18FEB12 News and Skepticism

Gathering informations from various news sources.  Being skeptical, I did a quick Google Search because the first article I read was from a source that for whatever reason got my skepticism in full swing:

http://patriot-newswire.com/2012/02/killer-on-the-loose-grandpa-armed-with-baby-is-swat-veterans-seventh-kill/

Patriot Newswire paints the story of a victim of police brutality.  A 'victim' that the police had absolutely no reason to shoot what so ever because he had a baby in his arms; while the officer who engaged him has been involved in seven shootings now.  Largely, what concerns me about this first source is how they really build up the 'this guy was all about liberty' and part of the 'patriot movement' and so this is a government conspiracy to kill (coming just short of saying it was ordered by the Obama Administration).

Next, I found a local news source:

http://www.kpho.com/story/16937336/man-holding-baby-shot-killed-by-police

I won't say its much better.  It starts out with describing two loaded pistols found feet away (but not on the person) of the man killed.  Being that they weren't on his person, but 'a few feet away' is indeed concerning, especially since the closest one was stuffed in chair cushions in what sounds like out of sight.  By reading this article, we find that Loxas was out walking with his grandson when he got into an argument with neighbors and 'threatened them' with his pistol.  However, we don't know the nature of the argument, or if in fact because Loxas had his grandson in his arms if his 'brandishing' might have in fact been an act of self defense on his part (in which case, frankly he should have retreated and called the police himself to report the incident...  Should be interesting to see if that happened during the course of the investigation).  It is indeed a bit disturbing that they found a 'functional IED'.  Beyond describing Officer Peters as a 12 year veteran, we don't find out much else.  Almost objective, of course they seem focused on 'this guy had guns and explosives in his house'.  While the IED with black powder and ball bearings is a bit suspicious, we all have 'bomb making materials' in our homes (few of us realize it is all).

Then we have MSNBC:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/16/10428255-grandpa-shooting-arizona-officer-has-five-previous-kills-under-his-belt

They go right into questioning the officer without going into the background of the suspect one bit.  I expect nothing less from them however...

Huffington Post/Associated Press report is similar, but at least provides a considerably longer background on Officer Peters and his 12 year career:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/16/police-officer-shoots-man-with-baby_n_1281450.html

So far, each of these in one form another offers us a skewed perspective.  So, its up to use to do our homework and figure it out.  Frankly, there are questions about both Loxas and Peters.  Over the last few years, I've seen some nut jobs come to the forefront of the 'patriot' movement (locally) and become extremely egotistical.  However at the same time, we've also seen agencies continue to employ much more brutal techniques and leave certain standards behind.  Officer Peters doesn't appear to have fought in GWOT where we have indeed seen suicide bombers use children as decoys, and based on past investigations and based on the quoted lawyer who has represented officers who've had to shoot to kill in the line of duty, his actions do warrant extreme scrutiny in light of the fact that the suspect killed had no weapons on his person and may have not had that pistol even within reach.

This certainly isn't a black and white case of another patriot being snuffed by the evil government, nor is it a clear case of a nut job threat being taken out after losing it.  It is however a case worth following.

16FEB12 UAV over ND Reply

Just got a reply back about my 12DEC11 inquiry to Representative Don Young's office regarding the use of an RQ-9 in North Dakota: http://trendnemesis.blogspot.com/2011/12/12dec11-uavs-and-local-sheriffs.html

Good news is that it wasn't a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act or USC Title 18.  Bad news is that US DHS isn't just using UAVs to guard the border, but also to monitor activity within the US.

Right off the bat, we do need to establish clear policy regarding the use of UAV's in the US by law enforcement.  Mainly, all the standards to protect our 4th Amendment rights that are applied to all other air frames (helicopters and plans equipped with Forward Looking Infra-Red sensors) are also observed with UAV's so equipped.  Not only should there be established LIMITS to the use of FLIR in regards to protecting private citizens from un-Warranted government intrusion, but also limits to the use of the radar systems used when observing private property.

We face a reality of increasing technological advances in aircraft technology.  That doesn't mean that new laws need to be on the books, as most of the laws on the books especially in the Bill of Rights apply no matter what the technology.  Just as the 1st Amendment applies to the Internet in spite of being written in the 18th Century, so to does the 4th Amendment apply to the use of FLIR and SAR (Signature Aperture Radar).  If anything needs to be written into the books, its policy that limits agencies from abusing the new technology.

Another concern that the greater use of UAVs (I firmly refuse to feed USAF Pilot ego by calling them Remotely Piloted Vehicles) is the air traffic aspect of using un-manned aircraft that limit the situational awareness of the operator.  In theater military airspace control procedures address this concern in a very good manner and simply keep aircraft out of blocks of airspace or altitudes in which UAVs are operating, or they use covert lighting (NVG detectable) devices so that specialized mission aircraft (USSOCOM, name your alphabet soup covert military and CIA unit of choice) don't run into them.  NVG detectable lighting is great, when most of the aircraft that might run into them have pilots with the right equipment.  This is not something acceptable in domestic airspace during peace time by any stretch of the imagination (unless of course they have it in for Civil Aviation).  Neither is blocking off large portions of airspace.  Dense urban areas that rely on "Flight for Life" helicopters, police helicopters (which might be replaced by UAVs), along with News helicopters (again, they might even be replaced by UAVs) are going to experience the worst airspace issues and have the highest probability of mid-air collision.

We already have crowded skies, and problems with aircraft coming far too close to each other with them manned.  Adding UAVs to the mix in a lot of areas outside guarding our borders is going to add to the problem and not solve a damn thing.

Click for Full Size to Read.

14FEB2012 AK State HB 251, seriously flawed...

Normally I'm all for de-regulation of some practices...  However, in this case, I'm opposed to it.  While the AK State House Bill 251 has good intentions in regard to getting rural residents veterinary care at low to no monetary cost (gratis) it de-regulates so much so that the Veterinary Board of Examiners has no ability to act if a 'doctor' should do something that is far below the standard of care required of State Licensed Doctors of Veterinary Medicine.

http://www.legis.state.ak.us/PDF/27/Bills/HB0251B.PDF

I encourage you to read the bill first before forming your own opinions obviously.

However, I want to also post Dr. Delker's letter from the Alaska State Veterinary Medical Association in opposition to the bill as it is now written.  First however, I'm going to post what I believe Dr. Delker's chief concern, and indeed what stood out as the most serious flaw in HB 251 that the letter he wrote points out:

Section 4- Complaints, Investigations, Hearings…  We do not believe it is proper or ethical to take away the right of a citizen to report misconduct by a professional.  Additionally, to provide an effective “statute of limitations” of 6 months is somewhat reprehensible.  In my practice experience (in another state), I had a client present me with an animal ~9 months after it had surgery elsewhere.  I performed a second surgery to correct the improperly performed first procedure.  Under this bill I would have no right or responsibility to report this to any board and the owner would have no recourse as their “6 month” window had expired.  Another scenario presented by this bill -- A “veterinarian” can come up from Mexico under the banner of “gratis medicine” and potentially cause harm to an animal.  As long as the owner/caretaker doesn’t complain--it’s ok.   Let us suppose the owner/caretaker is concerned.  When we are talking about a rural community, what are the chances this owner will have the resources and finances necessary to track down this professional and pursue litigation - even just weeks after he/she has gone?  Remember in this bill we have already stripped the Veterinary Examining board from any oversight.  We fail to see how this section of HB251 protects Alaskans. (emphasis mine)

There is indeed a purpose to some State Government agencies.  This is indeed one of the areas reserved to the States to regulate as they see fit.  Alaska established a Veterinary Board of Examiners for a good reason, and they serve to address grievances and establish a good Alaskan Standard of Care for our animals (for which they routinely draw fire from animal rights activists...).  They also act on behalf of the citizens to strip mal practicing Veterinarians of their licenses to practice in this state.  Many cases DON'T tie up the Civil and Criminal Court system as a result of agencies like this, as well as the actions of private institutions like the American Veterinary Medical Association and various professional liability insurance agencies that compensate owners and fine doctors (or remove a doctor and/or clinics accreditation and rating within their organization).  They also ensure that pharmaceuticals and medical equipment are kept to specific standards as well, without always going to the USDA and FDA to do so.

Honestly, I think with some serious revisions, this bill could be a better product and assit with providing rural Alaskans with better services without eliminating the oversight that provides them with redress without always having to file a civil lawsuit or seek criminal charges for fraudulent services.

February 10, 2012

Chairman Kurt Olson  
House Labor & Commerce Committee                                                                                                                            
Rm. 24, State Capitol                                                                                                                                          
Juneau, Alaska  99811

Dear Chairman Olson:

As licensed veterinarians and members of the AKVMA Executive Committee, we have been following HB251 as sponsored by Representative Dick.  Although we understand and support his effort to increase the availability of veterinary health care in rural/bush communities, we have some significant concerns with the bill as drafted.

The purpose of the Veterinary Board of Examiners is to protect the citizens of Alaska.  HB251 strips the Veterinary Examining Board of any oversight or recourse for certain individuals who want to practice gratis medicine in our state.  The bill also proposes to give equivalent rights and privileges to animal health care professionals who may originate in other countries where the
standard of training and health care is far below what we would consider acceptable anywhere in our state or country.  Furthermore, the bill removes the rights of citizens to report harmful activity to animals simply because they do not own them.

The intent of this bill is honorable – enhance veterinarian services in rural Alaska.  But, as written, this measure fails to protect the citizens and pets of Alaska adequately; lowering the standards of medical care not just in rural communities but statewide.  As veterinarians we understand  “field medicine” is not the same as that which can be undertaken in a clinic/hospital structure.
There is no statute that presently prohibits veterinarians from providing gratis veterinary care in Alaska.  These veterinarians are expected, however, to provide competent veterinary services, within a basic standard of care, to the best of their ability given the circumstances under which they provide them.  For example:  A veterinarian spaying an animal in Bethel is not expected to have a completely sterile operatory setting.  But he or she is expected to have as clean an environment as possible, with properly sanitized instruments, using appropriate anesthetics and pain management.  Under current statutes only a veterinarian performing grossly substandard medicine would be investigated by the Examining Board or prosecuted with criminal animal abuse statutes.

Some additional inherent concerns we see with HB251 are outlined below:

Section 1- Persons practicing without compensation… Persons licensed in the United States and most Canadian Provinces have graduated with an AVMA accredited degree.  A veterinary degree from another “country,” as proposed in the bill, is not necessarily equivalent to an AVMA accredited veterinary degree.  In fact there are vast differences in standards of teaching and care.  I
refer to an article from JAVMA that evaluated veterinary education in Mexico and other developing countries--“The accreditation system is poor or nonexistent in other developing nations. (JAVMA 2004) Just because an individual is licensed in another country, does not mean he or she is competent to practice medicine in our country, no matter what the cost.  Accepting a lower
standard of veterinary care in the bush, just because it is free, does not protect our rural residents.
In part (c) of this section there is reference to compensation.  We would all agree that “actual expenses incurred” should include costs of travel, lodging, and supplies.  But allowing all “other nonmonetary consideration” is a bit ambiguous and open to abuse.  Shouldn’t there be a clearer definition or limits on nonmonetary compensation?   Present regulations do not prohibit a veterinarian from receiving shelter, a warm bed, and complimentary meals.

Section 2-  Surrender and reinstatement of a license… We are somewhat ambivalent on this provision, but we don’t see the need for this section.  We are wondering what the intent or purpose of this section is?  Presently a veterinarian can surrender his or her license and leave the state with no questions asked.  If you plan to return to practice you simply continue to pay a nominal Biennial fee and the license will remain active (as long as you meet minimum CE requirements and are not under investigation or prosecution in another state).  In certain states (i.e. MN) you can pay a lesser fee for an “Inactive License.”    This license stipulates you are either absent the state or not practicing more than 2 weeks a year in the state.  This “inactive” status allows personal leave from the state while not requiring re-licensure upon return.  Again this process assumes you have maintained minimum CE requirements upon reactivation.  If this scenario is the intent of the section above, we would recommend the collaboration with Veterinary Examining Board for recommendations.


Section 3-  (7)(A) Professional incompetence… We believe the proposed language is vague and dangerous.  Allowing any veterinarian to practice “unconventional” and “experimental” medicine without any liability would be reckless.  What if the “unconventional medicine” does not immediately harm a pet but places a family member in danger?  Suppose a veterinarian uses an
unlicensed homeopathic rabies vaccine that he or she believes to be effective against the rabies virus.   The pet was not harmed by the vaccine, but this scenario would place the pet and family at risk by allowing “experimental” medicine.  Further, who or what defines “unconventional or experimental,”?  There is  significant risk for abuse due to this section; a veterinarian could cite this section as an excuse for negligent or improper medicine.  We believe all practitioners, whether providing paid or free services, should have to provide care within a minimum safe standard, regardless of where they practice in the state.


Section 4- Complaints, Investigations, Hearings…  We do not believe it is proper or ethical to take away the right of a citizen to report misconduct by a professional.  Additionally, to provide an effective “statute of limitations” of 6 months is somewhat reprehensible.  In my practice experience (in another state), I had a client present me with an animal ~9 months after it had surgery elsewhere.
I performed a second surgery to correct the improperly performed first procedure.  Under this bill I would have no right or responsibility to report this to any board and the owner would have no recourse as their “6 month” window had expired.  Another scenario presented by this bill -- A “veterinarian” can come up from Mexico under the banner of “gratis medicine” and potentially cause harm to an animal.  As long as the owner/caretaker doesn’t complain--it’s ok.   Let us suppose the owner/caretaker is concerned.  When we are talking about a rural community, what are the chances this owner will have the resources and finances necessary to track down this professional and pursue litigation - even just weeks after he/she has gone?  Remember in this bill we have already stripped the Veterinary Examining board from any oversight.  We fail to see how this section of HB251 protects Alaskans.

We truly applaud Rep. Dick for attempting to increase access to veterinary care in rural /bush communities.  We don’t know of any veterinarian in the state who would complain about or argue with someone willing to go into these rural communities and provide needed care.  But the care provided needs to meet basic standards and not harm those being helped.  HB251, as written, does not
protect the constituents in rural communities from substandard care.  We support the intent of this bill but cannot endorse it as written.

We agree to support legislation that improves access to proper veterinary care without lowering the standards of healthcare in the state.

Regards,
Dr.  Jim Delker
Alaska Veterinary Medical Association Executive Committee

04JAN12 Book Review

Book:  STARSHIP TROOPERS
A great explanation of why Citizenship and the Voting Franchise shouldn't be handed out just for having a pulse and being born in your home country...  After all, TANSTAFL!  Of course, you need to read the short story 'Who are the Heirs of Patrick Henry?' (more specifically the Afterward) from EXPANDED UNIVERSE afterword and you'll get it....  Ah what the heck, here are the main points I love bout the Afterward (In Heinlein’s own words) :
"The criticisms are usually based on a failure to understand simple indicative English sentences, couched in simple words-especially when the critics are professors of English, as they often are."
"Their failures to understand English are usually these:
"Veteran" does not mean in English dictionaries or in this novel solely a person who has served in military forces.  I concede that in the commonest usage today it means a war veteran...  but no one hesitates to speak of a veteran fireman or a veteran school teacher.  In STARSHIP TROOPERS it is stated flatly and more than once that nineteen out of twenty veterans are not military veterans.  Instead 95% of voters are what we call today "former members of federal civil service."

He/she an resign at any time other than during combat- i.e., 100% of the time for 19 out of 20; 99% of the time for those in the military branches of Federal service.

There is no conscription.

Criticism: “The government in STARSHIP TROOPERS is militaristic.” “Militaristic” is the adjective for the noun “militarism,” a word of several definitions but not one of the them that can be correctly applied to the government described in this novel. No military or civil servant can vote or hold office until after he is discharged and is again a civilian. The military tend to be despised by most civilians and this is made explicit. A career military man is most unlikely to hold office; hes is more likely to be dead- and if he does live through it, he'll vote for the first time at 40 or older.”

He goes on to explain beautifully about how its a tribute to the PBI, the Poor Bloody Infantry.

Finally, the last point he makes is indeed perfect:

“I think I know what offends most of my critics the most about STARSHIP TROOPERS: It is the dismaying idea that a voice in governing the state should be earned instead of being handed to anyone who is 18 years old and has a body temperature near 37°C.

But there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Democracies usually collapse not long after the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses... for a while. Either read history or watch the daily papers; it is happening here. Let's stipulate for discustion that some stabilizing qualification is needed (in addition to the body being warm) for a voter to vote responsibly with proper consideration for the future of his children and grandchildren- and yours. The Founding Fathers never intended to extend the franchise to everyone; their debates and early laws show it. A man had to be a stable figure in the community through woning land or employing others or engaged in a journeyman trad or something.”

Yet every time I bring this up I get accused of being Fascist or Nationalist to a fault... By the very same people trying to say that America is falling apart like Rome with bread and circuses. But then, most of the people who accuse me of this when I call in (on KFAR) never served a day in the military, much less any other public service and I suspect are more offended at the notion that their franchise would be threatened by such a system... Denying them the power they do truly for themselves seem to be seeking.

Honestly, I do indeed believe in a form of earned Citizenship as opposed to leaving it to just coming of age. Its a fact that it always leads to our present situation. STARSHIP TROOPERS was written in the 1950's and drew sharp criticism no only for presenting such a system, but also for the notion that Conscription in war or peace is a bad, and immoral idea. While Conscription has been replaced with an all volunteer military (with .45% of our population answering the call guarding 99.55% of the population...); we continue to allow people to vote just for breathing and being 18 while starting to declare the requirement to prove citizenship (in the face of having massive amounts of illegal aliens in our borders) un-Constitutional.

Personally, I like the idea of granting residency at 18 as opposed to automatic citizenship... After all, if you cannot serve the public truly, without being able to vote yourself more benefits as civil servant... An earned citizenship almost always produces more informed and involved citizens. Just ask anyone who spent 7 years EARNING their citizenship after coming here from abroad. I know that I never fully appreciated my Citizenship until I came back from Kuwait in 2002... I very nearly kissed and hugged the ICE Agent at Customs in Boston...   

03JAN12 Remember you are dust, to dust you shall return...

Sadly I have no picture of my Grandfather who passed away this morning, today, I remember two men who have died this day. 0005 EST 03JAN2012 Howard Sutherland, my grandfather passed away. My father was able to speak with him, and he left this world in peace. Keep my father and his sisters in your thoughts and prayers. This day, two years ago, we lost a brother ROMAD and JTAC SrA Bradley Smith. Please keep his Widow and daughter in your prayers.

22DEC11 Creepier and Creepier...

Things continue to get creepier and creepier in the United States since September 11, 2001. Honestly, I'd love to go back to the days where we only had metal detectors and fully armed men (and I must say, National Guard soldiers are professionals compared to the run of the mill screener) at the airports instead of these rent-a-cop wannabes in the TSA uniform working for an $80 billion waste of tax payer money known as the Dept. of Homeland Security (multiple redundant bureaucracy that has FAILED to communicate across to other agencies like the Dept. of Justice... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/26/napolitano-cross-examined-over-fast-and-furious/ Which is one of the justifications for DHS in the first place...). For Airline travel we now get two choices, regardless of the fact that they have failed to prove that there is probable cause for searching every single American who flies, we either can have our nude picture taken at a scanner equipped airport or submit to an intimate pat down. While they claim that because they only partner you up with a person of like sex, with the current tolerance of homosexuals (indeed, actual deliberate recruitment in some cases) in the Federal Government it still begs to question if someone doing the pat down isn't some perverted freak getting his or her kicks on your taxpayer dollar. Then there is whom they choose... They can't profile, oh heavens no. So, Grandma, six year old girls, and Alaska State Representatives http://www.newsminer.com/pages/full_story/push?blog-entry-State+lawmakers+warn+Alaskans+about+TSA+body+scanners+&id=16859474&instance=blogs_editors_desk ) who have had breast cancer get flagged instead of Islamic males between the ages of 16 and 30 who have attended Madrassas in Pakistan or Afghanistan (notice that I didn't put race in there as there are plenty of white and black Muslim converts in our country that have gone off the deep end...). Of course, perhaps the Airport Police Officer and former co-worker with a violent ex-boyfriend are not to be believed when they express concern over the employment of near criminals by the TSA... Namely, the Airport PD Officer pointing out which screeners couldn't join a real police force due to criminal records as well as lack of competency identifying suspicious persons needing apprehending during TSA audits of local TSA checkpoints. Don't even get me started on the violent man who purchased ammo whom I almost took down because his ex-girlfriend worked where I did (we sell ammo) in spite of being told to keep away... He very nearly skirted a restraining order that would have cost him his job (and really, she should have still filed IMO... buying ammo where your ex works? When other places sell ammo in town? Creepy... But then, this is the TSA's finest!).

DHS and the TSA is just the tip of the iceburg these days. Since the election of President Barack Obama things have only gotten worse faster. I can't blame him completely as the TSA and DHS were indeed creations of the previous Bush Administration with body scanners in the R&D phase during Bush's second term. However, former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano was placed in charge of DHS by Obama. Whats her experience with 'homeland security'? Well, she was Governor of a border state and supported Obama's rather ludicrous immigration policy and Southern Border plan (which is sit and do about nothing). So, while Americans must be scanned, swiped, and groped; Mexicans pass north virtually without so much as being asked why... Not that I mind the actual workers coming, so long as they pass through the gate and get a card and pay our payroll taxes in order to assist in funding the benefits those taxes pay for that they receive... Its just the massive amount of drugs, and yes even now terrorists, that get smuggled in with the workers. Its the human trafficking that bothers me more than the pot and the cocaine (but that gets my goat too...). Of course, with this kind of problem, who is targeted by DHS as a potential threat? The guys trying to blow themselves up (all of whom, or most of whom, if I recall correctly originated in European airports by the way...) in the name of Allah? The shady Mexican with the gang tattoos? One of the thousands of OTM's that actually gets snagged by the few Border Patrol catches? Nope, the Pro-Life, Pro-Gun, white, Conservative, GWOT Veteran, who has a Gadsden Culpeper Flag that says “Don't Tread on Me”. Twice in 2009 we had reports from the DHS, FBI, and other LEA's working closely with the Federal Government brand people like myself who have crazy notions of Liberty as terrorists (http://trendnemesis.blogspot.com/2009/04/14apr09-we-are-being-profiled-again.html)... Despite the damage control that had to be exercised from these two FUBARs, DHS still continues to follow this line of thought (which is the agenda of the Southern Poverty Law Center by the way, while they have some great information they are slaves to a Left Wing agenda that slams anything they deem as 'Right Wing'; for example I would probably be labeled as a potential hate threat due to my stances on immigration and homosexuality, and believe it or not my affiliation with the American Legion) without question.

To top this all off, we have seen a new trend in the manner in which the FBI operates. Dangerously close to, or actual, Entrapment. FBI informants finding people of a specific profile that is vulnerable and easily manipulated, and then pushing them into plotting acts of violence. Its a convoluted trail to follow, and not all cases run the risk of Entrapment honestly speaking (locally the domestic threat presented by Schaffer Cox is an example where FBI informants were pushing violence, but we also have Cox and his disciples stating in no uncertain terms to police officers and State Troopers that they knew where they lived and that they could kill them; all while standing in a COURT HOUSE, regardless, its interesting to connect this to other FBI cases with the same tactic: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/schaeffer_cox_fbi_informants_basically_kidnapped_m.php ). While there are 20 plots the FBI brags about, we find out 17 were FBI produced, bank rolled, and supplied to individuals targeted by informants with some bad records (not too dissimilar to Olson in the above article). Not only do we have Muslims being entrapped and pushed over the edge to violence (makes you wonder if someone working for the FBI didn't push Maj. Hassan over the edge at Ft. Hood and everyone is keeping quiet about it...) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/16/fbi-entrapment-fake-terror-plots but also it seems like its happening to Americans that fall under the new definitions of domestic terrorists (albeit Cox certainly was leaning heavy that way without the FBI when I look back at whom he chose to surround himself about the time I did some art for him in early 2009...). Of course, whats also interesting is how they treated a Material Witness in the case against Schaeffer Cox: http://newsminer.com/view/full_story/16673344/article-Anderson-brought-in-under-material-witness-warrant-in-Schaeffer-Cox-case?instance=home_news_window_left_top_2 and http://patriotslament.blogspot.com/2011/12/it-wont-happen-in-america-yeah-well-it.html. With this kind of treatment of a material witness, one wonders why agents have shown up to cuff Eric Holder with his refusal to cooperate in the Fast and Furious investigation (the gun smuggling by the BATFE which resulted in the death of a Border Patrol Agent... Killed by a gun provided to a cartel by courtesy of the agency responsible for busting illegal firearm transfers and smuggling...).

So there you go folks. Creepier and creepier. Try to enjoy the Holidays, maybe someone in Washington will wake up and pull their head out of their ass finally and pull the plug on this travesty of a Department known as Homeland Security and end the multiple redundant security apparatus that is only making matters worse in the US by trampling our Bill of Rights (particularly that Fourth Amendment) every time we go to the airport... Makes me wonder if my fellow Veterans and I aren't going to have to bear a Scarlet Letter at some point in time and submit to a bit more extensive procedures to be allowed to travel around the country if we also happen to hold certain political view points based on some of the reports flying out of DHS, DOJ, and other Federal agencies.

13DEC11 Skepticism pays off... Sometimes...

Why I'm a skeptic about Conspiracy Theories...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-federal-agents-really-raid-a-mormon-food-storage-facility/

...and yet keep a wary eye on government intrusion regardless.

'As of late Monday, Oath Keepers had pulled the food storage raid story from their website, and gave an explanation that stated:

“We have pulled this story about the Mormon cannery being visited by federal agents because the source of the information at the cannery is now denying that he ever told us that event occurred.” '

However, the poking around does lead to some questions, though indeed if its the county asking 'are you prepared' its completely different from the Federal government knocking on the door demanding an inventory and searching without a warrant like the alarmists are screaming (A certain local 'tactical' store owner comes to mind...).

"But the full context to the story does not seem to end there. It turns out authorities have been poking around and asking Tennesseans about their emergency preparations, even going door-to-door with questionnaires.

Local Nashville news broadcasters at WTVF-TV reported on house-by-house Metro Public Health department efforts to check on citizens’ emergency preparedness, including the off-putting line that ”The county still wants to know exactly what you are doing to start thinking ahead:”

As it stands, the Surplus Store alert from BJA still has yet to be debunked...

"The Blaze called one of the phone numbers listed on the flyer, and it is in fact a direct line to a joint terrorism analysis fusion center in Colorado. When asked for an official comment on the distribution of the flyer, a fusion center officer declined to comment and stated that any request would have to be made in writing."

Nor do I think it will be.  In light of MIAC and the 2009 DHS 'Right Wing' Extremism report targeting GWOT veterans as potential domestic terrorist threats...  Of course, my excessive skepticism about all things coming from the Prison Planet crowd back in '08 did bite me when I stated here on this blog that I thought the MIAC report was joke.

That taken in context with Senate Bill 1867 still leaves that lovely creepy feeling in the back of my mind....

The Blaze Article:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/can-the-indefinite-detention-bill-send-americans-to-military-prison-without-trial/

Lets not forget the 10DEC11 use of an RQ-9B Predator by the Air Force in support of a local police agency...  Yes, it gets creepier and creepier, and people wonder why stories like the one from Oath Keepers grab hold and never let themselves go from the national conscience...  Never mind the kernels of truth to these sensationalized stories that are in fact very real oversteps by our Federal Government these days.

12DEC11 UAVs and local Sheriffs...

Since this is eating my afternoon, I figure its a worthy blog posting.  Heck, its been too long since I took the time to blog...

I just finished reading an article about the Air Force using an RQ-9B in support of a North Dakota Sheriffs Department...  And found it disturbing.  Well, not the use of a UAV so much (as its just like police helicopters which I'm not against either), but because WHAT THE HELL IS AN ACTIVE DUTY AIR FORCE UAV DOING IN SUPPORT OF POLICING THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY?

So I wrote my Alaska Senators and Representative in the Swamp:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear (Insert Senator and Reps name here),

I am deeply disturbed by a 10DEC11 LA Times article about the use of an RQ-9B Predator UAV (or RPV as the Air Force now calls them, but since I'm of the 'older' crowd and got out in '07 I still refer to them as UAV...) in the state of North Dakota. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-drone-arrest-20111211,0,324348.story

I'm not at all shocked about the vehicle used. An RQ-9 is an incredible tool, and is a worthy successor to the manned helicopters that do the same mission in many places, its sensors are more acute than the old FLIR systems on many police department helicopters. It makes perfect sense to use them in this capacity. Since RQ-9s can be equipped with AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, they should however be utilized rather sparingly as this causes no end of speculation about what who is controlling them desires in the United States.

What disturbs me most however has nothing to do with the airframe involved, but who is controlling the airframe and the mission. I don't have a completely accurate picture of who called for what when or who was in charge of the mission, but I do understand Title 10 and Title 32 rather well; and I do understand that the US Military (in this case Active Duty Air Force) have no authority to police within the United States under Title 10 and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. There are exceptions for EXTREME circumstances, and on Federal land. However, it seems that none of the conditions were properly met.

There is a very simple solution to this matter, to prevent further breaches of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and potential violations of Title 10, Title 32, and Title 18. First off, it starts with the State (North Dakota in this case) having RQ-9s under its Air National Guard. This way, under Title 32 orders from the Governor, they can use the RQ-9 in their state when needed. Second, encourage North Dakota to equip its Army National Guard with the RQ-7 Shadow UAV, again under Title 32 orders it would be very simple for the Army National Guard to act under the Governors orders. Third, perhaps the state of North Dakota should seek to hire UAV contractors like ISR Group or Insitu if they desire UAV support for these incidents instead of immediately asking DHS or the Federal government for such assistance.

Its apparent to me that these solutions must be implemented at a state level, but weren't. So the US Air Force was called in... This is a very slippery slope to move down, and its up to you our Federal policy makers to prevent this from happening and establishing a precedent that could indeed endanger Civil Liberties. When they called the Air Force for a UAV, the answer should have been a distinct “NO, we aren't authorized to do that.” Instead, since the UAVs have supported the FBI during drug raids (which on Federal land such as National Parks and BLM land ISN'T an issue...), and along the border (which again, being a Homeland Security mission and a Constitutional mandate to protect that International Border isn't an issue), the complacency resulted in the US Air Force giving support to LOCAL police, thereby policing, within the United States. I'm sorry, but that sticks out to me as a blatant violation of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, as well as a violation of several other US Codes. Perhaps I could be wrong, but since I just knocked out the FEMA EMI IS 800 b. course that stated quite clearly that US military is LIMITED as to what they can perform (but Title 32 forces are not) within the United States...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should be interesting to see what kind of response I get back...  One thing I can say for my Alaska delegation, every single one of them is pretty good about getting back with constituents even if they disagree with my ranting!

04OCT11 FNSB Elections!

Here are my election predictions for the Fairbanks Northstar Borough. Its about 2:50 PM, and I'm about ready to head out to the North Pole traffic circles with my kids for some good ol' fashioned sign waving!

Assembly:

Michael Dukes is likely to win his bid for re-election. But then, since I'm a dedicated listener of his, and I haven't seen his opponents ads or signs everywhere... I'm biased.

Here is where it gets tricky. Between the Bennett Brothers in their two races (Josh and Aaron) I suspect neither will win their bid this election cycle. In fact, I'm positive both will lose their races, as well as Joe Blanchard and Guy Sattley. The fallout will certainly be more whining on their part with David Gissel that its proof positive that voting doesn't work. Let us hope they learned from Schaeffer's past going down that path that forming a 'gang' erroneously labeled 'citizens militia' is a bad way to go; and that going back to the drawing board and planning for next election is the way to go. Both Aaron and Josh seem much more organized this time, and getting a radio show on Saturday mornings will likely get them more votes and support. I suspect their loss won't be as great, I'll even venture to say that one of them might even pull off an upset. I'm no expert, there are no real polls on that, after all its a local election. Got to give them both credit for giving it a shot and trying, and with the incumbents being at a disadvantage due to past decisions, anything can happen. Sadly though, I think the Unions are going to be able to get their boys (Davies at least) in because that segment of the population will only have one candidate out on top verses the current split conservative vote.

Proposition 2 is likely to fail. Perhaps not with the astounding 60% vote that the voters initiative forbidding the Borough to ban heating devices had, but I think most Alaskans when its said and done will see the ban for what it is and vote NO. Sure, it'll have the most support in the Ester Goldstream and University voting districts, however it'll likely fail in the North Pole districts. Swing vote will be in Fairbanks itself. With the ban they've already faced, who knows; maybe they won't screw over everyone else in the borough. If it does pass, I'm positive there will be a lawsuit filed; I might even throw some cash to fight it if it does pass! I'm one of those people that can't afford the oil any longer!

Bonds, and School Board... Who knows. I give the Bonds a 50/50. The only un-opposed School Board race should be interesting. I've only heard Ryan Smith on the radio, and nothing about or from Sharon McConnell. So, that being the case, and at least hearing Mr. Smith on the radio at least once, I voted for him.

Don't like what I've got to say? Well get your arse to the polls before 1900 (7 PM) and Vote!

Don't Vote? Don't Bitch.

If you vote, you might not get the government you want; but if you don't vote you always get the government you deserve (to include the next dictator...).

26SEP11 Can the Ban, the big signs!

Well, considering Prop 2 outright bans coal, and my outdoor boiler regardless of which fuel I use... And sets up police powers for the Borough to measure the moisture in your wood pile to ensure you have dry wood... As well as setting up opacity measurements for wood smoke (but doesn't apply to any other types of smoke even though oil boilers, wood boilers, and coal boilers all produce very opaque smoke at -30 through -50 F....) in which a 'code enforcement officer' objectively determines if you smoke is too opaque (also, never mind the lack of daylight during winter in AK, or that its banning the most economical fuel sources at this present time requiring us to burn oil or 'approved' wood stoves). All this, because the people who live in Ester literally badgered people into signing petitions at the Library and soccer practices. Yup, I can confirm that its the Ester crowd, while I running the Equinox Ultra Marathon on Ester Dome; all the Subaru's, Volkswagens, and Audis had "Yes on 2" signs and stickers as well as the properties. Obviously, its meant to get riff-raff like my family out of town so that the folks who can afford the $20,000 Volkswagens and Audi and the fuel oil to heat their hilltop homes don't have smell my wood or coal smoke regardless of the actual air quality (by they way, we have worse air quality in summer with our 1,000,000+ acre forest fires... but those don't count toward 'attainment' or 'non-attainment' of PM 2.5 standards... Which is the only reason we are non-compliant, it used to be PM 10 until we obtained compliance, funny how the number moves like that!). I borrowed the sheepskin over the Communist hammer and sickle from Antonio Prohias. It was what instigated his rather dramatic departure from Cuba, his employment with MAD, and the creation of "Spy Vs. Spy".