Yup still the Opening banner pretty much sums up this issue. The clean out of my Hard Drive continues, a bet at a slightly slower pace (it’s too hot here). It probably will continue for the next several issues.
Speaking of hot I noticed some serious hypocrisy coming out of the NWS last week. Nearly simultaneously on the same day they issued Ozone Levels and Excessive Heat Index warnings. Now don’t get me wrong these warnings ARE important but for High Heat Index they say things like “limit exertion, physical exercise & over all amount of time spent outside during daylight hours”. Then for the Ozone Warning they are saying we should “take steps to limit ozone production by walking or Bicycling NOT using drive thru lanes but getting out and walking” in High Heat Index conditions (which means you shut your car off. Here in the hot Texas sun that means it immediately ceases being a car and becomes a solar furnace). IF you go into say BK for roughly 10 min to get your lunch chances are decent that you 72 degree car you left will be 120+ when you get back to it.
Anyone else see a hypocritical contradiction of instructions here?
Coffee for the Extremely Grouchy in the Morning!
Had a nice time for the 4 day Holiday weekend. Actually managed a short getaway for some Fun, Sun, Sand and Family (not all those things necessarily occurred at the same time or together) Impish even winged down for a day of Sun, Sand & Salt Air. I had to cover him in sand to keep him from burning on the beach as he took his post flight snooze. Here’s a pic I took of him on the beach in relaxed repose.
Michael Douglas sparked a firestorm claiming that he caught throat cancer by giving oral sex to his wife.
It begs two obvious questions.
Is this a sound medical diagnosis..or is Michael Douglas just the latest Democrat to blame everything on Bush?
I Party Too Much wiff da Leppercon on da Fourth!
Sort of makes you think doesn’t it?!
CLINT EASTWOOD AND A ONE SENTENCE EDITORIAL
This one sentence editorial appeared in the Peoria Journal Star . . . . .
“A pen in the hand of this president is far more dangerous than a gun in the
hands of 200 million law-abiding citizens.”
Then Clint Eastwood added his words . . . . .
“We Americans are so tired of being thought of as dumbasses by the rest of the world that we went to the polls this past November and removed all doubt.” –Clint Eastwood
Poll: Most love America, don’t think founders would
71 percent say Founding Fathers would be unhappy with Washington
By Ashley Killough CNN http://www.click2houston.com/news/Politics/poll-founding-fathers-would-be-disappointed-in-america/-/2574696/20840566/-/nnatf7z/-/index.html?treets=hou&tid=2659926414813&tml=hou_12pm&tmi=hou_12pm_1_12000107042013&ts=H
(CNN) – With signs of patriotism abounding for the Fourth of July, a new survey indicates seven in 10 Americans think the Founding Fathers would be disappointed by the way the United States has turned out, 237 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
But that doesn’t mean Americans themselves are displeased. The same poll, released Thursday by Gallup, shows the number who say they’re very or extremely proud to be American remains steady at 85 percent.
According to the poll, 57 percent of adult Americans are “extremely proud” and 28 percent are “very proud.” In addition, 10 percent say they are “moderately proud,” with 3 percent saying they are “only a little proud” and a mere 1 percent saying they are “not at all proud.”
Despite the high level of patriotism, 71 percent of Americans think the signers of the Declaration of Independence wouldn’t be pleased with the nation today. That number has steadily risen since 2001, when the number stood at 42 percent.
On the contrary, 27 percent in this year’s poll say the Founding Fathers would appreciate how the country now fares, down from 54 percent in 2001.
Older Americans, those in the Midwest, conservatives and Republicans are the least likely to say the signers would be pleased, according to Gallup.
“This indicates that Republicans’ and conservatives’ growing disenchantment with a Democratic president could be one of the underlying factors in the decline in the percentage of Americans who say the signers would be pleased,” stated a release with the Gallup poll.
For the survey, Gallup questioned 1,529 adults by telephone from June 1-4 and 2,048 adults from June 20-24. The poll’s sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.
Mexican amusement park offers fake border crossing
‘Night Walk’ puts tourist groups through the wringer for 3 hours
Published On: Jun 27 2013 10:03:41 AM CDT http://www.click2houston.com/news/mexican-amusement-park-offers-fake-border-crossing/-/1735978/20738060/-/7qgltz/-/index.html?treets=hou&tid=2659926414813&tml=hou_12pm&tmi=hou_12pm_1_12000106272013&ts=H
A new amusement park attraction in Mexico is giving visitors the thrill of an illegal border crossing without the risk of arrest.
The Parque EcoAlberto in Hidalgo says it’s offering the experience, complete with fake smugglers and Border Patrol agents, as a way to dissuade Mexicans from attempting to cross the U.S. border, PBS reported.
For three hours, visitors are put through the wringer, enduring sirens, chases and the threat of dogs.
Tours of the Night Walk attraction cost the equivalent of about $20.
Visitors can also enjoy other recreational attractions like hot springs and rappelling, according to the park website.
An administrator at the park, Maribel Garcia, told PBS the purpose of the border crossing attraction is simple.
“Our objective is to stop the immigration that exists amongst our citizens, principally from the state of Mexico to the U.S.,” she said.
OK two things. First of all….
I REALLY did not see that one coming!
Secondly, if there are Mexicans w/ $20 to blow on a single amusement park attraction they are better off that many Americans I know. So then WHY are they all so damned eager to get here? Because we have flushable toilet paper?
What if great scientists had logos?
What kind of math is that you ask? Why its Bacon lovers math!
ACT! for America founder Brigitte Gabriel speaks at anti-Shariah Conference in Nashville.
Get comfy as it is a bit long, but this is a brutal eye opener. You’ll definitely want to see this, especially if you have kids.
AND REMEMBER FOLKS! This is YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK! YOU are footing the bill for this undermining of our once great Nation through the teaching of a curriculum approved by YOUR LOCALLY ELECTED SCHOOL BOARD. A board to whom you have ENTRUSTED the impressionable minds of your sons & daughters!
Air sick bags are available under your seats! Mess on my floor you clean it, mess on someone else you’re responsible for the dry cleaning bill!
Impish was complaining of knotting and cramps in his wing roots after his long flight in (WHINING would be more accurate actually) so here’s a photo of me taken by Molly as I walk Impish’s back (I’m jig dancing actually)working those knots out.
I’m guessing their target market is the rare nerd &/or geek that actually has a girlfriend that’s not a gym sock!
Does anyone know why baby diapers are called Luvs and Huggies while old people’s diapers are called Depends?
Well, it’s because if a baby craps in his pants, you are still gonna Luv’em and Hug’em. But, if an old person craps in his pants, will he still be Luv’ed or Hugged?
Well, that Depends on if your ass is in the Will or not.
[Photo of the original SWAT team shown stacked for entry into a suspected Catnip Den]
New ID rules would threaten citizens’ rights
By Richard Sobel, Special to CNN
(CNN) — Sensible immigration reform will strengthen American society and economy. But it must also respect the rights of U.S. citizens and those aspiring to join them.
Buried in the comprehensive immigration reform legislation before the Senate are obscure provisions that impose on Americans expansive national identification systems, tied to electronic verification schemes. Under the guise of “reform,” these trample fundamental rights and freedoms.
Requirements in Senate Bill 744 for mandatory worker IDs and electronic verification remove the right of citizens to take employment and “give” it back as a privilege only when proper proof is presented and the government agrees. Such systems are inimical to a free society and are costly to the economy and treasury.
Any citizen wanting to take a job would face the regulation that his or her digitized high-resolution passport or driver’s license photo be collected and stored centrally in a Department of Homeland Security Citizenship and Immigration Services database.
The pictures in the national database would then need to be matched against the job applicant’s government-issued “enhanced” ID card, using a Homeland Security-mandated facial-recognition “photo tool.” Only when those systems worked perfectly could the new hire take the job.
Immigrant employees would probably have to get biometric (based on body measurements like fingerprint scans and digital images) worker ID cards. Social Security cards may soon become biometric as well. Any citizen or immigrant whose digital image in the Homeland Security databank did not match the one embedded in their government-issued ID would be without a job and benefits.
Yet, citizens have a constitutional right to take employment. Since the Butchers Union Co. decision in 1884, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that “the right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right … under the phrase ‘pursuit of happiness.’ ” This right is a large ingredient in the civil liberties of each citizen.
The digital ID requirements in S. 744 eliminate that fundamental right to take employment and transform it into a privilege. This constitutional guarantee could in effect be taken away by bureaucratic rules or deleted by a database mistake.
As philosopher John Locke, whose phrase “consent of the governed” animates the Declaration of Independence, once said, everybody “has a property in his own person.” Who is a citizen is today determined by his or her American personhood. Under S. 744, that would no longer be true.
Instead, the determination of whether someone has a right to take a job would be made by two computer files: one in a Department of Homeland Security database and the other on a government-issued ID card. Identity and IDs become “property of the U.S. government.”
Moreover, S. 744 undermines constitutional federalism by resurrecting ID provisions that most states have rejected. Not only does S. 744 mandate “E-Verify” as a national electronic verification system for employment for the 33 states that have not joined it (Illinois actually outlawed its use), the bill also revives the moribund “Real ID” requirement for sharing of driver’s license photos among the states and federal government, which 25 states opposed by law or resolution. Only 13 states joined as of last year.
In short, S. 744 gets around states’ repeated rejections of national identification systems by lumping E-Verify and Real ID into overly comprehensive national identification (rather than immigration) “reform.” S. 744’s provisions also mandate collection of the details about almost every American, an enumeration task the Constitution authorizes only to the census every 10 years, and then only under a 72-year guarantee of confidentiality.
E-Verify essentially equates all Americans with “illegal immigrants.” Instead of naturalization freeing legal immigrants from carrying mandatory “green cards,” universal E-Verify would impose IDs on American citizens. E-Verify effectively creates a “no-work” list for the unverifiable.
Uses of worker IDs will proliferate like Social Security numbers — once intended “not for identification purposes” — and driver’s licenses — once simply proving driving skill. Worker IDs could become “travel licenses” for “official purposes,” as defined by the secretary of Homeland Security, like entering government buildings, flying (still possible now without ID) or taking public transit. These undermine the rights to petition government and to travel. Even though the bill says it does not authorize a national ID, its provisions do.
Digital photos in the Homeland Security databank can be used to match anyone anywhere using facial recognition surveillance technology. Because the standards are cross-national and the U.S. exchanges information with other governments and global organizations, the digital photos will probably be shared with foreign and international intelligence and police agencies.
Moreover, the recent revelations of IRS and National Security Agency excesses raise the question of universal E-Verify as the foundation for a central surveillance system of storing and tracking job, tax, communication and biometric information on individuals. This shifts too much power to the government and away from citizens.
Worker ID systems will burden individuals and businesses with large expenses. Many Americans without driver’s licenses will lose work time traveling to vital records offices for birth or marriage certificates or to motor vehicle agencies for state IDs to become eligible to be E-Verified. The large costs some people pay will include the inability to work because they cannot get proper documentation..
As one immigration-policy expert was quoted saying in the Wall Street Journal, a biometric E-Verify system is “not only a gross violation of individual privacy, it’s an enormously high-cost policy that will have an incredibly low to negligible benefit.” Even sponsors of the bill have noted that biometric tracking systems are inordinately expensive and “have experienced problems in test runs.” If E-Verifying costs $150 per employee, only a third (37%) of Americans say in polls that they would support using the system.
The existing E-Verify is infamous for database errors that kept tens of thousands of citizens out of work and in limbo. Nationwide E-Verify could raise that number many-fold. A 1% error rate for a labor force of more than 150 million workers, with the vast majority being American citizens, leaves 1.5 million unemployed.
These ID provisions divert attention and resources from effective and comprehensive policy measures to stop illegal immigrants and reform immigration.
Simpler and less invasive alternatives to E-Verify, such as longstanding provisions for citizen attestation of their rights. And others can “answer questions about previous addresses or other details.” These can be implemented inexpensively on forms kept at the workplace.
Protecting the constitutional right to employment of a diversity of citizens helps everyone who wants to contribute to prosperity and to become American by maintaining citizenship as the bedrock of freedoms. Our citizenship must remain the gold standard, rather than a tarnished dream, for both current Americans and those seeking to enter here.
Our leaders have to hear that E-Verify, digital IDs and databanks, and biometric worker cards need to be dropped fast. Increased legal immigration, reasonable legalization, fair work standards enforcement and viable guest worker options can sustain citizenship and employment rights fairly and without exorbitant costs.
And we do not want biometric worker IDs or digital “Big Brother” verification schemes that trample on the basic rights of American citizens and those working to join us.
Nothing to Hide: The False Tradeoff between Privacy and Security
by Daniel J. Solove
George Washington University Law School May 1, 2011
download link lower right side for Chapter 1 in Pdf which every one should be able to read.
“If you’ve got nothing to hide,” many people say, “you shouldn’t worry about government surveillance.” Others argue that we must sacrifice privacy for security. But as Daniel J. Solove argues in this book, these arguments and many others are flawed. They are based on mistaken views about what it means to protect privacy and the costs and benefits of doing so.
In addition to attacking the “Nothing-to Hide Argument,” Solove exposes the fallacies of pro-security arguments that have often been used to justify government surveillance and data mining. These arguments – such as the “Luddite Argument,”the “War-Powers Argument,” the “All-or-Nothing Argument,” the “Suspicionless-Searches Argument,” the “Deference Argument,” and the “Pendulum Argument” – have skewed law and policy to favor security at the expense of privacy.
The debate between privacy and security has been framed incorrectly as a zero-sum game in which we are forced to choose between one value and the other. But protecting privacy isn’t fatal to security measures; it merely involves adequate oversight and regulation.
The primary focus of the book is on common pro-security arguments, but Solove also discusses concrete issues of law and technology, such as the Fourth Amendment Third Party Doctrine, the First Amendment, electronic surveillance statutes, the USA-Patriot Act, the NSA surveillance program, and government data mining.
Anyone interested in the entire paper (275+ pages) can contact me.
If you think you can hide in a crowd, think again. Keep clicking on the picture to magnify it (or click on the “+” sign at upper left). In the case of an iPad, just keep touching the + sign
“This picture was taken with a 70,000 x 30,000 pixel camera (2100 Megapixels.) These cameras are not sold to the public and are being installed in strategic locations. It can identify a face in a multitude of people. Place the cursor in the mass of people and double-click a couple times (or ‘finger-spread’ on a device.) Scary sharp.”
What A Drone Can See From 17,500 feet
Pay attention to the narrator when he says “and Argos stores everything”! What, me paranoid? You can’t be paranoid if you are worried about the factual truth!
Personally, I’d LOVE to organize a day where everyone ran around all day long outside in Guy Foss masks, wide brimmed hats and capes as a protest against domestic spying