Frontpage Feed
Community Feed
The Idea Market Feed
The 'Verse Feed
Brian Macker's blog
Obama Doesn't Speak Austrian, Only Keynesian.
Submitted by Brian Macker on Mon, 2009-04-06 17:33.I don't see why Michelle Malkin is making such a big deal about Obama saying he doesn't speak Austrian. I thought everyone knew he only speaks Keynesian, and not because his father is from Kenya either.
Social Security. It's Insolvent Now.
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2009-04-04 08:25.Tom Blumen writes an article on how Social Security is likely to be insolvent six years earlier than expected.
Are you kidding me? It's insolvent now like any Ponzi scheme. Just because Madoff made payments to investors doesn't mean his operation was solvent at any point. It became insolvent the minute it used new investor money to pay old investors. That's exactly what Social Security does.
The True Meaning of The Pitchfork
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2009-04-04 06:49.Obama is now quoted as saying, "My administration,“is the only thing between you and the pitchforks" to AIG officials giving out bonuses.
Obama, let me clue you into the true meaning of Christmas the pitchfork.

Me and My Pitchfork - Feb 28, 2009
Picture taken by Arthur B. with my camera.
My pitchfork was aimed at the politicians and their appointees.
Politicians are the ones that interfered in free markets to cause this economic crisis. They’re the ones throwing my money in the air around their rich friends. They are the ones who attempted central monetary planning with the Fed, and GSEs.
Obama, Bush, Clinton, Paulson, Geithner, Bernarke, Franks, Raines, and most importantly Greenspan, all need the business end of a pitchfork.
Update: I had used a publicly posted picture that had no copyright notice without crediting the photographer, Eugene Gannon. He had intended for his picture to be shared but wanted credit. I hadn't thought he would care and I should have asked first. I added a credit yesterday but apparently he didn't notice and posted another comment where he still seemed upset. So I have now replaced the photo with one taken by my camera. You can see Eugene Gannon's Photo at his site.
While I was at it I'll also add some sexy protest babes who are way better looking than me. My photo but anyone who wants can use it. I don't care. Ask me if you want full resolution. You can crop out the Frankenstein monster that way if you want.
I didn't take many pictures but I had to get a picture of the poster on the left. It was the best one I saw.

Get With the Program Krugman
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sun, 2009-03-22 08:51.Paul Krugman is finally, very late in the game, criticizing just some of the economic madness that has been going on for the past twenty years. He points this out in his article, More on the bank plan. He does so for all the wrong reasons.
Krugman states in his article, “A bank, broadly defined, is any institution that borrows short and lends long.”
Get with the program Krugman. This is the bust phase of an Austrian business cycle. A bust caused by the fact that you can't borrow short and lend long without causing a mismatch between the plans of the lenders and the borrowers.
Eventually the short term plans of the lenders cannot be serviced by the borrowers. The lenders want their money back to spend but it's all tied up. They thought they had more savings than they actually did because fractional reserve acts as a monetary multiplier. There are more short deposits than actual liquidity to serve the accounts.
If your definition of a bank implicitly includes that then you should be against banks. However, banks don't need to do that. They could match maturities. They don't because they can cheat the system that way, with the help of the government. It allows them to leverage on the backs of savers without them being fully aware of the game. It’s implicit fraud.
You know that Austrian Economics is the way to go. This Keynesian/Monetarist Frankenstein hybrid you mainstream economists, yes YOU, have been running the country on is going to end up destroying us.
You don't give a sh_t about the poor unless you are willing to swallow your pride, admit you've been wrong all these years, and join the good guys. Join those who are against the reckless governmental destruction of the past twenty years.
I've known this mess was coming down from at least 1996. My coworkers and I have been speculating on when this sham economy was going to come down around our feet since at least then. Fractional reserve monetary inflation coupled with margin account leverage was not the answer to prosperity during Clinton. Reflating the fractional reserve bubble with absurdly low interest rates was not the answer during Bush. Now printing fiat money will not help correct the fractional reserve monetary deflation problem.
Money is NOT goods. Inflating the money supply is not the way to prosperity. Government spending is consumption not production. This “plan” is idiotic and will fail, as would your plan. You say time for a Swedish solution? Get real. That would just set us on the path to socialism, and further destruction of the economy. Nationalization of industry is NOT the way to go.
People are going to starve if this keeps up. Not just here but all over the world. We've had central monetary planning and it doesn't work just as Austrian Economics predicts. That's science. Nationalized banks aren’t going to help. This whole mess was caused by government sponsored entities in the first place. The Fed, Fannie and Freddy, etc.
Setting interest rates below market is a price control. Like all price controls it causes producers to produce less and consumers to consume more. For interest rates that means low savings (the producers) and high borrowing (the consumers). So that's economics 101 in ANY school of economics. Shame on Alan Greenspan for not following those metrics and shutting down the monetary pumps. Shame on the Fed and Bernarke who was instrumental in helping Greenspan ruin the economy.
Furthermore, with low interest rates, Austrian economics predicts that there will be asset price inflation in goods that are far away from production and companies that produce them. That describes internet companies and housing to a tee. Can anyone say Internet bubble? Can anyone say housing bubble?
It also predicts, according to theory, that commodity prices will skyrocket as the extra money injected into long term goals bids up the prices of those first. They go up highest because interest rates are more important to the costs of production of things that are far away from consumption.
That's exactly what happened confirming the theory.
Furthermore Austrian theory predicts that commodity prices will collapse as fractional reserve monetary inflation contracts at the end of an expansionary period. It happened confirming the theory.
Plus it predicts that there will be trade deficits as the fractional reserve (or fiat) inflation proceeds and other countries still accept the currency. This causes a shift of production to foreign countries according to Austrian theory. This is exactly as it happened. Shame on Greenspan for causing this. Shame on him for adding the additional incentives that caused capital flight. Incentives like the Mexican and the Asian Crisis bailouts.
It also predicts that under a metallic standard such monetary inflation will cause an outflow of the backing assets. In the case of the US during and before Nixon it was gold. We had below market interest rates back then too. Plus a currency pegged above gold. So the gold flowed out. Being the idiot he was Nixon took the final steps to get us off gold and made us have a completely fiat currency.
What is our backing asset now that we are on fiat currency? It's our ability to pay. So taxpayer debt is the backing asset to our currency. Increasing governmental debt is equivalent to the draining of gold now days. This whole time the central bank has been watching as our coffers have been drained. A sure sign that monetary policy was too loose.
Austrian Economics now predicts massive inflation. When that event happens will you finally believe in proper theory?
Austrian Economics also predicts that you can't do the kind of quantitative predictions that other economists are so fond of. You have to do the qualitative types of predictions as I did above. No mainstream economists saw this coming with their physics based mathematical models. Just as Austrian theory predicts.
Every step of the way the Austrians have been right and the Keynesian and Monetarists have been wrong.
Yet after Keynesianism just failed twice, once with the internet bubble, and now with the housing bubble, now Obama is going to try the same stupid “solutions” again. Lower interest rates, print money, and spend. This is Bush and Clinton on steroids. Who the hell is this guy listening too?
If he were smart he'd look me up and fire his entire cabinet.
You know the next government steps. Inflation will harm old people, people who will lose their jobs, orphans, everyone in the US trying to buy foreign trade goods. So the incredibly stupid politicians we have will try price controls which will further cripple the economy.
Krugman, Greenspan, Paulson, Bernarke, you are all economic ignoramuses. Try applying scientific principles to economics. All scientific principles like self consistency. Stop believing the fantasies of Keynesianism a self contradictory system with all its "paradoxes". They are not paradoxes to be accepted they are contradictions that falsify the theory.
You call your column, "The Conscience of a Liberal". How can you live with yourself when you know you've been wrong all these years? Do the right thing and abandon your socialist tendencies and failed economic policies.
Update: I posted this comment at Krugman's blog. It stayed up for a while. Now it is gone. This guy is as honest with his blog as Delong. That is to say totally dishonest. His comment section is a echo chamber.
Another NY Tea Party
Submitted by Brian Macker on Wed, 2009-03-04 08:14.There is going to be another NYC Tea Party held on Mar. 13 at 11:00 am near the Wall Street Bull. I work on Fridays and will not be there.
New York Tea Party
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2009-02-28 00:10.Today, Saturday the 28th, there will be a "Tea Party" protest being held in City Hall Park. That's 249 Broadway, New York, from 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm.
There will be socializing afterwards.
If you want to spot me then I'll be the guy with the faux pitchfork.
I'm fed up with these stimulus bills.
Some Republican's Don't Take the Money, or Do They?
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sun, 2009-02-22 17:15.On February 16th, Paul Begala, trying to justify the most wasteful spending bill in the history of the US wrote, in perhaps the most face punch worthy hypothetical of all time:
"Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina took umbrage at my writing that his approach to the economic crisis is to do nothing. I'll deal with his "ideas" in a moment, but first let me make a modest proposal:If Republican politicians are so deeply opposed to President Obama's economic recovery plan, they should refuse to take the money. After all, if you think all that federal spending is damaging, there are easy ways to reduce it: Don't take federal money.
Gov. Sanford can lead the way. South Carolina should decline to accept any federal funds for transportation, education, health care, clean energy or any of the other ideas President Obama is advocating to fix the economy. And the rest of the GOP can follow suit."
Yeah, he essentially says, "we are going to spread the slop we expropriate from the taxpayers and if you don't like it then just back off from the trough. Oink. Oink."
His picture is in the article. Fist, smirking face, POW! Print it out. Tape it to a soft object, and punch it.
Well some Republicans have now responded, not that they have been exemplars of fiscal responsibility when in control, they at least have a guilty conscious.:
"If we were to take the unemployment reform package that they have, it would cause us to raise taxes on employment when the money runs out -- and the money will run out in a couple of years," Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour told CNN's 'State of the Union' on Sunday."
Wow, some sanity at last. Wait a second. I read on ...
Schwarzenegger called it "a terrific package," and said he does not foresee a need for a tax hike in the future to sustain the unemployment provisions.
The fantasy lasted for maybe five seconds.
Oh, Arnie, Whatever happened to the free market, Milton Friedman, stuff? Guess you never truly understood in the first place. I know Friedman didn't. His monetarism got us into this mess, and it wasn't truly free market. Go Austrians! No not the Schwarznegger type. The other kind.
Yeah, some other republicans are mentioned as turning down the unemployment money but they don't seem to be doing so for the rest of it.
Begala was right in his estimation of Republicans that's for sure. I don't however think that makes him or the Democrats look very good. Makes them look like robbers who flung money in the mud to some groveling wino.
Isn't there some movie scene like this with some evil doer throwing change in the dirt for some hard up addict looking for a fix while giving the poor creature a humiliating tongue, or physical thrashing? Some scene where the bad guy humiliates someone also prone to vices?
No, I am not talking about Deliverance, despite the "Oink, oink, squeal like a pig". That scene more about the taxpayer.
Instruction Manual For Life
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2009-02-21 06:57.A reminder that faith based religion is not merely about community. If it were then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
I Call For McCain
Submitted by Brian Macker on Mon, 2008-11-03 22:21.Here's my reasoning. Obama has raised so much cash and has run so many ads that the American public will blame him for all the commercial interruptions during their favorite shows. Mark my words.
Poking Around the Friesian Web Site
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sun, 2008-10-12 10:34.I was poking around the Friesian web site when I came across this article that jogged my memory. The topic is criticism of Poppers philosophy of science, and in particular falsification.
To put some context to the first sentence please remember that Popper himself had already assumed and explicitly addressed the issue of "explaining away falsifying evidence".
Here we have the interesting case of an actual event that falsifies Kuhn's theory of science. I'd forgotten about it.
"Kuhn's critique contains a considerable element of truth, since people, scientists included, often do just see what they want to see, and it is possible to explain away falsifying evidence. On the other hand, anomalies are often recognized that are inconvenient to a theory, and most scientists are now aware that if the theory cannot ultimately accommodate them, then a new theory will be necessary. And then there is the Great Devonian Controversy. Once all the major geologists recognized that there was no unconformity in the sequence, and that there were plants in the lower strata, there simply was no existing theory that could accommodate the facts. Thus, we had a situation that, in Kuhnian terms, was impossible. The evidence could not be interpreted to sustain any existing theoretical views.
The situation was sometimes discussed by participants in what sound like modern terms. Thus, John Phillips, professor of geology at King's College, in London, wrote to De la Beche that his discovery of certain plant fossils, "is a fact to be introduced into the induction, not an anomaly to be frightened at" [p. 223]. Here "anomaly" would mean just what it means now: Some fact inconsistent with a received or desired theory. As "Baconians," both Phillips and De la Beche think that the appropriate theories will be produced by "induction" from a sufficient catalogue of facts. Neither Kuhn nor Popper could agree with that old "Baconian" view of theories, but Kuhn and deconstructionists cannot allow that an anomaly all by itself could potentially falsify a theory, rather than vice versa. But in the Devonian Controversy, the anomalies overthrew all the theories."
Doing My First Write In Vote
Submitted by Brian Macker on Fri, 2008-10-10 23:13.Based on watching the Obama-McCain debate and their absolute ignorance of economics I have decided that both are totally unacceptable candidates.
Ron Paul is the only candidate that is talking sense at this point. I'm writing him in.
LOL, Take That Halo Hardcore Gamers
Submitted by Brian Macker on Fri, 2008-10-10 09:47.There is an article over at Gizmodo I thought was funny and seems to have a grain of truth titled, "Scientists Find Gene That Makes You Good at Halo Also Makes You a Premature Ejaculator".
After a study of 200 Dutch men, scientists found that those with a premature ejaculation problem all had a version of a gene that controls the release of serotonin. And, unfortunately for all of you awesome Call of Duty players out there, those affected seem to "have very quick reflexes. They may be excellent at playing tennis or computer games, for example." Oh, cruel fate!
Now I understand why I lose so quickly to some of these guys. Bad news for the South Koreans also? I know, I know, South Korean gamers.
The Dupes of Fractional Reserve Banking
Submitted by Brian Macker on Fri, 2008-10-10 09:33.I had a discussion with a commenter called Midwesterner at Samizdata back in March that will give a fairly good idea of my understanding of fractional reserve banking. I thought it was a useful exercise for both Midwesterner and myself, and is one of those rare occasions on the internet where there was a changing of minds.
Midwesterner had posted a comment which included a hypothetical situation and his interpretation of it.
"Let's you and I play Monopoly™ some time and see how it works.
Lets say nine players start with 100 dollars each and all sales are done at open auction (simulates the market). Democratic vote will decide which players may engage in fractional reserve lending (simulates politics). Everybody else can only lend hard currency.
Lets say four players and I collude to engage in preferential treatment of each other. We five can use fractional reserve the other four cannot.
To keep it simple, let's say the other four colluders (in the real world, a couple of dupes would, too) all deposit their money with me and I lend it back to them. We have an initial kitty of 500 dollars (mine and their $100 starting stakes). By practicing fractional reserve lending I can actually loan them by the tenth deposit/loan cycle a total of $1785.25 (5 x $357.05) . This assumes that the player they spend the loan with turns around and deposits the money with me. So the five of us now have $1785.25 to bid against the other four players $400. We could actually have almost $1000 each if we managed to ring every last cent out of the system. By borrowing for all of our expenses and depositing all of our receipts, one can see how quickly the game would shift to the five of us with each lap around the board.
Players not in the lend/borrow/lend/borrow/.../... system have $100 each to spend. People in the system have $357.05 each to spend. Needless to say, a little collusion goes a long way. Separating the players from the dupes in this example makes the racket a little more obvious."
So what would be your answer to this and why? Do you think you would be able to give an explanation that would convence Midwesterner of your position?
Well surprisingly, I was able to convince him that in fact he was wrong, and along the way this exercise lead me to realize some things that were implicit in my beliefs but that I had never explicitly derived.
This was a series of comments exchanged on fractional reserve banking that also touched on anti-empiricism in Austrian Economics.
Turns out the only dupes in the system were those holding the bank accounts and accepting the bank notes and not the non-participants.
Here's my first salvo:
"Midwesterner,
Their are restrictions on who can collude which prevents the collusion from being as easy as you make it out.
First off they have $500 between them. No matter how they lend the money out to each other there is still only $500.
When they borrow they must have access to the possibility of buying an asset with a revenue stream in order to service any loan they may take out to buy that asset. However in your example there are no assets with revenue streams.
Even if there were if any back and forth lending and purchasing occurs betwen the 5 colluders then the net benefit to them is zero.
The non-colluders could always decide to lend to each other also. So there is no asymmetry of fairness there. Nice player a could lend to nice player b who happens to buy a performing asset with the money. He then provides a with part of his revenue stream to service the interest on the loan. Player a no longer has the money he lent to b. He only has a promise to pay it back based on the revenue stream. So a has less cash on hand. As long as a understands this and doesn't think he can just retract the loan at any time then there is no problem.
Any "collusion" that occurs between the five colluders requires one of the colluders to lend and one to borrow with a net gain in cash of zero. Of course colluder c1 is not going to lend to c2 out of the goodness of his heart. He going to want proof that c2 can pay him back with interest.
So your model here is not sufficient to capture the nuances of the issue of fractional reserve banking. It's not merely that every schmoo on the street is harmed by people lending money to each other. There is something more that goes on.
Hint: There is a problem if and only if any player a lends to player b with b buying a long term capital asset that only has a revenue stream sufficent to pay back the loan, while telling a he has the capability to pay him back fully with cash out of hand he doesn't have.
This however is a fraud between a and b and doesn't involve the other people, and gives a no ability to bid up prices in the economy. Player a may overspend on his budget based on his mistaken trust in player b but that's only his problem when he runs out of cash and b can't pay him. That does not effect any person who is not lending to player b.
There's no reason why a bunch of players might cooperate, not collude which is a loaded word, to pool their cash on hand, just in case any one of them has an emergency.
I leave it to you to figure out how banks play a role in this."
BTW, there was another good article on Samizdata on the role of China in this crisis. It's something I recognized more than a decade ago. I've commented in that post also and although it's a rushed comment I think it would be helpful for anyone who doesn't understand why some people oppose loosening credit as a response to the crisis.
Remember these comments in the second article are not polished in a way that makes them easy to understand, unlike the comments to the first article. Repeatedly explaining this will help me understand why people can't grasp the argument and I will improve it.
I understand the causes of this problem, I understand the current situtation, and I understand the proper "solution". Getting anyone else to grasp it is another matter.
College "Speech Code" Lose Out in Court Case
Submitted by Brian Macker on Tue, 2008-08-26 06:20.I am behind the curve on this one and not sure if it got much coverage. I just learned that earlier in the month Temple University lost a case in which their speech code was ruled unconstitutional.
Hopefully this ruling will be applied on other campuses.
First Reason to Like One of Them
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2008-07-26 08:03.Well I've found my first reason for liking a presidential candidate this year. Not that I'm trying very hard, being a rational voter. McCain is against bailing out Fannie Mae.
Up to this point I had disliked him due to McCain-Feingold and at least he is not tied to racism like Barack "Trinity Church" Obama , or Ron "Newsletter" Paul was.
I hadn't like Paul for other reasons. His blame terrorism on America stance was a one issue killer for me. The world is more complex than "We'll stay out of everyone's business and they'll be nice".
I still don't have a candidate I like enough to vote for and I don't hate any candidate enough to "vote for the other guy" at this point so it looks like I won't be voting at all. I do think Obama is going to make a mess of the economy but I think that of all the candidates.
This Fannie Mae stance was only a minor sign that McCain gets the economics, but Bush had such "minor signs" before he was elected and he proceeded to screw up the economy more than it already was. He was into bailouts, tariffs and keeping Alan Greenspan around to inflate the currency, for example.
We are in real deep economic trouble and most people don't recognize it. Whoever is president is going to inherit a mess. I wonder how it's going to play out. If it's Obama he might get sainted like FDR did for making things worse. I don't think McCain will get that benefit. Even if he does exactly right things I think he will be blamed for the troubles and may not make a second term.
Note that I think doing exactly the right things is going to make lots of people unhappy, including me. Financially I'm betting they'll do the wrong things because it's the politically expedient thing to do. In fact, I might vote for Obama to increase my odds of being right. Inflation, here she comes.
[Update: When I began writing this post I was thinking about the winning candidates of the Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian parties. I don't particularly like Bob Barr. Yes, it was hyperbole to say "First reason to like one of them". No it doesn't neccesarily apply to Ron Paul, or in fact any of the candidates. In general I was trying to express how jaded I feel about the candidates. Sorry if that lead to any misunderstandings.]
Who's Committing the War Crimes?
Submitted by Brian Macker on Wed, 2008-07-16 06:29.Colombia had a recent triumph in freeing hostages from the leftist rebels FARC. If there is any doubt about the debased ideology of FARC the fact that it kept the hostages chained together at the neck continuously for years on end should make one pause for thought. Not CNN. No, they are already trying to interpret these events as a crime committed by the Colombian government.
CNN has just run an article trying to paint the Colombian government as "the bad guys" titled “Colombian military used Red Cross emblem in rescue”. By the third paragraph they are already making claims against Colombia.
“Such a use of the Red Cross emblem could constitute a "war crime" under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law and could endanger humanitarian workers in the future, according to international legal expert Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.”
Tough charges, lets see if they hold up. Will this endanger Red Cross aid workers in the future? How?
“It is clear that the conventions are very strict regarding use of the symbol because of what it represents: impartiality, neutrality. The fear is that any misuse of the symbol would weaken that neutrality and would weaken the [Red Cross],"
Yes, they are serious charges and that is a quite reasonable law, but the spirit of the law is that one not use the symbol to impersonate the Red Cross in doing humanitarian work. So the true question should be, “Was there an impersonation of the Red Cross here”.
If you look at the CNN article you will see that they have displayed the Red Cross in their article. No one would bother charging them with a “war crime” because they aren’t impersonating aid workers in doing so. There is no attempt to deception involved.
Well I shouldn’t say that. There is deception involved in their article, an attempt to deceive the public into believing that a “war crime” was committed by the Colombian government. What wasn’t attempted was to deceive any parties that CNN was the Red Cross. Nor was there any such attempt on the part of the Colombian government to do so as we will learn from information later in the article, despite CNNs attempts to magnify a different point of view.
It’s not until we get to the sixth paragraph that we learn.
"The unpublished video and photos of the mission, hailed internationally as a daring success, were shown to CNN by a military source looking to sell the material. CNN declined to buy the material at the price being asked; it was therefore unable to verify the authenticity of the images."
Why the rush to paint Colombia as war criminals if the photos are not know to be authentic?
Buried even deeper in the article.
“"After all these years of guerrilla war, we have become experts in identifying who is before us," she answered. "That's why I said it was very strange to me. I said, 'Well, what is this? A helicopter, a white helicopter. Red Cross? No. France? No.' There was no flag. There was nothing; there was no sign anywhere."
Here they have eye witness testimony from the event stating that there was no credible impersonation of the Red Cross. Was the Colombian government trying to impersonate the Red Cross here or were they trying to do something quite different?
“One of the members, dressed in a dark red T-shirt or polo shirt, khaki cargo pants and a black-and-white Arab-style scarf, also wears a bib of the type worn by Red Cross workers.”
An Arab-style scarf. Well that doesn’t sound like someone trying to impersonate the Red Cross. The Red Cross is not a Muslim organization.
At the beginning of the article we learned.
“The military source said the three photos were taken moments before the mission took off to persuade the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia rebels to release the hostages to a supposed international aid group for transport to another rebel area.”
Were they trying to imitate international aid workers? Do international aid groups transport prisoners for terrorist organizations? I don’t think so. We do know that it’s a common practice for terrorists to pretend they are running ambulances. The Al-Dura affair was an event at which such mock use of ambulances took place. Something we know with no thanks to CNN. In this case the Colombian forces are obviously pretending to be FARC sympathetic operatives pretending to be aid workers in order to transport prisoners.
“Both of Colombia's two main guerrilla armies, the FARC and the smaller National Liberation Army, have been known to misuse the Red Cross symbol, sometimes transporting fighters in ambulances.”
Well, then it’s obvious that there was no impersonation of the Red Cross. From prior reports we know the FARC rebels had been told that this was a prisoner transport operation ordered by FARC leadership. Since it is common practice for FARC to impersonate the Red Cross for transport then what better way to impersonate other terrorists than to use the same tactic. Therefore no “war crime”.
Have no doubt, there was no attempt here to trick anyone into believing the Colombian military personal were actual aid workers doing humanitarian work. The Colombian government was on a true humanitarian mission but that is the exact opposite of what FARC was lead to believe. FARC members were under the mistaken belief that this was just another prisoner transport operation by other members of FARC. There was no attempt to deceive anyone into believing that this was the Red Cross, the Colombian Military certainly wasn’t trying to deceive itself, so there was no violation of the spirit of the law even if a Red Cross symbol happened to be worn.
Now had the Colombian government convinced FARC they were the Red Cross and were planning on actually helping these people with treatment, or by releasing them then certainly there would have been a “war crime” in the sense perhaps that was not intended. That’s a problem with the letter of the law not the spirit. In fact, if anyone, even a bunch of doctors, impersonated the Red Cross to deliver medical attention they would be violating the letter of this law. That’s not the spirit however. The spirit is that the symbol of the Red Cross not be used for military operations like transporting prisoners. The true “war criminals” here are members of FARC.
This CNN story was written with a certain bias, a certain interpretation of events, and I don’t think it was unintentional. The article could have been headlined “Colombian Military Uses FARC’s Abuse of Humanitarian Aid Symbols to Rescue Hostages”, and it could have stressed the important point that no FARC member ever truly believed this was a humanitarian mission. Instead they painted this as war crimes being committed by a US ally. This is far from objective journalism.
How can CNN wonder why they are considered by some of being anti-American, and pro-Terrorist? People are rescued from being chained together at the neck day and night for years and CNN finds a way to paint their rescuers as demons, shame on you CNN. Shame, shame.
Student Who Took Condom Getting Death Threats
Submitted by Brian Macker on Fri, 2008-07-11 09:03.I'm linking to this story too trigger a discussion of contracts. Well, maybe not, I just find it ridiculous. I've changed the nouns to protect the innocent.
"A UCF student claims he’s getting death threats for messing with something sacred.
Webster Cook says he smuggled a condom, a small rubber ballon that to planned parenthood members is symbolic of responsible behavior after a volunteer hands it out, he didn’t use it as he was supposed to do, but instead walked with it."
Ok so he took something that he was given freely and left with it disobeying some rule about immediate usage. In this case the condom was suppose to be used in an act of oral sodomy. A kind of symbolic cannibalism.
"Planned Parenthood members worldwide became furious."
Not only were they furious but they wanted it back.
Why? They gave it to him for free and if he used it the way they wanted it would've been ruined by the act. In fact the volunteer had directly put the condom on Webster Cook. Who else would want to use it after that?
The quality of the condoms handed out do not even rise to the level of what is sold in stores. This is a five cent condom not a fifty cent one.
Surely not something to become outraged over even had Cook signed a contract stating that he would use the condom in a sex act. Suppose he had gotten home and thrown the condom away instead of using it in a sex act, thus violating the contract. Surely Planned Parenthood could be indemnified by this wastage of their condom by paying five cents or better yet buying a high quality condom on Amazon or at the supermarket and returning that instead.
"Webster’s friend, who didn’t want to show his face, said he took the Eucharist, to show him what it meant to Catholics."
He wanted to show his friend the condom and perhaps discuss safe sex practices. You'd think planned parenthood would be good with that.
Another article at WorldDaily.com gave even more details on his motivations.
The student senator, Webster Cook, originally claimed he merely wanted to show the condom to a friend who had questions about Planned Parenthood before using the condom for a oral sex act.
So apparently he was planning to use the condom all along, just from home.
"Webster gave the wafer back, but the Condom League, a national watchdog organization for Condom rights claims that is not enough.
“We don’t know 100% what Mr. Cooks motivation was,” said Susan Fellatio a spokesperson with the local Planned Parenthood. “However, if anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it.”"
Wait a second. He gave the same condom back and they are still not satisfied? I find this puzzling to say the least. Not using a freely distributed five cent condom that you can buy online is a hate crime?
Get real.
If you want to control how your condoms are used then you are going to have to restrict your distribution to members only, put signs up, have them sign a contract first, and supervise the process more diligently. You can even make the pay for the condoms up front if you want.
Once you put the condom on a person though I don't see how you can force them to perform a sex act if they decide not to at the last minute. So even if Cook was a member and all these procedures were followed the most they can do is revoke his membership.
What is especially disturbing is that throughout the middle ages Planned Parenthood used the false accusation of "Stealing the Condom" and "Condom Desecration" to persecute Jews.
"Accusations of condom desecration leveled against Jews were a common pretext for massacres and expulsions throughout the Middle Ages in Europe.[1] At the time, the concept of Jewish condomcide — that the Jewish people were responsible for poking holes in condoms — was a generally accepted Condomist belief."
This seems to be a common practice of non-profits. They set up some taboo that no rational person would give a second thought about and use that to demonize, persecute and lynch anyone who disagrees with their dogma. What better excuse for killing someone and stealing their property than accusing them of stealing a five cent condom or mishandling a book that is full of lies. Hell they'll beat you to death even if they own the book or were the ones that originally handed you the condom.
Hell, in the middle ages they were forcing the Jews to put on the condoms in cannibalistic ceremonies, and at the same time accusing them of smuggling them out for illicit purposes. If you remember your history on the incondomquisition then you will recall that many Jews were forced to become Condomists by the Spanish.
Only the Government Can Do It
Submitted by Brian Macker on Mon, 2008-07-07 17:48.We've seen the government lose money running gambling organizations like the OTB. Which is surprising enough given that uneducated gangsters can run such operations profitably while incurring the costs of avoiding the law and not being able to openly advertise. But how can they lose money if they feel they can do things like selling 'Zero' chance lottery tickets.
"Through a request filed under the Freedom of Information Act, Fishwick's firm was able to obtain records that showed the Virginia State Lottery sold $85 million in tickets for which no top prize was available. Fishwick says the state should pay $85 million in damages."
Well maybe that idea won't pan out if they have to pay the money back. I wonder if the Virgina State Lottery will be running in the black if they lose the suit. I say "if" because maybe it's perfectly legal.
Speaking of Tomatoes
Submitted by Brian Macker on Mon, 2008-07-07 16:08.Here I am in my natural habitat. I'm around 6'1" so you can see the tomatos are already up around 5 foot. Those poles are twelve feet long each. I may have to add a third rung near the top if they go past the 6 foot mark. I've gotten two ripe tomatos so far.
No it's not just tomato's either. Half that garden is other things. I keep four foot wide beds with paths that run east to west. The shorter stuff grows at the front of the beds and the tomatos shade the footpaths. It's 32x32 and I have another at 12x40.

Watermelon, zucchini, gourds, turks turbins, cucumbers, radishes, carrots, turnip greens, green beans, soy beans, peas, bitter melon, leaf lettuce, winter lettuce, miners lettuce, turnip greens, onions, strawberry spinach, strawberries, long island cheese pumpkins, giant pumpkins, pie pumpkins, american giant sunflowers, potatoes, eggplant, hot peppers, sweet peppers, verdolaga, and italian wall lizards.
There's around 14 kinds of tomatos, 3 hot peppers, etc. I grow many types of flowers too. Here's mullen banana custard next to my pool.
I'm growing the hottest pepper in the world this year, the bhut jolokia, which is three times hotter than the second hottest the habanero. It rates a around one million scoville units. The pepper spray they use in riot control is 2 to 5 million scoville units, while tabasco is a mild 2,500 units.
Here's a video of some kid eating a habanero. Notice the flames coming out his ears and the uncontrollable knitting of his eyebrows in anguish. He emits a pained squeal before going for the water. You need to watch this first to be impressed by the others.
Here's different guy but instead eating a bhut jolokia. Remember the individual peppers are between half and one fifth pepper spray by volume. I'm quite impressed but I think he was born with defective pain sensors so it's not quite fair. At least he was smart enough not to eat then entire thing like the other guy.
A couple of these Mexican's are obviously racist against East Indians as they don't seem to be enjoying this traditional Indian food. The one on the right not only handles the hot but she is hot. Perfect if you're planning a riot.
I thought I wasn't going to be able to find any videos of normal people eating the bhut jolokia. Seem's like everybodies doing it but they are all super human. This guy eats a whole one, you can sense he wants to cry when he talks, but then he gulps down another. Apparently it hurts on the way out too.
Yes, someone did "plant" italian wall lizards in my garden to keep the bugs in check. Besides they're cute. I think that same someone is responsible for putting them in my old garden back in New Hyde Park. They have been in the news recently as they are rapidly evolving new body parts.
I believe with the new habitat containing bhut jolokia this is the first step in evolving true fire breathing dragons.
Sunday School Art
Submitted by Brian Macker on Sat, 2008-04-19 19:54.A Sunday school teacher in Florida has been arrested for pasting kids faces onto porn.
"A volunteer Sunday school teacher is facing child pornography charges, after investigators say he took photographs of young girls and pasted their faces to sexually explicit pictures of adult women."
I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around what he was thinking let alone what the DA is thinking with regards to the charges. Is it really kiddie porn? It's not like he snapped pictures of naked kids.
Certainly this guys creepy and pontentially a danger but I'm not sure he actually violated a law here, or even harmed anyone.
If he did violate a law then it's a pretty broad one. What next? If you pencil in boobs on a kids picture you end up a felon and on a sexual predator list?