I wanted to mention a scam that I have just heard about. It’s a scam that targets grandparents. The vultures that do this should be beaten with a stick.

The way the scam goes a grandparent is called with the criminal asking for either grandparent. When they respond who is on the phone the criminal asks them to guess, hoping to get the name of one of the grandchildren. Once a name is offered they assume that as their own.

Then comes the trap. They mention that they are in a location, normally out of the country but not always, and their car has been in an accident. They may or may not be at a police station. But wherever they claim to be, and whatever the reason they ask for a large sum of money, thousands of dollars. They insist that the grandparent not contact the rest of the family – because they are embarrassed about the situation.

The money is to be sent via Western Union or another similar service.

This kind of scam preys on the fact that grandparents love their kids. They rip of the elderly for money that a grandparent might need to live off of but will provide to help a grandchild in need. There is nothing lower than this kind of scum.

For my readers that are older, never volunteer the name of any family member to someone on the phone. Never provide details of your personal information to someone that can’t confirm they are family over the phone, or the internet. Always check with other family members and the police – locally and at the supposed location of the “grandchild”.

These few steps could be the difference between helping a loved one and losing $5,000 or more.

So far this year one grandparent in Missouri was nearly scammed out of $8,000, another grandmother nearly lost $5,000. Luckily they checked with the police, in these cases at Niagra Falls on the Canadian side, and family before sending the money. It’s not known how many grandparents across the nation have received this kind of call and lost money but have yet to report it due to embarrassment.

Please spread the news on this. I don’t know if the major media will cover this, they ignore important news like this regularly. But this is not a made up internet joke. This is real. You can check this news on the Associated Press at http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iQk9EuiZGD3nAeTOPG7uwsFl2x7QD93PQ1L80

Labels: Associated Press, internet scam, violent crime, western union

The Presidential election of this year is special. Perhaps this is the most special election for over 100 years, perhaps going as far back as to the Civil War. That is because in this one election multiple events are going to happen that will change America forever, no matter which candidate wins.

Specifically I want to focus on Senator Obama. By his historic nomination he has set off dominoes that continue to fall, and will fall for decades to come. And every one of those dominoes is connected to race relations in America.

I know many people have wondered what are Senator Obama’s chances of winning the election. And I must say that they are pretty bad. And this has little to do with his political intentions. Because if anyone was honest they would admit that in an election year with a President that has one of the worst (if not the worst) approval ratings since they kept these ratings, and a war as unpopular as Viet Nam it is unheard of to not be leading the opposing Party with at least 10 – 20%. The words landslide should be in play.

But what is holding America back? The Congress is Democratic, and ineffective. While this is the hands-down worst Congress ever, with approval ratings even lower than the President, no one really believes that Congress is all that effective even in the best of times. But the Congress is chanting the latest political fads – change, environmentally positive everything, more money in the average guys pocket, and an end to the wars. The Democratic nominee should be swimming in the excess.

But this Democratic nominee is Black. Which means he has Black friends. And Black wife and children. All of them will be in the White House, and not as cleaning staff.

It would be a laughable statement, except this is America land of the worst memory in history. This nation can’t remember that slaves built the foundation of everything. This nation can’t remember that African Americans fought in every war this nation ever had, of their own free will. This nation strives to forget that up until 1922 lynching a Black man was not a crime. Or that the murder of an entire town went unpunished. Or that laws based on skin color were as real as laws from Congress.

Because in America we forget that people of color exist on television, movies, cartoons, and books. We insist on populating news footage with negative images of people of color – to such an extreme that exactly the same photos of survivors of natural disaster portray Whites as foraging for food, and Blacks as looters. It’s because of this complete unwillingness to admit that our past is as ugly as any nation, and that this past was rather recent, that we see many people shun Senator Obama.

I’m sure most have forgotten already that during the Democratic Primaries polls showed that 11% of Democratic voters (who tend to be the most liberal part of the Party) in Pennsylvania and Ohio felt that race was important in selecting a candidate. And in West Virginia there was a large group that were sure that Senator Obama was a secret Muslim terrorist.

But now there is even more proof that not only some Democrats, but the nation makes decisions in Black and White.

The Associated Press, Yahoo, and Stanford University conducted a poll of 2,227 adults between August 27th and September 5th. 55% were between 30 and 60 years old. 52% were women. 86% had high school or better educations. 57% were married, 27% single. 27% had kids. 84% lived in a city of some size. 59% were employed. 71% made $25,000 or more per year. 49% were Democrats, 36% Republican, and 7% Independent. Most importantly 69% were White, 11% were Black, and 13% were Hispanic.

Here are the important results of the poll.

• 54% had a somewhat or very favorable opinion of Senator Obama.
  
• 55% had a somewhat or very favorable opinion of the Democratic Party.
  
• 64% somewhat or strongly disapproved of the job President Bush is doing.
  

Up to this point you would have to wonder why Senator Obama is not doing better in polling results. Both he and his Party enjoy a better than 50% favorable opinion. And President Bush represents Republicans (supposedly) so he should be doing gangbusters against anything that sounds remotely like a President bush policy. Yet we know he is not.

The following is verbatim from the poll (wave 6 is the version of the poll):

[RANDOMLY ASSIGN RESPONDENTS TO RAC3 OR RAC4 OR RAC5 OR RAC6]
RAC3. Please indicate HOW MANY of the following upset you.

• The federal government increasing the tax on gasoline
  
• Professional athletes getting million-dollar-plus salaries
  
• Large corporations polluting the environment
  Wave 6
  0 4
  1 14
  2 31
  3 51
  Refused / Not Answered 0
  
  RAC4. Please indicate HOW MANY of the following upset you.
  
• The federal government increasing the tax on gasoline
  
• Professional athletes getting million-dollar-plus salaries
  
• Large corporations polluting the environment
  
• A black family moving next door to where you live
  Wave 6
  0 1
  1 12
  2 41
  3 38
  4 7
  Refused / Not Answered 0
  
  RAC5. Please indicate HOW MANY of the following upset you.
  
• The federal government increasing the tax on gasoline
  
• Professional athletes getting million-dollar-plus salaries
  
• Large corporations polluting the environment
  
• Black leaders asking the government for racial equality in the work place
  Wave 6
  0 3
  1 9
  2 32
  3 30
  4 25
  Refused / Not Answered 1
  
  RAC6. Please indicate HOW MANY of the following upset you.
  
• The federal government increasing the tax on gasoline
  
• Professional athletes getting million-dollar-plus salaries
  
• Large corporations polluting the environment
  
• A black person serving as president of the United States
  Wave 6
  0 3
  1 11
  2 28
  3 46
  4 10
  Refused / Not Answered 1
  

Notice what is different in each of the above. The numbers jump dramatically when adding in a Black person. Especially if that African American is a leader asking for equality, or is President. But isn’t it nice that there is only a slight increase when a Black person lives near Whites. I guess racism doesn’t exist – as long as we don’t try to do more than live near Whites.

But the pool goes on.

• 60% of the respondents like a little to a great deal Whites (which is funny since 69% are White)
  
• 52% of the respondents like a little to a great deal Blacks
  
• 52% of the respondents like a little to a great deal Hispanics
  
  Do you happen to know the religion of each of the following candidates? If you don’t know, you can mark that too.
  

The key in this response is the fact that 14% feel that Senator Obama is a Muslim. That’s after 16 months of pundits on television, campaign ads, and the actual words of Obama dispelling rumors about his faith. And since 9/11 being a Muslim in this nation can be painful if not deadly.

But couple that response with this next question:

CQ8. Does Barack Obama’s religion make you more likely to vote for him, less likely to vote for him, or have no effect on whether you’d vote for him?
More likely 6
Less likely 18
Has no effect 75
Refused / Not Answered 0

That’s 18% that would be less likely to vote for Obama, and 23% that fail to recognize or believe in his Christian faith – most believing him to be Muslim.

But what about Reverend Wright, a Christian and much spoken about during and since the Primaries?

CQ9. Does Barack Obama’s relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright (his former pastor in Chicago) suggest to you that Mr. Obama would be a better president, a worse president, or suggest nothing to you about how good or bad a president he would be?
All Respondents Wave 6
A much better president 2
A somewhat better president 3
A somewhat worse president 15
A much worse president 19
Suggest nothing to you 61
Refused / Not Answered 0

Whites Only Wave 6
A much better president 0
A somewhat better president 2
A somewhat worse president 18
A much worse president 23
Suggest nothing to you 56
Refused / Not Answered 0

The total of all respondents was 34% feel Rev Wright was a bad influence on their vote
The total of White respondents was 41% feel Rev Wright was a bad influence on their vote

Yet 50% said they want Senator Obama as President with or without a Democratic Congress
47% said they want a moderate President but 63% feel Obama is slightly to extremely Liberal

RAC8. When it comes to politics, would you say that each of the groups listed below has too much influence, just about the right amount of influence, or to little influence?

Now I found it interesting that 87% of White respondents felt they had just enough or too little influence on politics. Yet 75% White respondents felt Blacks had too much influence or just enough.

This question really makes me wonder

RAC10. How often have you felt admiration for blacks?
All Respondents Wave 6
Extremely often 8
Very often 18
Moderately often 43
Rarely 21
Never 8
Refused / Not Answered 1

Whites Only Wave 6
Extremely often 3
Very often 15
Moderately often 49
Rarely 23
Never 8
Refused / Not Answered 1

What do they mean admiration? And for whom? Do they mean if Whites admire Tiger Woods for his golfing ability, or Shaq for being able to play basketball, or do they mean Tyler Perry for his business success? And guess which one the average White American knows the name of.

When the poll asked:

RAC11. How well does each of these words describe most blacks?


• Whites responded 57% that Complaining was a moderately to extremely well description
  
• Whites responded 38% that Lazy was a moderately to extremely well description
  
• Whites responded 40% that Irresponsible was a moderately to extremely well description
  
• Whites responded 48% that Violent was a moderately to extremely well description
  

Another question asked how much people agreed or disagreed with a statement:

Generations of slavery have created conditions that make it difficult for blacks to work their way out of the lower class – 51% of Whites strongly or somewhat disagreed with this.

Over the past few years, blacks have gotten LESS than they deserve – 44% of Whites strongly or somewhat disagreed with this

Over the past few years, blacks have gotten more ECONOMICALLY than they deserve – 29% of Whites strongly or somewhat disagreed with this

So in looking at these questions you get this picture – Whites (at least in this poll) feel that Blacks are violent and complain too much, in particular about slavery and Jim Crow laws and the effect being a considered a non-human that did not deserve the right to read and/or write for centuries might have had up until 1965. And that it’s irresponsible for us to believe we deserve anything more than EXACTLY what we have now.

That how I read that section.

Another question of note:

RAC14. How much of the racial tension that exists in the United States today do you think blacks are responsible for creating?

85% of the White respondents believe that Blacks are responsible for most or some of the racial tension in America today. But if you go to your TV right now, and flip thru 5 channels (excluding Unavision and BET) I doubt you will be able to find more than 2 main black characters, 1 Hispanic, and 0 Asians on all the programs combined. But being made invisible on a medium that broadcasts 24/7 wouldn’t make you feel invisible or tense. Just like if no one ever spoke or looked at you for a day or two. Wouldn’t that be relaxing, now imagine that happens everyday of your life.

Another great question:

RAC15. How much discrimination against blacks do you feel there is in the United States today, limiting their chances to get ahead?

81% of the White respondents believe that there is little to some discrimination. Refer back to the example above. Or better yet provide me with a video or link to news about a White man being shot 50 or more times by police.

Now I realize that this has been very long. And if you have followed this to here I thank you. But more importantly I hope you are thinking about this poll, and what it says about America.

There are very real issues about race in this nation. It’s more than the fact that in June of 2007 Senator Obama had to have a Secret Service detail because of the death threats he was receiving – before he became popular and months before any other potential candidate was made a similar offer. It’s more than the fact that fully some 10% of people polled in every state have said they won’t vote for an African American. It’s not even solely about the lopsided justice that the Jena 6, Wesley Snipes, Megan Williams, Sean Bell and the 3 men beaten by 15 Philadelphia police received. It’s that America has issues with anyone of color, and that issue is exponentially greater if that person has or tries to attain a position of power.

Has America improved its race relations since 1965? Yes, because police dogs and fire hoses are not used when a Black kid goes to an integrated school. But that fact, and that 1 Black man is running for the Presidency, does not mean that racism has been abolished.

Not when during the time of this election cycle African Americans have been beaten, killed, and persecuted by the same Government that he is running to be elected to lead. Not when so many believe Blacks have too much power, or are innately violent and/or lazy, and so many have problems with the idea of a Black leader or President.

In that kind of an environment are you surprised that anyone might wonder if Senator Obama can win? Even though he is well liked, his political party is favored, and the current policies and President is virtually despised. Is it really any wonder that this is not a landslide election for the Democrats and Obama?

I mean think about this. Of all the questions asked in the poll, not one mentioned a single political issue. Not one mentioned any change in the government. Not one question focused on a campaign promise that Democrats and/or Obama has made. Yet consistently for reasons revolving around the fact that Senator Obama has an excellent tan every day of his life, he is viewed as a violent, lazy, irresponsible, Muslim, that creates racial tension and complains too much with too much political power for the likes of some 20% or so of Americans.

Please tell me how this does not bode poorly for the nation and our future?

Labels: Associated Press, Megan Williams, Presidential election race 2008, race in America, Sean Bell, Senator Barack Obama, Stanford University, Wesley Snipes, Yahoo

There is an international shit storm about to hit the U.S., and the American media is eating it up. The storm comes in the form of a video released to the Canadian government of detainee Omar Khadr. Omar Khadr is currently held in Guantanamo, after being captured in Afghanistan where he is alleged to have killed U.S. Sgt. Christopher Speer and blinded another with a grenade.

Omar Khadr is a Canadian citizen. He is the son of alleged Al Quida financial supporter Ahmed Said Khadr, his father. He was captured when he was 15, six years ago. Canada has not tried to get his release, and continues to make no efforts to regain him. He is facing life imprisonment in October.

The following video is the longest version of the video released to Canada, that I have been able to find so far. It is 5 minutes of 10 that exists. This snippet of video is the material being used by Canadian defense lawyers on behalf of Khadr.

When I say snippet that is because there is in fact 7.5 hours of video. The defense obviously used the most beneficial minutes for their cause. Part of what was excluded was video showing Khadr denying the existence of his family, and urinating on their photo.

I will comment further after the video



First let me say that I am a supporter of the Child Soldier Act [also see here What's better a laptop or food?]. I believe everything possible to prevent children from engaging in war should be done. The U.S. government (at all levels) has dragged its feet in this matter.

Now as for the video, it’s not horrendous. It does show that he is being treated like an adult though, which is illegal for a U.S. citizen child. He is Canadian. I cannot comment on international law (I don’t know it I’m not a lawyer).

The interrogations are being done by CANADIAN agents. They were involved lock step with his American detainment. The Canadian government was directly aware of what was happening, and they felt it was appropriate.

He was deprived of sleep, that is illegal mental torture. But he was given food and rest as the video clearly states.

The wounds he wants to receive pity for were inflicted (as reported by Rolling Stone in the most anti-war form) from the grenade he used to kill a U.S. soldier. [I have seen one news item stating the chest wounds were from gunshots – it is not made clear how he was shot in that same article] That grenade injured his eye and chest. And as noted in the video and the fact he has lived for 6 years he received adequate medical treatment, which the Canadian government was aware of.

These are facts we can determine from what is known. Anything else is subjective, and based on the views of the viewer. And the media is definitely against Guantanamo.

The first sentences of several media news releases says it all.

AP via Yahoo – TORONTO - A 16-year-old captured in Afghanistan and held at Guantanamo Bay sobs during his questioning, holding up his wounded arms and begging for help in a video released Tuesday that provided the first glimpse of interrogations at the U.S. military prison.”

Newsblog - “A 16-year-old sobbing teenager is not, needless say, the image the Pentagon would like you to associate with its infamous destination for "enemy combatants".”

Rolling Stone – “At that moment, Omar entered the extralegal archipelago of torture chambers and detention cells that the Bush administration has erected to prosecute its War on Terror. He has remained there ever since.” [3rd paragraph]

Leader-Post – “Canadian Security Intelligence Service officials "callously disregard" everything terror suspect Omar Khadr had to say during an interrogation when he was 16 years old, according to the Guantanamo detainee's two lawyers.”

And it just goes on.

But let me refer back to something. Ahmed Khadr trained his son to be a fighter. Ahmed Khadr placed his son in a war zone to kill Americans for Al Quida. Omar threw the grenade that killed Sgt. Christopher Speer.

It’s one thing to be against recruiting children into a military, or to force them to fight. It’s quite another to defend yourself as the child tries to kill you. Successfully at that.

In that video, did you hear remorse? Did you hear any argument that he did not kill Americans? Did you note him being upset that his father placed him in the situation he was in? NO, I did not.

You heard a child that wanted sympathy for the consequences of the actions he took, and his father wished him to live. You heard a child (whether he states, Kill Me or Help Me) that realizes that he has done a wrong and is being punished. You hear a trained assassin that is seeking means to circumvent any legal reprimand for his actions.

Are those my opinions? Yep. And of his Canadian government.

So while the media may want to focus on the fact that this murderer, active in a war zone, was a child and was treated, admittedly, badly stop. Before you give him pity stop. Before you hear the roaring tide of liberals saying that war is bad, stop.

Before Omar Khadr threw that grenade he had a choice. While in interrogation he had a choice. Before he urinated on the picture of his family he had a choice.

The lawyers from his defense team had a choice after viewing 7.5 hours of video tape. They chose the most sympathetic 10 minutes. What happened in the remaining 7+ hours?

The news media at large had a choice in how to frame this video. They could present facts, or color the presentation to increase exposure, gain sympathy, and support their political views. Call me old-fashioned but I believe Edward R. Murrow was in favor of facts.

Is his incarceration fair? Not entirely. But then again many nations incarcerate minors that commit murder, some less Westernized nations kill them.

Was his interrogation and torture fair? Who are you asking, me, yourself, the members of SGT. Speer’s unit, or the family of Sgt. Speers? You might get different answers from each, and every one of them is valid.

War is not without its mistakes and over-reactions. It is the single worse state of Mankind. But it is also a reality that has existed for as long as Mankind.

In the end this particular story does not reflect on Guantanamo, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Oil, Terrorism, America or Canada. It is a very small piece of war, and it is sad. Any other thought is what you bring to it, just as I have and the news media in general have not.

I would have to believe that overall we all would agree that this was not a shining moment for anyone involved, but that it is part of the price of war. It’s one outcome in a sea of tens of thousands of outcomes, just as occurred in Viet Nam, World War I, the Spartans last stand, the Crusades and every other conflict known to Man.

So what do you think? Not what the media, or fanatical political or religious groups want you to think, but your thoughts?

Labels: Afghanistan War, Associated Press, Canada, Child Soldier Prevention Act, Leader Post, news media, Newsblog, Omar Khadr, Rolling Stone

Hear is something that I’m sure few thought about while having their turkey, ham and stuffing. Deserters. Not the pie you had after the meal but those who have run away from their oath and country. As you may note I’m not happy about the subject.

Why am I even thinking about this? This is the title of a press release I found on Yahoo news, Army desertion rate up 80 pct. since '03. Sounds horrific doesn’t it. It sounds like our troops are running from Iraq, Afghanistan and service they volunteered for in droves. Of course this is not true.

I’m annoyed by the tone the piece sets, starting with the opening paragraph.

“Soldiers strained by six years at war are deserting their posts at the highest rate since 1980, with the number of Army deserters this year showing an 80 percent increase since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.”

Sounds impressive. Sounds like there is a problem and our soldiers are being affected by it. It sounds like droves of our service men and women cannot handle the situation. Of course it’s not until the 5th paragraph we find out that the number of deserters is less than 5%. In fact the number is close to 3%. Of course that’s considering the troops in Iraq. If we look at the total number of troops, in the Army that’s roughly 1.05 million alone, the number percentage drops even lower. And of course the article never states where those troops desert from, whether it’s Iraq or the middle of Texas. Takes the wind out of this story doesn’t it?

In essence I’m annoyed with reporters, like Lolita C. Baldor, and major news agencies who carefully phrase an article to project a certain view which places our troops in danger. This article may have been made in the U.S., but who do you think is interested in it?

Perhaps some of those setting roadside bombs and recruiting members to attack our troops have downloaded this article – thanks to our troops providing them with electric power – and lauded the thought that our Armed Forces are running away in droves. Perhaps Osama Bin Laden is using this type of article to add members to Al Quida, and training them to come to fight us, abroad or here in our homes, because he is the David placing fear in our Goliath.

Articles worded like this are political agendas, but they can also be propaganda for those that would see every American dead whether we fight them or not, simple because we exist in a country where women wear clothes they chose, believe in a God other than theirs (of forbid the thought don’t believe or pray differently), and educate children.

One thing this article does remind me about though is the cavalier way that deserters are being treated so far. I am biased so I have no problem with shooting deserters in a time of war, especially those that desert combat. The oath taken by those that choose to serve this nation is both an honorable act and serious. No one forced them to join, or to take that oath. To desert it is both cowardly and dishonorable.

But at this point, nothing is being done. Deserters are merely being discharged with less-than-honorable records. That’s it. Now I’m sure some corporations and business owners can connect the dots and refuse to hire these individuals that have turned their back on their own nation. I’m equally sure there are some organizations that will be happy to hire them. I am of the former and not the latter of course.

Still it seems that this is too little. At least Canada is taking action in this matter, refusing to grant asylum to those deserting their oath. Amazing that Canada will act on this issue while we have not so far.

I don’t care what the reasons, those that desert are cowards. They had a choice to not join. Like all things in life there is a consequence for every action. One consequence has been the ability of some writers to infer and proclaim problems where they don’t really exist. Another is aiding the enemies of this nation, giving them fuel by which other members of the Armed Forces who value their word and the responsibility they have taken on die. I think having a penalty applied to these deserters is the least we can do. Perhaps rescinding the birthright they so callously violate.

**This can also be seen at All American Blog, where I am a contributing author.**

Labels: al quida, Armed Forces, Associated Press, desertion, Lolita C. Baldor