Member Profile

Total number of comments: 10 (since 2013-11-28 16:33:04)


Showing comments 10 - 1

  • Top Five Ways to tell if a Terrorist is still al-Qaeda despite name Change
  • Questions I ask myself about Connecticut School Shooting
    • Ah, but would only apply to NEW gun purchases, not guns already owned. Can you imagine the uproar if the government banned "assault weapons" and then actually tried to confiscate those already owned? You WOULD get civil war. There is ALWAYS a grandfather clause. Those who own them when law is passed are cleared to continue owning them. You'd certainly not coax me into handing mine over, regardless of the law. Not my semiauto pistol and not my semiauto assault rifle. I already own them so they cannot be taken. Also, the run has already started. ANYTIME gun control comes up in the general discussion, gun sales ALWAYS spike. It would take a while before any new control legislation passed through all the hoops and in that period gun sale would shoot to the moon.

    • I recently watched my father die a painful, slow, cancer death. Before I go through that same sort of thing OR before I allow myself to lose my marbles to Alzheimer's or other debilitating or painful disease I would absolutely kill myself. If I can't do it cleanly with drugs, I would do it quickly with a gun. Suicide is NOT always bad.

    • The easy answer is not THE answer. It rarely is. Assault rifles: there are SO many out there (I own one) that even if you actually banned them tomorrow, they would all still be there (mine wouldn't magically disappear due to a law passed...and I'd be protected by grandfathering). The original Assault Rifle ban did NOT ban assault rifles. You could STILL buy them, you could STILL own them. What would happen if a new ban goes into effect is this: each one of those weapons out there that would then be "banned" would SKYROCKET in value. My own rifle would double, if not treble, in value. My cheap $10 20-round magazines would also likely treble in value at least. Over time their value would keep climbing. Now, I don't own crazy 50 rd or higher magazines. Why would I want that? My rifle was made to use a 20 rd mag so 20 is what I want with it. High capacity beyond that is just ridiculous and silly. Perhaps even crazy.

      I'm a hobbyist and former military. I LIKE guns. Part of my blood. Some people like stamps, some like ceramic trinkets, etc. I like certain guns. I am not a whackadoodle. I am not in any way inclined to shoot people up. I shoot targets, not people (not anymore...military remember?) and I do not shoot non-human animals. I don't want to kill anyone or anything. So no point in trying to take my weapons from me and people like me.

  • Visiting Liberty Square (Occupy Wall Street)
    • Indeed. We do not need wishy washy lawyer speak here. We are not in a bogus "justic system" courtroom. We are in the reality-based world. Bologna DID gratuitously and maliciously pepper spray peaceful protesters. He did so with a grin on his face (probably laughed about it later with his thug cop buddies around the coffee pot back at the precinct later).

      He did it. There' is no "alleged" to it. He did it. And it wasn't just one cop. There were plenty of other cops brutally handling peaceful protesters and anyone with the gall to actually have cameras out filming the Gestapo tactics.

      Land of the free my ass.

    • Great posting and my heart and soul is with the protesters on Wall Street. I myself cannot attend (they would not really want me) as I am NOT into passive resistance. I am NOT inclined to simply sit there and take it if some Gestapo thug (aka, a "cop") came along and pepper sprayed me. I am NOT inclined to simply go with the flow if such a thug tried to toss me to the ground, pin my head to the concrete, and tried to slap zip ties on my wrists.

      They don't want me there. I believe in AT LEAST proportionate response, with a leaning towards disproportionate response. But I'm military. "Kinetic" response is in my blood.

  • What should have been Headlines in the Corporate Media: Today's Best of the Blogosphere
    • As for the wikileaks link issue. I am a military member and the brass has come down that it is verboten for us to view leaked secret documents.

      This, of course, only works while on duty and using govt computers. At home...well, I view whatever the hell I want and wikileaks happens to fall within that range.

      It is self evident that once a secret is leaked, it is no longer secret and cannot be "protected" any longer. What benefit is derived from barring government employees (in their various guises) from viewing what everyone else in the universe is viewing - many of them our "enemies" - is beyond me and beyond simple logic. This nonsense is worse than Bush Jr.

    • Don't underestimate the vitriole and vindictiveness of the rice lobby! You can smell the fear flowing off them like a mid-west flood in the face of the couscous invasion.

  • Top Ten Myths about the Libya War
    • I'll call this a win ONLY after the dust has settled and there has been no attempts to impose neoliberal economic models upon the Libyan people (as a precondition for economic and reconstruction aid). Also, there must be NO attempt by the USA to locate AFRICOM in Libya, NO attempts to get basing rights there. Nada.

      Hands off. Only then is this a win and NOT a manipulation/subversion by the West.

  • Ret'd. CIA Official Alleges Bush White House Used Agency to "Get" Cole
    • I'm terribly sorry Juan but the House and/or Senate investigating this? I almost sprayed my latte all over my keyboard and screen. See, "we need to look forward, not backward". Didn't you get dur Fuhrer's, err, the President's memo? That would be the "Democratic" President, not the guilty party before at that! There will be no investigations by anyone in government until some point in the future, like the re-examination of what/how the Spanish-American War got started...WELL after all involved were dead and buried.

Showing comments 10 - 1