More Oil. NOW!

Saudi Arabia announced in the past hour that they will increase production of oil. The amount would increase to 9.7 million barrels in July. It is currently 9 million flat. Also, the Saudis have said that by the end of the year, they will be producing 12.5 million barrels.

On paper this sounds like relief. But it should help a little by easing the demand. Saudi Arabia has also said they would like to create an OPEC fund of $1B for loans to third world nations such as African nations.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a very recent candidate for candidate for President, who also thinks the Surge didn't work in Iraq, thinks that increased oil production is not the windfall some are hoping it to be. In the short term it may be a relief, but in the long term, he's right. We need to continue focus on developing energy systems the run on renewable resources because its only a band-aid.

Oil Companies have used many tactics throughout the past century such as buying new technogies and suppressing them. There have also been anecdotes about murder being used to suppress technology (Think I'm making it up? Nope. That this guy might be. I doubt it.). What we really have is an energy monopoly. Not very libertarian. It results in restriction from a free and open market. I can't walk down to the local dealership and get a car that doesn't run off gasoline. Hybrids regardless of their fanfare, still utilize oil at some point during the operation. Hydrogen requires a mot of oil to create the hydrogen fuel to run those cars. Why do you think George Bush was in favor of that particular alternative energy?

I want to point out that with Bush's declarations that Congress needs to open up ANWAR and other areas for exploitation, it seems rather stupid. Here's Why: Bill Richardson brought up something that has only been mentioned in the past week. Oil companies hold leases to many places throughout the country where they can drill for oil, which by the way, it takes ten years to develop an oil deposit. They aren't using them. Why? Why is there a demand from Oil man George Bush to open up areas when there are plenty of leases already held?

A good reason is that by limiting the supply, it drives the price of oil up. it is highly unlikely that ANWAR will ever be opened. It creates a perception of restricted production that drives price uo and puts money in the hands of those who already have plenty. This sounds criminal because oil is in many areas of the country a necessity. In rural parts of the nation, there is no access to alternative transportation like buses, trains and light rail lines. Its the car, truck or tractor to get around. There are no alternatives! But in the rural areas there are plenty of renewable resources like wind, solar, hydro and other biological materials that can be utilized for fueling purposes. However, these are not going to make a dent in the energy problem in the near future.

What I'm getting at is that the whole country is not made the same. Every city and every region has its own set of unique problems and also solutions. The reason we cannot tackle "America's Addiction to Oil" is because its an extremely daunting task. Every area needs to be evaluated for its particular needs, problems and available resources. What works in New York City may not work in Davenport.

I also want to point out the media's misuse of the phrase "Addiction to Oil". Is it an addiction is the only vehicles a consumer can purchase is gasoline fueled? Is it an addiction if car manufacturers continue to produce cars at the minimum of CAFE standards? If I could change my car to running off of water, trust me, I would. But I lack the automotive abilities to make that transformation.

As you can from the meandering post that I have composed thus far, there is not an easy issue to analyze. No one solution is an absolute cure all. This means that one person does not hold all the cards to solving the energy crisis. It involves a lot of hard work and patience from all involved and the country itself. Unfortunately, with our global economy and the limited supply of oil, costs will not decrease any time soon and many people will continue to suffer through these hard economic times, myself included.

But we were warned. The demand for oil is infinite. The supply is finite. When we burn a fuel faster than it can be harvested and refined begins to become a problem. There is also the issue of peak oil. Peak oil is basically this idea: oil production will peak at one point and drop off. Now someone could point out that will alternative energies, this would cause the dropoff prophetized. But M. King Hubbert who made this prediction in 1956 was not looking at environmentalists to change the fuel economy of the world. Peak Oil would come about because of resources of oil which I've already pointed out are very finite. Hubbert predicted that the US production of oil would peak in the late '60's to early '70's. This roughly coincided with the fuel crisis that developed. This was not a natural crisis. There were also political motivations involved such as the Arab-Israeli war.

Nobody wants to continue giving money to the middle east. Nobody wants to be subserviant to another county. We live in a country that cannot fuel itself. We need to be able to do that. But as long as we have a oil companies restricting technology, refusing to exploit alreasy held lands and pushing to create better technologies, we will be held hostage in the Global Economy. And while the welathy exploit the middle and lower classes to line their pockets, they will destroy the economy. If the economy crumbles, then it won't matter anymore. That's how bad it could get. Stock up on water.

Moving on to other topics that are less depressing. Tim Russert died over a week ago. This led NBC to broadcasting a gluttony of production that came just short of canonizing him as a Saint of American Objective Journalism. True, he probably the last bastion of the objective journalist values so rarely seen in the media these days. But seriously! Things went too far! I couldn't turn on a channel without hearing about it... and the 17 girls in Gloucester, Massachesetts. The man was a great guy but i think this was overdone. Russert himself would have been embarrassed.

That's it for now. I was planning on writing more, but I'm running on empty.

Yeshiva Shooting

Very confusing information coming from Jerusalem. According to witnesses, one, possibly two, infiltrators entered the dining hall in a Yeshiva at around dinner time Israeli time and opened fire. At this time, the numbers of deceased is misleading with the number listed at different sources anywhere from 4 to 7. There are unconfirmed reports that one of the gunmen (if there were two) was wearing some form of explosive. This happened around 1.45 Eastern time. According to Jerusalem Post, the school in question is the Merkaz Harav Yeshiva located in the Kiryat Moshe neighborhood, a very religious neighborhood with many yeshivas.. The article also states that approximately 40 people are wounded and that the two gunmen are dead. CNN is reporting that there is celebration in Gaza over the attack. It has been a relatively long time since Jerusalem has witnessed incidents of this magnitude.

Though Palestinians are celebrating the crime, with intense gunfire near the Prime Minister's home, it is unknown who the gunmen were or whether this was politically motivated. Israel had launched forces in Gaza last week but withdrew them on Tuesday. There has also been no claim of responsibility. Though it may appear to be clear that is a retaliatory strike against Israel, it may not be. It may be a school shooting like the ones we have suffered through here in the US as well as in other nations of the world.

Links: Ynet, Jpost

Earlier today, here in the United States in Times Square, New York, there was an explosion at an Army recruiting office. Some believe a cyclist is was recorded passing by the office not long before the blast may be involved if not the bomber. The explosion happened at 3.39 Eastern time this morning. No one was injured.

Israeli Army Radio with the Ambulence service backing it up have increased the number of dead to 8. CNN has also just reported that two bombs went off within moments of each other in Baghdad.

Foot in Mouth for everyone

That's It!!!!!!

I say this with all impunity: no more Congressional comments on political activity. Not that there have been more really since the Moveon.org ad attacking General Petraeus. In fact that was ok. And there haven't been any more since....

All right, there was only the one. But repeatedly I see Congressional types and Senators get asked if Congress should make a call about the 12-year-old Bush critic that has been swift boated by the Right Wing blogosphere. But to be honest, this is still not the activity of congress. Let me explain.

Civics 101: You shoulda learned this shit in 9th grade.

There are three (3) branches to the US government. The Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial branches constitute the government at the federal level according to the constitution. The Legislature has the powers of the purse and the sword. This means they have the powers to declare war and raise taxes (Oddly enough, the big guy does not). They also have powers to create laws, enact bills, ad nauseam. In fact here are their powers:

The constitution of the United States of America (in congress assembled), Article !, Section 8. All the numbered statements would be called powers.

1)The aforementioned power of purse and sword (providing for common defense).
2)To borrow money on the credit of the US.
3)To regulate commerce with other nations, states and even Indian tribes (I guess this was before we threw them on reservations)
4)To establish rules of Naturalization and Bankruptcies.
5)To coin money and establish and fix weights and measures
6)To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting and something else I can't remember off the top off my head (Yes, I'm doing this off the top of my head!)
7)To establish post office and I think roads, too.
8)To further progress of Arts & Sciences (read: they should be helping PBS & NPR. And the National Endowment for the Arts!)
9)To create tribunals that are inferior to the Supreme Court (cuz its like Supreme. Who can be superior to them?!?!)
10)To define and punish piracies on the high seas
11)To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisals
12)To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two years (what does that even mean?)
13)To provide and maintain a Navy (there are no restrictions on the Navy. Interesting, considering I'm ex-Navy, I like that)
14)To make rules for the government and regulations for land and naval forces
15)To provide for calling of militias and to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.
16)To provide for the organizing, arming and disciplining the said militia (does this include the Minutemen?). This one is long but I do believe there is a part that says they can erect forts, armories and dock-yards. Yes, it specifies dock-yards. Yes, one of the vaguest legal documents in history is specific about what Congress can build for the militias. Yes, dock-yard is written in your constitution. No, Jesus is not.
17)To make all laws which shall be necessary for proper for carrying into execution the aforementioned powers, all other powers the constitution decides to give to congress and the offices and yada yada yada...

No where in there does it say “To rebuke the press for printing things, even if they are crap and badly rhymed, that Congress assembled thinks is crap”.

Reasons Congress is pissing me off. First, As much as the moveon.org ad is wrong, I don't think Congress should take up precious tax subsidized time with. I, you and the kid who delivers your paper are paying for congress to sit around and tell people on the internets to not say crap because it makes them so mad.

Second, for Congress to take time to address every little prick on the Internet is just silly. The Internet is so full of shit, there is no toilet big enough to put it into. For such a respected body (if you believe such) to single out a little turd among the shitpile is disgusting. They have better and more important things to do like getting our troops out of misguided and badly planned wars. Oh, like the scales are falling from your eyes!!!

Third, its completely politically motivated and cannot convince a thinking American that politicians aren't just covering their collective asses. There is nothing like Congress saying “OMG, IMHO those fuckups!!!!!”

So, in the spirit of Congress who obviously has too little to do, I move for the following motion:

That both houses of the Congress of the United States shall not make negative nor positive remarks in congress assembled toward the media in its many forms and formats as well as free speech by any citizen of these United States. Furthermore, Congress is urged to restrain its spirit when making bills that exceed the powers of congress as stipulated in the Constitution of the United States.

My mother seconds the motion. Motion so moved and seconded.

All those in favor say Yea:

“Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

All those opposed say Nay:

[crickets in the galleries]

As the yeas outweigh the nays by 100%, the motion is resolved. Its now a bill. Mozel Tov.

Look I spent all that fucking time on this. I didn't even get to the juicy part about Ann Coulter making anti-semitic comments. I guess I can wait... no, I really can't.

For those of you who know me, you know that I think Ann Coulter is insufferable (I must be tired. There is no long string of obscenely large adjectives describing the acrimonious and repugnant spew that she calls her opinions... Oh wait...). Miss Coulter thinks her opinions matter. And despite the fact the woman is educated, she makes some really pathetic and poorly thought through comments like women should not be allowed to vote because they are stupid and have no knowledge of money. To be fair, she is just like any other political hack, Republican or otherwise, who thrives on name calling and insult mongering to sell books. For other people with actual shows and lets just be honest, jobs, they call it raising their ratings.

Ann Coulter appeared on CNBC “The Big Idea” with Donny Deutsch all the way back on Monday. But since I do not go out of my way to consume all things Coulter, I didn't hear of it till it came up on The Countdown with Keith Olberman ( I love you, Keith!), who is by the way on MSNBC, and yes, they are affiliated channels.

She made some rather anti-semitic comments but they were grounded in theology. Basically, she said that Christians want Jews to be perfected. She also used Seinfeld, a sitcom that went of the air 9 years ago as a reference for mixed race couples in New York City having chips on their shoulders. To think Ann Coulter bases her critique on modern urban society on Seinfeld boggles the mind. I think Jerry Seinfeld is weeping somewhere.

I enclose the following transcript in my already overly long post. I actually procured this from Fox News. See they aren't all bad.

DEUTSCH: Let me ask you a question. We're going to get off strengths and weakness for a second. If you had your way, and all of your — forget that any of them —
COULTER: I like this.
DEUTSCH: — are calculated marketing teases, and your dreams, which are genuine, came true having to do with immigration, having to do with women's — with abortion — what would this country look like?
COULTER: UMMMMM (pause) ... It would look like New York City during the Republican National Convention. In fact, that's what I think heaven is going to look like.
DEUTSCH: And what did that look like?
COULTER: Happy, joyful Republicans in the greatest city in the world.
DEUTSCH: No, no, no, no, but I'm talking about this country. You don't want to make this country — it's not about Republicans. I'm saying, what would the fabric of this country look like? Forget that the Republicans would be running the show.
COULTER: Well, everyone would root for America, the Democratic Party would look like Joe Lieberman, the Republican Party would look like Duncan Hunter —
DEUTSCH: No, no, no, I don't want — I'm not talking about politically the landscape. What would our — would we be safer? Would people be happier? Would they be more —
COULTER: We would be a lot safer.
DEUTSCH: Would there be more tolerance? Would there be — would women be happier, would the races get along better? The Ann Coulter subscription — prescription. What — tell me what would be different in our fabric of country, because —
COULTER: Well, all of those things.
DEUTSCH: I can give — I can give you an argument there would be more divisiveness, that there would be more hate —
COULTER: Oh, no.
DEUTSCH: That there would be a bigger difference between the rich and the poor, a lot of other — tell me what — why this would be a better world? Let's give you — I'm going to give you — say this is your show.
COULTER: Well, OK, take the Republican National Convention. People were happy. They're Christian. They're tolerant. They defend America, they —
DEUTSCH: Christian — so we should be Christian? It would be better if we were all Christian?
COULTER: Yes.
DEUTSCH: We should all be Christian?
COULTER: Yes. Would you like to come to church with me, Donny?
DEUTSCH: So I should not be a Jew, I should be a Christian, and this would be a better place?
COULTER: Well, you could be a practicing Jew, but you're not.
DEUTSCH: I actually am. That's not true. I really am. But — so we would be better if we were — if people — if there were no Jews, no Buddhists —
COULTER: Whenever I'm harangued by —
DEUTSCH: — in this country? You can't believe that.
COULTER: — you know, liberals on diversity —
DEUTSCH: Here you go again.
COULTER: No, it's true. I give all of these speeches at megachurches across America, and the one thing that's really striking about it is how utterly, completely diverse they are, and completely unself-consciously. You walk past a mixed-race couple in New York, and it's like they have a chip on their shoulder. They're just waiting for somebody to say something, as if anybody would. And —
DEUTSCH: I don't agree with that. I don't agree with that at all. Maybe you have the chip looking at them. I see a lot of interracial couples, and I don't see any more or less chips there either way. That's erroneous.
COULTER: No. In fact, there was an entire "Seinfeld" episode about Elaine and her boyfriend dating because they wanted to be a mixed-race couple, so you're lying.
DEUTSCH: Oh, because of some "Seinfeld" episode? OK.
COULTER: But yeah, I think that's reflective of what's going on in the culture, but it is completely striking that at these huge megachurches — the idea that, you know, the more Christian you are, the less tolerant you would be is preposterous.
DEUTSCH: That isn't what I said, but you said I should not — we should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians, then, or —
COULTER: Yeah.
DEUTSCH: Really?
COULTER: Well, it's a lot easier. It's kind of a fast track.
DEUTSCH: Really?
COULTER: Yeah. You have to obey.
DEUTSCH: You can't possibly believe that.
COULTER: Yes.
DEUTSCH: You can't possibly — you're too educated, you can't — you're like my friend in —
COULTER: Do you know what Christianity is? We believe your religion, but you have to obey.
DEUTSCH: No, no, no, but I mean —
COULTER: We have the fast-track program.
DEUTSCH: Why don't I put you with the head of Iran? I mean, come on. You can't believe that.
COULTER: The head of Iran is not a Christian.
DEUTSCH: No, but in fact, "Let's wipe Israel" —
COULTER: I don't know if you've been paying attention.
DEUTSCH: "Let's wipe Israel off the earth." I mean, what, no Jews?
COULTER: No, we think — we just want Jews to be perfected, as they say.
DEUTSCH: Wow, you didn't really say that, did you?
COULTER: Yes. That is what Christianity is. We believe the Old Testament, but ours is more like Federal Express. You have to obey laws. We know we're all sinners —
DEUTSCH: In my old days, I would have argued — when you say something absurd like that, there's no —
COULTER: What's absurd?
DEUTSCH: Jews are going to be perfected. I'm going to go off and try to perfect myself —
COULTER: Well, that's what the New Testament says.
DEUTSCH: Ann Coulter, author of "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans," and if Ann Coulter had any brains, she would not say Jews need to be perfected. I'm offended by that personally. And we'll have more "Big Idea" when we come back.
(BREAK)
DEUTSCH: Welcome back to "The Big Idea." During the break, Ann said she wanted to explain her last comment. So I'm going to give her a chance. So you don't think that was offensive?
COULTER: No. I'm sorry. It is not intended to be. I don't think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to, you know, live up to all the laws. What Christians believe — this is just a statement of what the New Testament is — is that that's why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don't believe our testament.
DEUTSCH: You said — your exact words were, "Jews need to be perfected." Those are the words out of your mouth.
COULTER: No, I'm saying that's what a Christian is.
DEUTSCH: But that's what you said — don't you see how hateful, how anti-Semitic —
COULTER: No!
DEUTSCH: How do you not see? You're an educated woman. How do you not see that?
COULTER: That isn't hateful at all.
DEUTSCH: But that's even a scarier thought. OK —
COULTER: No, no, no, no, no. I don't want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean (Jerry) Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is "Christ died for our sins." We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all.
DEUTSCH: We will let the audience decide then, won't we? Ann Coulter. New book. More "Big Idea" straight ahead.

She would have been better of by just going “Hm.... foot”. Ha! A quote I got from Friends no less. To be honest, she is stating what many Christian Evangelicals believe. Many will deny it and for the most part it is not ill-intentioned. They have a mission to save as many souls as they possibly can. I have no idea. I was raised Catholic. We believe in Good Works and that Judgment is reserved for God and God alone. We also said we weren't going to try to convert the Jews anymore. We weren't even going there. If anything we want to become one of the Righteous among the Nations.

So, all Ann did was present the side of Evangelical thought that is for the most part frightening. She mentioned Jerry Falwell and he probably would have rooted her on. He had some beliefs about the Jews and Israel, particularly that if there were an Israel and it conquered the Middle East, Rapture's gonna come. If it does, I got dibs on the car.

I want to point out how difficult it is for her to not base things in political terms. She has to keep everything politics. Does she consider politics when changing lanes.

Just for the hell of it, here's the YouTube entry for this. It must be seen!!!



For the love of all things good and American, someone help her!!!!!

Other news. The mercenary company Blackwater, Inc. is being sued in a US court. Well, ain't that dandy! A Philadelphia firm filed a lawsuit against the company for committing murder on behalf of the families of the men who died. The Iraqi government contends that the 17 men killed on September 16th died by “premeditated murder”. The company is usually contracted to protect US diplomats traveling through Iraq. They claim the convoy they were protecting came into danger. There has been no evidence to back this up and an investigation by both the US and Iraqi government is underway.

And the final thing I'm commenting on should have been the first. A bill has passed the the House Foreign Affairs committee with a vote of 27-21. This bill calls the slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians by Turkey, then the Ottoman Empire, during World War I, genocide. Turkey does cop to it but calls it a massacre.

This has not gone to the full house floor and may in fact, do so Friday. It has gone through committee before but never gone to the floor. If this gets passed, there may well be very shaky relations for the United States and Turkey ahead. We keep discouraging Turkey's desire to move into Northern Iraq to quash the Kurdish communities there. They shouldn't anyway. It'd be an act of war, boneheads! Secondly, they've obviously slaughtered enough.

Turkey has recalled its US ambassador and there have been protests in the streets of Istanbul. Come on. Just forget about it like you did the Armenians. I mean this is pretty insensitive of Turkey I might add. Not to mention, nobody cares. Look how quickly they stopped talking about Myanmar or Burma. And they really have a gripe!

Not to mention, its or legislature. Not yours or the United Nations. We can say the sky is green. Does that make it true? I'm not saying that we do or that the Armenian genocide did not happen but protesting something that could be so insignificant looks like you're fishing for some excuse to act torked or it really happened and you're in denial.

OK, thats it. No “on this day” segment. I'm wiped. Have a good night y'all!

God responded and other wackiness

Among all the hubbub of returning to school this fall, I managed to break my hand. Yes, my hand. I hit someone on the side of his or her head with my hand and am now paying for it (literally).

Tonight in my first post in three weeks or so, I want to address the whole thing about Moveon.org. Apparently, no one can do just that: move on. The ad itself while rather uninspired ("Hey, Petraeus rhymes with Betray Us!!!" "That's brilliant!!!!!!") and off target. Lets set something straight. Military figures are not politicians. When they leave the service they may then feel free to pull an Ike and run for office, even the highest in the land. Until then, there are as much a part of the chain of command as the grunt who hauls a 60 lb pack and a rifle. He's taking orders from the Commander-in-thief... I mean chief.

Moveon.org is attacking the wrong guy. He's stuck having to fight a war that even he may not agree with. SEevice people are citizens, too. They do not think the same and no one should ever categorically assume that all service men and women are therefore gun toting, conservative yahoos. Anyone who's served a day in the armed forces will tell you that there are as many varying beliefs, opinions and ideologies as there are in the civilan world. Never take for granted that a soldier is there completely by choice. Signing up means you follow orders regardless of your ideas but unable to express them To attack someone who cannot freely express their own heart and mind do to the role they have is sheer rudeness and dispicable.

I've said my peace on that (mistake intended) and lets put this puppy to bed!

Next week, the United Nations will once again begin its General Assembly for reasons unknown to anyone with brain cells to rub together. If you must ask why, read the UN charter. I even linked it for you because I'm such a nice caring person... Ban Ki-Moon and all the rest will show up for hopefully, another circus. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the current President of Iran will be in New York again despite last year's outright weirdness (Do I need to remind people of Chavez and his "devil" talk?). Ahmadinejad, beyond being short and an excellent modern Napoleon wannabe, asked to be able to visit Groud Zero in New York to pay his repects. New York officials denied his request citing safety concerns since the site is now a construction zone. Way to go New York!

Beacause I want to keep this post short I will refrain from talking about Bush's supposed B in Econ 101 (word on the street says it was a C-). I will, however, discuss a recent lawsuit brought about by a Nebraska State Senator named Ernie Chambers on September 14th. This senator was incenced to dicover a lawsuit being brought by an accuser in a sexual assault case. During the case, the words "victim" and "rape" were barred from the proceedings. The victim, as it were, has now sued saying her right to free speech was infringed upon.

Mr. Chambers took it upon himself to file a lawsuit against God. Thats right! The One, the Almighty, the great I Am. According to Chamber, he can sue God in Douglas County, his home county where Omaha is, because God is everywhere. Chambers also waived personal service i.e. notifying Him of said suit, because God is omniscient. He already knows.

Specifically in the suit, God is accused "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." In addition, God has caused (though I'd prefer the words allowed or enabled over caused) "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects, and the like." (Nice use of allitereration! Woeful Wars might have been cooler).

And it doesn't end there. God further takes it on the chin with this scathing diatribe against God (probably Morgan Freeman) of "calamitous catastrophes resulting in the wide-spread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants including innocent babes, infants, children, the aged and infirm without mercy or distinction." Never accuse God of being too random.

Well, God spoke back (or is it spake?) At any rate, God says that Chambers cannot sue anybody as his frivolous lawsuit is supposed to prove. He also added in the response that Chambers missed a very important point particularly concerning blaming him for human oppression and suffering. According to God "I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal life, free will is my greatest gift to you." Apparently there was another response that listed a phone number for a law firm in of all places, Corpus Cristi.

I have nothing witty to add to this. Its funny enough on its own but in an intellectual way. I would like to, however, say a few things about the case that brought this about. The woman who brought about the suit has a case. Here's why: the case of her "assaulter" ended in mistrial because the surrounding publicity damaged the prosecution's chances of getting an impartial jury. Since she also couldn't speak freely in the court to lay her claim of assault against another, she and the prosecution were effectively gagged. This amounts to a judge who would rather control how a case is tried rather than interpret the law and ensure that justice is served.

I also want to add that calling someone a victim in a trial does not absolutely mean that the defendent victimized the accuser. He may be proven otherwise. However, there is still eveidence that the victim was victimized. That cannot be disputed.

As much as I could rant till I'm actually in Nebraska, I must move on... hee hee....

On Sunday, a new Ken Burns' documentary is premiering on PBS. It is called simply The War and it details events as seen through orinary people who fought or assisted in World War II. As most of those close to me know, I am obsessed with World War II. I invite all who have the chance to view this. War stories are rarely told and even more rarely heard. In fact, less so since 1,000 World War II vets die everyday. But worse than this, a majority of high school graduating seniors believe the US fought with Germany against the USSR. Now thats just BAD!!!!!!

Now onward toward history (can those two words be used together like that?)

On this Day, in 1780, Benedict Arnold became Benedict Arnold by giving the British the plans to West Point. Who was he before you ask? He was benedict arnold.

In 1765, Antoine de Beauterne claimed to have killed the mysterious wolf-like creature called the Beast of Gévaudan (French: La bête du Gévaudan). The beast continued its horrific attacks all the same.

On this day, in 1897, The New York Sun published the letter stating "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus". The editorial is now the most republished editorial in the English Language.

J.R.R. Tolkein published The Hobbit in 1937. Geeks and free thinkers would forever feel its fantastical pull. But really, bedtime stories would never be the same.

And in 1991, after decades of oppression and before that, genocide, Armenia is independent of the USSR which ceased to exist shortly thereafter.