Friday, April 17, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Thousands of dolphins block Somali pirates
Thousands of dolphins blocked the suspected Somali pirate ships when they were trying to attack Chinese merchant ships passing the Gulf of Aden, the China Radio International reported on Monday.
The Chinese merchant ships escorted by a China's fleet sailed on the Gulf of Aden when they met some suspected pirate ships. Thousands of dolphins suddenly leaped out of water between pirates and merchants when the pirate ships headed for the China's.
The suspected pirates ships stopped and then turned away. The pirates could only lament their littleness before the vast number of dolphins. The spectacular scene continued for a while.
Xinhua
h/t
Snowshoe
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Knights Templar hid the Shroud of Turin, says Vatican
Medieval knights hid and secretly venerated The Holy Shroud of Turin for more than 100 years after the Crusades, the Vatican said yesterday in an announcement that appeared to solve the mystery of the relic’s missing years.
The Knights Templar, an order which was suppressed and disbanded for alleged heresy, took care of the linen cloth, which bears the image of a man with a beard, long hair and the wounds of crucifixion, according to Vatican researchers.
rest of the article plus a neat little video
The Knights Templar, an order which was suppressed and disbanded for alleged heresy, took care of the linen cloth, which bears the image of a man with a beard, long hair and the wounds of crucifixion, according to Vatican researchers.
rest of the article plus a neat little video
Sunday, April 5, 2009
William K. Black: The government is lying to us
Former government regulator alleges the government is lying about bank losses in order to maintain an artificial public confidence. Excerpt from his interview with Bill Moyers:
Moyers: How is this happening? Why is it happening?
Black: Until you get the facts, it's harder to blow all this up. And of course the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts.
Moyers: What facts?
Black: The facts about how bad the conditions of the banks is. So as long as I keep the old CEO who caused the problems, is he going to go vigorously around finding the problems, finding the frauds, taking away people's bonuses?
Moyers: To hear you say this is unusual, because you supported Barack Obama during the campaign. You're seeming disillusioned now.
Black: Certainly in the financial sphere, I am. First, the policies are substantively bad. Second, I think they completely lack integrity. Third, I think they violate the rule of law. This is being done, just like Sec. Paulson did it, in violation of the law.
You can watch the 20 minute interview here.
h/t
Rod Dreher
Moyers: How is this happening? Why is it happening?
Black: Until you get the facts, it's harder to blow all this up. And of course the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts.
Moyers: What facts?
Black: The facts about how bad the conditions of the banks is. So as long as I keep the old CEO who caused the problems, is he going to go vigorously around finding the problems, finding the frauds, taking away people's bonuses?
Moyers: To hear you say this is unusual, because you supported Barack Obama during the campaign. You're seeming disillusioned now.
Black: Certainly in the financial sphere, I am. First, the policies are substantively bad. Second, I think they completely lack integrity. Third, I think they violate the rule of law. This is being done, just like Sec. Paulson did it, in violation of the law.
You can watch the 20 minute interview here.
h/t
Rod Dreher
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
3 Kits
No signs of any foxes yet this year. Last year a litter of three kits was born in the woodlot next to us. Our front lawn was a playground for them, they were a lot of fun to have around. They played like kittens, chasing each other in circles and playing stalking games. Once one of them jumped on the birdbath and seemed to dare the other two to try and knock him off. One of them ran around behind him and swatted at his tail. It worked, he jumped off and the chase was on. I missed them when they left, I'd love to see another litter this season.
Image courtesy of Moraxion's Fox Page
Update: The fox is around! Two sightings in the past week. She looks a little filled out, could be pregnant. Time to start putting food out!
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
End the barbarity
Raised S.B. No. 994, AN ACT CONCERNING LEGHOLD TRAPS, has made it out of committee. Anyone interested in ending the barbaric practice should contact their Reps and Senators now. Here is a handy list of members of the Environment Committee. Thanks Wonderwoman!
From the joint favorable report:
REASONS FOR BILL:
To prevent needless animal suffering caused by leghold and body crushing traps.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) opposes this bill as it would be detrimental to wildlife management in the state. DEP feels these traps are the most effective tool available to control and prevent damage caused by coyotes and beavers. Currently Connecticut has strict laws and regulations which regulate the use of foothold and conibear traps which include when and where such traps can be used and they feel more restrictions will not prevent the illegal use of these traps. DEP testimony states that regulated trapping is essential to the balance between wildlife and humans.
Department of Agriculture opposes this bill as they feel conibear traps are an effective way to trap beavers and eliminate flooding problems caused by beaver dam. Where there may be alternatives to conibear traps (i.e. “suitcase-type, live traps), the alternatives are costly and dangerous to the humans setting them. When addressing coyote problems leghold traps are the only effective way to trap them, coyote are abundant and cause safety and public health problems such as rabies transmission and tick borne disease. Banning the use of these traps would take away farmers and trappers most effective tools.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
ASPCA supports this bill as they can maim and/or kill humans, companion animals and non-targeted wildlife. The ASPCA supplied a partial list of the 85+ page list of non-target species, companion animals and humans trapped in leghold traps, of the 15 incidents reported 8 of the “victims” died as a direct result of the injuries inflicted by the trap.
The Humane Society of the United States supports this bill as these traps cause needless suffering to the trapped animals. Not only are the animals subject to physical damage ranging from bone fractures to hemorrhage, but they are also subject to physiological stress because in many cases death is not immediate. Conibear (submersion traps) are inhumane as death is caused by drowning. They induce panic and there is a prolonged period until unconsciousness. Testimony submitted indicates that body-crushing traps which are designed to kill the animal by snapping shut on the animal's spinal column are not always effective as it is impossible to control the size, position and direction of the animal entering the trap. They state that animals often endure prolonged suffering as they are not always killed by the clamping force of the trap. The Humane Society feels these are cruel trapping practices. Further the Humane Society states there are non-lethal means of trapping animals whether they be coyote, beaver or nuisance wildlife.
Skip Hilliker, licensed Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator supports this bill as he feels these traps are “grossly inhumane.” He states that he has been trapping in Connecticut for the past 50 years and in 1985 switched to live catch for trapping as trappers have humane alternatives available to them. He states that even with current modifications to the leghold and padded traps the animals still suffer unnecessary pain and suffering as it is impossible for a trapper to guarantee an instant death.
Michael Broderick, D.V.M., supports this bill as he has seen the effects of these traps. He states leghold traps cause horrific injuries and animals endure excruciating pain as a result of being caught in them. He states that leghold traps kill and maim non-targeted species included endangered species and domestic pets. He believes it would be “immoral not to ban this devise from our humane minded state.”
Kimberly McClure Brinton D.V.M. supports this bill and feels these traps are cruel and cause unnecessary suffering.
Gail Petras, City of Middletown Animal Control Officer supports this bill as she has personally tended to incidents involving non-targeted animals. In one case the trap was set illegally in a residential neighborhood. She further states that she has seen a skunk and coyote with leghold traps stuck on them. She feels that these animals will eventually need to be euthanized. She also states these incidents are acts of irresponsible people and the animals should not be subject to unnecessary suffering.
Kathy Grasso, Wildlife Rehabilitator supports this bill. Ms. Grasso states she has witnessed firsthand pain and suffering caused by leghold traps. She cared for a Great Horned Owl that was not the intended target of the leghold trap. The owl died as a result of the injury incurred by the leghold trap. She states that many non-targeted species become victims of leghold traps and feels they are inhumane.
[more at the link]
From the joint favorable report:
REASONS FOR BILL:
To prevent needless animal suffering caused by leghold and body crushing traps.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) opposes this bill as it would be detrimental to wildlife management in the state. DEP feels these traps are the most effective tool available to control and prevent damage caused by coyotes and beavers. Currently Connecticut has strict laws and regulations which regulate the use of foothold and conibear traps which include when and where such traps can be used and they feel more restrictions will not prevent the illegal use of these traps. DEP testimony states that regulated trapping is essential to the balance between wildlife and humans.
Department of Agriculture opposes this bill as they feel conibear traps are an effective way to trap beavers and eliminate flooding problems caused by beaver dam. Where there may be alternatives to conibear traps (i.e. “suitcase-type, live traps), the alternatives are costly and dangerous to the humans setting them. When addressing coyote problems leghold traps are the only effective way to trap them, coyote are abundant and cause safety and public health problems such as rabies transmission and tick borne disease. Banning the use of these traps would take away farmers and trappers most effective tools.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
ASPCA supports this bill as they can maim and/or kill humans, companion animals and non-targeted wildlife. The ASPCA supplied a partial list of the 85+ page list of non-target species, companion animals and humans trapped in leghold traps, of the 15 incidents reported 8 of the “victims” died as a direct result of the injuries inflicted by the trap.
The Humane Society of the United States supports this bill as these traps cause needless suffering to the trapped animals. Not only are the animals subject to physical damage ranging from bone fractures to hemorrhage, but they are also subject to physiological stress because in many cases death is not immediate. Conibear (submersion traps) are inhumane as death is caused by drowning. They induce panic and there is a prolonged period until unconsciousness. Testimony submitted indicates that body-crushing traps which are designed to kill the animal by snapping shut on the animal's spinal column are not always effective as it is impossible to control the size, position and direction of the animal entering the trap. They state that animals often endure prolonged suffering as they are not always killed by the clamping force of the trap. The Humane Society feels these are cruel trapping practices. Further the Humane Society states there are non-lethal means of trapping animals whether they be coyote, beaver or nuisance wildlife.
Skip Hilliker, licensed Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator supports this bill as he feels these traps are “grossly inhumane.” He states that he has been trapping in Connecticut for the past 50 years and in 1985 switched to live catch for trapping as trappers have humane alternatives available to them. He states that even with current modifications to the leghold and padded traps the animals still suffer unnecessary pain and suffering as it is impossible for a trapper to guarantee an instant death.
Michael Broderick, D.V.M., supports this bill as he has seen the effects of these traps. He states leghold traps cause horrific injuries and animals endure excruciating pain as a result of being caught in them. He states that leghold traps kill and maim non-targeted species included endangered species and domestic pets. He believes it would be “immoral not to ban this devise from our humane minded state.”
Kimberly McClure Brinton D.V.M. supports this bill and feels these traps are cruel and cause unnecessary suffering.
Gail Petras, City of Middletown Animal Control Officer supports this bill as she has personally tended to incidents involving non-targeted animals. In one case the trap was set illegally in a residential neighborhood. She further states that she has seen a skunk and coyote with leghold traps stuck on them. She feels that these animals will eventually need to be euthanized. She also states these incidents are acts of irresponsible people and the animals should not be subject to unnecessary suffering.
Kathy Grasso, Wildlife Rehabilitator supports this bill. Ms. Grasso states she has witnessed firsthand pain and suffering caused by leghold traps. She cared for a Great Horned Owl that was not the intended target of the leghold trap. The owl died as a result of the injury incurred by the leghold trap. She states that many non-targeted species become victims of leghold traps and feels they are inhumane.
[more at the link]
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Ron Paul bumpersticker? You might be a terrorist!
Red flags outlined in the document include political bumper stickers such as those for U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, talk of conspiracy theories such as the plan for a mega-highway from Canada to Mexico and possession of subversive literature.
I wonder what they mean by that? On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Thoreau? No Treason by Lysander Spooner? The writings of Albert Jay Nock or Frank Chodorov? What could they possibly mean...??
Brings to mind the line by former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, "If it's printed on paper it's legal, I don't even have to look at it."
h/t
Glenn Reynolds
Update: State retracts report amid growing backlash
Missouri Homeland Security wouldn't recognize a jihadist if he walked up and bit them in the rear. But little old ladies praying the rosary at an abortion clinic are a threat.
I wonder what they mean by that? On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Thoreau? No Treason by Lysander Spooner? The writings of Albert Jay Nock or Frank Chodorov? What could they possibly mean...??
Brings to mind the line by former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, "If it's printed on paper it's legal, I don't even have to look at it."
h/t
Glenn Reynolds
Update: State retracts report amid growing backlash
Missouri Homeland Security wouldn't recognize a jihadist if he walked up and bit them in the rear. But little old ladies praying the rosary at an abortion clinic are a threat.
Some things I miss about Oklahoma
I lived in Oklahoma for awhile. There are some things about the place that are unique. :)
h/t
Doug Ross
h/t
Doug Ross
Sunday, March 15, 2009
HR 875 - The Federal Take-Over of Food Regulation
Some of the requirements set forth within H.R. 875 include:
- Designating FSA as sole regulator of food safety rather than the individual states, including granting FSA the power to implement and administer a “national system for regular unannounced inspection of food establishments” under its own terms.
- Reclassifying all farms as “food production facilities”, ensuring they come under the regulatory and inspection protocols of FSA as well as enforcing compliance with whatever FSA deems as appropriate food safety requirements.
- Requiring farmers to comply with FSA-established “minimum standards” for farming practices, including requiring them to establish Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans and other written documentation as determined and mandated by FSA.
- Granting FSA the power to arrogate “preventative process controls to reduce adulteration of food” as it deems fit.
- Instituting FSA as food safety law enforcement, allowing it to assess civil penalties and fines for violation of any and all FSA safety laws up to $1 million for each violation. Collected fines would become unappropriated slush funds to be used however FSA deems fit in order to “carry out enforcement activities under the food safety law”.
The burdensome requirements the bill imposes on small farms and the intrusive federal control it creates over small farm operations threaten the future viability of sustainable agriculture and the local food movement. HR 875 has been assigned to both the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the House Committee on Agriculture. It needs to be stopped. Anyone who values freedom of food choice and the rights and independence of small farmers should contact their elected representatives and the members of the two committees to ask that they oppose HR 875. Updates on the status of this bill will be provided on this site.
- Designating FSA as sole regulator of food safety rather than the individual states, including granting FSA the power to implement and administer a “national system for regular unannounced inspection of food establishments” under its own terms.
- Reclassifying all farms as “food production facilities”, ensuring they come under the regulatory and inspection protocols of FSA as well as enforcing compliance with whatever FSA deems as appropriate food safety requirements.
- Requiring farmers to comply with FSA-established “minimum standards” for farming practices, including requiring them to establish Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) plans and other written documentation as determined and mandated by FSA.
- Granting FSA the power to arrogate “preventative process controls to reduce adulteration of food” as it deems fit.
- Instituting FSA as food safety law enforcement, allowing it to assess civil penalties and fines for violation of any and all FSA safety laws up to $1 million for each violation. Collected fines would become unappropriated slush funds to be used however FSA deems fit in order to “carry out enforcement activities under the food safety law”.
The burdensome requirements the bill imposes on small farms and the intrusive federal control it creates over small farm operations threaten the future viability of sustainable agriculture and the local food movement. HR 875 has been assigned to both the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the House Committee on Agriculture. It needs to be stopped. Anyone who values freedom of food choice and the rights and independence of small farmers should contact their elected representatives and the members of the two committees to ask that they oppose HR 875. Updates on the status of this bill will be provided on this site.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
First, they attacked religious liberty. Now they've taken away your right to a public hearing!
From my email:
Judiciary Committee Co-Chairs Rep. Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) and Sen. Andrew McDonald (D-Stamford) have abruptly cancelled tomorrow's public hearing on R.B. 1098, the bill targeting the Catholic Church. That the other members of the Committee were not consulted about the cancellation highlights the hypocrisy of Lawlor and McDonald, given their claim that R.B. 1098 was about transparency and accountability. The cancellation is also a huge act of disrespect to the thousands who, on very short notice, arranged for buses and planned to take the day off from work in order to testify against the bill.
WE STILL NEED ALL OF YOU AT THE STATE CAPITOL TOMORROW, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH! The Legislators who introduced this bill and cancelled the public hearing will not get away with this. WE WILL BE HEARD!
From 10:00 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. Room 1A at the Legislative Office Building will be the Family Institute of Connecticut's religious liberty headquarters. Please stop by to pick up packets of information about R.B. 1098, the legislature, and what you can do to turn the tide for faith and family in Connecticut. (Click on our homepage for parking and directions.)
From 12:00 p.m. until 1:30 p.m. there will be a Rally Against R.B. 1098 on the North Steps of the Capitol (210 Capitol Avenue in Hartford). The Rally is sponsored by the Catholic Church and will include speeches by the state's Catholic bishops. Family Institute's members of every faith are also encouraged to attend. Archbishop Leroy Bailey of First Cathedral, who is about to undergo surgery in North Carolina, called FIC executive director Peter Wolfgang today and strongly urged involvement by all the churches.
Also beginning at 12 p.m. the House and Senate Republicans will go ahead with their own informational hearing on R.B. 1098. An informational hearing has less official importance than a public hearing, but is still a valuable opportunity. Here is the message sent to members and staff of the GOP: "On behalf of House and Senate Republicans I would like to inform you that the House and Senate Republican Offices will be going forward with an informational hearing on SB 1098,AN ACT MODIFYING CORPORATE LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS tomorrow starting at 12:00pm. The hearing will be held in room 2C and overflow rooms will be available. Sign up for the hearing will start at 9:30am in lobby of the Legislative Office Building. We will hear from Church officials first and then open it up for other public comment. We have invited and will be reaching out to anyone who has contacted us on this bill so we can let them know they will be heard on this issue tomorrow. We will also be inviting our Democrat colleagues to join us. We hope all Republican members can attend, especially our Republican Judiciary Committee members who were scheduled to be in attendance tomorrow anyway. If you have any questions please let us know. Thanks, Deb Hutton Chief Legal Counsel, House Republican Office, 860 240 8700."
At 7:30 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday March 11th, FIC executive director Peter Wolfgang will debate the head of the Connecticut chapter of NARAL, the pro-abortion group, at the Lincoln Theater on the University of Hartford's campus. Doors open at 7 p.m. If you are still in Hartford, we would welcome your attendance at this event.
Judiciary Committee Co-Chairs Rep. Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) and Sen. Andrew McDonald (D-Stamford) have abruptly cancelled tomorrow's public hearing on R.B. 1098, the bill targeting the Catholic Church. That the other members of the Committee were not consulted about the cancellation highlights the hypocrisy of Lawlor and McDonald, given their claim that R.B. 1098 was about transparency and accountability. The cancellation is also a huge act of disrespect to the thousands who, on very short notice, arranged for buses and planned to take the day off from work in order to testify against the bill.
WE STILL NEED ALL OF YOU AT THE STATE CAPITOL TOMORROW, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH! The Legislators who introduced this bill and cancelled the public hearing will not get away with this. WE WILL BE HEARD!
From 10:00 a.m. until 11:30 a.m. Room 1A at the Legislative Office Building will be the Family Institute of Connecticut's religious liberty headquarters. Please stop by to pick up packets of information about R.B. 1098, the legislature, and what you can do to turn the tide for faith and family in Connecticut. (Click on our homepage for parking and directions.)
From 12:00 p.m. until 1:30 p.m. there will be a Rally Against R.B. 1098 on the North Steps of the Capitol (210 Capitol Avenue in Hartford). The Rally is sponsored by the Catholic Church and will include speeches by the state's Catholic bishops. Family Institute's members of every faith are also encouraged to attend. Archbishop Leroy Bailey of First Cathedral, who is about to undergo surgery in North Carolina, called FIC executive director Peter Wolfgang today and strongly urged involvement by all the churches.
Also beginning at 12 p.m. the House and Senate Republicans will go ahead with their own informational hearing on R.B. 1098. An informational hearing has less official importance than a public hearing, but is still a valuable opportunity. Here is the message sent to members and staff of the GOP: "On behalf of House and Senate Republicans I would like to inform you that the House and Senate Republican Offices will be going forward with an informational hearing on SB 1098,AN ACT MODIFYING CORPORATE LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS tomorrow starting at 12:00pm. The hearing will be held in room 2C and overflow rooms will be available. Sign up for the hearing will start at 9:30am in lobby of the Legislative Office Building. We will hear from Church officials first and then open it up for other public comment. We have invited and will be reaching out to anyone who has contacted us on this bill so we can let them know they will be heard on this issue tomorrow. We will also be inviting our Democrat colleagues to join us. We hope all Republican members can attend, especially our Republican Judiciary Committee members who were scheduled to be in attendance tomorrow anyway. If you have any questions please let us know. Thanks, Deb Hutton Chief Legal Counsel, House Republican Office, 860 240 8700."
At 7:30 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday March 11th, FIC executive director Peter Wolfgang will debate the head of the Connecticut chapter of NARAL, the pro-abortion group, at the Lincoln Theater on the University of Hartford's campus. Doors open at 7 p.m. If you are still in Hartford, we would welcome your attendance at this event.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
