Iran inching closer to genocide.

Saturday, May 20, 2006

http://newsbusters.org/node/5436

***Begin Quote***

A number of Canadian news websites are reporting that the Iranian parliament passed a law this week requiring non-Muslims in the country to wear certain insignia identifying them as such (hat tip to Drudge). As reported by Canada’s National Post: “Human rights groups are raising alarms over a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear coloured badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.” The article continued: “‘This is reminiscent of the Holocaust,’ said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. ‘Iran is moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis.’" 

***End Quote***

The nut in charge of Iran already denied the Holocaust . Anytime government starts to "identify" its people you have to think GENOCIDE! If one was in Iran, near Iran, or even know an Iranian, then you have to be concerned. I KNEW an elderly Jewish lawyer who escaped Germany when he saw the trend. He was unable to convince his best friends, his family elders, or his friends in his community. They were all wiped out. Some of his friends were Catholic, Christian, Agnostics, or Anything. When the genocide begins, it doesn't matter what you are. You're grist for the mill. Only government can kill in numbers that are worse than a natural disaster. Pop over to http://www.jpfo.org/faq.htm#faq14 and read Paul Harvey's list of atrocities. I'd expect Iran to be next on the list.


Google’s Notebook has been running when I had some lockups. Beware?

Saturday, May 20, 2006

When using GNotebook, I have had Internet Explorer 6.0.2900.2180.sp2 go nuts TWICE. It, on its own, spawned a bunch of extra windows. I assume it kept going until it ran out of whatever. Now I have never seen IE6 do that before. I don't know what causd it. I've used without it happening. And, I've never seen that behavior with Firefox1503. So be advise!


SPAM seems to be picking up! What to do?

Saturday, May 20, 2006

In my unscientific study of email trends, I am taking more spam on my non-hidden short "human being readable" email addresses. Sigh, we know who controls the inet.

The hidden and random sting ones seem to be pretty immune. The hidden ones are never exposed to any one but me; no significant risk there. The random string ones are the ones where the address portion is just a long random string. And they seem immune; guess no spammer wants to chase them.

I have lot's of dedicated email addresses for lots of different purposes and have also “lost” a lot of addresses to spammers.

In the losing, I discovered "alpha spammers". They use alpha progression to eventually “discover” every address.  I wised up to it when some dumb spammer had “reinke @att.net, reinkea@, reinkez@ reinkeaa@, …” in the To field. They eventualy discovered every one of my @att.net addresses since they all looked like reinke xxxxx @ att.net! So, I have adopted the long random strings as the “user” part.  Also since no one invests any time in the “name”, I can change it when needed (i.e., if it starts to be spammed). 

Since 99% of the use of an email address is to be hit by “reply”, no one cares. AND I have many ways for people to get back in touch, like http://public.2idi.com/=reinkefj, so it seems to work for me. 

I'm going to have to abandon more of my non-hidden short "human being readable" email addresses. Sigh. I'm probably going to have to look into more of the alternatives.

My web-based email web form at http://public.2idi.com/=reinkefj has been very immune to spam. Who knows how long that will last.
Some of the various providers have some interesting features like only accepting email from sources in your address book. I'm going to look into them.


Only a old exGI could call the National Guard to the border what it is “political theater”!

Saturday, May 20, 2006

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese281.html

Guarding the Border
by Charley Reese
***Begin Quote***

Using the National Guard for players in this political theater shows you that the president never thinks a moment about the plight of regular Americans. Young men and women join the National Guard willing to serve their country in an emergency. Our leaky borders are not an emergency. They've been leaking for the past decade. For six years, Bush has ignored this problem. The only emergency is the collapse of Bush's popularity and the Republican Party's fear that it might lose control of Congress this fall. 

*** AND *** 

But overseas personnel are just a drop in the bucket from which the president can draw his 6,000 men for the border. Excluding the National Guard and Reserves, he has 1.4 million full-time active-duty military personnel, and all of them not in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing housekeeping chores and running training missions at home and abroad. That's what armies do in peacetime. 

***End Quote***

Only a vet understands how the politicians abuse, overuse, misuse, and turn our military into props. That's on both sides of the duopoly — R and D — D or R — Blue or Red — Red or Blue. There's no difference! Bad polls? Rush the guard to the borders. Impeachment? Bomb an asprin factory. Everytime a Washington president needs to distract, disrupt, or mislead, they use the military to distract us. 

BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW! FROM EVERYWHERE! NO DELAYS! NO EXCUSES!
Everone is on their own.  We're not the world's policemen. We have our own problems.


Americans today should free “its children” by separating education and state!

Saturday, May 20, 2006

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger86.html

***Begin Quote***

What is amazing is that after so many years of government involvement in education, with all its dismal results, so few people ask basic and fundamental questions about the education of their children, such as:

  • Why shouldn’t families have the same sovereign and independent control over the education of their children as they have over religious matters?
  • Given that the free market produces the best of everything and socialism produces the worst of everything, why are people willing to submit their children to a second-rate product in an area as important as education?
  • Why should providing education to people be considered a legitimate function of government?

***End Quote***

It's all about socialism. Centralized state planning has put us in the mess we are in. The skoolz resemble the state's prisions. Money is wasted; sometimes it's lost, stolen, or misappropriated. Results are a joke.

Here in the People's Republik of New Jersey, we have litany of problems. Here's a few of my personal favorites:

  • Schools are "financed" by property taxes. Regardless, if one has any children, everyone is "assessed" to pay for the gummamint reeducation camps. Too bad if you're a senior living in the same house for 70 years and now on a fixed income, time for you to move to a different state. Too bad if you have multiple properties, you're too rich.
  • Schools are run by the gummamint, teaching the gummamint religion (i.e., Conserve Mother Earth like good little druids and honor the all wise State from whom all benefits flow), and dumbing down the population. I particularly like how the brag on their "achievements" (i.e., number of students going to college) but never mention their failures (i.e., GEDs) and figure out ways to "cook the books". Of course, this is all done for MY benefit (i.e., Good schools mean that people will want to move here and buy your house at a big profit. Ignoring the fact that I have to live somewhere!) by "selfless public servants". Silly me!
  • There is a Political – Educrat – Servicing conspiracy at work as a positive feedback loop. Politicians "save the children" with programs. The Board of Education, School Administrators, Teachers, and Unions all campaign for more money. Custodians, Builders, Service Providers all have lucrative contracts. The School Administrators, Teachers, Unions, Custodians, Builders, and Service Providers contribute to the Politicians with money, labor, and "needs". Politicians raise taxed to "save the children" with new programs. And on and on.

So we have to break the cycle. 

I don't pay to feed, clothe, or entertain your children. Why should I pay to "educate" them?

And, if I do have to pay, which I don't think is fair, why do I have to do it with government?

Could it be that you could not "convince" me to pay for it without the force of government to make me.

Remember the hallmark of a bad idea is that you can't convince people to do it voluntarily.

(I think somebody smart said that, but I don't know who. Do you?) 


%d bloggers like this: