Crime, with strings attached (so to speak)

Thanks to Bob N. for forwarding this report of a hapless crook caught in the good old-fashioned way.

An attempted bicycle theft in a Walmart parking lot was foiled by a cattle rancher on horseback, who chased the thief down and lassoed him until the local police in southern Oregon could arrive.

. . .

“I seen this fella trying to get up to speed on a bicycle,” Borba told the Medford Mail-Tribune. “I wasn’t going to catch him on foot. I just don’t run very fast.” He added: “I use a rope every day, that’s how I make my living. If it catches cattle pretty good, it catches a bandit pretty good.”

Not a lot is known about Borba because he is new in town, Adams said, but “it appears he will be a good fit. Eagle Point is a small city, and people watch out for each other. That’s exactly what he did.”

David Stepp said that he had been sitting in his car nearby when he saw the cowboy trotting across the parking lot on his horse after the thief, who was trying to escape on the stolen bicycle.

When the thief dismounted and tried to flee on foot, Stepp watched as the cowboy lassoed him by the ankle. The thief then grabbed a tree and held on to it until the police arrived. “Best day of my life,” Stepp said.

“I was laughing too hard to intervene,” he said. “I’ve seen it all, but I’ve never seen anything like that in my entire life.”

There's more at the link, including a lovely photo of the horse and its rider standing ready to tow the miscreant by the foot if necessary.  Definitely giggle-worthy!

Sounds like a public-spirited gentleman at work.  Good for him!  I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the local jail, to hear the thief's excuses as he tries to explain to his fellow inmates how he got himself lassoed in true Old West style.  "Waal, I was a-tryin' ta rustle this here bike when . . . "




Peter

About those hippopotamus fighting tusks . . .

A while back I pointed out that a so-called hippo yawn wasn't a yawn - it was a threat display.  I said about the photograph in question:

The hippo is showing its fighting tusks, ivory 'teeth' that can tear great chunks out of a rival hippo, or dismember a crocodile . . . or rip you apart if you provoke it.  That's what its actions are saying to the photographer.  "You worry me.  If you come any closer, I'm going to do something about you - and you won't enjoy it!"

There's more at the link.

Courtesy of Daily Timewaster, here's a video of hippos in a zoo being fed watermelons.  It offers great shots of their fighting tusks (and everything else in their mouth).  The ease with which they crush whole watermelons gives you some idea of the force with which they can bite, too.

Not cuddly critters at all, despite Disney's protestations to the contrary . . .

Peter

Writing for a living - passion or professionalism?

I wrote an article on that subject today over at Mad Genius Club, the shared writers' blog to which I contribute.  Click over there to read it, if the subject interests you.  I think it's a contrast that many people - not just writers - might consider.

Peter

A possible root for some cases of PTSD?

The term 'post-traumatic stress disorder' has become something of a cliché these days.  I think it's greatly over-diagnosed by doctors and other medical professionals who have no personal experience of it, and therefore treat it as a 'catch-all' category in which to lump those with a military or security background who have psychological or psychiatric issues for which they have no other explanation.  Nevertheless, it is real.  I've experienced it to some extent myself, during and after eighteen years' exposure to conflict in southern Africa.

One possible cause of at least some sorts of PTSD has come to light.  The Telegraph reports:

Shockwaves from explosions may scar the brains of soldiers in areas linked to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suggesting a possible physical cause for the condition.

Scientists found distinctive injuries in the brains of eight military personnel who survived bomb blasts but died between four days and nine years after the trauma.

. . .

“Blast-related brain injuries are the signature injury of modern military conflicts”, said senior author Dr Daniel Perl from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Maryland, USA.

“Although routine imaging for blast-related traumatic brain injury often shows no brain abnormalities, soldiers frequently report debilitating neuropsychiatric symptoms such as headaches, sleep disturbance, memory problems, erratic behaviour and depression suggesting structural damage to the brain.

“Because the underlying pathophysiology is unknown, we have difficulty diagnosing and treating these ‘invisible wounds’.”

The authors conclude: “This presents the possibility that the scarring, particularly that in the neuroanatomical areas associated with PTSD ... may increase the probability of PTSD symptom expression in people exposed to blasts.”

In five male soldiers who survived more than six months after blast exposure, the scientists found a ‘distinctive, consistent, and unique pattern’ of prominent scarring in parts of the brain that are crucial for thinking, memory, sleep and other important functions.

. . .

The scarring was different to injuries seen in soldiers who had suffered other types of brain injury such as through car accidents or contact sports.

“In these controls we did not see similar scarring to the blast cases, which increases the likelihood that the pattern is linked with high-explosive exposure,” added Dr Perl.

“Although little is known about the effect of blast shockwave on the human brain, the unique pattern of damage that we found is consistent with known shockwave effects on the human body.”

There's more at the link.

I'm intrigued by this discovery.  I've been exposed to high explosive blasts (artillery shells, grenades, etc.) at close range (sometimes very close).  I can well recall the effect;  it was as if my brain had suddenly been clogged with excessive quantities of cotton wool.  I could think, but only very slowly, struggling to form coherent thoughts and finding it difficult, if not impossible, to act on them with any speed.  I can only describe it as the mental equivalent of a sprinter having to run through thigh-deep molasses.  He'd be straining every muscle and sinew, but unable to move at more than a snail's pace.  That's pretty much what it felt like (although, fortunately, the symptoms disappeared after a few minutes or hours, depending on the severity of the exposure).

Interestingly, I haven't experienced (or, at least, I don't think I've experienced) the physical PTSD consequences described in the article.  My PTSD was more psychological in nature, the result of losing 27 friends (including my fiancée) in the 18 years of near-civil-war that South Africa experienced between 1976 and 1994.  I've written about some of those experiences - see here for one example.  They affected me very profoundly.  I was fortunate to be able to make a fresh start by coming to the USA in the late 1990's, and to find a therapist here who'd had to deal with his own PTSD after serving in Vietnam.  He was able to help me find ways to accept and deal with the bad memories, then put them away and move on with my life.

I guess my PTSD (if that's what it was) was transient in nature.  This research appears to have uncovered a more permanent form of PTSD, one that doesn't go away after therapy, and perhaps is physically incapable of going away.  I hope this line of inquiry is pursued further.  If it can help those who suffer from PTSD to find balance and get on with their lives, it'll be invaluable - and, heaven knows, after fifteen years of the War on Terror, we have far too many of them in our midst.

Peter

A kidnapping attempt in broad daylight - what would YOU have done?

My friend Kathy Jackson of The Cornered Cat has published an excellent analysis of a recent kidnapping attempt in Florida.  Here's a brief excerpt.

Broad daylight, as far as I can tell. Not an empty back alleyway in the middle of the night. Just inside a dollar store in Florida, with other people around.

Stranger tries to grab a 13 year old and drag her out of the store. The girl’s mom reacts quickly and fights back, eventually throwing her own body on top of her daughter to thwart the assailant, who fled for the exit.

The fleeing criminal was stopped by a good guy with a gun. An off duty cop happened to be pulling up outside the store. He blocked the assailant’s car in the parking lot and held the assailant at gun point until law enforcement arrived to arrest the guy and take him into custody.

Several people have asked me what I thought the mother “should have” done. My answer: exactly what she did! She used the tools and skills she had available to her, without any hesitation at all. Her immediate and full commitment to action almost certainly saved her daughter’s life.

Others have asked a different question: if one of us were in the same situation, would it be legal to shoot the attacker? Is it legal to shoot an assailant who’s trying to kidnap your child, and who appears to be succeeding? Let’s look at that.

There's much more at the link, including security video footage of the kidnap attempt.

This is a very important lesson taken straight from the headlines.  It's a danger any of us can face, in this world of unconfined and uncontrolled crazy people.  (Take a guess - how many of the people around you every day, as you shop or go to work or take your kid to school, are on some sort of mood control medication?  And how many of them might 'snap' if they fail to take it, or run out?)

Highly recommended reading - and definitely food for thought.  This is the sort of lesson that's worth discussing with your spouse and children, too;  and if you decide you want training in how to deal with similar situations, find out when Kathy's teaching schedule will bring her in your direction.  She's a great instructor, and very good at what she does.  You won't go wrong taking a class from her.

Peter

Excavator to the rescue

Bill Davis found two baby black-tailed deer stuck in the mud on a construction project.  He and a fellow worker made good use of an excavator to rescue them.

Nice work!  Now, if only the excavator had been a John Deere . . .

Peter

Technology and the numbers game in warfare

I've been reading many articles in recent months concerning new or expanded threats confronting military forces and technological upgrades to counter them.  However, I fear that a growing number of commentators are missing the point.  Technology has expanded to the point where threats are asymmetrical;  where even a relatively minor player on the world stage can take out a strike force, or a major asset such as an aircraft carrier, with relatively minor difficulty.

Consider these examples.

1. The USAF's Predator unmanned aerial vehicle has a maximum speed of 135 mph and a range (excluding loiter time) of up to 775 miles.  It has a payload (fuel, weapons and sensors) of just over 1,100 pounds, and cost about US $4 million a pop in 2010.  The new Cub Crafters XCub, a carbon-fiber modernized version of the venerable Piper Cub with greatly upgraded capabilities, has a maximum speed of 153 mph, , a maximum range (at economical speeds) of 800 miles or more, and a maximum useful load of 1,084 pounds - and even with a relatively 'luxurious' leather and carbon-fiber interior, it costs less than $300,000.  I'd imagine any halfway competent aeronautical engineer and computer whizkid could add pilotless operation to it relatively cheaply and easily - the technology to do so is now over-the-counter stuff.  For a total expenditure of $200,000 or so, they could also add a surveillance system (in a retractable turret), a satellite communications system, and either weapon hard points under the wings, and/or a means of launching small weapons from the load compartment.  That means one could field up to ten pilotless XCubs or equivalent aircraft for the cost of a single Predator.  Obviously, the latter is purpose-designed for its surveillance mission, and is therefore likely to be much more capable at it . . . but just how capable does it have to be?  The USAF needs four Predators to maintain what it classifies as a single 'unmanned aerial system', sufficient to keep an aircraft continuously on station over a surveillance or target area.  A third world nation could have up to 40 light aircraft equivalents to the Predator for roughly the same cost.  Which fleet will be more cost-effective and mission-capable in a typical engagement - say, in the next Iraq or Afghanistan conflict?  Think about it.
2. A modern main battle tank such as the US Army's M1A2SEP costs about $10 million each.  Modern anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM's), such as Russia's 9M133 Kornet, Israel's Spike or the latest versions of South Africa's ZT3 Ingwe, can be bought for under a quarter of a million dollars each in quantity.  An adversary can buy up to 40 such missiles for the cost of a single main battle tank . . . and no tank in the world, no matter how well equipped with defensive systems, can withstand a barrage of (say) half a dozen ATGM's like that.  The cost-per-kill equation has shifted in favor of the defender.
3. The same consideration applies to naval vessels.  Anti-ship missiles have come a long way since the Soviet Styx missiles that sank Israel's destroyer Eilat in 1967, or the Exocet missiles that sank British ships during the Falklands War in 1982.  To take just one example, China's YJ-83 (known as the C-802 in its export version) costs less than $1 million apiece, and is very capable (as Israel found out when its corvette Hanit was struck by one off Lebanon in 2006).  It's available in ship-, air- and land-based versions.  With a range of 80-120 miles, depending on the version, this missile could force naval vessels to keep their distance from its launchers.  This would protect shore bases, navigation choke points such as straits and channels, etc.  Even if the vessels have the latest anti-missile defenses, they would be swamped by a barrage of several dozen such missiles, some of which would be sure to strike home.  Even if they didn't sink the ships, they'd almost certainly do sufficient damage to prevent them achieving their objectives - a 'mission kill'.  Let's be extravagant and say that 100 missiles would be needed.  That's a total cost of $100 million or thereabouts - but they could damage an aircraft carrier battle group (costing well over $20 billion) sufficiently to force it to abandon its mission.  Even if the battle group could defeat such a threat, it would arise again the next day, and the next, and the next.  Eventually, the defense would be worn down.

It's no longer good enough to argue that we need a '300-ship navy' or a '2,000-plane air force' or anything along those lines.  The question should be, "What will be survivable (let alone operationally effective) in the face of the massed threats posed by the proliferation of technology?"

I think that watching Israel's changing force structure offers a very interesting perspective on the problem.  Israel is emphasizing not one, but many solutions to the problem.  It's employing technology to defend against barrage attacks, even down to anti-missile protective systems on its tanks and armored personnel carriers.  Even without stealth technology (yet), its Air Force is employing electronic counter-measures to fool enemy air defenses and allow its planes to strike enemy installations (for example, see Operation Orchard in 2007).  It's currently preparing to stand up its first F-35 squadron, which will introduce stealth technology for the first time.  The IAF is also using large numbers of unmanned aerial vehicles.  Their operations are highly classified, but they're almost certainly being used for reconnaissance in areas where the threat to manned aircraft would be too great, and possibly also to deploy electronic counter-measures to allow manned aircraft to get through heavily defended areas.

Israel also appears to be modifying its tactics and systems to take account of the increased threat from guided weapons.  Its land units no longer bull into an assault, but soften up the target area first, seeking to make the enemy expend his 'smart' munitions before its forces get into range.  Its aircraft operate under the protection of electronic warfare systems, sometimes on their own airframes, sometimes provided by dedicated support aircraft or land-based systems.  Furthermore, UAV's such as its Harpy and Harop systems actively target enemy surveillance and defensive systems.  Israel's Navy is fairly small, but has increasingly onerous responsibilities, including the defense of natural gas platforms in the Mediterranean Sea, which will be vulnerable to 'barrage' attacks from anti-ship missiles.  Details of measures and systems to protect these platforms are highly classified, but I'd expect them to include a wide range of electronic counter-measures as well as active defenses of some sort.  I also expect the defenses to include pre-emptive attacks against potential bases from which 'barrage' attacks could be launched (e.g. Hezbollah bases in Lebanon, Hamas bases in Gaza, etc.).

This is where I think the institutional thinking of the US armed forces is lagging behind.  For example, in naval terms, I'm seeing lots of debate over whether or not the Littoral Combat Ship was/is/will be worthwhile (personally, I think not), how many aircraft carriers should be fielded, and whether or not to order more F/A-18's.  I see much less debate (at least in public) over whether 'barrage' attacks from missiles (particularly higher-technology ones such as we're likely to face in the hands of sophisticated opponents) mean that naval vessels will simply not be able to survive at any meaningful distance from a combat zone.  If aircraft carrier battle groups are forced to remain 500 miles or more from a combat zone to evade such a threat, their air wings will be too far away to intervene . . . effectively, a 'mission kill' in all but name.  The Navy's investing a lot of money to develop defensive laser weapons and extended-range attack weapons, but will this be enough to defeat the ever-increasing threat?  How long does it take a defensive laser to shoot down an incoming missile, re-target onto the next missile, and destroy it?  If it takes 3-5 seconds per missile (a very optimistic estimate), but there are 50 incoming weapons, that means more than half of them will make it from the horizon to the target before they can be shot down.  That's not a happy thought for those on board the ship.

I don't want to single out the US Navy for criticism.  The Army and Air Force have plenty to answer for as well.  I suspect there's too much focus on building better, faster, more capable weapons systems, without considering whether the threat environment in which those systems will have to operate will allow them to accomplish the mission for which they're designed.  There's too much focus on building all sorts of 'gee-whiz' capabilities into each platform, without asking whether those capabilities will be destroyed by a barrage of cheap missiles that overwhelm them.

Food for thought.

Peter

An unexpected side effect of a heart attack

Regular readers will recall that back in 2009, I suffered a heart attack and underwent quadruple bypass surgery.  Since then, thanks be to God, my heart's chugged along just fine.  However, I've been left with a zipper scar down the center of my chest where they cut me open to operate, then wired my sternum back together again.

Today I had to cut a padlock to which I'd lost the key, so I dug out my trusty bolt-cutters.  Guess what?  When your chest has been wired together, and you try to exert very strong pressure from both sides towards the middle of your body (like when trying to close bolt-cutters), that wire binding hurts like a sumbitch!  It seems the inward pressure from both hands tries to pull it apart.  I had to stop, take a deep breath, and admit defeat.  One quick trip to the hardware store later, I now own a small Porter Cable grinder with a cutting wheel.  Once I've learned to use it safely (the last time I used something similar was back in the 1970's or early 1980's - if I recall correctly, they were steam-powered in those days!), that padlock will be history.

(Something else I was reminded about today;  the latest and greatest technology is not only often unnecessary, it can also be much more expensive than it needs to be to get the job done.  A battery-powered grinder to do the same job would have cost me several times more than the wired version I eventually bought.  It wouldn't have done a better job - simply been a little more convenient through not having to lead an extension cable to the work site.  I'll take the savings instead, thank you very much!)

It's frustrating to be reminded that one's no longer in the first flush (and strength) of youth . . .

Peter

Bucatini, Mafalde, Strozzapreti and more

There seem to be a lot of Italian pasta varieties of which I've never heard.

In case you hadn’t noticed, Italians take pasta very seriously. There are dozens of varieties - it's much more than just spaghetti and fusili - and menus can be hard to decipher to visitors and newcomers.

Pasta is an art form; not only does each region have its local specialities, but there are rules as to which sauce goes best with which pasta. To start with, Italians would never pair chicken or meatballs with pasta - and don't even think about topping a seafood pasta dish with cheese.

There are so many different kinds that sometimes you don't realize it's pasta, let alone what shape, from reading the menu.

Waiters have been known to draw pasta shapes in order to help diners understand what they're ordering, while many foreigners in Italy have sat through lectures from Italian housemates on why you should never, ever order spaghetti bolognese.

There's more at the link, including descriptions and photographs of the varieties mentioned in the title of this article and a lot more.  Interesting reading for food lovers - and it helps to pasta the time . . .




Peter

Looks like the Iraqi Army is improving

At the onset of ISIL's attack on Iraq, the army of that country basically collapsed like a house of cards.  Its troops (and, more to the point, its commanders) fled in panic from Mosul as the city fell with almost no resistance offered.

Fortunately, it seems that Iraq's army has been re-learning how to fight.  Chris Hernandez reports:

I was pretty happy when I recently met a US Marine Corps advisor to an Iraqi armored division. This officer deployed twice to Iraq as a tanker, and made trips to Afghanistan to see how tanks were being employed there. Policy prevents me from identifying him, so I’ll call him Brad.

. . .

“We don’t accompany the Iraqis. Mostly, they’re doing it, they don’t need us,” Brad said. “It’s like the old parable, ‘what you expect of people they tend to deliver’. If we don’t accompany them, the Iraqi Army realizes they need to do it on their own. The only thing we really have a problem with is that they move at their speed, and we want them to move faster. But when it comes to the rubber really meeting the road...

“I was part of an operation earlier this month. They were clearing a road, and it was heavily defended by Daesh. They ran into several problems, they lost one of their senior leaders, they had issues where certain units weren’t performing as well as others. But they adjusted their scheme of maneuver on the fly, they provided relatively accurate reporting, they were relatively responsive to our requests for information while they were in the middle of the fight. Their problems now lie in basic soldierly proficiency. They’re in the war now, and they don’t have time to focus on just basic soldiering. They have to keep everybody on the line, they have to keep everybody attacking.”

Basic proficiency is a big deal though, especially considering all the complex tasks that go into running a tank. So where are they as far as being able to perform basic tanker tasks?

“I mean, are they US Marines or American Army? No. Those are the two finest fighting forces in the world. But they adapt to changing tactical situations, they continue to press despite casualties and IEDs. Are they incredibly proficient at accurate fires and all those thing? Well, they’ve got some work to do in that area. But when it comes to behaving like a professional army, they’re making great strides every day, actually. It takes decades to produce the kind of culture and institutional knowledge the US Army and Marine Corps have with their tanks. It takes going to gunnery twice a year, year after year, it takes officers who have been to multiple gunneries, the Master Gunner program, you know, all those things they just don’t have time to do. They are at just a basic level of proficiency. I think the biggest thing to say about this is…they’re not us, but they’re resilient, and they don’t give up. The fighting spirit’s really there.”

. . .

What can you say about our strategy to defeat ISIS?

“It blew my mind when I got here. Cause I’d been watching the news and following the election back home, and I’ve only been out here a couple months on the ground, and within a week I’m like, ‘This is fucking brilliant. This is really working.’ We don’t know why it’s so hard to convince everybody back home that thinks, you know, ‘We should send our own troops in, the Iraqis aren’t good enough.’ No, we’ll let the politicians decide how we’re going to do this. I’m just telling you, what I’m doing here right now without accompanying them, just providing advice and assistance, it’s working just fine.

“The talking heads who want to complain about the strategy here, if you come here for five minutes and you actually see what’s happening on the ground, it’s a very different story. I am seeing this strategy work every day. It’s slow, but there’s not a lot of Americans dying. And Daesh hasn’t taken any new territory. They’re losing. A hundred meters at a time, they’re losing. Steadily and completely.

“Again, don’t let me paint too rosy of a picture, but it’s just not that bad. There are some units aren’t very good, but we’ve taken ground since I got here, and we’ve held it. ISIS has counterattacked, and we’ve still held it. And we’re planning on taking more.”

Will ISIS ever be truly defeated in Iraq?

“Without a doubt, given enough time and our patient support, eventually the last ISIS fighter will be out of Iraq. I don’t know how long it’s going to take, but it’s inevitable. As long as we continue to support them, they will eventually eliminate the last ISIS fighter inside the borders of Iraq.”

There's much more at the link.

Iraqi tankers certainly seem to be learning to fight their tanks better than their predecessors.  Here's a snap shot from an Iraqi M1 tank at an ISIL suicide bomb vehicle in December last year.

On target, I'd say.

Peter

Would someone please explain to me . . .

. . . why a book with this title:

can currently be ranked #1 on Amazon.com in "New Testament meditations"?!?!?

Yes, the F-word in the book's title has been blanked out - this is a family friendly blog, after all!

I have to admit, even though I'm a man of faith, the sheer incongruity of it had me smiling . . .  After all, one's faith, like everything else in life, has to be taken with a sense of humor.  I can always hope (and do) that the author (and her impish sense of the ridiculous) will develop a little more understanding and tolerance of faith in due course.




Peter

This makes me feel old

In a collection of images from times past, The Feral Irishman included this one:

I remember learning exactly the same system of writing (or 'penmanship', as we called it) in the first few years of primary school (which covered the equivalent of Grades 1-7 in South Africa).  We also started in pencil, and were allowed to graduate to fountain pens - no ballpoints allowed, but strictly! - when the teacher felt our progress warranted it.  From Grade 3 onwards those with the best handwriting were allowed to use ballpoint pens, but if their script deteriorated they were immediately 'demoted' to fountain pens once more.  (I didn't get to use a ballpoint pen until Grade 4.  I felt very put upon!)

There are several other images at the link that brought back memories.  Click over there and see how many you remember.

Peter

This cries to heaven for vengeance

If you can read this without anger or disgust, I don't wish to know you.

ISIS militants have publicly executed 19 Yazidi women by burning them alive in Mosul, Iraq, local activists report.

The women were burned to death in iron cages because they refused to have sex with Isis fighters, the Kurdish ARA News agency reported.

“They were punished for refusing to have sex with Isis militants,” Abdullah al-Malla, a local media activist, told the agency.

There's more at the link.

After this latest atrocity, there's no longer any excuse for those who talk a good fight against ISIS/ISIL, but won't actually do anything about it.  Please consider contributing to the 'good' side in that war, which to me is overwhelmingly represented by the Kurds in Iraq and Syria.  (One can choose an organization out of the list provided at the link, or find out more information for oneself.  Unfortunately, it's almost impossible to tell which of the Arab aid organizations in the region are worth supporting - the corruption is endemic.)  One can also donate to international organizations involved in the aid effort, which is the route I've chosen (I'm supporting Doctors Without Borders and World Vision, as I've encountered them both on more than one occasion in the Third World, and I know from personal experience that they do good work).

It's not legal for private US individuals or organizations to provide weapons or materials of war to Kurds, Yazidis or others involved in the fight against ISIL.  However, the US government has done so in the past, and is reported to be doing so again.  If you feel so inclined, write your Congressional representative and Senators to encourage them to support such measures.

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #911

Today's award goes to two dumb armed robbers in France.

Around 40 customers were chomping on their burgers on Sunday evening in [a McDonalds restaurant] in a shopping centre in Besancon when two men burst in, fired in the air with a shotgun, threatened the guests and ordered staff to open the till, which contained €2,000 [about US $2,270] in cash.

However, unbeknownst to the robbers, among the terrified customers were 11 off-duty members of the French paramilitary special forces, Groupe d’Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale, or GIGN - the Gallic equivalent of the SAS - who were not amused at having their meal of Big Macs and French fries disturbed by the low-level criminals.

Along with the French counter-terror police unit, le RAID, the GIGN are highly admired by peers in Britain and beyond. One former SAS officer, Col Tim Collins, recently described them as "among the most effective anti-terror forces in Europe, if not the world" in an assessment in the Telegraph.

Keeping their cool during the hold-up, the GIGN officers only leaped into action as it ended to avoid any collateral bloodshed.

Edwige Roux-Morizot, the local prosecutor, said: “During the hold-up, the gendarmes didn’t do anything. It was out of the question to use their weapons, as this would have created difficulties and could have placed many people’s lives in danger.”

The highly trained and battle-hardened officers were able to pounce on the first of the two robbers when he tripped on his way of the outlet without firing a shot.

However, they were forced to shoot the other in the abdomen when he pointed a gun at them as he sought to make his getaway with the cash, ignoring their orders to drop his weapon.

There's more at the link.

Massad Ayoob would call that "a sudden and acute failure of the victim selection process".  Hard to disagree . . .

Peter

For low-level jet noise aficionados

For everyone who can recall low-and-fast close air support maneuvers overhead, here's a collection of F-4 and RF-4 Phantoms doing their thing, including a couple of supersonic passes.  'Noisy' just about describes it!

That brings back lots of memories . . . not of Phantoms, but of South African Mirages and Impalas (friendly) and Soviet-era MiG-21's, MiG-23's, MiG-27's and Sukhoi Su-22's (not so friendly) low overhead in African skies.  Modern jets make a lot less smoke, but they're no less noisy - sometimes more so.

Peter

We need a lot more people like this kid

Full marks to this youngster for drive, initiative and a sense of purpose.  I wish there were more like him.  Full marks to his mother, too, for raising him right.

If I were still living in Nashville, I'd make a point of seeking him out and buying him a meal.  Way to go, son!

Peter

In Valhalla, the Norse gods must be going gaga over this

Full marks for creativity!

Obviously produced by an egg-centric mind . . .




Peter

When the camera gets too close to the action for comfort . . .

Last week the Celebrity Infinity, a 90,000 ton cruise ship, rammed the pier at Ketchikan, Alaska, causing several million dollars' worth of damage to itself and the dock.  Here's what it looked like from the shore.

Apparently there was a strong wind blowing from seaward at the time, which made it more difficult to stop the ship.  It'll take several months to replace the shore facilities.  The ship's already docked in Vancouver, Canada to undergo repairs.

Peter

"What's the single most effective thing you can do to improve your chances in a gunfight?"

That question was put to me by a reader this weekend.  He asked, "There are so many different opinions out there for a defensive weapon:  this or that caliber, or cartridge, or firearm, or technique, or whatever.  Is there any one thing I should look to master before worrying about the others?  Is there any single element that can make the difference between life and death, if I ever need it the hard way?"

Why, yes.  Yes, there is.  It's basic marksmanship.

• No matter what super-dooper, felon-stopper, magnum-blaster ammunition you carry, unless you can put it into an attacker's vital zones and shut him down, he's going to hurt or kill you or your loved ones.
• No matter what plastic-fantastic, space-cowboy-zapper death-dealing firearm you're toting, unless you can bring its whiz-bang features to bear against an enemy, it won't do you any good (except to make you look technologically sexy, and I doubt your corpse or your surviving family members [if any] will care about that).
• No matter how gung-ho, super-fit, extreme-martial-artist your physical capabilities may be;  no matter whether you can sprint a hundred meters in Olympic-record time while simultaneously dodging speeding bullets;  no matter whether you can bench-press three hundred pounds while operating a machine-gun with your toes;  unless you can put down aimed, effective fire on your opponent, his return fire is going to turn your superhero body into a colander.

A couple of years ago I wrote an article titled '.22LR as a defensive round'.  It remains one of my most popular and most-searched articles on the subject of defensive shooting.  In it I outlined a very low-cost and extremely effective training technique that anyone can apply to almost any weapon.  If you read that article, and follow the training it advises, I guarantee that your combat effectiveness will be multiplied several times over, even if you do nothing else to improve your chances.  Weapon and ammunition selection can follow, and of course you'll need to practice to achieve similar results with a harder-kicking, less easily controlled firearm.  Nevertheless, the basic principle of getting effective rounds on target remains the key to successful self-defense.

Remember, too, that accuracy with a firearm is a perishable skill.  It's not one you'll retain unless you keep in training.  Start with basic 'bullseye' target shooting and/or competition, by all means, and progress through the training methods I outlined in my earlier article;  but don't rest on your laurels once you achieve marksmanship nirvana.  You'll have to stay in practice.  I reckon you should be shooting at least a hundred rounds a month with your BB handgun to do that;  and if you've upgraded to a suitable defensive weapon, plan on shooting 100-200 rounds every three months as an absolute minimum with it.  I prefer a practical minimum of 50-100 rounds every month, but I realize not everyone can afford that much time or that much ammunition.  That's why ongoing practice with a BB gun is a very inexpensive, ultra-affordable and extremely important way to keep your skills current.  You can do that in your back yard, or in your garage, or even (using Airsoft guns) in your living-room without risking damage to your furniture or fittings.

Practice, practice, and more practice.  It's indispensable - and it really does make a difference.  There's a lot more to defensive shooting than just marksmanship, but in the absence of accuracy, none of it matters worth a damn.

Peter

That's telling 'em!

Joel brings us this classic warning sign:

And how much am I bet that some mindless moron will ignore it, get hurt, and sue anyway?


*Sigh*


Peter

Plastic fantastics - musical edition

I was amazed to learn that many musical instruments I'd only encountered in brass have also been produced in brightly colored plastic versions.  There's a plastic trumpet, a trombone, a tuba, a euphonium . . . the list seems endless.

They even sound pretty good.  Some readers may be aware of the music of British trumpeter Alison Balsom.  Here she is at the 2009 Last Night of the Proms concert in the Royal Albert Hall, London, performing the first movement of Haydn's Trumpet Concerto in E flat.

Warwick Music in the UK, inventors of the pTrumpet, invited her to test a production version.  Here's how it went.

Warwick Music have just introduced the bargain-basement-priced pBuzz, a brand-new instrument designed for the first years of music education in schools.  It looks like a lot of fun.

Hmmm . . . I wonder what Miss D. would say (not to mention do to me!) if I brought home one of those, and announced my intention of learning to play it?  I suspect I might be exiled to the garden shed, complete with muttered comments about "bloody vuvuzelas!"

At least the neighbor's goats could respond in kind as I practised . . .




Peter

I laughed and laughed . . .

People who are profoundly religious seldom learn to laugh at their faith, much less their own . . . ah . . . embodiment of that faith, shall we say.  I learned to do so early and often, partly due to living in a country where one's faith/tribe/skin color/whatever could get one killed.  What was there to do but shrug one's shoulders and laugh at the inevitability of something going wrong?  It was that, or cry, and there was no future in the latter.

Nevertheless, sometimes one comes across a delightfully funny encounter between faiths.  Reader M. K. sent me this one.  The author was a student at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary at the time he describes, and working part-time at a local bookstore.  Here's an excerpt.

These [Mormon missionaries] decided that spreading the message of the late prophet Joseph Smith was a poor career choice. They eventually gave up on evangelism and quietly dumped two massive cases of “The Book Of Mormon” at the back door of Taylors Books and said “screw it”.  Maybe they would’ve felt too guilty about throwing the books into a dumpster, but figured that a bookstore might sell them.  We never saw them again, and as far as I know they took their bicycles to I-20 and pedaled back to Salt Lake City.

. . .

Let’s just say that I wasn’t happy [at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary]. I couldn’t imagine spending the rest of my life enmeshed in those debates. I had already blown off half of my classes and was half-auditing the others just to learn more, with no intention of taking any final exams. I didn’t know what I wanted to do with the rest of my life and didn’t have an immediate goal.

But someone had given me 250 copies of The Book Of Mormon. I took that as a sign from God, or Jupiter, Zeus, Zool, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (who had not yet been revealed unto us, Bless His Noodly Appendage), that those books should be put to use.

Early one Saturday morning, I put on a generic denim shirt, one that could’ve been issued to someone’s maintenance crew. I got my cases of Joseph Smith’s Epistle To The Polygamists, a couple of shopping bags, and drove to school.

Other than the professorial and administrative offices, Southwestern Seminary classrooms were as open and empty as the tomb of the slain Galilean. I decided to hit the school of Theology first. I went into a classroom and propped a copy of “The Book Of Mormon: Another Testimony Of Jesus Christ” on the chalkrail of the blackboard. Front and center. It felt good. It looked right. A Hustler centerfold of Hillary Clinton couldn’t have been more offensive in that environment. I took a few steps back to admire my work, “and saw that it was good.” (Genesis 1:10 )

I went from classroom to classroom, like a Utah Johnny Appleseed, spreading the Mormon Gospel of Sacred Undergarments, Celestial Marriage, Republican Governors, and large families. What were they going to do to me, throw me out of school? Plus, the only way I was going to get caught was if I kept breaking out in loud giggles.

I went to the Preaching Lab, a mini-church sanctuary with a pulpit, piano, and pews. I put a copy in the hymnal rack on the back of each pew, left one on the pulpit, and then propped open one on the piano.

Next, I entered to the chapel. Entering this room with those Joseph Smith’s books was like performing a Muslim ritual Hajj to Mecca, approaching the holy Kaaba, and then whipping out a Pizza Hut Deep Dish Pork Lover’s special (with extra bacon) just to see how it would go over with the other pilgrims. I decorated the chapel with my heretical books. Thus was The School Of Theology evangelized.

. . .

Tuesday morning, there was a massive uproar all over campus. Outrage. Sturdy, strapping young Baptists discussed marching on Salt Lake City to plant copies of Herschell Hobbs’ landmark tract “The Baptist Faith And Message” in the Mormon Tabernacle Choir loft. Some professors declared it to be a harmless prank, while others began their classes with a prayer that all Mormons/LDS church members would listen for the Spirit’s voice, find the true path, repent of their errors, and blah blah blah freakin’ blah.

There's more at the link.  Go read the whole thing.  It's great!

The story reminded me of the presence at the Second Vatican Council of a Pentecostal observer, David du Plessis, who was originally from South Africa (like yours truly).  He'd been effectively excommunicated from his denomination for warning that the Holy Spirit and Pentecostal gifts would one day 'bust loose' in the Catholic church, and when they did, watch out!

It's many years since I heard the story, so I apologize for any lapses of memory, but it seems he was present at the plenary Council session which adopted the document proclaiming Mary to be the Mother of the Church.  Over tea and sticky buns afterwards (or whatever churchmen imbibe and consume on such occasions), he was approached by a few of the Bishops, who asked him how he, as a Pentecostal, related to the idea.

"I'm sorry, gentlemen, but you've got it wrong," he's said to have replied.

"Oh?" they inquired, allegedly rather snootily.

"Well, Mary is the mother of Jesus, right?"

"Yeeesss . . . "

"And the Church is the Bride of Christ, right?"

"Yeeesss . . . "

"Then surely that makes Mary the Church's mother-in-law?"

Apparently the shattered sensibilities of the Bishops took some time to recover!




Peter

College then and now

Fred Reed lays it down in his latest column.

Long ago, before 1965 say, college was understood to be for the intelligent and academically prepared among the young, who would one day both provide leadership for the country and set the tone of society. Perhaps ten percent, but no more than twenty percent, of high-school graduates were thought to have any business on a campus.

It was elitist and deliberately so. Individuals and groups obviously differed in character and aptitude. The universities selected those students who could profit by the things done at universities.

Incoming freshmen were assumed to read with fluency and to know algebra cold. They did, because applicants were screened for these abilities by the SATs. These tests, not yet dumbed down, then measured a student’s ability to handle complex ideas expressed in complex literate English, this being what college students then did.

There were no remedial courses. If you needed them, you belonged somewhere else. The goal of college was learning, not social uplift.

. . .

That is how things were. Then came what are roughly called the Sixties, actually the late Sixties and early Seventies.

They changed everything.

The first and worst change was the philosophy that everybody, or much closer to everybody, should go to college. Disaster followed. There descended on the schools huge numbers of adolescents without the brains, preparation, or interest needed for college. They had little notion of what college was for. The very idea of cultivation seemed undemocratic to them, as of course it was. They set out to avoid it. And did.

Since they were not ready, and for the most part could not be made ready, colleges dumbed down courses. Remedial classes proliferated. These worked poorly.  When a graduate of high school can barely read, there is usually an underlying reason why he will never be able to read.

. . .

What the students didn’t want was an education, to the extent that they knew what the word meant. They wanted courses that were easy and fun. Soon there were things like “What if Harry Potter were Real?” and “The Comic Book in the Struggle for Gender Equality.” These were vacuous, but the students didn’t know and wouldn’t have cared. They were in a USP—a university-shaped place—that had the form of schooling, such as numbered courses with solemn-sounding titles, credit hours, and buildings with blackboards. They  thought they were in college. They weren’t really, but didn’t really want to be.

College, once a passage into adulthood, became a way of avoiding it. Immaturity and narcissism flourished well into the students’ twenties. This was perhaps because they had never had the experience of having to do things, such as work in a gas station or manage a paper route.  They confused universities with their parents and worked to outrage them. With the righteousness of the still-pubescent, they demanded justice for everything and, having no experience of rational argument, or of thought of any kind, called for the abolition of anything that didn’t suit them. To their delight, they discovered that administrations would cave. Expelling them would have been  a wiser course. They became the prissiest of prissy moralists.

. . .

The result was that students who wanted to learn nothing did so, at great expense and to little advantage to themselves or society, and were ruthlessly exploited by banks and rooked for exorbitant tuition while failing to grow up.

There's more at the link.  Read it and weep.

I learned from the example of my parents - either or both of whom would have beaten me senseless if I'd behaved as the 'students' of the '70's and beyond did.  Neither of them earned so much as a school-leaving certificate in the pre-war years of the Great Depression in England.  My father entered the Royal Air Force as a so-called 'boy apprentice' in 1936, graduating from the three-year Aircraft Apprentice Scheme course taught by No. 1 School of Technical Training at RAF Halton in 1939 - just in time for World War II.  He had a 'good' war, being commissioned in 1940 and ending the conflict as a Squadron Leader (equivalent to a USAF Major).  My mother worked as a shop assistant at John Lewis during the day, and stood watch at night with a bucket of sand, a bucket of water and a stirrup pump, to extinguish German incendiaries dropped on British cities.  The picture below isn't her, but it illustrates her 'war work' for years on end.  Not only the soldiers were on the front lines.

After the war, my parents emigrated to South Africa and began to work at 'improving' themselves, in the parlance of the times.  During twelve years of raising a family and studying part-time at night, they each earned the equivalent of a school-leaving certificate, followed by three degrees;  Bachelors, Masters and Doctorate in their respective fields.  They never asked for any favors from anyone;  they paid their own way, worked like dogs, and earned their qualifications the hard way.  While they studied, Dad worked at several jobs (sometimes more than one at the same time) while Mom raised their kids.  They were immensely proud of their academic and life achievements, and had every right and reason to be so.

I followed their example when it came to my own studies.  I've written about my experiences during the 'evil years' in South Africa, so it won't surprise you that my studies were somewhat intermittent.  Also, by the time I left high school, my father was preparing to retire and my parents were about to move to another town, so there was no prospect of them paying for my studies.  That didn't faze me.  I paid my own way (with a little help from them now and again, when they could afford it), and studied part-time, as they had done.  I ended up with four University qualifications, the last being because the good Lord changed my career direction (after I'd already become a company director) and redirected me into the ministry.  Like my parents, I had to learn self-discipline and the need to apply myself.  I don't think it did me any harm.

I look at many university students today and I wonder what the heck they think they're doing there.  They certainly don't seem to be learning anything - rather, they seem to be incessantly whining at life, the universe and everything.  They seem to expect 'fairness' and 'justice' and 'compassion' and 'understanding' and a bunch of other things that life isn't exactly noted for handing out like candy.  Here's a clue, special snowflakes:  life doesn't owe you anything.  You have to get out there and earn it - and sometimes wrest it from the grasp of a resisting, actively non-cooperative fate!  No-one's going to give you anything.  You have to get it the hard way.  If you expect anything else, you're either a fool or a moonbat.

I hope Fred's young lady, to whom he wrote the words above, learns those lessons before it's too late.

Peter

A crisis of affordability

That's how Zillow described the state of the US housing market in a recent report.  I've written many times before about the parlous state of that market.  This report reinforces what I've been saying.

Over the past roughly two decades, incomes for the lowest-earning Americans have barely grown at all, but housing costs have grown a lot – particularly among entry and mid-level homes.

On the mortgage side, low-income households spend more of their income on a mortgage, even on a less-expensive home, compared to the highest-income households purchasing a high-end home. And the gap is widening as income growth at the top stays strong but is flat at the bottom. At the end of 2012, low-income households purchasing a low-end home spent 10 percentage points more of their income on a mortgage than high-income people purchasing a high-end home. By midway through 2014, the gap had widened to 14 percentage points.

On the rental side, because rents have been rising steadily for years without much income growth for many Americans, the annual salary needed today to get the share of income spent on rent back to historic levels in most markets would represent a huge raise for most workers.

In the San Jose area, for example – the epicenter of booming Silicon Valley – the current median income is $99,897 per year, almost double the U.S. average. But even with that healthy paycheck, San Jose renters can still expect to pay 41 percent of their monthly income on the area’s median rent, up from 26 percent historically. To get that share of income back to historic levels in the San Jose area, the median renter renting the median apartment would need to make $158,283 per year, a hypothetical raise of more than 58 percent. We’re guessing most bosses, even bosses at the area’s famously generous tech companies, would laugh at that kind of raise request.

And San Jose isn’t alone. Even in a relatively more affordable market like Chicago, where rents consume “only” 31 percent of monthly income, the typical renter would need an almost 23.6 percent raise – from $62,935 currently to $77,784 – to get that share back down to historic levels of 25 percent.

The average raise needed to get the share of income spent on rent back to historic norms (across all markets where the current share needed is higher than the historic share) is approximately 21 percent.

But increasingly, even as homeowners enjoy a significant housing affordability advantage over renters, even they aren’t immune to mounting affordability problems. In a number of large, fast-growing metro markets, the share of income needed to afford a mortgage today is actually higher than it has been historically, bucking the national trend.

. . .

Finally, perhaps the most worrisome housing affordability problem we’ve noticed is the fact that ... home values have increased sharply in the very same metro areas that offer a path to a prosperous future – and incomes have not kept up. In the late 1990s, the average home value in the best places for socio-economic mobility was about 56.1 percent higher than home values in the places where getting ahead was most difficult. Today, the gap has almost tripled, to 147.3 percent.

This shows that it’s harder than ever for kids who grew up in the country’s poorest households to live in the places where they’re most likely to succeed. Getting ahead and improving your socio-economic status is at the very heart of the American Dream. We already know that high rents and growing housing costs are hitting low-income people hardest, and it’s clear the housing affordability crisis on the coasts is going to be more and more of a barrier to their upward social mobility.

There's more at the link.

This has really worrying implications for Americans approaching retirement age, who are planning to sell their big, expensive homes at current property values and use that money to fund at least part of their retirement.  What if there are few buyers available who can qualify for a mortgage sufficiently large to pay their asking price?  Are they prepared to lower their price so that buyers can get financing for it?  Can they afford to do that, without jeopardizing their retirement plans?

The value of an asset is ultimately what someone else is willing or able to pay for it.  If you're relying on the value of your asset(s) to fund future needs, you may want to take a long, hard look at your strategy, and your plans - and possibly begin working on alternatives.  I don't see things improving for some considerable time.

(That's one reason why Miss D. and I bought the house we did.  We're paying about the same on a 15-year mortgage in Texas every month that we were paying in rent on a much smaller and less comfortable duplex in Nashville.  We're also paying in extra every month to reduce the capital balance owed.  With luck and hard work, we'll have paid for our house in ten to twelve years, and own it free and clear.  That's the way housing was supposed to work, traditionally . . . but thanks to the financialization of almost everything and every market, housing's gone the same way.  People are spending far more than they can afford on their homes, whether buying or renting.  Sooner or later, that's going to bite.)

Peter

Two great ways to pass the time

I've spoken before about fellow former South African and popular author, Dave Freer, who now lives on Flinders Island in Australia.  He's brought out two books in the last couple of months, one through Baen and one self-published.  Both are fun reads.

'Changeling's Island' was published by Baen Books in April.

Tim Ryan can't shake the feeling that he is different from other teens, and not in a good way. For one thing, he seems to have his own personal poltergeist that causes fires and sets him up to be arrested for shoplifting.

As a result Tim has been sent to live on a rundown farm on a remote island off the coast of Australia with his crazy grandmother, a woman who seems to talk to the local spirits, and who refuses to cushion Tim from facing his difficulties. To make matters worse, Tim is expected to milk cows, chase sheep, and hunt fish with a spear.

But he's been exiled to an island alive with ancient magic—land magic that Tim can feel in his bones, and sea magic that runs in his blood. If Tim can face down the danger from drug runners, sea storms, and the deadly threat of a seal woman who wishes to steal him away for a lingering death in the land of Faery, he may be able to claim the mysterious changeling heritage that is his birthright, and take hold of a legacy of power beyond any he has ever imagined.

"Living on a rundown farm on a remote island off the coast of Australia" . . . sounds just like where Dave lives!  Talk about writing from experience!

Dave's second book, 'Tom', was self-published just last month.

Tom is a cat in trouble. The worst possible kind of trouble: he’s been turned into a human. Transformed by an irascible old magician in need of a famulus -- a servant and an assistant, Tom is as good at being a servant as a cat ever is. The assistant part is more to Tom’s taste: he rather fancies impressing the girl cats and terrorizing the other toms by transforming himself into a tiger. But the world of magic, a vanished and cursed princess, and a haunted skull, and a demon in the chamber-pot, to say nothing of conspiring wizards and the wickedest witch in the west, all seem to be out to kill Tom. He is a cat coming to terms with being a boy, dealing with all this. He has a raven and a cheese as... sort of allies.

And of course there is the princess.

If you were looking for ‘War and Peace’ this is the wrong book for you. It’s a light-hearted and gently satirical fantasy, full of terrible puns and... cats.

Knowing Dave's love of cats, and his terrible ghastly funny puns, how could I resist this one?  The thought of a cat as a human is particularly entertaining.  Knowing the mischief our cat gets up to in feline form, the thought of her as a bipedal with opposable thumbs . . . shudder!

I've already bought both books, and I recommend them to you as well.  Dave's a good guy, and worth supporting - and you'll get two great reads out of it, too.  (No, in case you were wondering, neither Dave nor Baen Books are giving me any sort of kickback for mentioning his books.  I just enjoy his work, and I like to support my friends.)

Peter

"Terribly sorry to bother you, old chap, but there seems to be a bomb in my basement . . . "

That's the approach taken by this British family, anyway.

A father who found an unexploded German bomb in his cellar waited until the next morning to call the police because he "did not want to wake up the neighbours".

Stephen Sin, 44, was mid-way through a clean when he stumbled across the 1930s incendiary device.

He and his wife, Janice, eventually reported the discovery to the police - but only after a night's sleep and a morning of errands.

Mr Sin, a civil servant from Crystal Palace, south London, said: "We knew that this was going to happen, where literally everything stands still, so because I had to see some Scouts off to Brussels this morning I thought, it's been down there for 50 years, another couple of hours isn't going to matter."

A bomb expert later identified the explosive as being from 1936. It was originally made for use in the Spanish Civil War, but was dropped on London during the Blitz.

There's more at the link.

A better example of sang-froid would be hard to find, but I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in the police station when he finally got around to reporting it!  Talk about consternation and monkeyhouse . . .

Peter

RA-CISSSS! . . . jumps the shark?

The perpetually offended SJW's who see racism behind (and often in front, to either side and on top of) every bush have claimed a new 'victory'.

“Dat Boi” is an Internet meme that sprung up randomly, as so many memes do, about two months ago. It’s a low-resolution frog riding a unicycle, with the caption “Here come dat boi!” Don’t try to overthink it. It’s (supposedly) funny because it’s silly and random. A frog, retro low-res graphics, a unicycle, and slang for “that boy.” If you insist on knowing more, there’s no shortage of Dat Boi explanatory articles. But really, all you need to know is that it’s arbitrary on purpose, a non sequitur, a head-scratcher for “noobs”...everything that makes a good meme.

Except that according to black social justice warriors, it’s a bad meme. A very bad meme. Because it’s racist (you expected a different reason?). Yes, the frog on the unicycle is racist. According to a May 25 piece in PAPER magazine, proud African-American warriors have decided that Dat Boi is yet another case of “cultural appropriation,” as well as “white privilege and the Internet’s casual appropriation of African-American Vernacular English (AAVE).” Over the course of three days, the influential, 40,000-person meme-appreciation Facebook group Post Aesthetics experienced a mutiny of sorts as black members demanded that posts featuring Dat Boi be censored, and that Dat Boi be banned from ever showing its froggy face again. The moderators agreed, and the frog on the unicycle was banished, along with many group members whose racism was so severe that they were blinded to the obvious fact that the unicycle frog was a greater menace to black people than a thousand noose-wielding Klansmen.

One anti–Dat Boi group member actually put the time into crafting a six-point itemized list explaining why the meme must be banned. Reason No. 1 was “People who are not black don’t get to decide what is and isn’t antiblack, or what is and isn’t AAVE.” In other words, my opinion is more valid than yours because my skin is different. That’s what passes for “antiracism” these days. Post Aesthetics mod Tamia Thompson explained to PAPER mag that Dat Boi represents “the commodification of black culture on the Internet,” adding, “we try to quell instances of appropriation in the group.” So sayonara, Dat Boi (wait…did I just culturally appropriate from Asians?).

Black social justice warriors won the battle. But what did they win? A ****ing frog on a ****ing unicycle. They got a meme banned from a meme appreciation group. Big victory ... As SJWs continue to micromanage every perceived microaggression on the part of whites, we see black person after black person fighting inconsequential battles in the name of combating “cultural appropriation,” celebrating their victories as though they’ve actually accomplished something of value.

. . .

For a people who like to boast about being descended from kings, this is most surely an ignominious reduction in influence. “My ancestors ruled over a vast, fertile kingdom and commanded an army of warriors. I got a frog on a unicycle banned from a Facebook group.” From Zulu emperor to hobo emperor. It would be funny if not for the fact that the black community in the U.S. can ill afford such stupidity from its leaders and activists. Stoners wearing dreadlocks and frogs on unicycles…these are the worst problems black Americans face?

There's more at the link.

I would shake my head in despair at the short-sightedness, the moral and ethical blindness, of those who obsess over such things . . . but that would be a waste of effort.  They've doomed themselves to irrelevance through their stupidity.  Let them wallow in it, while the rest of us get on with rebuilding a nation from the mess they're leaving behind.  They have no future, and they've effectively written themselves out of ours.

Peter

Quote of the day

From Edward Snowden, via Twitter:

OK, Hillary, let's see your comeback to that one . . .




Peter

So, what sex/gender/thingumajig are you anyway?

In the light of our recent discussions about transgender bathroom usage, I did a bit of research.  Some of it was serious.  Some of it, typified by this 4chan graphic representation of sexual preference/orientation/whatever, is less so.  Click the image for a larger view.  (A tip o' the hat to Claire Wolfe for the link.)

There's only one way to describe that chart, courtesy of Sir Walter Scott:

Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practise to deceive!

(Self-deception being the first and most predominant, of course . . . )

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #910

I should perhaps have titled this 'Boys And Their Toys #whatever';  but he's definitely a doofus, too, so I guess this will do!

I'm just glad the glass didn't shatter and cut him to ribbons . . .




Peter

Charges? Hell, I'd buy him a beer . . .

I note with displeasure that a New York man is facing charges for defending his wife against the attack of a career criminal.

Bronx cabby Mamadou ­Diallo was looking for a parking spot outside his building when he got a call from his wife that filled him with shock and fury.

She said a stranger had just tried to rape her in their apartment — and was still upstairs.

Diallo grabbed a tire iron and did what most husbands in the same situation would do: He rushed to his wife’s aid and then bludgeoned the pervert.

The attack killed career criminal Earl Nash, 43 — and left Diallo facing assault and weapons charges Tuesday.

. . .

Surveillance footage shows Mamadou walk past Nash, but wheel around when Nenegale pointed him out as the attacker.

The enraged husband swung the weapon at Nash — driving him into the elevator. He followed with several more blows, in a beating that lasted up to two minutes, sources said.

Nash fought back with a belt, but the pounding left him with a fractured skull, sources said.

Emergency responders rushed Nash, who also had severe body trauma, to Lincoln Hospital, where he died from his injuries.

Diallo was initially charged with manslaughter by cops, but during his arraignment at Bronx Criminal Court, the charges were dropped to two counts of assault, harassment and criminal possession of a weapon.

“This was not an offense where the defendant committed an aggressive act,” defense attorney Anthony Michaels said. “This was an attack on his family, in his house under extreme circumstances.”

At the hearing, which was attended by more than a dozen members of Diallo’s family and mosque, prosecutors didn’t ask for bail, and instead said they would agree to whatever Judge Julio Rodriguez thought was best. He released Diallo on his own recognizance.

There's more at the link.

I know there are some who will argue that the husband's response was excessive;  that the assault on his wife had already ceased, and that therefore he should have let the police handle the situation.  To that I can only say that where I now live, the defense of "He needed killing!" is very widely recognized by both the law enforcement officers and agencies, and the citizens of the region - so much so that if the husband were facing those charges down here, not only would he be virtually guaranteed an acquittal in court, but the District Attorney who dared to bring such charges would probably be voted out of office at the very next opportunity.  Charges, indeed!




Peter

If you want better and more secure Internet passwords . . .

. . . but don't want the complications, security hassles or expense of a password manager program, there's a simple and very effective way to get them.

Go to the Norton IdentitySafe Password Generator, enter the details it asks for, and click the 'Generate Passwords' button.  I'd suggest a minimum password length of 12 characters for greater security.  When the list appears, copy and paste it into a word processor document, then save it on your hard drive or print it out.  You can generate up to 50 passwords at a time;  for more than that, run the Generator more than once.  As you use each password, note the Web site or account that uses it, then cross it off the list of available passwords.

Short, sweet, simple, and pretty secure.  What's not to like?

Peter

An interesting training aircraft

I recently came across this video of the prototype Russian KB SAT SR-10 forward-swept-wing training aircraft.  It shows the plane making a series of touch-and-go landings and takeoffs.  The smoke trail from the 1960's-vintage turbojet engine fitted to the prototype is clearly visible;  production aircraft (if it reaches that stage) are expected to be fitted with a more modern, more economical turbofan engine.

What's particularly interesting is that this is a private venture aircraft, not sponsored by the Russian government.  It's intended as an ab initio trainer, taking student pilots from their first flight through mid-level aerobatic training, before they progress to the Yakovlev Yak-130 advanced transonic training aircraft (closely related to Aermacchi Alenia's M-346 Master) for operational conversion.  The SR-10 was apparently defeated in the competition to supply the Russian Air Force's basic training aircraft by the turboprop Yakovlev Yak-152, but the former aircraft's development is being continued as a private venture in the hope of attracting customers.

The SR-10's forward-swept wing is certainly unusual.  It appears to be a further development of the experimental forward-swept wing of the Soviet-era Sukhoi Su-47.  I note that it's positioned fairly far aft on the fuselage, with a leading edge extension reaching forward to almost beneath the dual cockpit.  I've no idea what that means for its handling, but other videos on YouTube show the aircraft performing most standard maneuvers.

The SR-10 is the smallest and lightest jet training aircraft I can remember seeing.  I look forward to observing its progress.

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #909

Today's award goes to several embarrassed members of Japan's Ground Self-Defense Force.

Japan’s military officials may be feeling a bit sheepish after their troops accidentally fired dozens of live rounds at one another during a military exercise - though no one was hit by the stray bullets.

Nine members of the country's Ground Self-Defence Force (GSDF) reportedly shot as many as 79 live rounds at one another during the military drill in northernmost Hokkaido after mistakenly loading assault rifles with the wrong ammunition.

Two people sustained minor injuries – a sergeant in his 30s and a leading private in his twenties – although to the force's relief no one was shot by bullets during the incident on Monday, according to Kyodo News.

. . .

Bullets are typically handed to each troop just before the drill, before being loaded into their rifles, according to Kyodo News.

Confusion reportedly surrounds how such a mistake could take place as troops generally understand the difference in appearance between life and blank rounds.

There's more at the link.

I'm still mind-boggled at this news.  During my military service I had plenty of opportunities to fire 'blank' rounds.  There was never any doubt, visually or by feel, how to differentiate them from 'live' ammunition.  How the hell did these soldiers not know the difference?  And after the first injury, why did they continue using the real stuff?  Was this a case of, "Because I said so!  The Army doesn't pay you to think, private!  Get on with it!" ?

However it happened, there's egg (or should that be egg drop soup?) on several Japanese faces right now . . .

Peter