Uncivil Rights

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/15/inside-the-newsroom-case-for-gun-permit-listings/?partner=RSS

Thanks to commercialappeal.com, robbers, thieves, murderers, and rapists know who to attack safely.

Nice going.

If you are robbed, mugged, raped, or in anyway attacked, sue the bastards. That is YOUR RIGHT.

Since liberals like to label conservatives "neocon", we have decided to label liberal/progressive/socialist/democrats "NEOCOM". Neocom, of course, means new communists which is exactly what Obama and his leftists are. Let's hope this makes it to the web before the "tolerant" lefties try to stop web postings too.

I just couldn't help myself:

Polish people are protesting weather! And if that wasn't polish enough, they want the UN to hurry and make the weather stop changing!

...protesters in Poznan waved a banner reading: "Stop clowning around, get serious about climate action."

Others carried pictures of seas inundating cities and villages, and the suited hand of a businessman squeezing the planet.

Everyone knows businessmen are immune from changes in the weather...

Obama has admitted to being the cause of the rise in gun sales today in the Chicago Suntimes.


Obama states:

"I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the second amendment," Obama said at a news conference. "Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word."

Now when is he going to admit to being the cause (along with his socialist policies) to the largest stock market crash following a presidential election?

Labels: guns, liberal, media bias

Timothy Egan is a bit upset. He doesn't like the fact Joe the plumber has a book deal. As Timothy states in his NYT opinion piece:

The unlicensed pipe fitter known as Joe the Plumber is out with a book this month, just as the last seconds on his 15 minutes are slipping away. I have a question for Joe: Do you want me to fix your leaky toilet?

Joe would love for you to fix his leaky toilet, Timothy...if you can. Obviously, Joe has the skills to write a book. Do you have the skills to fix a toilet? We all know how mad you are that someone could just get a book deal simply for being in the public eye. (Have you mentioned Paris Hilton and her music career anywhere in your rants Timothy?) No? Just a little pissed that maybe someone other than a journalist can write a book? It's quite obvious anyone can write an opinion piece for the NYT, or a blog, but getting it read is quite another thing.

But Timothy goes on:

With a résumé full of failure, he now thinks he can join the profession of Mark Twain, George Orwell and Joan Didion.

Actually Timothy, he is joining the ranks of people such as yourself, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and other people thrust into the spotlight by the media.

I would like to question YOU. Why do you get to write a guest opinion piece of the NYT? Why should you get to voice your opinion on something personal to you and pretty much no one else? There are millions of other people from whom I would like to hear who never get a chance to voice an opinion. Something similar to your thought here: "...voices in Iran, North Korea or China struggle to get past a censor’s gate." Voices here in America struggle to get heard right here at the New York Times. There are no consevative voices at the Times (David Brooks is NOT a conservative).

So stop your vitriolic whining. With Obama as president, I'm sure the government will crack down on differing opinions with such things as the UnFairness Doctrine (that should pep you up some).

And just because I am fair, here are some books by Timothy Egan. Let's allow the consumer to decide.

Labels: media bias, Timothy Egan

We know the bias in the media trends toward the left. I have maintained they are socialists. Up until this election, they have been on the quiet side of socialism. This election cycle has seen them come out of the socialist closet. Here is a prime example of Tom Brokaw espousing his actual beliefs. This is what he really thinks of normal, middle-class Americans, and this is what he wants from us...remember, the left claims to be the party of the the people. From NEWSBUSTERS:

Let's talk for a moment about consumer responsibility when it comes to the auto industries. As soon as gas prices dropped, consumers moved back to the larger cars once again. The SUVs are the big gas consumers. Why not take this opportunity to put a tax on gasoline, bump it back up to $4 a gallon where people were prepared to pay for that, and use that revenue for alternative energy and as a signal to the consumers: "Those days are gone. We're not going to have gasoline that you could just fill up your tank for 20 bucks anymore."

So Tom Brokaw does NOT believe in consumer choice. He believes government must enact laws and taxes to alter consumer behavior. This is not only socialism at its finest, but this borders on communism. I guess Tom Brokaw wouldn't mind if consumers had to wait in lines for consumables if it "benefited everybody" and saved the planet.

Thank you comrade Brokaw. The state will reward you for this.

Labels: media bias, socialism, Tom Brokaw

The new word of the day is COMPASCISM. Compascism is the political and/or philosophical ideology that compassion can only be achieved through government mandates on individuals and businesses. Compascist is one who subscribes to this ideology.

Timing is everything...except for maybe GOOD old-fashioned objective journalism. It seems every time someone wants to praise Obama for something, something else gets in the way...like reality. It reminds me of the global warming meetings. You know, when global warming alarmists get together to discuss the obliteration of mankind unless taxes are levied and the successful are punished. Then, during this meeting, there is a huge snow storm.

It must feel like that for USA Today writer, Adam Shell. His article, "President-elect Obama's actions perk up stock market" in today's edition, updated 8 hours ago as of this writing. In it he praises Obama on "...hasn't even moved into the White House yet. But Wall Street is already showering him with praise for injecting confidence into the battered psyche of investors and working quickly to hatch a plan meant to jolt the economy out of its worst funk in decades."

Simply amazing. Here's some more: "Stocks soared last week after Obama moved aggressively to fill the power vacuum until he's sworn in and demonstrated his commitment to dig the USA out of its economic rut. The Dow has rallied 17% during its current five-session win streak — its best five-session run since 1932. The rallies coincided with Obama-related news and public appearances where he introduced his economic dream team and sent a clear message that he'll do whatever it takes to repair the economy. Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank, says the so-called Obama Factor has been "a solid force behind the recent moves in the stock market." Reminder to self: NEVER USE HARRIS PRIVATE BANK!

More from Adam: "So what has Obama done to restore hope to investors? •He's made the economy priority No. 1, •He's chosen a first-rate economic team, and •He's moved quickly to fix things.

REALITY CHECK:

Down we go again: Fourth-worst drop ever for DowBy Sara Lepro and Tim Paradis, AP Business Writers Wall Street breaks 5-day win streak as stocks plunge; Dow down 680 in 4th-worst decline.

Wow Adam, how could you be SOOOOOO WRONGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!???

The Dow lost 679.95 points to close at about 8,149. There have only been three days in market history with bigger point losses for the Dow -- the Monday after the Sept. 11 attacks, and Sept. 29 and Oct. 15 of this year.

Let's here it for Adam Shell of USA Today! He get's the DOH! Award by Homer Simpson. I bet you feel like a bit of an idiot right about now, don't you, Adam?

Labels: media bias

Vanessa Niekamp is a hero. She blew the whistle on improper (can someone say illegal) searches into Joe the Plumber's background by Ohio state employees. However, since she blew the whistle on Obama supporters, the article's title is: Employee Defends Exposing 'Joe the Plumber' Searches.

Gee, we never heard of stories titled: The New York Times Defends Exposing America's National Security Secrets and Making the US Less Safe. I wonder why.

The biggest culprit is Ohio Department of Job and Family Services agency director Helen Jones-Kelley. She received a 30-day suspension without pay. She should have been fired. Not only did she improperly use state computers to find personal information regarding Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, but she also improperly used state e-mail to engage in political activity. I wonder what Barack Obama has to say about this?

But what about Niekamp's boss, ODJFS deputy director Doug Thompson? He forced her to send an e-mail covering up the reason behind the searches into Wurzelbacher. "The e-mail, which was sent to chief privacy officer Rick Copley, explained that the queries into Wurzelbacher were made for child support purposes..." So Mr. Thompson lied. He should be fired as well. However, "Thompson has not faced disciplinary action." Nice going Ohio.

Vanessa, I think you should sue.

Labels: whistle blowing

Jackie Calmes of the New York Times is at it again. Her bias reporting can be seen in the previous post on the Lamestream Media, and she does not disappoint today in Obama Vows Swift Action on Vast Economic Stimulus Plan.

She writes: "Advisers to Mr. Obama say they want to use the economic crisis as an opportunity to act on many of the issues he emphasized in his campaign, including cutting taxes for lower- and middle-class workers, addressing neglected public infrastructure projects like roads and schools, and creating “green jobs” through business incentives for energy alternatives and environmentally friendly technologies."

What she DOESN'T write, or ask, or probably know: 45% of the wage earners in this country pay NO income taxes, so how can he CUT them? Are reporters supposed to get to the heart of the subject or just take someone's word?

This is one of my favorites: "His address, a video of which was made available on YouTube, was part of an effort to calm financial markets roiled by the failure of an outgoing president and a lame-duck Congress to come up with a plan to lift the economy and restore investor confidence."

What she DOESN'T write, or ask, or know: The democrats made banks make risky loans to those who didn't qualify. Republicans wanted MORE oversight, and Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and your's truly, Barack Obama, stopped it. Fannie and Freddie took on bad paper from Countrywide - thank you Chris Dodd. This caused the housing bubble to burst. Bush did NOT fail. Then Barack Obama is elected and the stock market TANKED...because Barack Obama was elected. Investment in free markets will go down when a SOCIALIST is elected as president, Jackie.

It's curious how you manage to deduce the increase in the market to the naming of Giethner: "News that Mr. Geithner, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, would get the job helped send the stock market up by nearly 500 points on Friday after days of sharp losses." But no where did you EVER mention that the election of Barack Obama may have had the slightest impact on its downturn...hmmm...stupid?...idiotic?...bias???

In your defense, I will say you have the uncivil right to be a biased idiot.

But there's more. Speaking of letting the Bush tax cuts expire: "That could have economic and political benefits. Mr. Obama would not be open to the charge from Republicans and other critics that he is raising taxes in a recession, which many believe is counterproductive." FYI Jackie, that WOULD be a tax increase and would be reported as such by those willing to be objective and truthful. I understand you wrote what you wrote because YOU would NOT refer to it as a tax increase. And WHY do people think it would be counterproductive, Jackie? Because tax increases DO NOT necessarily produce more revenue. The collection of tax revenue is at its highest in the nation's history due to Bush's tax CUTS. You, however, prove your idiocy on this subject here: "By letting the tax cuts expire, Mr. Obama would get the benefit of higher revenues in 2011 and beyond to help finance his promised health care plans without having to propose raising taxes on the affluent and without the Democratic majority in Congress having to take a vote on a tax increase."

When the rich are burdened with higher taxes, they hire accountants. Remember John Kerry's wife? She stated her tax burden was only 12%. Even Barack Obama stated, in an interview, that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would not necessarily raise revenue. It wasn't about raising revenue; it IS about FAIRNESS. Of course, if you investigated this story, you would have known this and hopefully included it in your story. Instead, you made it quite clear that you are propagandizing for Obama, or Obamagandizing as I like to call it.

I'm sure the democrats enjoy your advertisements. I hope they will pay you well.

Labels: media bias

Deborah Howell, the Ombudsman of the Washington Post, has admitted the bias of the Post's coverage of Obama here. She follows that editorial up, due to the loss of subscribers, with how the Post can remedy the "perceived" bias here.

Her "remedies"???

"More conservatives in newsrooms and rigorous editing would be two."

Tom Rosentiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said:

"There should be more intellectual diversity among journalists. More conservatives in newsrooms will bring about better journalism."

Bob Steele, 'an ethics scholar at Poynter Institute (which trains journalists)' "recommends "prosecutorial editing" as one way to "minimize the ideological bias and beliefs that all journalists have."

Hey Bob, where are these journalists your instituion is training? And, Tom and Bob, why aren' these things happening NOW!? It ocmes down to the agenda of the owners and editors of these newspapers. There is a reason why reporters are liberal. People hire likeminded people. The idea that a newspaper is fair, balanced and objective is GONE. The Hew York TImes can call David Brooks a conservative, but that doesn't mean that he is, and true conservatives see this.

I believe the REAL problem, besides the agenda-driven articles, is the lack of true objective journalism. I am not just picking on the Post, but all liberal media outlets.

For example, this article was on the front page of the online edition of the New York Times today, Fed Official Is Said to Be Choice for Treasury.

Let's take a close look at OBJECTIVITY: "...quavering financial markets are looking for reassurance about the direction of economic policy." I didn't know financial markets had human attributes... And the source(s) for this??? "...people briefed about the decision said..."

How about this deduction: "Word of Mr. Geithner’s selection helped drive stocks sharply higher on Friday afternoon as investors concluded that Mr. Obama was taking steps to fill a leadership vacuum at a time when the economy and financial markets are showing new signs of strain." It's interesting to note the mention of this man's name drives stocks up, yet the election of Obama seemed to have nothing to do with the stack market crash. Reporters have come up with "other" reasons why the stocks plummetted, but no where is Obama mentioned either here or here, to cite just a few. If you noticed the chart from the second article, the stocks started descending when Obama and Clinton were in the lead for the dem nomination, just as the media were picking thier condidate for the white house.

But this isn't the only place that concludes Geithner's name is responsible for the stock increase. From this MSNBC story: "*** UPDATE *** Msnbc.com's Al Olson reports that immediately after NBC News' report on Tim Geithner likely to be named Treasury Secretary, stocks rebounded sharply." Funny how we DIDN'T see a story that said: "Immediately after Barack Obama was elected president, the stock market dropped 400 points..."

Bias?

But the NYT story continues on its bias path talking about Mr. Geithner: "But his association with the current administration’s policies is balanced by his close connections to the centrist Democratic policies of President Bill Clinton and Mr. Clinton’s best-known Treasury secretary, Robert E. Rubin." Let's see, current financial policies must be far right, and the democrat policies are centrist? That is the way I am understanding the conclusions of Jackie Calmes, the author of this "objective" piece.

This is just one example of the majority of articles throughout the NYT, Washington Post, Boston Globe, and other liberal newspapers. Am I being fair? Am I right? Ms. Howell, do you care? Do you truly want objective, nonbiased reporting? I think it would certainly bring back readers. However, I believe the liberal agenda is a greater force than profit, and newspapers will fail due to the lack of objective reporting.

Labels: media bias

In yet another declaration of defeat and surrender, Harry Reid claims the US has lost in Iraq.

I would like to use a little liberal tactic now and ask the liberals, "Why do you hate the US so much?"

Let us all sing now, the DEMOCRAT PARTY SONG! (Tot the tune of "The Inquisition")

(Sung by the Senate and House Democrats)
The Inquisition (what a show)
The Inquisition (here we go)
We know you're wishin' that we'd go away.
But the Inquisition's here and it's here to-
"Hey Nancy P, walk this way."
"I just got back from the Auto-de-fe."
"Auto-de-fe? What's an Auto-de-fe?"
"It's what you oughtn't to do but you do anyway."

(To Republicans, neo-con, zionists, and global warming deniers...)
Will you convert? "No, no, no, no."
Will you confess? "No, no, no, no."
Will you revert? "No, no, no, no."
Will you say yes? "No, no, no, no!"
Now I asked in a nice way, I said, "Pretty please."
I bent their ears, now I'll work on their knees!
"Hey Harry Reid, walk this way. We got a little game that you might wanna play, so pull that handle, try you're luck."
"Who knows, Harry, your land deals might earn you a buck!"

"How we doin', any converts today?"
"Not a one, nay, nay, nay."
"We flattened their fingers, we use media galore!
Nothing is working! Send in Al Gore!"

The Inquisition, what a show.
The Inquisition, here we go.
We know you're wishin' that we'd go away!
So all you neo-cans and global warming deniers
We got big news for all of the zionist repliers:
You'd better change your point of views TODAY!
'Cause the Inquisition's here and it's here to stay!

Obama ditches Congressional Black Caucus/Fox News debate

Is Obama not black enough or is the Congressional Black Caucus losing its power and influence...even in the black communities?

Originally published at The Wide Awakes.

Are all men created equal? It’s a nice sentiment, however, reality dictates a completely different belief. All men are created the same way, biologically, but the comparisons stop there.

All men are not created equal. This is just basic human nature and called the human factor. Every individual has his/her own strengths and weaknesses, each unique to that individual. If we consider equal opportunity, we could and should conclude that each individual will utilize that opportunity in different and unique ways dependent upon the strengths and weaknesses of the individual. In reality, if each person started life with the same opportunities (education, wealth, values, family life, etc…) each person would not have the same cumulative life, or in other words, the resulting life, benefits, trials, and tribulations of each person would be different.

Imagine, if you will, a simple equation: I + O = L, which represents an individual (I), plus all opportunities (O), will result in the life (L) of that individual. I will forgo anymore of the mathematical equations and try to explain it. We must include time in this equation, so each variable is in the same representative time. For example, at time 1year, the life of the individual at 1 year old will be the summation of the knowledge, skills, and abilities of the 1 year old individual plus the opportunities presented within that 1 year, ad infinitum(I’m trying to keep it simple so far).

If all men are equal, and each individual was presented with the same opportunities, could we conclude that the resulting lives of these individuals will be the same? The equation would conclude that the lives would be the same. However, though opportunities presented may be the same, the resulting outcomes of those opportunities will be different based on the actions or inactions taken by the individual. Therefore, even if each individual was given the same opportunities throughout life, the outcomes of those opportunities will be different and have a different impact on each individual’s resulting life. It is logical to conclude that the life of each individual will be different even if all opportunities presented are the same. In fact, given the human factor, the outcome of any and all opportunities can not be predicted, and the resulting life can not be assessed until that life has ended.

Liberals will then be lead to believe that the resulting life can be altered if some individuals were given more opportunities than others. However, there can never be any assurances, and there will never be any proof that an increase in opportunities will result in a better resulting life. Legislating the resulting life can never work since the variables that make up a life are never equal and cannot be known or quantified.


The Math:
I was thinking in terms of calculus with the summation of each variable from time (t) to the nth (year). O is only constant at death, and O at time (t) is a function of the summations of I at time (t) plus O at time (t). I didn't want to get into subscripts and math; it’s been almost 25 years since my calculus class.

Judicial Activism at it's finest (from WSJ):

The current Supreme Court is a talented group of jurists, but until yesterday we didn't think their expertise ran to climatology. The Justices would have done better in their big global warming decision if they'd stuck more closely to the law.

Typical LIBERAL DEMOCRATS at work spending YOUR hard EARNED MONEY (from Detnews.com):

An iPod for Every Kid? We have come to the conclusion that the crisis Michigan faces is not a shortage of revenue, but an excess of idiocy. Facing a budget deficit that has passed the $1 billion mark, House Democrats Thursday offered a spending plan that would buy a MP3 player or iPod for every school child in Michigan.

Greenie Weenies Pick on Children...how nice...(from SFGATE.com):

It was supposed to be a birthday night out for the kids in San Francisco, but instead turned into a Critical Mass horror show -- complete with a pummeled car, a smashed rear window and little children screaming in terror.

Less than 100 days of Democrat OCCUPATION in the Congress and they're already backing out of their campaign promises...anyone SUPRISED...(from the Washington Times):

Congressional Democrats say their constituents are clamoring for something even the most liberal lawmakers promise they won't pursue: President Bush's impeachment.

Pelosi goes to talk to the TERRORISTS in SYRIA and COMPLETELY SCREWS UP (from the CNSNEWS.COM and the Examiner.com):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered the wrong message to Syrian President Bashar Assad from Israel, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said on Wednesday evening.

In her latest mishap, Pelosi went to the Middle East this week with the aim of brokering a peace between Israel, the United States' closest ally in the region, and Syria, a widely recognized state sponsor of terrorism.
Pelosi said she was "very pleased with the reassurances we received from Syrian president [Bashar al-Assad] that he was ready to...engage in negotiations for peace with Israel." The meeting with Assad, she told reporters, "enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister [Ehmud] Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks as well."
Trouble was, Olmert denied that he had authorized Pelosi to pass along this conciliatory message. In fact, his office issued a statement saying quite the contrary.

Meanwhile, Nancy thinks it was helpful...(from Breitbart.com):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, deflecting White House criticism of her trip to Syria, said Friday she thinks the mission helped President Bush because it showed the United States is unified against terrorism despite being divided over the Iraq war.

AND if you only needed ONE bit of evidence to determine if this was good or bad...here it is...(from CNN.com):

Former President Jimmy Carter expressed his support for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria, rejecting White House criticism of the visit.

I guess the question should be, "Well, has she learned anything?" (from CNN.com):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she raised the issue of Saudi Arabia's lack of female politicians with Saudi government officials on the last stop of her Mideast tour.

OBVIOUSLY NOT...

That's right...Al "The Goracle" Gore IS the "MAN" responsible for MANMADE Global Warming. In the picture above (thanks to Dylan Pool), Mr. Gore makes CO2 spontaneously combust in a burst of flames by breaking into song about CARBON OFFSETS...

Thursday, April 5th at 6:00 pm CST, Total Kaos with Dave and Glen will interview Eric Beckjord (see info below). This is a MUST LISTEN!

Jon-Erik Beckjord, BA (honors -Tulane),MBA (UC Berk.) , is a managment consultant and also an investigator of anomalous phenomena world-wide, spirit photographer, an adventurer, traveller, lecturer and author. There is a tremendous amount of info, photos, evidence in these sites linked below, and how can Beckjord have done this? He used his MBA skills, Mensa traits, & photographic skills, to go out and go after these mysteries full time, working only to get the next airline ticket, while others decided to raise kids, become middle-managers, watch TV, join Little League, and get early heart attacks. Your webmaster avoided that, is often broke, but he has had a glimpse of the mysterious, and it has been worth it.

Adventure!

Now he shares it with you, and several books will be made form these sites. Letterman,Leno, and Good Morning America all seem to approve and he's been on them all, and more. Now take a look.

This site is dedicated to educating the average public as to the Multiverse, parallel universes to infinity, the new paradigm of advanced theoretical physics, wormholes, blackholes, Dr. Micho Kaku, Dr. Fred Allen Wolf, Dr. Colm Kelleher and 20 others, and how this relates to scientific anomalies. NEW ANSWERS!

UPDATE: Thanks to Erik for a good show. He does have a sense of humor. If you missed it, you can listen to the archives at BlogTalkRadio.

This is the party for which YOU voted, to root out corruption:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has abruptly walked away from her responsibilities with the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee after a report linked her votes to the financial well-being of her husband's companies, which received billions of dollars worth of military construction contracts she approved.

and protect America and its ciizens from terrorists. However, NO DEMOCRAT GOT THE MEMO.
Can Democrats do ANYMORE TO HURT THEIR OWN COUNTRY? I don't think so. (From the New York Post) This is in response to Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) proposing an amendment directed at a dangerous new threat to national security. His motion was a response to the "John Doe" lawsuit filed by six "Flying Imams.":

Meanwhile, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, took the floor to oppose King's motion - and to defend the lawsuit against John Does. "We should be tolerant," he argued; people shouldn't be singled out because they "look different."

In fact, the flying imams triggered concerns by a variety of unusual actions, as well as words that roused the concern of another Arabic-speaking passenger. Witnesses say that House members started booing Thompson.

Finally, a member of the leadership realized how this would look to Americans watching on C-SPAN: Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) was seen staring at Thompson and repeatedly drawing his hand across his throat - an urgent signal to get off the floor.

With Democrats realizing they couldn't argue against King's measure, it went to a vote, and passed, 304 to 121

Every one of those 121 votes aimed at defeating protection for "John Does" was a Democrat - indeed, more than half of all Democrats present voted "nay."

Rather than standing up to evil, Britain is turning to appeasement...since it's obviously worked so well in other countries like Spain...

Last night, there were reports ministers are planning a compromise solution to the crisis, which would see a Royal Navy captain, commondore or special government envoy sent to Tehran to publicly assure the Iranians the Royal Navy will never knowingly enter Iranian waters without gaining permission.

Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, has called on Tehran to negotiate an end to the detention of the 15 British soldiers and Marines Iran claims strayed into its waters nine days ago. She told reporters: "The message I want to send is that I think everyone regrets this position has arisen. What we want is a way out of it."

And how about the UN and it's perpetual appeasement:

Iranian media have been trumpeting Britain's failure to secure a strong condemnation of Iran at the UN Security Council or a freeze on EU diplomacy. State television has run footage of the seizure of the boats and the "confessions" of Faye Turney and Nathan Thomas Summers, two of the seized UK personnel, repeatedly on the news channel.

Ahh yes, bad behavior will be deterred...NOT!