About Me

Name: Gray Ghost
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

The Marcellus Ridge Natural Gas Field

In 2002, the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) made a hugh discovery in a 54,000 square-mile swath (stretching from West Virginia to New York) in the Appalachian Mountains. Geologists call this area the "Marcellus Ridge". The drawing below indicates the area of this ridge:
    
  
 
 
These geologists have conservatively estimated that the Marcellus shale contains 168 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in place and optimistically suggests that the amounts could be as high as 516 trillion cubic feet. The U.S. currently produces roughly 30 trillion cubic feet of natural gas per year from our existing wells. Due to the age of most of the existing natural gas wells, this number (i.e., 30 trillion cubic feet) is dropping.
 
The technology exists to easily recover 50 trillion cubic feet of gas from the Marcellus Ridge, thus keeping the U.S. production up. If this recovery is realized, the Marcellus Ridge would be considered a "Super Giant" gas field (the geologists' words, not mine).
 
Why then, you might ask, has no one really heard about this news? Well there are two reasons. First, in most states, geologic surveys are released to the public almost instantly. In Texas, for example, a survey must be released in 60 days or less. In Oklahoma and Nevada there are similar laws. However, in Pennsylvania (where the majority of this field is located) the information doesn't have to be made public for a full five years.
 
Second, guess who is playing "fast and loose" with this knowledge? If you guessed Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrat Party, then go to the head of the class.

My "so called conspiracy theories" are starting to multiply. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

In the "Tank" for Renewable Energy

In business, timing is everything. On May 25, 2007, Speaker Nancy Pelosi bought at least $100,000.00 in the initial offering of a renewable energy stock. The name of this stock was "CLNE", standing for the Clean Energy Fuels Corporation. Some of you might remember the original name of this company. The original name of this company was "Pickens Fuel", so named after the company’s primary investor, T. Boone Pickens.

The reason I said "at least $100,000.00" (in the first paragraph) is that it is entirely possible that Speaker Pelosi bought over $3,000,000.00 in stock in this company. The listing of companies and individuals that bought stock during the initial offering (uncovered by such groups as "dontgo Movement.com") shows a large number of dummy corporations and Democrat-controlled trust funds. It is more than possible that Speaker Pelosi, and several key Democrat Leaders, now control CLNE.

So what, you might ask. Let’s go further along in time. On February 27, 2008, the US House of Representatives passed the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 (H.R. 5351). Speaker Pelosi used extreme pressure to make sure this bill passed the US House. Some representatives said that Speaker Pelosi did everything but "place a gun to their head" to make sure they voted correctly. 

But concerning the US Senate version (S. 3044), what occurred was interesting. The bill needed 60 votes under Senate rules to move forward but failed 58 to 41, with 8 Republicans joining 48 Democrats and 2 independents in support of it. Aides of Senator John McCain said he would have opposed the measure, but he was absent during the vote. (Note: Speaker Pelosi chastised Senator McCain for his absence.) 

If the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 had passed, the value of Speaker Pelosi’s stock could have been worth over $30,000,000.00. But more importantly, the Democrat Party would have controlled the development of renewable resources in the US. They would do so by determining who got grants and loans under the "rules" of this bill. However, you have to give Speaker Pelosi credit. As soon as it was evident that the "US Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008" was dead in the water, Speaker Pelosi and the California State Legislature hit the road with a "new battle plan".

The "new battle plan" is California's Proposition 10. (Proposition 10 is also known as the "California Alternative Fuels Initiative".) Proposition 10 would spend $5 billion in California bond money ($10 billion by the time the interest is paid, according to the LA Times) to promote natural gas as an cleaner alternative for automobile and truck fuel in California. Interestingly enough, in an LA Times editorial, Anthony Rubenstein was highly critical of Proposition 10, calling the proposition a "raid on California's general fund to support ‘Pickens’ self-serving national gas agenda."

"The initiative deceptively reads like it's supporting all alternative-fuel vehicles and renewable energy," Rubenstein wrote. "But a closer read finds a laundry list of cash grabs. … Much of the measure's billions could benefit Pickens' company to the exclusion of almost all other clean-vehicle fuels and technology."

And guess who T. Boone Pickens newest best friend is, at least since May 25, 2007?

But don’t worry. The Democrats have a new scheme for controlling US energy. On May 22, 2008, Representative Maxine Waters said the following during the "grilling" of oil executives during a US House panel meeting:

"And guess what this liberal would be all about. This liberal will be about socializing … uh, um. …" (The congresswoman paused to collect her thoughts.) "Would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies. …"

And what party affiliation is Representative Waters? And what state does she represent? For those who don’t know, she is a Democrat representing the 35th District of California. Strange isn’t it? Waters and Pelosi are both Democrats and both represent California.

I use to laugh at conspiracy theories (the JFK assassination, Bigfoot, etc.), but no more. As The Monkees use to say: "Now I’m a believer."
Please go to the following sites:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=72225

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rubenstein29-2008jul29,0,2980323.story

http://www.house.gov/pelosi/

http://www.house.gov/waters/

http://dontgomovement.com/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (74) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Bakken Oil Field

In April of 2008, the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) issued a report concerning the Bakken Field (also known as the Williston Basin). This revised report, which had not been updated since 1995, estimated the oil reserve in the Bakken Field. The drawing below indicates the area of this field:                 

The amount of oil in this field which is easily recoverable is estimated by this report to be anywhere between 3.0 billion barrels to as much as 4.3 billion barrels. Plus this oil is light, sweet crude!

But it gets better, various government agencies (including the Department of Energy) have estimated that the total amount of oil in this formation could be as high as 500 billion barrels. This includes oil in oil shale and oil not recoverable with today’s technology.

This number (i.e., 500 billion barrels) is larger than the entire Saudi Arabia fields. With the new techniques that the oil industry has developed over the last twenty years, it is anybody’s guess as to how much of this oil will become "recoverable" in the next twenty years.

But if the 4.0 billion barrels number is all that is correct, at a cost of $100.00 per barrel this represents a net worth to the US of $400,000,000,000.00. That is correct, 400 hundred billion dollars.

A slide show of this USGS Report can be found at the following address:

http://energy.usgs.gov/flash/Bakken_slideshow.swf

The "pdf" file of this USGS report can be found at the following address:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3021/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (16) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mainstream Media Lied and People Died

The last remnant of Iraq's nuclear program (a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium) reached a Canadian port on July 5, 2008. This completed a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing of two oceans.

See anything wrong with this picture? For more than five years, the "Looney Left" and the Mainstream Media have said that Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. "Bush Lied and People Died." Somehow, that slogan loses its credibility now that 550 metric tons of yellowcake (used for nuclear weapon enrichment) have been shipped to Canada for a new use in the nuclear energy field.

In 2003 American troops found 550 metric tons of uranium after invading Iraq. Our troops had to sit on this information and the uranium itself, for fear of terrorists attempting to steal it. It was guarded and kept safe by our military in a 23,000-acre site, with large sand beams surrounding the site.
This is a vindication for the Bush administration. They were attacked mercilessly by the Mainstream Media and the far-left pundits concerning the missing "WMD’s". Now that it is proven that President Bush did not lie about Saddam's nuclear ambitions, one would think the Mainstream Media would report the story. Once the AP released the story, the Mainstream Media should have picked it up and broadcast it worldwide, Right? 
 
Wrong! This never happened, due in large part to the fact that the Mainstream Media would have to admit they were wrong about Bush's war motives all along. Thankfully, the AP got it right when it said, "The removal of 550 metric tons of yellowcake (the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment) was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy."
Conservatives now have another reason to say the "War in Iraq" was entirely correct! As far as the anti-war crowd is concerned, the next time they say that Bush lied, they should be told that THEY ARE WRONG. (Read the article yourself by going to the article at the address below.)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

Tags: msm   WMD  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (36) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Skirmish at the Sword Family Farm

In early September 1777, General John Burgoyne (and the British army he commanded) groped southward from present day Schuylerville, New York. Burgoyne’s objective was Albany, New York, and the destruction of the American army under General Horatio Gates. Supposedly at Albany, two other British armies would rendezvous with Burgoyne and his army, dividing the colonies and isolating the New England colonies from the rest of the country. The Revolutionary War would be over; and the British Crown could bring the "troops home for Christmas".
 
The British army had found it increasingly necessary to forage for supplies during this campaign. But after the disaster on August 16, 1777, at Bennington, Vermont, Burgoyne was keeping his foraging parties close to the British main army. At Bennington the British army had lost over 900 "foragers" to a group of ragamuffin militia under the able command of former Rogers’ Ranger (now American general) John Stark. After a day long, heavily fought battle (with both sides being reinforced at critical junctures during the engagement), total British losses were recorded at 207 dead and 700 captured. American losses were recorded at 40 dead and 30 wounded.
 
However, this "closeness" of the British foragers to the British main army would not be caution enough.

Only a few days before, Gates’ American army had been reinforced by perhaps the best unit in the Continental army, the Rifle Corps under the command of Daniel Morgan. All of these soldiers were volunteers. Each soldier was armed with the technological equivalent (in today's terms) of a long-range "sniper rifle". The "Pennsylvania" rifles of the Rifle Corps had only two equals in the world: the German "Jaeger" rifle and the British "Ferguson" rifle. Unfortunately for Burgoyne, neither of these fine weapons were available to his army (although it is believed that several German units in Burgoyne’s army had a few of the "Jaeger" rifles).

On the morning of September 18, 1777, approximately 100 British regulars, loyalists, French Canadians, and a handful of Indians were digging for potatoes at the abandoned Sword Family farm, some 500 yards in the advance of the British main army.

In a lightning attack, General Daniel Morgan announced his presence on the battlefield. Hitting the foragers from three sides, elements of the American Rifle Corps killed, wounded, or captured over 30 men, without losing a single man. Although this engagement was "small potatoes" in the larger scheme of things, it should always be remembered by Americans. Because of this action at Sword’s Farm, General Burgoyne decided to make a risky, foolhardy assault on American positions on the next day, thus starting the Battle of Saratoga.
 
                                             
 

(Thirty-five years ago this week, my wife and I first visited the Saratoga National Park. For two young "kids", it was exciting to be in New York State and seeing historical places we had both heard about all of our lives. I have a picture of my wife under a tree in the Saratoga National Park. The leaves on this tree are the most beautiful yellow I had ever seen.
 
I made a promise to write about this visit "when I was old and gray". A note to my younger self: the promise is fulfilled.)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (14) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Chooses Sarah Palin as His Vice Presidential Running Mate

In a very surprising move, Senator John McCain has selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate. Heads must be "exploding" over at the Democrat Party Headquarters; and Barak Obama must be literally crying his eyes out. McCain has selected one of the most "Conservative" Republican governors in the USA. A governor who has made ethics an unwritten cornerstone of her administration. What has Obama got? Joe Biden (a Washington DC insider and "old white guy") who was originally elected in 1973 to the US Senate. (In 1973, I was graduating from Mississippi State University; and I have now had a 35 year career in engineering.)
 
Take a look at some of Governor Palin's accomplishments:
 
1. A successful push for an ethics bill in Alaska,
 
2. The shelving of pork-barrel projects supported by fellow Republicans in Alaska,
 
3. The "killing" of the "Bridge to Nowhere" project in Alaska that had become a nationwide symbol of wasteful spending,
 
4. Approval rating by the citizens of Alaska of over 80%.
 
 
Governor Sarah Palin is pro-life and a supporter of capital punishment. She opposes same-sex marriage. These items should make Conservatives very happy.
 
But what makes this choice by McCain so fascinating is what the election of a McCain/Palin  ticket could set up. If McCain only serves one term (as he has discussed), then Ms. Palin would be poised to become the first woman president of the USA in 2012. (This would also tend to delegate a run by Hillary Clinton in 2012 for president to the "dust heap" of history.)
 
 
      
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (119) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Statements By Joe Biden that Obama Wants To Forget

Here is a partial list of Joe Biden's comments over the last eight years that I am sure Obama wishes had not been said:
 
Biden, on a post-debate appearance on MSNBC, October 30, 2007: “The only guy on the other side who’s qualified is John McCain.”

Biden appearing on The Daily Show, August 2, 2005: “John McCain is a personal friend, a great friend, and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off, be well off no matter who...”

Biden, on Meet the Press, November 27, 2005: “I’ve been calling for more troops for over two years, along with John McCain and others subsequent to my saying that.” 

Biden, assessing Obama’s Iraq plan on September 13, 2007: “My impression is [Obama] thinks that if we leave, somehow the Iraqis are going to have an epiphany” of peaceful coexistence among warring sects. “I’ve seen zero evidence of that.”

Biden, speaking to the New York Observer:  “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

Biden in an interview with the Huffington Post: “The more people learn about them (Obama and Hillary) and how they handle the pressure, the more their support will evaporate.”

Biden on December 26, 2006: “Frankly, I think I’m more qualified than other candidates, and the issues facing the American public are all in my wheelbarrow.”

Biden on Meet the Press in 2002, discussing Saddam Hussein: “He’s a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security… “We have no choice but to eliminate the threat. This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world.”

Biden on Meet the Press in 2002: “Saddam must be dislodged from his weapons or dislodged from power.”

Biden on Meet the Press in 2007, on Hussein’s WMDs: “Well, the point is, it turned out they didn’t, but everyone in the world thought he had them. The weapons inspectors said he had them. He catalogued — they catalogued them. This was not some, some Cheney, you know, pipe dream. This was, in fact, catalogued.

Biden, on Obama’s Iraq plan in August 2007: “I don’t want [my son] going [to Iraq],” Delaware Sen. Joe Biden said from the campaign trail Wednesday, according to a report on Radio Iowa. “But I tell you what, I don’t want my grandson or my granddaughters going back in 15 years and so how we leave makes a big difference.” Biden criticized Democratic rivals such as Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama who have voted against Iraq funding bills to try to pressure President Bush to end the war. “There’s no political point worth my son’s life,” Biden said, according to Radio Iowa. “There’s no political point worth anybody’s life out there. None.”

Biden on Meet the Press, April 29, 2007: “The threat [Saddam Hussein] presented was that, if Saddam was left unfettered, which I said during that period, for the next five years with sanctions lifted and billions of dollars into his coffers, then I believed he had the ability to acquire a tactical nuclear weapon — not by building it, by purchasing it. I also believed he was a threat in that he was — every single solitary U.N. resolution which he agreed to abide by, which was the equivalent of a peace agreement at the United Nations, after he got out of — after we kicked him out of Kuwait, he was violating. Now, the rules of the road either mean something or they don’t. The international community says “We’re going to enforce the sanctions we placed” or not. And what was the international community doing? The international community was weakening. They were pulling away.”

Biden to the Brookings Institution in 2005: “We can call it quits and withdraw from Iraq. I think that would be a gigantic mistake. Or we can set a deadline for pulling out, which I fear will only encourage our enemies to wait us out — equally a mistake.”

Biden, analyzing the surge on Meet the Press, September 9, 2007: “I mean, the truth of the matter is that, that the — America’s — this administration’s policy and the surge are a failure, and that the surge, which was supposed to stop sectarian violence and — long enough to give political reconciliation, there’s been no political reconciliation... The reality is that, although there has been some mild progress on the security front, there is, in fact, no, no real security in Baghdad and/or in Anbar province, where I was, dealing with the most serious problem, sectarian violence. Sectarian violence is as strong and as solid and as serious a problem as it was before the surge started.”

Biden in October of 2002: “We must be clear with the American people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the day after, but the decade after.”

Biden, on Meet the Press, January 7, 2007, assessing the proposal of a surge of troops to Iraq: “If he surges another 20, 30, or whatever number he’s going to, into Baghdad, it’ll be a tragic mistake, in my view, but, as a practical matter, there’s no way to say, ‘Mr. President, stop.’”
 
Have fun Mr. Obama. The manner in which you "white wash" these statements by Joe Biden will be instructive.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (48) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Democrat's Denver Convention: The City and Convention That Rocks (And Anything Else They Can Throw)!

The Washington Post describes Denver as preparing for either the Democrats' National Convention or the "institution of martial law". Swat Teams are training using helicopters. A warehouse was converted into a jail, with chain-link fences and signs threatening the use of electric stun devices. Travel agents are selling "getaway packages", with one travel agent imploring residents to "escape town while you still can."

The possibility of Protesters at the convention hurling feces? The City of Denver proposed an ordinance to prevent it. The threat of crowd violence? The City of Denver spent $2.1 million on "personal protection equipment" for police.

"The nice thing about hosting one of these conventions is that you can show off," said Denver Mayor Hickenlooper (D). And Denver is well prepared to "show off" to the Democrats and the Nation!

The city raised the $50 million it promised to convention organizers. It received a $50 million federal grant for security. In other words, Denver understands "Tax and Spend"! The Democrats WILL BE SO IMPRESSED.

Denver office buildings have hired extra security and prepared evacuation plans. The Denver Democrat host committee recruited, trained and organized 20,000 volunteers. Colorado Department of Transportation personnel restructured traffic patterns to accommodate major road closures. The private sector is spending a "not so small fortune" to protect its investment. 
The cost for all of this is starting to make Operation Desert Freedom look cheap in comparison.
 
And what does the "Enemy" say? What is on the mind of the Protestors? "Basically, what's happening is a cat-and-mouse game," said Adam Jung, organizer of a protest group called Tent State University. "The city keeps coming up with new restrictions on us, and we figure out ways to get around them. That's how it's going to go, until one of us gets the last word."
 
I should have entitled this article: "On The Funnier (?) Side". For the whole article, go to the following address:
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (8) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Non-Paid Endorsement for Mohammed Brand Condoms (And Boaz's Site)

Normally, I don't make endorsements. But every now and then a product comes along that is so good, I have to say something about it. Please go to the following address:
 
 
Mohammed Brand Condoms are a product whose time as come. I know that goats all over the Middle East are feeling a little more comfortable tonight, knowing the security and peace of mind that comes from the use of this superb condom.
 
Mohammed Brand Condoms, its all about the feeling.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Newest Addition to the Gray Ghost Arsenal

I recently obtained a new rifle. I say "new"; but that is not the appropriate word to describe it. The rifle was built in 1830 (approximately). It is of the "plains rifle" style and is a .40 caliber. The ignition system is percussion. I have included a couple of pictures of it:
 
 
             
 
 
             
 
Holding my new rifle is like holding history in your hand. When this rifle was built, the Alamo meant nothing outside San Antonio. San Jacinto was a little known river in Texas. David Crockett was still alive and had just been defeated for Congress (the first time) in a close election by forces loyal to President Jackson.
 
My new rifle was owned by a family in West Louisiana. It had been "handed" down in this family since it was bought in 1830. The gunsmith, who sold it to me, completely checked it out; and I intend on shooting at least once.
 
For fun, I would love to hear what name you think I should give it. I can't use my wife's name. That name has already been given to my .50 caliber flintlock Virginia pattern rifle. My daughter's name has already been given to my replica Ferguson rifle (a breech loading flintlock designed by Major Patrick Ferguson of the British Army in 1774). If any of you have any suggestions, please say so in your comments.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (33) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

On The Funnier (?) Side

Do you need a new house? Do you not have much money? Then go to Detroit!
 
There houses are selling for $1.00! Imagine, buying a house for less than the cost of a glass of ice tea at McDonald's! The following address will tell you all about it:
 
 
Of course, the house is a "Fixer-Upper"; but the cost is sweet. I also assume, after reading the article, that you would need a platoon of Marines to protect yourself while living in it.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (26) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Russian Army Invades Georgia

Parts of Russia's 58th Army (including 150 tanks and armored vehicles) are moving towards the capital of South Ossetia. This Russian attack is in response to the actions of Georgian troops who are attempting to crush separatist forces in this province.
 
Georgia's president says that Georgia is calling home its troops from Iraq amid the heavy fighting in South Ossetia. Georgia has 2,000 troops serving with the coalition forces in Iraq. (This makes it the third-largest contributor after the United States and Britain.) Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili told reporters the troops in Iraq would be recalled to Georgia. "One brigade of Georgian forces is in Iraq and we are calling it home tomorrow," Saakashvili said in the interview.
 
The area is of strategic importance, largely because of the BTC oil pipeline, which runs through central Georgia just south of South Ossetia. The pipeline pumps around 1% of global crude supplies from the Caspian to the Turkish port of Ceyhan for export to Western Europe. However, this pipeline is already closed because of an attack in Turkey by the Kurdish separatist organisation "PKK".
 
It would appear that the "Russian Bear" is flexing its "muscles". Georgia has been trying to become a part of NATO, much to Russia's displeasure. But this fighting could easily esculate into a major war.
 
(I am also tempted to believe that Russia's actions are part of a larger plan conceived by Russia and Iran.)
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (29) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Looney Tunes This Isn't

The following dialogue occurred on an episode of the Hamas children's show "The Pioneers of Tomorrow", which aired on Al-Aqsa TV on July 11, 2008. You can watch the actual episode at: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1814.htm.
 
If it wasn't so sad, it would actually be funny:

Assud the bunny: "In the name of Allah, I hope my dad doesn't see me. God, make him go on sleeping, while I take one or two bills. There's his stash of money... Man, there is so much money here... No, I must put it back. Stealing is forbidden."

Satan: "No, no... What are you doing, Assud? No, Assud, I promised you that nobody would see you or know about this. Take one or two bills. Don't be afraid, Assud."

Assud the bunny: "Okay, I'll just take one... Actually, I'll take two."

Satan: "No, take three."

Voice of girl: "Assud, you were wrong to follow Satan, who is the source of all problems. In addition, you caused problems between your parents. You have no right to cause such a great problem. Don't you know that stealing leads to Hell? The Prophet Muhammad said: 'If my daughter Fatima had stolen, I would have chopped off her hand.' If you were in Saudi Arabia now, they would chop off your hand. Allah said in the Koran: 'As for a thief, male or female, cut off their hands: A punishment by example, for their crime.'"

Child TV host Saraa: "What do you think about what Assud did?"

Asmaa: "It was wrong, because 'as for a thief, male or female, cut off their hands'."

Assud the bunny: "Oh my God! You say that my hand should be chopped off, Asmaa?"

Asmaa: "Yes."

Assud the bunny: "You think my hand should be chopped off?"

Asmaa: "What?"

Assud the bunny: "You want my hand to be chopped off?"

Asmaa: "Yes."

Nur: "The Prophet Muhammad said: 'If my daughter Fatima had stolen, I would have chopped off her hand."

Assud the bunny: "So if Saraa were to steal, her hand should be chopped off, right?"

Nur: "No."

Assud the bunny: "When you were little, didn't you ever steal a shekel or something?"

Nur: "No, because Allah is watching me."

Saraa: "Nur, do you think we should go ahead and chop off Assud's hand now?"

Assud the bunny: "No, no. Saraa, I'm begging you..."

Nur: "Saraa, he has repented and promised never to do it again, then that's it."

Saraa: "Well, if we don't chop off his hand, maybe we should chop off his ear?"


Assud the bunny
: "No, please, no, I'm begging you..."
 
 
I hope the Liberals and the "Far Left" enjoyed this little show. This is what the radical Islamists are teaching Islamist children. This is what a nation governed by Islamic Religious Law (Sharia) requires.
Tags: Sharia  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (37) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

After Shocks: D.C. vs. Heller

One aspect of the majority opinion written by Judge Scalia that has not yet attracted the attention of Liberals, but may be of great importance in the long run, is the presence of natural law in the Second Amendment. D.C. vs. Heller reaffirms a point made in the 1876 Cruikshank case. The right to arms is not a right granted by the Constitution. It is a pre-existing natural right. As such it is recognized and protected by the Constitution.

It has always been widely understood by Gun Owners (but not by the Gun Confiscation Crowd) that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it "shall not be infringed."

In United States v. Cruikshank (92 U. S. 542, 553, 1876), the majority opinion says, "This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed…"

This is consistent with Blackstone’s language (See 1 Black-stone 136, 139–140, 1765) that the "right to arms" protects the "natural right of resistance and self-preservation."

Justice James Wilson interpreted the Pennsylvania Constitution’s "arms bearing right", for example, as a recognition of the natural right of defense "of one’s person or house". He called this the law of "self preservation." But some federal and state courts have been hostile to "self-defense" or "self preservation" as a right (considering it as a mere privilege, which can be withdrawn by government or even forbidden).

THIS RULING BY THE SUPREME COURT SAYS THE RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IS A NATURAL RIGHT, WHICH WAS IN EXSISTENCE BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION.

D.C. vs. Heller moves self-defense from the shadows of the Ninth Amendment ("The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.") into the bright light of the Second Amendment ("A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed").
 
It is now beyond dispute, in an American court, that self-defense is an inherent right, and that it is protected by the United States Constitution.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (69) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

D.C. vs. Heller Decision to Be Annouced Tomorrow

Chief Justice John Roberts announced today that the Supreme Court would release its three remaining decisions tomorrow, Thursday, 6/26/08, beginning at 10 a.m., Eastern time.

This includes D.C. v. Heller, the Washington, D.C. gun-ban case that is examining the meaning of the Second Amendment, and whether a complete ban on any operable gun in a private home violates the constitutional rights of individual citizens.

Every news outlet on the planet is expected to cover the case in some fashion. Typically, the "Main Stream Media" reports on gun issues often have errors, spin, editorial mixed in with fact, and just plain lies. They should be taken with at least a grain of skepticism until a detailed analysis is available. The decision could be lengthy (perhaps 100 pages according to one knowledgeable party), and will take a certain amount of time to digest in its entirety.

The law firm of Akin Gump is predicting with a high degree of confidence that Justice Scalia will be the author of the principle opinion in the Heller decision. This alone says Heller won.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (36) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive