Reflections on James Foley’s Execution

My personal involvement with Islam started with the opening of a Mosque in Washington when I was a young fellow, new to the world,  I recall driving down Connecticut Avenue and hearing the call for prayer. It was a moment to remember. A few years later, I was on board the USS Greenwich Bay, a small seaplane tender as it transited the Suez Canal on its way to become Flagship for the US Middle East Force on Bahrain Island in the Persian Gulf. I was working on deck when I noticed a fellow running along the bank, yelling in Arabic and throwing rocks at us. I had never experienced such overt anit-American behavior in my life. It was terrifying as it was my first encounter with hatred.

After spending the Summer in Bahrain, mostly on board the GB, where I had limited connection with the Bahranian people, except for my exploration of the island by cab. This exploration took me to the mounds of Ancient Dilmun and to a Portguese fort from, I think, the 15th Century.  My main involvement came one night when a call from a local hospital to the ship asked for blood donors for a young Bahranian who had suffered blood loss in an accident. I voluntered immediately. Medical records, that is my dog tags, were checked and I had the right blood type.

The launch took me to the Jaffair Jetty and a car driven by a Bahranian took me to a clinic, where I rolled up my sleeve and gave a pint of blood. The clinic was sparse, the doctor competent, and when I met the fellow who got my blood,  I was happy to help him. He was unconscious at the time.
The trip back to the ship was quick and I went on board sometime after midnight. My kind boss,  later a friend, James Little, BM1, told me I could take the morning off. Such kindness. I learned the young man survived and wonder, even now, how my blood was doing. So, in a moment of need, the Muslim doctor reached out to American sailors for help.

The cruise continued and the ship visited, Karachi, where a goup of us met with a class in a local college who asked us about America, our government, culture and we also asked them about Pakistan. It was very cordial. Then off to Sri Lanka,  Diego Garcia, Mombasa then up the coast to Port Sudan, Massawa, Aden, Jeddah and finally back through the canal to the Med and home.

At this time, as I reflect on that experience,  I think of James Foley’s horrible death by decapitation by knife. Decapitations have occured in Europe, think of how Henry VIII ordered a swordsman to decapitate Anne Boleyn, and the French invented the Guillotine to perform the act quickly.  The Muslims use a knife and saw though the living, for a while, neck of the victim. I have a visceral reaction to this particularly barbaric act. Barbaric is the right word, by the way. This is by the same culture that called the Greenwich Bay to see if one of the sailors would donate blood to an injured Muslim. They didn’t object to having a Presbyterian American’s blood tranfused into the Muslim patient. Our blood is interchangeable:  I did it gladly and would do it again.

What strikes me in James Foley’s case is that he would have done the same thing I did. It is the humanitarian thing to do. He was killed because he was an American and the killing is an act of aggression against our entire nation.  We must take action as our inclination to help people of all religions and races is no protection against radical Islam. This is a dangerous time and we need to protect ourselves and our friends.

Al Gore’s Climate Change CO2 Claims Are Erroneous

I was in a debate yesterday over Climate Change, or Global Warming, or whatever the idea that atmospheric CO2 causes temperatures to rise is called today. I say “atmospheric” because CO2 is present in the oceans in huge amounts.  My argument was based on Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” book and movie that showed graphs showing the results of the Vostok Ice Core analysis that, he said, proved his case, when, in fact, it destroyed his claim.
A link to this analysis is here
It shows that temperature, the “effect” says Gore, precedes CO2 increases, the “cause” sometimes by a century or so.  Of course, that can’t be the case. There is a simple answer to why temperature increases from solar activity increases CO2 in the atmosphere. It is due to the process of “out-gassing.”   When a liquid is heated, its capacity to hold gases is reduced and gases are released into the atmosphere. When liquids cool, the process is reversed and gases are absorbed again.  The simplest explanation is often the best, so there you have it. Look at the article for more on this subject.
The folks I was debating with took offense to this argument and attacked me from several angles. None scored by the way. I was wondering why they would react in this way and have concluded that where I am talking about the science of climate change, they were talking about their religion. What can I say?
By the way, Gore had a very hard time with this fact of “out-gassing” and attacked the Ice Cores themselves and then admitted that the relationship between temperature and CO2 was complicated. His own evidence disproves his theory, and it’s not complicated. .
You may not read about this in the media, but you have it here.  

MLB Rule 7.13 Needs To Be Clarified

MLB Rule 7.13 is designed to reduce if not eliminate “catastrophic collisions at home plate.” The rule mandates that the catcher who has yet to catch the throw must provide the runner with a clear path to the plate. No more “blocking the plate.”  This has resulted in runs being allowed for blocking the plate and games lost because of it. In a recent game between the Reds and Marlins,  a Reds player was called out at home. Upon review, the run was allowed, the inning continued and the Marlins lost a 3-1 game. I then saw a video that showed the pitcher covering home with his entire body blocking the runner and there was no infraction found.
From what I’ve seen, the catcher is not supposed to put his leg across the foul line to allow the runner access to the plate. How long does this apply? Can the catcher catch the ball and then block the plate. Who knows? I just think this rules needs to be tweeked. A leg does not block access, the catcher must have room to move to catch the ball and then be in position to make the tag on a runner sliding to avoid that tag. 
The interpretation of the rule should be that a catcher that fully blocks the plate without the ball, and not anticipating the imminent arrival of the ball, is in violation, but a catcher should be allowed to take a position in front of the plate to make the play. Here’s what I said about the catcher/runner encounter in “Baseball’s Timeless Appeal.” (Read the entire article Here “The runner is bound to stay on the straight and narrow base path while his enemies plot his end.  He, like Odysseus, only wants to get home safely, and to do so, he must take risks, and be crafty, careful, and fleet of foot, and he usually needs a little help from his friends. Like Odysseus, the runner often finds home blocked by the catcher, armored like a Greek warrior in mask, breast plate, and greaves, who is the last barrier to success.” 
The catcher must be allowed to do his job!    

The Global Warming Hoax: Watch “International Conference on Climate Change” on YouTube

I was introduced to climate change. In 2006, about the time movie “An Inconvenient Truth” appeared. I was immediately struck by the Hockey Stick Graph fraud and the claimed connection between temperature and co2, the suggestion being that co2 caused temperature to rise, but the graph shown indicated that co2 increases followed temperature rises. Even Gore said “the relationship is complicated.”
As to the Hockey Stick Graph, I pointed out that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age had been eliminated.  The speaker was not amused by that as I was supposed to accept this hoax. As to the warming and co2 connection, having the effect, temperarture rise, come before the cause, co2, was baffling. It just can’t be. That is like saying that umbrellas cause rain! Furthermore, the fact that temperature rises would cause co2 to increase is due to “out gassing,” that phenomena of gas escaping from warming liquids, like the oceans, is a scientific fact. The alarmists claim that 97% of scientists agree and etc. That is also a hoax that has been debunked repeatedly. You can look that up.
In addition to these myths, I was struck by how co2, the basis of life on earth, was supposed to be poison (says the EPA). It is a very small part of the atmosphere. How small? There are about 3.5 molecules of co2 in 10,000 parts of the atmosphere. A rise to 4 molecules per 10,000 was said to be disaster. Who are they kidding, I thought? Well they are successfully kidding the politicians and a declining portion of the population. The major drive here is the $7billion dollars given to academia to “Prove” climate change, global warming, and other permutations of the hoax.   
There are other scares promoted here, coastal flooding, more flooding, more drought, more hurricanes,(there have been fewer) and etc. The glaciers have been melting for 10,000 years and that’s a good thing. If they were growing, thats a sign of an ice age and that is big trouble.  Remember, there has been no warming for17 years, how’s that for an inconvenient truth?
The impetus for this fraud is political power. Scare the people, pass restrictive laws, then claim the earth is saved and we did it, hence permanent political and police power. The goal is power and money, I think it will fail in the long term but we will suffer in the short term.
UPDATE: The International Monetary Fund has just urged higher taxes on oil, natural gas and coal in the 156 countries it works with. The money goes to government.
The link below is to a scientific review of the climate issue and is short and to the point. Take a look. 

Link from
International Conference on Climate Change:

Right To Work Laws Raise Workers’ Income in Michigan

Former union stronghold Michigan shocked the labor inion bosses when it became a right to work state in December 2012.  There were threats of violence:

“There will be blood, there will be repercussions,” State Democratic Rep. Douglas Geiss, speaking on the House floor on Tuesday, warned ahead of the votes.

And of course, there were predictions of disaster for the “little guy” as ruthless bosses would exploit the defenseless workers.

Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing, said that right-to-work legislation would lower employee wages.

Utter self-serving nonsense from the political party which rakes off union dues as political “contributions” from workers whose paychecks are deducted from by their union bosses. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports:

Michigan’s per-capita personal income increased from $38,291 in 2012 (before right-to-work became law) to $39,215 in 2013, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. That increase was the ninth highest in the country. (snip)

“The dire predictions of right-to-work detractors have not come true — Michigan has been a leader in income growth since passage,” said James Hohman, assistant director of fiscal policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

A study released this week by Richard Vedder, a distinguished professor of economics at Ohio University and an adjunct scholar with the American Enterprise Institute as well as with the Mackinac Center, found that “incomes rise following the passage of RTW laws, even after adjusting for substantial population growth that those laws also induce. RTW states tend to be vibrant and growing; non-RTW states tend to be stagnant and aging.”

The study states: “The evidence suggests that if non-RTW states had adopted RTW laws 35 years ago or so, income levels would be on the order of $3,000 per person higher today, with the overall effect varying somewhat from state to state.”

In fairness, RTW is not the only factor in determining personal income, which includes sources other than wages in its totals. But it makes sense that freeing workers from the compulsion to join a union and fork over part of their paychecks to bosses who spend it on political donations to Democrats raises their incomes. Not to mention that it stimulates entrepreneurs and established companies to expand job opportunities, thereby raising demand for workers, and growing wages.

Another big fail for big labor.  More evidence that unions harm workers

Hat tip:

Share Share |Share on twitter Twitter
|Share on facebook Facebook
| Comments | Print |Share on email  Email
by TaboolaSponsored ContentYou May Like

3 Steps to Finding the Right Assisted Living Care Facility
Care Conversations

If Scotland votes “yes”: Dear Prime Minister and First Minister… | The Economist

This link is to an article on the vote for Scottish Independence. As a Scottish-American, I have interest in this issue as do, of course, my Scottish relatives in Caithness.   This is interesting and attention should be paid to this issue. By the way, I did send The Declaration of Independence to Caithness.

On “America. Imagine The World Without Her,” Flixter’s “Critics” Problem

Flixter and Rotten Tomatoes are on line movie information and ratings sites. Flixter is the mobile version of Rotten Tomatoes. These sites offer two ratings for current films. The first is the Critics rating. These critics are hired by the site to rate movies. The next ratings is from actual viewers of the films as they emerge from the theater. I pay attention to the Viewers opinion and none to the Critics opinion. Now I think I know why that is the proper action.
The. Dinesh D’Souza movie, “America, Imagine the World Without Her” is curretly playing in theaters across the nation. (Comment Here The. Critics give this excellent film a 9% positive rating while Viewers give it a 89%  positive rating. So what’s the difference?
The movie has a political and cultural message of American exceptionalism that is embraced by most Americans and recognized around the world. However, this is contrary to the progressive view that America is a flawed nation with horrible history. So now we know that Flixter and Rotten Tomatoes hire critics for political reasons who are directed to review film for political content first and merit last. So the only valuable review you should pay attention to is the Viewer rating and disregard the Critics as they are only ideologues without redeeming virtue.   In this action, these sites join COSTCO that tried to remove the book from its stores and Google that suppressed search inquiries for the film. These are progressive efforts to reduce audiences for this important film. I think they back fired and that is a good thing.
This is a significat demerit for Flixter and Rotten Tomatoes, but one the managers there are not likely to correct.