tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-135980682024-03-13T14:22:55.459-05:00Red Ink: TexasRorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.comBlogger822125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-29898385888340343672014-11-05T16:27:00.002-06:002014-11-05T16:27:13.951-06:00Red Teaming against the USIt is common practice in military strategy development to assign a group to act as a "Red Team" to research weaknesses and develop strategies in order to exploit them against the "Blue Team" in order to try to identify ways in which a real enemy might try to exploit our weaknesses against us. I am about to lay out how a government like ISIS/Iraq/Syria or North Korea or Iran might be able to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_EMP" target="_blank">bring our country to it's knees</a>. This is nothing new to our government. <a href="http://empcommission.org/" target="_blank">We have known this weakness existed and how it might be exploited for some time</a>. I will show how it can be achieved using the technology that we already know these nations have access to, and how we have failed to address this problem. <br />
<br />
The Method:<br />
<br />
Setting off one or more simple fission devices in suborbital or low earth orbital altitudes in order to destroy all electrical and electronic systems over very wide swaths of the CONUS, bringing power, transportation, food, medical and fuel delivery systems to a grinding halt. Within days starvation will set in as perishable foods rot, warehouses of food will be broken into and scavenged and will not be replaced, and sewer and sanitation breakdowns will trigger plagues of Typhoid, Cholera, Bubonic plague, and other diseases. Within weeks the population will begin to fall precipitously and the bodies of the dead will add to the already overwhelmed sanitation resources. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_EMP#Weapon_yield" target="_blank">Ironically simple fission devices are actually much more efficient at creating EMP than three stage Fission-Fusion-Fission devices are.</a><br />
<br />
The Hardware:<br />
<br />
Both the US as well as the Soviet Union tested nuclear devices at high altitudes and accidentally discovered the effects of EMP are nothing to laugh at back in the early 60's. The US with project <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime" target="_blank">Starfish Prime</a>, which set telephone wires hundreds of miles away in the Hawaiian Islands on fire. and the Soviet's similar experiences in Kazakhstan on Oct. 22 1962, with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_K_Project" target="_blank">184 K3 (Joe 157), a 300kt device.</a> Since pure fission devices are much more efficient at producing prompt Gamma radiation which is the trigger for the E1 EMP pulse, large and complex three stage hydrogen bombs are not required. A device in the range of 10kt or less is more than adequate to produce a very large EMP pulse. Many people believe that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taepodong-1" target="_blank">Taepodong-1 type IRBM's</a> that North Korea have developed do not have enough payload to carry a weapon of any real size and therefore are not nuclear capable. This is a grave error.<br />
<br />
Many people feel that the first nuclear device that North Korea will field will be a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design#Implosion-type_weapon" target="_blank">"Trinity" type spherical implosion device</a>, simply because that was the evolutionary path the western nations and the Soviets and Chinese followed. There is no reason to believe that North Korea's nuclear evolutionary path will be similar. After all, they already have access to the accumulated knowledge of those who have gone before. Further, they have access to Russian and Chinese Nuclear weapons designers as well. The United States developed a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48" target="_blank">low yeild pure fission device that was small enough to be fired from a 155mm (and later a 130mm</a>) artillery with yeilds of approximately 100 tons, Larger W-54 devices (approximately 10-1/2" O.D.) had variable yeilds up to 1kt and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W45" target="_blank">W-45 warheads</a> which were about an inch larger in diamer and weighed about 150 lbs had yeilds up to 15kt. These devices are very inefficient as nuclear weapon designs go, and squander the very valuble plutonium used in the device, which is why they were retired, but they can fit in very small spaces and they are very simple devices. They do not require klystron type triggers or very timing critical spherical shaped implosion charges. Merely an ellipsoid of plutonium that is just subcritical, and two shaped charges on either end of the "egg" that when triggered at the same time drive the ellipsoid towards a spherical shape which then triggers a chain reaction. Use of tampers made from beryllium, tungsten, thorium, depleted uranium or HEU can easily increase yeild without increasing size to a huge degree. The US's most advanced warhead, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W88" target="_blank">W-88 MIRV used in the Trident D-5</a>, uses precisely this type of device as it's primary because of space constraints within the MIRV nosecone. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test" target="_blank"> North Korea's first test device in 2006</a> was intended to be a 4kt yeild device, precisely the yeild range that is thought to be likely to be used in such an attack. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_Korean_nuclear_test#Yield_estimates_and_authenticity" target="_blank">Seismic data indicates a very low yeild, but this is likely to be in error</a>. North Korea likely used a trick developed by the US in the early 60's in Mississippi. <a href="http://mshistorynow.mdah.state.ms.us/articles/293/nuclear-blasts-in-mississippi" target="_blank">Setting off a low yeild device in a large cavern with a lot of airspace around the device causes the sesmic signal to be "muffled" and look like a much smaller device than it actually was by a factor of 100</a>. <br />
<br />
Therefore, the belief that North Korea's first device will be a crude device is frankly a bit arrogant on many advisor's part. There is absolutely no reason why North Korea could not leapfrog several evolutionary design steps ahead. After all, they already KNOW that such a device is possible, which our designers back then did not, and that is more than half the battle.<br />
<br />
The Taepodong-1, if the third stage were to be fitted would be able to loft an estimated 50 kg (110 lbs) approximately 6000km (3728 miles) which is in the weight range of a W-45 warhead equivalent. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taepodong-2" target="_blank">The Taepodong-2</a>, if they work the bugs out, could potentially loft a 1100lb payload 5600 miles which is more than enough to put such a device over the CONUS from mainland NK. But there is no reason to believe that NK would necessarily launch from the mainland. The missile could potentially be launched from a disguised freighter in the open ocean far outside the territorial waters of the US and still be able to put a nuclear device well above the visible horizon covering most of the eastern seaboard approximately over Minnesota, and another over Montana or Wyoming impacting the western coast, and potentially a third over approximately Kansas to impact the Gulf Coast. <br />
<br />
This is how the opening salvo of WWIII is likely to be launched.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-65576671764178424522014-11-05T14:04:00.000-06:002014-11-05T14:04:06.377-06:00A new day dawns...I have been away from this blog for quite some time. I admit to have becoming burned out and despondent and I was beginning to think this country was doomed to go the way of the Roman Empire, and it may yet be. But the results of yesterday's election has given me new hope. In the coming days I will be reactivating the blog and perhaps sprucing the place up with something other than black, which I had chosen in mourning for our republic. Stay Tuned.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-54717481045279474312012-01-20T19:56:00.004-06:002012-01-20T20:46:10.274-06:00The swath of death widens, but the story just won't die.Back in July 2008, <a href="http://redinktexas.blogspot.com/2008/07/larry-sinclair-obamas-bad-penny.html">I wrote a post </a>about Larry Sinclair, Donald Young, Larry Bland, <a href="http://chgocutie.blogspot.com/2007/12/nathaniel-nate-spencer-tucc-sanctuary.html">Nathaniel Spencer</a> and their connection to Barack Obama. Since then, the story has both refused to die, as well as expanded. <a href="http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/mom-of-murdered-obama-gay-lover-speaks-up/">Wayne Madsen posted a story about Donald Young's mother's contention that Obama's organization murdered him. </a>Now <a href="http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/the-ulsterman-report-sex-and-murder-in-the-land-of-obama/">an eyewitness account of a gay sex encounter between Donald Young and Barack Obama has come to light</a>, and conveniently, <a href="http://dellsbottomline.blogspot.com/2011/10/jane-jamison-1955-2011.html">the woman who saw it has died under questionable circumstances.</a> Now, the way I see it, there are at least two, possibly as many as four, people dead to try to bury this story, but the story just won't die. You know what they say: It isn't the original crime that gets you, it is the cover up, but in this case, it just might be both.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-21018840206643115912011-11-02T11:17:00.000-05:002011-11-02T11:18:47.052-05:00How we will trigger WWIII by refusing to fire a shotThe Obama admin is making a huge mistake in refusing to strike Iran's nuclear facilities in a limited conventional fashion. By refusing to do so ourselves with our conventional bunker busting weapons capabilities, we are forcing Israel to do so. And unfortunately Israel does not have the long range conventional capability to do so without sending it's pilots on a one-way suicide mission. Which forces Israel to contemplate Nuclear Weapons in order to get the job done. The political fallout (not to mention the nuclear fallout) that will result from an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran will probably result in an all-out war on Israel from all sides, one in which Israel's survival may well be in question. (At least not without the use of more nuclear arms on the combatants.) Do we really want to be the cause of WWIII?Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-64279705994106224002011-10-31T11:51:00.000-05:002011-10-31T11:53:04.046-05:00About those Sex Harassment claims against Herman Cain...Before everyone jumps all over him for being a perv, I would ask that you stop and think about the situation as a whole first. Sex harassment claims are very difficult to defend against. You usually have no documentation, and few if any unbiased witnesses, and you never know what kind of jury you'll draw either, so you are going into court with the deck stacked against you. Secondly, in these situations, the corporation is named in the lawsuit and therefore the corporations ins. co is in the driver's seat on any settlements. The accused might have to sign off on any settlement, but if you refuse, the ins. co will leave you holding the bag for whatever the jury might decide. So the pressure on the accused to sign on the dotted line is immense. Many women (and lawyers) have figured out that filing a bogus sex harassment claim is tantamount to winning the lottery, there is very little incentive not to. At worst, you are given just enough money to pay the plaintiff's lawyer, at best you retire a rich person. Who cares if nobody would ever hire you again? You're rich! THIS is a perfect example of why Loser Pays must be instituted nation wide, if you are going to make this kind of claim, you need to have some skin in the game.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-45214062100475085372011-05-16T09:10:00.004-05:002011-05-16T11:28:07.592-05:00Measuring the length of the Thread of the Fates.In Ancient Greek Lore, Three Women who all shared a single eye, measured the length of each person's life by a thread which they cut when the life was to come to an end. In genetics, this is believed to be analogous to the lengths of a repeating "end of file" or EOF marker in computer parlance, at the end of your DNA called telomeres. The number of repeats dictates the length of our lives based on the fact that when cells replicate, the number of telomeres is reduced by one. So in theory, when the number of "EOF" markers reaches zero, then the replication fails resulting in DNA damage which either results in cell death (apoptosis) outright, or cancer/mutation which may or may not result in apoptosis, but will certainly lead to health effects on the body as a whole.<br /><br /> <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-163400-test-that-tells-you-how-long-youll-live-2284639.html">A company in the UK has developed a genetic test</a> in which they compare the number of telomeres still in your DNA to your chronological age and try to extrapolate how long (approximately) you have to live based on this ratio. Now, this is certainly not proven to be accurate, but there is strong evidence that telomeres are a good guide to the longevity of an organism. Cancer cells and Stem cells replicate without reducing the telomere count and are by all accounts appear to be "immortal" for all practical purposes. <br /><br />The company plans to make this test available to the public in the UK for the equivalent of about $700USD (at current exchange rates). Which begs the question: Is this a good idea? The test of course almost certainly has a fairly wide margin of error, and does not take into account a number of things that may shorten your life such as accident or poor diet/exercise. So someone could get information that they will live a relatively short life and decide there is no point in saving for retirement and blow all their money, or the reverse is true, someone who thinks they will live a long time saves every penny they have to live on when they get old, only to die in a car wreck five years later. What about the potential for depression/suicide? or someone embarking on risky behaviors in the belief they will die soon?Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-86739338166795322862011-04-27T13:26:00.003-05:002011-04-27T13:33:32.482-05:00Adventures in Headline Writing Part 98704Yet another headline that does not match the text of <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/health/7537870.html">the article</a>. I will however note that this is an AP article and the headline MAY be theirs.... And this is a screenshot just in case the article falls down the memory hole as errors are wont to do at 801 Texas Ave....<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OoN3wrA1sLo/TbhhIvmzb3I/AAAAAAAAASU/pInAA_Vsphs/s1600/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt3.bmp"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 273px; height: 320px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OoN3wrA1sLo/TbhhIvmzb3I/AAAAAAAAASU/pInAA_Vsphs/s320/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt3.bmp" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5600332939481280370" /></a>Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-30154814276078728252011-04-27T11:08:00.004-05:002011-04-27T11:14:03.044-05:00Adventures in headline writing part 98703Today on the Chronicle website we find the following (note the red rectangle):<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QtQYn-zFyWo/TbhAHCVI83I/AAAAAAAAASE/8FaoBnJn6rY/s1600/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt1.bmp"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 184px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QtQYn-zFyWo/TbhAHCVI83I/AAAAAAAAASE/8FaoBnJn6rY/s320/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt1.bmp" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5600296626264011634" /></a><br /><br />But the story that it links to says something 180 degrees opposite....<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tvJoM7VIRAU/TbhAavkoAdI/AAAAAAAAASM/ph1CbnvOGKc/s1600/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt2.bmp"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 173px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tvJoM7VIRAU/TbhAavkoAdI/AAAAAAAAASM/ph1CbnvOGKc/s320/adventures%2Bin%2Bheadline%2Bwriting%2Bpt2.bmp" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5600296964826071506" /></a><br /><br />(click on images to enlarge)Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-55366311778079269432011-04-15T09:44:00.014-05:002011-05-16T08:29:41.169-05:00Air France Flight 447: A Prediction/Postmortem (updated)A couple weeks ago, searchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (<a href="http://www.whoi.edu/">WHOI</a>)finally discovered the debris field from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447">Air France Flight 447</a> which went down in severe thunderstorms in the South Atlantic on a flight between Rio and Paris in 2009. The aircraft was an Airbus A330. They've found the tail section mostly intact and the possibility that the flight data recorders may be recovered has increased significantly, although they are below their rated crush depth. They may or may not be readable at this point. I'm going to presume for a moment that they are readable and I am going to predict what I think the data will show.<br /><br /> But first some background information.<br /><br /> The Airbus 3XX series has had a rather bumpy safety history. There have been two documented instances where the rudder has broken clean off the aircraft due to excessive loading, either from turbulence or from excessive rudder engagement at high speeds or a combination of the two. All of the A3XX series share a similar rudder design. When the problem was finally identified, instead of strengthening the rudder or it's attachment point, EADS chose to install a "software fix". They inserted a rule into the flight control software (remember all but the A310 are "fly-by-wire aircraft" meaning that the computer is in ultimate control of the aircraft, not the pilot. Remember this because it will play an important role in my prediction.) that limits the amount of rudder control surface movement the pilot is allowed to command depending on the speed of the aircraft.<br /><br />All of the A3XX series (except the 310)utilize a flight control computer to control the aircraft because they are designed to be aerodynamically unstable and cannot be controlled by a human. This allows the control surfaces to be much smaller limiting drag and the associated fuel consumption. A very small control surface change results in a very large change in the aircraft's attitude. The A310 is aerodynamically stable, but just barely. Since the control surfaces need not be large to control the aircraft, they are structurally weaker (and lighter) than a similarly sized aerodynamically stable aircraft's are. But this also means that when the control surfaces are buffeted by extreme turbulence, they may fail regardless of the control surface movement or speed of the aircraft at force levels lower than those of other aircraft.<br /><br />The design philosophy of the Fly-By-Wire system is also different from that of Boeing designs. EADS programmed the aircraft controls to only perform the maneuvers that the computer, taking all of the design loads of the structures involved into account, decides the aircraft can do safely. But when equipment is designed, the design load is usually several times smaller than the calculated load at failure. This difference is called safety margin which is often 4 or more times the design load. Further, structural materials are rated for their minimum strength, which they ALWAYS exceed in real life, so there are levels of safety piled upon more levels of safety so the maneuver could be much more aggressive than the system would allow and still be completed safely. But the Airbus system will not perform it regardless of the actual safety margin available, taking that decision away from the pilot. The Boeing system is predicated on the notion that the Pilot, and not the aircraft, knows what is best for the situation at hand. The system will warn the pilot when he is departing from the safe operating envelope of the airframe but will continue to allow the maneuver up to the absolute bare minimum safety margin on the assumption that if the pilot is commanding such a radical maneuver the aircraft must be in imminent danger of collision/crash and the pilot is given every bit of control the airframe can muster in order to save the aircraft. As you can see, this is a significant difference in design philosophy. The pilot is deemed to need to be saved from himself at all times. Further, since the system assumes that the computer will actually be in control of the aircraft at all times, there is no feedback mechanism in the Airbus's flight controls. The pilot has a joystick which has no force-feedback so he cannot "feel" when he is approaching the flight rule design limits. The Boeing system makes the controls increasingly stiff as the aircraft is deemed to be departing the safe envelope and shakes them when the aircraft is approaching the "hard limits" or when the aircraft begins to stall as well as activating the stall warning horn. This philosophy of saving the pilot from himself breeds complacency by the pilots who do not practice emergency procedures as often because they believe that the computer will save them.<br /><br />The flight control computer is supplied information about the air temp, humidity, density, airspeed, angle of attack, and altitude by three independent ADIRU's or Air Data Inertial Reference Units, one on each side of the aircraft as well as one in the tail. These are connected to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitot_tube">Pitot Tubes</a> which are used to calculate airspeed by comparing the outside barometric pressure to that of a tube bent at a right angle and aimed towards the front of the aircraft. The pressure difference is directly related to the velocity of the air passing around the pitot tube because it creates an area of high pressure in the the tube opening. One problem is that if due to atmospheric conditions, ice forms in either the static port or the pitot tube itself, then that pressure differential can be thrown off. to combat this, the pitot tubes are electrically heated. If the pitot tube were to ice up, the ADIRU would receive bad or no data about airspeed, and we all know about the concept of "garbage in garbage out". If the flight data computer gets bad data then the decisions it makes are just as bad. By supplying three independent systems it was believed that this limitation would be mitigated by redundancy, but since all three are designed identically, if conditions were such that one would fail, all three would likely fail. This is false redundancy and is the bane of control system designers everywhere. It protects against damage, but not against a common failure mode.<br /><br />There were two manufacturers (now three) of Pitot tubes approved for use on the Airbus A330. One is built by a European company called Thales, the other by BF Goodrich in the US (they sold the tire side of the business to Michelin in 1988 but they still use the same name). Prior to the AF447 crash it was discovered that the revision A of the Thales unit would tend to ice up under the conditions similar to AF447's flight. An airworthiness directive was issued by EADS to all carriers to swap half of the model A units with model B units to prevent icing in the belief that the revision B would solve the issue. Air France, being a government owned carrier and immune to liability, chose to "slow roll" the changes. Further testing in the wake of AF447 revealed that the revision B units would also ice up just as easily. Therefore the only system that was actually reliable was BF Goodrich's. But Air France, being the arrogant European company that they are, chose to use only the Thales units, instead of switching to Goodrich ones, until it was determined that both revisions would fail. I do not know what further remedial changes have been made since that determination was made. I suspect either the Goodrich or the other manufacturer's units (I do not know who that is.) were swapped for at least half the units on each airframe.<br /><br />One final bit of information you need to understand. At the altitude that the aircraft was flying at the time (40,000 ft., which is the maximum ceiling of the aircraft.) the margin between overspeed (in which the airflow over the wings becomes supersonic and the center of pressure (lift) moves rearward of the center of gravity of the airframe due to the resultant shock wave causing an extremely abrupt nose down and roll condition, known as "Mach tuck".) and stall (where the airflow over the wings is inadequate to create enough lift to keep the aircraft in the air, again causing an abrupt nose down condition), is only about 70 knots. This is the so called "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_corner_%28aviation%29">Coffin Corner</a>" of the flight envelope. The aircraft was flying through a line of thunderstorms that reached above 50,000 ft. and wind gusts/shear that likely exceeded 150 knots in multiple directions. The aircraft was able to walk that fine line of airspeed because of it's automated flight controls, at least until the control systems began getting bad ADIRU data.<br /><br /> The final telemetry from the aircraft indicated multiple ADIRU data failures and that the flight control computer had switched from it's normal automated control flight rules to manual override flight rules, which means the computer had given up trying to understand what was happening and dropped the problem in the pilot's lap, but that also removed the "software fix" concerning the rudder too.<br /><br />Now for the prediction:<br /><br /> The aircraft, flying at the speed and altitude it was at at the time had a very narrow margin of error, was being buffeted by extremely strong winds from variable directions and could not maintain stable flight speed or attitude as a result. Because of the icing conditions, either the plane went into a stall or an overspeed condition, most likely an overspeed. The plane abruptly dived and rolled, and either the abrupt roll itself, or the excessive rudder movement by the pilot fighting to save the aircraft, or perhaps simply from extreme turbulence by itself, caused the rudder to shear off the airframe. (the rudder was found virtually intact, sheared off at it's base, floating only days after the crash). The flight should have been cancelled due to bad weather, but the aircrew chose to fly (or were required to fly, overruling their objections, by the carrier) despite knowing that the weather in flight would be very bad. The carrier should have been more proactive about keeping up with airworthiness directives but they were not. Airbus/EADS should have done more testing on the Thales units prior to specifying them instead of taking Thales' word that they were ok. Thales of course should have also tested their design better. EADS/Airbus should also recognized that their software fix for the rudder was at best a band-aid approach and that the rudder could experience excessive side loading from external factors, and that the "fix" only worked when the computer was getting good ADIRU data.<br /><br />One final prediction: the french Government and EADS/Airbus will bury these findings and never admit that they were complicit in foisting off a fundamentally flawed airplane design on the world.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Update:</span> Since the publish date of this, the Flight Data Recorders have both been recovered and it has been determined that they are readable despite being in the water below their design crush depth for two years. I will be honest and say that I was actually mildly surprised that the French Gov. admitted that the data was readable. I expected them to use the fact that they were below their crush depth for two years as an excuse to find no data. Now the question is whether they will admit to the flaws in the aircraft design or not. You might recall that they refused to admit to the design flaws of the Concorde fuel tanks and instead blamed Continental for the crash and fire instead of admitting that there was a design retrofit to address this problem that they refused to implement, AND that the airport operations at Charles De Gaul (Airbus's corporate headquarters) failed to properly sweep the runway to remove any potential FOD debris as is required for that aircraft prior to take off. They also refused to admit that the Airbus rudder design is too weak for the potential loading it could experience in flight. Will Realpolitik bury this crash investigation? We can only wait and see.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-38369375669440423302011-03-24T09:21:00.002-05:002011-03-24T09:51:44.299-05:00The Decriminalization FallacyThere has been a push from the libertarians and the left to decriminalize some or all drug use. The arguments made are that it puts non-violent people in prison for long sentences who's only crime was getting high (or facilitating others getting high.). But in reality the REAL reason why these people are pushing for decriminalization is that THEY want to be able to get high without going to prison. Almost to a man, those who argue for decriminalization are closeted drug users themselves. But be that as it may, let us look at WHY the drugs are illegal to begin with.<br /><br /> Illegal drugs are illegal because they are far more addictive than "legal" drugs such as alcohol or tobacco. That is not to say that they are all equally addictive, some are far more addictive than others obviously. Marijuana is much less addictive than say "crack" cocaine, but it is still more addictive than Vodka. Drugs are also very dangerous for young kids and young adults whose brains are still developing, as they can severely disrupt normal brain development, leading to an increase in paranoia and schizophrenia, as well as ADD and impulsive risk seeking behaviors.<br /><br /> But even if one were to make the libertarian argument that drug use harms only the drug user so it should be up to the individual to make that choice, that is again false. Drug users will drive under the influence and kill people and damage property. they will go to work under the influence and make stupid mistakes that either cost their employers a lot of money or get themselves or their co-workers killed. They will have drug addled unprotected sex and bring unwanted children into the world with no means of supporting them. These children will be neglected and abused mentally, physically, and sexually. they will also pass STD's along to their partners or contract them themselves, further draining the welfare state. They will be unemployable so they will be drains on the welfare systems as will their offspring and sexual partners. So arguing they will only be hurting themselves is a lie.<br /><br />Others make the argument that legalization and regulation to keep it out of the hands of juveniles the way alcohol is sold will increase tax revenue as well as dismantle the drug cartels and their reign of terror on Mexico and Central America. this sounds good in theory but in practice this will not be the case. Some will not want to pay the tax, others will want the drugs but will be unable to buy them because they are too young, or the quack doctor writing the script won't write it for as much as they want, so the black market won't go away. And the attempts to control the black market won't either because the government won't want the competition undermining their newfound tax base. So the drug war won't go away, if anything it will get bloodier because of the added profit pressures.<br /><br />So we are left with only one justification for legalization that makes any real sense, those calling for it just want to get stoned but don't want to risk going to prison. THAT is the only motivation that makes any kind of logic at all.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-75193228846860067172011-03-17T09:21:00.006-05:002011-03-17T10:11:02.522-05:00The Looming Constitutional CrisisIn 1935, FDR was handed a defeat by the Supreme Court when it struck down a large portion of his New Deal. FDR's response in 1937 was an attempt to water down the Supreme Court by packing the court with his cronies. He was thankfully defeated in his attempt. This was seen then (and still) as a potential constitutional crisis.<br /><br /> Today we are presented with a similar looming Constitutional Crisis involving the Executive and the Judiciary. The Obama Administration has massively overreached both in it's attempt (so far successfully) to halt all oil and gas production from the Gulf of Mexico through a "permitorium" of slow-rolling permit applications and not approving any of them, and in it's attempt to take over 1/6th of the economy through Obamacare. In both instances, Federal courts have found the Executive branch in violation of the constitution and in both cases they were found to be in contempt of court by refusing to abide by the court's rulings. In the case of Judge Feldman's ruling concerning the "permitorium", his order was stayed by the Fifth Circuit only two days before the deadline for the Interior Dept. to act. and Ken Salazar had been quoted as saying that if the Order was not stayed, he would simply deny all of the permit applications outright. In the case of Judge Vinson's ruling concerning Obamacare, the Justice Dept filed a "request for clarification" which was really a request for a stay. Judge Vinson ordered the Justice Dept. to stop slow rolling the appeal to buy time for Obamacare implementation and to file an appeal, either to the Federal Appellate Courts or preferably directly with the Supreme Court within 7 days. As of this writing I am unaware of such an appeal being filed. <a href="http://patterico.com/2011/03/16/stay-granted-in-drilling-moratorium-case/">It is the opinion of some observers</a> that the Stay by the Fifth Circuit in the Judge Feldman Ruling <a href="http://patterico.com/2011/03/16/the-obama-administration%e2%80%99s-hypocrisy-on-enforcement-of-judicial-decisions/">was an attempt by the court to save face by preventing the Administration from openly defying the court.</a> <br /><br />It is clear to me and many others that the Obama Administration feels it does not have to abide by the Court's rulings. This sets up a looming constitutional crisis. If Obama does finally force the Judiciary's hand and openly defies the courts, who will make him? Who will arrest him? The US Marshall's Service? The FBI? The Secret Service? The US Military? All of them answer to Obama. The courts do not have a means of enforcing their own rulings, they must rely on the Executive Branch.<br /><br />If the Administration feels it is above the law, and can do anything it likes, what is the liklihood that it will abide by a lawful election in which the administration is removed from power. Will it go quietly?<br /><br />This will not end well. Mark my words.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-24741813316239408432011-03-05T14:07:00.003-06:002011-03-05T14:14:03.697-06:00In search of the Fourth Amendment.Much has been written and said about the TSA and it's total disregard for the fourth amendment. <a href="http://www.lonestarreport.org/Blog/tabid/65/EntryId/1022/Simpson-files-anti-body-scanner-bill.aspx">One state rep is doing something about it.</a> David Simpson (R- Longview) has filed HB 1938 which makes it illegal to operate a whole body scanner in the state of Texas. a wgole host of other reps have signed on as co-sponsors, including: Reps. Jose Aliseda (R-Beeville), Leo Berman (R-Tyler), Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont), Allen Fletcher (R-Tomball), Dan Flynn (R-Vann), John V. Garza (R-San Antonio), Larry Gonzales (R-Round Rock), Ryan Guillen (D-Rio Grande City), Charlie Howard (R-Sugar Land), Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola), Jason Isaac (R-Dripping Springs), Jim Landtroop (R-Big Spring), Jodie Laubenberg (R-Rockwall), Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), Debbie Riddle (R-Houston), Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston), and James White (R-Hillister). In addition, Congressman John Carter also supports the measure. <br /><br />And as proof that politics spawns strange bedfellows, the Travis County GOP, the Travis County Libertarian party and the ACLU of Texas are all three supporting the measure as well.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-45739082431378551702011-02-11T14:46:00.002-06:002011-02-11T14:56:52.599-06:00Thoughts on EgyptLet us be clear from the outset, Mubarak was a ruthless dictator. No question about it. But Egypt is not like the US either. They have very real internal security issues to deal with. That is a not insignificant fraction of the population which is in favor of a unified Arab Middle East lead by the Wahabbist/Shiite arm of Islam. Egypt made peace with Israel many years ago after having it's arse handed to it many many times by the Jews. Under that situation Democracy becomes very dangerous. It is said that Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, and true democracy is the fastest road to anarchy yet known to man. Our own founding fathers had a very justified fear of true democracy, which is why we do not have a democracy in this country, we have a constitutional representative republic where there are mechanisms in place to blunt the claws of true democracy. Mubarak's dictatorship served a similar function, preventing the dangerous radicals from gaining a toehold in Egypt's government. Those mechanisms just went out the window. Will Egypt as a country survive? Will the peace between Israel and Egypt? I do not know but I fear for the worst.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-59281314837018484022011-02-10T19:13:00.003-06:002011-02-10T20:17:18.737-06:00Is Apple a victim of hacking?This afternoon at 1:39 PM, New York time, Apple stock took a massive nosedive in the course of 4 minutes. <a href="http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/10/snapshot-of-an-apple-flash-crash/">Losing $10 Billion in value before the stock began to recover</a>. This selling pattern is extremely odd. No clear reason has been found to explain it, and no "circuit breaker" kicked in to arrest it. <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/nasdaq-hacked-2011-2">It has been discovered that a group of hackers had penetrated NASDAQ computer systems for some months</a>. But it was believed that no access to the trading computers had been made. I wonder if the two aren't related.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-43995392064958381262011-02-10T13:12:00.002-06:002011-02-10T13:15:23.460-06:00WARNING! Product recall!Federal Ammunition is recalling a number of lots of .45 ACP ammunition due to a manufacturing error that put an excessive powder charge in the case. Use of this ammunition could result in violent high speed random disassembly of your firearm (and you!). You can read more about the recall<a href="http://www.federalpremium.com/pdf/45_Auto_warning.pdf"> here</a>.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-15092633716316741292011-02-08T11:13:00.003-06:002011-02-08T11:22:36.122-06:00Welcome to the land of Sharia, and the home of the depraved.School officials in Mansfield, near DFW, applied for and received a federal grant to teach Arabic language and culture to high school students. <a href="http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/02/07/mandatory-arabic-classes-coming-to-mansfield/">But this is not an optional elective, this is going to be MANDATORY</a>. The reason? The Department of Education has declared Arabic the "<a href="http://www.dippindots.com/">Language of the Future</a>". Funny thing is, nobody ASKED the parents if they thought this was a good idea or appropriate, so now they are in a bit of a bind, it would seem they've already accepted and spent a large portion of the federal money but the parents are about to march on the schools with pitchforks and torches looking for someone to lynch. What to do, what to do....<br /><br />Given the demographic makeup of the state, wouldn't it have been smarter to teach say maybe Spanish? But these are school administrators, not exactly the sharpest tools in the drawer now are they?Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-37561939838923864532011-02-03T14:59:00.003-06:002011-02-03T15:02:29.393-06:00Pork the one you love....<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://m.mississippilink.com/mobile/news/article_ad8c2112-27ca-11e0-a2ab-001cc4c002e0.html"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 639px; height: 434px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CqfX2aO_9nY/SwGUqtXG_JI/AAAAAAAAN7A/f8RT1BWyBQw/s1600/pork_jason.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><h1>Greenwood man caught having sex with hogs</h1> <p class="byline">By Monica Land | Posted: Monday, January 24, 2011 9:15 am </p> <div class="photo"><img alt="" src="http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/mississippilink.com/content/tncms/assets/editorial/9/6b/5ab/96b5ab2a-27ca-11e0-a898-001cc4c002e0-revisions/4d3d93e4ecac9.preview-300.jpg" /></div> <div id="mobile-story-ad"> </div> <div id="blox-story-text"> <p><strong><em>Gave hogs vaginal infection</em></strong></p> <p><strong>GREENWOOD</strong> - Authorities said a man who was caught having sex with show hogs will have his case presented to the Leflore County Grand Jury next month. Andrew Lee Nash, 52, was arrested on Dec. 3, 2010 after police set up surveillance cameras in the owner's stalls near U.S. Highway 82 and the Yazoo River.</p> <p>Greenwood Police Chief Henry Purnell said the hogs were examined by a local veterinarian, during a routine examination, and the owner was told that four of the hogs had a vaginal infection.</p> <p>"The owner of the animals knew someone was messing with his animals," said Chief Investigator Huntley Nevels. "And the veterinarian confirmed the sexual assault. So, the owner contacted police and the officers staked it out and caught him out there."</p> <p>Nash, who lives in the 700 block of Mississippi Avenue, was arrested at the scene and charged with 12 counts of unnatural intercourse.</p> <p>Nash's bond was initially set at $600,000, but later reduced to $60,000.</p> <p>Nash remains in custody at the Leflore County jail.</p> <p>Greenwood authorities said Nash's case is scheduled to be presented before the Leflore County Grand Jury next month. If Nash is indicted and found guilty, he faces up to 120 years in jail.</p><p>H/T Michael Berry<br /></p> </div>Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-16066144286915044482011-02-02T09:36:00.005-06:002011-02-02T10:03:23.831-06:00The City of Houston is mathematically challengedIt must be, because since December the <a href="http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/politics/110201-green-budget-shortfall-increased-by-23m">Comptroller's office has found $23 million more dollars that the city doesn't have</a>. But yet, for some reason <a href="http://www.bloghouston.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=7023">the City still has no problem giving back $3 million if sales tax revenue over 30 years to help build a soccer stadium</a>. <a href="http://www.houstontx.gov/municipalart/">Or spending 1.75% of the budget on "art"</a> that is rarely actually delivered on time, if at all and when it is, it is often ugly as sin, (<a href="http://www.kvue.com/news/state/City-of-Houston-spends-360000-on-sculpture-despite-budget-problems-109215399.html">despite the fact that nobody yet knows what that budget is going to look like, they have already allotted the money for this year.</a>), or <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7344842.html">$30,000 to erect a white wall to let grafitti "artists" to paint to their heart's content....</a><br /><br />Is it me or does the city seem to have a problem with spending priorities?Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-20630434106641104652011-01-28T10:20:00.002-06:002011-01-28T10:27:09.475-06:00Funny how I didn't read this in OUR newspaper..It would appear that our constant complaints that our unsecured border was a avenue for jihadists to enter our country for nefarious purposes has been spot-on for quite some time. Said Jaziri, a hard line Wahabbist Imam from Tunisia who has been banned from both France and Canada for his calls for the death of Danish Cartoonists and other terroristic threats and jihadist activities and lying on immigration paperwork about his prison record in France, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351385/Controversial-Muslim-cleric-caught-smuggled-U-S-Mexico-border.html">was found hiding in the trunk of a Mexican BMW trying to cross the border in California.</a> What is ironic, is that he is not charged with a crime, he is being detained as a material witness against the driver of the vehicle which is charged with immigrant smuggling....Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-20185058765195610742011-01-27T11:44:00.001-06:002011-01-27T11:45:21.730-06:00He's "laser focused" on jobs...<a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/white-house-to-push-gun-control.html">...but first he has to take guns away from those crazy teabaggers</a>!Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-6784295018591506752011-01-20T13:45:00.004-06:002011-01-20T14:26:38.684-06:00Chose your weapons....A friend of mine who has never owned a gun in his life, and has only shot one once approached me the other day about helping him decide on a weapons purchase. I'm going to take him and his wife shooting with a friend of mine and hopefully between the two of us they'll be able to shoot enough different kinds of weapons that they'll have a better feel for what they want and what to look for. The following is a slightly edit version of what I wrote to him yesterday in preparation for our trip to the range. I thought it might be of use to others as well:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Food for thought on selecting a weapon.</span><br /><br />For a household protection weapon, I would suggest something like the Mossberg Maverick Shotgun as the ideal weapon type. It will hold 6 shells and it is mechanically simple and reliable. Shotguns will deliver devastating damage at short ranges and do not tend to "over penetrate" walls. <a href="http://www.theboxotruth.com/" target="_blank">This site</a> shows the relative penetration distances for various weapons. A word about the proper shotgun shell to use for home defense: <u><i><b><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">DON'T use bird shot for self-defense</span>.</b></i></u> Cheney used bird shot and the guy walked back to the truck. Use 00 buckshot, nothing less. The only real downside is you only have 6 shells to work with but that is a common problem with shotguns. A wise man once said that the purpose of a handgun is to allow you to fight your way to a long gun. The reasoning being that a long gun, be it a rifle or a shotgun, has an order of magnitude more muzzle energy than the biggest handguns available. The damage capability is not even in the same league as a handgun. The survival rate from being shot with a handgun in the center of mass is generally about 60%, but being shot with a long gun is almost always fatal (90%+) if the shot is even remotely close to the center of mass.<br /><br />Now if you want something more portable and concealable you have a selection of semi-autos and a revolver to choose from. I <i>personally</i> would steer you away from "modern" Smith and Wesson guns. They have <a href="http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_173_29/ai_n7578382/">had problems</a> in the past with their<a href="http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?31603-S-amp-W-Internal-Lock-Failure"> integrated gun locks</a> (all manufacturers have had some issue or another, but<a href="http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-210874.html"> S&W seems to have had the lion's share of problems</a>.) causing the gun's action to lock up at inappropriate times (like when the hammer is back and the safety is off and the gun loaded!). MAYBE they have resolved those issues, maybe they haven't, but for a self-defense weapon, you want something that is going to go bang every time you pull the trigger (and not go bang when you haven't!). S&W used to be a premier brand, but ever since the sale back in the 80's (thank you very much Bill Clinton and the threat of product liability lawsuits against gunmakers that put them in the position of having to sell!) they have slipped IMHO. On the flip side, Taurus used to be a junk gun, but their quality has come way up in the last 15 years or so as evidenced in the prices being higher than S&W's. The Taurus Judge for instance is a nice revolver that can shoot both a .45 Long Colt or a .410 shotgun shell. Nowhere near as good as a 12 gauge with 00 buckshot but not THAT bad either. (I have to wonder how it gets around the ban/tax on "short barrelled shotguns" though, probably because it can shoot .45 LC as well.) but it has a decent kick too. In revolvers, light weight means more recoil (not true of semi-autos which use springs to eat up recoil.) so for a revolver a heavy gun is easier to shoot, but harder to carry and/or conceal. The mass of the weapon eats up the recoil through inertia. Choosing a gun is an exercise in trade offs. weight vs shootability vs concealability vs simplicity vs complexity. Everybody ends up with a slightly different answer. What works for me might not work for you, which is one reason why there are thousands of different gun designs available. And of course there is the fact that different guns are designed for different jobs, there is no cookie cutter, one size fits all gun for everyone.<br /><br />IF you wish to get a CHL, there is an issue you need to bear in mind. In Texas, there are TWO different kinds of CHL lisences. One is for revolvers only, and the other is for both revolvers AND semi-auto's. The class is the same and the cost is the same, the only difference is to get the gen purpose CHL you have to qualify with a semi-auto. You have to qualify with a .32 cal or larger, but once you have your CHL you can carry anything you like (depending on the kind of license of course), but a .22LR or .25 is really at best a back-up gun. You won't put a man on the ground immediately with one unless you get real lucky. You might still kill him but it'll be a slow death and he would probably still have time and energy to kill you in the process. That said, many people ask "what is the best gun for self defense" and the answer is "the gun you have with you when you need it." if it is too heavy or too clunky and hard to conceal and/or carry you won't carry it consistently and that means you may not have it when you need it, so picking a gun that is comfortable to carry and shoot is EXTREMELY important. If that means only a single shot .22 derringer, it is still better than nothing. That just means you have to place your shots a HELUVA LOT BETTER.<br /><br />That brings up one other point. Under duress, even trained police officers have only a 40% hit rate typically (hitting a man sized target at a typical shooting distance of 7-10 feet.). And that is just hitting the guy, not necessarily hitting him with a knockout shot. Now granted, they generally are not as well trained as your average CHL holder either believe it or not. They only have to qualify with their weapon once a year and most never go to the range or do any kind of tactical shooting practice except for their qualification shooting so they tend to be a lot less capable than people give them credit for (there are of course exceptions to this too). Not knocking cops or anything, but that is the reality of the situation. More often than not they are working two or three side jobs to keep a roof over their heads and they don't have time or the energy to go shooting as often as they ought to. CHL holders in general tend to be a bit more motivated to master their weapon so they tend to shoot a lot more than cops. It is also a case of familiarity breeding complacency. Another reason why cops tend to have more Accidental Discharges/Negligent Discharges than CHL holders too. So practicing with your weapon, and learning to use it in a tactical situation particularly (vs just standing still at a shooting bench and wailing away at a stationary paper target) is an important piece of the puzzle. This is a big reason why semi-autos are far and away preferred for CHL (but not the only reason, concealability plays a role too.). They have WAY more rounds in them than revolvers so you have a better chance of being able to put a round in the guy's wheelhouse when you have more shots to fire. Some people like revolvers and women tend to have less hand strength than men and sometimes have problems operating the slide on semi-autos (there are ways to deal with that though, it is a matter of training), and to each his own, but I would strongly suggest you think about that long and hard before you make an expensive decision you and/or your wife might not live to regret.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-49472423483745875232011-01-14T07:49:00.002-06:002011-01-14T08:00:39.790-06:00I really don't know why this surprises me anymore...<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Fv4jnlkxOaw?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Fv4jnlkxOaw?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object><br />President Obama seems to have a pathological problem about lying. He lies even when there is no consequence for telling the truth. And the sad part is that it is so easy to spot when he does it. In this video, he very clearly and unequivocally states his father served in WWII. This is simply not possible. His biological father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr. was born on 4/4/1936 in Kenya which at the time was a British Territory. He would have been 5 years old when the war started and only 9 and a half when it ended. His Indonesian stepfather Lolo Soetero was born in 1935 so he was only a year older and was in Indonesia at the time. <a href="http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/service.asp">Snopes claims that he was really talking about his maternal grandfather</a>. Sorry, I'm not buying that, Snopes just can't stop carrying the liar-in-chief's water.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-31956985469622646572011-01-12T10:29:00.002-06:002011-01-12T10:32:56.003-06:00A word about the Strauss win.OK, I did not want Strauss to win the Speaker race, but he won fair and square. I can hope that he governs Conservatively, but what is done is done. Now we must put aside our differences and make the best of the situation and try to get as much conservative work done as possible. If Strauss interferes with it, we know we will at least have done everything we could to prevent it AND we know who to blame for it for the next go-round. Small comfort I know, but you have to work with the cards you are dealt.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-87169936449951679732011-01-10T09:38:00.004-06:002011-01-10T16:22:33.969-06:00And so it begins anew.... UpdatedSaturday, a crazed lone gunman who was angry at his congresswoman for not being leftist enough apparently showed up at a congressional "town hall" event and started blasting away with his Glock 19. He shot Gabrielle Giffords in the head, and 11 other people, 6 of whom died. One of them was a nine year old girl who wanted to grow up to be a congresswoman herself. Giffords survived and is able to respond to commands but how much brain damage she sustained is still a question mark. It is almost certain she will not be the same person she was before the shooting. few people who undergo even minor brain injury recover fully.<br /><br />Before the congresswoman even went into surgery, some comentators on the left were already ascribing the shooting to "an angry right wing radical", this turned out to be nowhere near the truth. The shooter turns out to be a "crazy pothead" who appears to be schizophrenic and ascribes to far leftist views, spouting Marx and the communist manifesto. He was apparently also fixated on Giffords who he thought to be "unintelligent".<br /><br />And before she even left surgery, <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20027986-503544.html">gungrabber Rep Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) is already talking about making it impossible to buy large amounts of ammunition and "large capacity" magazines and making it illegal for crazy people to buy guns</a>. And another Dem Congressman is talking about restrictions on public speech that could be interpreted as threatening to federal officials. Of course that begs the question what exactly is the definition of "threatening"? or what is the definition of "high capacity"? or "large ammo purchases"? These people are not letting a good crisis go to waste. We need to make sure voices of reason are heard to counter their wild ideas.<br /><br />UPDATE:<br /><a href="http://thechollajumps.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/jared-loughner-is-a-product-of-sheriff-dupniks-office/">It would appear that Sheriff Dupnik's office has had multiple contacts with this individual for making death threats against people</a>, to Dupnik's bs about right wing hate speech is nothing more than a smoke screen to cover his arse. Apparently his office convinced everyone who was threatened to not file charges against him claiming "it would make things worse". Had he been charged, then it is probable that he would have had a felony conviction and would have been unable to buy the gun from where he did. OR he would have been involuntarily committed for mental evaluation. The failure lies with Dupnik's office.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13598068.post-54100836850064466462010-12-14T22:42:00.005-06:002010-12-16T10:30:27.767-06:00The cure for HIV is Nigh *Updated*In 2007, an American living in Berlin who was HIV+ contracted Leukemia. He underwent a bone marrow transplant to cure his leukemia and<a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9K42RJG0&show_article=1"> it cured not only his leukemia, but his HIV as well</a>. But this was no ordinary bone marrow transplant. It was from a donor that was not only an unusually good match genetically, but he had a mutation that made him HIV resistant. This is the only known instance of a cure of an HIV infection. But the risks of such a transplant are not trivial. The mortality rate from such transplants is as high as 5% or more. Not to mention the fact that finding suitable donors with just such a rare mutation is not easy either. But what if that problem could be solved? What if you could grow your own custom tailored bone marrow? It should be possible. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoplasma_laboratorium">Craig Venter has already demonstrated that it is possible to grow a completely synthetic organism by replacing the nuclear material in one bacterium with a synthetic one.</a> Further it has been shown that <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101107202144.htm">skin cells can be chemically tricked into becoming bone marrow stem cells</a>. And of course the ability to completely sequence a human genome is old hat, again, Craig Venter did that too. So all that is left is to combine the four technologies. DNA from the infected patient is completely sequenced, the HIV resistant mutation is spliced into the patient's DNA and a synthetic copy of the modified DNA is produced. Heck, while they are at it, other beneficial mutations could be spliced in as well. Skin cells from a donor who does not need to be a very close match at all are then stripped of their nuclear material and the material is replaced with the synthetic DNA. The skin cells are cultured and tested to verify that the nuclear transfer was successful and that the cells are now a genetic match with the patient. The cells are then chemically converted to bone marrow stem cells and cultured to again ensure that they are reproducing true to their intended genetic line. Then the patient's bone marrow is destroyed with a combination of radiation and chemotherapy. This is a very delicate point in the process because if any of the bone marrow were to survive the treatment, it would fail. And if the patient were to come down with an infection while immunosuppressed, it would likely kill him. once the original bone marrow is gone, the new hybrid bone marrow is injected. This should then cure the patient, assuming he lives through the procedure. This procedure should also work for other <a href="http://www.noah-health.org/en/blood/types/genblood.html">genetic blood disorders</a> like sickle cell, hemophilia, and others.<br /><br />UPDATE:<br /><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a03843bc6289f00ba74faca28ff52cf9.1e1&show_article=1">The White House has determined that synthetic biology poses limited risks and should be allowed to proceed</a>, so there are no regulatory roadblocks to proceed with this methodology beyond those normally required for FDA medical trials.<br /><br />Further thought on the ethics of this proposal:<br />Many would argue that such a procedure poses far more risks than the risks inherent in treating the disease through drug therapy. First, I would submit that the mortality and side effect rates from the drugs involved and complications from the disease itself are only PART of the equation. One must also consider the potential to spread the disease to others and THEIR potential mortality rates as well. This is not at all unlike the ethics of the "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_experiment">Tuskegee Experiment</a>" where blacks with known cases of syphillis were left untreated intentionally when a treatment for the disease existed at the time resulting in the spread of the disease to their sexual partners/spouses and congenital defects in their children as well. One must also consider the ability of a person to make a free choice in his or her own medical destiny. Millions of men and women undergo elective surgeries every year for various reasons. All of these surgeries entail a level of risk. Even a root canal procedure has a certain level of risk involved. They take that informed risk into account when they decide to undergo these procedures (or at least they should be, even if they chose not to consider them). So withholding this potential cure on the basis of someone ELSE's determination that the risk or cost is high is unethical. That decision should be the left to the patient since they are the ones that have skin in the game. After all, we all run similar risks every day when we get out on the road to go to work. The patient may value the ability to have unprotected sex with their partners or the ability to become impregnated without expensive IVF procedures higher than an uninterested third party who may have no skin in the game.Rorschachhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11848860674369931761noreply@blogger.com1