Wally Parks, NHRA founder, 94. Long Live The King!

September 29, 2007
Wally Parks, the hot-rodder and entrepreneur who curbed drag racing on city streets by steering drivers onto legal racing strips and founded the National Hot Rod Assn., has died. He was 94.

Parks died Friday at St. Joseph Hospital in Burbank, the NHRA announced, without specifying the cause of death.

Today, the NHRA is the world's largest motor sports sanctioning body, best known for its professional race car drivers locked in 300-mph duels over a straight quarter-mile stretch of pavement in 23 national events held each year.

But the Glendora-based organization also has at the grass-roots level more than 80,000 members and 140 member tracks from coast to coast catering to drag racers and their lust for speed.

"Today is a sad day in the world of NHRA and the sport of drag racing," NHRA President Tom Compton said in a statement. "Words simply can't describe the immeasurable impact Wally has had on the sport he created and the millions of people's lives he touched along the way."

As a young man, Parks was one of those hot-rodders. Since the early 1930s, racing fans had gathered at impromptu exhibitions on dry lake beds, back roads, even city streets in Southern California.

Parks started out by racing a modified 1924 Chevrolet at what is now Rogers Dry Lake at Edwards Air Force Base. After joining the Road Runners car club in 1937, he was part of a group that formed the Southern California Timing Assn., one of the nation's first hot-rod car clubs.

"The SCTA began getting heat from government and the media over the incidents of racing on city and country streets, so some of us decided to start a campaign to get racers off the streets," Parks recalled a few years ago. "Back then, the clubs were racing on the dry lakes, but after World War II, we found that abandoned air strips, or ones used only part time, were available."

An unused runway at what is now John Wayne Airport in Orange County became the Santa Ana Drags, the first professional track to charge admission in Southern California. (A strip adjacent to a landing field in Goleta is recognized as the first drag strip of record in Southern California.)

There was no set distance for side-by-side races in those days. It was whatever was available, but Parks determined that a quarter-mile was best because that was about the distance suitable for racing on an airport runway, with enough room after the finish line to stop the cars. He felt the need for a specific distance so that times from any track in the country could be compared to others.

In 1947, Parks, Bob Petersen and Bob Lindsay established Hot Rod magazine in Los Angeles, with Parks as its first editor. Two years later, he gained nationwide recognition for his proposal to open the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah for speed trials, featuring drivers racing against a stop watch, not just against each other, and emphasizing quickness in addition to speed.

Using Hot Rod magazine as a forum, Parks promoted legal drag racing for enthusiasts of speed and power, as well as for a mainstream audience. In 1951, he formed the NHRA and became its first president.

Parks organized Safety Safaris led by NHRA field officers who traveled around the country showing members how to conduct a safe and standardized drag meet. They also met with local law enforcement to explain their goal of getting racing into a legitimate, controlled environment.

The NHRA's first official race was held at the L.A. County Fairgrounds in Pomona in 1953, and two years later the first national event was run in Great Bend, Kan. Drag racing became standardized, with cars in similar classifications racing a quarter-mile from a standing start. The rewards were modest.

"Just trophies," driver Don Prudhomme told a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter in 2001, on the NHRA's 50th anniversary. "We never even thought about making a living doing it, let alone it turning into what it has become. We never dreamed of that."

Nicknamed "the Snake," Prudhomme lined up against Tom "the Mongoose" McEwen and "Big Daddy" Don Garlits.

"There's no question that we had colorful characters," Parks said. "They were part of the foundation, the building of the popularity of drag racing. They developed the show business element of the sport."

By the time Parks left Hot Rod magazine in 1963 to work full time for the NHRA, the sanctioning body had organized in every state across the country. Drag racing fans were attracted to the personable drivers and the exotic cars that had been modified to their powerful essence.

"Being in the pit area is something you can't explain to people and you can't show them on TV," Parks told the Contra Costa Times in 2001. "You have to be there and feel the ground shake and see for yourself the magic of these vehicles."

As performances pushed the limits -- with speeds ticking above 300 mph and topped by Tony Schumacher's 337-mph run at Brainerd, Minn., in August 2005 -- sponsors signed on and TV networks struck deals.

Today, the NHRA trails only NASCAR in U.S. racing popularity. It has an established fan base attending races at stadiums with luxury boxes, its major corporate sponsors include Budweiser and Powerade, and ESPN has a contract to televise its events through 2011.

"It's still a little awesome to me," Parks told The Times in 2001. "None of us had any vision it was going to develop into what it is today. We were trying to create an activity for our particular interest in cars that would be safe and fun."

Parks came to love cars at an early age. Born Jan. 23, 1913, in Goltry, Okla., he was 8 years old when his family moved to California, settling in South Gate. At Jordan High School in Watts, his auto shop instructor had two Model T roadsters that students stripped down to hot rods as class projects.

After high school, Parks became a test driver at a General Motors assembly plant. During World War II, plant production was converted to military vehicles, and he tested tanks for the Army. He later served in the Philippines, where he toyed with a hot-rod Jeep in his free time.

After the war, he returned to work for GM as a road test driver and engineer until 1947. He also jumped right back into the hot-rod scene, becoming general manager of the SCTA, organizing races and car shows. Then it was on to Hot Rod magazine and the NHRA, where he was president until 1984.

A tall man with a deep voice and a statesman-like presence, Parks remained on the NHRA board of directors as its chairman emeritus until his death. He also was chairman of the Wally Parks NHRA Motorsports Museum in Pomona, where a 7-foot statue of him stands at the entrance.

He was drag racing's first inductee into the International Motorsports Hall of Fame in 1992 at Talladega, Ala., and the Motorsports Hall of Fame in 1993 at Novi, Mich.

Within the NHRA itself, Parks was the first recipient of the Don Prudhomme Award in 1994, given to an individual who made a profound impact on the growth of NHRA drag racing.

In 1957, Parks drove his Plymouth Hot Rod Special to a speed record for closed-bodied cars at Daytona Beach during NASCAR's Speed Weeks. Forty years later, at 83, he drove the same car over the Bonneville Salt Flats and the Rogers and El Mirage dry lakes in Southern California. "I did it just for the fun of it," he said. "And to prove to some folks that I could do it."

The '57 Plymouth was honored too. After being displayed at the Walter P. Chrysler Museum's exhibit saluting Chrysler's early Hemi engine performances, it was put in the NHRA museum that carries Parks' name.

Parks, a longtime resident of Glendale, is survived by two sons, Richard and David; five grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren. His wife, Barbara, a secretary at Hot Rod magazine and the NHRA, died in January 2006.

Services were pending.

THE HOUSE THAT WALLY BUILT

The years fly by, and you are eternally missed.

Twenty-one years ago today... Man, it seems like yesterday. Your genius will never be matched and your spirit inspires to this day.

We miss you.

Stutter stepping toward complete abolishment of the Patriot Act.

This is why the states hold the power, and some would-be dictator finally gets his balls in a vise, but not after making as many people suffer as humanly possible.

A federal judge in Oregon ruled yesterday that two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional, marking the second time in as many weeks that the anti-terrorism law has come under attack in the courts.

In a case brought by a Portland man who was wrongly detained as a terrorism suspect in 2004, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Patriot Act violates the Constitution because it "permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."

Click Me For The Full WaPo Write-up

End the push for Internet taxation, forever.

The existing federal moratorium on taxes on Internet access will expire on November 1, 2007. Legislation is currently being debated in both houses of the U.S. Congress - H.R. 743 and S. 156 - to avoid this expiration of the current Internet Tax Moratorium. Passage of the 'Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2007' is the crucial first step needed to ensure that Internet access is not subject to further taxes that would limit consumer choice, delay innovation, and often require consumers to pay more for service. Since 1998, Congress has determined that Internet access should not be subject to multiple state or local taxes, and also that electronic commerce should not be subject to unfair and discriminatory taxes. Wireless is an incredible and ever-evolving resource, as is the Internet, and increasingly many of America's 243 million wireless Americans are now accessing mobile Internet content while on-the-go. Congress should protect American wireless consumers once and for all, and share in a bi-partisan goal of expanding affordable Internet access to all Americans.

What can you do? You can Follow this link and educate yourself further. Just put your contact information in the form and click [Send A Letter]. By putting your zipcode in, it automatically sends a letter to your legislators. Nothing for you to write. No need to try to figure out how to get your point across to your legislators. It's too simple not to do.

You do enjoy surfing the net, right?

ETA: I just want you guys to have this link. It'll make it easier for you to send your message.

Remember me? I am your playbook, and I demand your attention.

America!!! Fuck Yeah!!!

The two posts preceding this one are on the topic of the amnesty that is trying to be piggy-backed on the defense bill, the following is also being piggy-backed on the defense bill, but it is the kind of legislation that we need to get behind.

Contact your Senators and make sure that they support Senate Amendment 2022: The restoration of habeas corpus.

That's right. The restoration of habeas corpus. Finally accepting that the Military Commissions Act was a clear attack on the Constitution, people are starting to attempt to recover some of our national honor and dignity.

Follow Me to Sen. Leahy's statement.

The following is excerpted from Sen. Leahy's Statement.

This is wrong. It is unconstitutional. It is un-American.

ETA: Sadly we could not defeat the filibuster today and this issue was squashed, continuing the subversion of the Constitution and any person's rights to face his accuser.

They have a DREAM... It's our nightmare.

This is a continuation of the 9.17.2007 post, addressing the immigration amnesty. I mean, come on, could you get any more blatant in your handing over the country? They don't even try to hide it anymore. Why? Because they know that you aren't paying attention. They know that football and American Idol have you occupied and that you'd rather eat glass than pay any attention to what's going on, let alone turning off the television and actually giving a shit.

WE HAVE EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, PEOPLE. IF WE ENFORCE WHAT IS ALREADY LAW, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR COMPLAINT, AND NO NEED FOR ANYTHING FURTHER.

A Sleeper Amnesty: Time to Wake Up from the DREAM Act
by Kris W. Kobach, D.Phil., J.D.
Backgrounder #2069

Just three months after the Senate immigration bill met its well-deserved end, amnesty advocates in the U.S. Congress resumed their efforts. Recently, Senator Richard Durbin (D–IL) announced on the Senate floor his intention to offer the Development, Relief, and Edu­cation for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act as an amend­ment to the defense authorization bill.

The DREAM Act (S. 774) is a nightmare. It is a mas­sive amnesty that extends to the millions of illegal aliens who entered the United States before the age of 16. The illegal alien who applies for this amnesty is immediately rewarded with "conditional" lawful per­manent resident (green card) status, which can be converted to a non-conditional green card in short order. The alien can then use his newly acquired status to seek green cards for the parents who brought him in illegally in the first place. In this way, it is also a back­door amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens who brought their children with them to the United States.

What is less well known about the DREAM Act is that it also allows illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition rates at public universities, discriminating against U.S. citizens from out of state and law-abiding foreign students. It repeals a 1996 federal law that pro­hibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens.

On its own, the DREAM Act never stood a chance of passing. Every scientific opinion poll on the subject has shown over 70 percent opposition to giving in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens.

Not surprisingly, the DREAM Act languished in committee for five years after it was first introduced in 2001—until the opportunity arose to hitch it to the Senate's "comprehensive" immigration bills of 2006 and 2007.

To understand just what an insult to the rule of law the DREAM Act is, it is important to look at the history behind it.

A Brief History of the In-State Tuition Debate
In September 1996, Congress passed the land­mark Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). Led by Lamar Smith (R– TX) in the House of Representatives and Alan Simp­son (R–WY) in the Senate, Congress significantly toughened the nation's immigration laws. To his credit, President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law.

Open-borders advocates in some states—most notably California—had already raised the possibil­ity of offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens who attend public universities. To prevent such a development, the IIRIRA's sponsors inserted a clearly worded provision that prohibited any state from doing so unless it provided the same dis­counted tuition to all U.S. citizens:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a polit­ical subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, dura­tion, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.

Members of Congress reasoned that no state would be interested in giving up the extra revenue from out-of-state students, so this provision would ensure that illegal aliens would not be rewarded with a taxpayer-subsidized college education. The IIRIRA's proponents never imagined that some states might simply disobey federal law.

States Subsidizing the College Education of Illegal Aliens
However, that is precisely what happened. In 1999, radical liberals in the California legislature pushed ahead with their plan to have taxpayers sub­sidize the college education of illegal aliens.

Assemblyman Marco Firebaugh (D) sponsored a bill that would have made illegal aliens who had resided in California for three years during high school eligible for in-state tuition rates at California community colleges and universities. In August 2000, the California legislature passed his bill. However, Democrat Governor Gray Davis vetoed the bill in September 2000, stating clearly in his veto message that the bill would violate federal law:

[U]ndocumented aliens are ineligible to receive postsecondary education benefits based on state residence…. IIRIRA would require that all out-of-state legal residents be eligible for this same benefit. Based on Fall 1998 enrollment figures…this legisla­tion could result in a revenue loss of over $63.7 million to the state.

Undeterred, Firebaugh introduced his bill again, and the California legislature passed it again. In 2002, facing flagging poll numbers and desperate to rally Hispanic voters to his cause, Governor Davis signed the bill.

Meanwhile, similar interests in Texas had suc­ceeded in enacting their own version of the bill. Since then, interest groups lobbying for illegal aliens have introduced similar legislation in most of the other states. The majority of state legislatures had the good sense to reject the idea, but eight states fol­lowed the examples of California and Texas, includ­ing some states in the heart of "red" America. Today, the 10 states that offer in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens are: California, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Washington. (The legislatures of Maryland and Connecticut passed similar bills in 2007, but the governors of those states rightly vetoed the bills.)

In most of these 10 states, the law was passed under cover of darkness because public opinion was strongly against subsidizing the college educa­tion of illegal aliens at taxpayer expense. The gover­nors even declined to hold press conferences or signing ceremonies heralding the new laws.

Not surprisingly, when voters themselves decide the question, a very different result occurs. In November 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 300, which expressly barred Arizona universities from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens— 71.4 percent voted in favor.

The American people realize the injustice of giving illegal aliens a taxpayer-subsidized education when out-of-state U.S. citizens and law-abiding foreign students have to pay the full cost of their education.

This strong public sentiment against giving ille­gal aliens access to in-state tuition rates is powerful enough to swing the results of an election. In Nebraska, the last of the 10 states to pass the law, that is exactly what happened. During the 2006 session, Nebraska's unicameral legislature passed an in-state tuition bill for illegal aliens. Governor Dave Heineman vetoed the bill because it violated federal law and was bad policy. In mid-April the legislature, which included an unusually large number of lame-duck Senators, overrode his veto by a vote of 30 to 19.

The veto would become an issue in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary. Heineman's opponent was the legendary University of Nebraska football coach and sitting U.S. Representative Tom Osborne, a political demigod in the Cornhusker State. Osborne had never received less than 82 percent of the vote in any election. Heineman, on the other hand, had not yet won a gubernatorial election. He became governor in 2005 when Gov­ernor Mike Johanns resigned to become U.S. Secre­tary of Agriculture.

Few believed that Heineman had a chance of winning the primary. He was behind in all of the polls. But then Coach Osborne fumbled. During a debate, he stated that he favored the idea of giving subsidized tuition to illegal aliens. Heineman seized the opportunity, and highlighted this difference of opinion between the candidates in his political ads. The voters reacted negatively to Osborn's position, and Heineman surged ahead in the final weeks of the race. He beat Osborn by 50 percent to 44 per­cent in the primary election on May 9, 2006. After the vote, both candidates said that the in-state tuition issue had been decisive.

State-Subsidized Lawbreaking
In all 10 states, the in-state tuition laws make for shockingly bad policy.

First, providing in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens amounts to giving them a taxpayer-financed education. In contrast, out-of-state students pay the full cost of their education. This gift to illegal aliens costs taxpayers a great deal of money at a time when tuition rates are rising across the country. For exam­ple, in California, a lawsuit on the matter has re­vealed the staggering cost to the taxpayer: The state pays more than $100 million annually to subsidize the college education of thousands of illegal aliens.

Second, these states are encouraging aliens to vio­late federal immigration law. Indeed, in some of the states, breaking federal law is an express prerequi­site to receive the benefit of in-state tuition rates. Those states expressly deny in-state tuition to legal aliens who have valid student visas. And in all 10 states, an alien is eligible for in-state tuition rates only if he remains in the state in violation of federal law and evades federal law enforcement. In this way states are directly rewarding this illegal behavior.

This situation is comparable to a state passing a law that rewards residents with state tax credits for cheating on their federal income taxes. These states are providing direct financial subsidies to those who violate federal law.

Third, not only are such laws unfair to aliens who follow the law, but they are slaps in the faces of law-abiding American citizens. For example, a student from Missouri who attends Kansas University and has always played by the rules and obeyed the law is charged three times the tuition charged to an alien whose very presence in the country is a violation of federal criminal law.

This gift to illegal aliens comes at a time when millions of U.S. citizens have had to mortgage their future to attend college. During 2002–2007, college costs rose 35 percent after adjusting for inflation. Two-thirds of college students now graduate with debt, and the amount of debt averages $19,200. In a world of scarce education resources, U.S. citizens should be first in line to receive a break on college costs—not aliens who break federal law.

Even if a good argument could be made for giv­ing in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens, the bot­tom line is that the policy violates federal law. These 10 states have brazenly cast aside the constraints imposed by Congress and the U.S. Constitution.

Pending Lawsuits
In July 2004, a group of U.S. citizen students from out of state filed suit in federal district court in Kansas to enjoin the state from providing in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens.They pointed out that Kansas is clearly violating federal law, as well as vio­lating the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Con­stitution by discriminating against them in favor of illegal aliens.

The district judge did not render any decision on the central questions of the case. Instead, he avoided the issues entirely by ruling that the plain­tiffs lacked a private right of action to bring their statutory challenge and lacked standing to bring their Equal Protection challenge. The case is cur­rently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Meanwhile, in December 2005, another group of U.S. citizen students filed a class-action suit in a California state court.They too maintain that the state is violating federal law and the U.S. Constitu­tion. Pursuant to a California civil rights statute, they are also seeking damages to compensate them for the extra tuition that they have paid above that charged to illegal aliens.

The DREAM Act Amnesty
Now, just when it looks as if U.S. citizens might vindicate their rights under federal law and the way­ward states might be held accountable, Senator Durbin and his pro-amnesty allies are seeking to offer the offending states a pardon.

The DREAM Act grants an unusual reprieve to the 10 states that have ignored federal law. The Act retroactively repeals the 1996 federal law that the 10 states violated, making it as though the provi­sions in the 1996 law never existed.

On top of this insult to the rule of law, the DREAM Act includes a massive amnesty, as noted above. This amnesty opens a wide path to citizen­ship for any alien who entered the country before the age of 16 and has been in the country for at least five years. The guiding notion seems to be "The longer you have violated federal law, the better."

Beyond that, all the alien needs is a high school diploma or a GED earned in the United States. If he can persuade an institution of higher education in the United States—any community college, technical school, or college—to admit him, that will suffice. Any illegal alien who meets these con­ditions (or who can produce fraudulent papers indicating that he meets the conditions) gets immediate legal status in the form of a "condi­tional" green card good for six years, according to Section 4(a)(1).

It is important to recognize just how sweeping this amnesty is.

* There is no upper age limit. Any illegal alien can walk into a U.S. Customs and Immigration Ser­vices office and declare that he is eligible. For example, a 45 year old can claim that he illegally entered the United States 30 years ago at the age of 15. There is no requirement that the alien prove that he entered the United States at the claimed time by providing particular documents. The DREAM Act's Section 4(a) merely requires him to "demonstrate" that he is eligible—which in practice could mean simply making a sworn statement to that effect. Thus, it is an invitation for just about every illegal alien to fraudulently claim the amnesty.

* The alien then has six years to adjust his status from a conditional green card holder to a non-conditional one. To do so, he need only complete two years of study at an institution of higher edu­cation. If the alien has already completed two years of study, he can convert to non-conditional status immediately (and use his green card as a platform to bring in family members). As an alternative to two years of study, he can enlist in the U.S. military and spend two years there. This provision allows Senator Durbin to claim that the DREAM Act is somehow germane to a defense authorization bill.

* An illegal alien who applies for the DREAM Act amnesty gets to count his years under "condi­tional" green card status toward the five years needed for citizenship. (Section 5(e)) On top of that, the illegal alien could claim "retroactive benefits" and start the clock running the day that the DREAM Act is enacted. (Section 6) In combi­nation, these two provisions put illegal aliens on a high-speed track to U.S. citizenship—moving from illegal alien to U.S. citizen in as little as five years. Lawfully present aliens, meanwhile, must follow a slower path to citizenship.

* It would be absurdly easy for just about any ille­gal alien—even one who does not qualify for the amnesty—to evade the law. According to Section 4(f) of the DREAM Act, once an alien files an application—any application, no matter how ridiculous—the federal government is prohib­ited from deporting him. Moreover, with few exceptions, federal officers are prohibited from either using information from the application to deport the alien or sharing that information with another federal agency, under threat of up to $10,000 fine. Thus, an alien's admission that he has violated federal immigration law cannot be used against him—even if he never had any chance of qualifying for the DREAM Act amnesty in the first place.

The DREAM Act also makes the illegal aliens eli­gible for federal student loans and federal work-study programs—another benefit that law-abiding foreign students cannot receive—all at taxpayer expense. A consistent theme emerges: Illegal aliens are treated much more favorably than aliens who fol­low the law. There is no penalty for illegal behavior.

Conclusion
In addition to being a dream for those who have broken the law, the DREAM Act raises an even larger issue regarding the relationship between states and the federal government. The 10 states have created a 21st century version of the nullification move­ment—defying federal law simply because they do not like it. In so doing, they have challenged the basic structure of the republic. The DREAM Act would pardon this offense and, in so doing, encour­age states to defy other federal law in the future.

One thing that we have learned in the struggle to enforce our nation's immigration laws is that states cannot be allowed to undermine the efforts of the federal government to enforce the law. Only if all levels of government are working in concert to uphold the rule of law can it be fully restored.

Ready for another round of "Let's slip the immigration bill through,"?

It's time to warm up the fax machine, email, and telephone. Your representatives think that you've forgotten about the immigration bill, and have decided to slip it to you a little at a time. Just what we expected.


Immigration Again [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

From Congressional Quarterly:

Democrats Try to Revive Immigration Provisions

By Michael Sandler and Bart Jansen, CQ Staff

Senate Democrats plan to use the defense authorization bill next week to revive a provision from the failed immigration overhaul that would put some children of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is working to bring to the floor another provision from the immigration bill (S 1639) that would create a guest worker program for up to 1.5 million agricultural workers (S 340).

Both efforts are likely to rekindle the kind of heated debate that engulfed the Senate when the immigration overhaul measure was being considered in June.

Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., is expected to offer an amendment to the defense bill (HR 1585) that would attach legislation (S 774) to allow children of illegal immigrants who entered the United States before age 16 and lived here at least five years to gain conditional legal status and eventual citizenship if they attend college or join the military for at least two years.

Durbin said Wednesday he is working on the amendment and contacting colleagues to gauge support.

“The Department of Defense has endorsed this, and I think it would be of value,” he said in an interview.

Durbin said Feinstein is searching for the right vehicle. One possibility could be the upcoming five-year farm bill, which is expected to reach the Senate floor next month.

Injecting immigration into the defense debate could be a risky move, with Republicans likely to accuse Democrats of tying up legislation needed to help U.S. troops.

Moreover, even supporters of more lenient treatment of illegal immigrants have expressed doubts that any such measure could pass after the crushing blow it suffered June 28, when proponents failed to get even a majority of votes to end debate on the comprehensive bill.

Durbin said he’s aware of such reservations, but he suggested that waiting until next year, when election-year politics will be in full bloom, would make it even more difficult to act.

He noted that senators from both parties had approached him immediately after the broader bill fell and encouraged him to move forward with the education legislation, known as the DREAM Act.

“I think there is room here for senators who opposed the comprehensive bill to still support the DREAM Act,” Durbin said.

Among those working with him to advance the measure will be Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sponsor of the broader immigration bill. An aide to Kennedy said Durbin’s amendment is relevant to the defense bill because it would offer an incentive for children seeking legal status to join the military.

“There will be a strong effort to get this done this year,” the aide said.

Opponents at the Ready

Frank Sharry, executive director for the National Immigration Forum, which lobbied for the broad bill earlier this year, said that having an alternative strategy for passing highly contentious legislation is a necessity in such an evenly divided Congress.

“Most legislation does get done as riders on appropriations or authorization bills,” Sharry said. “That’s how it happens. This is really the way business gets done.”

The tactic of picking out potentially popular provisions of the immigration bill has already yielded some success.

The Senate in July voted, 89-1, to attach a provision to the Homeland Security spending bill (HR 2638) that provided $3 billion in emergency spending for border security.

But the Democratic proposals are not likely to enjoy that kind of support.

Indeed, one of the harshest critics of the comprehensive legislation called a news conference Wednesday to voice his objections to the plans to breathe new life into it.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said the proposals could put more than 4 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship. That is about one-third of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who would have benefited from the comprehensive immigration overhaul bill he helped kill earlier this year, Sessions said.

LET'S START A WAR!!! The 60 Minutes you weren't supposed to see.

There's some Ron Paul stuff at the end of this item. You're either pro Ron Paul or you're not, but that's not the issue of this post. The 60 Minutes segment speaks for itself.

Remember when I went on about Iron Maiden earlier in the year?

Whoa to you of earth and sea,
for the devil sends the beast with wrath
because he knows that time is short
let him who have understanding
recon the number of the beast
for it is a human number
its number
is six-hundred-and-sixty-six

Shit is about to get spiritual!

I'm not sure exactly where I'm going to have to fly, drive, hitch-hike, or crawl to, but you can bet your undead ass that I'm going to be there.

Even if the tickets are priced that the astronomical prices of the fucking Van Halen tix.

The 'SOMEWHERE BACK IN TIME' World Tour 2008 will be in three sections, starting in February and March 2008 with the first leg encompassing major concerts in 20 selected cities on five continents in seven weeks including India, Japan, North America, Central and South America, and, of course, Australia, opening in Perth on Feb 4 and continuing through Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane.

To tie in with forthcoming 2008 releases on DVD of the classic 'LIVE AFTER DEATH' and 'MAIDEN ENGLAND' concert videos (more details coming soon) this tour, aptly entitled 'SOMEWHERE BACK IN TIME', will revisit the band's history by focusing almost entirely on the 80's in both choice of songs played and the stage set, which will be based around the legendary Egyptian Production of the 1984-85 'Powerslave Tour'. This will arguably be the most elaborate and spectacular show the band have ever presented, and will include some key elements of their Somewhere In Time tour of 1986/7, such as the Cyborg Eddie.

Apparently the end time is near, folks. I never thought that I'd ever get to see anything close to the Powerslave show, ever again. To hear that we not only get the Powerslave set, but Eddie from the SIT tour. It's about as close to rapture as you're ever going to get.

I'll be putting together an mP3 player for the IRGM MySpace as the time draws neigh.

In the meantime, go visit Iron Maiden dot com for some kick-ass schwag and news straight from the abyss.

Lions and Tigers and Bears... OH MY!!!

See that image up there? Keep coming back to it in the coming days. In four days it will be the 6th anniversary of 9/11. Now, you know me, I don't like to use 9/11 as an example for anything, and even more so, I despise the media and the White House for using 9/11, Sept. 11, and any other reference, when attempting to justify the further usurpation of the Constitution.

Here's the rub. Osama, is supposed to magically make a State of the Union to the American people on 9-11-07. Convenient, huh? The propaganda machine is running overtime and extra oilers had to be hired just so this machine wouldn't burn itself to the ground. The machine is fabricating fear and apprehension in order for you to support anything that they may say or do. You'll be teary eyed in remembrance, you'll be afraid that something terrible is going to happen, because that bad man bin Laden is making another speech. Never mind the fact that we haven't heard from Osama in years. But hey, his showing up on the anniversary of a crime that he's been accused of and you should be afraid, right?


Never mind that after he had served his purpose and we were in the full run up to the invasion of Iraq that Mr. Bush stated, when asked about bin Laden, "I don't know where he is. I don't know and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." OK, whatever you say. Seems that we're making a pretty large fuss over a man who isn't important, and not our priority. Oh, wait, damn... He wasn't important then, because we had used him as a straw man to create fear and hatred in the hearts of the American people. He wasn't our priority because we put him back into the box to be used another day. Well, that day is coming up folks. Your about to get a dose of bin Laden with your breakfast, lunch, and diner. Why? Because you don't really buy the, "Let's invade IRAN!!!" line... Yet. You have to be stormed in on during the middle of the night by cardboard bin Ladens in order to placate you and send you back to your remotes and the latest episode of whateverthefuck you watch.

Remember, the New York Times told you earlier this week that you should get over 9/11 already, damn. You need to let go of the past and just stop worrying about what happened.

You just keep your eye on that image up there. And while you're looking at it, take notes on the complete line of shit that you're being spoon fed.

Just fucking pay attention and stop toeing the party line. There is no party anymore. Anyone who holds on to the party line and tells you that they'd be glad to give up some freedoms to keep the lifestyle that they currently enjoy is a fucking five-gallon-bucket full more dangerous than a straw man put up by the propaganda machine in order to put doubt and fear in your hearts. Osama? The last bin Laden video was in October 2004, shortly before the U.S. presidential elections. Convenient? As Buggs would say, "Meh, could be."

Oh, and by the way, Michael Chertoff says that your 'unequivocally' safer now than you were before 9/11. Now, don't you feel better? What will make you feel even more safe? Grounding every single USAF plane that is tasked for the protection of the US should do it, right? When? Sept. 14, 2007. Look that one up on your own.

In the words of a couple good men:

"Good night, and good luck."

Just want to give a shout-out!!

To all my fans at the Los Alamos National Lab, National Security Section, I hope you enjoy my blog. It's not much, but I occasionally use some big words like liberty, Constitution, freedom, Bill of Rights, and such. If you need a primer, I'll be glad to help.

Seeing that I've made the list, can I use you guys as references when Austin PD does my background check in the near future?

Have a great day, and if there are any topics that you would like me to touch upon, please do not hesitate to ask. I'll be glad to write on a topic that concerns you.

I'll let you guys mull it over.

To add... I think that it's cool that you guys did a direct Google search for Independent Rebellion to get to my blog. If you need any graphic design work or maybe some machining done, don't hesitate to ask.

Oh, and please come back tomorrow. I'd like nothing more than to see you guys as returning visitors.

Then again, you could just be a guy(s) that I hang out with on other areas of the Intarweb. In that case, someone tell Darren that I'll likely be sending my information this week.

Cya!

Yeah, we have to pull out of Iraq... Because we're going to Iran.

This goes along with my 8.28.2007 post on Iran.

It's better if you don't get me started. Just read the link, please.

IRAN OR BUST!!

What the fuck?!!!!

It seems that the train has derailed and the wheels are flying off in every direction. This is a bit of a recap. I've been busy.

Q So you need those Australian troops there.

THE PRESIDENT: We need all our coalition partners. And I would hope that -- and I understand, look, everybody has got their own internal politics. My only point is, is that whether it be Afghanistan or Iraq, we've got more work to do. We, the free world, has got more work to do. And I believe those of us who live in liberty have a responsibility to promote forms of government that deal with what causes 19 kids to get on airplanes to kill 3,000 students.

Yeah, you read that right. The President of the United States now states that the 3000 people killed on 9/11 were students, and the alleged hijackers were "kids". Kids?

I know, you're saying, "Wrench, you've got to be kidding! We know that you're down on the administration and pretty much any Republican or Democrat who violates the Constitution, but this is insane!" Hey people, I couldn't make this shit up.

FOLLOW THE LINK... IT'S THE THIRD QUESTION DOWN

Ok, on to other items that need to be addressed.

Anyone who has spent more than 45 minutes in the 21st century knows that information, especially the electronic kind, not only does not get lost, but cannot be destroyed. Regardless of that knowledge, the White House says that you're all dipshits who have no idea how these magic computer thingies work and that once an item is lost/deleted, there is no recovering it.

Oh, and by the way, "Hey America, it's none of your fucking business who the company was who handled the information, because if you knew the name of the company, you could subpoena their records and actually find the missing stuff that we told you magically disappeared and cannot be retrieved! Now, go fuck yourself!"

LINK TO ABC ARTICLE ON HOW STUPID THE WHITE HOUSE THINKS YOU ARE

NEXT!!

"You're suing us because we violated your rights? Well, tough shit, Mr. Bush says that your law suits and your legal rights don't count, because we're the next in line to get immunity from you, the American people, and we don't have to answer to you or your government officials! Now, go fuck yourself!"

LINK TO MSNBC ARTICLE ILLUSTRATING THE QUICKEST WAY TO SHUT YOU UP

As if it isn't clear, there is a running theme to my post today. I'm not sure how many people actually read my blog, but I urge you, even if there is just one of you, to not take my word for anything, take my links and see for yourself.

What do you mean there's a war on? With who...? Really?

Remember back in the day when we were going to war because we were attacked and we would not rest until we found the bad guys, al Qaeda/Taliban/Osama bin Laden, that attacked us, and how we would hunt them to the ends of the Earth and punish anyone who was harboring them?

No?

Maybe you'll remember that Saddam, not bin Laden (because he isn't a threat or interest), was linked directly to al Qaeda and 9/11 and how we had to invade Iraq to dispose of Saddam and his WMDs before we were attacked again, by Iraq and al Qaeda?

No?

It's ok, apparently no one else does either. Seems that the whole(new) reason that we invaded Iraq so that we could be at the central front in the fight against he Sunni Muslim extremism of the Al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Shiite extremism fueled by Iran.

Don't believe me?

CLICK THIS LINK TO BE LIED TO AGAIN.

Oh, and get ready for...

Wait for it...

Ready for more Fearmongering Propaganda?

Wait...

!!!!!'Nuclear Holocaust'!!!!!

That's right friends, prepare to be misled, fearmongered, and propagandized into complacency/lock-step, the dreaded fear of a nuclear winter has been brought back, just for you, so that you can feel safe, while the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is pulled out from under your feet like a table-cloth.
But, there's a bright side. There's all kinds of new American Idol and America's Greatest Dipshits lined up to keep you exactly where they want you. Oh, and be a good American damnit!!! Go buy something, because that's exactly what the terrorists don't want you to do.

Buy a house, buy a car, buy anything that will make a feeble attempt to stabilize a crippled economy, because Islamic Fundamentalists want to disrupt you as you go to Best Buy to buy that HD Plasma Wide Screen Flat Panel.

Don't want a National ID? DHS says, FUCK YOU!!

In a thinly veiled attempt at circumventing Congress and not making a public scene, the Department of Homeland Imprisonment, ahem... Security is working with, so far, a couple of state houses to implement a new ID.

Where's the harm in that? Seeing as how Congress is against a National ID, because WE THE PEOPLE, are against a National ID, that is the harm in that. How does this equate to a National ID? If DHS implements it in all, or a majority, of states, then what we effectively have is a National ID. Once that happens, Congress will bend to the will of DHS and the state houses because, "Well, it's already in place in most of the US; might as well push it through." And just like that... You've been tagged with a National ID.

Oh, and ummm, that's the MARK OF THE BEAST for you end-time/Revelations types. For the rest of us, it's total control of personal information/finances.

No, your Social Security Card is not a form of ID. Have you ever read your SSC?

links? Oh hell yes, I have links.

DHS and Vermont get together for a special ID.

DHS and Arizona get together for a special ID.

And before you ask... Yeah, you're next.

The Ramblings of a Coward or How to Piss on the Honor of Heroes

I don't think that the man that presumes the Presidency of the United States of America has felt the full brunt of his outrageous blunder. "Blunder?", you ask? In the not so distant past Mr. Bush made a clear and concise separation between the conflict in Iraq and the Vietnam conflict. Yesterday, however, he stepped on his dick and stated that Iraq is like Vietnam. More to the point, he also stated that Vietnam could have been won if we had stayed longer. What kind of horse-shit is he attempting to peddle here?

I take great offense to this man even mouthing the word, "Vietnam", let alone speaking out out with any type of authority on the subject. Mr. Bush, unlike you, my family fought in Vietnam. My family bled in Vietnam. My family has been rendered asunder by the Vietnam conflict. But you see... Not just my family, EVERYONE who was ever close to my family gave to the Vietnam conflict. The Vietnam conflict touched all sides of my family. Even my immediate family paid the price of Vietnam.

I'm reading all that I can at this time on this topic (not Vietnam, but the topic of this post), and I am still struggling to get my head around it. First, what good can come of comparing the Vietnam conflict to the conflict in Iraq? How can it help the country? How can we reconcile Iraq when we haven't reconciled Vietnam? We're still recovering remains from Vietnam, for Christ's sake. How can you hope to further the cause of Iraq by comparing it to one of the darkest times in your country's short history? What hope are you giving the families of those deployed to Iraq by making such a comparison? Hell, how can you hope to maintain the morale of the deployed troops by making such a comparison? It doesn't matter if he said, "Would be like.." or, "Is like...". What would he know of what it would be like? He's never fought in a military conflict in his life. He has no experience, save that of what other's provide him with. He has no catalog of action from which to draw from in order to justify his speaking out of turn.

Again, it seems that the big kids table is not the place for Mr. Bush. But then again, those weren't his words at all. If he hadn't been reading from a pre-written speech, that someone else wrote, we'd be getting words like "Strategery", "Conflictation", "Quagmirification", and any other make believe word that any number of four-year-olds can concoct.

A good friend of mine once said that we are supposed to be nice to little kids and dumb animals. I don't suffer dumb animals.

Oh... Links to the articles or speech from Mr. Bush? Look 'em up.

Edited to add:Michael Vick is the new Paris Hilton. Fuck Vick. Send him away like the embarrassment that he is and forget about him, after making an example out of him in the justice system of course.

Is the next presidency already being setup?

I understand that the current administration has a full time job with covering their asses and making themselves unaccountable, but damn, when are the American people going to say, "Alright!! You people have to answer for some of this shit!"?

The following WaPo article tells of yet another OFF-LIMITS policy that has been ushered in.

HEY, AMERICA!!! KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF OUR BUSINESS!!

Want to know how to stifle the 1st Amendment? Read on.

In the following ABC news article you will learn of a couple who were protesting by wearing t-shirts in 2004. You may or may not remember. You can catch up by reading the link. The important thing here is that I have a link for you to click that will take you to a document that has been created to stifle your 1st Amendment rights, completely.

Here's the link to the article.

More importantly: Here's the link to the document. Oh, and ummmm, we're not supposed to be in possession of this particular document. Hmmmm... I wonder why?

There just aren't enough ass kickings to go 'round.

Is there no end to the complete dumbass of main stream media talking heads.

These fucking people shouldn't be allowed to speak, let alone speak to the nation as if they have any real input.

This silly cunt, Erin Burnett, says that if China stops making poisoned food or non-lead painted toys, that the prices at Wal-Mart are going to go up, and that the American people don't want that. Oh yeah, and China's our best friend right now. What a smoking load of horse shit. Are you people out there not even paying attention to the shit that you watch on t.v.? Or is the idea of not thinking like those around you, or being an outcast that much of a problem for you.

I say we ship this silly bitch to China so she can see who her friends are.

Wanna see something cool?

VAN HALEN AND DAVID LEE ROTH ANNOUNCE NORTH AMERICAN TOUR
HISTORIC CONCERT TOUR MARKS FIRST OF ITS KIND FOR VAN HALEN IN 22 YEARS
LOS ANGELES, CA -- August 13, 2007

Beginning this September, in what promises to be the most exciting live tour this year, Van Halen will embark on a national concert tour throughout the U.S. and Canada with its original lead singer David Lee Roth for the first time in 22 years.

Considered by fans and media alike as one of the most highly anticipated tours in rock and roll history, Roth, guitarist Eddie Van Halen and drummer Alex Van Halen will perform with Eddie's son, Wolfgang who joins the line-up as the band's bass player. Van Halen and Roth have not performed or recorded together since 1984's classic multi-platinum album 1984 and subsequent tour, making this tour truly a historic event.

25 dates in all were announced today for the tour which is slated for a September 27th kick-off in Charlotte, North Carolina. Tickets for select dates on the tour go on sale beginning on Saturday, August 18th and are available on www.LiveNation.com. A complete list of confirmed dates can be found HERE. The Van Halen tour is being produced by Live Nation. Individuals who have the Citi® / AAdvantage® card, the official credit card of the tour, will be offered access to purchase preferred seats to all U.S. shows.

Fans can enjoy the ultimate Van Halen experience including concert pre-show parties, backstage access, premium seating and more. For additional details go to www.ILoveAllAccess.com.

Fans are encouraged to also check in at www.Van-Halen.com or www.DavidLeeRoth.com for additional information.

Van Halen remains one of the most important and influential bands of all time. Formed in Los Angeles in 1974, the band quickly won a loyal hometown fan base with their electrifying live shows. From the moment they released their self-titled 1978 debut album, Van Halen shook the foundations of rock, thanks largely to Roth's peerless showmanship, Eddie Van Halen's revolutionary guitar virtuosity and their songwriting abilities. It changed rock music forever.

The band's first album proved one of the biggest selling rock debuts, with key tracks like "Eruption," "Running with the Devil," "Jamie's Cryin'," "You Really Got Me" and "Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love" leading the way. The next year, the band followed up with Van Halen II, which included the hit "Dance the Night Away."

Subsequent albums like Women and Children First (1980), Fair Warning (1981) and Diver Down (1982), along with worldwide touring, solidified the band's reputation for innovative and unparalleled live performances. Classic Van Halen tracks from the early 80's include "Everybody Wants Some," "Unchained", "And The Cradle Will Rock", "Beautiful Girls", "Mean Street" and "Somebody Get Me A Doctor" just to name a few.

With their sixth album, released in, and titled 1984, Van Halen rose to stratospheric heights. Recorded at Eddie Van Halen's 5150 Studios, the multi-platinum smash yielded one of Van Halen's signature hits, "Jump," which remained #1 on the Billboard charts for an astounding five weeks straight. Other hits from the album include "Panama," "Hot For Teacher" and "I'll Wait."

The band's record of achievement is hard to top. Presented with two Diamond Award RIAA Certified Status' for their albums Van Halen and 1984, Van Halen joins an elite short list of two time Diamond Award honorees in the history of the music industry. The Diamond Award is presented to an artist for album sales of 10 million or more units. They are also in the Guinness Book of World Records for having the most #1 hits on Billboard's Mainstream Rock chart than any other band in history.

Inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall of Fame in March of this year, Van Halen has produced a treasured body of work that fans will admire for decades to come.


Sooooo, who's going to Cleveland with me in October? WOOT!!!! Fucking Diamond Dave baby!!! I haven't seen Van Halen since 1984 and damned if it ain't about time to get "Unchained".

While you were sleeping, in front of the t.v., we got sold out.

I've been following this for sometime, actually since last year, but it's about to come into law, and I figured that you'd like to see it. If you don't know what "Posse Comitatus" is, look it up, you'll wish that you had sooner.

While you're at it, maybe you should take a look at how close martial law might be.

Keep in mind that the whole reason that you're reading the rest of this post is so I can say, "I told you so, you pathetic, complacent, fucks!"

Congress passed a controversial bill which grants the President the right to commandeer Federal or even state National Guard Troops and use them inside the United States. This bill, entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), contains a provision, (Section 1076) which allows the President to:

“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to...

1. restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order;
2. suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...” [3]

Senator Patrick Leahy and others have condemned Section 1076 because it effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. 331-335) and gives the President the legal ability to define under what conditions martial law may be declared. [4]

H.R.5122 was signed into law by President Bush on October 17, 2006, and will take effect October 1, 2007 (unless an earlier effective date is established by regulation). "On the same day, Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which abolishes the legal protection of habeas corpus, authorizes the president to detain and jail anyone (even US citizens) without charge and subject them to harsh interrogation that may or may not involve torture." [5]

President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.

Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."

For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.

The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.

An article on "recent contract awards" in a recent issue of the slick, insider "Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International" reported that "global engineering and technical services powerhouse KBR [Kellog, Brown & Root] announced in January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division was awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency." "With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term," the report notes, "the contract is to be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," "for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) - in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The report points out that "KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton." (3) So, in addition to authorizing another $532.8 billion for the Pentagon, including a $70-billion "supplemental provision" which covers the cost of the ongoing, mad military maneuvers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, the new law, signed by the president in a private White House ceremony, further collapses the historic divide between the police and the military: a tell-tale sign of a rapidly consolidating police state in America, all accomplished amidst ongoing U.S. imperial pretensions of global domination, sold to an "emergency managed" and seemingly willfully gullible public as a "global war on terrorism."

Make no mistake about it: the de-facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both," is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will.

Unfortunately, this past week, the president dealt posse comitatus, along with American democracy, a near fatal blow. Consequently, it will take an aroused citizenry to undo the damage wrought by this horrendous act, part and parcel, as we have seen, of a long train of abuses and outrages perpetrated by this authoritarian administration.

Despite the unprecedented and shocking nature of this act, there has been no outcry in the American media, and little reaction from our elected officials in Congress. On September 19th, a lone Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) noted that 2007's Defense Authorization Act contained a "widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order WITHOUT the consent of the nation's governors."

Senator Leahy went on to stress that, "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders."

A few weeks later, on the 29th of September, Leahy entered into the Congressional Record that he had "grave reservations about certain provisions of the fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill Conference Report," the language of which, he said, "subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law." This had been "slipped in," Leahy said, "as a rider with little study," while "other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."

In a telling bit of understatement, the Senator from Vermont noted that "the implications of changing the (Posse Comitatus) Act are enormous". "There is good reason," he said, "for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy. We fail our Constitution, neglecting the rights of the States, when we make it easier for the President to declare martial law and trample on local and state sovereignty."

Senator Leahy's final ruminations: "Since hearing word a couple of weeks ago that this outcome was likely, I have wondered how Congress could have gotten to this point. It seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the Conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it."

The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact.

The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions," authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."

In other words, the law facilitates the "transfer" of the newest in so-called "crowd control" technology and other weaponry designed to suppress dissent from the Pentagon to local militarized police units. The new law builds on and further codifies earlier "technology transfer" agreements, specifically the 1995 DOD-Justice Department memorandum of agreement achieved back during the Clinton-Reno regime.(4)

It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq, and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections, the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect, declare himself dictator.

Counting your vote.

I've watched this video over and over in disbelief. Every time I see it, I get that much more pissed off. I know that it's two hours, and that I lose most of you after 15 seconds, but I would appreciate it if you set aside the time and watched this one. It just may change your life, or at least your perception. It also is relevant to the present time, what with the Iowa straw-poll being botched and all.

While I can no longer embed the video due to the embed code being pulled from Google, and the quality not being good enough, the following link works and the video is of excellent quality. We'll keep putting it up until I can burn a copy of my own and upload it to my server.

Click Me To Watch The Video

Wonder what happened to change Dick's mind? Money?

In 1994, Dick Cheney gave all the right reasons for why we shouldn't have occupied Baghdad when my compatriots and I were there in 1990-91. Keep in mind, he was the SECDEF at the time. Short but sweet.

How we have arrived at our current location in time.

How much of this do you know? If you don't know all of it, you should be ashamed, and you also have nothing to bitch about, ever.

Enjoy.

Digging through even more mounds of bullshit.

So, while surfing around and looking for those who would circumvent or stifle the Constitution, I found this little morsel that could effectively end our 2nd Amendment rights. I have been busy as of late and failed to disseminate this information before the initial deadline.

Make sure you're sitting down when you click this link

What does all that mean? You ask, while rubbing your eyes.

Here's what the NSSF(National Shooting Sports Foundation) has to say:

"As written, the proposed rule would force the closure of nearly all ammunition manufacturers and force the cost of small arms ammunition to skyrocket beyond what the market could bear—essentially collapsing our industry. This is not an exaggeration. The cost to comply with the proposed rule for the ammunition industry, including manufacturer, wholesale distributors and retailers, will be massive and easily exceed $100 million. For example, ammunition and smokeless propellant manufacturers would have to shut down and evacuate a factory when a thunderstorm approached and customers would not be allowed within 50 feet of any ammunition (displayed or otherwise stored) without first being searched for matches or lighters."

LINK TO THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

Luckily, the actions of many have allowed us to spread this information further, and hopefully, squash this thinly veiled attempt.

Here's some information from Front Sight Magazine's editor:Proposed OSHA Regulation Threatens Firearm and Ammunition Industry

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the government agency charged with assuring the safety and health of America's workers, is proposing a regulatory rule ( REG LINK )affecting the manufacturing, transportation and storage of small arms ammunition, primers and smokeless propellants.

As written, the proposed rule would force the closure of nearly all ammunition manufacturers and force the cost of small arms ammunition to skyrocket beyond what the market could bear—essentially collapsing our industry. This is not an exaggeration. The cost to comply with the proposed rule for the ammunition industry, including manufacturer, wholesale distributors and retailers, will be massive and easily exceed $100 million. For example, ammunition and smokeless propellant manufacturers would have to shut down and evacuate a factory when a thunderstorm approached and customers would not be allowed within 50 feet of any ammunition (displayed or otherwise stored) without first being searched for matches or lighters.
NSSF and SAAMI have already had a preliminary meeting with OSHA officials to begin the process of explaining to them the major problems this proposed rule presents for all levels of the firearms and ammunition industry. Furthermore, NSSF and SAAMI are each seeking a 60 day extension of the public comment period (currently scheduled to expire July 12).

NSSF is urging all retailers to contact OSHA directly and request a 60-day extension of the public comment period. Retailers should inform OSHA that the proposed rule constitutes a "significant regulatory action" as defined in Executive Order 12866 (1993) Section 3(f)(1) in that it will clearly "adversely affect in a material way" the retail sector of the firearms and ammunition industry, productivity, competition and jobs and that the annual compliance cost for all retailers of ammunition will far exceed $100 million dollars.

Click this link for a template letter. If you choose to draft your own letter, the reference line must read as follows:

RE: Docket No. OSHA–2007–0032
Request to Extend Public Comment Period and Request for Hearing on
"Significant Regulatory Action" as Defined in Executive Order 12866
Please fax the letter to: 202-693-1648 (include the docket number and Department of Labor/OSHA on the cover sheet and in the reference section of your letter).
Please e-mail the letter by visiting: this site and following the submission instructions.

There's a lot there, and not a lot of time to act. I urge each and every one of you to write your legislators and pressure them into killing this back door attack on the 2nd Amendment.

Through the efforts of NSSF, SAAMI, NRA-ILA etc., OSHA has granted a 60-day extension to submit comments on this issue. The new deadline is September 10, but do not delay! Be heard. There are plenty of form letters, etc. to send to your congressman and OSHA directly.

Want to lower the price of gas? Contact your legislators.

While this legislation is awaiting debate, I urge you to contact your leadership and ask them to not only support this bill, but to do everything in their power to make sure that it happens.

I'll post an article from Slate about this yet to be debated bill, but if you do not contact your leadership, then this bill may never even see the light of day, as many are not only aware of it, but may never be able to hear/vote on it. Following the article will be a link to the actual bill.

Slate article follows:

Go NOPEC!Congress takes on the biggest, baddest cartel of all.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007, at 8:02 PM ET

Longtime readers of this column may recall my interest in a lawsuit filed in 2000 by Carl and Debbie Prewitt, a married couple who ran a Texaco station in Birmingham, Ala. The Prewitts were naïve enough to think that the United States might care to enforce the Sherman and Clayton antitrust acts against an international conspiracy to fix the price of oil. The conspiracy, which began in 1960 and continues to this day, is called the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. An appellate judge shut down the Prewitts in 2003, just as another judge had, in a similar lawsuit two decades earlier, shut down the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Far from taking on OPEC, the U.S. government actually protects OPEC from citizens who try to compensate for the Justice Department's peculiar blind spot. Think about that the next time you shell out $60 to fill up your tank.

OPEC would like you to believe that it's an international agency dedicated to world peace and economic development, like the United Nations or the World Bank. But of course, OPEC is a cartel. Cartels are illegal in the United States, and in recent years the Justice department has busted international cartels for computer memory chips, vitamins, and rubber, all of them operating in secret. OPEC conducts its price-fixing out in the open. Its name adorns a public building in Vienna! The United States accepts this mockery in silence. Indeed, during the formal American occupation of Iraq (prior to the establishment of a sovereign, if shaky, Iraqi government), the United States itself went native and became, via the Coalition Provisional Authority, an actual participant in OPEC. (Incredibly, re-establishing Iraq as a member of OPEC is listed proudly in the CPA's in-house compilation of its accomplishments.) The only reason America's price-fixing lark never became much of a story is that Iraq's postwar oil production, beset by sabotage, poor management, and insurgent attacks, never progressed beyond 40 percent of capacity. Today, at 1.9 million barrels a day, Iraqi oil production remains below the 2.6 million barrels a day, judged "erratic" by the U.S. Treasury Department, that Saddam's dictatorship was extracting immediately prior to the U.S. invasion. If, as this country's harshest critics maintain, we invaded Iraq for its oil, we've got embarrassingly little of the black sticky stuff to show for it.

The American legal system's bizarre tolerance of the OPEC oil cartel has long irritated Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., who around the time the Prewitts filed their OPEC lawsuit undertook to remove any legal doubt as to whether OPEC was susceptible to U.S. antitrust enforcement. That doubt, more imaginary than real, arises from whether OPEC's member nations enjoy "sovereign immunity" because they are countries, not private companies. "Sovereign immunity" is a red herring because OPEC itself is not a sovereign nation. And anyway, Kohl has pointed out, "The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act … already recognizes that the 'commercial' activity of nations is not protected by sovereign immunity."

To wit:

Under international law, states are not immune from the jurisdiction of foreign courts insofar as their commercial activities are concerned, and their commercial property may be levied upon for the satisfaction of judgments rendered against them in connection with their commercial activities.

Is conspiring to set the price of oil a "commercial" activity? Of course it is. OPEC's member nations get paid for the oil they export.

Kohl drafted a bill, dubbed "NOPEC," that said OPEC could no longer protect itself from antitrust prosecution by citing "sovereign immunity" and explicitly granted the Justice Department jurisdiction. The bill went nowhere back in 2000. But this past spring, Kohl dusted it off, and John Fialka reports in the July 6 Wall Street Journal that NOPEC has won the support of veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate. The appeal of NOPEC extends from left to right; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is pushing it, and so is the Heritage Foundation. The Bush administration, however, can't stand the idea.

The White House Office of Management and Budget says it opposes the NOPEC bill "adamantly." Perhaps this is because, as I've noted before, OPEC is just about the only international organization that President Bush has any regard for. (Shortly after taking office, Bush lectured a reporter about the importance of keeping oil prices "stable and predictable," even if that meant preventing a price drop.) Conceivably Bush is worried that busting OPEC might give Russia too free a hand in setting oil prices. (Russia is not an OPEC member, and its oil production now rivals, and may actually exceed, that of Saudi Arabia.) But busting OPEC would weaken two of Bush's least-favorite regimes, Iran and Venezuela. The Saudis wouldn't be happy, but neither would they be terribly impoverished, given the significant power they'd retain (as guardians of one-quarter of the world's proven oil reserves—about four times those of Russia) to affect prices. Diplomatically, busting OPEC strikes me as a wash at worst.

Economically, dismantling OPEC would be a boon. Cartels, even when managed to keep prices "stable and predictable," mainly have the effect of driving prices up; that's why people create them. A decent case can be made that gas prices should be higher, because that would limit gas consumption and therefore carbon emissions that contribute to global warming. But OPEC isn't in the business of encouraging conservation. It's in the business of maximizing profits. If gasoline prices are to rise artificially, it makes no sense, ecological or otherwise, to bestow the windfall on Texas oil barons or Saudi princes. Better to return the money to consumers, either through government expenditure or through rebates that encourage further conservation or some other benefit to society at large. Free trade is good enough for vitamin pills and memory chips. Why isn't it good enough for petroleum?

Link to the bill below:

S 879 RS

Good luck, I hope that we can push this through.

Edited to add: I had to change the link to the bill so that you guys could have it.

Crossing the Rubicon

Edward R. Murrow rose and applauded Keith Olbermann on July 3, 2007



Everything that I ever wanted to say, as eloquently as I ever wanted to say it.

Welcome to Rome 2007 A.D.

I have to apologize for my lengthy absences and lack of attention on all sides of the Internet and everywhere else for that matter. Why have I been gone? Actually, I haven't been gone. I've been here at one time or another in some capacity. Occupied may be the word of the day. With what? Politics. Ewwwwww! Yeah, I know... How dare I say such a word. As many of you may or may not know, the political atmosphere of our country is more volatile now than it has been in decades, if not hundreds of years. I have abandoned the two party system of our government due to the fact that I don't feel that anyone is trust worthy. So, don't go calling me a liberal or conservative or whatever. The issues at hand are solely of Constitutional importance and we ignore them at the peril of the Bill of Rights and the very ideals that this country was founded upon.

Daily we are blind-sided by the current administration's refusal to abide by the rules set forth and seemingly operate solely along a criminal if not dictatorial tack. The immigration debate is hotter than ever and the current immigration legislation must be squashed, in its entirety. We have broad and encompassing immigration laws already on the books that only need enforcing, plain and simple.

Is the current administration's every action so despotic or illegal that they have to refuse to cooperate with the Senate at every turn? How is it that the VP can honestly claim that the office of the VP isn't part of the Executive Branch?

If you're one of the many who either choose not to be informed or think that this country is running along smoothly, I submit the following links for your edification:

Bush Won't Supply Subpoenaed Documents>Bush Won't Supply Subpoenaed Documents

One of the most informative, yet, scary articles on the VP, albeit a few years too late.

Senator Sessions' 20 Loopholes of the Immigration Bill

While the loopholes that Senator Sessions mentions are from the old immigration bill, the issues that he addresses are still part of the new bill. In an effort to make the new bill more appealing, the president has offered $4.4 Billion dollars. Where will those billions come from? Nowhere, it's imaginary money. Why do I say that? Because the president has stated that those billions would come from the fines that illegals would have to pay. See how it's imaginary? We call them illegals for a reason... They are here illegally. Simple concept isn't it? So, the president says that he is going to fine these illegal aliens to the tune of $4.4 Billion dollars. We can't even locate these illegals. How does he expect to get money from them?

The new immigration legislation is titled S. 1348 I suggest that everyone familiarize yourselves with it, albeit a bit late, unless you act today and contact your representatives and demand that they vote against it.

I got so busy with the "amnesty" bill that I forgot to mention the recent attacks on free speech from both sides.

Trent Lott, while being enraged that we bloggers and talk radio side tracked the immigration bill that failed, decided that the 1st Amendment needs to be repealed.

I'll post a few links, you guys have to do some deeper digging on your own. I can't cover every news agency by myself.

Talk Shows influence immigration debate.

Static from radio hosts.

While what Lott says is enough to hold him in contempt and expel him from any leadership capacity in the country. Hillary, while voting for the frigging Immigration bill with Obama, decided that she wanted a piece of the "free speech killing" pie. While she states that we need equal time for both sides of the debate, there is a more sinister issue at hand... The control of the airwaves and the control of what is said on those airwaves.


THIS JUST IN!!!!

WE HAVE DEFEATED THE IMMIGRATION BILL!!!

I'll get back to Hillary's 1st Amendment bashing soon. It's time to celebrate!

Intercept a private jet, but cannot intercept 4 airliners? I call Bullshit!!

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - F-16s intercepted a small plane after officials misinterpreted a phrase uttered by the pilot as his aircraft flew over military airspace: "hostile takeover."

The pilot was talking about business, the plane's owner said. But a frantic air traffic controller couldn't confirm that because the pilot had turned off his radio, said Maj. Roger Yates of the Clay County Sheriff's Department.

Within minutes, federal aviation authorities scrambled the fighter jets to intercept the plane Monday evening just outside of Oklahoma City and escort it to the Clay County airport near Mosby.

Read the rest of the article at the link below:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19210952/

Damn Conflicted

You've no doubt noticed the header change from almost a solid year of being there to what it is now. And thus you see the source of my confliction. You see, I'm in a weird spot. It isn't easy for me to write this, as I haven't actually got it all sorted out as of this time. As long as I have been in posession of enough ability to view something in amazement, I have been a Captain America fan. Not the kind of fan, mind you, that has every issue and is intimately familiar with all aspects of the Cap's history. Even so, I am not unfamiliar with his character either. I have drifted in and out of the story of Cap pretty much all of my life. Mostly in favor of other aspects of the comics continuum.
No, I'm not a johnny-come-lately Cap fan... Just a fan. But see, that's just it. Captain America stood as more than a simple comic character. In the darkest recesses, even the most hardened critic and haters of comics had/have pieces of Captain America within them. Cap is/was the universal symbol of us as Americans. His undying love for his country. No, he didn't always agree with what was going on, but he never turned his back on the country. I defy anyone to deny that each and every time that they saw Cap or his shield, they felt pride in who they are as Ameicans. As I write this, I realize that the younger I was, the more of a Captain America fan I was. Before our facination with mutants, born or man-made, or our intellectual growth into larger issues, we identified with the simplicity that Steve Rogers represented. Red/White/Blue; American Pride/Spirit; Good vs. Bad. Not flashy, not covered in weapons and never beyond understanding. Pretty much the same reason that I cry every time the National Anthem is played.
I feel that I took Captain America for granted. I feel that I didn't pay him the proper respect as I feverishly read Daredevil, X-Men, Wolverine, Iron Man, and every other comic that I was reading, that wasn't Captain America. I feel that I wronged him by thinking that he'd always be there, just out of eye-sight, with his shield protecting us from the world. And that when I needed him, all I had to do was turn around, reach out, and there he'd be. When I turned around last week, he wasn't there as he had been in the past, and my heart hurt.
It has taken me a week to formulate this post. At first, I wanted to post his obituary, or some headline from the Daily Bugle, but even then, I felt ashamed. Ashamed to recognize him and his sacrifice because I didn't give him enough respect while he lived. I'm still not square with my feelings on this situation. I'll sort them out, or I won't. I'll still miss Captain America.

R.I.P. Steve Rogers (Captain America 1941)July 4, 1917-March 7,2007

L8R,

Wrench

Yeah, I know, and I apologize, but...

So, it's been like, for-ev-er, since I posted, right? I have good reasons, I've been busier than ever. How's that? You ask.

* After creating a myspace in the form of Independent Rebellion. I started networking like I was building tunnels underground (visualize an ant-farm). In the beginning I was only building a website and myspace for Small Town Tattoos and Piercing, and that kept me busy enough. Only a short time later, I became friends with the Las Vegas Hot Rod Girls. A few days after that, I became a 50/50 partner in the Las Vegas Hot Rod Girls. I took over total design and web-representation for LVHRG and began updating their Myspace and building a massive website. I figure that the web-site located @ http://lasvegashotrodgirls.com will be a continually evolving entity all on its own.

But I am getting ahead of myself. During the site build for LVHRG and shortly after an xmas photo shoot. I got hooked up with Branon White. Branon White? Branon White Racing's Myspace. I have designed 8X10 autograph glossies for him, designed his new logo (the BWR), designed his business cards, did the banner you see and can get on his site, and did a graphic for the back of his 24ft. trailer. Who is he? He pilots a Harley Davidson drag bike. So, we have this ongoing design thing, as he has agreed to use my services for the entire AHDRA season. You can read about him at Drag Bike.com and you can read about him and me in this month's RPM Magazine, print version.

I've also been busy doing a smallish bit of stuff for Tony Billet, an NHRA top fuel guy.

On top of all this busyness business, I'm maintaing a 3.4GPA and have made the Dean's list. WOOT!!

Back to LVHRG: If you go to the LVHRG Myspace you'll see all the image manipulation that I have done. Also, if you see anything new from them as far as print media, logos, web-sites, etc. I am the one who does it.

Oh, and I'm building a web-site for CHAOS MMA Productions. I have already built their myspace. You can see it @: CHAOS MMA.

I will also be building a web-site for Mark Rogers very soon. Mark Rogers? He runs Arlen Ness Las Vegas. Yeah, I said "Arlen Ness Las Vegas". His myspace, which I have nothing to do with, can be seen here: Mark Rogers' Myspace.

In case you haven't clicked the links in the above:

http://myspace.com/independentrebellion
http://myspace.com/lasvegashotrodgirls
http://lasvegashotrodgirls.com
http://smalltowntattoos.com
http://myspace.com/bswracing I don't run it.
http://myspace.com/125695108 I don't run it.
http://myspace.com/hellsforty
http://myspace.com/smalltowntattoos

And last but not least: I am in the process, and it is a process, of rebuilding the entire department website for a college English department.

Busy? Hellsyeah I'm busy.

L8R,

Wrench

Iron Maiden selling out venues like it's the 1980's.

All of you who really know me, know that I'm probably the most intense metal head walking, among other facets of my musical sustenance. Iron Maiden's new album, A Matter of Life and Death is a serious return to the powerhouse days of Maiden. Not only that, but they have rocketed to the top ten in the US and are selling out venues around the world. Among all the other detritus that people are attempting to pass off as music, Iron Maiden are sitting proudly and defiantly among them. Almost brings a tear to the eye. All that being said, it doesn't come with out the price of reality smacking us in the face.

Allow me to illustrate my point: Lauren Harris. The preceeding link will take you to Lauren Harris' myspace. Who is Lauren Harris? She's the daughter of Iron Maiden bassist, Steve Harris, and she's quite the hottie. She also happens to be on tour with her dad and opening for Maiden on the non-US legs of the tour. Now, this isn't Kelly Osbourne by any stretch of the imagination. Strap yourself in for a rockin good time.

Anywho, I just wanted to spread the word to those of you who are interested and those of you who probably don't give a shit anyway.

Dropping the ball and missing the important things.

Shortly after three eight-year-old boys were found mutilated and murdered in West Memphis, Arkansas, local newspapers stated the killers had been caught. The police assured the public that the three teenagers in custody were definitely responsible for these horrible crimes. Evidence?

The same police officers coerced an error-filled “confession” from Jessie Misskelley Jr., who is mentally handicapped. They subjected him to 12 hours of questioning without counsel or parental consent, audio-taping only two fragments totaling 46 minutes. Jessie recanted it that evening, but it was too late— Misskelley, Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols were all arrested on June 3, 1993, and convicted of murder in early 1994.

Although there was no physical evidence, murder weapon, motive, or connection to the victims, the prosecution pathetically resorted to presenting black hair and clothing, heavy metal t-shirts, and Stephen King novels as proof that the boys were sacrificed in a satanic cult ritual. Unfathomably, Echols was sentenced to death, Baldwin received life without parole, and Misskelley got life plus 40.

For over 13 years, The West Memphis Three have been imprisoned for crimes they didn’t commit. Echols waits in solitary confinement for the lethal injection our tax dollars will pay for. They were all condemned by their poverty, incompetent defense, satanic panic and a rush to judgment.

But there’s still hope for them, and you can help.

The above is the opening splash page for The Official Site for the West Memphis Three. This past week was West Memphis Three Awareness Week, and I had every intent of getting the word out sooner, but less important things and just plain forgetting got in the way. I'm almost ashamed to admit it. No, I am ashamed, because that's the fucking problem with this country, we are too quick to forget. To quick to put the important shit on the back burner in leiu of something far less important and most likely absolutely trivial. Here we are on the Internet with the capacity to flood the world with media, print, and sites with the truth and support of this travesty of justice, and we fill it with bullshit about less-than-nothing.

Though I have been busy and trying to get things rolling as solidly as possibly on a few fronts, that doesn't take away the fact that some things warrant more attention than others. So, with that said, even though the week has passed, this thing is bigger than a week. It's an every day slap in the face of truth and justice. Here's the kicker: You're not immune from shit like this. You think that you're safe because you might know someone or some other bit of bullshit, but when the hammer falls and you're the one on the receiving end of some dumb ass case, you'll wish you paid better attention to what was going on around you and how fucked up things are getting. If we don't reign this kind of shit in, it will get worse, and that's not some conspiracy shit, that's fact. We cannot keep looking away from the failing system. It will consume us. That uncomfortable feeling you have right now is someone's hand up your ass convincing you that your liberties are secure and telling you and everythin's ok, and people like this Wrench guy don't know what they're talking about and they should be ignored. Ignore at your peril.

Falling victim to the black hole that is Myspace.com

Yes friends, the beast came and tempted me, and yeah though I was resistent for a lengthy amount of time, I was laid low by the beast and succumbed to its temptation. It's all good though. It's good for business and networking. See, when I finished the Small Town Tattoos site, I created a companion site on Myspace so that all our friends and others could have active participation in the living, breathing, behemoth that is Small Town Tattoos. I figured, "What the hell. It can't be bad for business, right?" And here we are Independent Rebellion's Myspace. I figured that if the best people in the world that I know can have a Myspace, who am I to deny its power and ability to thrust me to the fore. While I have your attention, I would like to direct you to Garage Magazine. Quite possibly the best magazine dedicated to Kustom Kulture and all that is pure and good in the world of wrench turning, pinstriping, tattoo owning, tattoo doing, and any other odd-ball or off the wall activity that requires hot chicks, hot rods, and cold beer. It's now owned by Pay Up Publications. You'll recognize Pay Up, or you won't. Those that do know who it is know that he can only bring more power to the mag and its purpose.

You guys should creep on over to Coop's Blog and check out his progress on a few things. Anywho, things are rolling right along in a slightly productive motion, so I cannot complain. I'm considering getting back into photography on a more serious note and taking pix of chix. If you're interested and you're in the area, e-mail me and we'll see what we can work out. It's something that I've always wanted to do, and as you can obviously see, have been heavily influenced by, and am seriously considering giving it a try. If it works out, fine. If not, that's fine too. It's not like there aren't enough professional photographers taking some seriously hella-cool images of chix, rods, and the life in general.

Till next time, my blessed deciples.
Get more tattoos, get grease under your nails, make more friends,and don't tolerate any bullshit.