Tuesday, July 07, 2009

You're not listening to me...

... Sarah Palin told Andrea Mitchel today during an NBC Nightly News interview at Bristol Bay. The Palin family was out on the water commercial salmon fishing while the media tried to figure out why Sarah was stepping down as governor of Alaska.


Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy


The media just doesn't get it, they can't understand giving up a powerful well paying job in favor of saving the state millions of dollars in legal fees and protecting her family from media and Democrat crude attacks, especially the unconscionable attacks, jabs, and snipes directed at the infant, Trig, born with Down Syndrome.

Leaving office early gives the time, opportunity, and freedom to fight back against her accusers and help other Republican candidates running for the House and Senate in 2010. According to a Pew poll, Palin is leading in approval ratings among her party with 73% Fav/17% Unfav.

Atlas Shrugs has the numbers and writes, "Clear thinking Americans see what is happening... Sarah Palin sees it, too. Smart, sharp, patriotic, she best represents the majority of Americans... We want Palin... We need her. She knows it. She is heeding our call. Is she a hack like Obama and going to campaign on the taxpayers' dime, as he did as a junior senator when he ran for President? No. Extraordinary? Yes. But so is integrity, ethics and decency. The left is calling her a "quitter". Just the opposite, my friends. Just a fighter, a winner. And she is getting into the fight..."




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Copyright Laws v. Freedom

Every direction we turn now days, whether in the real world or the virtual, Big Brother, Big Sister, or the Nanny is there to scold us or scare the living daylights out of us. Such is the case with copyright laws. Now, I generally agree with copyright laws because authors and artists have a right to make a living and their stock-n-trade is by it's very nature ephemeral especially if the work is on the Internet.

But when an author, a public official no less, writes an article concerning the threat copyright laws pose to our freedom that is published by a well respected on-line magazine, specifically The Financial Times (which also has a right to make money with exclusive material), and that magazine then places copyright restrictions upon that work decrying copyright law restrictions, well, it just cries out for copyright violation.


Copyright laws are a threat to our online freedom
By Christian Engström

Published: July 7 2009 18:10 Last updated: July 7 2009 18:10

If you search for Elvis Presley in Wikipedia, you will find a lot of text and a few pictures that have been cleared for distribution. But you will find no music and no film clips, due to copyright restrictions. What we think of as our common cultural heritage is not “ours” at all.

On MySpace and YouTube, creative people post audio and video remixes for others to enjoy, until they are replaced by take-down notices handed out by big film and record companies. Technology opens up possibilities; copyright law shuts them down.

This was never the intent. Copyright was meant to encourage culture, not restrict it. This is reason enough for reform. But the current regime has even more damaging effects. In order to uphold copyright laws, governments are beginning to restrict our right to communicate with each other in private, without being monitored.

File-sharing occurs whenever one individual sends a file to another. The only way to even try to limit this process is to monitor all communication between ordinary people. Despite the crackdown on Napster, Kazaa and other peer-to-peer services over the past decade, the volume of file-sharing has grown exponentially. Even if the authorities closed down all other possibilities, people could still send copyrighted files as attachments to e-mails or through private networks. If people start doing that, should we give the government the right to monitor all mail and all encrypted networks? Whenever there are ways of communicating in private, they will be used to share copyrighted material. If you want to stop people doing this, you must remove the right to communicate in private. There is no other option. Society has to make a choice.

The world is at a crossroads. The internet and new information technologies are so powerful that no matter what we do, society will change. But the direction has not been decided.

The technology could be used to create a Big Brother society beyond our nightmares, where governments and corporations monitor every detail of our lives. In the former East Germany, the government needed tens of thousands of employees to keep track of the citizens using typewriters, pencils and index cards. Today a computer can do the same thing a million times faster, at the push of a button. There are many politicians who want to push that button.

The same technology could instead be used to create a society that embraces spontaneity, collaboration and diversity. Where the citizens are no longer passive consumers being fed information and culture through one-way media, but are instead active participants collaborating on a journey into the future.

The internet it still in its infancy, but already we see fantastic things appearing as if by magic. Take Linux, the free computer operating system, or Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Witness the participatory culture of MySpace and YouTube, or the growth of the Pirate Bay, which makes the world’s culture easily available to anybody with an internet connection. But where technology opens up new possibilities, our intellectual property laws do their best to restrict them. Linux is held back by patents, the rest of the examples by copyright.

The public increasingly recognises the need for reform. That was why Piratpartiet – the Pirate party – won 7.1 per cent of the popular vote in Sweden in the European Union elections. This gave us a seat in the European parliament for the first time.

Our manifesto is to reform copyright laws and gradually abolish the patent system. We oppose mass surveillance and censorship on the net, as in the rest of society. We want to make the EU more democratic and transparent. This is our entire platform.

We intend to devote all our time and energy to protecting the fundamental civil liberties on the net and elsewhere. Seven per cent of Swedish voters agreed with us that it makes sense to put other political differences aside in order to ensure this.

Political decisions taken over the next five years are likely to set the course we take into the information society, and will affect the lives of millions for many years into the future. Will we let our fears lead us towards a dystopian Big Brother state, or will we have the courage and wisdom to choose an exciting future in a free and open society?

The information revolution is happening here and now. It is up to us to decide what future we want.


The writer is the Pirate party’s member of the European parliament

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

I "have the courage and wisdom to choose an exciting future in a free and open society."

Okay, maybe not the wisdom, but I'm not the cowardly lion either. So sue me.








The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Sunday, July 05, 2009

Iran Election Invalid Qum Clerics Declare

Cracks in the Iranian body politik keeps gettin bigger. A group of Shi'ite clerics from the Assembly of Qum Seminary have declared invalid the presidential vote last month. The reelection of Ahmadinijad has provoked demonstrations and strikes by opposition groups while spurring violent and deadly reprisal attacks by government supporters.

From Reuters:

A pro-reform Iranian clerical group said on Sunday the outcome of last month's presidential vote was "invalid," even though Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has upheld the result.

In a sign of a deepening rift among Shi'ite clerics, the Assembly of Qom Seminary Scholars and Researchers also called for the release of Iranians arrested in protests after the hardline president was declared winner of the June 12 vote.

"Other candidates' complaints and strong evidence of vote-rigging were ignored ... peaceful protests by Iranians were violently oppressed ... dozens of Iranians were killed and hundreds were illegally arrested," said a statement published on the Assembly's website. "The outcome is invalid."

Qom is Iran's center of Shi'ite learning, about 80 miles south of Tehran. The assembly has little political influence but its statement is a significant act of defiance since Qom is the power base of the clerical establishment.

These clerics may be powerless, but they must also be a pain in the neck for their bosses on the Supreme Council.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Pink Boxer Shorts Soldier...



... is home in Fort Worth, Texas for July 4th celebrations. His "I love NY" pink boxers have gone to the 1st Infantry Division museum at Fort Riley, Kansas.

Specialist Zachary Boyd's unit came under fire in Afghanistan earlier this year while Boyd was napping. With no time to don his uniform Boyd grabbed his weapon, vest, and helmet and ran to the fire line.

He bought the pink undies on a layover in the Big Apple thinking they would make his buddies laugh. He said of the red T-shirt,

"The enemy already knew where I was. If they want to shoot at me, then that's less fire they put on the guys that are pinned down, so that's fine with me."
After the holiday, Boyd, who also has a face, will return to active duty at Ft. Hood near Killeen, Texas until Feb 2011. Then he intends to begin training for helicopter pilot, presumably with clean pink boxers.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

In Congress, July 4, 2009 - A Modern Declaration of Independence


On this day, 233 years ago, a group of men, and, yes, they were men, assembled on a hot, rain drizzled day in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to declare the American Colonies free and independent States absolved of all allegiance to the King of England, the British Crown, and the British Parliament. They went a small step further by pledging their own lives, fortunes, and sacred honor and that of their families in the pursuit of liberty. And, as if that were not enough, in a giant leap for mankind, they declared for the first time in human history that ALL men are created equal, that ALL men are born with certain rights that cannot be taken away by any government because those rights come from God, or Nature, or whatever source beyond man and governments one wishes to name.

It is unfortunate that so few of the world's people, and so few Americans, have actually read the Declaration of Independence. It is also unfortunate that the few who have read it have not understood the words and great ideas expressed within. Mark it to the advance of time, the changing meanings of words, and perhaps the general apathy of people born to freedom and liberty to truly appreciate what was written eleven score and thirteen years ago.

When I was in 8th grade American History, the local VFW presented each student with a pamphlet containing the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, a pamplet I still have, carry, and frequently refer. We were to memorize the Preamble of the Constitution and recite it in front of the class. I have long since forgotten the words of the Preamble, but I have not forgotten the part that was not required to be memorized -- "When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. -- We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

The Founders went on to declare that whenever any government tries to destroy the rights given by divine Providence, and force the people into unquestioning obedience under a tyrant, whether brutish or benevolent, the people have a right and a duty to replace that government, even by violent means; the people have a right to start a new government that will obey the law as set forth by the governed, as the free and independent people of Honduras did recently when their leftist president simply broached the idea of a second term despite their constitution's restriction of one presidential term. Our own head of state, Barack Hussein Obama, has publicly sided with the former Honduran president rather that with the people and Providence. There's a movement here today in America to repeal the 22nd Amendment that restricts the American president to two consecutive terms of office. Obama is also a leftist and just the suggestion of breeching the people's trust, established by our first President who resfused to serve more than two terms, may be too much to endure.

But, what does the Declaration of Independence say in modern terms without the flowery prose and high sounding phrasing. Brent Riggs - blogger, author, and smart guy - has rewritten the hallowed document for modern ears which by the end of a recitation aloud the reader and listeners may understand more completely the meaning of the words those men assembled in congress 233 years ago brought forth to this world.

The Declaration of Independence IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

Every State in America agrees with and declares the following,

When it becomes necessary during the normal course of human history that a specific group of People find it undeniable that they must completely end their relationship with another group of People and assume in this world an equal, separate and sovereign status among nations (which the Laws of God entitle all mankind) – common and decent respect for humanity compels that group of People to clearly and publicly declare their reasons which have forced them to end the relationship in question.

We hold the following truths to be obvious and undeniable,

All men are created equal and have been equipped and supplied by the Creator with certain rights that cannot and must not be taken away which include:
Life
Personal freedom (liberty)
And the right to pursue happiness.
To secure these God-ordained rights, Governments are created and they derive their power and authority from the People they govern, who give them permission to govern, and willingly submit to their authority.

However, when any Government decides to take away the right of personal freedom and the pursuit of happiness, it is the right of the People under that Government to change the Government, or if necessary, get rid of the Government altogether, to recreate a Government which are once again founded upon the principles of freedom, and organized in such a way as to guarantee those freedoms.

Logic, caution and good judgment requires that established Governments should not be altered hastily, without good reason or for temporary circumstances. As well, experience has demonstrated that the People have a tendency to suffer Government evils, rather than change them, as long as the suffering is not too extreme. Why? Because People get used to things being a certain way, and it is difficult and takes great effort to change.

But… when a long series of abuses and stealing of freedoms has occurred by the Government, which are all meant to achieve the goal of putting the People under the rule of violent tyrants, it becomes the right of the People – even more it becomes the duty of the People – to defeat and cast away that Government and create a new Government and new safeguards to protect their freedom.

This is what has happened to the thirteen Colonies who have been patient in this matter of suffering. The Colonies have reached a point where they have no choice but to alter their current system of Government because their freedoms have been abused.

The King of England has a long history of recurring abuses and seizing freedom by violent threats. The King has one single objective: to take absolute, dictatorial control over the Colonies. To prove this, consider the following facts which we make public for the whole world to evaluate:

* The King has refused to sign into law a system where Courts administer justice
* The King has forbid his Governors to pass urgent laws that are extremely important to us. They must delay the laws and get the King’s permission first. Even when the Governors suspend the laws, the King still neglects to consider them anyway.
* The King has refused to sign or consider other laws that enact provisions for large groups of People unless those People give up their right to be represented in the Government – in other words, they must give up their freedom to get the King to pass the law… something only a Tyrant would ask the People to do.
* The King has called the Government leaders together in unusual and uncomfortable places, far from any legal resources or Public Records for the sole purpose of making them so tired and uncomfortable, they will simply agree with King and do what he wants.
* The King has repeatedly shut down the parts of the Government that represent the People. Why? Because they have opposed him when he was has abused the rights of the People they represent.
* The King has refused for long periods of time to allow other Representatives of the People to be elected after he himself dissolved their Representation. So the Representatives, who simply cannot walk away and forget those they represent or their duties, have returned to the People to do their service. Meanwhile, the country remains exposed to invasion by other countries, and intense turmoil and uncertainty from within.
* The King has tried to prevent people from coming to live in our States, obstructing Laws that allow foreigners to become citizens, refusing to sign laws that encourage foreigners to migrate to this country, and making new laws that make it more difficult to own or buy land here.
* The King has hindered the administration of law and justice by refusing to allow us to create Courts and appoint Judges.
* The King has appointed his own puppet Judges who will do nothing except what the King says to do. If not, he will remove them from office or not pay them.
* The King has created many new public offices in order to send large groups of Government officials to harass the People, and take their wealth.
* The King has kept his battle-ready Armies living among us, even in times of peace, without our permission or agreement.
* The King has declared that his Army is not subject to our laws or authority.
* The King has agreed to make us subject to the laws and authority of foreign Governments and disregarding our own laws, he gives his agreement to the foreign law makers.
* The King houses and feeds large Armies within our civilian population.
* The King protects his Armies from any punishment or prosecution by fake trials even if they are guilty of murdering our citizens.
* The King has cut off our trade with other parts of the world.
* The King has imposed taxes on us without our permission or agreement.
* The King often refuses our citizens the benefits of a trial by jury.
* The King will transport our citizens across the ocean and put them on trial for pretend violations of the law.
* The King has abolished our Government in one area only to set up his own Government. Then the King will enlarge the territory this new Government is responsible for, and claim that the citizens of this expanded area are now under the absolute rule of the Government the King set up.
* The King has taken away our own Government agreements, dismissed our most valuable laws, and fundamentally changed the way we govern ourselves by suspending our Legislatures and declaring that the King and his representatives now have the power to make law in all cases.
* The King has disowned and dismissed our Government, declaring that we are no longer under his protection as he wages war against us.
The King has robbed our overseas trade, destroyed our coastal economy, burned our communities and ruined the lives of our people.
* The King is, at this very moment, sending large Armies of foreign soldiers of death to complete the work of destroying us, of ruining our country and establishing his tyranny over us. The King acts with a cruelty and betrayal that has seldom been matched in even the most barbaric of times… actions that are totally unworthy of being a ruler in a civilized world.
* The King has captured our Citizens while out at Sea and has forced them to fight against their own country and to kill their friends and family – or face death.
* The King has stirred up rebellions among us and has gone about trying to convince the violent Indian populations to kill us. The Indians are well known to have only one rule of warfare: kill every man, woman and child without mercy no matter what their age or physical condition.

At every stage of our suffering and oppression under this King, we have humbly, repeatedly, officially and publicly asked for the ceasing of this oppression, and the correction of these abuses. Our requests have been met only with further injury and insult. A King who has this type of character and morals is defined in only one possible way: a Tyrant, unfit to rule free People.

We have never failed to warn or inform our British brethren. From time to time, we tell them about the attempts of the King and their Government to extend their authority over us. We remind them of the reason why we left England to come to this new country. We have tried to appeal to their own sense of justice and goodness, and have sincerely asked them, based on our common ties of ancestry and family, to not agree with or cooperate with these violations of our freedom which deny that we are a separate Nation. We now consider our brethren in England, as we do all peoples of the world, Enemies if we are at war, and Friends if we have peace.

Therefore, as the Representatives of the United States of America, we, the General Congress, having assembled and prayed to God about the honor and rightness of our conclusions, publish and declare with grave seriousness by the name and authority of the People of these Colonies the following:

The United States have the right to freedom, and ARE free and independent. We denounce and separate ourselves from all authority or allegiance to the King of England and dissolve any political agreements or connections between America and Britain.

As free and independent States, we have the full right and authority to declare War, make peace agreements, build alliances with other countries, establish trade and commerce with the world… and do anything else that free and independent countries have the right to do.


In support of this Declaration, we rely on God to protect and provide for us. Together, we all promise our lives, wealth and honor as a pledge to uphold and honor this Declaration of Independence.


Whether in the the language of the original Declaration of Independence or the modern version above, these are not simply words; they are Just words to be honored, preserved, protected, and understood if we are to remain a free and independent people blessed by whatever Divinity or Providence there may be and the one truth that remains - these are MY rights, these are OUR rights, and no man will take them away.

Happy Independence Day, America.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Dems: No Health Care Insurance to be Federal Crime

Here's a health care idea - anybody who does not buy health care insurance will be put to death. Too serious? Penalty doesn't fit the crime? Maybe. How about go to jail? Still too much? How about this - $1000 fine? Still too much? But, that is exactly what Congressional Democrats are proposing. Not buying health care insurance should be a crime punishable under federal law.

Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000 under a health care overhaul bill unveiled Thursday by key Senate Democrats looking to fulfill President Barack Obama's top domestic priority.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines will raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals.

In a revamped health care system envisioned by lawmakers, people would be required to carry health insurance just like motorists must get auto coverage now. The government would provide subsidies for the poor and many middle-class families, but those who still refuse to sign up would face penalties.

Called "shared responsibility payments," the fines would be set at least at half the cost of basic medical coverage, according to the legislation. The goal is to nudge people to sign up for coverage when they are healthy, not wait until they get sick.
(...)

In a statement, Obama welcomed the legislation, saying it "reflects many of the principles I've laid out, such as reforms that will prohibit insurance companies from refusing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and the concept of insurance exchanges where individuals can find affordable coverage if they lose their jobs, move or get sick."
Nudge?! This isn't a nudge. It's intimidation, it's coercion, it's scaring the crap out of freeborn Americans to kowtow to an all pervasive evil federal nanny state.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Canada Provides No Problem, No Waiting Health Care


Canadian health care offers state-of-the-art leading edge technology access round the clock, 24/7. Need a CT scan? No problem, no waiting. Need an endoscopy? No problem, no waiting. Need thoracoscopy, laparoscopy, or colonoscopy? No problem, no waiting. Sounds great and I want that kind of access here in the US of A.

Sorry. It's only available for animals - cats, dogs, gerbils, rabbits, birds, rats, horse,s monkeys, chimpanzees, Vietnamese potbelly pigs - you know, pets. Even unicorns, if they had any. If you're a person, a human being, homo sapien you are just shit-out-of-luck, to use a technical health care term meaning 'take a number, we'll see you in one to six months if you survive that long.'

Health care access to human type animals is highly regulated, monitored, and rationed in Canada, so much so that some communities hold lotteries to choose which lucky individuals get to see a doctor. Others choose coming to America for health care, like Shirley Healy who was told she had only weeks to live because a blocked artery prevented her from digesting food. The British Colombia health care officials deemed treatment to be elective. Shirley elected to live and she is paying for that election.

Canadian health care is "free" because the government pays for treatment it chooses to cover with money collected through taxes from the nation's citizens and still over a million Canadians say they cannot find a family doctor.

American health care is not free. As individuals, we pay for our care and coverage either through direct payroll group health care deductions or privately purchased insurance. Some folks even pay-for-service like in the old days when a patient went to the doctor place, got taken care of, and then, on the way out, paid the nice lady at the front desk. Because of this system of coverage and payment, cardiovascular disease deaths have been halved in the last 50 years in this country. In Canada, a person can die from a toothache.

Life is not cheap in the US; we pay for our health care. Life, it seems, is much cheaper in Canada under their socialized medical system. But, that seems to be the direction Obama is taking us even though he says no to single payer/provider health care. Soon life in the United States too will be cheap.







The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Paki Taliban Buying Children as Littlest Bombers

The Taliban leader in Pakistan, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children to use as bomb delivery systems, reports the Washington Times today.

Pakistan's top Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets, U.S. Defense Department and Pakistani officials say.

A Pakistani official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said the going price for child bombers was $7,000 to $14,000 - huge sums in Pakistan, where per-capita income is about $2,600 a year.

"[Mehsud] has turned suicide bombing into a production output, not unlike [the way] Toyota outputs cars," a U.S. Defense Department official told reporters recently. He spoke on the condition that he not be named because of ongoing intelligence efforts to catch Mehsud, a prime target for a U.S. and Pakistani anti-Taliban campaign.
(...)

The U.S. official said the price depends on how quickly the bomber is needed and how close the child is expected to get to the target.

"[Mehsud] produces these suicide bombers, which are sold or bartered, which can be used by [Afghan Taliban leader Mullah] Omar's Taliban or ... other groups," the U.S. official said.

In some cases, he said, the children are kidnapped and then sold to Mehsud.

Using child suicide bombers "is the grim reality of the Taliban Frankenstein that now threatens to overwhelm the Pakistani state," said Bruce Riedel, a Brookings Institution scholar who chaired a review of Pakistan-Afghanistan strategy for President Obama.
To call these children, some as young as 7 years old, suicide bombers or martyrs is an outrage. To say that the Islamic Taliban, and nevermind Islam itself, has anything in common with civilized people is a complete travesty.

A US drone plane missed killing Mehsud last week... DAMN!!




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.