Teen To Face WMD Charge In School-Bombing Plan
The 18-year-old who planned to bomb his high school is facing a possible life sentence after being charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and two other charges.
Authorities have said Schallenberger could have assembled deadly bombs
within minutes with the materials they found. Police said they also
discovered bombing plans including a hand-drawn map of the school, a
hate-filled journal lauding the Columbine killers and an audiotape that
authorities say was to have been played after Schallenberger died.
Schallenberger has been charged by the state with making a bomb threat,
and county prosecutor Jay Hodge planned Tuesday to charge him with
possession of bomb-making materials.
This was a straight-A student who police say was just "mad at the world". What were his parents worried most about?
I think most of us civilians would consider a personality disorder a kind of mental disorder -- or something more like a mental birth defect. It's only for the purposes of being able to lock someone away for life that I can approve calling it something else.
The coverage of Columbine (and every school shooting thereafter) was appalling. If we keep making rock stars out of these toe-rags, we're going to get a LOT more of them.
Posted by: S. Weasel at 23 April 2008@06:12:10 (rasT+)
Personality disorders are descriptive terms for what people would also call spoiled brats, assholes, abusers, drama queens, criminals, sociopaths, bullies, divas, etc... a maladaptive pattern of behavior that is under their control but they choose to use because it has always worked for them before. They know it's wrong when they see it in others, but many times don't think it's wrong for them because someone else "makes them do it". It's very difficult to treat because it develops over a long period of time and the behavior patterns are firmly set.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 23 April 2008@07:28:16 (Q5ggV)
I would argue that if it were fully under their control, they would control it. The adults, anyhow. I wouldn't at all be surprised if better brain scanning ultimately leads us to find that criminality has to do with a visible, measurable lack of that which governs impulse control.
At first blush, this looks pro-criminal -- poor babies, they can't help it. But it's the opposite: if they are physically incapable of learning to conform and we have no mechanisms to change that, we are obliged for the good of society to lock them up (at least) and throw away the key.
Even thornier -- if we know what criminality looks like before it happens, how temped are we going to be to punish people who haven't actually done anything yet?
The libertarian in me shrivels up like a spider on a hotplate over that one.
Posted by: S. Weasel at 23 April 2008@09:52:55 (rasT+)
You speak of temptation so you believe in free will, yes? You have the choice to give in to temptation or resist it. Same for these people. They have the choice to behave appropriately and choose not to in order to achieve a desired end, no matter the cost.
Personality disorders are characterized by patterns of choices, whether they adapt to the situation or not. If someone threatens my child and I get aggressive, or even violent, that can be an appropriate response. If someone fails to hold an elevator when I am running for it and I decide to run up the stairs, catch them, and start assaulting them... usually not appropriate. If every time I wanted something I choose to become violent in an attempt to get what I wanted, that would frequently fail and have negative consequences... a maladaptive pattern of behavior. Not a mental illness.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 23 April 2008@14:34:40 (Q5ggV)
I'm not a free will absolutist; I don't think everyone finds it equally easy to make good choices. It doesn't make sense to me that talent or intelligence might vary, but everyone is temperamentally identical. A man with a bad temper and a good character can learn, by force of will, to control himself, but he'll still be a man with a bad temper. He will always be at a disadvantage in this regard to the man who is naturally phlegmatic (however much the latter may congratulate himself on the excellent choices he makes).
I'm largely a materialist: I think the differences between people lie in brains or hormones or other organic and measurable physical differences. Whether a brain configuration that makes impulse control more difficult is an "illness" or not is...a different conversation.
Posted by: S. Weasel at 24 April 2008@07:57:48 (rasT+)
10 pounds of ammonium nitrate is considered a â€œweapon of mass destructionâ€?
Posted by: JBHood at 24 April 2008@11:06:55 (UFNnW)
JBHood, If I recall correctly that could have the explosive force of 12 pounds of TNT if mixed and sensitized properly. Some Park service people would use it if they had to hike back in to blow up a stump or log that was blocking a stream or posing a hazard. Getting it involved much less red tape than dynamite and they could carry the fertilizer and sensitizer in separate packs to mix on site. Safer than dynamite if someone fell off the trail.
Posted by: Machinist at 24 April 2008@13:44:37 (yFIK0)
Hey Mac-agreed-ammonium nitrate, ten pounds of the stuff properly processed, could make a decent little bomb. But, a gallon of gasoline weighing a few pounds less could also do a lot of damage-is gasoline now a WMD too? This kid appears to have some problems, but I have to wonder at the state lobbing out this WMD charge absent any radioactive or biological components or substantial amounts of explosives; it trivializes the whole idea of WMD.
Posted by: JBHood at 24 April 2008@17:05:17 (GkYyh)
JBHood, Good point, Sir. I suppose the idea is the indiscriminate destruction possible by several large bombs but that does not really fit the idea of a WMD. I did not properly consider that aspect and I should have. I do not like the dilution off words. If this is considered a WMD then they will be claiming any explosive ordinance used by our troops classes as WMDs. I'm reminded also of the poor security guard in Atlanta. They said he had "bomb making materials" in his garage. That turned out to be duct tape and nails. That makes a LOT of bomb factories in this country.
Posted by: Machinist at 24 April 2008@18:35:45 (yFIK0)
Al-Sadr Demands Deserters Be Rewarded
Muqtada Al-Sadr is getting desperate, but shouldn't worry yet because he still has the AP to shill for him.
The Basra offensive â€” which
opened on March 25 â€” quickly stalled amid strong resistance from the
outnumbered militiamen, despite artillery and air support provided by
U.S. and British forces.
During the attack more than
1,000 security troops â€” including a full infantry battalion â€” refused
to fight or joined the militias, handing them weapons and vehicles.
"Quickly stalled" as in, kicked so much ass that militia are still running for their lives. Those who deserted or refused to fight should never be allowed to don a uniform again... not even as a bus driver. They weren't security forces, they were infiltrators from the militias. How else to explain their behavior? Muqtada has a possible explanation.
"All the brothers in the
army and police who gave up their arms to their bothers (Sadrists),
were only obeying their grand religious leaders and they were driven by
their religious duties," the anti-U.S. cleric said.
call upon all concerned authorities to reconsider their decision to
dismiss those people from the army and the police. I demand they be
reinstated and even rewarded for their loyalty and devotion to their
religion," he added.
Demand all you like fatso, the only reward they should get is a firing squad, and you should be the first one in line. You're still wanted for murder, remember? If you ever poke your nose out of Iran long enough for real Iraqi troops to draw a bead on you, I'm certain you'll find out how much they support you.
New Surveillance Program To Begin
It's now time for the next Democratic pseudo-scandal to start. A new surveillance program using satellites is ready to "go warm" according to the Director of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff.
Sophisticated overhead sensor data will be used for law enforcement
once privacy and civil rights concerns are resolved, he said. The
department has previously said the program will not intercept
Of course, that won't stop Democrats from lying about the administration infringing on civil liberties and breaking the law.
But Congress delayed launch of the new office last October. Critics
cited its potential to expand the role of military assets in domestic
law enforcement, to turn new or as-yet-undeveloped technologies against
Americans without adequate public debate, and to divert the existing
civilian and scientific focus of some satellite work to security uses.
say Chertoff has not spelled out what federal laws govern the NAO,
whose funding and size are classified. Congress barred Homeland
Security from funding the office until its investigators could review
the office's operating procedures and safeguards. The department
submitted answers on Thursday, but some lawmakers promptly said the
response was inadequate.
"I have had a firsthand experience with
the trust-me theory of law from this administration," said Harman,
citing the 2005 disclosure of the National Security Agency's
domestic spying program, which included warrantless eavesdropping on
calls and e-mails between people in the United States and overseas. "I
won't make the same mistake. . . . I want to see the legal
underpinnings for the whole program."
You can expect all the details in the inevitable hearings and briefings to come. Anything not disclosed by the Democrats directly will surely be leaked by them to the NYT.
Terrorist Final Exam = FAIL!!
I wrote about the mid-term exams for terrorists-in-training earlier. Here are the results from the final exam.
Twenty Hizbullah terrorists were killed recently during military training in Iran, according to the Kuwaiti paper Al-Watan.
The paper based its report on statements from senior Lebanese Islamist
Mohammed Ali Hosseini. Hosseini did not say how the 20 were killed.
Must have slept through all the Risk Assessment classes, eh?
With that many, we're probably looking at the whole class. Maybe the instructor gave a demo and forgot the saftey precautions. You know: wear goggles, close the gas valves before igniting, explode bombs only in the presence of innocent civilians...
Posted by: kishnevi at 10 April 2008@22:34:53 (xtp2U)
LOL!! Read some of the comments over at Rantberg, they're hilarious. I really liked the one about bayonet training.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 10 April 2008@22:42:51 (tarqT)
The Defense Department says the portable device isn't perfect, but is
accurate enough to save American lives by screening local police
officers, interpreters and allied forces for access to U.S. military
bases, and by helping narrow the list of suspects after a roadside
bombing. The device has already been tried in Iraq and is expected to
be deployed there as well. â€œWe're not promising perfection â€” we've been
very careful in that,â€ said Donald Krapohl, special assistant to the
director at the Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment, the midwife
for the new device. â€œWhat we are promising is that, if it's properly
used, it will improve over what they are currently doing.â€
Troops are generally smarter than a lot of people (there's a lot of moonbats, right?) give them credit for. They'll know this is just a tool and not perfect, but having it give a positive will definitely make them take a closer look at the person suspected of lying.
It would be interesting to see these used in hospitals as well. I can't tell you how many times I've had a diabetic swear to me that they've been following their diet and the HgA1C result comes back elevated as hell. Or doing an intake on somebody who swears they don't use street drugs and their urinalysis comes back positive for cocaine and marijuana. Show them the results and they almost always look down and say, "Yeah, I really didn't mean to lie." (huh? Isn't that another one? Yep.)
The problem with lie detectors is that what they really measure is the level of anxiety. So Ahmed Tikriti may be all nerved up because he knows that Hussein Anbari planted the bomb, and has just lied to the soldiers about that; or he may be all nerved up because he's being questioned by the soldiers even though he has nothing to do with the bomb.
That's why lie detectors aren't actually useable in criminal trials.
Posted by: kishnevi at 09 April 2008@21:02:58 (xtp2U)
They can also be spoofed through medications (Valium or Ativan, for example) and training using biofeedback. As an imperfect tool, it's still betting than relying solely on gut feelings. The linked article mentions how these things will be addressed, some nice foresight for a change.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 09 April 2008@21:43:14 (tarqT)
More Terrorists Escape From Prison *UPDATE*
What is so hard about keeping terrorists locked up? In this story , about nine convicted terrorists who bombed several targets in Casablanca escaped from the prison in Morocco.
The Moroccan Justice Ministry said in a
statement that officials discovered Monday morning that the nine had
escaped from a prison in Kenitra, some 40 kilometers (25 miles)
northwest of the capital Rabat, MAP reported.
The ministry said all measures have been taken to find the escapees.
How about some measures to keep these guys from escaping in the first place? I'm liking the idea of a GPS harness more and more (but no explosives kishnevi and Mac, sorry).
*UPDATE* kishnevi was the one who originally suggested explosives.
The explosives were not me, Sir. I considered them but rejected it for the reasons you mentioned, collateral damage, accidents, lack of due process, etc. I just wanted the guys to come crawling back begging someone to find a guard.
Posted by: Machinist at 07 April 2008@16:26:49 (yFIK0)
Maybe we could just tell them it has explosives? Heh.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@16:30:17 (tarqT)
Besides, I know you and Harper like 'splosions (eyebrows grown back yet?)
I see kishnevi was the one who originally suggested explosives, so I'll update the post.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@16:37:19 (tarqT)
Thank you. It's not often that I come up with a sick and nasty idea, so I like to have the (dis)credit due me.
Posted by: kishnevi at 07 April 2008@19:04:09 (DqtzB)
You're quite welcome sir. Hang around Mac and me for much longer, you'll find they come easier and easier.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@20:45:35 (tarqT)
Hillary Calls For Olympic Boycott
I never thought I would see this day come. I agree with Hillary Clinton and disagree with President Bush. This alone was cause to reconsider my thinking, but I can't get around it... I think Hillary is right on this one.
Clinton, in a statement, cited violent clashes in Tibet and
the lack of pressure by China on Sudan to stop "the genocide in Darfur."
"At this time, and in light of recent events, I believe President Bush
should not plan on attending the opening
ceremonies in Beijing, absent major changes by the Chinese
government," the New York senator said.
I'm seriously disturbed by this. Fortunately, she'll "qualify" her statements very soon I'm sure, if only to reassure my faith in her dishonesty. Next, Barack Obama will argue the exact opposite, then "qualify" his statements to say we should have a boycott. That way, they can both point to the statement that benefits them most and "tut-tut" any attempt to point out any conflicting statements they've made before or since. 'Cause that's how they roll.
John McCain will promise to hold a "virtual" Olympics... but only if the athletes are all given medals, whether they actually compete or not.
Remember, the "Free Tibet" is important to the lefties, because of the Dalai Lama, I suppose. So Hillary is looking to score points with them.
(I shouldn't joke about the Dalai Lama. He's actually on the faculty of my alma mater; taught there for a week last fall.)
I spent an hour or so this afternoon trying to come up with a version of the Beijing Olympic logo that's more accurate than the official version. Either convert the Olympic rings into ball and chain, or drape chains over the humanoid figure in the upper half. Unfortunately, my artistic and photoshopping abilities are woeful of the woefulest, so nothing usable was achieved.
Posted by: kishnevi at 07 April 2008@19:12:47 (DqtzB)
What does boycotting the Olympics accomplish, really, though. We need to address the trade deficit to China if we want to correct our standing --- that seems more important, to me anyway. Because China can call our loans, which are so huge they defy the common calculator (how many zeroes in a trillion?), we probably shouldn't give them reason by way of insulting them. Eye on the prize. Become self-sufficient. That's the way to hit where it hurts. My 3 cents.
What does showing up accomplish besides give them increased credibility? The Games have become a joke, nearly the opposite of what they were intended to represent.
What loans do we have to China? If you're talking about a trade deficit, that's something completely different. Besides, appeasement never works with totalitarians, they (by definition) want total control. Even if they could damage our economy, what good does that do them? The economy in the rest of the world is heavily dependent on the United States economy. Jihadists would like to destroy it because it would also hurt the world economy, furthering their cause which only prospers in ignorance and poverty.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 09 April 2008@16:16:11 (tarqT)
I wish I understood more about Chinese culture. Then I'd understand how they'd interpret being shunned versus validated, or if they even care. Will being boycotted shame them into changing their foreign policy? I kind of doubt it, seeing as though I agree that the Games have become something of a laughing matter (although I'm not sure the athletes share that sentiment).
In any event, don't be misled. I hold no regard for totalitarian governments, and I certainly don't want to enable or validate them (or Jihadists). However:
What I heard (on Lou Dobbs Tonight, a couple or three years ago) is that China has been building, building, building its military, including nuclear submarines, at a pretty good clip. They've got the surplus to do it, certainly. So economy coupled with intent certainly does affect foreign policy, perceived power, and on.
Am I wrong in my perception that we're suffering a near-unmanageable deficit right now? Not a sarcastic comment --- I've only heard it from the media and politicians. Although foreclosures are riding high in these parts. Hm.
60 Minutes had a story, an eye-opener for many people, about this issue last week. I missed the program, but the whole town seems to be talking about it. I wish I hadn't missed it.
China has been building up their military and their economy is doing very well right now because they've incorporated some capitalism into it. I did an earlier post about boycotting the Chinese Olympic Opening Ceremonies with a link to their economy here.
We don't owe them money and trying hurt our economy would hurt theirs more overall. There's really not a lot they could do to hurt us though. I've done several posts on the economy, just put "recession" into the Search Thingy at the top or bottom of the sidebar for those.
How they perceive it is less important than how it's perceived by us. Boycotting the Opening Ceremonies or the entire Olympics would show the American people that we're serious about human rights, not hypocritically supporting one abuser while claiming to fight a war on others.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 09 April 2008@18:57:06 (tarqT)
The deficit is below the record in terms of percent of the GNP. The dollars are higher. That does not mean it is not too high but the scare talk by the democratic politicians is risible. They just want an excuse to raise taxes. They have shown they would just spend the money, not reduce the deficit. The increased taxes would slow the economy and reduce tax income prompting them to call for yet more taxes. When the Republicans tried to push for a balanced budget in the 90s, Bill Clinton actually said a balanced budget was bad for the country. The Democrats have never been able to resist increasing spending when they got there hands on more money.
China has long had a huge but primitive military. Clinton greatly increased the threat by selling them a ten to fifteen year leap ahead in weapons technology in return for campaign contributions to help win the 96 election. This saved them many billions of dollars in R&D and put 100,000,000 Americans under nuclear threat. He provided them knowledge we did not give our allies. I do not mind imports but I try to avoid buying Chinese.
Posted by: Machinist at 09 April 2008@19:00:46 (yFIK0)
A credit card balance that is ruinous at $30,000. a year can be minor at $300,000. a year. Just looking at the dollars is deceptive. Our economy is growing. This may be the first time in history an economy was considered a recession while it was growing every quarter. Must be global warming overheating the debate.
Posted by: Machinist at 09 April 2008@19:08:06 (yFIK0)
When we let politicians and the MSM "frame" things, they always turn out to be lies. The economy and global warming are just two examples. Too bad they won't just tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may. We'd be better off in the long run, but they can't see past their next campaign or deadline.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 09 April 2008@19:37:04 (tarqT)
Taliban Commander Captured
This is good news from Afghanistan.
Police arrested Taliban commander Abdul Jabar on Saturday
in the most significant capture of a militant for some time,
the Interior Ministry said.
Jabar, who the government said organized attacks in the
south, was captured while on his way towards Pakistan. He was a
deputy of Mullah Mansour Dadullah, a prominent Taliban
commander captured in Pakistan in February, it said.
They should put a super heavy duty shock collar on these guys when they are out of maximum security. Have a five minute timer that a guard must reset which can only be turned off or removed in the cell. Let him run.
Hey, I can dream!
Posted by: Machinist at 06 April 2008@23:46:02 (yFIK0)
Why bother with a shock-collar? Just put a GPS with remote alarm on a tamper-proof collar or harness. If they get away, follow using GPS and when you're close, turn on the alarm (very loud siren-type). If it's loud enough, they'll probably be disoriented or give up to get it shut off.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@00:19:03 (tarqT)
I rather like the fantasy image of the guy franticly searching for the guard at the four and a half minute point.
Posted by: Machinist at 07 April 2008@00:37:26 (yFIK0)
How combining and improving on both your ideas? GPS collar. Small explosive placed at the back of the neck. If the GPS goes beyond a certain limit, an alarm goes off. If the GPS stays behond that limit for a certain number of minutes (say, two minutes), the explosive is set off.
Posted by: kishnevi at 07 April 2008@13:18:31 (0gB9X)
I have several problems with using an explosive:
1. Innocent people close by when it goes off (possibly an intentional homicide bombing where we provide the explosives... I wouldn't want to try and explain that one to the family members). 2. Accidental detonation through mechanical failure (especially since GPS coverage can go offline for several reasons, i.e. going through long tunnels, inside certain buildings, etc...) 3. We know some are willing to kill themselves and may consider such a death "martyrdom". I'd bet that several of the radical imams would issues fatwas proclaiming these types of deaths as resistance and not suicide. 4. The potential for misuse by totalitarian governments under the guise of fighting terrorism. China, Zimbabwe, Yemen, and others come to mind.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@13:33:19 (tarqT)
1. Make it a small explosive. Bullet size, perhaps. Enough to impact the skull of the jihadi, not enough to damage anything else.
2. Hadn't thought about that one. However, if they're with a guard, the time delay will allow the guard to intervene and keep it from exploding. And if they're not with a guard, then it sounds to me like they're escaping...
Is a systemwide failure (say, all GPS in the camp lose signal) possible? If so, then either appropriate precautions need to be taken, or the idea becomes too risky. At the very least, we would need to keep the cells clean for the next detainee to occupy it, and nothing unsettles a person like finding blood stains under their bed.
3. As far as I am concerned, they can all "shaheed" themselves, just as long as no non-jihadi gets killed with them.
4. Totalitarian governments use lots of things for their oppressive purposes. Should we give up armies, police, and barbed wire because the Chinese use them? Not to mention dim sum.
Posted by: kishnevi at 07 April 2008@19:01:36 (DqtzB)
7Is a systemwide failure (say, all GPS in the camp lose signal) possible?
Can you name a technology that never goes wonky? Murphy's Law applies to everything I can think of.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@20:48:46 (tarqT)
Guess He Didn't Get The Memo *UPDATE*
Senator Biden says the troop buildup was a failure.
"The purpose of the surge was to bring violence in Iraq down so that its leaders could come together politically," said Biden,
D-Del., in this week's Democratic radio address. "Violence has come
down, but the Iraqis have not come together."
Isn't that a failure by the Iraqi leaders and not the troop buildup? I thought the current talking point wasn't about the surge, but that we should focus on Afghanistan. Wasn't it pretty much accepted, even by the Dems, that the surge did what it was supposed to do?
They said their focus will be on restoring the strength of the Army and
Marines and refocusing the nation's resources on fighting terrorists in
See? Don't worry Joe, the Associated Press has got your back.
*UPDATE* Tarnation!! DRJ over at Patterico's beat me to this one, but I missed it before writing this. I try to avoid stories that other people have done already (hint: if you check the timestamps on any of my posts that you see covered elsewhere, mine are almost always first. Heh.) Nice work DRJ.
Not only are you frequently first but I often drop by here to get ideas.
Speaking of ideas, I ran across an LA Times' correction on a GTMO article. I didn't notice the original article but they had lots to correct. I wondered if you plan to blog on it. Here's a link (scroll down to 4/5/0
Posted by: DRJ at 06 April 2008@21:26:40 (wE7Og)
Heh. Instead of a parenthesized 4/5/08 it inserted a cool happy-face. I need to remember that one.
Posted by: DRJ at 06 April 2008@21:27:36 (wE7Og)
Lots to correct indeed. I didn't see the original article, so I don't know how much they got right. Even with the original, I probably wouldn't blog it because it mostly talks about stuff after I left. I could make some educated guesses about whether something was true or not, but if I were challenged to prove it, I'd be hard-pressed to defend the post. I usually jump on Guantanamo stuff from when I was there, or before I got there (since I saw most of the historical stuff), but not much on stuff after I left for that reason.
I know there were more than 2,000 books and magazines even when I was there. I was also involved with the hunger-strike and helped develop the policy that ended up getting it under control. No way would we have considered force-feeding someone who had only missed 9 meals and I can't imagine that was ever true, even after I left.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 06 April 2008@22:15:39 (tarqT)
You don't want to write about something that happened when you weren't there?
Thank you very much DRJ, that means a lot coming from you. Anyone who has gone through my posts can easily tell how much respect I have for you, Patterico, and the other co-bloggers there.
I've commented on things that happened after I left Cuba, but made sure that it was clearly a personal opinion. I always try to make distinctions between what I know is fact, what I believe to be true (not always the same as fact, as we both know), and what is opinion. I wish journalists tried to do the same.
For example, when the three detainees committed suicide, I commented that I absolutely believed it to be an act of asymmetrical warfare but couldn't say it was a fact.
I think it would be very difficult for anyone to find an example of me dishonestly arguing a point or reporting anything. I'm pretty proud of that.
Posted by: Stashiu3 at 07 April 2008@01:19:20 (tarqT)
"Re-Education" In China
China's crackdown on the people of Tibet continues. Now the Chinese government is calling its horrid oppression something different... re-education.
Efforts by authorities to "re-educate" monks at a monastery in Sichuan province in southwest China led to protests there on Thursday in which at least eight Tibetans were killed, the activist groups said.
I guess the Chinese government is going to teach the people of Tibet how to become patriotic Chinese citizens, even if it kills them.
The International Campaign for Tibet said the re-education campaign, a
tactic long used by the Communist Party, typically involved forcing
Tibetans to denounce the Dalai Lama.
The Dalai Lama fled his homeland in 1959 and remains a revered figure
for Tibetans, although China believes he is a dangerous figure bent on
achieving independence for Tibet.
China says he is orchestrating the latest unrest, claims he denies.
They must believe that if the lie is big enough, told loud enough, and for a long enough time it becomes the truth. Of course, you need one more element for any chance of successfully injecting doubt into the crimes you commit.
Independently verifying what happened, as with all the unrest, is
extremely difficult because China has barred foreign reporters from
travelling to Tibet and the other hotspot areas and blanketed them with
Sites are added to the Moronosphere and Gerbil Nation blogrolls by request. I got everyone on there who was there when they were made, so email me if you know of a new addition. Some of these are on the main blogroll as well and will remain duplicated.
The main blogroll is at my own discretion. I gratefully accept suggestions by email, but I don't do blogroll exchanges. If a site is there, it's because I personally recommend it. If it's one that is not updated often, check out the archives and you'll probably see why it's there. I will rarely remove a site from the main blogroll once it's there.
*rustle, rustle* **looks around empty thread** SQUEaK! entry
Comments are not moderated and users are not registered. This means that I have little to no control over who posts a comment or the content of that comment. Therefore, comments other than my own do not reflect any viewpoint of mine, no matter how long it appears as I will likely remove comments that cross the line of decency. If a comment is removed, a notation that the comment was there will be inserted. Any questions or concerns about posts, comments, copyright, or other issues may be addressed by emailing me at "stashiu3 AT gmail DOT com" replacing the AT with @ and DOT with a period. If that's too complicated, maybe you shouldn't be on the internet without supervision. Just sayin'
If you have suggestions for the blog, put them in a comment to the original welcome post, a comment to any other post, or email me at the contact below. Be well.
I am a Psychiatric Nurse who retired from the Army after 24 years total service. I started out as a Private E-1, made Sergeant E-5 in 23 months, then went to nursing school and ROTC to get commissioned. I am interested in politics where I lean heavily conservative, movies, music, and books. Hopefully you will enjoy what you see and come back often.
Stashiu3 AT gmail DOT com
(Replace the "AT" with "@" and the "DOT" with ".")