Today
I’m so proud of us.
|
|||||
Hot Mic
Bloggers in Arms
BlogrollContinuous WavePaid to BlogReciprocating EnginesSmarter'n MeWingmen
OmakaseAmazon Search |
Yesterday and TodayBy lex, on April 5th, 2010
April 5th, 2010 | Tags: Gratuitous slap | Category: Gratuitous slap
30 comments to Yesterday and Today |
Targets of Opportunityblog advertising is good for you Credo"Sign on, young man, and sail with me. The stature of our homeland is no more than the measure of ourselves. Our job is to keep her free. Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all. To this solemn purpose we call on the young, the brave, the strong, and the free. Heed my call, Come to the sea. Come Sail with me." -- John Paul Jones "Pardon him, Theodotus; he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature" --George Bernard Shaw, "Caesar and Cleopatra" "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."--Friedrich Nietzsche "A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate."--Edmund Burke “You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”--General Sir Charles Napier "Μολὼν λαβέ" -- Leonidas "Blogito Ergo Sum" -- Neptunus Lex Amazon AssociateFor the Effort!Winnar! Subscribe CategoriesPagesTagsacademy
afghanistan
Araby
Blogging
buffoonery
culture
Defense Industry
economy
Flying
Friday Musings
geopol
Gratuitous slap
GWOT
Headlines
health care
History
iran
iraq
issues
libya
Media
Memory Lane
Military
Navy
norks
Oz
pakistan
piracy
politicians
politics
Politics and Culture
prc
pundits
science
sea stories
silliness
Small Stuff
SoCal
Tech Lust
technology
UAVs
UK
usaf
usmc
weapons
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2013 Neptunus Lex - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
Yep…one of Bill and Janet’s better moments..
At least Bill and Janet didn’t connive to burn him alive.
Save that for the wacos.
They may have had that contingency in mind. MP-5 Guy is in full Nomex™ mode, except for the brain bucket.
Looks like real shooter (wannabe version). Most of those “Special Response” guys are wannabes that just don’t wanna do the work to be the real deal.
A lot of those tac team guys were the real deal in the military before they went into law enforcement. I’ve known plenty of them.
Curtis, are you calling the FBI “wacos”?
Not very nice of you.
That would be conflating a bunch of government thugs with some really nice old airplanes. I agree; that’s not very nice.
naa. I was recalling david koresh and the scores of innocents that our federal agents burned alive in their spare time between sending refugees back to Cuba.
and it rhymed.
I always thought that actually turned out well. The Rule of Law over emotion and all that.
PS. Trigger finger outside of the trigger well.
Matthew, exactly which police force is the guy with the MP5 with?
Now somebody comes to your door with an MP5 wearing cammo, a bicycle helmet, goggles, and starts kicking the locks in you have about half a second to determine if this is a home invasion by Crazy End-Times Militia looking for your stash of ammunition, or Crazy Department of Transportation Bicycle Helmet Police enforcing that rule about having a flag on your kid’s bicycle and it had better be registered too.
Used to be police, military, firefighters, elevator operators, mailmen, even bus drivers were proud to wear that uniform, proud to be part of a team providing services and protection to the body politic.
The wore their job on their sleeve, so to speak.
What does it say when those enforcing the laws wear no identification as to which organization they belong? I’m thinking it doesn’t bode well for people enforcing the law.
But that’s just me.
– Max
Max- Probably the police force that had the house surrounded for a few weeks. It wasn’t a surprise to anyone that they made entry. That sure is a helluva helmet design though now that I look at it closer.
Redc1c4- Ah you have hit one of the issues on the head. The mom died. Therefore the next of kin were enabled to make the decision to bring him back.
Justthisguy- I am not trolling. I’ve been here for awhile.
I see that others beneath have made more eloquent defenses of this sad situation than I did. I will let their comments speak louder.
true that Matthew…. after all, what’s one more individual condemned to life under a totalitarian regime, even if one of his parents gave their life to free him?
Dammit, Cap’n, I was just about to tear my self away from the Tubez and go to bed, and decided to check in with you first. And you show us this. How am I to get to sleep now?
P.s. Matthew is either trolling, or just doesn’t get it, or, uh, I hate him. There. I said it.
Let’s compare and contrast Elian Gonzalez’s situation with that of children ‘abducted’ by a parent to certain U.S.-ally countries:
http://travel.state.gov/family/abduction/country/country_517.html
As a father, I place a very high premium on parental rights.
mea maxima culpa
This is one of those situations that really just plain sucks. I understand why Elian’s mother wanted to take him to the US, but when she died the only person who had a right to make decisions in his life was his father. I’m a strong opponent of communists, they’re firmly in the “too dangerously stupid to live” category (with the exception of those fed propaganda all their lives), but do you really want to take away a man’s parental rights based on politics? Is that a precedent you really think should be set?
I’m a family values kind of guy, and I do not want the government deciding who raises my kid or how. The young boy’s father was the person who needed to be raising him. Conservatives suddenly wanting the government to step in and be the nanny state was hypocritical.
I agree. Parental rights supercede politics. Period. Otherwise, that’s one helluva slippery slope to head down.
But it was evil Bush who trampled on the Constitution.
Me thinks the natives are having the scales drop from their eyes as to the totalitarianism of the left. If not, then the loing slide to failure begins.
One wonders how long before they try to break up a Tea Party rally? I wish I didn’t think that was a far-fetched notion. With all the coordinated propaganda about them being vile organs of hate speech you can sense it coming.
I believe it was Eric Holder who managed this incident for Reno back in the day. Never heard him say it wasn’t the right thing to do either.
Sorry fellas, I’m with Matthew, Steve, DirtyBlueshirt and taxi1 on this. The boy had a living parent (who actually was the custodial parent in the first place). Yes, he lives in a horrible communist dictatorship. Yes, it is highly likely Castro was pulling the strings and having dad call for the boy to be sent home. Yes, Elian is living much worse off than he would have within the USA. But that’s not our call to make. Just like the kids whose non-custodial mothers or fathers take them back to Saudi Arabia, or Brazil, or Indonesia, or Japan, or anywhere that refuses to hand the kid back to the American parent… we rail against that, but yet we let our dislike of Billy Jeff and Janet Reno override the father’s rights to his own son? Sorry, I don’t like that the boy has to live in tyranny in Cuba; but if we take that route and take kids from their parents because we don’t like the politics of the custodial parent, that’s NOT the USA I gave five years of my life defending.
After sober (who’d a thunk it?) consideration, I reluctantly concur.
My issue all along has not been so much what was done, although I do not much like it (I do not have to). It was how the thing was done.
Shabbily, in my view.
What they did was shabby. After his mother died to get him to freedom, and he is returned by an maladminstration that was more than willing to dishonor that and themselves.
Lex: The “how” it was done worked perfectly. I believe you military folks follow the same procedures with the idea of having lots more force available than you expect to need to complete the mission with all of your forces going home safe and sound.
The home where the boy was held was surrounded and populated by a lot of folks who repeatedly told the media that the U.S. government would enforce the law and court orders over their dead bodies. So the officers who enforced the court orders wisely came loaded for bear and ready for any resistance. Fortunately, although I think some folks in and around the house may have suffered some bruises and maybe wet underwear, nobody ended up in a hospital or body bag. And the boy was returned to his father, his immediate family.
Oh yeah. MP-5 pointed at scared little kid by rather non-human-looking Fed.
Just remember: Once you agree that the US government has the right to remove a child from the custody of the sole surviving parent based solely on the politics of that parent, you a) give up the right to bitch and moan about other countries doing the same thing to children of OUR citizens, and b) pave the way for children to be taken from their parent and placed with “appropriate” caregivers chosen by the state.
As for me, I’ll have none of either, thank you. If a parent doesn’t have a right to be with and raise their children, then we are all truly slaves.
What made this situation far different is the FedGov sent him to Cuba to be abused. AND they knew that would happen. Just another entry on the list of things the Clinton Maladminstration should be ashamed of.
No difference at all, except what side of the border you are standing on. If the US government can take a child away from a father because we don’t like the country of his origin, which he may or may not love, then any pretext can be used. Try this on for size. American couple goes to third world sewer. They find a distant relative, abduct the child from the parent, and bring the child to the US against their wishes. Oppression is rampant in the child’s home country, and the child will certainly enjoy the finer things in life like iPods and Disney World in the US. Is that OK? If not, how is that ANY different from the FACTS in this case?
And what abuse are you alluding to? Do you really think taking him from his father and leaving him in the care of a mentally unstable young woman and her felon relatives was in the best interest of the child because the US is so awesome? Or is living with his father in the country of his birth considered abuse now?
No one can accuse me of harboring any fond feeling regarding the Clinton administration, but in this case the outcome was proper. The only gripe I had is that it took so long to pry that little meal ticket out of Marisleysis’ and Donato Dalrymple’s (what a leech) hands. It should never have taken more than a day to a) determine if Juan Miguel was actually his father, and b) determine what his wishes were regarding HIS son. Anything more was an attempt to molify a violent and armed crowd intent on exercising their entitlement mentality regarding their “special” status for immigration.
Another view..Humberto Fontova : Anniversary of an Outrage — Elian Gonzalez
I was kind of unkind to those idiots that stole kids in Haiti after the quake. Our Doctor at my last command spent years, years, adopting 2 infants from Haiti. They were just babies.
Gonna wait for H.A.L. Moore to step off before I shop for bicycle pedals of all things.