Marjorie Taylor Greene and The Death of Conscience...

Marjorie Taylor Greene is a freshman US Representative from Georgia District 14.  The qualifications to serve as a US Representative include being 25 years of age, a US citizen for a7 years, and a resident of the state you are representing.

Prior to her election, Mrs. Greene held and voiced some thoughts and beliefs about reasons for things in government and the world that she found otherwise inexplicable.  For those beliefs and those expressions, yesterday the US House of Representatives voted to strip her from her roles on any House committees - essentially reducing her influence in the House and in the Federal Government to a single vote when called upon.

Her input will not be heard or considered in any deliberations, policy development, or crafting of legislation.  

This is the death of conscience in our representative government.  How many of us have thoughts and beliefs that may seem irrational or mystical upon which we rely for understanding and context for things we cannot fully comprehend?  

Why are human beings seemingly the only self-aware life forms on earth?  There was an intelligent super-being that had offspring it wanted to grow and develop, so it created a place for them - us - to grow.  All other life and things were placed at their - our - disposal for their - our - use and learning.

Why is the global temperature rising?  Carbon dioxide is a particular gas that helps the atmosphere trap solar heat.  Mankind's development of carbon emitting machines adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and that miniscule additional amount of one type of 'greenhouse gas' that represents, in total, a miniscule portion of all greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is the root of the rising temperatures.

Alternating electrical current is dangerous and must be understood in order to be worked with safely.  Using imaginary numbers - square roots of negative numbers - makes the math work so that electricians and others avoid electrocution when following the mathematical results.

Punishing or excluding someone from full participation in a process they are otherwise qualified for - in this case, an elected representative in governing the nation - by simple virtue of their having once held unpopular or even misguided beliefs is to kill Conscience.  The US House of Representatives has stripped one of its members of the protection of the Constitution's First Amendment.  Because she has not in the past conformed to the current orthodoxy, she is marginalized and excluded.  

The vote was unconscionable, and the outcome was immoral.  Mrs. Greene is qualified to serve, and the process for removing her from office is already defined as an election every 2 years.  Marginalization based on thought, ideas, intelligence, or understanding is not an option.

One Misleading Headline After The Election...

On the evening of the 7th of November, 2016, as election results were coming in from across the United States, it became apparent that Donald Trump could win the presidency of the country.

The Drudge Report, a news aggregator that has become a blatantly pro-Trump propaganda site of late, ran in its top of page banner the headline, "Gold Spikes As Trump Leads" or some such click-bait.  I didn't click, because I was more interested in learning who was going to be my next president than in following what I assumed was a momentary uptick in the price of precious metals.

But the headline stuck with me for days.  And I thought I would just check the story.  After all, the implication was that Donald Trump's presumed victory was disturbing global equities markets so badly that capital was fleeing to the 'safe haven' of gold.

To the contrary, it appears that markets settled down and returned to their previously lackadaisical performance, and gold continued its long, slow retreat.

Here are the actual spot prices for gold in the days following the election, November 8th - 15th.



And, just in case we think that the gold market's spike was followed by an almost instantaneous correction on the morning after, here is a chart showing the price of gold in the 3 weeks leading up to the election, and the week following.



So, what do we see?  Thanks to goldline.com, we know that the Drudge Report, once a reputable source of real news, has become just one more deceptive media outlet with a political agenda.

Gold had begun a sharp slide well before the election, which continued during and after the election.  The price of gold today is right about where it was in early 2016, before any debates or primaries or elections took place.

Allen's Nu-Way To Fight Hunger And Protect Self-Respect...

In 1995 my wife's grandparents moved from the little trailer they'd called 'home' for decades into the Arizona Pioneer's Home in Prescott, Arizona.

For them it was the beginning of their life's final act.

For me it was the beginning of my discovery of the family legacy I'd recently married into.

Dick Allen and his wife, Velma, of more than 60 years were settled into their little apartment in the old brick retirement mansion once designated as a home for sick and elderly mine workers in Central Arizona.  And our work of sorting through their life's accumulated effects started.

There was the odd, like clean, empty yogurt cups; the expected, like stacks of lace doilies; the treasured, like an original oil painting of a violin and a trumpet.

And there was the revealing.

In a cigar box in the back of one of Dick's dresser drawers, I found an insight into who this man was, what motivated him, and why he did some of the things he did.

Dick was born Richard Michael Allen on the 8th of June, 1911 in Mesa, Arizona Territory.  By the time he was 10 years old, his family had moved from the desert into the more pleasant ranching and mining community around Prescott, Arizona.

One morning, Dick's father, Warner, heard about a family that had just arrived in the Prescott area destitute.  They had come up from a ranch in Southeastern Arizona driving a wagon pulled by a borrowed team of horses.  Drought had killed their last cattle and a house fire had burned their home to the ground while they were hauling water from a nearly dry river miles from their land.

Prescott seemed like as good a place as any to start anew.

Warner took Dick, hitched up a team of horses to the wagon, and drove out to meet the new family.  On the way he loaded the wagon with groceries and other supplies he thought these immigrants might need.  And while Dick helped unload the wagon at their new homestead, Warner slipped $50 in gold coins into the newcomer's hand.

There was no expectation of repayment.  It was what Warner did.  It was what he believed was the right thing to do.  It was what he raised his children to do.

Dick met Velma Christensen in 1933, and on February 1st, 1935 they were married.

Their life was as normal as so many others' were during the Second World War and the ensuing decades of the American Golden Age.  Dick managed, then owned the Allen's Nu-Way grocery store on Gurley Street in Prescott, and Velma headed up the PTA while raising 6 children.  Their oldest died when he was only 2 years old, and their second youngest contracted polio, but survived.

Dick had grown up learning and believing that all mankind - white, black, brown and red- are children of the same God.  He had grown up learning that service is the price we pay to live in this world.  He had grown up learning that the best thing you can do for a body is to let them retain their dignity.

And in that cigar box I found a revelation of how deeply Dick lived that ideal.

There were a few cheap, broken watches, a pen knife, a woman's hat pin, a brooch, and a handful of notes.  "J. Martins - $50."  "Mrs. Dascomb - $25."  And on, and on.  Careful not to harm anyone's dignity, Dick had taken collateral on grocery accounts his neighbors could not pay right away.  And Dick had taken a lenient approach to collection efforts.  That is to say, judging by the contents of his cigar box, none.

Believing in the soul-destroying power of a handout, Dick Allen waged his own war on hunger and poverty.  A one-man army simultaneously acting in charity and respecting humanity, he did what no government program, no community service project, could ever do.

And in 1995 I learned that part of my wife's character and my children's' legacy.

An Apology To Erin (Revisited)...

A gay friend of a gay friend of mine posted this cartoon online and the two, joined by a third person proceeded to 'LOL' and 'like' the post.

Why do I point out the sexual preference of the people involved?  Because it speaks to the fact that embracing violence, finding pleasure in others' pain, and general moral sickness is not limited to straight, white, or male people.

And I owe my niece an apology...



You see, for quite some time my niece has been decrying what she calls the 'rape culture' of America.  My insistence has been that there is no culture - no societal norm - of rape in America.

But I don't play video games, I rarely go to movies, and I don't have television at home.  I go to work, I go home, and I go to church.  The people I associate with, in the settings in which we associate, don't talk about, display, or exhibit violent behavior toward anyone, let alone toward women.

So, when I saw this cartoon I was stunned, repulsed and disgusted.

When I expressed this in a comment on the post, the original poster jumped in, accused me of having mental issues, and justified the post as a humorous communication to a friend who would appreciate it.

Except it wasn't.

When we share on social media, many times there is a way to make a message private or to restrict who sees the message.  This poster opted to post this image publicly.  He thought nothing of the anti-social, vile, despicable act portrayed and thought less about showing it to the world.

So, Erin, while I still believe that America is a place where right is right and wrong is wrong and where society will not accept violence against women or anyone else, I apologize for discounting your point of view.

It is evident that this is working itself into our culture.  And if we do not return to a civil society of moral people, this cartoon will become our signature image, and not some repugnant anomaly.

EDIT - 12 January 2018

It would seem that one reason those on the political left are so taken with the notion of a 'rape culture' that pervades American life would be that they are intimately familiar with it. 

Leftists from Harvey Weinstein to Al Franken have recently been exposed as flagrant perverts, misogynists, and even rapists.  (No, don't bring up Roy Moore.  He's a relative minority - being conservative - in the recent flood of perverts revealed.)

The old stories from Bill Clinton's presidential candidacy and terms in office still haven't garnered much attention from the likes of Oprah Winfrey or Elizabeth Warren.  It would seem that those on the political left have an exceptionally high tolerance for liberal-on-liberal sex crimes. 

But perhaps, those young leftists who actually believe the Party Line about equality and respect have had about enough.  When will they understand that the rest of the promises of secular statism are lies, too?

Thoughts On My Mother...

There is a common witticism that says something to the effect that we don't appreciate what our parents have done for us until we do the same things for our own children.

I don't dream memorable dreams often. And the dreams I have that are still with me when I wake most often fade from memory before I'm out of bed. But I recently had a dream that some might say is haunting me; I would just say it lingers.

My mom and I were in a newer Toyota Camry.  It was burgundy, with tan leather interior.  She was driving, and I was sitting in the passenger seat with my carry on luggage at my feet.

We pulled up to the airport terminal.  In the dreams I can remember where mass transit has been a part, terminals and stations are chaotic and confusing places with convoluted access and departure paths.

This was no different.

Streams of cars hurried by, filling many lanes of traffic.  Ramps led to and from parking garages and overpasses and tunnels.  My mom pulled up to the curb and I hopped out of the car and threw a quick, "Thanks, Mom!" over my shoulder as started to walk into the terminal.

Out of the corner of my eye I saw her standing on the pavement, with the driver's door open, watching me leave.  Her curly white hair was dignified.  Her comfortable velour jacket almost matched the car's color and a gold necklace laid over her knit blouse.  She was wearing pearl stud earrings, as she so often did.  And she was smiling.

She had a brave look on her face, but in her eyes I could see anxiety - almost terror.  And I suddenly remembered that she had dementia.  There was no way that she would ever find her way out of the airport, let alone find her way home.  My mind flashed to the trip I was scheduled to leave on, all the work I had to do, and the important things waiting for me.

"Ah, hell," I mentally muttered, not in resentment, and not in protest.

And in that instant I saw that my mom was doing what she had always done.  She'd done it as a girl, part of a family of eight crowded into a tiny three-bedroom house in a blue collar Southern California neighborhood.  She'd done it as a young wife, married to a man who, though good, could also be demanding.  She'd done it as a mother to four boys whose antics and mischief were enough to try the best of women to the breaking point.

She had done what had to be done.  She had borne what had to be borne.  And she had given what had to be given, walking through the Valley of The Shadow of Death and refusing to stay.

There she stood, bravely letting me go, knowing that she would never be able to find her way back to 328 Semillon Circle, back to her swivel rocker, back to her picture window view of Mount Diablo.

There she stood again, willingly giving what she knew I needed to be happy and confident and successful.

I dropped my bag on the curb, helped my mom into the passenger seat, and climbed in to drive her home.  And the dream ended there.

I hope in real life, that I was willing enough to drop my bag and take her home whenever she needed it.  I don't think I understood fully how much she'd given for me until that dream, though.

And as is so often the case, it is too late now to tell her.  But I'll do it here, trusting that she'll somehow see it.

Thank you, Mom, for giving every thing you had - the last full measure of devotion, I now see - for me.

I love you.

LaVoy Finicum and The Long Slow Death Of Constitutionalism...

"Congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

That is the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.  The full text.  Since 1791 those few words, that one sentence, has been the symbol of individual liberty that has been the hallmark of America.

The significance of the text following the last semicolon must be understood in light of history.  This right of petition and redress was guaranteed in the laws of Great Britain and finds its roots in the Magna Carta; but the method King George III provided for hearing grievances from his colonies was cynical at best.  He would grant audience at inconvenient times and in inconvenient places, he would cancel or postpone audiences at the last minute, and he would drag out addressing grievances over months and years.  The 'established channels' for airing and resolving grievances with the government were used to enforce tyranny while lending an air of legitimacy to the process.

For decades, and for reasons I don't fully understand, American farmers and ranchers have been under increasingly unreasonable regulation.  The federal government, in granting statehood to western territories, agreed to an initial period of federal control of public lands which would then, as quickly as practical, be turned over to the sovereign state for management or disposal.

Western states looked at American history east of the Mississippi River and had no reason to doubt that they would be treated equitably as their earlier brothers, where state control of land was the norm and where control had been returned fairly quickly.

For whatever number of reasons this did not happen.  This left local ranchers and farmers to negotiate with a distant and removed federal bureaucracy which became known as the Bureau of Land Management.

Perhaps it began when the 'environmental movement' gained popularity within government planning circles.  The BLM's attention shifted from managing land and administering land use agreements to 'conserving' the land and 'protecting' wildlife.  The relationship between the federal government, represented by the BLM, and American agriculturalists began to deteriorate.  Ranchers who had counted for decades on free access to range land and water for livestock found their access restricted.  Sometimes the restrictions came in the form of arbitrary reduction or revocation of grazing rights; sometimes it came in the form of restricting access to water; but always it was incremental and localized.  A handful of small ranchers affected in a remote area, or a family farmer affected in a state whose economy was not dependent on agriculture made it easy for lawmakers and the public to ignore an increasingly heavy-handed bureaucracy.

But every now and again some small person gets the idea in his head that something is wrong with the way things are.  Thomas Paine was one; Rosa Parks was another; and Dwight Hammond was a third.  When, in the early 1990s, the BLM started to squeeze him and his family ranch in Harney County, Oregon, Dwight objected.  In court case after court case, judges and juries decided in his favor and forced the BLM to back down from their desired course of action - absorbing his privately owned family ranch into the Malheur Wildlife Refuge.  But when a government with unlimited legal and financial resources decides it will destroy one of its citizens or subjects who has only limited resources, the outcome is a foregone conclusion; only the timing is in question.

And bureaucrats have very long attention spans and even longer memories.

So, when Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven, committed a tactical error - in order to prevent a lighting-caused fire burning in 2006 on the Refuge from spreading to his land, Steven lit a backfire on his land  without seeking a fire permit.  The backfire was successful; it not only saved his family's land, but it stopped the wildfire from spreading more within the adjacent Refuge.  Steven's actions were reviewed and no charges were filed at the time.   But in 2011, at the urging of the BLM, both Steven and Dwight were charged under a relatively new anti-terrorism statute and convicted. They we're each sentenced to and served  months in prison.

Years passed and in 2015 BLM asked a judge to review the arson conviction and sentencing.  The review judge found that the trial judge had been too lenient in his sentencing, as the statute called for a minimum sentence of 5 years.  He ordered the two, aged 74 and 45, to return to prison to serve more than 4 1/2 years more time.  This despite the fact that the trial judge had determined that more than a few months in prison would have violated the men's rights under the 8th Amendment which protects Americans from cruel and unusual punishment.

This brings us to 4 January 2016, when, as the Hammonds reported to prison, fellow ranchers Ammon Bundy and LaVoy Finicum arrived at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge which surrounds the Hammond Ranch.  Ammon Bundy and his father, Cliven, are ranchers in Nevada and recently had their own difficulties with BLM when the agency ruled that they could not run cattle on their desert ranch leased from BLM because the ranching would pose problems for an endangered species of tortoise - never mind that the cows and tortoises had peacefully coexisted for more than 150 years.

Bundy and Finicum's arrival did not go unnoticed by self-styled 'militia' types who were sympathetic to the idea of an out-of-control bureaucratic government. In short order the Refuge headquarters building and surrounding area was occupied by dozens of armed men and women all bringing their grievances, real or imagined, to the table.

Days turned into weeks and law enforcement officials from agencies as local as the Harney County Sheriff's Office and as shadowy as contract security forces working for agencies they would not name gathered for this waiting game.  And through it all, LaVoy Finicum was a voice of reason.  Firm? Certainly.  Irrational? Definitely not.  Listen to the uncut audio and watch the uncut video of anyone his several interviews and you will see a man who is not deranged, but who is determined.

Finicum and Bundy and their close associates frequently visited the town of Burns, Oregon - about 30 miles away - to eat, shop or meet with people from journalists to law enforcement agents.

But something changed in late January; the tone of both FBI and HCSO became more aggressive.  The Harney County Sheriff, David Ward, began cancelling meetings, making the people he was supposed to hear wait long hours, and rather than being conciliatory or neutral, he became openly hostile.

On 26 January 2016, Ammon Bundy and LaVoy Finicum, accompanied by at least 4 others, left the Malheur Wildlife Refuge for a meetings with the sheriff and other citizens of another county.  They never made the meeting.  They were driving in two vehicles; one was LaVoy's truck and the other was a Jeep belonging to a recent arrival at the Refuge who called himself Mark McConnell. Both vehicles where stopped on the highway leading out of the Refuge.  The Jeep with Ammon Bundy was not allowed to drive on, but LaVoy left the traffic stop and continued to his meeting.  When rounding a blind curve in the road, LaVoy encountered a road block for which he could not stop in time and he drove his truck into a snow bank at the side of the road.

What happened at either the first traffic stop or the road block is unclear.  By some accounts, police were shooting at LaVoy's truck during the first stop, leading him to 'run for his life.' One passenger in the truck says that as soon as they crashed into the snow bank, law enforcement officers began shooting at the truck.  The official story is that upon crashing, LaVoy leapt from his truck and charged at law enforcement officers who had to shoot him.  The video released by the FBI contradicts this.  It shows LaVoy standing outside his truck with his hands in the air, and trying to keep his hands up as he is shot by no fewer than 3 agents.

By any measure, this was a murder.  And it was a murder intended to stop objections to government abuse at the hands of bureaucratic agencies. LaVoy Finicum was a sympathetic, well-spoken, rational and knowledgeable man.  He was a threat to the power structure.

I am convinced that he had no idea how greatly he was feared until the first bullet entered his body.  I am convinced that he believed that he could make people hear reason and that there was an outcome without blood that was possible. Right up to the end.

I don't like the crass and ugly threats from 'militia' types that I see on line.  That type of rhetoric is dangerous and ignorant.  And they represent a very small, by their own estimates 3%, of the population.

What concerns me more is the response I get from my friends in government and in general. A US military officer I know has no sympathy.  He chose to 'live by the sword' and thus chose his fate.  Never mind the fact that LaVoy Finicum hurt no one.

An attorney has no sympathy.  There is a right way to bring grievances before government.  When one goes outside that channel, then killing that person is justified.  Never mind the 8th Amendment or the 1st Amendment.

A liberal environmentalist has no sympathy.  There was important work to be done on the Refuge and he was keeping them from it. When someone undertakes to obstruct government work, then killing them is okay.

A business executive has no sympathy.  The guy was obviously a kook.  Someone being a kook makes it okay to kill them.

The general understanding among these people seems to be that, in order for First Amendment rights to be protected, one must be socially acceptable, not speak or act against government, and use those rights only within established channels as dictated by law and tradition.  This would be the first time I know of where the exercise of speech, assembly and petition were so narrowly applied.

I want to shake them and shout, "ARE YOU OKAY?!?! YOU THINK THESE GUYS HAD A SERIOUS CHANCE AT RESOLUTION THROUGH A SYSTEM THAT HAD BEEN TRYING TO DESTROY THEM FOR 30 YEARS?!?! WHAT GIVES YOU THAT IDEA? AND WHAT MAKES YOU THINK IT'S OKAY TO KILL SOMEONE WHO DISAGREES WITH GOVERNMENT ACTION?"  

Mission Accomplished, Ahmed...

In December, 2002, just 15 months after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the New York and New Jersey Metropolitan Transit Authority adopted the slogan developed more than a year before by an advertising agency, "If You See Something, Say Something".

It's been the mantra preached to us by Left and Right alike for more than a decade.  Vigilance!  Watchfulness!  We're all in this fight together!

And then something really weird happened.  Ahmed Mohamed, a young student in Irving, Texas, brought a device to school.  He started showing it to teachers.  One teacher who saw it told him not to show it around because it looked a lot like a bomb.  Another teacher he showed his 'homemade clock' to decided to say something.

The long story made short is that the teacher and everyone who took what on its face looked like a threat seriously were pilloried.  The President of the United States came out on Twitter and said, "Cool clock, Ahmed!"  At the same time he implied that anyone who couldn't see that this was a simple clock was an idiot.  And anyone who 'said something' about a Muslim and an explosive device in the same sentence was a bigoted fear-mongering racist.  The lesson Americans were intended to learn - and indeed many did - was that if you see something involving a Muslim, you'd better just keep it to yourself.

Some of you may recall that I posted something to this effect on Facebook as the Clock Kid debacle unfolded.  Ahmed Mohamed was a pioneer in changing the way Americans are allowed to speak and even think about terror and Islam.

And now, San Bernardino.  Sayed Farooq fights with coworkers about politics and religion.  He tells a Jewish coworker that he will never live to see Jerusalem.  Farooq goes so far as to threaten to kill the Jew.  And nothing is said.  Nothing is done.  Because we can't push the alarm button when a Muslim is involved anymore.  Remember, the President taught us that with the Clock Kid.

And now, San Bernardino.  A neighbor and others working in Sayed Farooq's neighborhood notice suspicious activity at Farooq's house.  Large numbers of Middle Eastern men coming and going at all hours of the day and night.  In the old days we would have thought Farooq was running a drug house, called the cops, and they would have surveilled it until they were able to determine what was going on.  But today nothing is said.  Nothing is done.  Because we can't push the alarm button when a Muslim is involved anymore.  Who wants to be pilloried as a racist and an islamophobe?  Remember, the President taught us that with the Clock Kid.

And so, Sayed Frooq and his wife Tashfeen Malik interrupt Sayed's company Christmas party with two AR-15s and hundreds of bullets.  They leave a sack full of explosive devices in hopes of killing even more as first responders come to retrieve the 14 dead and other wounded.  And they go out in a 'blaze of glory' as police catch up with them and load their SUV with more than 350 rounds of all types of ammunition.

In the meantime, the press and the Obama administration are tripping over themselves for days trying to make sense of the senseless when it is they who are insensible.  Call it what you will, but do NOT call it terrorism.  And NEVER call it Islamic terrorism.  It was a fight at the party that escalated to this.  It was 3 white men (wearing masks).  It was white supremacists.  It was a quiet religious man who snapped.  It was a gun.  It was a legally purchased gun.  It was fear of Muslims.  It was the NRA.  But, please, please, please, don't call this Islamic terrorism on American soil.

And to think that all this could have been prevented.  If someone who had seen something had said something.

Will I Continue To Support the BSA...?

At least once a day I get an email from some organization or another.  About once a month I get a letter from the Republican National Committee.  Every few months I get a letter from the American Red Cross.  Twice a year the ACLU pings me with a 'survey'.  And once a year I am approached by the Boy Scouts of America.

All these groups represent themselves as having urgent needs for funding so that they can either combat some great evil or accomplish some great good.  And all these groups presume to know me.

Their communications seek to pull on some heart string or another, seek to play on some fear or anxiety, seek to exploit some prejudice or preference.  And the goal of that pull or play or exploitation is to persuade me to send them money.  Money that they need to help the world look more like they think I think it should.  Money that they need to help defeat monsters that they think I think should be defeated.  Money that they need to be able to promote causes that they think I think they should.

I delete the daily emails.

I toss out the Red Cross appeals.

I take time to complete a note to the RNC and ACLU.

And in the past I've cracked my wallet to give $50 or so to the BSA.

I'm not cold hearted, and I'm not stingy.  I want to support causes I agree with and organizations that support my set of values.

The daily emails?  I don't know who those people are, and I don't want to invest the time to find out.

The Red Cross?  Their cynical response to Mitt Romney's appeal for donated items in the wake of Hurricane Sandy turned me off.  It showed me who the leadership of the organization are - self important progressives.  I'm not interested in that.

The RNC?  They've never stood for my values.  They fought Ronald Reagan in every campaign he ran.  They continue to stand up despicable human beings like Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and others in Congress and across the country.  Nope.  My routine note to them tells them that I will not support them until they show me that they support my values, and step one in that process is getting rid of the scumbags they support in government.

The ACLU?  I could actually get behind these guys if it weren't for their all-in support of the leftist agenda and their inability to send an honestly objective opinion survey to my house.

And the BSA...  'On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.'  That's about 120 years old.  And I feel like the BSA, as an organization, has left that ideal in the proverbial dust as they've raced to keep up with the almighty dollar and the ever-moving target of popular opinion.  For years their executives have been paid too much to promote the values of the Scout Law too little.

And now, their caving to political pressure brought by progressive thinkers who falsely use the name of 1.8% of the American population has pushed beyond the pale of my tolerance.

So, no, I will not support the BSA anymore.  I will send them a note explaining why I am withholding funds, and instead I will donate everything I would have given to the BSA to my local Boy Scout troop in the form of equipment or assistance for boys without means to attend camp and other activities.

And I would encourage everyone to follow the dictates of their own conscience.

Haters Gonna Hate...

This is the kind of hateful and fearmongering thing that is not productive.  In fact, it's evil.



And it really is scary how many people are standing and clapping and shouting in agreement with this lunatic.

Hopefully they're like so many of us who 'get the Spirit' at church and then go home and forget to do anything about it.

Islamist Terrorist (noun, singular) Attacks TWO Military Installations (noun, plural)...

You might as well post a sign that reads, "TARGET RICH ENVIRONMENT."

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, a 24-year old Kuwaiti native, killed 4 US Marines before being "enthusiastically engaged" by police in Tennessee.

The 'engagement' resulted in Mr. Abdulazeez's nearly instantaneous death.

Before you jump to conclusions, Ed Reinhold, the FBI's agent in charge of the investigation wants you to know, via CNN, that his team has "not determined whether it was an act of terrorism or wheter it was a criminal act."  Indeed, they are "looking at every possible avenue, whether it was terrorism - whether it was domestic, international - or whether it was a simple criminal act."

Hmmm...

Here are some background facts you should know:
1. Virtually all federal installations, including all military bases and offices, are 'gun-free zones.'
2. The two installations attacked by the same man, Mr. Abdulazeez, today were 7 miles apart and in two different states.
3. The first attack included Mr. Abdulazeez sitting in his car outside a recruiting station and firing some 50-70 shots at the building.  He injured no one.
4. All 7 of Mr. Abdulazeez's victims - 4 were killed and 3 were injured - were working at the second site he attacked.
5. This is not the first Islamist attack on military recruiting offices or recruiting staff.
6. This is not the first Islamist attack on American soil since 11 September 2001.

Big Marathon Bomber

Marine Shooter

Ft. Hood Shooter

Little Marathon Bomber

 

Underwear Bomber

Avenger

Shoe Bomber

Head Chopper

Next Up: Nuclear Iran...

When USA Today, the fluffy progressive rag, comes out with a piece of analysis that really isn't opinion, but leans toward the facts, it's worth noting.

USA Today Article

And when USA Today's story actually tells us something that President Obama insists is not, it's worth reading.

The "deal" with Iran on nuclear programs that the "West" appears to have just made is a bad one.  Bad to the core.  Not only is in unenforceable, but even were the terms to be kept, it gives all up-side and no down-side to the Iranian regime.  We will see an Islamist state in control of a nuclear weapon in short order.

Given that we know Iran's history of supporting terror and aggression around the world, we should not be surprised to see that weapon used - either as leverage to force others into compliance, or as a bomb to disrupt the world.

The only question to be answered is, when that bomb is used, will the then-president have the courage and the resources to respond appropriately?

We will see.

Progressives v. Family...

My gay friends have consistently, stridently and repeatedly argued that their push for what they call 'marriage equality' is not an attack on the traditional family.

This article exposes the lie that they've either been ignorant or party to.

Not An Assault On The Family...?!

How can any sentient being have been, or allow themselves to be deceived by this notion?  All one must do is find the origins of the 'gay marriage' movement.  They don't trace back to homosexuals.  Indeed, in the 1980s around San Francisco, where I grew up the message was loud and clear:  We choose the gay lifestyle because it's the anti-family.  We have no responsibilities, no children, no strings and no rules.

But then something changed in America.  We tilted to the left and became a much more government-focused people.  And then something changed in the 'gay agenda.'  The 'gay agenda' was co-opted by the 'progressive agenda.'  Just like the 'civil rights' movement has been hijacked by progressives, so has the gay movement.

Marx, in his Communist Manifesto cheerfully cries for "abolition of the family!"  His argument goes something  like this:  Since only the bourgeois (middle class) have intact families, and the proletariat (worker) is reduced to seeking fulfillment in broken families and prostitutes, the natural solution is to destroy the bourgeois family.  (Don't speak of building up the family as an institution among workers!)

Now, we have arguably the most Marxist president and administration arguing before the arguably most Progressive Supreme Court that children do not have a natural or fundamental human right to have a mother.  Just as Marx, they posit that, because some children do not have mothers living with them at home, no children should.

(Why not speak the truth:  Having a father and a mother in every home is the ideal.  The simple and sad fact that it is not so for all children does not make the ideal void.)

More In Common Than Not...

MTV asks in its probing new documentary, 'what does it mean to be white in America?'

I reject the 'white privilege' assertion that is so popular among wealthy, young, guilty white American women today, and that is so aggressively crammed into their mush-filled skulls by elementary, high school and college teachers and popular icons who view themselves either as aggrieved victims of rampant hate, or elite and enlightened paragons of righteousness, or some bizarre combination of the two.

(I cannot be alone in seeing the irony of Michelle Obama claiming to be a victim of institutional racism, or Michael Moore railing against capitalism.)

What can be the intent of the questioner?  Only to highlight differences which, truthfully, seem to be a fetish for progressives.

By dividing and subdividing Americans into endlessly small special groups and classes, the progressive statist then gains the maximum effect of the old martial axiom 'divide and conquer.'  When we view ourselves as members of one impossibly outnumbered group or the other, then we naturally look for protection from someone else.

The larger question; the more productive, less divisive, and frankly more honest question, is 'what does it mean to be an American?'

To be an American is to own the traditions and heritage of truth and justice.  To be an American is to honor the liberties that come with personal responsibility.  To be an American is to respect the rights of all people to live as they wish, and to respect and uphold the laws that make civil society possible.  To be an American is to reject hate.  To be an American is to protect the weak.

Why not produce a documentary that illustrates the similarities Americans share regardless of race?  Why not highlight that young Americans are concerned with getting through school, finding and keeping a good job, love and marriage, raising a family, understanding themselves in a theological context, turmoil in the world, economic uncertainty and opportunity, and things like that?  Why not showcase the fact that young Americans value independent thought, freedom of choice, peaceful neighborhoods and good friends?  And why not demonstrate that things like these cross all races, all sexes, all classes, all preferences and orientations?

To be an American is to stand as the last best hope for mankind; between man's enlightened liberty and his benighted oppression at the hand of evil.

Jack Ma, Alibaba CEO: Write Your Own Caption...

But remember, you'll probably be working for him one day...

Self-Inflicted Totalitarianism...

Here is some of what I've been trying to say about leftists and statism in America.

The New Totalitarians Are Here...

Far from being 'liberal', the statist elites and their lapdog press are moving us toward a totalitarian state (of behavior and being) that forbids free thought and expression, that encourages and perpetuates hatred and fear, and one in which you and I antagonize and terrorize each other.

The government won't have to change its laws.  Jack-booted government agents won't have to drag us to reeducation camps.  Because we, goaded on by the press and other self-proclaimed leaders who crowd and shout like 7th Graders, "Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!" will self-police each other.

Even now, we find ourselves without thought adding, "not that there's anything wrong with that," to any statement that might be misunderstood to be a values statement or to be judgmental.  We walk into a gun shop with the same apprehension with which we might have walked into a porn shop 20 years ago.  We conspicuously avoid posting things that might be offensive and instead choose images either deliberately neutral or that might be interpreted as supportive of the mainstream thought of the day.

Think about the environment.  Think about religion.  Think about history.  Think about race relations.  Think about sexual preference.  Think about education.  Think about national debt.  Think about welfare.  Think about national security.  Think about values.  Think about politics.  Think about personal responsibility.  Think about vaccinations.  Think about personal choice.

Think about just about anything that is NOT portrayed in a reality TV series, and you'll find something that has two and only two diametrically opposed sides.

On the one side, we must embrace the enlightened and liberating catechism of leftist tolerance; or we find ourselves on the other side - at once intolerant and intolerable, full of hate that is fueled by fear and ignorance.  We do not love.  We do not care.  We do not understand, as long as we do not accept, embrace, agree....

Gay Marriage: What's Next...?

Whatever it takes to make you happy, you know...

But as the famous saying goes, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

This is a swing that I think is bound to conflict with and ultimately violate my right of conscience and the oft-flouted and more frequently misunderstood principle of the separation of church and state in America.

Justice Kennedy's comment after this decision belies his naivete or his willful misrepresentation of the facts.  He tells how he has heard stories from gay people wanting to get married and that they 'reveal that they seek not to denigrate marriage but rather to live their lives, or honor their spouses' memory, joined by its bond...'

But here's how it goes.  We already know that speaking in favor of a heterosexual definition of marriage is hateful.  We already know that hate (as long as it not the acceptable and expected type of hate du jour) is intolerable.  We already know that companies and individuals accused of hate can lose and have lost their livelihoods, including government contracts and tax favored status.

So, what happens to me?  I'm not a hater.  I couldn't care less with whom or what you do this or that.  I just don't want to hear about it.  Straight or queer, keep it to yourself, puh-lease!

But what happens to me?

I attend one of the many churches that adamantly supported California Proposition 8, some years ago.  That was the popular ballot initiative that passed with more than 52% of Californians voting to define and preserve traditional marriage.  While the will of the people in California was overturned by one judge after another, what will happen if my church doesn't change its stance on gay marriage?

I was assured by a gay friend of mine that this initiative in no way was aimed at impacting my right of conscience or other rights protected by the First Amendment, but I'm not so sure.

Migrant LOVE.

See, this is the thing most xenophobes and haters don't understand.  These people cross our borders illegally for LOVE.

Migrant LOVE...

The issue being not that American citizens aren't guilty of heinous crimes, but rather that this one crime could have been prevented by responsible enforcement of existing border and immigration laws.

UPDATE 8 JUL 2015:  The shooter claims to have found the gun on the pier and to have 'accidentally' shot Kathryn Steinle to death.  This still does not change the fact that, had this man been properly deported and prevented from returning to our country, he could not have possibly killed Ms. Steinle...

Stars And Bars; A Relic Of An Unsavory Past...

I've never appreciated the Confederate Battle Flag, the Stars and Bars.  Those who fly it have always seemed to me to be self-identifying with the losing side of a moral war.  Is it the most pressing concern of our time?  Not by a long shot.  But I'll mention it briefly.

I suppose that there are some families - maybe even many - who fought valiantly on the side of the South in the Civil War, and who didn't entirely buy into the foundational racism on which the Confederate States of America was built.  Just as I am sure there are German families who weren't completely bought into the ideals of Nazism, Hutus who didn't support the Rwandan genocide of Tutsis.

And I suppose that there are some individuals - maybe even many - who fly the Stars and Bars in memory of a bygone time when life was sweet, simple and slow.  Perhaps they fly it in defiance of an ever encroaching federal power.  Perhaps they fly it as an affirmation of their value of individual and states' rights.  But the fact remains that it is also, and primarily, a symbol of man's inhumanity to man; of his willingness to enslave his brother and to torment his sister.

It can be argued that, although perhaps not as close to the roots of some, there are other symbols of defiance that lack the racist and oppressive overtones of the Stars and Bars.  There is the Navy Jack, the Gadsden Flag, the Liberty Bell, the Texas state flag, the Texas Independence Flag, the eagle, the lion, the star, or the anarchist's "A".

As such, I don't much care if someone flies the Confederate Battle Flag, wears it, or makes art of it.  And I don't have a problem with Governor Haley taking it off the South Carolina capitol grounds.

If one is going to keep or display it, he just needs to be sure of the context in which he presents it, and the feelings it may evoke in others.

That's not censorship.  That's just being neighborly.  

The Leftist's Ego-Centered Universe...

While professing concern and solidarity with the 'common man,' leftists really see the world only in terms of self.  How must the world see me?  What do I think about this or that?  What do I see when I look at the world?

Mrs. Obama recently visited a school in Great Britain.  In the course of her remarks she told the girls she was addressing that when she looked at them she saw herself....  Similarly, when President Obama spoke of Trayvon Martin he did not identify him as someone else's loved one.  Instead he asserted that Mr. Martin could have been his own son.  A part of himself.

What does that mean?  When I look at you, I don't see you as an individual worthy of respect by virtue of your being.  When I look at you, I don't see independent wills and minds.  When I look at you, I don't see sovereign souls.  Rather, when I look at you, I see creatures in my own image.  When I look at you, I see what I imagine I am.  Indeed, I am your creator and you exist because I will it.  

Look at the leftist social engineers who believe that people will behave because they are told to behave.  Farmers will farm because they are told to farm.  Steel workers will make steel because they are told to make steel.  Soldiers will fight because they are told to fight.  And all will care for all because they are told to care.  Like cattle, like productive assets, like automatons people are expected to obey the social engineers; their masters.  And the hubris does not stop there.

Central planners in the old Soviet Union dictated when to plant and when to harvest independent of the weather, believing that commanding it would make it so.  They dictated how much coal to mine and how much steel to produce independent of the capacity of men or machines, believing that commanding it would make it so.  The result was famine and industrial disaster.  And the social engineers never took responsibility, never acknowledged the flaws in their reasoning.  Rather, they blamed 'wreckers' and 'spies' for problems.  

Today, President Obama believes that because he wishes Iran not to have a nuclear weapon they will not have one; because he wishes government assistance to lead to prosperity poor people will become wealthy by using food stamps; because he wishes illegal immigrants to be productive members of society they will be.  His belief denies the free will of mankind and the laws of nature.  Further, it ignores millenia of historical documentation of human nature.

Further, President Obama speaks in the first person and is so completely self-referential in his rhetoric that it becomes difficult to imagine that he did not cast the winning vote for the Affordable Care Act, did not help every illegal immigrant graduate from college, and did not physically pull the trigger killing Osama Bin Laden.  

Because the leftist is without God, he must self-identify as the supreme being in the universe.  While physiologically similar to other hominids scraping and groveling in the common biosphere, the leftist is, by some accident of evolution, intellectually superior and has a duty - it is unclear from whence this duty devolves, as morality and moral imperative are murky concepts - to coordinate and manage the affairs, the relationships, the existence of all lower life forms, all the while he must ensure that his own comfort is not compromised, but rather enhanced.

Because the leftist is the center of his own universe.

Why Wage War On A Way Of Life...?

Plentiful and inexpensive food and energy are two of the factors that separate our country from Europe and the rest of the world.  Alexis de Toqueville marveled at the bounty enjoyed by even the poorest in America when compared with the starving huddled masses of Europe in the 1800s who slaved for monarchs and aristocrats.  The same is true today.  A "poor" American is far better off than so many living in other parts of the world.

So,  the Bureau of Land Management is working - and ready to kill human beings - in order to move cows that have grazed for 100 or more years off of 600,000 acres of range land in Nevada. 

More than 200 law enforcement officers, armed with handguns, shotguns, assault rifles and sniper rifles have established a perimeter and are keeping a Nevada rancher and his family from entering their land.  Meanwhile they are rounding up his cattle and moving them.

Why?

To make way for a desert tortoise.  That has coexisted with these cows.  For more than 100 years. 

In the meantime, the price of beef in the US has gone up 19% this past year.

Combine that with ever-increasing EPA, USDA, FDA and DOE regulations and it is easy to understand why government inflation figures omit the cost increases in fuel and food.

The Left must STOP WAGING WAR ON THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE!

Thug-ocracy...

Yesterday, US Attorney General Eric Holder was being questioned by Representative Louie Gohmert in a House hearing about the DOJ's lack of response to requests by Congress to provide documents related to terrorism funding.

Mr. Gohmert suggests that Mr. Holder's lack of response shows his contempt for Congress' oversight authority.  To which, Mr. Holder replies in a threatening tone, "Oh, you don't want to go there, Buddy.  You don't want to go there."

That's a schoolyard bully's threat.  That's a street thug's threat. 

That's a very real threat, too, given the amount of data that has been collected by the executive branch of this government in the past 13 years, given the existence of secret courts, given the practice of indefinite detention.  This administration could put together a story just plausible enough for the MSNBC crowd to swallow and destroy virtually any person they wanted to. 

I don't recognize my country...

30 years ago - hell, 5 years ago - any political appointee like the attorney general who pulled a stunt like that would have been forced to resign.  The media would be playing that sound bite over and over; parsing it; analyzing it; reading meaning into it that may or may not have been there.  Americans would have been whipped into a frenzy over the threat of thuggery made by the most powerful law enforcement agent in the country.

Today?  A collective yawn...



 

Terrorism: It's Not Always A Bomb...

"The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is a disturbing history of political imprisonment in the Soviet Union from the October Revolution to the 1970s.  Solzhenitsyn was himself a prisoner of the system for many years and his account of the deprivations, depravations, and despotism political dissidents suffered in prison under the Stalin and later regimes is sickening.

As disturbing is the willingness of the Soviet people to simultaneously accept and deny the existence of the agencies, courts and prisons that tortured and killed tens of millions of Soviet citizens in the name of the Revolution.  In the name of national security.

I'm not saying here that FEMA is building concentration camps, etc.  I'll leave that to the Alex Jones types.

What I want to discuss is the idea of terrorism and torture.  Some have called the Obama Administration, the Holder Department of Justice and the Lerner Internal Revenue Service "terrorist" organizations.  The statists, the progressives and much of the left and right in the country have scoffed at that.  I'm not convinced that the description is entirely without merit.

In the Gulag, prisoners were frequently left alone all night long.  No glaring lights, no jailor's key in the lock, no interrogation, no torture.  But from down the prison hall the screams of other prisoners being tortured and interrogated could be heard incessantly.  The prisoner knew all the while that the next time someone came for him, it could mean torture and pain; and when all that came was a bowl of thin soup instead, the psychological effect was profound.  But inevitably the interrogators did come for him; and the pain was just as severe as it had been for that unknown individual nights before.  And because of the psychological preparation he'd received the effects of the torture were even more severe.

Prisoners sentenced to death were treated similarly.  Sometimes they were held in cells so long, and treated with such friendliness that they began to believe that their day of execution would never come.  Sometimes they were kept in a constant state of terror by being dragged out of their cell - sometimes several times a night - bound, gagged, made to face a firing squad with rifles raised, only at the last minute to be snatched up and thrown back into their cell.  A momentary reprieve that was in truth no reprieve at all.  Just think of the frustration and pain you've felt sitting on the tarmac waiting for your plane to take off, and then pulling back into the gate for some maintenance item...

When government applies or enforces laws inconsistently and inequitably, this is what they are doing to the entire population. And yet there are so many of us who say, "Oh, yes, but it is for the greater good."  "Oh, yes, but we all must sacrifice."  "Oh, yes, but they know better than we."  "Oh, yes, but it is a complicated issue."  "Oh, yes, but I haven't been hurt."  "Oh, yes, but it has been good for me."

Anxiety.  Uncertainty.  Frustration.  Terror.

How many immigrants - legal or otherwise - live in constant uncertainty of their future?  They came here under one set of laws that were predictable in their unenforced state.  Now there is constant commotion and perpetual change.  Comprehensive immigration reform?  They are anxious and uncertain.

How many people accepted employment with one of the considerations being the healthcare benefits their employer offered?  Now, with the on-again, off-again implementation of the Affordable Care Act they cannot know what to expect.  Patient protection?  They are frustrated and anxious.

How many entrepreneurs put all of their human and financial capital into their dreams?  Now they don't know what will be required of them by the State and if they will be able to meet those requirements or be required to close up shop.  The land of opportunity?  They are uncertain and frustrated.

How many of us, depending on the guarantee of freedom of conscience, speech and privacy have spoken our minds?  Now, with the IRS free to audit and harass on the basis of politics, the DOJ free to hunt and entrap dissidents as extremist elements, and the NSA recording every bit of data for use in some future trial we can know exactly what to expect unless we can reduce the power and reach of government to some reasonable level.  The land of the free?

We are terrorized.

Hugging The 3rd Rail...

I know by writing this that I am touching the proverbial "third rail," and I still feel the need to bring clarity to the issue.  I would begin with the assertion that one person's personal beliefs and values are as valid as another's.  I would also ask you to embrace the notion that if you have a right to express your views, I do as well.  Let me list my assumptions:  1) There is a God who loves us; 2) there are absolutes - absolute right and absolute wrong; and, 3) the words "sin" and "sinner" are not aspersions, but simply describe all of us in our fallen state.

I do not pretend to know the mind of God.  I cannot answer "why" for Him.  I am confident, however, that at the end of this life He will be more than willing to sit with each of us for a LONG time and answer any questions we have for Him.  And I know that He will answer many of our questions before we die if we will ask Him sincerely and with a real will to know, understand and do.  Nothing I write here is done in a spirit of hate or fear or condemnation.  I hope that you will feel my love, my sincerity, and my concern in what I say.

For years I have struggled to pinpoint the reason I feel so strongly in defense of what we have come to call "traditional marriage."  A recent conversation in which I was unable to express my thoughts adequately prompted me to ponder deeply and to seek my "why."  I know and love and enjoy the company of many homosexual people - out and closeted, practicing and celibate, decided and confused.  And it troubles me that they find themselves in an awkward (to say the least) place in society.    So...

Here goes.

I have found by personal experience that when I do what I know is wrong - when I sin - I find myself separated from God and the influence of His Spirit.  I find myself alone, without His guidance and without His blessing.

If I should refuse to repent - change, come back - and instead to embrace sin and make it a part of the fabric of who I am, then I would so alienate myself from God's Goodness that I would be vulnerable to a very real physical and spiritual destruction.

Let's look at gluttony.  Overeating once can make me feel sick.  A lifestyle of gluttonous living will lead me to obesity, chronic illness, pain and an early death.

Now let's look at "gay marriage." 

While I am aware of and have listened to the ideas of sophists and apologists, still I am not convinced that the act of gay sex does not go against God's will for our behavior.  (If and when God were to tell me differently, then I would be willing to change my views.)

I do not believe that it's a sin to "be gay."  I believe it is a cross to be borne much like any other that is common to mortality.  I do believe that homosexual acts are sinful and that they hurt the sinner.  Why does God allow each of His children to go through this world with crosses on us?  I don't know for sure.  I do believe that He loves each one of us, though.  And when we humble ourselves in His sight enough to understand our own state of weakness and vulnerability, then lay that burden at the feet of Jesus, God gives us strength in Him.

Similarly, as a society, we will sometimes make mistakes that hurt people and that result in a need for societal repentance.  Slavery is one glaring example that comes to mind. As a result, we collectively disqualify ourselves for the blessings of God until society repents and applies the gift and sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

And, as a society, when we embrace "sin" in the form of gambling, prostitution, infidelity and homosexual behavior, then we weave it into the fabric of who we are as a people.  And we collectively turn our backs on God and willfully disqualify ourselves from His blessings.

While gay people should be allowed to love whom they will, at the same time, we should not make homosexual behavior part of our national fabric.  The United States of America needs God's blessings, guidance and protection now, perhaps more than she ever has. 

Killed For Her Cross...

Please follow the link below to an article about a horrific crime.

I want to emphasize that this is not a purely religious thing, either.  Any ideology from Islamism to Environmentalism can be used in the extreme to justify mob violence or terrorism like this.  But when a society or government turns a "blind eye" to it, or by its silence tacitly endorses the behavior, things get out of control quickly.

This kind of thing can happen when extreme ideologies control governments or society.  It's not just Muslims.  Communists did it during the Cultural Revolution in China.  White supremacists did it during "Jim Crow" in the US.  The difference I see is that, in the US, the people decided that this was unacceptable and changed the law.  In China and in many Islamic countries public dissent is against the law.

Really?  I think this is what we will get if we keep talking in slogans instead of ideas.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/egyptian-islamists-murder-young-christian-after-dragging-her-car

MH370 - An Example Of What Not To Do...

I copied this from NBCNews.com on 31 March 2014.  Sorry I couldn't find a clean link.  Read the last 2 sentences and ask yourself why the multiple stories coming from the Benghazi investigation, the IRS investigation, and the BATFE/DOJ Fast and Furious investigations haven't made this much news...

Officials Release New Last Words for Missing Malaysia Flight

   

Officials have revised the account of the last words that came from the cockpit of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 — the latest about-face in the ever-shifting investigation into the jet's disappearance.

The Malaysian Department of Civil Aviation said Monday that the last communication with the air traffic controller was "Good night, Malaysian three seven zero."     

Weeks earlier, officials reported the last words were: "Alright, good night."

The cause of the discrepancy was unclear.

Authorities also said they are still conducting a forensic investigation to determine who was talking — even though the airline's chief executive said two weeks ago that it appeared the co-pilot was the speaker.

Since the flight vanished March 8 en route to Beijing from Kuala Lumpu with 239 people on board, the investigation into what happened has been beset by false leads and conflicting information.

“This investigation is an example of what not to do,” James Hall, a former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board told NBC News last week. “Everything they do, they change.”