Wednesday, October 27, 2010




“Sex, Tattoos & Violence R Us” = An absolutely unrelated, multitudinous conglomeration of subjects all addressed in a single blog bit and tied together by absolutely nuttin’. (A.K.A. “Hodgepodge O’Nuttin”.)

My inflatable girlfriend - Ariel O. O’Airedale (an Irish airhead really; not much of a girlfriend, but she’s the only one I’ve got) - she insisted that I post a new installment of ‘Sex, Tattoos & Violence R Us’ because it’s been quite awhile since the last one. I didn’t really want to do it but, well, Ariel wears the pants in this relationhip and if I don’t accede to her wishes she’ll just keep barking (read: “bitching”) at me and hit me in the head with my own air pump the moment I turn my back on her.

You may wonder why I ever blow her up at all under these circumstances but… well… hell, sometimes a man gets lonely.
In the last major election, it was all about the Democrats chanting the mantra “Hope and Change”. This time it’s the Republicans chanting their version of the same thing: “Tea Party Candidates” and “Anti-Incumbency”.

Same crap, different year, different party.
Y’all crack me up. When are you going to figure out that no matter how many times you change the party in power the crap remains the same? Repugnantcans no good? Elect Dumb-O-Crats! Dumb-O-Crats no good? Elect Repugnantcans! How many times do you Americans need to play this game before you figure out that… BOTH Repugnantcans AND Dumb-O-Crats no good? Sheesh, even the dumbest hamster eventually figures out that the wheel’s turning but he ain’t goin’ nowhere!

Look, people, you don’t get to elect the real power players – those folks are groomed and appointed from behind the scenes, they're not elected. You only get to elect “the fall guys”. If that makes you feel better somehow, then go ahead and mark your X.

But I hereby guarantee every one of youz that more of the same is in America’s future, and it won’t make a bit of difference which of the two major political parties you put in power.

Speaking of Thomas Sowell . . .

Thomas Sowell said a very quotable thing. This comes from the latest issue of The New American magazine:

How to combat America’s problems? Stop doing what we’ve been doing. Thomas Sowell, an economist and political commentator, says everything the government did wrong in the past is being repeated and escalated. Case in point: “The recent so-called financial reform act left out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” two institutions that brought on the housing bubble and led the way into recession.
In an interview appearing in Investor’s Business Daily, Sowell adds: “People ask me sometimes why politicians continue to make the same mistakes. Don’t they ever learn? And I reply, ‘They do learn! They learn that they can get away with it. That’s what they learn’.”

Back in April, when Arlee Bird was doing his ‘A To Z Blog Challenge’, I left a comment on some participant’s blog, and in doing so, I was required to type the ‘Verification Word’ to submit my comment. I can’t recall what that Verification Word was, but it so tickled me that I actually mentioned it in a postscript and I decided I would invent some meaning for it and begin using it. Unfortunately, I forgot what the word was and when I went back to relocate it, I was unable to find where I had posted it. I searched every single blog I could remember attaching a comment to, but I never did find it again. And I mean I spent a couple of WEEKS searching for that Lost Word.

Well, I decided that would never happen to me again, and shortly afterwards, I began collecting all of the better Verification Words I came across at while in the process of submitting blog comments. Sadly, I never again was given a Verification Word that I felt matched the wonderfulness of that Lost Word. But below is my collection of favorite Verification Words that I have collected since last April. Of course, none of these words mean anything – they’re just randomly thrown together letters by the blogspot computer system – but they all seem to me like they SHOULD have meanings attached. I just like the way they sound; and the first one - “jebocker” – sounds like a word my Pa made up and often used as an expletive. Oh, how many times I heard my Pa say from behind the wheel, “Come on, move it, ya jabroney!”

jebocker - mifie - curbiti - stermo - bolergar - redshe - stampoxi - phreti - liturva - spoteli - hingsomp - jewdays - demetax - waysizin - emotle - mingsi - equalysi - antiverg - muthref - expot - wingam - ellycart - unglyz - dinathr - ditypolf - inhomiz - locurri

OK, those were the best Verification Words I came across during my last seven months of blogging. Pick a word, any word, and use it in good health! C'mon, you know "ditypolf" deserves wide usage!

And speaking of words . . .

I’ll never forget the time my Pa and I went to Santa Monica Beach and gradually entered the water – gradually, because it was way too cold to do the usual, dash ‘n’ dive. But the moment that cold water reached my Pa’s… uhm… you know, most sensitive area, he yelled out, “Jacques O'Reilly!”

Now, that’s cold… AND funny.

And speaking futher of words . . .

In this blog’s last installment [‘Tyranny And Mvtation’], when I couldn’t come up with an appropriate word to describe something, I just invented one on the spot [“odduation”].

I surely don’t mean to boast but I feel that I do at times have a certain capacity for “wingin’ it”. When I desperately need one, I can often come up with a decent counterargument. For example, I recall the time I was in the midst of a debate with some typical liberal. When he wrote to me: “It seems that you can't take disagreement.”
I countered with: "I disagree."

I’ll admit it, I’m rather proud of that comeback, and it still tickles me all these years later.

Also, I recall a couple of Christmas Days ago when at my Sister’s house, I was talking with my brother Nappy and said to him, “Buck Dharma was the most underrated guitarist of the classic Hard Rock era.”
A teenaged friend of the family, standing nearby, overheard just the last part of that sentence and so he asked me, “Who did you say was the most underrated guitarist of the Hard Rock era?”
I repeated it, “Buck Dharma”.
“No he wasn’t”, the young man argued.
I immediately turned to my Brother and said, “You see what I mean?”

I also feel that I am occasionally able to come up with a decent one-liner. Some of my better ones are:

Life is too long to take crap from people.

I never drank to forget nor forgot to drink.

Why don’t you just be YOU so someone else doesn’t have to?

I would rather KNOW an unpleasant truth than BELIEVE a pleasant lie.

You can't reason with a person who forms their beliefs without reasoning.

Barack Obama promised us "Hope" and "Change" but he never said anything about "Honesty." Yes, he did mention "Transparency" but I could see right through that.

But if I have any talent at all, it might be the ability to make up words when I can’t think of the real, legitimate word I need, or when I feel there is a word void, I can fill it. More times than not, I forget my new words almost as quickly as they come to me, but a few of them have stood the test of time for me. The Stephen T. McCarthy’s 'One Man’s Dictionary’ includes these terms that I have used for some years now:

For my place of residence and my fellow citizens: Airheadzona and Airheadzonans.

For “Dead Drunk”: Liquidated.

For members of either the Republican or Democrat parties: Republocrats

For the current state of our economy: Our Eek!-conomy

For Barack Obama: USAP (It’s an acronym for “Undocumented Socialist Acting As President”).

For USAP’s fans: Obama-Rama-Lama-Ding-Dongs

However, one of my favorite words I ever came up with is “Incongrutiating”. Please allow me to give you a bit of the background story. [As I wrote to my friend Arlee Boid a little while ago…]

Years ago, when I had a blog at, I had an Internet friend named Aaron, whom I nicknamed A-DogG. A-DogG and I had a very unique relationship in that we seemed simpatico in many (although not all) ways. He regularly commented on my blog postings and we would get into these amazin' discussions that went on and on and on and on!
A-DogG had a very witty mind and a great ability for wordplay, and my blog posts became mere jumping off points for A-DogG and I to start "riffing", and not only did we have each other laughing but we had outside visitors laughing as well.
With A-DogG and myself, there was an abundance of long-running inside jokes (that anyone following over a period of time would come to understand). One of the many of them pertained to Robert Blake and his TV character "Baretta". Somehow or another (and always in some seemingly natural way) Blake or "Baretta" would find his way into our ongoing dialogues, and damn, it was FUNNY!
More than one person told me that although they really enjoyed my blog postings, what they liked best was watching where A-DogG and I would go with them from there. I had readers following the blog bits just for the amusement of seeing what A-DogG and I could turn them into. The wordplay was a gas, and the riffing was... well, you just had to be there. It was like watching Jimi Hendrix and Eddie Van Halen on Words. DAMN! DO I EVER MISS THOSE DAYS!

At any rate, one day I invented the word “Incongrutiating” (pronounced: In-con-GREW-she-ate–ing). Anytime you find yourself simultaneously doing two (or more) incongruous things, you are “incongrutiating”.

The day that word came to me, I used it in a written sentence during a comment section exchange with A-DogG. The next thing I knew, we were both coming up with multiple examples of “incongrutiating”. Sadly, when Amazon banned me from its website, they deleted all of my old comments, so my own examples of incongrutiating no longer exist. But I recently copied some of A-DogG’s examples for your amusement. Here’s my old buddy A-DogG on incongrutiating:
Incongrutiating: Listening to Michael Medved while reading "The Creature From Jekyll Island".
Incongrutiating: Watching ESPN while snacking in a
La-Z-Boy chair.

Then A-DogG expanded the term and gave us the 'xtreme' version of it:
Hyperincongrutiating: Reading Chomsky while listening to the Star-Spangled Banner.

And finally, he began to play with variations on that theme and came up with the antithesis of incongrutiating:
Nonincongrutiating (synonymous with Congrutiating):
Listening to U2 while reading The Struggles of Northern Ireland.
Listening to Pete Seeger while reading Chomsky (I think my head would explode!!).
Listening to "Born to Run" or "Eye of the Tiger" while watching Marcus Allen reverse field in the Super Bowl.

A-DogG was GREAT!

The reason I thought to post all this here is because my buddy DiscConnected reminded me of the word “incongrutiating” the other day when he gave me a compact disc containing the Bob Dylan song ‘Talkin’ John Birch Paranoid Blues’ at the same time he gave me the John Birch Society magazine, ‘The New American’. Ha! That was a prime example of a person “incongrutiating”.

And speaking of Bob Dylan . . .

I’ve told y’all plenty times by now that I think Bob Dylan was a musical genius; and that unbeknownst to me at the time, his album ‘Bringing It All Back Home’ had a massive impact on me as a writer; and that I believe ‘It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)’ is his greatest of many great songs (and if you can’t remember all this, too bad; don’t blame me for your lousy memory).
But right now, I want to take a few moments to analyze the structure of Dylan’s greatest song.

You’ll note that most songwriters write verses that either do not rhyme at all, or else use a pretty simple rhyming scheme, something like 1/2/3/2 or 1/1/2/2. Maybe the more adventurous and ambitious songwriters might use rhymes or near-rhymes in a verse structured like 1/2/1/2. Or maybe even a longer verse that goes like 1/1/2/3/2. Now that last example would be considered pretty darn complex by normal songwriting standards.

But in Dylan’s song ‘It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)’ not only does he come up with brilliant lyrics – some that became slogans for his generation, such as “He not busy being born is busy dying” and “Money doesn’t talk, it swears” and “even the president of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked” – but Dylan actually formatted these lyrics in the most complex, imaginative song structure I have ever come across. If any other songwriter has ever equalled this for inventiveness, I am totally unaware of it.

You know how when a line of lyric comes to an end and the last word is a rhyme or near-rhyme, that word seems to “fit into a slot” designed for it? Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle piece that completes the picture on a puzzle? There’s a kind of “Ahhh” moment, or sense of being satisfied when that last rhyming word in a verse or chorus takes it’s place to fulfill the build-up to it, right? You know what I’m talking about - it’s as if that last rhyming word fully satisfies an itch on your back that you needed to address.

But in Dylan’s true masterpiece, he turns normal rhyming schemes upside down, and rather than concluding each verse with a word that rhymes, he has every single line in each verse end with a rhyme or a near-rhyme EXCEPT for the last word of the last line in the verse. In other words, he totally reverses the standard approach.

Below are three example verses I took from 'It's Alright, Ma’. All of the verses are comprised of five or six lines and the rhyming pattern goes like this: 1/1/1/1/1/2

Read them and see:

Disillusioned words like bullets bark
As human gods aim for their mark
Make everything from toy guns that spark
To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark
It’s easy to see without looking too far
That not much is really sacred

A question in your nerves is lit
Yet you know there is no answer fit
To satisfy, insure you not to quit
To keep it in your mind and not forget
That it is not he or she or them or it
That you belong to

While one who sings with his tongue on fire
Gargles in the rat race choir
Bent out of shape from society’s pliers
Cares not to come up any higher
But rather get you down in the hole that he’s in

Aside from the philosophically intriguing ideas being creatively conveyed in these verses, note how the last word in the last line of each verse actually works like a final rhyming word would in most other songs. Because the last word is the only one that DOES NOT RHYME (or near-rhyme) with the others, it feels - it seems - it “sounds” - as if that is the word that brings the verse to a satisfying conclusion in a rhyming way. Do I make myself clear? In the verse above, it is that last word “in” that gives your ear the "impression" of rhyming solely because it is the one word that DOESN’T actually rhyme with all the others. It creates a kind of aural illusion.
That final non-rhyming word in each verse seems as if it’s fitting into a slot designed for it as the conclusion of the idea’s pattern, but in truth, Dylan could have used ANY non-rhyming word at the end of each verse, and regardless of whatever word he chose to use it would have equally given the impression that it was the “perfect” word to end with.

This is an amazing trick that Dylan devised; I am unaware of any other song structure that even remotely resembles this. (If anyone else is aware of a similar rhyming structure in song, please let me know.)

If you still don’t get what I’m driving at here, then please click on the YouTube link below, listen to the entire song, and see if you aren’t left with the “impression” that every verse ends with a rhyming word, even though the fact is that each verse ends with the only NON-RHYMING word. I trust you’ll hear what I’m writing.

Click here and listen: It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)

[No need to take notes; there will be tasting but no testing.]

As I’ve told y’all before, when my Pa passed away, he didn’t leave me a fortune in money, nor did he bequeath to me his good name (it ain’t that good!), however, I did inherit his truck and (most importantly) his book. Yeah, he only had one book but it’s a great one:
Perhaps the most valuable chapter in this 1969 book is ‘#6 – Bourbon Whiskey’. Herein we find some of the things about this important beverage that few Americans know.

Bourbon, America’s great whiskey, is the product of a craft and tradition dating back nearly 200 years. Its productiion calls for a wedding of golden corn with infusions of other rich grains, all of which have flourished in this country since its colonization.

The world’s finest whiskey is made with limestone water found in Nelson County, Kentucky!

Limestone water, usually given as an essential in the production of Bourbon, has been credited with nearly every virtue. According to various reports, it is responsible for the courage of Kentucky’s Colonels, the beauty of its women, the speed of its horses and even the eloquence of its politicians.

There is no question that the finest Bourbon whiskeys are produced in the state of Kentucky. A small cluster of distilleries located in and around Bardstown, Kentucky, produce the finest bourbon whiskeys in America.

Most sadly, it has recently come to my attention that perhaps Bourbon is no longer being produced in Nelson County, Kentucky. The following comes from the Wikipedia site:

On November 7, 1996, Heaven Hill's production plant was almost completely destroyed by fire. Several of the company's warehouses were destroyed, and over 90,000 gallons of alcohol lost. The company survived the next several years through the provision of production capacity by its fellow local bourbon labels, Brown-Forman and Jim Beam, until its purchase and adaptation of the new Heaven Hill Bernheim distillery in Louisville. While fermenting, mashing, and distilling occurs at the new distillery, aging, bottling, and shipping still occur in Bardstown.

Note that the distilling is now done in Louisville, outside of Nelson County. (Is it any wonder that my Pa chose the year 1996 to check out of this lifetime? I think he foresaw that there was no reason to go on living.)
Evan Williams is a good example of what I’m yakking about. This Bourbon was once made in Bardstown, Nelson County, but a close examination of the label now shows that it is bottled in Bardstown, but you won’t find it saying it was distilled in Bardstown. Is this somewhat deceptive advertising? I thinks so.

Evidently some of the so-called “bourbon experts” don’t think the distilling location change matters. Check out these tasting notes for the 1997 - '98 Evan Williams Vintage Bourbon:
“…The first sniffs detect pleasing aromas of pineapple, oak, and saddle leather; seven more minutes of aeration bring about added scents of toasted marshmallow, honey-wheat toast, and cherry. The palate entry is firm, spirity, properly oily, and leathery; at the midpalate juncture, the biscuity/honeyed flavor profile begins to remind me of the glory days of this series… Finishes oily, slightly sherried, honey-like, pear-like, luscious, and nutty…Highly Recommended
~ F. Paul Pacult - Spirit Journal
Hokey-Smoke! Who does this guy F. Paul Pacult think he is, Frasier Crane?! I mean, hey, I like my Bourbon as well as does the next guy, but when I sip it, all I taste is "whiskey", and then I get drunk.

Well, anyway, the three greatest things this country ever produced were Bourbon, The Blues, and Louis Armstrong. And sadly, it now seems that two out of three are gone (and The Blues is in sad shape, if you axe me). If anyone has happy news to the contrary about this Nelson County Bourbon problem, please be sure to notify me.

And speaking of my Pa’s truck . . .

Sure, I’ve pimped my ride (that is, my Pa's old truck), but I’ve had to do it ultra-low budget-like. But if you’re ever driving the mean streets of Phoenix, Airheadzona, and see a truck with these things in the cab . . .
[A cowboy outlaw - made in England - sits atop my steering column.]
[Meditatin' Rafiki attempts to conjure up some gasoline.]
[BATMAN: “Quick! To the Batbathtub!”]
. . . Then be sure to run me off the road and introduce yerself.
Just last week, a good ol’ friend of mine Emailed me some photographs he had gotten from someone else. I was in a couple of the photos – I don’t know who took them and I had never seen them before – but these suckers are OLD!

That first one (below) was taken on the set of ‘Happy Days’ probably in 1978, the year after Fonzie “jumped the shark”. That’s me out-of-focus in the background taking notes. I don’t recall the story now, but Fonzie was probably giving us pointers on how to pick up girls, or something equally silly.
[STMcC in center. Lookin' pretty young there, boy!]
Here’s a second one of me, possibly backstage on the ‘Happy Days’ set, although I’m far from certain of that:
These pictures got me to thinking about how quite awhile back, my brother Nappy and I were discussing shows that “jumped the shark”. That term, if you don’t already know, is used to describe the first moment or the first episode in which a TV series began it’s decline in quality. It can also be applied to Rock ‘N’ Roll bands, or cartoon strips, you name it – but it was initially a judgment against 'Happy Days' and then later applied to all TV shows. In 1977, an episode of ‘Happy Days’ had Fonzie water skiing (in his black leather jacket no less) where, in danger of landing in an area containing a man-eating shark, he manages to successfully jump over it. STOOO-PID!

So, I told brother Nappy that long before I had ever heard the phrase “jump the shark” I had come to the conclusion that for most TV shows, the episode when they "jump the shark" (or, in other words, display the fact that they’ve run out of good storylines) is when the protagonists go to Hollywood, or when some celebrity plays himself or herself on an episode. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen this, but after awhile I began to notice the Hollywood/Celebrity pattern that indicated a TV series was exhausted.

Nappy laughed and pointed out to me that the very episode in which Fonzie jumped the shark also was an episode in which the Cunningham family, along with their friends and Fonzie, had gone to Hollywood. Doh! That’s right! That’s why Fonzie was even in a position to jump the shark – they were at the Pacific Ocean! That hadn’t even occurred to me, but it just goes to prove my point. ‘Happy Days’ didn’t “jump the shark” when Fonzie jumped the shark; ‘Happy Days’ “jumped the shark” when it was first announced that the show’s characters were going out West to Hollywood! (Although, personally, I think ‘Happy Days’ was a shark-jumper from episode one, but…)

My all-time favorite TV series is ‘The Andy Griffith Show’ (TAGS). After five seasons, Don Knotts (“Barney Fife”) left the show, and in season six, TAGS switched from black and white to color. It also began its obvious decline in quality at that point. Is it any coincidence that it was also early in season six that Andy Taylor and his family went to Hollywood? No Barney Fife? Quick! What do we do? “I know,” says the desperate writer, “Let’s have the Taylor’s make a trip to Hollywood.”

For a TV show, it’s the kiss of death, I tell ya!

Now, I’ll admit, there are exceptions to my rule of thumb (there’s an exception to every rule, isn’t there?), but by and large, I think my observation holds up. True, Dr. Joyce Brothers and Dr. Phil each played themself on the show ‘Frasier’ and yet the ‘Frasier’ series never jumped the shark. Yes, Sammy Davis Junior played himself in the second season of ‘All In The Family’ and it would be a few years yet before that show jumped the shark. And what do we do about a show like ‘The Beverly Hillbillies’ which actually starts out with the main characters already in Hollywood? (Well, close enough – it’s a five minute drive from Beverly Hills to Hollywood.) But start paying attention and see if my theory doesn’t hold up pretty well.

Since I’ve been reminiscing here, check out this also recently discovered picture of my brother, Nappy, with Michael J. Fox on the set of ‘Back To The Future’.
Speaking of Brother Nappy . . .
Nappy and I were recently laughing about this. Independent of each other, we’ve both discovered that there are three things you can count on 95% of all Americans to say, and each American who says it believes that he or she is saying something that pretty uniquely applies to themselves:
1) Cigarette smoke irritates my sinuses.
2) Aspirin irritates my stomach.
3) I’m addicted to chocolate – I’m a “chocoholic”.
Ahh, yeah, you people are just SOOOooooo unique!

Turning briefly to The Sports Section . . .

I noticed in the Wednesday, October 27th edition of ‘The Airheadzona Repugnant’, under the category “Today On Radio” it said: “MLB: World Series (Game 1) – Rangers at Giants, joined in progress, 6 p.m., 620 AM”

620 AM is KTAR, a local Sports Talk radio station and ESPN affiliate. Weekdays from 2 to 6 is the sports talk program of Dumbo And Ass… er, I mean, Gambo And Ash. Phoenix is just a wide spot in the desert pretending to be cosmopolitan, and here, our Airheadzona radio programmers evidently think it’s more important to carry Gambo And Ash yakking about sports in general until six o’clock, and pick up the Game 1 World Series broadcast in progress after their regularly scheduled sports yak program concludes... when the game is already in the third inning and the score is Rangers 2, Giants 0. Only in Airheadzona, I tell ya! The only station to carry the World Series in the Phoenix area, and they give precedence to two local yokels.

If you’re thinking about moving to Airheadzona, do yourself a favor: DON’T!

In the same sports section of the same newspaper on the same day, we find Bob Young of ‘The Heat Index’ has written:

Praise Breesus! New Orleans savior Brees has seen his passer rating slide from 109.6 last season, to 91.4 on your quarterback dial. That’s like down with the jazz stations.

Now, I’ll admit, that’s a pretty clever line. The only problem with it is that here in “cosmopolitan” Phoenix we don’t have Jazz stations, unless you’re counting KYOT, our Jazz-lite Kenny G-string station (and I’m NOT counting it). Well, there is the NPR station that plays Jazz after the sun goes down, but unlike a Big League city, like say a Los Angeles or a New York, Phoenix doesn’t have a 24/7 Jazz/Blues station. But then why should we? We’re really just a wide spot in the desert pretending to be wearing big boys britches.

One final sports observation . . .

Earlier this week, Darnell Dockett, defensive lineman for the Airheadzona Cardinals, was quoted in the sports section as having said:

I don’t think we’ve arrived or anything.

You don’t think? Well, considering that y’all have a record of 3 and 3, and are getting your azzes royally kicked on a pretty regular basis, yeah, I guess you're right, you haven’t “arrived or anything”.

Dockett continues:

We’re just going to stay humble and try to get better every day.

Gonna stay humble, eh, Darnell? What on Earth would you Cardinals have to be conceited about? Don't worry, Darnell, I'm pretty sure that if your egos start to rebel without a cause, any number of NFL teams will quickly re-humble you guys.
Sheesh! Do these athletes ever listen to themselves?

OK, speaking of John F. Kennedy . . .

In a recent Email I sent to my new friend with the pseudonym “Charts And Grafs” I wrote this:

I have read a couple of books and some articles on the Kennedy assassination, and it was so strange: that was the only subject I have ever studied in which the more I learned the more confused and uncertain I became. I have also seen a few documentaries on the subject. I finally reached the conclusion that I would never really feel I knew what had happened with JFK. And last year, after I had given up all hope of greater understanding, I finally viewed a documentary that “felt right”. It may have been the most clarifying look at the Kennedy assassination I have yet discovered . . . if it’s true. Ha!

In case anyone’s interested, that two-hour documentary is called SPOOKS, HOODS, AND THE HIDDEN ELITE. It can be purchased at G. Edward Griffin’s ‘Reality Zone’ site, but it seems the entire thing may also be available for free viewing online. (Try “Googling” it.)
Here’s Reality Zone’s description of the program:

This is the confession, made eight days before his death, of a man who worked in the joint service of organized crime and the CIA. Chauncey Holt tells why the Mob and the CIA wanted JFK dead and how they carried out his assassination. One of Holt’s assignments was to create false ID papers for Lee Harvey Oswald who he knew as a CIA undercover agent posing as a Castro supporter. Holt reveals that there were several shooters, but Oswald wasn’t one of them. He was set up to take the blame and draw attention away from the real assassination team.
And speaking of the Mob . . .
Not far from where I work is a typical Airheadzona strip mall. For about a month now - I kid you not, about 4 weeks - there has been a gutted car parked in front of a tattoo parlor and it has not moved. I see it on my way to work in the afternoons, I see it there all by its lonesome in the parking lot after midnight when I'm driving home from work, and I see it there on weekends. Any time of day or night, 7 days a week, that car is in the same conspicuous spot in the parking lot.
This car has obviously been stolen and abandoned or else just abandoned. There is an oil slick underneath it now and I saw the driver's side door ajar a few nights ago. I've also seen cops parked in this lot at night. Wouldn't you think that by now one of our dedicated "protecting and serving" boys or chicks in blue would have had this car towed?
One day last week, I also saw a grocery cart lying on its side in the far right lane of a freeway onramp. It remained there for over 24 hours until finally moved off the side of the roadway. This was in a very high-traffic area, and I can guarantee you that in that 24+ hour period, there had to have been at least six cops drive past that cart, as well as three or more Highway Patrol characters. It took 24+ hours for someone to move it... and whoever moved it may not have even been a public "servant".
Of course, none of this surprises me because I know only too well that people don't become cops because they want to move grocery carts out of the road and have abandoned cars towed. They become cops because they want to be involved in high-speed chases and kick front doors down.
The next time a proposition on your ballot is asking you to tax yourself even deeper in order to put more cops on the street, remember these things and... "Just vote NO!"
A bit of advice: Don’t kill the family dog by shooting its fleas.

And speaking of families . . .

Have any of you noticed that by capping the number of profane words I’m willing to use in any one blog installment at “lots and lots”, I have managed to create a more family-friendly blog? Please spread the word. (No! Not that word! Sheesh!)

This has been another fine Ariel O. O’Airedale & Stephen T. McCarthy production, brought to you by our sponsor . . .
“Come hungry and sober -- Leave hungry and puking”

~ Stephen T. McCarthy (and Ariel O. O’Airedale)

Back Issues:

Forerunner to S. T. & V. R US:
7 Remastered RANDOM THOUGHTS + 1 Previously Unreleased BONUS TRACK And 1 ALTERNATE TAKE.

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Thursday, October 21, 2010



On Tuesday, a funny thing happened. Ya know, like “funny”? Like how sometimes you find yourself in somewhat strange circumstances? There should be a word for that, and there probably is one but at this moment, I can’t come up with one off-a the top of my headbone. So I’ll just make one up. Hold on a sec. --- OK, got it! “Odduation”. That’s an “odd situation”. Why use two words? We need to reduce government and verbiage!

So, as I was saying, on Tuesday I found myself in an odduation. You see, my friend DiscConnected who has a great political blog called “Back In The USSR” - why aren’t ya reading it regularly, ya Low IQers? (to borrow a Bullwinkle J. Moose term) –

Uhm. Where was I? Oh, yeah . . .
As I was saying, on Tuesday I found myself in an odduation when one of my McBuddies handed me a ‘Bob Dylan In Concert At Brandeis University–1963’ compact disc and asked me if I wanted to keep it. It seems DiscConnected had ordered something online which came with a free copy of this CD as a bonus. But they had inadvertently shipped two copies to him and when he inquired about whether or not he should return one, they told him not to bother. So, someone’s mistake was my good fortune.

Well, the Dylan disc includes ‘Talkin’ World War III Blues’, a song I’ve always loved but do not own.

Down at the corner by a hot-dog stand
I seen a man
I said, “Howdy friend, I guess there’s just us two”
He screamed a bit and away he flew
Thought I was a Communist

But at the same time that DiscConnected generously gave me his extra Dylan disc, he also handed me the latest edition of The New American magazine. You see, these days, my buddy subscribes to it, and after he’s read the issues, he gives them to me and I read ‘em and save 'em.

But the funny thing was that The New American is the official magazine of The John Birch Society (best current events magazine in the country, sez I!) but also included on the Bob Dylan disc is the song ‘Talkin’ John Birch Paranoid Blues’. Ya see what I’m sayin’ ‘bout an “odduation”?
Well, I was feelin’ sad and feelin’ blue
I didn’t know what in the world I wus gonna do
Them Communists they wus comin’ around
They wus in the air
They wus on the ground
They wouldn’t gimme no peace . . .

So I run down most hurriedly
And joined up with the John Birch Society
I got me a secret membership card
And started off a-walkin’ down the road
Yee-hoo, I’m a real John Bircher now!
Look out you Commies!
Well, Dylan was a genius. Anyone who can write something like ‘It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)’ is clearly a genius. But politically speaking, Dylan was ign’ant as a lib. And he still is ign’ant as a lib. He did, after all, get fooled by all that “Hope and Change” yak spillin’ from the mouth of our foreign-born USAP.
Well, it struck me “funny” that DiscConnected was giving me an anti-John Birch Society song and the John Birch Society magazine all at the same time. Anyway, I told you all that so I could tell you THIS:

I thought there was a really outstanding article in this October 11th issue of The New American. It was penned by Mr. Jack Kenny and titled ‘Tyranny Triumphing’. Most of the time The New American gives an even, unemotional, scholarly, Constitutionalist-view of the “odduation” America finds Herself in today. But every once in awhile, one of The New American writers will author an article that is unusually forceful and fiery. ‘Tyranny Triumphing’ was one of those “every once in awhiles”.

It is my opinion that a calm and calculated recitation of facts won’t make much of an impact, won’t get things done in America today. With the mainstream media and the blogosphere, there are too many voices asking to be heard. What you need is the rabble-rousing, torch-lighting, musket-loading passion of a Patrick Henry, a Joseph McCarthy, or an Ann Coulter, if you want to be heard and to get things movin’.

And so, in that spirit, it is my pleasure to repost for your edification and the fueling of your fire . . .
By Jack Kenny

America is sliding into tyranny, and few Americans seem to recognize it. Before you dismiss this as alarmist propaganda, consider the following:

A September 8 ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, often described as the nation’s most liberal, offers another example of a tortured balancing act. The court ruled that private persons may not sue over the government practice of rendition and torture of terrorist suspects because the defense would require the government to compromise “state secrets.” This extension of the “state secrets privilege,” argued by the George W. Bush administration and again by the Department of Justice under President Barack Obama, was used to cover even a subsidiary of Boeing, the giant aircraft manufacturer, that allegedly transported the suspects overseas for interrogation. Now even Boeing apparently enjoys the privilege of “sovereign immunity.”

Writing for the majority in the court’s 6-5 decision, Judge Raymond C. Fisher described the case as “a painful conflict between human rights and national security.” But the court’s majority assigned all the pain to human rights and gave all the security to those in both the government and private sector who plan and carry out the transfer of prisoners in U.S. custody to overseas jurisdictions, where interrogations are carried out in a fashion that is, to say the least, pre-Miranda.

The plaintiffs were five prisoners who claimed they were tortured during their detainment, a charge that the United States, so far, does not need to refute. That could change if the U.S. Supreme Court accepts an appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the suit for the plaintiffs. The court declined to hear a similar appeal in 2007 and, according to the New York Times, the high court has not taken on the limits of the state secrecy privilege in 50 years.

For most Americans the issue will, perhaps, be of minor concern. When people are out of work or fearful of losing their jobs, what happens to people overseas is, in a manner of speaking, foreign to them. But Ronald Reagan was fond of saying that elections are not merely about who gets what, but about who we are as a people. And if we stop to look now at who we are as a people, we might not recognize the face in the mirror.

No Wonder Why
For we are to blame. Even though the judges may have erred in deciding the case against the plaintiffs and ranking human rights below the state secrets privilege, they did not create the policy of “extraordinary rendition.” They did not decide that sending people to secret prisons run by our Central Intelligence Agency was essential for the defense of America. They may have permitted, but did not invent policies that more resemble those of the Soviet Union than the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States. No, our executive branch did that and the council of cravens known as the Congress of the United States lets the executive get away with it. And We the People let the Congress get away with that. What Congressman has lost his seat for not opposing “extraordinary rendition”?

At the end of the 19th century, William Graham Sumner published an essay called “The Conquest of the United States by Spain, 1898.” Now at first glance you might think he got it backwards. The good old USA won that “splendid little war.” But no, he meant we lost by winning. Subtraction by addition. We came to resemble the nation we conquered, becoming more imperialistic and authoritarian and less liberty loving in the process. His essay is not widely read these days and was no doubt denounced at the time as unpatriotic. But it has proven to be prophetic. And I wonder today if we are not coming to resemble more and more the Soviet Union, the evil empire we thought we had vanquished.

Even the momentous issue of war or peace is no longer decided by our representatives in Congress, as the Constitution requires, but by a few people in and around the Politburo — I mean the White House. This was never more clear than when the United States was on the verge of the first Gulf War, Operation Desert Storm, in January of 1991, when the Congress was debating a resolution authorizing the President to decide what Congress refused to decide — whether the United States should go to war to liberate Kuwait.

During the House debate, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) noted that those arguing in favor of the war would often invoke the duty to “support American policy.” “What are we,” asked Frank, “the Canadian consulate?” In the Senate, Warren Rudman, Republican of New Hampshire, covered himself with ignominy by arguing that it was a matter for the President to decide. “It’s not a decision for a committee,” said the state’s senior Senator, who was apparently oblivious to the constitutional requirement that “a committee” called Congress, not the President, must declare war.

Also, the Founders, who did not contemplate a standing army, assigned to Congress the duty to “raise and support Armies” and “To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them shall be employed in the Service of the United States,” so how did it become the exclusive role of the executive branch to determine how people captured by our armed forces or even our domestic police forces shall be treated — whether or not they shall be subjected to “enhanced interrogation” techniques and in what country and under what government such interrogation shall be carried out? What is the position of the Congress on that? What, come to think of it, is the position of the Congress on anything?

Well, it seems, the position of Congress is always the same: supine.

Obviously, we’re to blame in this as well. Most Americans can hardly believe their government would be engaged in torture, so they assume that it is not even true — that it is an exaggeration of “bleeding heart” liberals who are worried about prisoners enjoying the good life at “Club Gitmo,” as Rush Limbaugh and others like to call the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — as though any of them would care to spend as much as a day there. And the stories of prolonged confinement in underground cells or cages, the stories of laceration and hot burning liquids poured into open wounds, electric shock, waterboarding, etc., go virtually unreported in our hometown newspapers.

You can read about such methods of “enhanced interrogation,” if you have the stomach for it, occasionally in the pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post. You may also read occasionally of legal arguments about the status of prisoners taken and confined as “enemy combatants,” who are suspects not entitled, according to the current as well as the previous administration, to hearing the charges against them, since the government need not file any formal charges to detain them indefinitely. No charges, no trial, no lawyers required, thank you. Welcome to the former United States of America, now the Brave New World where the Bill of Rights has gone down a black hole, there to keep the Magna Carta company. Our government now assumes the right even to target Americans overseas for assassination if they are suspected of engaging in or supporting terrorist activities. No “due process” problem there.

Rationalizing the Reasons
Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) was the lone Senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act, that mischievously named piece of unconstitutional legislation that allows the government access to records of, among other things, the books you buy and borrow from the library. When told by his critics that his thinking is “pre-9/11,” Feingold replied that their thinking is “pre-1776.” Yes, it seems many of our “intellectuals” would seem to prefer that we were still a colony of Great Britain. A lawyer friend insists that waterboarding is not torture, even though the United States in World War II subjected some of our own soldiers to court-martial for employing that forbidden technique. He reads widely, the gentleman does, so he has learned of a decision by a court of the European Union, which found that the waterboarding of Irish prisoners by the English was not torture. “It’s unpleasant, but it’s not torture,” my friend tells me. Unpleasant? How bloody English of him.

The gentleman is also a “conservative” of the neo-nihilist Cheney-Rumsfeld “stuff happens” variety and becomes predictably irate when the U.S. Supreme Court reaches across “the pond” to find a decision by a foreign court that seemingly buttresses the U.S. Supreme Court’s own finding. Yet he has no problem finding an international court opinion to support his contention that “waterboarding is not torture,” and uses that to trump the legal precedent of the United States government and its armed forces. The same gentleman was also predictably indignant when President Bill Clinton got caught in perjury and adultery. Yet, to update an old Republican argument, nobody drowned, was tortured, or lost their liberty in “Monicagate.”

To repeat: America is sliding toward tyranny and few Americans recognize it. Sometimes tyranny is advanced in the name of expanding our liberties, as when the U.S. or a state Supreme Court discovers a right in the Constitution that has been there all along, you see, but simply never before had been found. Thus, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts found somewhere in that state’s 1781 Constitution the “right” of homosexuals and lesbians to have their same-sex cohabitations blessed by the state as marriage. John Adams would have been amazed, but the state’s legislature dutifully obeyed the court and made the necessary change to the Bay State’s ancient marriage laws. Worse was the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that denies every state the ability to legislate a defense of the life of pre-natal infants, or fetuses, formerly known as babies. Thus, we are supposed to regard the slaughter of some 50 million babies as, at worst, the Constitution’s collateral damage.

In New Hampshire, which used to provide a refreshing contrast to the “people’s republic” of Massachusetts, the state’s lawmakers have demonstrated time and again that the majority is “pro-choice.” So the real meaning of the state motto, “Live Free or Die” is that life-terminating women and their abortionists get to live free, while pre-born babies get to die. They call that “freedom-loving” in the Granite State. It is an upside down world as George Orwell described Big Brother’s empire in 1984: “War is Peace. Ignorance is Strength. Freedom is Slavery ”

You can sell almost any form of tyranny to the American public as long as you wrap a flag around it, sing “Yankee Doodle” and “God Bless America,” and call it patriotism. And the bean counters in government, the certified public accountants and those other CPA’s, the certainly pusillanimous Americans, and both John and Jane Q. Public can all be counted on to not recognize or raise the alarm about it.

And where, pray tell, are the friends of liberty among the members of the ruling class? I can think of only two members of Congress who spoke up against the government kidnapping of Elian Gonzalez, the Cuban refugee who was rescued at high sea by the same Miami fisherman who sheltered the frightened child in his arms before he was snatched away by Attorney General Janet Reno’s goon squad. One was then Sen. Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat, who protested that he had been assured by the White House that no such seizure would be undertaken until the legal appeals on behalf of the boy and his Miami relatives had been exhausted. The other was Bob Smith, a Republican and at the time the senior Senator from New Hampshire. As a longtime New Hampshire resident, I know how much ridicule and scorn was heaped on Smith for his efforts. Ridicule and scorn are the rewards the Sneering Class saves for those Americans who speak up for and act in genuine patriotism. If we didn’t recognize tyranny during the government siege at Waco or in the Gestapo-style “dynamic entry” of the Gonzalez home in Miami to capture and kidnap a six-year-old at gunpoint by a government thug in riot gear, then we might well wonder what might awaken us.

Where was Florida Governor Jeb Bush? Where was Gov. George W. Bush of Texas? He was apparently too busy campaigning for his party’s presidential nomination at the time to take a stand for either liberty or decency. Ditto John McCain, Sen. Bill Bradley, Vice President Al Gore, and others. And the same may be said about nearly every other member of the Congress of the United States.

A few members of Congress forced an investigation of the siege at Waco that resulted in the death of 76 people, including more than 20 children. The hearings were interesting and quite revealing. They reached the height of absurdity with Attorney General Reno, who told the House committee probing the atrocity that the tanks ramming the side of a wooden frame residence at the Branch Davidian “compound” in Waco were not armed with bullets or explosives. She saw the tanks essentially as “rental vehicles,” she told the committee. That was too much for committee co-Chairman Bill Zeliff, the usually placid Republican Congressman from New Hampshire.

“Rental vehicles?” he repeated. “Tanks ramming the side of a house?” Yes, the Attorney General said, that’s essentially what they were.

Well, as Groucho Marx said, “Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?” The ramming by the tanks against the house was accompanied by a voice over the loudspeaker, announcing: “This is not an assault! This is not an assault!”

“It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties,” wrote the “father of the Constitution,” James Madison, in “A Memorial and Remonstrance.” We are well beyond the “first experiment” in 21st-century America. We need to think and act on that “prudent jealousy” that Madison called “the first duty of citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle.”

Perhaps liberty’s last word was written not by James Madison, but by George Orwell. Perhaps we don’t read or heed Orwell’s warnings any more than we do Madison’s. Orwell wrote what may be the epitaph of liberty in our time. He ended 1984 with the following observation about Winston Smith, Orwell’s Everyman: “He loved Big Brother.”
Well, I think that is a fine article. The New American is the best political magazine in the country, but I do wish it would adopt that tone more often.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
‘Loyal American Underground’

DOCTORS FOR FREEDOM by William F. Jasper
[An excellent doctor’s-eye view of the impending disaster known as “ObamaCare”.]
[a DiscConnected blog. Read it or be as ign’ant as Dylan.]
YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010


In The Holy Bible - you know, that Book your tax dollars must be forever separated from? That Book which your children’s eyes must not fall upon in a public place for fear that the kids might actually start following the example set by that robed and bearded Rebel, that Maverick of mavericks, Jesus Godriguez. – Well, in “that” Book, there is a section titled “Acts”. And in the 17th chapter of Acts we find Saint Paul ingeniously addressing a gaggle of Greeks about their altar inscribed, “TO THE UNKNOWN GOD”.

Well, this blog bit is addressed “To The Unknown Reader”.

Are there “unknown readers” of this blog? That’s what I aim to find out.
A funny thing happened on the way to my blogging retirement. When for the first time I announced on this blog that it is my intention to discontinue posting on ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’ (F-FFF) at the end of this year, my new friend ChartsAndGrafs, whom I did not previously know existed, suddenly came out of the woodwork to tell me that I must be “temporarily insane to consider shutting this blog down.”

ChartsAndGrafs wrote some very complimentary and persuasive things to me in an effort to get me to reconsider walking away from this blog. Here is what he said in part:

Believe me, you are reaching people both directly and indirectly and helping to fuel the increasing spread of information necessary to the burgeoning freedom movement. … Needless to say, your words have been instrumental in helping me put the pieces of the puzzle together.

I replied:

C&G, I appreciate what you have written MORE THAN YOU COULD IMAGINE! Naturally, you make me wonder if there might be others out there, quietly, invisibly following this blog unbeknownst to me. And if so, how many?

But people need to understand that a person can't just keep writing and pouring so much energy and passion into a blog like this if they don't periodically receive some feedback assuring them that they are reaching others. One cannot seemingly write in a void and keep up their enthusiasm enough to continue it indefinitely.

And that is why it is so important that readers occasionally reach out and contact the writer, letting him or her know that their efforts are not all in vain. I don't mean that I need a regular dose of comments as complimentary as yours was, but I - we! - need SOME feedback in order to know that the words are having SOME effect. Otherwise the writer becomes dogged by the impression that it's just words in the wind and all for naught.

And that brings us to the reason for this blog bit addressed to the Unknown Reader. I simply need to know if there ARE any unknown readers out there, or if ChartsAndGrafs was the only one of his kind.

As things stand right now, my intention is to continue posting at ‘F-FFF’ until the end of 2010, after which I will disappear entirely, or – more likely – disappear for the most part but occasionally – RARELY! - put in a guest appearance on my own blog with perhaps a new installment of ‘Sex, Tattoos & Violence R Us’, or maybe a brief commentary on some future hot-news item that I simply can’t refrain from speaking out about. (“Speaking out” – Ha! “Hollering about” is more like it.)

At this point, I need to know how many regular or even semi-regular readers this blog might have that I am currently in the dark about.

ChartsAndGrafs seems to think that . . .

“For every follower I bet you have a handful of others who are too lazy to make it official. In fact, I bet some shadowy lurker will someday read my comments here and make themselves a follower just to officially increase your number of followers.”

I would like to believe he’s right, but I’m skeptical. I’m always skeptical. About EVERYTHING! And I’m not willing to go on under the assumption that more persons are regularly reading this blog than are signed up as official “Followers” of it. Especially considering the fact that I strongly suspect only 5 of F-FFF’s registered “Followers” are reading it on an even semi-regular basis.

If anyone out there is reading this blog routinely but unbeknownst to me, I need to hear from you . . . now. I certainly am NOT fishing for compliments (heck, I never even fish for fish), but I’m Looking For Mr. Lurker. Or his wife. Or his mistress, his lesbian lover, whatever. (Don’t ask me to explain what I don’t understand!) What I’m DEFINITELY NOT looking for, however, is pictures of Brett Favre’s... uhm... “football”.

The response I get (or don’t get) to this blog bit will likely play a significant role in my decision about the future of ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’. I am tired of writing, and I’m especially tired of preaching to a choir of five or so, and receiving no reaction from the “outside world”. (I’m merely assuming there is one.)

If you exist, Unknown Reader, and if you find the existence of this blog valuable in any way, shape, form, or degree, NOW is the time to show yourself; NOW is the time to stand up and be counted. I’m not saying that now is the time to sign up as a legitimate “Follower” (you “bastard”), I’m only saying that I need to know you’re out there and checking in from time to time.

Unknown Readers, that is non-“Followers” (henceforth to be known as my “Beloved Bastards”?), if you exist and if the survival of ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’ is important to you in the least, please submit a comment to this blog bit’s ‘Comment Section’. Please tell me approximately how long you’ve been reading this blog from your unseen hiding place, and please tell me approximately how often you return to it. Once a week? Once a month? Once every 6 months? Only when the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie?

What you say might well make a difference. And how often is that the case? Don’t miss this fabulous opportunity to be noticed, to have an impact and maybe bring about REAL change. (Unlike that “Change” you voted for in 2008 and never got. Remember that?)

Ferret-Faced And Fascistically Yours . . .
~ Stephen T. McCarthy
'Loyal American Underground'

C&G And STMcC Discuss The Future of ‘F-FFF’
[See the 'Comment Section'.]

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Monday, October 11, 2010


It is amongst my all-time favorite quotes, and for many years I've felt that it succinctly and perfectly sums up America's stated foreign policy:

Tell them it's going to be a new place. It's going to be a nice place to live. I'm the new judge. There's going to be law, there's going to be order, progress, civilization, and peace. Above all, peace. And I don't care who I have to kill to get it.
~ Paul Newman
(from the movie "The Life And Times Of Judge Roy Bean")

Now what part of "peace" don't you understand?

Of course, in reality, American foreign policy has more to do with control than it does with peace. But "peace" is something we can all agree on. Or most of us anyway. For some reason the word "control" is harder to swallow.

The puzzling thing of it is: With people being almost unanimously agreed on the desire for peace, how come it's always in short supply?

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
D-FensDogg of the 'Loyal American Underground'

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Friday, October 8, 2010


For most intents and purposes, this blog (as well as my other blog, the frivolous 'Stuffs' ) will cease publishing by the end of 2010. I've had enough! Enough of your apathy - your lack of interest in the serious matters; enough of your lack of concern for your fellow man; and enough of your dogmatic, Pavlovian party-affiliation reaction to political issues. In short, I've had enough of YOU!

I certainly did not start this blog under the delusion that I was going to change the world. But I did (mistakenly) think I might change the world-view of some readers. I did believe that some of the persons who visited here would find my positions seemingly informed and intriguing. At least intriguing enough to go out and acquire and read some of the books I repeatedly recommend.

The Analytics system installed on this blog shows me that over time there has been no shortage of visitors to Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends. But how many of them have had their viewpoints impacted by what I've posted here? How many of them have interacted with me? How many have bothered to investigate further some of my seemingly wild claims only to discover that I was correct in my assessment after all, and then returned to tell me so? The answer is: None, or nearly none.

And I think I know the primary reason why. Patrick Henry said:

We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth ... For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it.

Very sadly, there are few Americans left with the stuff of Patrick Henry. Most Americans would rather stick their head in the sand - or better yet, paste it to their TV screen - than face the cold, hard, unpleasant truths of this nation and of this world and then work to change things. I mean, REALLY change things - not "change" things as in voting for some friggin' Marxist to occupy the White House and lead us yet further away from the government established by our Founding Fathers. (Gee, I know... maybe you should have voted for the CFR member John McCain instead. Yuk!-Yuk!)

I have said it a million times. This makes a million and one. Like Patrick Henry . . .

I would rather KNOW an unpleasant truth than BELIEVE a pleasant lie.

Yeah, you can talk all you want about your conservatism, your Constitutionalism, your Christianity, your respect for "Family Values", but what are you DOING about them?

Even more sadly, the reaction I've received from my supposed friends leaves me extremely disheartened. The first step is self-education, and with only a few exceptions (namely, Br'er Marc, Ol' WP, and The Great L.C.) my own friends wouldn't even go out and buy and read the books I've recommended. Or take just a few hours to watch some of the DVDs I've urged them to see.

Which brings me to the point of this post. Again - AGAIN! - I am urging everyone to rent, buy or steal the documentaries LOOSE CHANGE: AN AMERICAN COUP and 9/11: PRESS FOR TRUTH. Maybe if I say it enough times someone will actually do it, for crying-out-loud!

What follows is the message written by Daniel Sunjata which appears in the booklet included with the LOOSE CHANGE: AN AMERICAN COUP documentary. Sunjata is the movie's narrator as well as an actor known for his role in the TV series 'Rescue Me'. I have borrowed the following from the website 911Blogger.Com, and they borrowed it from the 'Loose Change' booklet itself [minor grammatical errors and misspellings intact]. Thanks, 911Blogger, for saving me the time of retyping all this.

The only thing I have altered from the 911Blogger posting is to break the statement up into additional paragraphs for easier online reading. Yes, Sunjata's message is fairly lengthy - as a subject this important demands - and since neither he nor I were named J.K. Rowling or Dan Brown, you will probably find it too long to read completely. I'm not surprised. This blog's "Followers" and visitors have made their habits well known to me by now. Yeah, I know: you don't have the time; you can't be bothered; or, insert YOUR excuse here: ________.

INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY IN THE AGE OF UNIVERSAL DECEIT: A Message To The Corporate Media And Our Elected Officials.
By Daniel Sunjata - May 4, 2009
[Posted by]

"The inert masses are mentally and spiritually ill equipped to deal with reality, so they block it out of their minds - aided of course, by the corporate media and the propaganda apparatus of the government itself. This is why fantasy is frequently substituted for reality, plutocracy is mistaken for democracy, and the majority of the people do not know the difference. Millions of good people thus refuse to allow into their psyche the suffering and misery that U.S. policies have produced and exported to the world, even as that reality is closing in upon them."
- Charles Sullivan

"They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality...and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening."
- George Orwell, 1984

- From the 35 articles of impeachment introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on 06/09/08 in H.Res. 1258 by Congressman Dennis Kucinich

The list is not a short one. It includes professors, architects, aerospace and aviation professionals, structural / mechanical / & aeronautical engineers, demolition experts, firefighters and other first responders, scientists, theologians, senior members of both the military and intelligence communities, Republican administration appointees, state department veterans, and other government officials from the United States and abroad; credible experts of impeccable pedigree with impressive track records from relevant fields of expertise, whose coolly rational intellects are not easily given to an unfounded belief in outlandish, unsubstantiated, or unverifiable claims. Individuals such as these are numbered among the ranks of skeptics and critics of the official theory of conspiracy regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Some pose questions, others draw conclusions, still others (like Congressman Kucinich) go so far as to level accusations and to substantiate them with evidence.

Organizations like Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth (, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth (, Lawyers for 911 Truth (, The Journal of 9/11 Studies (, Pilots for 911 Truth (, Fire Fighters for 911 Truth (, and Veterans for 911 Truth (, have posted carefully crafted signing statements for all the world to see, and online petitions calling for a new and independent investigation with power of subpoena. Their unanswered questions, the consequent implications that arise, and the fundamental inadequacies they point out in the official reports issued by FEMA, NIST, and the now infamous 9/11 Commission are disturbing to say the very least. Even more disturbing, however, is the corporate media’s revolving door of silence and violence with which those who pose such questions have been greeted. In most cases they are completely ignored, and what might otherwise be front-page news goes virtually unreported.

Feigned and transparently disingenuous gestures aimed at affecting the appearance of fair and balanced news coverage occasionally result in an arguably credible expert being granted an interview only to be condescended to, constantly interrupted, shouted down, and verbally abused in the process. Examples abound. Thus, in spite of having shouted their findings from the proverbial rooftops for years, and in spite of such notorious historical precedents as the now declassified Operation Northwoods, there has yet to be any substantive debate, journalistically integrous investigation, or scrutinous inquiry by the establishment or its media into the claim that 9/11 bears all the hallmarks of a complex covert operation of state intelligence; false flag terror; an inside job.

This is not to say, however, that the issue has gone entirely unaddressed by mainstream sources. Hand in hand with the marginalization of informed dissent and deep concern expressed by qualified skeptics like Lt. Col. Robert M. Bowman, PhD (Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter), Paul Craig Roberts (Assistant Sect. Of Treasury under Pres. Reagan), Lynn Margulis (National Medal of Science recipient), James Quintiere (former Chief of NISTs Fire Science Division), Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (retired fighter pilot and Topgun Air Combat Instructor), and Sibel Edmonds (former FBI translator specializing in counter-terror, and gag-ordered whistleblower) is the corporate media’s rabid eagerness to confront, shame, condemn, and discredit celebrities and other citizens who have tried to draw public attention to the same issue.

Marion Cotilliard, Martin and Charlie Sheen, Rosie O’Donnell, Ed Asner, Willie Nelson, and former Governor Jesse Ventura among many others, have uniformly fallen under swift and venomous attack upon questioning the official theory of conspiracy, and for daring to utter the blasphemous assertion (recently echoed in sentiments expressed by Melissa Rossi in her recent Huffington Post article titled ‘Obama: Reopen The 911 Investigation’) that a new investigation is warranted given the innumerable inconsistencies, omissions, and outright distortions that permeate the aforementioned "official" reports.

Unfairly attacked based not upon the substance of the arguments they have advanced, but rather upon the basis of inane irrelevancies related to their private lives and public personas, they have been dismissed out of pocket as paranoid conspiracy fanatics, drug addicts, Nazis, and narcissists who should stick to playing their position as entertainers and leave the thinking up to the grown-ups when it comes to things they could not possibly understand. This is the classic ad hominem approach - to dismiss the source as a means to dismissing the message.

Consequently, nothing of what they have actually said has been given its due diligence by our supposedly free press. Even though their questions and conclusions rest upon broad-shouldered analysis, expert testimony, diligent research, peer reviewed scientific studies (most notably that of Danish scientist Niels Harrit, whose findings on undetonated nano-thermite explosive residues found in WTC dust samples can be read online in The Open Chemical Physics Journal), and a preponderance of other damning forensic and circumstantial evidence, such prominent skeptics have been greeted with outright hostility and the most virulent brands of journalistic irresponsibility and intellectual dishonesty.

This in fact is anti-journalism; the exact opposite of what one would expect to find in a society aspiring to exemplify the democratic ideal. If I didn’t know any better, I might think that such tactics were being employed just to shut these experts and celebrities up, and to keep the general public from paying them any mind. I might think that childish insults, character assassination, reductionist clichés, insipid platitudes, necessary illusions and emotionally potent oversimplifications had taken the place of journalistic integrity, objective scrutiny, and investigative rigor.

For instance, when Joe Scarborough covers a story about a 9/11 demonstrator being arrested during an appearance by Bill Clinton in Corpus Christi, and he and his MSNBC ‘Morning Joe’ co-hosts utter things like “Where is the taser? Tase him!” and “Led away in handcuffs…hopefully taken to one of those secret prisons in Eastern Europe and never to be heard from again. I hope we have a special prison for 9/11 conspiracy theorists” it is quite difficult to grant them high scores for anything other than spewing fascistic rhetoric. Similarly only willful ignorance or a deliberate contempt for accuracy and logic can explain Glen Beck’s lumping together of Congressmen, law abiding citizens, highly decorated military personnel, prominent artists, and CIA veterans with violent radicals, in sweeping statements such as his ridiculous contention that 9/11 activists are “insane, dangerous anarchists” who comprise “"the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from."

It is an easily verifiable fact that in the thousands of 9/11 protests that have taken place since 2001, not a single individual has ever been arrested for violent conduct or convicted of a violent crime. It is also, shall we say, less than candid to assert that a movement whose implicit moral imperative arises from a desire to protect constitutional integrity could in any way be considered anarchistic in nature. Also, in one of the most irresponsible acts of journalism on record, Geraldo Rivera conflated the notoriously non-violent 9/11 activist community with terrorists in the following statement he made on FOX News Channel’s ‘FOX and Friends’ program while covering the 03/08 Times Square Bombing of a US Armed Forces recruiting station:

"I think that this bomber isn't Al Qaeda, isn't anything like that... He's more like those '9/11 was an inside job' kind of guys... Protesting in a violent way, but in a violent way almost like the eco-terrorists... where they don't intend to inflict casualties."

The most egregious examples of this type of filth masquerading as responsible news commentary can perhaps be found emanating from the twisted and blusterous mouth of Bill O’Reilly. When the story broke that Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, was set to finance the distribution of ‘Loose Change 911’ (the most downloaded documentary in internet history) with Charlie Sheen set to narrate, O’Reilly (conceding his hypocrisy by admitting to not having seen the film or looked at the evidence) responded by unleashing a blitzkrieg of idiotic non-sequiturs, calculated ambiguities, and thinly veiled threats. After an erroneous and lame attempt to dismiss and discredit 9/11 Truth as “lunacy” from the “far-left fringe” (the movement transcends both liberality and conservatism alike, is a mainstream phenomenon, and its basic premise is in fact eminently sane), he compounded his ignorance by comparing 9/11-dissent to Nazi propaganda and holocaust denial. Like…dude…SERIOUSLY?!

It is the very height of disingenuity to suggest that by demanding truth and accountability one is somehow offending and dishonoring the victims or their families, when the only way to honor them is by finding out the truth and holding the guilty parties responsible for their crimes. It would be more apt to compare Nazi propagandists and holocaust deniers to an administration that skewed intelligence about Iraq in order to fear-monger the American people into supporting the doctrine of preemption, while evading the initiation of any official inquiry into the most catastrophic day in our nations history, for 441 days. Either O’Reilly didn’t know or he didn’t care to know that Bill Doyle, founder of World Trade Center United Family Group (one of the largest 9/11 victims’ family organizations, comprised of over 7000 members from 2,573 families) believes that the government was complicit in the attacks.

He has also publicly stated that at least half of his members harbor deep suspicions about what happened on 9/11 and why. Mr. Bill also saw fit to put Mark Cuban and Charlie Sheen on notice, so to speak. Sounding not altogether unlike a mafia don threatening to issue a hit, O’Reilly states "this is a warning to Mark Cuban, who is distributing that film in a few weeks. This is a warning to you Bud, okay, you pull that movie or I'm gonna be your worst nightmare, because this is gonna lead to death." “We're looking out for you, Charlie Sheen. Don't do this. You're not going to come back from it, if you do…”

As I said, examples abound. Such pathetically transparent diversionary tactics smack of cowardice and a reluctance to engage the subject of 9/11 based upon the facts at hand, and have no place in the realm of professional journalism (or info-tainment as the case may be). This must cease. If we are to have any hope of change as a nation, then we must recognize that turning the page on one of the darkest chapters in American governmental history without having properly read it, would be a grave and disastrous error. Regardless of how inconvenient, uncomfortable, or outlandish the implications may at first appear, this subject demands to be substantively addressed, free of spin or bias, for neither it nor its advocates are going to just fade away. Only a ship of fools would blatantly disregard the opinions of such highly qualified and erudite critics as those listed on sites like without closely examining their actual and factual claims.

Now that Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Patrick Leahy has officially introduced a proposal to investigate the Bush administration for war-crimes and the subversion of Constitutional Law, it stands to reason that 9/11 should also be soberly looked into once and for all. Given the swirling cloud of criminal accusations and populist rage regarding the legalization of torture, the illegal wiretapping of American civilians (including the intentional targeting of journalists and intellectuals according to NSA whistleblower Russell Tice) as well as other allegations of treasonous conduct, and taking into consideration the claims, statements, and research of critical thinkers across a wide spectrum of expertise who publicly doubt the government’s official explanation, it shouldn't (although apparently it does) take a rocket scientist to see the disturbingly plausible connections between the inside job hypothesis and every Orwellian legislative and militaristic act for which 9/11 and its victims have been invoked as justification.

Indeed the logic of context is fundamentally derailed by the prevailing ring-pass-not approach of investigating every area to which 9/11 is crucially relevant and intimately related, while treating the subject itself as sacrosanct. Clearly this should be part of any investigation into the alleged criminality of the previous administration; indeed it should be given priority. This above all else is President Obama’s litmus test of integrity and the quintessence of this nation’s hope for change. For if 9/11 was in fact an inside job, then it places all of the evils that flowed from and followed that event into vivid contextual focus. Bogus claims of executive privilege should offer no protection to those towards whom the preponderance of evidence points; chips fall where they may.

My own reasons for speaking out on this issue are fairly simple. I didn’t choose it; it chose me. Upon being hired to act the part of a post-9/11 NYC firefighter on Rescue Me, my research for the character led me to take a more objective look at what actually happened versus what we were told in the wake of the event. Nothing added up. No matter from which angle I approached 911, it invariably unraveled into contradictions and inconsistencies requiring the suspension of my logic and common sense in addition to several laws of physics. Slowly I came to the determination that I had no choice but to speak out, because (as Franco Rivera) I presume to represent the memories of the heroes who died that day, as well as the reality of the heroes who still mourn their loss. I work with these men; looking them daily in the eye. Therefore it is a citizen’s act of moral conscience and social responsibility, nothing more.

To know or even to merely suspect, and yet remain silent, would be anti-American, unpatriotic, and tantamount to betrayal. Therefore this is no stunt on my part to gain publicity or to garner attention for myself by appearing edgy and controversial. Believe it or not, I rather covet my relative anonymity as a quasi-celebrity/working actor.

I would much rather direct media and public attention to those most credible dissenting experts who have looked at and analyzed the facts (circumstantial as well as forensic) and found that they do not fit the government’s theory of conspiracy. People like Professor Emeritus David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage (AIA), Physics Professor Steven Jones (co-author of the above mentioned peer reviewed study proving that explosives were in fact used to implode the WTC towers as well as WTC 7), William Christison (former CIA Station Chief and Director of Regional and Political Analysis), Ray McGovern (27 year CIA vet., and former Chair of National Intelligence Estimates), Coleen Rowley (former F.B.I. Special Agent and Minneapolis Division Counsel), and Sibel Edmonds must be given fair and open forums on mainstream media platforms, as well as access to those with the power and responsibility to reopen the 9/11 investigation; or rather, to finally conduct one as the case may be. Until that happens we will not be silent. We will not go away. We will not submit.
~ Daniel Sunjata

For your information (not that any of you really wish to know) a second DVD on the 9/11 attacks which I highly recommend every truly patriotic American to view is '9/11: Press For Truth'.

If God doesn't judge America, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.
~ Billy Graham

"I'm so pissed off at the American people; I'm so pissed off at this government because of this cover-up!"
~ Bob McIlvaine (from '9/11: Press For Truth')

Hear!-Hear!, Mr. McIlvaine. Hear!-Hear!

America! You do not deserve even the small remnants of your Founding Fathers' genius. If there's a God in Heaven (and I'm thoroughly convinced there is), He will remove from you the remainder of your liberty. Of course, as long as He doesn't take away from you your television sets, your J.K. Rowling and Dan Brown books, and your bullshit "big boy toys", you probably won't even care.
America! You make me ill.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
'Loyal American Underground'

Loose Change: An American Coup
9/11: Press For Truth
YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.