V4VICI RSS Feed

The Royal "We"

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2008-05-13T10:31:25-07:00

"It's conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, 'This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he's not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush,'" Obama said in an interview with The Atlantic.

Okay, I'm not even going to comment on the fact that he "understands" why Hamas has thrown the terrorist support his way. Just note how he speaks of himself in the third person and sees himself more "worldly" than the rest of us. But calling him elitist is just a distraction.

Nick Cominos

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2008-03-21T14:02:29-07:00

In the mid to late eighties, I attended the University of Texas film school. I managed to accumulate enough credits to get my BS in only three years, and was permitted to spend my fourth year as a master’s student. I got a peek at academia and was actually paid to serve as a teacher’s assistant for a professor -- Nick Cominos. The faculty at this time was filled with wannabe’s, almost were’s and never-was’s. Then there was Nick. He was a tall gangly man with a thick shock of black hair now seriously streaked with grey. He had a wizard’s deep-set eyes. He was older than the rest of the faculty, and a little out of step with the other faculty members and definitely out of step with the students. He actually worked in old Hollywood and would bore us with his stories of working on films like The Girl In The Red Velvet Swing and how he was actually the guy pushing Joan Collins in the swing… Most students would either roll their eyes or worse yet, have them glaze over (It was the 80’s and we were punks). It wasn’t until I saw the speed and dexterity with which he handled a stand-up Moviola filmstrip editor that I realized Nick was someone to be revered.

All the other professors and students preferred the Steenbeck flatbed editors that allowed the filmmaker to sit and wallow in the angst of putting together their supposed works of art, whereas the Moviola required the filmmaker to stand and use his hands and even his feet. It was more of a tool for a craftsman attending to his craft. I realized that Nick was the only faculty member that understood that filmmaking was not just an art form but was also a craft. An important lesson unheeded by most students.

Although Nick was clearly rooted in the past, he was not falling into irrelevance. The eighties was a time of great technological changes in the motion picture industry, where electronic editing, videotape, and time-code started to replace the filmstrips, moviolas and lab work. Nick was on top of the revolution and actually taught the school’s electronic editing class where the students learned to perform A-B roll edits in a roomful of massive overheating electronic equipment. All this equipment was necessary to perform frame accurate repeatable dissolves from one image to another – you know, the same sort of thing that any given laptop computer can do today.

My favorite story about Nick was when I was attending one of his afternoon classes as his teaching assistance. He was wearing his trademark black turtleneck sweater with a grey pullover sweater over that. I was dog-tired that afternoon, as I had been up all night working on my pre-thesis film. I was struggling to stay awake as Nick droned on about something I cannot recall. But then I noticed him twitch. He continued with his lecture, and then he twitched again. I wondered if something was wrong. Then he swatted his hand under his arm. He continued his lecture, but by now the whole class was wondering what was going on underneath his sweater. Finally, he apologized, stood up, gave a self-deprecating smile and pulled off the grey sweater. Then he started working something out of his turtleneck. He worked it (whatever it was) all the way from his rib cage to his neck. Then finally he expelled the irritant onto the table that all his students were sitting around. A wasp crawled drunkenly across the table. His students looked on in slack-mouthed amazement.

My first thought was: It’s three in the afternoon. He probably put that sweater on what, eight hours ago? How long had that wasp been in there? But Nick didn’t miss a beat. “That reminds me of these African beekeepers I made a documentary about. These guys would work all day without any protective clothing whatsoever. They would be covered with bees and stings and would just keep working.” My next thought was: Bees only sting once. That was a wasp. Suffice it to say, Nick was quite a character.

Nick especially endeared himself to me during the faculty evaluation of my pre-thesis film. It was a very intimidating scene. All the graduate students and all the faculty members screened each student’s thesis or pre-thesis and the faculty proceeded to rip the film to shreds and explain how they could have done it better. My film was a twenty-minute gangster drama set in the early 60’s. It had impressive production values for a film made for a grand total of $3,500, particularly given the fact that most of that budget went to film stock and processing. It, like most short films, was missing one of its three acts, but all in all, not too bad for a first try. However, every aspect of my film was being completely brutalized by this lesbian professor whose only claim to fame was that she made documentaries about midgets and dwarfs. Then Nick came to my defense. He argued for my film, point by point. He described it as “a morality play for small time hoods.” I’ll never forget that, because he had not seen it before that screening yet he immediately “got” what I was going for. I didn’t finish the master’s program – I went to law school instead – but I’ll always appreciate the way Nick stood up for me and my silly little film.

Nick obviously left an impact on my life, but that was even before I found out that he was the real life freakin’ Gregory Peck in the Guns of Navarone. I did not learn until much later, but Nick was a super secret OSS commando who fought the Nazi behind enemy lines in Greece. In 1944, Nick as a member of the Greek / American Operational Group Office of Strategic Services raided Nazi controlled islands in the Adriatic then parachuted into occupied Greece, formed coalitions with local fighters, and harassed the Axis garrisons until they were forced to withdraw. His operation was so super secret that it remained classified until 1988, and serves to this day as a model for operations in Afghanistan.

I do not know how I knew, but I could always tell that the waters ran deep.

RIP Nick Cominos 3/14/08

National Intelligence Estimate on Iran -- No Nukes?

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-12-04T14:45:34-08:00

Here is a link to the actual declassified NIE on Iran. Why the hell was this declassified? Why does the world have to know what our intelligence community thinks on this very important issue? How will this impact our negotiations with the Islamic nation? Why do I know this information only a week after the leader of the free world learns of it? Is this NIE being released for political reasons? If so, by whom and for what purpose?

This is what I take away from the report: To have a nuclear weapon, you need fissile material, you need the know how to assemble the fissile material into a bomb and you need a method to deliver the weapon to a target. We know that Iran is already in possession of missiles with a range sufficient to reach Israel and is working on missiles that can reach Europe. They also have a puppet terrorist organization in Hezbollah that could deliver a suitcase nuke anywhere fanaticism can carry it. So, they already have a means (however crude) of delivering a weapon. They also have a civil nuclear program working furiously to enrich uranium. So, there is no doubt that they are working towards obtaining fissile material. The question addressed by the NIE is the weapons program, and it claims that Iran previously had a covert program but stopped in 2003.

That requires emphasis. The NIE says that until 2003, Iran had a secret undisclosed program developing a nuclear weapon. Iran was hiding a nuclear weapon program, but for some reason they stopped pursuing this program a few years ago. Could it be that their weapons program reached the point that they actually need real fissile material before they could move the weapons program to the next step? Could it be that Iran suspended its weapons program until the disclosed enrichment program succeeds in producing enough fissile material to move its weapons program to the next level?

The nation is still a fanatical theocracy run by a madman that believe the apocalyptic 12th Imam will reappear during our life time. He still thinks Israel should be and will be wipe off the map. This NIE does not fill me with confidence concerning our intelligence agencies, nor does it fill me with confidence about Iran's intentions.

Johnny Sutton's got some splanin' to do

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-11-19T14:59:12-08:00

Osvaldo Aldrete Davila, 27, was arrested Thursday at the Zaragoza Bridge by agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration and of the Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General for alleged incidents in September and October 2005. Davila was the accuser of Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean. Davila, a Mexican national, admits that he was smuggling drugs into the US, but claims he was unarmed when Ramos and Compean shot him in February of 2005 while fleeing the border back into Mexico. Davila made it back into Mexico and was not apprehended, making it basically Davila's word verses Ramos and Compean's word as to whether Davila was armed at the time of the shooting. Nevertheless, Johnny Sutton, friend of Geoge W. Bush and US Attorney in Southern Texas, indicted and convicted the two border guards. Ramos is serving 11 years in prison and Compean, 12 years. They are in solitary confinement to protect them from jailhouse retribution. To secure Davila's cooperation with the prosecution of Ramos and Compean, Sutton gave Davila immunity from prosecution for the drug smuggling activities that led to the shooting as well as a federal pass permitting him to cross back and forth over the border.

Of course, Davila apparently used this freedom to smuggle more narcotics across the border in September and October of 2005. All this should cause feelings of outrage concerning Sutton's misplaced priorities. Why take the word of one drug dealer over the word of two border guards? Why give a drug dealer immunity to go after border guards doing their job? Why give a drug dealer a federal pass over the border that was not supervised? Nevertheless, the outrage you feel from reading the above should be dwarfed by the outrage you should feel after reading the following: Davila's further drug smuggling activities took place AFTER the shooting by Ramos and Compean, but BEFORE their trial. However, the evidence of this further drug smuggling activity was withheld from the jury that ultimately convicted the border guards.

Do you think that knowledge of the fact that Davila was using the immunity and border pass granted by Sutton to continue his career as a drug smuggler might have an impact on the jury's evaluation of Davila's credibility? Of course. Anyway, here is Sutton attempted whitewash.

It's Not Just A Pin

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-10-04T12:44:52-07:00

B. Hussain Obama has decided to stop wearing an american flag lapel pin:

"The truth is that right after 9-11 I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9-11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism...

Funny, the further away from 9/11 I get, the more patriotic I feel. I guess we are just different types of people. It is not that you have to wear a pin to be patriotic. I don't have one and never wore one, but he did. He wore one as a sign of HIS patriotism. Since then he made the conscious decision to take that pin off, the pin that to him used to represent his patriotism. He took the pin off.

Is He Gay?

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-09-05T12:54:37-07:00

Republican Senator Larry Craig from Idaho insists that he is not gay even though he was arrested in a men’s bathroom for peering into a stall at an undercover police officer then occupying the stall next to the officer and making hand and foot motions consistent with someone soliciting anonymous gay sex. He pled guilty to a lesser charge, but now insists his actions were misconstrued and that he is totally innocent and is not and never has been gay.

Liberal Democrats, of course, are just salivating over the apparent irony. An outspoken critic of gay marriage was arrested in a men’s bathroom soliciting gay sex! Oh, the hypocrisy of it all. However, is it hypocrisy, and can Craig rightfully claim to not be gay?

I do not doubt for a second that the police officer accurately interpreted Craig’s actions and intentions. Apparently, rumors of this type of behavior have followed Craig around for some time. The particular restroom must have been a well known place for this type of lewd behavior -- why else would the police waste an undercover officer’s time in such an unsavory stakeout if there wasn’t a serious problem there? No, there is no doubt in my mind that Craig was there for anonymous sex with other men. But does that make him gay?

It is a truism that the purpose of sex is procreation of the species -- to make babies. Whether by Darwinian evolution or intelligent design or by some combination thereof, the human species was blessed with a bundle of nerves connecting the genitals to the brain which if stimulated just so creates a euphoric release better known as an orgasm. The purpose of this wonderful feeling is obvious -- to incentivize humans (both men and women) to procreate even though they really have much better things they could be doing with their time. This orgasm is a sensation found just as much in the mind as in the body. That is why it is such a powerful force in our species.

The traditional (though certainly not predominate) method of obtaining this sensation is genital intercourse between a man and a woman. You can say that that is the exclusive type of sex that has a rightful claim to an orgasm, because that is the very activity that the orgasm was intended to encourage. However, there are innumerable variations to that theme that can add to either the physical or mental makeup of the sensation. You can call these kinks or perversions -- conduct not necessary for procreation yet intended to enhance the sensation. Kissing is a kink or perversion, and one that I still participate in with my wife. We have other kinks and perversions, but those are better left to the privacy of the bedroom.

Some like latex, others like leather. Some like blonds, others like Asians -- I like my redhead. Some unfortunately like underage girls, others like underage boys. Some like hairy men, others are completely indiscriminate and will have sex with random men in a restroom. That brings us back to Craig. We all have our kinks and perversions -- variations on the theme of sex to enhance our orgasm. Sen. Craig must get some mental boost from the naughtiness and danger of anonymous sex with strange men in a bathroom -- that is his kink, his perversion. It is his way of stimulating that bundle of nerves. It demonstrates a shocking lack of self-control, violates ideals of hygiene and morals, and clearly demonstrates that he is not fit to be a Senator of the United States of America. Nevertheless, does it make him gay?

If your definition is any man who has sexual contact with another man, then of course. However, that is not how it is being used in the media to label Craig a hypocrite. You can be in favor of family values, believe a child is best reared in a family with one father and one mother, be opposed to open homosexuality in the military, be opposed to same sex marriages, be in favor of traditional marriages -- and still have the kink of wanting anonymous sex with other men in a bathroom. One does not necessarily have anything to do with the other. Gay sex is just another kink used to stimulate the nerve to create an orgasm. What the media is conflating is gay sex with the so-called “gay agenda.” This agenda, which is overwhelmingly liberal, wants those who participate in a certain sexual perversions to have a governmentally sanction protected status similar to racial, ethnic or religious minorities -- it is sort of like giving a legally protected status to those having a thing for French kissing, sadism and masochism, or autoerotic asphyxiation. They want to tear down cultural norms that have lasted millenniums, just because they believe those norms and their perversion make them an outsider. So, no Craig is not a hypocrite in participating in gay sex while opposing the “gay agenda.” His is a serious freak and is living a lie. He has a whole host of problems, but he is not a hypocrite for the reasons claimed by the media.

Is it better to study war or peace?

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-08-21T15:16:58-07:00

The City Journal has two very interesting articles this month:
Why Study War? by Victor Davis Hanson
and
The Peace Racket by Bruce Bawer

Hanson's article describes the impending demise of military history in today's universities, while Bawer discusses the emergence of "peace" studies and its founders connection with communism and anti-Americanism. These scholars say in a very literate and well thought out way what I attempted to say in a much more caustic manner here.

There is a serious struggle taking place for the mind and soul of the Western world. Peace is not something to be studied, it is a negative -- the absence of war. War is something that can be studied, understood, and used to improve society. Peace has no real existence or meaning other than the time between hostilities. Always striving for peace, without the ability to resort to war and to win it, is a sure path to destruction.

This Is Sparta!!! (?)

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-08-08T13:16:25-07:00

I know that I am several months late on this film portrayal of the battle of Thermopylae, but I have kids. So, I never got a chance to see this film in the theaters, and I had to wait to see it on DVD. However, since I consider myself an amateur / expert on ancient Greek history, I used the DVD release of this film to upgrade my system to HD DVD. I was able to watch this bloody film in all of its blood splattering glory in equally glorious 1080p on a full HD 1080p panel -- delicious.

When this film was first released, there was rampant speculation that there were political overtones. Right wing pundits saw it as an allegory for the West’s confrontation with resurgent Islam. Left wing pundits either disparaged the film as “war porn” or even suggested that it was an analogy alright, but George W. Bush was Xerxes maddeningly trying to finish the war that his father George Sr. / Darius failed to finish. Comic book nerds were rejecting both interpretations and pointing to the fact that the “graphic novel” was published before 9/11. The comic book nerds may have their chronology right, but their analysis is wrong. The comic book may have pre-dated 9/11, but Warner Brother’s decision to green light this movie was not. The studio executives were very aware that this movie would be red meat for audiences while we were involved in one war in the region and another was brewing with Persia itself. The liberals are right -- this movie is glorious war porn, but they are totally wrong with their analogy. The proof can be seen when Xerxes’ messenger rides into Sparta and demands earth and water. All Xerxes asks for is a sign of submission. Leonidas walks into extreme close-up scowls and in a Scottish ramble worthy of Sean Connery says, “Submission. Now, you see, that's gonna be a problem.” Then he kicks the messenger down a well and tells him to help himself to the water and earth down there. The true meaning of the film can be found in that one line. Islam, contrary to the PC crowd’s delusion is not interpreted as “Peace.” Islam literally translates to mean “Submission” as in submission to the will of Allah. There can be no doubt that this film was meant to be an analogy of the free West’s resistance to the East, which was then dominated by pagan Persia but is currently dominated by Islam. All that Islam requires from everyone on the planet is submission -- either in the form of conversion to Islam or recognition of Islam’s supremacy by accepting the inferior position of a dhimmi. The West is truly facing the same dilemma presented to Leonidas -- submit or fight.

The battle was a heroic resistance and act of self-sacrifice to preserve Greece’s freedom. It was just one of many examples of the martial superiority of the free Westerner against the slavish Easterner. But we should not forget that these Spartans were not exactly modern models of behavior. The Spartans practically invented big government where the state controlled every aspect of your life from the time a boy turned eight. Lesbianism was rampant among the women and one can only imagine what took place (other than extreme violence) in the boy’s and men’s barracks. Not only was abortion legal it was state administered up until the ninth trimester -- that’s right they killed babies. Not unlike our founding fathers, the Spartans were racist slaveholders. They had conquered Messenia and turned the Mycenaean population into slaves. There were slaves across the Greek world, but in Sparta, slavery was a race issue where the Dorians oppressed the indigenous population. They even had a secret police, the Krypteia, that literally went around murdering the best of the Messenians so that a Messenian Spartacus would never arise to lead a revolt of helots. They forgot to mention the plight of the helots in 300.

I would have much preferred a historically accurate portrayal of this great battle -- the tight formations, the heavy armor and interlocking shields, the pushing. There were knowledgeable references to all that (except the armor -- more on that later), but the action was portrayed in a Matrix-like style preferred by the younger theater-going audience. I would have preferred more life like action, but I am an old fart, and I understand both artistically and financially why they made the choices they made.

Concerning the armor, as we all know, the Spartans at Thermopylae were hoplites that fought in phalanx. This means that they wore heavy breastplates, grieves and shin guards. Nevertheless, the producers decided to make their Spartans look like underwear models. I guess this was an attempt to get the girls to see the movie as well, because what teenage girl doesn’t like to see men jumping around in loincloths with bulging muscles and six pack abs. My homophobic side thought it made the whole movie look kinda gay, but the portrayal was not totally without precedent. The early Greeks in the heroic age (long before Thermopylae) used to fight nude. You can see plenty of similar portrayals of nude Greek warriors fighting with spears on tomb paintings, sculptures and shards of ancient pottery. Then again, maybe being a sculptor or potter back then was the same as being a hairdresser or interior designer today -- professions populated by homosexuals. That would explain a lot, but that is another discussion. In any event, if you are predisposed to forgive this movie for its faults, you can forgive the nearly nude warriors by saying the filmmakers were portraying the Greek warriors in the heroic style (i.e., like gay underwear models)

I was turned off the Ephors, but I was impressed that they were included at all. Of course, the Ephors were not magical lepers, but they were a corrupt clique of old men running things. So, it was not a far stretch in this movie to illustrate their internal corruption with external disfigurement.

Where was the other king? Sparta had two. I guess that would confuse things.

All in all, it was a fun film to watch. I give it one and a half thumbs up.

Former Guantanamo Inmate Self Combusts

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-07-24T12:24:23-07:00

If we needed any further proof that the miscreants in military custody in Guantanamo, Cuba are the most virulent cancerous Islamists that need to be excised from the human race, check out this story…
And he was one of the guys that we thought it was safe enough to let go.

Question: If you blow yourself up but fail to take any Infidels with you, do you still get the 72 virgins?

The Haditha massacre that wasn’t

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-07-16T17:20:46-07:00

The hearing officer responsible for the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing against one of the marines accused of murdering innocent civilians has concluded that the government’s case was “based on unreliable witness accounts, insupportable forensic evidence and questionable legal theories. He also wrote that the case could have dangerous consequences on the battlefield, where soldiers might hesitate during critical moments when facing an enemy.” The findings of the hearing officer still needs to be accepted by the commanding general but indicates that the rush to judgment against at least this marine was unjustified.

Can a counter-insurgency be won by a military that plays by the modern rules of war against an enemy that recognized no rules at all?

We are relying on the presumption that if we act righteous and the enemy acts barbaric, the people will eventual recognize the difference and side with us. (This may finally be happening in Al Anbar) Nevertheless, realists such as Machiavelli or American Civil War General Sherman might argue that such a tactic is more likely to be seen by the people of Iraq as weakness, which will ultimately lead to them despising us -- better to have them fear us. Or maybe Sherman recognized that the velvet glove approach would take too long and would loose support back home. Thus, the iron fist is required to get the necessary results before the politicians back home went wobbly.

"[T]hat we will remove and destroy every obstacle, if need be, take every life, every acre of land, every particle of property, everything that to us seems proper; that we will not cease till the end is attained; that all who do not aid us are enemies, that we will not account to them for our acts.... I would not coax them, or even meet them half way, but make them so sick of war that generations would pass away before they would again appeal to it." -- William T. Sherman

UPDATE: The charges are dropped against two Marines, now a third. Murtha, time to be a good ex-Marine and eat some crow.

Bad Day At Jihad U.

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-07-03T13:06:36-07:00

Ouch!

Squandering our blood and treasure

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-06-28T18:24:03-07:00

That was an expression used by copperheads to complain about the costs in money and casualties for the Civil War -- when we were loosing thousands of dead in any given day -- a conflict that ultimately costs this country hundreds of thousands of lives.

That expression is being resurrected by opponents of the Iraq war and the global war on terror (i.e., the global war on the Islamists).

Here is a chart showing the relative cost of defense throughout this nation's recent history:

Here is a chart showing the number of deaths that our soldiers have suffered in Iraq compared to the losses that we suffered in the last quagmire, Vietnam at the same stage of the conflict:

Instead of emboldening our enemies by wringing our hands at every setback, we should -- in the worlds of Lincoln -- inform them "that we have more men now than we had when the war began; that we are not exhausted, nor in the process of exhaustion; that we are gaining strength, and may, if need be, maintain the contest indefinitely."

Another Civil War statement by Lincoln: "I am hesitant to estimated when the war will end. We accept this war for an object, a worthy object, and the war will end when that object is attained. Under God, I hope it never will until that time."

Not Victory, But Not Defeat

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-06-28T18:11:30-07:00

The Bush - Kennedy "amnesty / destroy the american way of life" bill was defeated in the Senate today. An unholy coalition of open boarder socialists and open boarder big business employers of slave labor almost managed to get their lackeys in the White House and the Senate to ram through this piece of crap before we knew what hit us. Luckily the internet and talk radio harnessed an unprecedented amount of public outrage, forcing enough Senators to vote to keep their jobs, as opposed to please their money men. I almost feel sorry for them -- having to choose between pissing off their entire voting block or the lobbyists that give the cashola. Vionovich was humiliated on Hannity for his ignorance, but it forced him to switch his vote no. Brownback saw his presidential campaign go up in smoke as the unpopular bill that he voted for went down to defeat, so he switch sides and voted no after it was clear it would loose. Weasel. Now, enforce the laws on the books, build the fence, then after it is totally secure for 5 years or so, come back to me and maybe we will discuss what to do about the millions of illegals that did not leave by attrition.

An American Success Story

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-05-31T16:36:28-07:00

This is an immigrant tale. It is the personal story of my family and means everything to me. However, I recognize that this story has been repeated over and over again so many times so as to be comically stereotypical. Nevertheless, it bears repeating in light of the 21st Century wave of American immigrants.

My grandfather was born an uneducated peasant in Sicily. As a young man in the early 1920’s he needed to leave his homeland in search of work to avoid starvation. He wanted to come to America like many Sicilians before him, but in 1921, the United States had passed the first immigration quotas designed to prevent the changing of American culture. Quotas were given to each nation based upon the immigration levels of 1910 -- before the start of the massive wave of Italian and Southern European immigration in the teens. Consequently, Italy had a very small quota, and my grandfather had to go to Argentina for a few years before he could come through Ellis Island as a legal immigrant.

When he finally arrived, he could not speak English, he did not have an education and did not have a skill. America was the land of opportunity, but it was not a welfare state. There was no social security. There were no food stamps. There were no unemployment benefits. If you presented yourself, sick or injured, to a hospital without the ability to pay, you could be turned away. Nevertheless, there was opportunity. My grandfather found a job as a barber. Eventually, he opened his own barbershop on Bloomfield Avenue in New Jersey -- no doubt, somewhere between Satriele’s meat market and Melfi’s doctors office. (I was never fond of his haircuts, but I was impressed by his work ethic and consistency. The floor in his barbershop was made of some type of white manufactured tile product, and over the many years my grandfather had walked around his favorite chair so many times that he had literally worn a ring all the way through the white portion of the flooring tile around that chair. It looked like something out of a Road Runner cartoon.)

He married another immigrant girl from Italy and together they had eight sons and a daughter -- Dominic, Vito, Connie, Joey, Franky, Johnny, Mikey, Tommy, and Georgie. He and my grandmother eventually learned to speak broken English, studied American civics and became naturalized American citizens. When he passed away, half of North Jersey turned out to pay their respects.

My father was my grandfather’s first born. He was born in 1939. That means that my father was born to two foreign-language speaking immigrants, and was actually learning to speak at a time when the United States was fighting a war against my grandfather’s former homeland. In fact, when my father was just 3 years old, American GI’s were invading Sicily and fighting battles in and around my grandfather’s hometown. But you know what? My father never once spoke a word of Italian (or more accurately, the Sicilian dialect my grandfather spoke). The only language my father ever spoke was English. My grandfather laid down the law upon himself and his wife -- they were not allowed to talk to their own child in their mother tongue. They forced themselves to struggle with a foreign tongue so that their child would grow up speaking the language of their adopted nation.

My father graduated from high school, volunteered for the Marines, put him self through college, married an Irish girl, became a traveling shoe salesman, had four kids (including me), and eventually became the President of the Keds Corporation. When he passed, the footwear trade papers respectfully referred to him as the “Godfather” of the shoe industry. Even though he was an ex-Marine and as American as apple pie, they compared him, with a humorous wink and nod, to a mob boss -- he was Sicilian after all.

So, excuse me if I take exception to the current wave of immigration so massive that it dwarfs the wave of which my grandfather was a part. Excuse me if I point out that the combination of open boarders with a third world neighbor and a welfare state does not make sense. Excuse me if I am insulted by bilingual education for illegal immigrants unwilling to assimilate the language and culture of this great nation.

No one is telling them to give up salsa, tortillas and mariachi music. I still eat pasta, mortadella, and provolone and I still listen to Louis Prima. Nevertheless, I hit “1” when the language option comes up.

How fast it can happen

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-05-25T13:04:06-07:00

In 1821, the newly independent government of Mexico hired Steven F. Austin and a few thousand Anglo Americans to do a job that ordinary Mexicans were not willing to do -- fight the Comanche and settle the wild lands of Texas. The Anglo settlers were given land at generous prices. All that they needed to do was swear an oath of allegiance to Mexico, affirm that they were Catholic, and agree to the gradual end to slavery. By 1836 (only 15 years later), those same Anglo, protestant, slave-owning settlers were rolling cannons into the Alamo and declaring independence.

Apart from the obvious economic and cultural problems with importing Mexico’s poverty problem, how wise can it be to import millions of unassimilated non-English speaking persons who have a legitimate historical grievance and claim to the land that they are occupying?

World Bank Fraud

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-05-15T17:31:05-07:00

The purpose of the World Bank is to lend billions (as in "B", $X,000,000,000.00) of dollars to corrupt third world nations so that the funds can be siphoned off by corrupt third world politicians. Now, this dubious organization is calling for Wolfowitz' head because of $47,000 -- relative pocket change. He disclosed his relationship with a Bank employee and asked to be recused from her reassignment. Nevertheless, overruling his request to be recused, he was instructed by the Bank's ethic's committee to reassign her and compensate her for the change in positions. Now, he has "lost all credibility", because he did exactly what they said.
Let's be honest. They want his head because he is a neocon responsible for Iraq, not because of his service on the Bank. This is payback time. It certainly is not about a $47,000 raise. However, once again, he has no one to blame but himself. He should have been aware that the Euros were looking for his scalp, and when the ethics committee rejected his request to recuse himself he should have smelled a rat and proceeded with extreme caution -- or better yet flat out refused to act in a situation where he was the one to identify a conflict of interest.

Tenet History Care

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-05-08T11:48:20-07:00

George Tenet was the director of the CIA during the two biggest intelligence failures in American history. This Clinton appointee was allowed to stay in his job after Bush took office, because Bush wanted to be a uniter, not a divider; plus Bush wanted continuity in intelligence during the transition of administrations.

A few months later, Tenet’s organization failed to connect the dots and allowed Al Qaeda to destroy the World Trade Centers -- killing 3,000 civilians.

A few years later, while assisting the Bush administration make its case for war against Iraq, he advised Bush to put all of his eggs in the WMD basket -- It was a “slam dunk” that Saddam had WMD. Bush believe his intelligence chief, and articulated the reasons for going to war by emphasizing Saddam’s stock pile of WMD and his links to terrorists. Ultimately, there were no WMD in Iraq and the international credibility of this nation (rightly or wrongly) was ruined.

Bush did not make up any of the facts he used in his rationale for war (i.e., “Bush Lied”). All this came from his Clinton appointed intelligence chief. Take a look at what Tenet told Congress in open session in February of 2003. Of course he talks about the WMD, but also look at the relationship between Iraq and terrorist organizations. Bush and Cheney did not make up a linkage that did not exist. He was just repeating what this Clinton appointee was telling him.

• Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of Usama Bin Ladin. We know Zarqawi's network was behind the poison plots in Europe that I discussed earlier as well as the assassination of a US State Department employee in Jordan.

• Iraq has in the past provided training in document forgery and bomb-making to al-Qa'ida. It also provided training in poisons and gasses to two al-Qa'ida associates; one of these associates characterized the relationship he forged with Iraqi officials as successful.

Mr. Chairman, this information is based on a solid foundation of intelligence. It comes to us from credible and reliable sources. Much of it is corroborated by multiple sources. And it is consistent with the pattern of denial and deception exhibited by Saddam Hussein over the past 12 years.

Now, the Iraq war is sagging in the polls, a presidential election is looming, and another Clinton is running for that office. Lo and behold, for a 4 million dollar advance, Tenet writes a piece of revisionist history. The Bush administration was fixated on Iraq and wanted to invade Iraq even though it had nothing to do with 9/11. More red meat for those wanting to smear Bush Co.

But wait a second. The facts have not changed. Those Halliburton stoogies made their decision to invade Iraq based upon the information provided to them by Tenet. Tenet was the one telling Bush that Iraq had mobile chemical labs, uranium tubes, and stockpiles of anthrax. He was the one telling Bush that Zarqawi escaped from Afghanistan, was getting medical treatment in Baghdad and setting up a training camp inside Iraqi territory south of the no fly zone. Bush took the faulty intelligence provided to him by a Clinton appointee and adopted a course of conduct that was overwhelmingly support by both houses of Congress, regardless of party.

If we were fixated on Iraq after 9/11, it was entirely because of what Tenet was saying.

UPDATE: To make his point in his book, Tenet fabricated a conversation with Richard Perle on the day after 9/11. He attributes the following quote to Perle: "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility." Of course, Perle was in France at the time and could not get back to Washington because all the flights had been cancelled. Furthermore, Perle denies the conversation ever took place. Undeterred, Tenet claims he may have the date wrong but still asserts the conversation took place, albeit on a later date. In this Washington Post article Perle shoots back and explains the same failures of intelligence that caused Tenet to write a book with faulty facts about a conversation that could not possibly have happened, led to the intelligence failures on his watch that have so harmed US credibility.

Evil Genius Speaks

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-24T14:21:08-07:00

He might just be a shill for Halliburton, but he speaks the truth here:

I usually avoid press comment when I’m up here, but I felt so strongly about what Senator Reid said in the last couple of days, that I thought it was appropriate that I come out today and make a statement that I think needs to be made.  I thought his speech yesterday was unfortunate, that his comments were uninformed and misleading. Senator Reid has taken many positions on Iraq. He has threatened that if the President vetoes the current pending supplemental legislation, that he will send up Senator Russ Feingold's bill to de-fund Iraq operations altogether.   Yet only last November, Senator Reid said there would be no cutoff of funds for the military in Iraq. So in less than six months' time, Senator Reid has gone from pledging full funding for the military, then full funding but with conditions, and then a cutoff of funding — three positions in five months on the most important foreign policy question facing the nation and our troops.  Yesterday, Senator Reid said the troop surge was against the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. That is plainly false. The Iraq Study Group report was explicitly favorable toward a troop surge to secure Baghdad. Senator Reid said there should be a regional conference on Iraq. Apparently, he doesn't know that there is going to be one next week. Senator Reid said he doesn't have real substantive meetings with the President. Yet immediately following last week's meeting at the White House, he said, "It was a good exchange; everyone voiced their considered opinion about the war in Iraq."  What's most troubling about Senator Reid's comments yesterday is his defeatism. Indeed, last week, he said the war is already lost. And the timetable legislation that he is now pursuing would guarantee defeat.   Maybe it's a political calculation. Some Democratic leaders seem to believe that blind opposition to the new strategy in Iraq is good politics. Senator Reid himself has said that the war in Iraq will bring his party more seats in the next election. It is cynical to declare that the war is lost because you believe it gives you political advantage. Leaders should make decisions based on the security interests of our country, not on the interests of their political party.

Democrat declares Al Qaeda Victorious!!!

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-19T12:05:38-07:00

I knew this was only a matter of time. The Dems couldn't wait to give the surge a chance. It might have succeeded, and that would have just been horrible for the Dems. So, they just stalled funding for it and declared it a failure. These people are dangerous, very dangerous.

In an insurgency like this, success and failure are all a matter of perception. Unlike global warming, consensus actually matters. If most people think you are winning, you are. If most people think you are loosing, you are. Compare McCain risking his own life to serve his country (again) by walking the streets of Baghdad in an effort to demonstrate some progress, to Reid who just announced to the world that we were beaten militarily by Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Bumper Sticker Rebuttal

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-16T16:01:29-07:00

This is a fascinating read. I strongly recommend it the next night you are suffering insomnia. He starts with rebutting West LA bumper stickers them ridicules the ridiculous.

Seeing the Unseen, Part I

Seeing the Unseen, Part II

Military Code Of Conduct

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-06T13:49:39-07:00

United States Military:
Article I
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
Article II
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
Article III
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
Article IV
Should I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information nor take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
Article V
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
Article VI
I will never forget that I am an American fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

British Military (at least as understood by the 15 sailors and marines held captive by Iran):
Article I
I am Briton, doing time in the military until something better comes along. I am prepared to fight for my country unless there is a possibility that I or any of my chums may actually be injured.
Article II
I will never surrender of my own free will, but I can be tempted by a cheap polyester suit.
Article III
If I am captured I will continue to avoid unpleasantries by all means available. I will make every effort to get home without being inconvenienced. I will accept parole and the aforesaid cheap polyester suits sans tie from the enemy.
Article IV
Should I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners (a joint book deal will be more profitable). I will give no information nor take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades (If I give an interview it might jeopardize said joint book deal) . If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
Article V
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, date of birth, a false confession, smiles for the camera and thanks to a dictator. ~~I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause~~. (That might lead to unpleasantries and violate article III)
Article VII will never forget that I am an American fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

Dhimmicrats

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-05T11:10:51-07:00

"Don't question my patriotism!!!" is their battle cry. "How dare you. You are just trying to silence dissent." they claim. What is absurd is that the politicians are buying into that BS and they are not questioning the patriotism of some of the politicians on the other side of the isle. In today's LA Times, in an apparent piece of "news" the paper regrettably announced that Bush will probably win in this standoff with Congress and will get funding for the troops without severe restrictions attached. However, there were some comments that I want to highlight:

"This is a moving picture, not a still frame, and with every day the situation fails to improve in Iraq, the support for withdrawal is stronger," said a Democratic Senate aide who asked not to be identified by name because his comments were not authorized by party leaders.

and

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, replied that he was confident the two houses could agree on a joint measure. "I bet we have a better idea how to pass [a compromise] than Bush has of figuring out a policy for success in Iraq," he said.

These are just the type statements that are repeated day in and day out by Democrats in Washington. It is clear to me that the Democrats do not want the surge to be successful. The Democrats do not want our troops to be successful. If the troops are successful and if the surge works, Bush is successful and his legacy will not be destroyed. The Democrats want the troops pulled out in defeat so that they can pin this defeat on Bush. Bush's war. I am sorry, our troops are fighting and dying to accomplish a goal (however ill defined it might be), and this Democratic Senate aide is hoping for things to go wrong in Iraq (higher US casualties maybe?) so that they will in the future have the public support for pulling the troops out in defeat. For this -- hoping for defeat of our troops on the battlefield -- Yes, I question your patriotism. No, as a matter of fact, there is no question. You are not a patriot. You are a craven politician willing to see people die and your nation humbled just to see the power of your faction increased.

An army of one

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-04T18:03:52-07:00

I was thinking that with the British response (or non-response) to their captive sailors and marines, the sun has finally set on the British Empire. But then it reminded me of General Elphinstone and I realized that the sun has been sinking toward that horizon for some time now.

In 1841, General William Elphinstone of the British army was stationed in Kabul, Afghanistan along with 4,500 soldiers and 12,000 British subjects. Elphinstone was considered a fine fellow but one of the worst generals ever to reach that rank.

On November 2, 1841, Akbar Kahn an Afghan warlord revolted and started attacking British interests. Jihadists stormed Sir Alexander Burnes’ home and slaughtered him and his staff. Elphinstone took no action in response, and by his inaction emboldened the jihadists to further bloodshed.

The British situation continued to deteriorate. Finally, State Secretary William Hay MacNaghten attempted to negotiate with the jihadists a withdraw of British troops and subjects from Afghanistan. The Afghan diplomats invited MacNaghten for tea, but just as the British delegation dismounted their horses, they were seized by the jihadists. Akbar Khan had MacNaghten executed and his body dragged through the streets of Kabul. Once again, Elphinstone did nothing.

Not only did Elphinstone not retaliate for Kahn’s perfidity, but he actually put the safety of those in his charge into the hands of the treacherous Kahn. He agreed to a capitulation wherein the British agreed to give Kahn the British gunpowder reserves, their best muskets and most of their cannons. In exchange, Kahn -- the man who just murdered MacNaghten -- promised the British safe passage to Jalalabad.

The British injured and ill were left behind -- Kahn had promised them safety. Once the last British soldier had left Kabul, the British sick and wounded were slaughtered and burned in their tents.

Elphinstone was just an incompetent on the march as he was in garrison. The column moved slow, and he failed to secure the passes which were now occupied by jihadist armed with new British muskets. Before the column had move 10 miles three thousand British subjects were dead - frozen to death or shot by Afghanis or suicide. A few hundred soldiers became so frustrated they returned to Kabul -- all were slaughtered. Elphinstone became dejected, and he stopped issuing orders. The women having no real alternative surrendered themselves as hostages to Kahn. The European women who could be ransomed were spared, but the Indian servants and wives of the Indian soldiers were all slaughtered.

Elphinstone allowed himself to be taken captive a few days later. He died in captivity a few months later. Basically, he abandoned his troops while they were struggling to fight their way out of hostile territory. The jihadist blocked the column at Jugdulluk crest. The British made a desperate assault but only a handful managed to break through. The last 40 men -- low on food and ammunition -- made their last stand at the village of Gandamack. They were surrounded, and the Afghan’s demanded their surrender. Remembering Burnes, MacNaghten, the sick and wounded in Kabul, the promise of safe passage to Jalalabad, and the slaughter of their women, one British sergeant curtly responded “NOT BLOODY LIKELY!”

Only one British soldier made it to Jalalabad -- William Brydon. On January 13, 1842, he rode through the city gates on a dying horse. Part of his scalp and skull had been sliced off by a jihadist’s sword. When he arrived, he was asked what happened to the army. He responded, “I am the army.”

AG, Who cares?

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-02T12:41:56-07:00

Alberto: "Yes, I fired those 8 US Attorneys for political reasons. They serve at the pleasure of the President. They were appointed for political reasons. They were asked to resign for political reasons. That is how the games is played. So, buzz off."

That is how Gonzo should have responded to Congress when Feinstein started sticking her nose into the affair. Instead he apparently lied, or is so stupid he did not know he was lying. Either way, he should resign -- not for this but for being a light weight "yes" man for Bush on immigration. There is no scandal here. The Democrats are just imagining things again, but he is totally unworthy of the effort to defend.

April Fool

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-04-02T12:35:15-07:00

I am a subscriber to the Los Angeles Times. My wife grew tired of my ranting about misleading reporting and propaganda. So, she tried to switch us to the Daily News. That didn’t work because it is not a real newspaper. So, she will just have to endure my rants.

I read this April Fools Day Puff Piece on a retired state department diplomat that is going around Montana condescendingly teaching the Montana hayseeds that Islam is not the cause of terrorism. You see, he is particularly qualified to make this determination, because he HAS TRAVELED. The article doesn’t explain how he reached his conclusion, it just repeats the fluff that Islam is peaceful but has been hijacked, yadda, yadda, yadda. (I guess the article is written for the typical LA Times reader that already knows Islam is the Region of Peace and wants to know what is being done to inform all those ignorant red state types what they should be thinking.)

Neither the article nor the retired diplomat discuss the jihad ideology, the violent example of Muhammad, the Islamic supremacist teachings of every major school of Islam, not to mention the daily reports around the world of violence committed by that “tiny minority” hijacking the religion.

I guess this former diplomat wants to indoctrinate the local yokels so he can enjoy his cocktail parties again as he used to with his elitist Washington friends.

Montana, do not believe this guy. Research the issue yourself and come to your own conclusion. Happy reading….

Evan Sayet

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-03-27T16:01:50-07:00

This guy was a writer for Bill Maher and has now committed career suicide in Hollywood. Although I do not agree with everything, he clearly has some interesting things to say. He over generalizes in an effort to polarize R vs. D. However, much of what he says is similar to my ranting in my letters to Vienna.

It must have been very difficult for him trying to work in the industry where liberal anti-American group think is so pervasive. Many of my friends work in that industry, and I live in Los Angeles. So, I know what it is like to hold a completely rational position but nevertheless be part of a small minority surrounded by a vast intolerant majority. Generally, I have to be very cautious about who I express any opinions to, because people in this town are very judgmental against anything resembling a conservative or a Republican. You cannot even admit to watching Fox News without being branded a racist, bigot, imperialistic homophobe.

My Take on Plame gate

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-03-18T12:52:57-07:00

Joe Wilson is a liar. He lied about how he got the CIA junket to Niger (nepotism). He lied about being sent by the VP (The VP had no idea who he was). He lied about identifying forged documents (he never saw the documents). He lied about debunking that Iraqis were seeking to purchase uranium in Africa (In fact, his report that Iraqi agents visited Niger actually supported the conclusion that Iraq was seeking uranium, because that is about all that Niger has to export). He lied about his finding being reported to the VP (he merely gave a verbal report to his wife's buddies at the CIA and had no idea if it was repeated to the VP). Plame lied about her nepotism in getting her husband the job. Both are definitely democrat operatives. Plame is probably part of the cabal inside the CIA intent on discrediting the Bush administration. Was it not the CIA WMD team that told Bush that it was a "slam dunk" that Saddam had WMD???

Furthermore, there was no crime committed. Plame was probably not "covert" as that term is used in the criminal statute. The statute requires that the CIA operative be stationed overseas within the last 5 years. Plame had travelled overseas on secret CIA business, but was not "stationed" overseas during the preceding 5 years. So, technically the statute was not violated even by Armitage.

HOWEVER, both Cheney, through his chief of staff, and Rove both disclosed to reporters the identity of a classified covert CIA operative working in a sensitive area. This disclosure was in violation of an executive order prohibiting the disclosure of classified information and was done for the intended purpose of refuting a critic of the administration. Some may even say as "retribution." However, since I agree that Wilson was lying, I believe the disclosure was just part of a misguided effort to correct the record, ala: "No, he was not sent by us, he was sent by his wife who works in the CIA. We didn't know anything about him."

Cheney, Libby and Rove may have been unaware of her classified status. That would also be a defense to the criminal statute. But, frankly, I expect more from my leaders. If they are going to drop names of CIA employees as part of a political hit piece, they had better make sure that the CIA employee is not a spy!

Armitage did it first. So what. I think this falls into the category of two wrongs don't make a right. Just because Armitage messed up, that does not excuse Cheney, Libby, and Rove from their mistakes.

Wilson outed her own wife in Who's Who. This is the dumbest argument of them all. Wilson was married to Plame that was public knowledge. What was not public knowledge was that her wife was a spy and that was not disclosed anywhere in the Who's Who entry.

Everyone comes out of this looking like crap. Wilson is for ever discredited as a liar. Plame is driven out of the CIA -- good that treacherous cabal needs to be broken up anyway. Libby is facing justice for a process crime. I had no sympathy for Clinton, and I see no reason to change my tune now. But Cheney and Rove have not suffered any consequences. They should resign and have their security clearances revoked.

However, I think we need to replace Cheney with a right wing ideologue that scares the crap out of the liberals. I think Cheney is the main reason liberals are concerned with Bush's health -- if you know what I mean.

War! Huh! What is it good for?

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-03-16T10:18:35-07:00

Absolutely nothing. Except eradicating Slavery, Fascism, Nazism, Military Shintoism, and Militant Islam. However, to have beneficial effects, war must be total. It must break what was defective so totally that it cannot grow back. The slate must be cleaned so that something different and better can grow.

"[T]hat we will remove and destroy every obstacle, if need be, take every life, every acre of land, every particle of property, everything that to us seems proper; that we will not cease till the end is attained; that all who do not aid us are enemies, that we will not account to them for our acts.... I would not coax them, or even meet them half way, but make them so sick of war that generations would pass away before they would again appeal to it." -- William T. Sherman

New Plates Arrived Today

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-03-13T14:23:28-07:00

Just Opening For Business

tmf@kingferlauto.com — 2007-03-12T16:33:49-07:00

Not sure if go daddy is forwarding www.v4vici to my .mac account yet. Still working out the kinks.