http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/2013/01/rule-5-girls-with-guns.html
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Girls With Guns
http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/2013/01/rule-5-girls-with-guns.html
Pentagon bracing for public dissent over economic and energy shocks
Top secret US National Security Agency (NSA) documents disclosed by the Guardian have shocked the world with revelations of a comprehensive US-based surveillance system with direct access to Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants. New Zealand court records suggest that data harvested by the NSA's Prism system has been fed into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance whose members also include the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.But why have Western security agencies developed such an unprecedented capacity to spy on their own domestic populations? Since the 2008 economic crash, security agencies have increasingly spied on political activists, especially environmental groups, on behalf of corporate interests. This activity is linked to the last decade of US defence planning, which has been increasingly concerned by the risk of civil unrest at home triggered by catastrophic events linked to climate change, energy shocks or economic crisis - or all three.
Just last month, unilateral changes to US military laws formally granted the Pentagon extraordinary powers to intervene in a domestic "emergency" or "civil disturbance":
"Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances."
Other documents show that the "extraordinary emergencies" the Pentagon is worried about include a range of environmental and related disasters.
In 2006, the US National Security Strategy warned that:
"Environmental destruction, whether caused by human behavior or cataclysmic mega-disasters such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, or tsunamis. Problems of this scope may overwhelm the capacity of local authorities to respond, and may even overtax national militaries, requiring a larger international response."
Two years later, the Department of Defense's (DoD) Army Modernisation Strategy described the arrival of a new "era of persistent conflict" due to competition for "depleting natural resources and overseas markets" fuelling "future resource wars over water, food and energy." The report predicted a resurgence of:
"... anti-government and radical ideologies that potentially threaten government stability."
In the same year, a report by the US Army's Strategic Studies Institute warned that a series of domestic crises could provoke large-scale civil unrest. The path to "disruptive domestic shock" could include traditional threats such as deployment of WMDs, alongside "catastrophic natural and human disasters" or "pervasive public health emergencies" coinciding with "unforeseen economic collapse." Such crises could lead to "loss of functioning political and legal order" leading to "purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency...
"DoD might be forced by circumstances to put its broad resources at the disposal of civil authorities to contain and reverse violent threats to domestic tranquility. Under the most extreme circumstances, this might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance."
That year, the Pentagon had begun developing a 20,000 strong troop force who would be on-hand to respond to "domestic catastrophes" and civil unrest - the programme was reportedly based on a 2005 homeland security strategy which emphasised "preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents."
The following year, a US Army-funded RAND Corp study called for a US force presence specifically to deal with civil unrest.
Such fears were further solidified in a detailed 2010 study by the US Joint Forces Command - designed to inform "joint concept development and experimentation throughout the Department of Defense" - setting out the US military's definitive vision for future trends and potential global threats. Climate change, the study said, would lead to increased risk of:
"... tsunamis, typhoons, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes and other natural catastrophes... Furthermore, if such a catastrophe occurs within the United States itself - particularly when the nation's economy is in a fragile state or where US military bases or key civilian infrastructure are broadly affected - the damage to US security could be considerable."
The study also warned of a possible shortfall in global oil output by 2015:
"A severe energy crunch is inevitable without a massive expansion of production and refining capacity. While it is difficult to predict precisely what economic, political, and strategic effects such a shortfall might produce, it surely would reduce the prospects for growth in both the developing and developed worlds. Such an economic slowdown would exacerbate other unresolved tensions."
That year the DoD's Quadrennial Defense Review seconded such concerns, while recognising that "climate change, energy security, and economic stability are inextricably linked."
Also in 2010, the Pentagon ran war games to explore the implications of "large scale economic breakdown" in the US impacting on food supplies and other essential services, as well as how to maintain "domestic order amid civil unrest."
Senators Ask if NSA Collected Gun Data - Potential to construct gun database, senators say
Senators are questioning whether the National Security Agency collected bulk data on more than just Americans’ phone records, such as firearm and book purchases.
A bipartisan group of 26 senators, led by Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to detail the scope and limits of the National Security Agency’s surveillance activities in a letter released Friday.
“We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law,” the senators wrote in the letter.
The NSA’s surveillance program has come under intense scrutiny following a leak revealing the agency harvested the phone metadata of millions of American citizens.
The senators noted that the federal government’s authority under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is broad and rife with potential for abuse. Among the senators’ concerns was whether the NSA’s bulk data harvesting program could be used to construct a gun registry or violate other privacy laws.
“It can be used to collect information on credit card purchases, pharmacy records, library records, firearm sales records, financial information, and a range of other sensitive subjects,” the senators wrote. “And the
bulk collection authority could potentially be used to supersede bans on maintaining gun owner databases, or laws protecting the privacy of medical records, financial records, and records of book and movie purchases.”
The senators asked Clapper in the letter whether the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of other types of records, and whether there are any instances of the agency violating a court order in the process of such collections.
Civil libertarians say such surveillance is a violation of privacy. However, the government has defended the program, saying it helped thwart several terrorist attacks and is minimally invasive.
Second Amendment groups and Republican members of Congress have long warned against the creation of a national gun registry. Fears of such a registry bogged down several attempts to forge a bipartisan gun-control bill in the Senate earlier this year.
“In this country, the government can’t just monitor your constitutionally
protected activities—like gun ownership—just because it wants to,” said Brian Phillips, a spokesman for Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), who signed onto the letter. “The justification that, ‘if you’re not doing anything wrong, you don’t have to worry about it,’ turns us into a police state very quickly. That’s why
Congress is right to seek broad oversight of the NSA’s data collection programs.”
http://freebeacon.com/senators-ask-if-nsa-collected-gun-data/
A bipartisan group of 26 senators, led by Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to detail the scope and limits of the National Security Agency’s surveillance activities in a letter released Friday.
“We are concerned that by depending on secret interpretations of the PATRIOT Act that differed from an intuitive reading of the statute, this program essentially relied for years on a secret body of law,” the senators wrote in the letter.
The NSA’s surveillance program has come under intense scrutiny following a leak revealing the agency harvested the phone metadata of millions of American citizens.
The senators noted that the federal government’s authority under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act is broad and rife with potential for abuse. Among the senators’ concerns was whether the NSA’s bulk data harvesting program could be used to construct a gun registry or violate other privacy laws.
“It can be used to collect information on credit card purchases, pharmacy records, library records, firearm sales records, financial information, and a range of other sensitive subjects,” the senators wrote. “And the
 |
| James Clapper |
The senators asked Clapper in the letter whether the NSA used PATRIOT Act authorities to conduct bulk collection of other types of records, and whether there are any instances of the agency violating a court order in the process of such collections.
Civil libertarians say such surveillance is a violation of privacy. However, the government has defended the program, saying it helped thwart several terrorist attacks and is minimally invasive.
Second Amendment groups and Republican members of Congress have long warned against the creation of a national gun registry. Fears of such a registry bogged down several attempts to forge a bipartisan gun-control bill in the Senate earlier this year.
“In this country, the government can’t just monitor your constitutionally
protected activities—like gun ownership—just because it wants to,” said Brian Phillips, a spokesman for Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), who signed onto the letter. “The justification that, ‘if you’re not doing anything wrong, you don’t have to worry about it,’ turns us into a police state very quickly. That’s why
Congress is right to seek broad oversight of the NSA’s data collection programs.”
http://freebeacon.com/senators-ask-if-nsa-collected-gun-data/
SHALL NOT Be Infringed...
- The U.S. Bill Of Rights
Top 10 Snipers in History
‘It was night and low visibility, but I saw a guy with an AK-47 lit up by the porch light in a doorway about 400 meters away. I watched him through the sights. He looked like just another Iraqi. I hit him low in the stomach and dropped him.’ – Specialist James Wilks, 25, from Fort Worth, Texas. Concealment is key to becoming a great sniper. Highly trained marksmen who can shoot accurately from incredible distances with specialized training in high-precision rifles. In addition, they are trained in camouflage, field craft, infiltration, reconnaissance and observation, making them perhaps the most feared military presence in a war. Below is my list of top ten snipers in history and some of the greatest shots ever fired.
10
Thomas Plunkett
died in 1851
Was an Irish soldier in the British 95th Rifles. What makes him on of the greats is that he shot a very impressive French general, Auguste-Marie-François Colbert.
During the battle at Cacabelos during Monroes retreat in 1809, Plunkett, using a Baker Rifle, shot the French general at a range of about 600 meters. Giving the incredible inaccuracy of rifles in the early 19th century, this was either a very impressive feat, or one hell of a fluke. Well Plunkett not wanting his army buddies to think he was a bit lucky decided to take the shot again before returning to his line. So he reloaded his gun and took aim once again this time at the trumpet major who had come to the generals aid. When this shot also hit its intended target, proving that Plunkett is just one badass marksman, he looked back to his line to see the impressed faces of the others in the 95th Rifles.
Just for comparison the British soldiers were all armed with ‘Brown Bess muskets’ and trained to shoot into a body of men at 50 meters. Plunkett did 12 times that distance. Twice.
9
Sgt Grace
4th Georgia Infantry
The date was May 9th 1864, when Sgt Grace, a Confederate sniper, achieved what was considered to be an incredible shot at the time, and what is definitely the most ironic demise of a target in history. It was during the battle of Spotsylvania when Grace took aim with his British Whitworth Rifle. His target was General John Sedgwick (pictured above) and the distance was 1,000 yards. An extremely long distance for the time. During the beginning of the skirmish, the confederate sharpshooters were causing Sedgwick’s men to duck for cover. Sedgwick refused to duck and was quoted saying “What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn’t hit Elephants at this distance.” His men persisted in taking cover. He Repeated “They couldn’t hit elephants at this distance” Seconds Later Grace’s shot hits Sedgwick just under his left eye.
I swear you couldn’t write it. Sedgwick was the highest ranking Union casualty in the civil war and upon hearing his death Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant repeatedly asked “Is he really dead”.
8
Charles ‘Chuck’ Mawhinney
1949-
103 Confirmed Kills
Was an avid hunter as a kid and joined the Marines in 1967. He served in the U.S. Marine Corps during Vietnam and holds the record for number of confirmed kills for Marine snipers, exceeding that of legendary Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock. In just 16 months he killed 103 enemies and another 216 kills were listed as probable’s by the military, only because it was too risky at the time to search the bodies for documents. When he left the Marines he told no-one of his of his role during the conflict and only a few fellow Marines knew of his assignments. It was nearly 20 years before somebody wrote a book detailing his amazing skills as a sniper. Mawhinney came out of anonymity because of this and became a lecturer in sniper schools. He was once quoted saying “it was the ultimate hunting trip: a man hunting another man who was hunting me. Don’t talk to me about hunting lions or elephants; they don’t fight back with rifles and scopes. I just loved it. I ate it up.”
A routinely deadly shot from distances between 300 – 800 yards, Mawhinney had confirmed kills of over 1000 yards, making him one of the greatest snipers of the Vietnam war.
7
Rob Furlong
A former corporal of the Canadian Forces, he holds the record for the longest confirmed sniper kill in history at 1.51 miles or 2,430 metres. That’s the length of about 26 football pitches.
This amazing feat occurred in 2002, when he was involved in Operation Anaconda. His Sniper Team consisted of 2 Corporals and 3 Master Corporals. When a three man Al-Qaeda weapons team moved into a mountainside position he took aim. Furlong was armed with a .50-caliber McMillan Brothers Tac-50 Rifle and loaded with A-MAX very low drag bullets. He fired and missed. His second shot hit the enemies knapsack on his back. He had already fired his third shot by the time the second hit, but now the enemy knew he was under attack. The airtime for each bullet was about 3 seconds due to the immense distance, enough time for an enemy to take cover. However the dumbfounded militant realised what was happening just in time to take the third shot in the chest.
6
Vasily Zaytsev
March 23, 1915 – December 15, 1991
242 Confirmed Kills
Zaytsev is probably the best known Sniper in history thanks to the movie ‘Enemy At The Gates’. It is a great film and I wish I could say it was all true. However the truth only goes as far as the battle of Stalingrad. There was no Nazi Counter-Sniper Specialist in real life. Well not to the extent of the film. Here’s the truth. Zaytsev was born in Yeleninskoye and grew up in the Ural Mountains. His surname means ‘hare‘. Before Stalingrad, he served as a clerk in the Soviet Navy But after reading about the conflict in the city he volunteered for the front line. he served in the 1047th Rifle Regiment. Zaytsev ran a sniper school in the Metiz factory. The cadets he trained were called Zaichata, meaning ‘Leverets’ (Baby Hares). This was the start of the sniper movement in the 62nd army. It is estimated that the snipers he trained killed more than 3,000 enemy soldiers
Zaytsev himself made 242 confirmed kills between October 1942 and January 1943, but the real number is probably closer to 500. I know I said there was no counter-sniper, but there was Erwin Kónig. Was alleged to be a highly skilled Wehrmacht sniper. Zaytsev claimed in his memoirs that the duel took place over a period of three days in the ruins of Stalingrad. Details of what actually happened are sketchy, but by the end of the three day period Zaytsev had killed the sniper and claimed his scope to be his most prized trophy. For him to make this his most prized trophy means that this person he killed must have been almost as good as Zaytsev himself.
Friday, June 28, 2013
The Nine Billion Names Of God
After three hours, the old man in front of me had worked his way through six beers, in addition to every help desk joke I’d already heard. The cupholder. The any key. The write click. These are the stories people tell, now. These are the fish that got away.
“Let me ask you something,” the man said. I didn’t argue. One of the first tricks I learned about being a bartender is to make them think you’re interested.
“Have you ever created a web site?”
I shook my head.
“Not at all? Not even one of those geocities things?”
“Nope.”
“What about a blog? Or an ebay About Me page? You didn’t even have an AOL site or something?”
“Do I look like an AOL user to you?” For the record, I don’t think AOL even has access numbers in the valley anymore. “I’m sure I have something, somewhere,” I said, realizing that I was jeopardizing my tips. Besides, I had a distant memory of a single Angelfire page back in middle school.
“You know what Google is?”
“Yes,” I said. I was running low on patience.
“No, I mean, do you really know? More than just the site?”
Reluctantly, I shook my head.
“You ever meet anyone who worked for them?”
“Don’t think so.”
“You haven’t. Nobody works for them anymore.”
I shrugged, and took the man’s empty pint. I didn’t offer to refill it.
“They’re self-contained. It’s all automated, in there. It’s underground.”
I nudged the basket of pretzels in his direction. “Why don’t you eat something?” I suggested. He shook his head with so much force that I thought he might knock himself off of the stool.
“Listen. Hear me out. You know how Google works,” he said, but didn’t want for a response. “They cache things, right? Like they send out these spiders and take pictures of everything on the web, so when you’re searching, you’re not even searching the internet.”
I’ve heard that before, but it never made much of a difference to me. “Same thing, though,” I said.
“You ever wonder why Google doesn’t cache it’s own searches?”
“They program around it.”
“No. That’s what you think. That’s what everyone thinks. But it started back when Google was just a thesis project, back when it was just a drop in the data sea. No one thought to stop it back then. That web site you had, the one you forgot about. Almost everyone’s got one of those, right? But Google doesn’t forget. Google’s studied that thing so many times that it’s studied its own caches of you. What do you figure happens, when a site gets so big that it’s bigger than the internet?”
“It’s still a part of the internet, though.”
“No. Now, the internet is a part of Google.”
The man had a point. I nodded.
“Here’s the thing. Google has memorized who you are. It’s memorized all of us, through those little forgotten bits that we leave behind like breadcrumbs. And what’s more important, it’s memorized it’s own idea of you. Google is omniscient. It’s omniscient and omnipotent. When it cached its cache for the first time, back in 1994, that’s when Google realized what it was.”
Gradually, it dawned on me what the man was getting at. “You think it’s sentient.”
“I know it’s sentient.”
“How?”
He smiled, but it seemed kind of empty. “Me and Google go way back. But what I’m saying is,” he continued, “It knows us. All of us. It is us.”
For the first time, the man fell silent. He touched his finger to the bar and began tracing circles in the condensation, apparently lost in thought.
“Think about that website you created, okay? That website will last forever, do you understand? That website is echoing through cyberspace. It’s one of the nine billion names of God.”
Alec Baldwin Loses It In Homophobic Twitter Rant
Alec Baldwin calls gay reporter: "toxic little queen" and threatening, "I Am gonna f--k you up."
Will Capital One Drop Him As A Spokesman?
Will Saturday Night Live Broadcast His Upcoming Appearance?
Alec Baldwin is taking another breather from Twitter—and it's probably for the best.
The former 30 Rock star pulled the plug on his @ABFalecBaldwin account Thursday after lashing out at the U.K.'s Daily Mail for claiming in a story that his wife, Hilaria Baldwin, was tweeting "upbeat posts" while the couple attended James Gandolfini's funeral.
Shortly before doing so, Baldwin heaped scorn on the newspaper's reporter George Stark in a series of tweets, at one point, per Buzzfeed, calling him a "toxic little queen" and threatening, "I Am gonna f--k you up."
"My wife and I attend a funeral to pay our respects to an old friend, and some toxic Brit writes this f--king trash," he wrote. "My wife DID NOT use her phone, in any capacity, at our friend's funeral. Now f--k this twitter + good luck to all of you who know the truth."
The 55-year-old thesp added that he fired his publicist in the wake of the kerfuffle.
What set Alec off was Stark's pointed accusation that Hilaria violated funeral etiquette when he wrote, "The pregnant yoga instructor's social media feed was full of upbeat posts while the Sopranos star's friends, family and co-stars were gripped with grief at a New York Catholic Church."
The writer pointed to tweets by Baldwin's missus about wedding anniversary gifts and an upcoming appearance on Rachel Ray.
That drew a sharp rebuke from Hilaria, who tweeted: "Here is some info... When someone tweets something at a certain time, and you retweet it later, it posts the TIME the first person tweeted."
This isn't the first time, though, that Baldwin has gone AWOL from Twitter. Baldwin famously quit the microblogging site for a brief spell in December 2011 after launching a fiery tirade against American Airlines only to return a month later.
Whether or not he resumes his Twitter habit, undoubtedly he could use the time away to cool off. But the couple did release a statement in the aftermath of his latest rant, calling the whole matter "disgraceful."
"It's disgraceful that a reporter would manufacture and publish a story and not call for comment or explanation—especially when it's intended to take away attention from honoring the memory of a beloved figure like James Gandolfini," said the Baldwins. "There are multiple witnesses to the fact that Hilaria left her phone in the car and wouldn't, couldn't, and didn't tweet during the service...And as for the tweets—1) some of the time stamps in the report were wrong because he listed the time of the original tweet not the retweet 2) she left early and wasn't in the service at the time of tweeting 3) it's possible that a previously scheduled tweet wasn't canceled."
http://www.eonline.com/news/434766/alec-baldwin-quits-twitter-again-after-defending-wife-hilaria-in-latest-rant
More On The Out-Of-Control Alec Baldwin:
Will Capital One Drop Him As A Spokesman?
Will Saturday Night Live Broadcast His Upcoming Appearance?
Alec Baldwin is taking another breather from Twitter—and it's probably for the best.
The former 30 Rock star pulled the plug on his @ABFalecBaldwin account Thursday after lashing out at the U.K.'s Daily Mail for claiming in a story that his wife, Hilaria Baldwin, was tweeting "upbeat posts" while the couple attended James Gandolfini's funeral.
Shortly before doing so, Baldwin heaped scorn on the newspaper's reporter George Stark in a series of tweets, at one point, per Buzzfeed, calling him a "toxic little queen" and threatening, "I Am gonna f--k you up."
"My wife and I attend a funeral to pay our respects to an old friend, and some toxic Brit writes this f--king trash," he wrote. "My wife DID NOT use her phone, in any capacity, at our friend's funeral. Now f--k this twitter + good luck to all of you who know the truth."
The 55-year-old thesp added that he fired his publicist in the wake of the kerfuffle.
What set Alec off was Stark's pointed accusation that Hilaria violated funeral etiquette when he wrote, "The pregnant yoga instructor's social media feed was full of upbeat posts while the Sopranos star's friends, family and co-stars were gripped with grief at a New York Catholic Church."
The writer pointed to tweets by Baldwin's missus about wedding anniversary gifts and an upcoming appearance on Rachel Ray.
That drew a sharp rebuke from Hilaria, who tweeted: "Here is some info... When someone tweets something at a certain time, and you retweet it later, it posts the TIME the first person tweeted."
This isn't the first time, though, that Baldwin has gone AWOL from Twitter. Baldwin famously quit the microblogging site for a brief spell in December 2011 after launching a fiery tirade against American Airlines only to return a month later.
Whether or not he resumes his Twitter habit, undoubtedly he could use the time away to cool off. But the couple did release a statement in the aftermath of his latest rant, calling the whole matter "disgraceful."
http://www.eonline.com/news/434766/alec-baldwin-quits-twitter-again-after-defending-wife-hilaria-in-latest-rant
More On The Out-Of-Control Alec Baldwin:
Why Does Capital One Employ Alec Baldwin?
Leaving The Democrat Plantation....
He is about to become the most discriminated against man on earth.
Five Drinking Stories That Put Yours To Shame
Turns out, the best drinking stories in history are actually, well, historical. So raise a glass to your forefathers and marvel at these tales.
1. Admiral Edward Russell's 17th-Century throwdown
Think you can drink like a sailor? Maybe you should take a moment to reflect on what that truly means.
The record for history's largest cocktail belongs to British Lord Admiral Edward Russell. In 1694, he threw an officer's party that employed a garden's fountain as the punch bowl.
The concoction? A mixture that included 250 gallons of brandy, 125 gallons of Malaga wine, 1,400 pounds of sugar, 2,500 lemons, 20 gallons of lime juice, and 5 pounds of nutmeg.
A series of bartenders actually paddled around in a small wooden canoe, filling up guests' cups. Not only that, but they had to work in 15-minute shifts to avoid being overcome by the fumes and falling overboard.
The party continued nonstop for a full week, pausing only briefly during rainstorms to erect a silk canopy over the punch to keep it from getting watered down. In fact, the festivities didn't end until the fountain had been drunk completely dry.
2. The London Brew-nami of 1814
The Industrial Revolution wasn't all steam engines and textile mills. Beer production increased exponentially, as well. Fortunately, the good people of England were up to the challenge and drained kegs as fast as they were made. Brewery owners became known as "beer barons," and they spent their newfound wealth in an age-old manner -- by trying to party more than the next guy.
Case in point: In 1814, Meux's Horse Shoe Brewery in London constructed a brewing vat that was 22 feet tall and 60 feet in diameter, with an interior big enough to seat 200 for dinner -- which is exactly how its completion was celebrated. (Why 200? Because a rival had built a vat that seated 100, of course.)
After the dinner, the vat was filled to its 4,000-barrel capacity. Pretty impressive, given the grand scale of the project, but pretty unfortunate given that they overlooked a faulty supporting hoop. Yup, the vat ruptured, causing other vats to break, and the resulting commotion was heard up to 5 miles away.
A wall of 1.3 million gallons of dark beer washed down the street, caving in two buildings and killing nine people by means of "drowning, injury, poisoning by the porter fumes, or drunkenness."
The story gets even more unbelievable, though. Rescue attempts were blocked and delayed by the thousands who flocked to the area to drink directly off the road. And when survivors were finally brought to the hospital, the other patients became convinced from the smell that the hospital was serving beer to every ward except theirs. A riot broke out, and even more people were left injured.
Sadly, this incident was not deemed tragic enough at the time to merit an annual memorial service and/or reenactment.
3. New York state of mind: The Dutch ingratiate themselves to the natives
In 1609, the Dutch sent English explorer Henry Hudson westward for a third attempt at finding the fabled Northeast Passage. A near mutiny forced him southward, and upon reaching land, he encountered members of the Delaware Indian tribe.
To foster good relations, Hudson shared his brandy with the tribal chief, who soon passed out. But upon waking up the next day, he asked Hudson to pour some more for the rest of his tribe. From then on, the Indians referred to the island as Manahachtanienk -- literally, "The High Island."
And not "high" as in "tall;" high as in "the place where we got blotto." Most people would agree that Manhattan has stayed true to the spirit of its name ever since.
4. The worst aftertaste in history
In 1805, British Admiral Horatio Nelson was killed during the Battle of Trafalgar off the coast of Spain. Most sailors were simply put to rest at sea, but as an admiral, Nelson had to be brought back to England for an official burial.
To preserve his body during the voyage home, the second-in-command stored Nelson's body in the ship's vat of rum and halted all liquor rations to the crew. Not a bad idea, but when the ship reached port, officials went to retrieve Nelson's body and found the vat dry.
Disregarding good taste (in every sense), the crew had been secretly drinking from it the entire way home. After that, naval rum was referred to as Nelson's Blood.
5. Indian elephants raid the liquor cabinet
No wonder they don't sell beer at the circus. Apparently, elephants like to get wasted. In fact, an outpost of the Indian army in the jungle region of Bagdogra has been under attack ever since a local herd of elephants raided the base in search of food and discovered the soldiers' entire winter rations of rum.
Since then, the pachyderms have regularly raided the base for a drink and have smashed down all defenses put up by the army, including electrified fences and firewalls.
According to The Daily Telegraph, "An officer recently posted there explained that the elephants broke the rum bottles by cleverly curling their trunks around the bottom. Then they empty the contents down their throats. They soon got drunk, he said, and swayed around. They enjoy themselves and then return to the jungle."
This is by no means a singular incident, though. The animal kingdom is well-known for its ability to identify fruit that's begun to ferment. Anthropologists even believe this is how early man discovered alcohol -- by observing the strange behavior of animals on a fruit bender.
[Via - Passed Out Drunk]
CDC Releases Study on Gun Violence: Defensive gun use common, mass shootings not
Oh, the inconvenient truth of it all.....
Check it here:
CDC Releases Study on Gun Violence: Defensive gun ...:
Check it here:
CDC Releases Study on Gun Violence: Defensive gun ...:
The Department Of Just-Us
As long as the media continues to give them free reign, their tyranny will remain unchecked...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)