. King, piercing the gloom and leading multitudes to freedom. Hell, I can’t even lead a dog to a bone. I’m just some crazy guy ranting into a blog, no one really cares what I think.

But crazy nobody that I am, I have seen what self hatred does. It makes it okay to hurt other people, to sneer at them, to kill them, to steal from them and call it economic policy. Self contempt justifies lashing out in fear, it justifies blind obedience to self-proclaimed authorities who are little more than psychotics on a rampage. Fear promotes isolation, which is the oily ground where self-loathing flourishes until all of us become voluntary slaves to chimerical authorities, authorities who eventually seduce us with their false promises of security.

Dr. King clearly understood, he knew the only solution to this problem. "He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." That quote from his essay Stride toward Freedom, 1957, puts the onus on each and every one of us. We are responsible for our own freedom, and we are responsible for our own slavery.

"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." This often repeated quote from The Trumpet Of Conscience, 1967, tells me that he looked deeply into the future, our future today, and he did not like what he saw. And here I am today, little inconsequential me, to tell you that silence is a very powerful force that destroys individuals, and can destroy civilizations. Believe me, I know this to be true.

The March Through Lincoln Park
The March Through Lincoln Park

We need to remember that Martin Luther King was murdered with a gun. It is an established fact that the fellow who was punished for this crime, James Earl Ray, did not and could not have shot Dr. King dead. We may never pierce the official coverup and find out exactly who killed the great man, but we do know it was a bullet fired from a gun that cut him down. That is beyond dispute.

Now, I am not opposed to personal possession of firearms by American citizens who are responsible enough to own them and who need them, I consider it a conditional right like driving a car. True, I do not own a gun because I live in a City and have no use for one in my daily life. And while I am not opposed to hunting, I am opposed to me sitting motionless in the middle of the woods at 3 in the morning in the freezing rain waiting for a damn deer to walk by so I can make it die. But if anybody wants to fetch me some fresh venison I’ll be waiting here next to my radiator.

But for what reason would anyone be opposed to registering firearms and restricting their manufacture? What sort of self-hatred born of isolation would make a person want to arm him or herself against their fellow citizens? What kind of self-loathing would cause public figures to demand armed guards on every street corner, and every citizen to be armed at all times?

The Middle Horse Has Just Dropped A Big Steamer On The Roadway
The Middle Horse Has Just Dropped A Big Steamer On The Roadway

I see very little reason to own a handgun, that old Lynyrd Skynyrd song “Saturday Night Special” nailed it precisely. All a handgun is good for is to shoot your best friend or shoot yourself. Or you can use it to rob a grocery store. Or follow around a hapless teenager in the middle of the night and shoot him for no apparent reason except that you can.

Up until recently there was a very simple solution to this problem, closely regulate or shut down the corporations that manufacture and distribute handguns without restraint. But that would have been contrary to the aims of corporate socialism, so instead we have seen our corporate controlled government encourage the manufacture and dissemination of handguns as if they were iPods. But it may be too late for that simple solution.

It is now possible to print out easily assemblable handguns on a 3D printer. Of course the first printed guns have been flukey and unreliable, but you know how desired technology improves rapidly. So banning handguns by force will soon become little more than another exercise in lawless fascism, much like the so-called War On Drugs. I suspect that is what the self-contemptuous authorities have in mind.

The State Police Color Guard Leads The March Around The Horse Poop
The State Police Color Guard Leads The March Around The Horse Poop

Then there’s high powered automatic weapons. I recall a bedroom in Niskayuna (a high income suburb of Albany) where this fellow (one of The Wife’s computer clients) pulled out of his closet all these impressive pieces of firepower, waving each one at me and tossing them on the bed. Each of these items, he explained, were semi-automatic and thus legal. He quickly demonstrated for me, in detail, how quickly he could convert each of these semi-automatics to automatic weapons, a few simple adjustments. If the need arose, he explained.

I asked him, politely of course, what for he needed all this hardware, and he told me he was expecting a societal collapse. Well, I said, I think you might be right but personally I don’t know how to prepare properly for such an event. Then I asked how would a closet full of semi-automatics help him if society collapsed, and he merely smiled knowingly.

Last I heard, a few years ago, his son stole all of his Dad’s gun collection out of the closet and sold them to feed his heroin habit. True story. I’ve always wondered who received all those guns and what they are being used for. I think we can safely assume that at least some of those weapons ended up being used.

The State Police Color Guard Leads The March
Marchers Right Themselves After Avoiding The Obstruction

Thanks to more than 30 years of childish simplification by the corporate media, the discussion around guns has been distilled down to the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights. You are either for the Second Amendment or against it. There is no middle ground, other viewpoints are not allowed. As I’ve tried to point out at every opportunity, until this stupid either/or black or white model is rejected by a majority of Americans then there will be no progress on solving this artificially created non-issue.

Back in 2004, life handed me one of those Ah-ha Moments. I was involved with the Albany Chapter of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC,) a noble attempt to raise awareness of and hopefully derail the obnoxious so-called “Patriot” Act, which effectively repeals the most important parts of the Bill of Rights and paves the way for a corporate dictatorship like they have in China. We were very successful in raising popular awareness, but of course we did not succeed in stopping this “legislation.” In fact we are now saddled with much worse.

Here’s what happened. At a 2004 conference in Albany about gun violence I crossed the invisible line and talked with some of the gun rights people lurking angrily in the back of the room, and discovered that they were already very aware of the “Patriot” Act and it’s implications for the Second Amendment. But later, when I suggested to our BORDC group that we join with the gun rights people in common cause (We don’t have to agree with them to work with them, I said) I was met with cold stares and the snotty comment, “We don’t need to talk to those people.” Right then and there I realized our cause was ultimately hopeless.

Marchers Carry Safe Generic Signs
Marchers Carry Safe Generic Signs

You see, my big Ah-ha was that the Second Amendment was successfully being used as a wedge issue to divide Americans against each other. That way some of us citizens end up supporting some parts of the Bill of Rights but in the end hardly any of us end up supporting the whole thing. From there it is a simple thing to negate the entire Bill of Rights for everyone, from free speech to religious freedom to the right to a fair and open trial to quartering troops in your goddam bedroom against your will. And don’t expect the coming corporate dictatorship to let you hang onto the gun collection in your closet.

What we have to understand is that the proliferation of guns, and the proliferation of loony pro-gun propaganda by the corporate media, is intended to promote chaos across America. To put it simply, if everyone is armed then everybody is unsafe. And if everyone is unsafe, then eventually the majority of people will welcome the imposition of a corporate dictatorship to restore a sense of order.

Bill Of Rights Opponent Antonin Scalia Of The Supreme Court
Bill Of Rights Opponent Antonin Scalia Of The Supreme Court

That is why Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who repeatedly insists that the Bill of Rights is “an afterthought” and that it does not have the force of law, makes an exception for the Second Amendment and maintains that it guarantees unlimited access to firearms. It astonishes me that no one ever points out this Scalia contradiction, or should I say Scalia hypocrisy. Scalia claims that the Bill of Rights has no meaning, but at the same time he claims that the Second Amendment of the Bill Rights means all kinds of things that it obviously was never meant to say.

I can’t understand why people continue to treat this jerk Scalia as if he is a serious responsible adult. Certainly he is one of the cleverest legal minds in America, but his actions indicate that he is not smart enough to see the consequences of his behavior. Like so many other public officials of his generation, it is painfully obvious that Scalia is incapable of taking personal responsibility for the deadly results of his oh so clever political games. His legal mind is crippled with self-contempt.

I believe that Scalia perpetuates this gun hypocrisy because he is consciously doing his part to shut down the Bill of Rights which he openly despises, and is using his position to help usher in a corporate dictatorship. A proliferation of unregulated guns produces a proliferation of chaos, and chaos leads to fascism. It is time to look at Scalia for what he is, a dagger aimed at the heart of American freedom, a corporate socialist agent provocateur, an enemy of my country.

Politicians Listen Solemnly To The Invocation
Politicians Listen Solemnly To The Invocation

Men often hate each other because they fear each other; they fear each other because they don't know each other; they don't know each other because they can’t communicate with each other; they can’t communicate with each other because they are separated from each other.

Martin Luther King, Symbol of the Movement, 1957

I think it is plain and obvious that if Dr. King was with us today he would be a passionate advocate for free and universal access to the internet. He would have been one of the first people to understand how this technology empowers popular movements and tears down barriers between individuals. Without question he would not have tolerated attempts by the government and the corporations to restrict online access and regulate political content of websites.

So it is sad and ironic that barely a week before Dr. King’s birthday holiday that internet access champion and freedom fighter Aaron Swartz put a rope around his neck and hung himself, on January 11. My first reaction upon hearing the news was that he must have been murdered, but no, he was indeed driven to suicide by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ.) Mr. Swartz suffered from depression, the federal prosecutors had bankrupted him and his family, and he faced up to fifty years in prison for a non-crime that merited, at most, a small fine. Not even that, in my opinion.

Internet Freedom Fighter Aaron Swartz
Internet Freedom Fighter Aaron Swartz

The corporate media falsely reported that Mr. Swartz invented RSS and was a co-founder of Reddit, neither of which was true, although he certainly contributed to the development of both. You see, the voice of the corporations, subtle as always with their disinformation tactics, did not report his greatest contribution to American freedom, which also happened to be the reason that the self-hating corporate lackeys of the DOJ hounded him to death.

During the winter of 2011 - 2012 Aaron Swartz organized the stunningly successful opposition to the so-called Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) along with opposition to the almost identical Protect Internet Providers Act (PIPA.) Under the guise of “copyright reform,” SOPA, according to Wikipedia, would

...Expand the ability of U.S. law enforcement to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods. Provisions include the requesting of court orders to bar advertising networks and payment facilities from conducting business with infringing websites, and search engines from linking to the websites, and court orders requiring internet service providers to block access to the websites. The law would expand existing criminal laws to include unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content, imposing a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

The requests for court orders, you see, would be made by international corporations that control (“own”) copyrights. And a copyright, under existing amorphous law, can be applied to just about any sort of information, turning any word or thought or image into “intellectual property” that can be bought and sold. The vast majority of information on the internet at any time would be subject to privatized regulation by corporations, that is, arbitrary censorship by foreign entities.

The US government would effectively be compelled to enforce the whims of international corporations, none of which are loyal to the United States Constitution. This would be a massive transfer of power from the elected government to the corporations. The passage of SOPA would have meant the complete shutdown of the 1st Amendment online.

Aaron Swartz Last January
Aaron Swartz Last January

Mr. Swartz explained how SOPA was stopped, not because he or anybody in particular willed it, but because he understood how to get the word out and how to get people to understand the problem. That’s mighty powerful. That’s how Dr. King would have done it. In a speech that he gave in May 2012 he explained:

...The reason we won wasn’t because I was working on it or Reddit was working on it or Google was working on it or Tumblr or any other particular person. It was because there was this enormous mental shift in our industry. Everyone was thinking of ways they could help, often really clever, ingenious ways. People made videos. They made infographics. They started PACs. They designed ads. They bought billboards. They wrote news stories. They held meetings. Everybody saw it as their responsibility to help...

Aaron Swartz, Doing What He Did Best
Aaron Swartz, Doing What He Did Best

If there was one day the shift crystallized, I think it was the day of the hearings on SOPA in the House, the day we got that phrase, "It’s no longer OK not to understand how the Internet works." There was just something about watching those clueless members of Congress debate the bill, watching them insist they could regulate the Internet and a bunch of nerds couldn’t possibly stop them. They really brought it home for people that this was happening, that Congress was going to break the Internet, and it just didn’t care...

And everyone I’ve spoken to agrees. The people rose up, and they caused a sea change in Washington—not the press, which refused to cover the story—just coincidentally, their parent companies all happened to be lobbying for the bill; not the politicians, who were pretty much unanimously in favor of it; and not the [internet] companies, who had all but given up trying to stop it and decided it was inevitable. It was really stopped by the people, the people themselves. They killed the bill dead, so dead that when members of Congress propose something now that even touches the Internet, they have to give a long speech beforehand about how it is definitely not like SOPA; so dead that when you ask congressional staffers about it, they groan and shake their heads like it’s all a bad dream they’re trying really hard to forget; so dead that it’s kind of hard to believe this story, hard to remember how close it all came to actually passing, hard to remember how this could have gone any other way. But it wasn’t a dream or a nightmare; it was all very real.

In other words, once the unfiltered vital information was disseminated, the American people, that is, the responsible citizens who understood the threat, took the lead and protected their own self interest by defending the Bill of Rights. It was this open flow of information that sidestepped the corporate media, and that could not be tolerated by the authorities. Thus the angry authorities and their corporate sponsors needed a scapegoat that they could blame for their powerlessness in the face of democracy, a human scapegoat they could destroy with applied bullcrap.

Aaron Swartz' Murderers, US Prosecutors Carmen Ortiz And Her Rarely Photographed Assistant Stephen Heymann
Aaron Swartz' Murderers, US Prosecutors Carmen Ortiz And Her Rarely Photographed Assistant Stephen Heymann

It appears that the Obama administration decided to make an example of Mr. Swartz. Carmen Ortiz, the DOJ prosecuting attorney for Massachusetts, and her equally ambitious assistant Stephen Heymann went after Mr. Swartz as if he had committed some sort of serious crime. In my opinion, these two pieces of human shit murdered Aaron Swartz.

What horrible crime did he commit? What did they prosecute him for? It seems that Mr. Swartz took a big stack of copyrighted science and technical papers that should not have been copyrighted in the first place and put them online for everybody to see. He did not profit monetarily from this. Seriously, that’s his “crime.” For this he refused to plead guilty to multiple felonies and a six month+ sentence. At the time of his death, as punishment for refusing the plea deal, was facing fifty years in prison. (Some reports say 35 or 40 years. Whatever.)

I guess that’s what Dr. King meant by a “recalcitrant status quo” and “spiritual death.” A man who liberated public documents that should not have been turned into commodities in the first place experienced ruination and faced life in prison and was driven to suicide. Meanwhile, the traitorous corporate criminals who continue to destroy our society are rewarded for their criminal activities, and they laugh at us because they own our self-contemptuous elected officials.

Aaron Swartz

Personally, I think that for what they did to Aaron Swartz, Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Heymann should be sentenced to indefinite detention and be placed in 23 hour a day lockdown for the rest of their lives. This business of punishing citizens for not accepting onerous “plea bargains” is in itself a crime, one that has so far been little discussed. But to destroy upright citizens and their families merely to protect ephemeral corporate profits, well, I think such people deserve to be strangled and dumped in a pit full of pig entrails.

I suspect that Dr. King would not have agreed to that, he believed in forgiveness and he believed that violence should only be used when all other methods had failed. But I do know with certainty that he would have identified with Aaron Swartz as a fellow patriot. And I do know that Dr. King would not have approved of Barack Obama and his corporate socialist agenda, not one bit.

The Citizens Observe Mayor Jennings
The Citizens Observe Mayor Jennings

It was really cold this year as the marchers gathered at the King monument in my neighborhood. The politicians lined up next to the statue while the public that consents to rule by those politicians gathered on the grassy slope below them. This is the one political event where the public officials don’t drone on and on, it’s usually too cold for that. Like I always do, I circled around with my little camera taking pictures, and sure enough there he was again on the edge of the crowd, just like last year.

Actually he wasn’t there but I saw him anyway. He was bundled up like a man who was not used to such cold, body straight and stiff and his hands thrust deep into his long coat. But his face, well, it looked hot. He watched Mayor Jerry Jennings at the mic with a steady gaze that I couldn’t even begin to describe.

I approached him quietly and this time kept my mouth shut. It’s was a bit strange for me to show such respect for a man almost two decades younger than myself. But I waited for the mayor’s remarks to end, and then I could see the cold man’s face become sad. Respectfully I asked him, Sir, what do you see.

Still gazing straight ahead he answered me, in a low deep voice, A tragic death wish.

I shivered and he was gone. The marchers dispersed, the politicians fled to their cars and the corporate media content providers took off with their appropriated images. The cop at the end of the street picked up the barrier, the cars went by and it was like Martin Luther King had never been here.

Prior Post * * * Next Post

If you are having difficulties posting a comment, please email Daniel Van Riper. We are experimenting with our spam filters, and we do not want to exclude any legitimate commenters, just spammers!

Posted by:Barbara
Posted on:01/31/2013
That's what bothers me about this whole issue - you have your dictator types like Cuomo and Obama immediately deciding on a "solution" that infringes on the rights of law abiding and very patriotic Americans in a way that I think demonizes and separates them from other freedom-loving individuals. To me, it isn't so much a question of who needs to own such a weapon, and why, as it's a question of who is Andrew Cuomo to give himself the power to make those decisions.
Of course, we aren't even going to look at the entertainment industry to see whether some of the movies, games and television shows that glorify gun violence could be having a negative effect on some members of our society. Does anyone else think that just maybe these alarmingly fast new laws were enacted in such haste to prevent any kind of rational discussion of a serious issue, lest it lead to areas the corporate media/government doesn't want to go? Meanwhile, Sylvester Stallone's new movie is titled "Bullet to the Head" and nobody says anything.
This was a very thoughtful and insightful post. I wish you could get it printed in one of the national papers.

Posted by:GAH
Posted on:02/01/2013
I think part of the reason copyrights are even more broken than patents (which are also in a sorry state) is that we don't make copyright holders pay maintenance fees. I think maintenance fees should accomplish the following:
1. Make people think twice before acquiring any sort of IP.
2. Double as insurance premiums, and be enough to cover any sort of "damage" to intellectual property. That way, if somebody accidentally infringes on your "property" you'd simply file a claim with the feds, and they would determine how much money you "lost" as a result of the "damage". If it turns out that your property was totaled, you'd have the option of getting bought out completely and your IP would end up in the public domain. In the case of deliberate infringement, the government could subrogate against whoever.
3. Completely void copyrights for certain categories of information, like medical and legal info.
4. A "use it or lose it" principle. All owners of IP should be required to present some sort of plan to produce and distribute something, within a certain timeframe. This could probably be included in item #1.

Posted by:Thania
Posted on:03/21/2013
THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WEAPONS AND ARMS!!!! A weapon is rgesitered with the state and or given by civil authorities to police, military etc, but our right to keep and bear arms is never rgesitered as it defeats the purpose and nullifies the fifth amendment PROTECTION! We cannot be forced to give up one right in order to secure another!! and keeps the POLICING POWERS equalized or in check. It does not matter what the policing powers have been taught or drilled with information from the government bureaucrats. Again We cannot be forced to give up one right in order to secure another!! We can talk about unlawful searches going into public buildings later. License is privilege to do that which is illegal or unlawful, owning a firearm is a right, why do we need to get permission to do what we already have a right to do??!! Further more, gaining a permit reduces our status of rights to a lower status of regulated enterprise granted by the state.Our status will be reduced to be controlled by the legislative action of the state, by law we will no longer have a rights issue, rather now we are reduced to a license to carry just like driving a car. The legislature passes laws to regulate drivers and can take away the driving license thereby making us slaves. Now legislatures can remove our license to carry because we reduced our status to contract, and abide by the licensing rules of that contract,. we have signed the contract for specific performance Lets keep our arms and let the existing laws deal with criminals as the law pertains to the law breaker Miranda vs Arizona states Where rights are involved ( right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed ) there can be no rule making, ( from a judge ) or legislation ( passing infringement laws of right to keep and bear arms ) to abrogate them . I will restate the MIranda Rule, WHERE RIGHTS ARE INVOLVED THERE CAN BE NO RULE MAKING OR LEGISLATION TO ABROGATE THEM Rights must be taken away from us by a jury of our peers, a conceal carry permit eliminates our jury trial and can be taken now by a judge in maritime jurisdiction, Then the maritime courts, not common law courts which is what our Constitution is, can run a muck and pretend to honor our rights but in reality it is denying our rights unless we demand our rights timely, failure to demand our rights timely waves our rights, Know your rights and how to demand them!!! i welcome feed back not from what you feel we should do but what we as a matter of right ought to do. These are not my words but Supreme Court decisions over the history of our republic, not the democracy!!! The constitution is inherent in the people first and any laws made against the constitution is null and void before it is even gone for a vote! see- 5 American Jurisprudent INFRINGEMENT means that we can buy a car but now the government forbids us to buy gasoline therefore making it unusable or now being INFRINGED upon. Same is true with ammunition and the only product that is protected by the constitution is the arms . and the infringement clause, or ammunition> All other products are negotiable in the free market place, except for the preservation of our arms.Constitutional Law classes anyone? We must all come together when our individual rights are being tampered with, even the press, religious peoples, non religious, atheists, radio talk hosts who exercise their free speech, , all protected rights let us put aside our peculiarities, for the common cause of Liberty, Liberty can be defined as status to contract if we have no contracts with the government then we have more liberty, the more contracts to government we have the less liberty we have, they control us by our contracts we make with govt. Government is the superior party to any contract we make with them , that is why they control us to the minute degree. and we have allowed it to happen. Any comments?do you know how to talk to a police man when you are stopped? or a county official like zoning board? you should

Posted by:Dan Van Riper
Posted on:03/22/2013

I hear what you are saying but there's a problem with that. Gun ownership, unregistered or otherwise, has so far not succeeded in protecting the Bill of Rights, nor will it. What has destroyed the Bill of Rights is isolation, most Americans have become divided into a myriad of little groups who are deeply suspicious of each other. When people are afraid of their neighbors the last thing on their minds is preserving everybody's freedom, rather they desire that "the others" be suppressed by any means.

So now we are being told by the corporate media that everyone should be armed with unregistered guns so that each of us can "protect ourselves" from our neighbors. That means a lot of people are going to be shooting at each other. Pretty soon, to stop the deadly chaos and protect each of us from our evil neighbors we will welcome a militaristic dictatorship by the foreign corporations to impose ("restore") order by brute force.

The only solution is for everybody to agree to defend and restore the Bill of Rights, like, now before it's way too late. Do you seriously think you can re-establish the Bill of Rights by sitting at home waiting for The Government to come after you with all their weaponry? And how long do you expect to hold out?

Remember what happened to the Sunni families in that "Neocon Laboratory" of Baghdad in the last decade. Each family was permitted to have and use two automatic weapons for their own defense. Fat lot of good those guns did them when General Petraeus unleashed the Shiite fundys against them. Now most of the secular Sunnis are refugees and the victorious Shiites have dragged Iraq back into the stone age. I hear they assassinate women for being hairdressers. Great.

Meanwhile here in America, we have loons running around with guns killing themselves and everybody in sight at an absurd rate. What exactly do you plan to do about that? Or are you one of those people who want to promote chaos so that we can descend to a corporate dictatorship?

Add a comment, if you like :

Posted by
Email (required
will not be posted )

Are You Human? To post this comment please answer this question!

What is one plus one?
Please type the answer as a number (not as a word) here:

Your commment will only post if you answer the question correctly!

- Did you answer the question "What is one plus one" above?

You will lose your comment unless you answer the question correctly!


Prior Post * * * Next Post

This site maintained by Lynne Jackson of Jackson's Computer Services.