Trayvon Martin....a breaking point.

Does anyone remember those old western movies where the townspeople storm the town jail and drag some guy out into the street and lynch him because the people wanted 'justice'? This is the image I have of what is going on in this case. 


Between 2005 and 2010 there have been 95 examples of the 'stand your ground' defense in Florida. Of these, 65 have been upheld as justifiable shootings. This means that 65 people did not get 'justice', 65 people 'got away with it'. What makes this shooting different? There is NO difference. But, to hear tell it, this particular case is a travesty. Why? There are two issues here, the law and racism. If Mr. Zimmerman acted in accordance to the law, then he will not be charged. If he broke the law, he will be arrested and charged. The big question is, did he or did he not break the law. A grand jury will decide this issue. The Feds have stepped in to determine if he violated Federal law. In both cases, the system is working as it is supposed to. Does this satisfy certain people and an ethnic minority? No. They want what they call justice, even if it means denying Mr. Zimmerman his due process rights, his rights under the US Constitution.

Now I do not profess to know or understand what was going through Mr. Zimmerman's mind at the time. None of us can. We are Monday morning quarterbacking if we think we know all the facts of the case. These groups are not interested in facts, they want blood. Eye for an eye. How is justice served if Mr. Zimmerman is denied an opportunity to defend himself? How is justice served if the jury pool is tainted and intimidated, if he is charged and heads to trial? 


If you read and listen to some of these people, what you hear is hatred towards whites, racism in it's worst form. I will not deny that this was a terrible mistake, the shooting. I lived in Los Angeles when the Rodney King verdict came down. We were all listening to the radio for the verdict and when it came down, I and many knew what was going to happen next. A friend of mine, who was from India, asked me what was going to happen next. I told him they will riot. I told him not to get off the freeway until his exit, do NOT take the side streets. Well, we all know what happened. Total breakdown of civil control. Now, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that justice was not served in this case, but still does not justify what happened next.

Lately, we have heard of the rantings of these people who claim that Negroes are being singled out for execution, presumably for crimes they did not commit, even though they were tried, convicted, went through the entire appeals processes and ultimately the Supreme Court, that the death penalty should not apply, rather life in prison is preferable. Well, if the person is innocent, then why settle for life? Yet, within 2 days of that execution, a Caucasian was terminated here in Texas for killing a Negro and they did not stand up for him, demanding life in prison. What does that say about justice being blind? Is there a double standard? It would appear so. 


The point here is that all of these rantings are a result of pent up racism in the Negro community. Certainly I am not the only one who see's this. If you are going to blame anyone or anything, blame the law which allows for this sort of thing. If this was such a terrible law, then why not scream for justice for the 1st or 2nd or 65th victim also? No, this won't happen because they were not an unarmed Negro youth. Justice is only required of certain people. 


I have become so disappointed in mainstream media and certain personalities that I have had to either defriend or unlike them on Facebook because they are on a racist rampage to demand their kind of justice, regardless of the law or due process. To attempt to deny this man his rights in the interest of a mob mentality out to lynch him is just as wrong as the the shooting in the first place.


We will never know what really happened. To suggest racial bias is yet to be proven. This profiling charge is nonsense. The race of the child did not become an issue until Mr. Zimmerman was asked to describe him. A hoodie? One could argue that issue any number of ways. One must remember the most notorious person to wear a hoodie was a Caucasian, the Unabomber.

I am not saying that Mr. Zimmerman was justified or not, I was not there, none of us were. Under our system of laws, a man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers. As of this writing, no charges have been filed. I suggest we let the system run it's course. To calm down the racial rhetoric. 


In the mean time, I would suggest than those who demand justice, find another route, such as trying to get the law changed. That would be a fitting resolution. So put away your ropes and go home. Let the system work as it is designed to do. As for the family, if they have not already done so, file a wrongful death suit. Get your pound of flesh that way.

Keystone and the tar sand issue....

Much has been made of the Keystone XL pipeline lately. I am not going to comment on the ridiculous 'what if' scenarios being bandied about. I am not going to comment about the rampant ignorance on the subject by people who appear to be professional whiners and complainers. These folks will look at a picture or read a talking point and formulate their indignation without checking out any of the facts. What I am about to comment about is the mining itself, to offer a different point of view.

There are some who say that if the pipeline leaks, it will destroy the aquifer. This of course is silly talk. The same argument was made about the Alaska pipeline. What these loons fail to understand is that the tar sands are already ruining the environment by it's mere existence.

A gazillion years ago, natures god dumped billions of barrels of oil ONTO the surface of the land in Alberta, Canada, making it probably the largest toxic dump site on the entire planet. The soil is 'contaminated' with oil. The oil sands are very near the surface making the clean up easier than having to re-mediate soil well below the surface. Notice I use the term 'clean up' and 're-mediate'? So how do they get the oil out? The caustic, smelly, thick 'crude' on the ground and dump into a pipeline? Simply put, they dig out the contaminated soil, remove the oil and leave clean 'sand'. I don't know about you, but this sounds more like a toxic dump site clean up operation. Maybe because that is exactly what it is. You should see some of the before and after photos and videos after the land is reclaimed. Where a moon-like landscape once existed is replaced by lakes, ponds, forests...etc.

So I ask, what is the big deal?

Iran..Jewish State and nukes.....

For it seems an interminably long time I have been listening and watching this debate. I have tried to put this subject in context and perspective. All parties seem to have overblown the importance of the issue in my opinion. The press is not much better, especially if you think about it, it's not really ll that important to include the Jewish state into the discussion. Yet, a tiny minority seems to have the political power the rough equivalent of the entire US. The Jewish population on this planet equals .02%. If you took everyone who claims to be Jewish, the rough equivalent would be the entire population of the state of Pennsylvania. I don't see Pennsylvania as being a world power equivalent to the US. I don't see Pennsylvania being a relevant political power in the US. There are more Jews living in the US than in Israel, 2.1% of the US population. I find it offensive that the TGOP can rail against American women who are 50% of the population, but don't dare say a word against the Jewish state. Why is that? I am so sick and tired of politicians in this country pandering to tiny minorities and allow them to influence foreign policy. The Jewish state is not the only one, Cuban's are another tiny minority which excessive political power. I can travel to Vietnam, China and Russia, but not Cuba. Explain this to me..please. 


First off, our policy towards Iran should reflect OUR national security issues, not the Jewish state. If Iran, having a nuclear device is against our national interests, then the policy should reflect that. Let us consider who does have nukes. India, China, Russia, Israel, North Korea and of course, Pakistan. Now think about it for a moment, of those nations mentioned, who are the most erratic, irresponsible and unstable. The nation that should concern us directly is of course, Pakistan. If we had a choice between which nation we would feel more comfortable with having nukes, we would probably opt for Iran since they ARE a stable government. North Korea is a threat to Japan and yet we hear nothing like we do with the Jewish state.

What concerns me is that the Jewish state could influence our foreign policy further if they unilaterally attacked Iran. Attacking Iran by the Jewish state is NOT in the national security interests of the US. If the Jewish state were to attack Iran, then they should be left on their own. The Jewish state has a history of initiating conflict against her neighbors. In fact the Jewish state is under UN sanctions for not returning lands they illegally seized during their war of aggression in 1967. The Jewish state is indeed a rogue nation, not unlike Iraq when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Am I the only one who sees the double standard? 


It was mentioned today, again that Iran is guilty of state sponsored terrorism. Depending on your perspective, one could argue this point either way. However this cannot be said about the Jewish state. The Jewish state created state sponsored terrorism, just look to the tactics of the Irgun and Hagenah and today, Mossad. Mossad is notorious for their tactics worldwide, with assassinations and terrorist activities. How many times have the agents of the Jewish state been arrested in the US for stealing US secrets. Some ally. The Palestinians learned from the Jewish state how to conduct terror campaigns because that is how the Jewish state became a reality in 1948. 


Now lets be realistic. We dealt with the Cold War and the Soviet stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The calming factor was MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. In the case of Iran, they have NO capability at all to equal the US in nuclear firepower. If they were to attack any US ally, Jewish state included, they would be instantly vaporized. The Iranians in power, many educated in the West know all too well this would happen. So an attack by nuclear means is almost impossible. The thing is, pragmatic Israelis also know this. So where is the realistic threat? Words? That's it...words. If the Jewish state were to attack every nation that say's they want to destroy them, we would be in WW3 by now. The key word is, 'Say's'. Someone you know tells you in anger, 'I am going to kill you'. Just words, unless they run to their pickup truck and grab their AK47 'hunting rifle'. The difference is the means.

I will end this blog with a quote from a well respected figure in history. One who also understood the US and the American people. The quote defines America and Americans.

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
                   Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto after the attack he led on Pearl Harbor.