How much food can $5 buy around the world?

This video clip provides some very interesting answers.

Lends a new insight to the so-called 'cost of living', doesn't it?  Ethiopia seems like a great place to live, if you like cheap bananas . . . but there are other drawbacks!





Peter

Opium - wars, treaties, paraphernalia, and addiction

An article in Collectors Weekly prompted many memories of studies in past years.  The article is titled 'How Collecting Opium Antiques Turned Me Into an Opium Addict'.  Here's how it begins.

Recently, Steven Martin—no relation to the actor—came by the Collectors Weekly office and told me all about his harrowing journey from collecting to substance abuse. He started out collecting innocuous things; at first, it was seashells and stones, then it was currency and Asian antiques like textiles. Eventually the Navy veteran found his way to Bangkok, Thailand, where he worked as a journalist and travel writer, covering Southeast Asia.

There, he also discovered the beauty of antique opium pipes, bowls, and lamps, as well as opium trays and the hundreds of little implements that went with the ritual.

Opium paraphernalia (Image courtesy of Collectors Weekly)

Because opium smoking had been so thoroughly eradicated around the globe in the early 20th century, Martin realized very little had been written about these objects. After years of intense research, he produced the first opium-smoking antiques guide, The Art of Opium Antiques, in 2007.

Martin’s research wasn’t limited to mining Victorian medical books or hunting down authentic pieces on eBay. As he came across various pipes and tools, he sought out the last of the Laotian opium dens to learn how these accoutrements were used and, yes, to try them himself. Before long, he and a friend had created their own private opium den in rural Southeast Asia, but when another of Martin’s smoking buddies, a top Asian ceramics expert, died in 2008, possibly from withdrawal symptoms, Martin knew he had to quit before it was too late for him, too. This summer, Random House published his latest book, Opium Fiend: A 21st Century Slave to a 19th Century Addiction, in which Martin details how his obsessive collectors’ bug led to his opium addiction.

There's much more at the link.  It's very interesting reading.  Recommended.

The memories this article brought back for me are of the years I spent studying colonial history.  Britain fought two Opium Wars with China, designed to force the latter nation to allow British merchants in India to export opium to China as trade goods.  They led to the first of the so-called 'unequal treaties', which ultimately fostered the rise of Chinese nationalism and led to the Communist takeover there after World War II.  Much of modern China's distrust of foreigners and insistence on its status as a superpower can be directly traced to lingering resentment and xenophobia caused by this period of colonial history.  Personally, I can't blame them.  In their shoes, I'd be equally resentful!  (It's also no surprise that many people in the Far East regard it as poetic justice that illicit narcotics from their part of the world - see, for example, the Golden Triangle - are now a major source of problems in Western nations.)

The enormous influx of opium into China during the mid-19th century led to massive addiction problems, which rapidly spread to Chinese expatriate communities overseas.  So-called 'opium dens' soon sprang up in most major European and US cities, and became a blight on civic consciences as details began to emerge of both Chinese and local addicts dying in squalor.  The development of opium pipes, lamps and other specialized paraphernalia is inextricably linked to these 'dens',

I hadn't realized how much of this paraphernalia had survived into modern times. There are many pictures of it in the Collectors Weekly article, and more at Steven Martin's Web site.  It's a fascinating insight into a profoundly shameful period of human history - one deliberately fostered and encouraged by many of our ancestors for commercial gain.

Peter

Terrorism, the Constitution and civil rights

The terrorist bombing in Boston has raised all sorts of issues about the conduct of police and city administrators in dealing with the threat.  Two sides of the problem have been illustrated (literally) by other bloggers.  From The Broken Patriot, we have this:

As a counterpoint, from Lagniappe's Lair we have this:

It's a monumental conundrum.  Our Constitution is very plain and clear as to the right of citizens to be secure in their lodgings and possessions, which are not subject to arbitrary and capricious search and/or seizure.  There's no doubt whatsoever that the authorities rode roughshod over those rights in Boston during the lockdown.  However, they argued that the exigencies of the situation warranted their actions;  that the urgent need to locate the bombers, prevent further bombings, and possibly rescue anyone being held hostage by them, overrode individuals' constitutional rights.

I'm not convinced by the latter arguments.  There are those who see it that way (for example, The Warrior Class advises profanely that 'Some folks need to get a grip'), but I'm not among them.  At the same time, I agree that the authorities had to take extraordinary measures to ensure public safety in the light of the ongoing threat.  I can't agree with those who believe that nothing can possibly justify infringing the rights and liberties of citizens.  That way lies potential catastrophe.  I've encountered terrorism the hard way (I've written about it before), and I know from bitter personal experience that theoretical constitutional perfection simply isn't practical under some circumstances.  If constitutional purists wish to argue the point, that's their right . . . but they're living in cloud cuckoo land.  (This is not to say that blatantly unconstitutional laws such as the Patriot Act are acceptable - they're not, and never will be - but to acknowledge that in specific instances, in the heat of the moment and under imminent threat, sometimes practicality supersedes principle.  In a perfect world, it wouldn't be like that . . . but we don't live in a perfect world.)

So what can be done to ensure public safety, whilst simultaneously infringing as little as possible upon the rights of citizens and residents?  Here are a few suggestions.

• It's in order for the authorities to 'lock down' an area immediately adjacent to or surrounding an incident, or where suspected terrorists are hiding, and order people not to leave their homes.  On the other hand, it's not in order for them to enter homes without permission to search for those they're seeking.  They need probable cause to do so, and a search warrant.  If I'm in that position, I'll certainly refuse permission for a search, unless the officer(s) concerned can articulate both probable cause and immediate, overriding necessity.  If they can't or won't, I'll resist any attempt to search my home without a warrant.  Under such circumstances, they're the criminal(s) - not me!
• If authorities restrict citizens to their homes to minimize the risk to them from dangerous individuals, it's incumbent upon those same authorities to allow those citizens to defend themselves if necessary.  That means allowing them to possess effective means of defense:  namely, firearms - and not just any firearms, but effective defensive weapons.  Vice-President Biden notwithstanding, a double-barreled shotgun is not the most efficient means of defense.  It's much harder to control and has a much shorter effective range than (say) an AR-15 rifle.  Massachusetts is one of the most restrictive states in the Union in terms of gun rights, and Boston is even worse than the rest of the state.  If the authorities there aren't in a position to protect or defend their people against attack, they need to lift those restrictions so that their people can defend themselves.  Anything else is hypocrisy.
• The authorities' response must be rational and proportionate to the threat.  In Boston, it wasn't.  They 'locked down' hundreds of thousands of citizens over many square miles of urban area, shut down rail traffic over more than 100 miles of track, re-routed air traffic, etc.  This was a ridiculous over-reaction.  In New York in 2001, Madrid in 2004, London in 2005, Mumbai in 2008 and many similar incidents, no city was entirely locked down like that (although, of course, individual buildings and specific areas were locked down).  Boston's panicked reaction cost hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in economic damage.  Chalk that up as a terrorist success.  It must not happen again.

The problem is, the authorities don't wish to have such a discussion.  It's much easier and more convenient for them to simply issue orders, dictate what we should do, and have us obey blindly and willingly.  Worse still, many of their people will eagerly enforce such measures - witness the hundreds, if not thousands, of law enforcement and military personnel who descended on the streets of Boston during the recent crisis.  How many of them went there with an attitude of being public servants, rather than public masters?  You tell me . . . but from the evidence of photographs and news reports, I'd say relatively few of them had the right attitude.  (Admittedly, the conditions under which they operate day by day have a great deal to do with that - but even so . . . )  The same attitudes and concerns were evident during and after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.  I wrote about them at the time.

I will not surrender my constitutional rights just because someone in authority says I must.  No right-thinking American should.  At the same time, I have to acknowledge that those in authority have a very difficult job to do.  Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, they're likely to err on the side of Big Brother rather than the side of legal, constitutional perfection.  We need to debate the issue now, and make our concerns known to those in authority, so that as far as possible, we can avoid an over-emphasis on either side of the equation in future.

Peter

The Horsehead Nebula as you've never seen it before

NASA has celebrated the 23rd anniversary of the launch of the Hubble Space Telescope by released a stunning infrared image of the Horsehead Nebula, along with a fascinating video describing how it was obtained.  The agency reports:

Looking like an apparition rising from whitecaps of interstellar foam, the iconic Horsehead Nebula has graced astronomy books ever since its discovery more than a century ago. The nebula is a favorite target for amateur and professional astronomers. It is shadowy in optical light. It appears transparent and ethereal when seen at infrared wavelengths. The rich tapestry of the Horsehead Nebula pops out against the backdrop of Milky Way stars and distant galaxies that easily are visible in infrared light.

The nebula is part of the Orion Molecular Cloud, located about 1,500 light-years away in the constellation Orion. The cloud also contains other well-known objects such as the Great Orion Nebula (M42), the Flame Nebula, and Barnard's Loop. It is one of the nearest and most easily photographed regions in which massive stars are being formed.

In the Hubble image, the backlit wisps along the Horsehead's upper ridge are being illuminated by Sigma Orionis, a young five-star system just out of view. Along the nebula's top ridge, two fledgling stars peek out from their now-exposed nurseries.

Scientists know a harsh ultraviolet glare from one of these bright stars is slowly evaporating the nebula. Gas clouds surrounding the Horsehead already have dissipated, but the tip of the jutting pillar contains a slightly higher density of hydrogen and helium, laced with dust. This casts a shadow that protects material behind it from being stripped away by intense stellar radiation evaporating the hydrogen cloud, and a pillar structure forms.

There's more at the link. You can view and download a much larger version of the image here.  Here's the video accompanying the news release.  I recommend watching it in full-screen mode.

Space never ceases to fascinate me.  There's so much we can see, but not touch;  so much we can imagine, or guess at, but not know for sure at this distance.  I daresay the human race won't last long enough to see it all . . . but wouldn't it be fun to try?

Peter

.22 price insanity!

I simply can't believe the insanely high prices currently being asked for .22 Long Rifle ammunition.  I've seen very little for sale in gun shops locally, and online sources don't seem to have much either.  Those who have it are asking an arm and a leg for it!  For example, I was sent a link to Alamo Ammo's Web site, where I found these prices for .22LR this morning (I've rounded the price per cartridge to the nearest cent):

Winchester 40gr. LRN (code XT22LR) - 50 rounds for $20.95 = 42c per cartridge

CCI Mini-Mag 36gr. plated HP - 100 rounds for $49.95 = 50c per cartridge

Federal 36gr plated HP - 550 rounds for $184.95 = 34c per cartridge

Alamo Ammo's not alone - many other vendors (when they have stock at all) are also asking high prices.  Sites such as GunsAmerica have some sellers offering .22LR ammunition at more reasonable prices, but others wanting a lot more.  Here are three auctions as examples:

Federal Auto Match 40gr. LRN - 325 rounds for $75.00 = 23c per cartridge

Winchester 555 40gr. RN - 555 rounds for $60.00 + $18.00 shipping = 14c per cartridge

CCI Mini-Mag 40gr. plated RN - 100 rounds for $30.00 + $12.00 shipping = 42c per cartridge

Frankly, at these prices, it becomes uneconomic to use .22LR as a low-cost plinking, varmint hunting and all-round 'fun' cartridge, as has previously been the case.  I can see people switching to BB or Airsoft guns for such purposes (except hunting, of course), because it still costs only about one cent per round to shoot them.  Furthermore, it appears that centerfire ammo is currently more readily available than rimfire, something I've never heard of before!

What about you, readers?  Is .22LR ammo available in your area, and if so, at what sort of prices?  Please let us know in Comments.  I'll be interested to find out whether this problem is worse in some places than in others.  Meanwhile, I'll be guarding my 'stash' of .22LR as if it were gold!  I traded into a bunch of it over the past few months, intending to use a lot for training;  but if prices continue to rise the way they're doing at present, I may be able to retire off what I can get for it!





Peter

When roadkill . . . isn't

This video, taken about a month ago, is self-explanatory.

Love the one officer's reaction . . . zombie deer, perhaps?



Peter

The Boston bombings II

(For those who missed it, Part I is here.)

By now everyone surely knows the news.  Two Muslim brothers from Chechnya appear to have been responsible for the bombing.  The elder was killed in an exchange of fire with police.  The younger was arrested, apparently badly wounded, after a prolonged stand-off.  Congratulations to the investigators who identified the suspects and all involved in hunting them down.

However, the process has raised several very serious concerns.  For a start, these two amateurs succeeded in effectively locking down an entire US city for a full day.  Hundreds of thousands of people were confined to their homes, prevented from going to work.  More thousands were prevented from returning to their homes.  A temporary no-fly-zone was declared over much of Boston.  All these measures amounted to a ridiculous, almost hysterical over-reaction.

Commander Zero put it very well:

So, what we have seen, interestingly, is that all it takes to completely shut down a (mostly) major US city is two guys who aren’t afraid to die. That’s it…two guys.

Imagine a larger, highly-motivated, technically-adept, group…maybe a small cell of four or six people all on the same page, working off the same plan, with the same level of dedication/fanaticism. Dude, you could totally shut down virtually any city.

Asymmetrical warfare is kinda what this seems to be an excellent example of. Two guys with a few hundred bucks of hardware shut down a city, suck the manpower of an entire city and surrounding regions, create a huge economic impact, and create chaos. Pretty big deal to pull off for just two guys. This, I suspect, is the future of ‘terrorism’ in this country.

There's more at the link.  Good reading - and, as one with more than a little experience in dealing with terrorism, both urban and rural, I agree with him.  Here's Karl Denninger's rather more blunt take on it:

The stupid, it burns.

The wrong answer to terrorism is what we're doing right now.

. . .

The payoff for [the bombings] is that an entire city shuts down to literal empty sidewalks and train service is halted along a hundred-mile+ stretch.

Even worse now the authorities are allegedly preventing residents who were away from their homes from returning there!  You are now being forcibly dispossessed of your residence!  Yeah, it's temporary, but so what -- that's my damned house, not yours!  Get the hell out of my way!

Need I remind people that the entire point of terrorism is to terrorize?  To create economic havoc in a given area through violence, and by doing so advance some social or political goal?

What sort of lesson is the jackass in the Oval Office along with those crap-for-brains idiots in Massachusetts sending to our enemies around the world? 

Two *******s shut down a city of 7 million people who then cower in fear in their homes.

I wouldn't have been quite so rude . . . but I agree, this was an over-reaction to the threat.

Another factor is that Massachusetts is one of the most restrictive states in the Union with respect to the private ownership of firearms (let alone issuing permits to carry them).  Most of those confined to their homes in Boston would not have owned firearms, due to the extreme difficulties placed in the path of those wanting to do so in that city.  Furthermore, according to Massachusetts law, they would not have been permitted to store them in a loaded, ready-for-immediate-use configuration, so that if one of these fleeing terrorists had kicked down their door, they would have been effectively helpless.  That should outrage any right-thinking person!

By contrast, imagine if a situation like this had occurred near the residence of Miss D. and myself.  If we were woken from sleep by all the fuss, I'd have no less than three loaded firearms immediately available for use.  Two are at my bedside - I won't even have to get out of bed to pick them up.  A third, more powerful weapon is within arms reach as I sit on the edge of my bed.  If someone decided to hide on my property or break down my front door in an effort to hide from the cops, he'd rapidly regret his decision!  As for not being allowed to leave the house, that wouldn't worry us.  Within a matter of seconds, we'd each be holding a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a 30-round magazine, loaded with the latest-technology bonded ammunition.  We'd have spare magazines and loaded handguns on our persons, and backup long guns would be stashed within easy reach.  Our housemate would have armed himself with his own weapons of household protection.  Given our joint and several levels of skill and experience, I daresay we could hold our own against an average infantry fire team if we had to, let alone a jihadist terrorist looking for somewhere to hide.

That's what the Second Amendment is all about.  It empowers and enables us to defend ourselves against illegal and unjust attack.  It's not about hunting, or target practice, or 'bitter clingers', or anything like that.  It boils down to, "If you want a piece of me, you'd better be prepared to pay for it!"  As Caleb said today:

Now, I’m no gun expert like Joe Biden, but it occurs to me that if a known terrorist who’d already displayed a willingness to shoot it out with the cops and use explosives was on the loose in my neighborhood, I’d probably want a little more defensive firepower than a double barreled shotgun. I might even want a rifle like what the police likely used to shoot at said terrorist with. But that’s crazy talk, right? Dianne Feinstein said there’s no reason for me to own a military style weapon, because we have cops and the military to protect from things like terrorists running around shooting up neighborhoods.

The situation in Boston presents an excellent teaching moment. When the emergency broadcast system comes on and tells you there’s a terrorist loose in your neighborhood, do you want to lock the doors and cower in fear hoping for the best, or would you rather lock the doors and go about your life as normal, knowing that you have a rifle and the skill to use it?

Yes, indeed!

The last word must surely go to the Huffington Post, which reports:

On Friday afternoon, a handful of Dunkin' Donuts stores remained open in the Boston area to serve coffee and donuts, despite the widespread lockdown of the city and surrounding areas. Karen Raskopf, chief communications officer for Dunkin’ Brands, said the orders to remain open came from the city.

"At the direction of authorities, select Dunkin' Donuts restaurants in the Boston area are open to take care of needs of law enforcement and first responders," Raskopf told The Huffington Post in an emailed statement.

If you'd wanted to satirize the police response today, could you possibly have invented anything more stereotypical - or as funny?





Peter

The F-16 gets a new set of electronic eyes

Two US manufacturers are competing in the retrofit market for AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radars.  Hundreds of older fighter aircraft such as the F-16 Fighting Falcon are still in service, and could benefit from the superior capabilities of more modern radars such as the Northrop Grumman SABR (chosen by Thailand, Iraq and Oman) or the Raytheon RACR (recently selected by South Korea).  Here's the latter unit mounted on an F-16.

One of the most impressive abilities of AESA radars is their ability to use what's called SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) mode to map the surface of the earth, producing a very detailed and precise image for use in navigation and targeting.  To illustrate, Northrop Grumman has just released this (deliberately degraded) SABR-generated image of an airfield.

(Click here to see a much larger version of the image)

AESA radars can produce pictures like that day or night, rain or shine, clear or cloudy.  That's a pretty impressive extension of a fighter's combat abilities.  The image is so clear it almost renders it unnecessary to look outside!  It's also worth remembering that SABR and RACR are compact radars, restricted in size (and hence in their performance) by the necessity to fit into the nosecones of smaller fourth-generation combat aircraft.  Modern aircraft such as the F/A-18E/F, F-22 and F-35 carry much larger, more powerful and more sophisticated units.  For obvious reasons, no images of this sort produced by their radars have yet been published.

Peter

Firearms community, take note!

I'm sure readers are familiar with New York's recently-passed SAFE Act, which places onerous restrictions on firearms ownership in that state.  With effect from April 15th, 2013, registration of so-called 'assault weapons' has begun.

In that regard, fellow blogger WyoThreeper issues this warning:

You definitely should not do this

Do not, whatever you do, print a bunch of these out and fill them with false info and send them in.

http://www.governor.ny.gov/assets/documents/PPB-11-1.pdf

There are reader comments at the link, below the article.  Some helpfully include the names and addresses of certain individuals that should not be used to fill in the documents - just in case anyone was wondering.

I'd like to thank WyoThreeper for bringing this important matter to our attention.  If irresponsible gun owners were to do this, it would impose a terrible burden of administrative overhead, wasted time and effort, and monumental frustration on the poor, overworked representatives of New York's enforcement authorities.  I'm sure that's the last thing any of us would want to do.

Right?

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #695

Today's winner comes from China - and I have to admit, this is one of the weirdest Doofus posts I've ever put up!  The Austrian Times reports:

A porn addict who inserted a live eel up his backside after copying a kinky blue movie had to endure an all night emergency procedure by surgeons in southern China after finding he couldn't get it out.

Surgeons finally removed the 20 inch long Asian swamp eel - which weighed more than half a kilo [over a pound] - in the early hours of the morning after a lengthy treatment with drugs and medical probes.

. . .

"This was a particularly idiotic stunt and could have caused him a serious injury. Eels have small but very sharp teeth," they added.

There's more at the link, including an X-ray image of the eel inside the man's body.

There's so much one could say about this!

• Clearly, this guy wasn't thinking straight.  In fact, he had more than his head up his ass!
• He doesn't need an implant - he's already eel-ongated!
• I'm glad for his sake that the surgeons were so ef-fish-ient.

Peter

So the 'Dirty Dozen' wasn't just Hollywood?

I'm sure many readers remember the 1967 move 'The Dirty Dozen'.  I didn't know that it was based on a real unit until I read the obituary of Jake McNiece in the Telegraph.  Here's an excerpt.

Jake McNiece, who has died aged 93, was the leader of the “Filthy Thirteen”, a crack US Army demolition unit that inspired Robert Aldrich’s macho classic The Dirty Dozen.

The “Thirteen” was an unofficial unit (in fact consisting of up to 18 men) within the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. It was parachuted into France hours before the D-Day landings to take and hold a bridge over the Douve river, in a bid to prevent German reinforcements from moving into Normandy.

The group derived its nickname from the fact that they showered just once a week and never washed their uniforms — as well as from their insubordinate attitude to authority. “We were absolutely undisciplined,” McNiece recalled. “We did not greet the officers and we did not speak to them by saying the traditional 'Sir’. We used to call them by their nicknames.” Following the example of McNiece, whose mother was a Choctaw Indian, the men prepared for their mission by shaving their heads into Mohican haircuts and smearing their faces with war paint.

Shortly after midnight on June 6 1944, McNiece and his men parachuted behind enemy lines. By the time dawn broke, they had destroyed two bridges and had taken up positions on the bridge over the Douve. They held it against German counter-attack for three days until the structure was bombed, apparently in error, by the US Air Force. “I was submerged by anger,” McNiece recalled. “We had kept this bridge despite all opposition! And it’s our aircraft which bombed it!”

McNiece and his men subsequently joined the main invasion, and on one occasion were on the winning side of a firefight that saw 700 German soldiers killed in just 20 minutes. Paratroopers did not take prisoners, as he later explained.

McNiece believed that the group had been selected because their task was regarded as a “suicide mission” and, as notorious troublemakers, the men were seen as expendable. “The average lifetime of a paratrooper was one and a half jumps,” he recalled. “They gave you one day’s food supply when you left the plane, and they figured you wouldn’t eat all of that.”

By the time McNiece returned to Britain after 36 days of fighting, all but three members of his unit had lost their lives. Yet there were some compensations: the survivors “got two months’ wages plus everything we stole in France”.

. . .

On September 17 1944 McNiece and his unit, their numbers swelled by replacements for those who had lost their lives in Normandy, parachuted into Holland, where they fought alongside other airborne troops for 78 days. Subsequently McNiece was locked up after taking an unauthorised five-day break in Paris.

To escape further retribution he volunteered for the Pathfinders, the elite paratrooper unit that provided logistical help to Allied missions — and suffered a casualty rate of 80 per cent. Parachuted into Bastogne, Belgium, during the Battle of the Bulge, he led a unit operating beacons which guided in 6,000 aircraft carrying vital supplies.

His last jump, on February 13 1945, was near Prume, Germany, to resupply General George Patton’s 3rd Army.

McNiece admitted later that his exploits on the battlefield had been somewhat overshadowed by his unruly reputation, as a result of which promotions to sergeant were quickly followed by demotions back to private. But in the eyes of his men McNiece could do nothing wrong. “We all did what Jake did because we had total faith in him,” Jack Agnew, a fellow survivor, recalled. “He was utterly fearless and working with him was an honour. He never asked his men to do anything he wouldn’t do himself.”

There's more at the link.

Sgt. McNiece was awarded four Bronze Stars, two Purple Hearts and the French Legion of Honor.  It sounds like he was quite a guy.  Still, for obvious reasons, I hesitate to say that this report 'passes the smell test'!





Peter

Real, or fake?

I can hardly believe this video clip.  It purports to show a wingsuit jumper 'flying' through a natural arch of rock - but the angle is so steep, the opening so small, and the clearances so very, very tight, that I have difficulty believing it.  It's possible, I suppose, but everything would have had to go absolutely perfectly, with no errors, a complete absence of tricky wind conditions, etc.  Also, the video doesn't show the flyer's perspective fully - it cuts back and forth between shots from different angles.

Watch it for yourself, and see what you think.  I recommend full-screen mode.

What do you say, readers?  Real, or fake?

Peter

Prince Rupert's Drop

Courtesy of a link at Dark Roasted Blend, I came across this video clip about a rather strange phenomenon.  I found it fascinating.  I recommend watching it in full-screen mode.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio . . . "  Indeed!





Peter

In praise of Jarte

You've never heard of Jarte?  Neither had I, until this morning.  It's an excellent (and free!) word processor for Windows, very small and compact, built on Microsoft's Wordpad kernel.   It's garnered very good reviews from PC World, Gizmo, and users.

I came across it while looking for a text editor that would strip out all word processor formatting codes, including hidden ones, from the manuscripts for my first two novels.  Miss D. and I have decided to format them for publication using Scrivener, a program that Marko enthusiastically recommends (and which he used to format his recently-published first novel).  We've been playing with an evaluation copy for some time, and like it.  Unfortunately, Microsoft Word, OpenOffice and many other word processors insert all sorts of extraneous code into one's documents.  You can't see it with the naked eye, but it's there, and it can screw up formatting in other software - including Scrivener - like you wouldn't believe!

I did an online search for text editors that would reduce a document to plain text alone, stripping out all formatting and other hidden codes, prior to importing it into Scrivener.  Jarte came highly recommended from several sources, and it's free, so I downloaded a copy and tried it out.  I was amazed!  It's very small, compact and fast, and it does an excellent job.  It stripped out all the extraneous codes from my manuscript in no time, and has given me a clean plaintext copy, ready for formatting in Scrivener.  I like it so much I think I may use it instead of OpenOffice for routine documents.  (There's also a paid version with additional features, but I don't think I'm going to need them.  However, if you don't have a full-featured word processor already loaded on your computer, it's cheap enough that you may find it worthwhile to invest in the paid version.)

I highly recommend Jarte as a very useful program.  Go download it for yourself, and play with it.  I think you'll like what you see.

Peter

Freedom, liberty and the law

Last night I posted about a US Army Master Sergeant who had a very unpleasant encounter with the Temple, TX police department.  I made several unflattering references to the latter force.  This produced some comments in favor of my approach, and others objecting to it, claiming that the Master Sergeant - in so many words - 'asked for it'.

I was thinking about this today as I responded to one such critic.  It seems to me that this disparity in responses is, in fact, a primary determination of who we are as individuals.  I submit that the problem boils down to the distinction between two approaches to life, the universe and everything:

1.  Everything that is not permitted, is forbidden

- OR -

2.  Everything that is not forbidden, is permitted

I'd go further, and submit that the first approach is statism writ large;  the presumption that the authorities have the right to state explicitly what they're prepared to allow, and then forbid their subjects to do anything else - up to and including taking action against them if they do.  The second approach is that of freedom and liberty;  the presumption that the individual is the master of his or her own destiny, which may not be restricted or obstructed by the authorities except in matters of overriding common concern (and those matters must be clearly demonstrated to be overriding, and be accepted as such by those who elect the authorities).

It's also worth noting that prohibiting something has never yet stopped it from happening.  Forbid murder?  It happens every day - once every 36 minutes in the USA, in fact, according to the FBI's crime statistics for 2011 (the last full year for which they're available at the time of writing).  Forbid alcohol?  Yeah . . . we all know how well that worked last time it was tried!  Forbid drugs?  Yeah, right.  Forbid extramarital sex, even on the grounds that it's a Divine command, not just a civil law?  I was a pastor.  I daresay that 99 out of every 100 couples I married were already sexually active - and between a quarter and a third of them were already pregnant!  No, never in human history has forbidding something actually stopped or eradicated it.  Not once.

The only thing forbidding something has achieved, from a historical perspective, is to expand the authorities' power to crack down on their subjects.  Note that I didn't say 'citizens', because citizens are free people almost by definition.  Authority uses legislation and regulation to transform citizens into subjects;  to force them to conform;  to coerce them into giving up some or all of their freedoms;  to make them allow those in power to dictate to them how they are to behave.  The events of 9/11 have led to precisely this reaction in the USA, with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, the erection of massive new state security organs and organizations (including the Transportation Security Administration), warrantless phone taps, warrantless searches, and so on.  It's even led to the indefinite detention, without legal representation or trial by a jury of their peers, of alleged 'terrorists' or 'criminals', despite the provisions of the Sixth Amendment.

Any and all of these developments would have been anathema to our Founding Fathers, who enacted the Bill of Rights specifically to guard against such developments.  Unfortunately, the present 'herd mentality' evident in much of the USA has tolerated such intrusions onto and erosions of our constitutional freedoms and liberties.  This meek, unthinking acquiescence merely ensures that the authorities will continue to impose more such measures upon us - and treat us as Master Sergeant Grisham was treated.

I absolutely, categorically refuse to consent to, co-operate with, or permit such treatment of myself or my loved ones by the authorities.  I stand upon the platform set out so well by Patrick Henry, who also reminded us:

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.

It's our 'public liberty' that's at stake if we permit the authorities to behave towards us as those Temple, TX cops behaved towards Master Sergeant Grisham.  Their actions defied and defiled his liberty.  They acted as if what was not explicitly permitted, was forbidden.  Since Texas law does not explicitly address the situation in question, then clearly, what is not forbidden by law should be permitted - the diametric opposite of their approach.

Samuel Adams' pre-Revolution words to the timid are, I think, germane to the point at issue:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!

I submit that one's reaction to Master Sergeant Grisham's predicament is a very clear indicator of whether one is, at heart, a subject or a citizen - a statist or a libertarian.  I submit that the former prefers 'the tranquility of servitude';  the latter, 'the animating contest of freedom.'

(If you feel differently, of course I welcome alternative points of view in Comments.)

Peter

A musical comparison

Thanks to my fused spine and nerve damage in my left leg, there are nights when I just can't sleep well.  No matter how tired I am, my body says to me, "You got nothing coming!" and nags at me until I have to get up to ease the aches and pains.  I try to make the best use of times like that by working on my book (which is entering its final stage of formatting prior to publication), or washing up in the kitchen, or doing other things (if they don't hurt too much!) to pass the time.

This morning, in the wee dark hours, I turned to YouTube to listen to one of my favorite modern Scottish tunes, 'The Queen of Argyle' by Silly Wizard.  Here it is.

As I was listening to it, I couldn't help but notice in the sidebar how many other artists had covered this song since it was first written.  I decided to see how musicians from different countries and cultures had modified it to suit their tastes.  That turned out to be a lot of fun.  For a start, here's what American Celtic rock group Tempest made of it.

Heading back across the Atlantic, in much slower and more meditative mood, here's the late John Wright from England with a beautifully plaintive version.  After a brief introduction, the music begins at the 1m.5s. mark.

Finally, let's hop back across the Atlantic to Newfoundland, Canada, home of many New World Celtic groups and singers.  Here's Fine Crowd with their rendition of this lovely song.

Some very interesting variations on a theme, no?

Peter

The five most dangerous things in the Army

Found at AR15.com:

I always thought the most dangerous critter in the world was a newly-minted Second Lieutenant with a map, a compass and a plan . . . but these five aren't bad!



Peter

It seems the Temple, TX Police Department is out of control

For the details, see this report at National Review, and watch the video below.  It shows a US Army Master Sergeant being illegally disarmed by a Temple PD officer.  Please note the 'official' attitude and language.

"We're exempt from the law", eh?  That officer needs a clue-by-four upside the head - repeatedly!

I'd be grateful if my readers would please let Chief of Police Gary Smith know their feelings about this - also Mayor William A. Jones III.  Any officers with attitudes such as those displayed here need to be taken off the streets, at once if not sooner.  They're not only not ensuring public safety, they're public menaces in and of themselves!

I also hope that Master Sergeant Grisham sues Temple, both city and PD, for everything from their hat to their cotton socks.  Just who the hell do these clowns think they are?





Peter

EDITED TO ADD: In the light of some of the comments to this post, I've expanded upon the problem in another article. I hope that makes my position clearer.

The Boston bombings

I haven't said anything about them yet because we know so little.  The news media are spouting a boatload of drivel, displaying their ignorance and prejudices to all and sundry.  (Don't you get the impression that MSNBC and their ilk are desperately hoping against hope that this can be pinned on the foes of the Obamessiah, like the Tea Party, or gun nuts, or people like that?  Furthermore, if the explosive used in the bombs turns out to be related in any way to gunpowder, or firearms propellant, or primers, then look for the anti-gunners to jump all over that, and try to ban or rigidly restrict the sale of reloading supplies.  They'll use any excuse to pursue their ends.)  About the only thing we can say for sure at this time is that the pressure-cooker construction of the bombs closely resembles techniques used by fundamentalist Muslim terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere.  Basically, those who know more aren't talking, and those who are talking don't know any more.  Same old, same old.

This is, however, revealing moonbats coming out of the woodwork.  Did you see the wonderful collection of tweets amassed by Moonbattery?  Yes, Sarah Palin / Bushitler / whoever did it!  If there weren't dead to mourn and injured to support in Boston, one would laugh aloud . . . but not under the circumstances.

I'm also noting an attack with terrorist overtones in San Jose, California.  The press are calling it vandalism, but those of us with experience of terrorist tactics can recognize certain all too familiar elements.  It may, indeed, be only vandalism;  but it might also be something much worse.  For more information about what that might be, see here and here.  I haven't written much about such tactics, because I think some things are better and more safely left unsaid;  but the real bad guys know about them.  I've been a civil defense Sector Officer for a major central business district, and fought terrorism in and out of uniform for many years.  I'm watching intently for more of this sort of thing.  If it starts to spread . . . hold on to your hat.

Meanwhile, may those who died in Boston rest in peace;  may their survivors find what comfort there is to be found;  and may the injured recover swiftly, and resume as normal a life as possible.  Strength and speed to those investigating this crime, to fnd, arrest and prosecute those responsible.

Let American Mercenary sum up the situation.

The truth is that you can't stop every attack, if you are lucky you can catch the stupid ones.

The problem with trying to provide "security" from a government standpoint is that it is impossible.  You can't search every bag, every where, all the time.  This is the dilemma of security.  Some people will say, "If we only had more cops this wouldn't have happened!" and tell me that I'm cruel and a horrible person for pointing out the facts that Boston already has more than enough cops and if they weren't part of a comprehensive overall security plan it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

. . .

After 9/11 the expansion of law enforcement under the Patriot Act was supposed to make things like this never happen again.  That is the great lie of big government, "if we were just a little more powerful we could always stop the bad guys."  The problem is that the bigger government gets, the more it NEEDS to find bad guys, even if it has to create them.

There's more at the link.  This man knows whereof he speaks.  Go read.

Peter

A fascinating look at a human warren

The history of Hong Kong's infamous Kowloon Walled City has long interested me.  It was a 'no-mans-land' during the British colonial era, due to an accident of nineteenth-century politics that effectively rendered it a separate enclave, under neither Chinese nor British administration.  Inevitably, criminals and others exploited that status to make it their base of operations, where police from both sides feared to enter.

The Walled City grew up haphazardly, shacks being piled upon shacks, no architect or city planner ever bringing order to its ramshackle chaos.  As a result, access to upper levels was often by ladders and ropes.  Stairs, where they existed, were usually precariously secured to external walls of the rickety buildings.  Dwellings were small and cramped, no more than one or two small rooms, into which entire families crammed themselves.  (At its greatest, the population density of the Kowloon Walled City was estimated to be almost five million people per square mile!  By comparison, New York City's population density is reported to be 26,403 per square mile.)  Criminal Triads and gangs took over parts of the Walled City as their 'turf', and waged fierce battles to keep out others of their kind.

A very interesting article in the South China Morning Post gives details of this strange place, which flourished and grew like a weed until it was finally demolished some 20 years ago.  It includes a fascinating and very detailed hand-drawn graphic, depicting life in one small part of the Walled City.  Here's a blown-up segment of a very small part of the graphic.

There's much more in the full graphic, which may be viewed either as part of the article, or at the StudioX blog.  It's well worth looking at it closely.  Someone took an awful lot of time, and went to a lot of trouble, to depict all that so realistically.

The Kowloon Walled City was demolished in 1993/94.  The site where it once stood is today a park.

Peter