Dixieville Journal

Do technology advances actually promote collectivism or liberty?

2011-08-04T04:01:00.001-05:00

Yes, that's an "either/or" question in this context; any other construct would be an oxymoron.

I tend to think that the advances we see in technology, particularly in communication media devices, that I'll admit I enjoy and use (nowhere near) as much and fervently as the aggregate of Mundanes, are nevertheless a curse more than a blessing. This is true not only because of the power of the devices themselves, but also (perhaps mostly) because of the rapid media presentation and convenience that today's highly-peddled so-called public "cloud" helps them to enable and provide, respectively. It sure sounds attractive and juicy.

Yes, it's a potential blessing to be able to have a mobile phone/cam handy to catch the state's minions in the act and stream it out in real time, easily take and store pics, etc. in the "cloud" somewhere and so on and so forth. That only lasts until the next wire-tapping dictate comes down the pike and/or the multinational corporation that owns your particular slice of the "cloud" shuts you down.

Meanwhile, on the cursed side, however, these same communication media technology advances are making it trivial to conduct national espionage, individual snooping, statist propaganda dissemination, statist indoctrination of every kind, not to mention ever increasing centralization and control of commoner data. This is all now done with ease by way of the vast majority of commoners enthusiastically and brainlessly tossing their stuff up into a public "cloud." The commoners irrational attraction to convenience, at any cost other than merely to their personal funds, never ceases to amaze me.

The data centers, full of racks of storage devices, that collectively make up this "cloud" of deceptive convenience are, of course, controlled by just a few multinational corporations who work hand in hand with a given country's Leviathan(s), in which they do business. Simply connect-the-dots. In fact, thanks to the "freedom-enhancing" Internet and advanced communication storage devices and the glorious "cloud" it's actually MUCH easier today for a Leviathan to find, track, and cull a profile of a given Mundane with a full compliment of pics, addresses, associates, mindset, and just about everything else, given how carelessly the commoners utilize their laptops, mobile phone/cams, and the immense assistance of Leviathan's own inner sanctum, or uh the "cloud," to post their whole life story and accompanying pics, videos, etc. online (that is, on a stranger's machine outside of his immediate or an immediate trusted subordinate's control).

It's true that trust is only an ideal, tentative at best in the humanoid world, in any case as there doesn't exist a no-risk existence or situation in this life; ergo, spare me the "That's life!" platitude if you were one who felt the urge to utter such. The critical point I'm attempting to pound home here is that blindly trusting and relegating oversight and control of your pertinent, critical, and/or intimate data (or any other property for that matter) to outright strangers - whether they be individuals, groups, or corporations (by extension -> Leviathan) carries orders of magnitude higher risk of compromise, betrayal, and ultimately repression.

So, in the grand scheme of contemporary online life, are we really gaining overall momentum for the freedom train to accelerate away from the garrisoned station as many seem to suggest, or are we instead unwittingly accelerating towards it by actually allowing the state through its corporatist tentacles to herd, corral, control, and ultimately repress us?

Something to ponder...'til next year's post ;).

America the Ugly

2010-10-27T09:48:00.002-05:00

O ugly are its towers kissing the skies,
For crimson waves of pain,
For red mountain oligarchies
Above the barren plain!
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
And judge thy evil with wormwood
From sea to darkened sea!

O ugly for Leviathan's feet
Whose serpent's guile enslaves the aimless
A thoroughfare of tyranny beat
Across the ghetto wilderness!
Amerika! Amerika!
God pour salt in every orifice,
Yank its soul for it has no self-control,
Its tyranny in lawlessness!

O ugly for despots at whom they marvel
In kindling aimless worship and hopeless strife.
Who rather than look to Providence for Leviathan they grovel
And love death more than mercy!
Amerika! Amerika!
May God thy mammon make worthless
Till all be rubbish
And every gain made vain!

O ugly for nationalist dream
That sees nothing beyond the usury
Thine Babel cities steam
Spreading worldwide human misery!
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
And judge thy evil with wormwood
From sea to darkened sea!

O ugly for its war machines,
For crimson waves of pain,
For imperial mountain travesties
Above the forsaken plain!
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
As its souls wax reprobate and full o' hate
And may its jungle noise drown in the sea!

O ugly for Leviathan's feet
Whose serpent's guile enslaves the aimless
A thoroughfare of tyranny beat
Across the ghetto wilderness!
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
Till fires be wrought through wilds of thought
By mundane foot and knee!

O ugly for for its gory-tale
In kindling aimless worship and hopeless strife.
When once and thrice,
To the common man's ignorant wail
Men hated liberty and even life
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
Till selfish gain can no longer sustain
The vainglorious and greedy mundane!

O ugly for nationalist dream
That sees nothing beyond the usury
Thine Babel cities steam
Spreading worldwide human misery!
Amerika! Amerika!
God lift his grace from thee
And judge thoroughly this crud country
Awaitin' your justice with glee!

"Cloud" computing a.k.a. Centralized control

2009-12-09T14:14:00.005-05:00

Being the radical cynic and skeptic that I am these days, I see nothing but mass data centralization from the move towards "cloud" computing for the inert masses being driven by such multinational corporate engines as Microsoft, among others (Hi, Google!). Doesn't it sound so warm and fuzzy to say "My stuff is out there in the cloud...wee! I can access it everywhere! Yahoo!" as opposed to saying "My stuff is completely outside my domain of control and resides on some server somewhere in the world that a multinational corporation, and also by implicit extension government, controls and can do with what they wish."

I don't think the common folk realize just how much of a paradigm shift this will become over time in regards to who REALLY will control virtually ALL of your personal data!

If/when we finally reach a stage where virtually every piece of data -- photos, e-mail, app data, and even apps themselves -- reside in "the cloud" (not your machine) and are accessed and, in the case of apps themselves, run only from "the cloud" (not your machine) the individual has lost the control of their data, privacy, and many aspects of freedom in general.

I really believe the aim here is to go retrograde, in a sense, to a time when there were only mainframes or minicomputers (yesterday's "cloud") where all apps, resources, and data resided and only a "dumb" terminal was available for the hapless peon to use in order to access his data and run apps. In other words, the home computer will simply become for all intents and purposes, a resurrected dumb terminal.

And privacy? What privacy? Anyone or any entity (not mutually exclusive, of course) who controls the server(s) in question in some data center can copy, view, steal, expropriate your valuable data. It's as simple as that. How will there be real privacy? Trust? Faith? Other than Jesus Christ Himself, I trust no one, especially in this haughty and reprobate day and age, except close associates and some family members. Obviously, there isn't and won't be any privacy, the corporate legalspeak that states otherwise notwithstanding. Needless to say, I don't plan to play in that sandbox.

Yes, everyone has had some personal data exposure on the Internet since the beginning, but not to this degree where folk seem eager and willing to entrust virtually all of their data to the whims of strangers in the "cloud." Your data will live on a remote box under some stranger's control, not your own box under your control. Ergo, unlike the commoner mass majority, I can't stomach the thought of exposing literally my entire life to the entire world! And I won't. I'll simply disengage from the "grid" if the only choice becomes to put my stuff in the hands and total control of another entity to be able to access it from anywhere through the Internet.

That's simply not how I play nor will ever play. For many years already, I've kept my most critical, valuable, personal data and apps within MY domain and under MY personal control. I either SSH into my box through an encrypted connection to access my data, and sometimes to even run X apps, remotely or I surf to my SSL-enabled website to retrieve my encrypted data. And, yes, I am my own CA ;), naturally. Speaking of being my own CA, it's amusing to observe a given browser have a conniption fit when it first hits my local web page. It'll display a message akin to "Get me out of here!" as well as stating that this website's certificate is not trusted (by whom? The powers that be?) and signed by a "trusted" Certificate Authority. Once again...naturally!

The bottom line is that I will continue to run my apps from my personal machine, not being spoon-fed to me in a browser window from a stranger's box out there in the ethereal somewhere.

Games, in various degrees, have already been gradually migrating to "the cloud" with such "cloudy" contraptions as Steam. "Install once, and play anywhere!" or something sounding similarly innocuous and convenient will become the mantra of the Age of the Cloud. Forget it, I'll pass.

Remember this well: Corporations and governments are married to each other; that's especially true with regards to multinational corporations. You'll pay to play, and not just in money.

Is America dying?

2008-06-10T00:56:00.004-05:00

I don't often completely agree with Janet Folger on her commentaries, although she's definitely a passionate defender of the faith, since she always seems to imply, in so many words and perhaps in ignorance, in her pieces that the State should somehow "protect" and provide the bulwark against evil and tyranny. No! Not in a constitutional republic anyway. Instead, the people themselves exercise their due diligence, vigilance, and responsibility in keeping government at bay and thereby, by default, protect liberty. The people no longer care for that level of responsibility anymore and instead plead for government involvement in their lives. After all, when you're a dependent, what else could one expect to be the case?

However, after reading her latest commentary, My 'mission trip' to the left coast, I think she finally has seen the light. That would be that it's the individual people within a nation rather than the "nation" itself that constitute the moral rudder, the character, the laws, the order, the culture, the very makeup of that nation. I've said this myself over and over again in various forums online and when speaking with folk generally. The people, after all, are the key ingredients that determine a nation's government (it reflects the people!) and its overall destiny, subject to and bound by the Laws of God, of course.

This simple concept apparently seems to glide right over people's heads and they only can see on one side "the government," "the State," "Leviathan..." and on the other, "the people" as if they're unconnected and even hostile entities. Bullsense! Regardless of what folk say online in forums or in public, they instead are privately more likely to be petitioning government for services, subsidies, new laws (actually more restrictions on responsible freedom),....the list is endless.

Anyway, not to tangent off-topic too far, I think Folger's last few paragraphs of that piece sum up the problem quite succinctly:

We talk a lot about national repentance, but that begins with personal repentance. That's where we take a break from worrying about our nation's sins, and start with our own. 2 Chronicles 7:14 isn't just for a nation. It is for us to humble ourselves, pray, to seek His face, and turn from our wicked ways.

It was suggested to me to turn off the news and just "sit in the presence of God." And I challenge you to do that with me for the rest of the week. I want the strategy that will put the enemies of life, liberty and the family on the run for a change. And I'm praying for it. But, instead of just seeking answers, and strategy, and all the stuff we want, I was advised to seek Him first. A novel idea; that's when "all theses things" are added, after all.

National revival is preceded by personal revival – and humility, repentance and prayer is what paves the way. The key to victory is "'not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,' says the Lord." So, if you're empty like I was after my "missions trip" and a glance at the headlines, there's one place to go to be filled, and it's not Fox News. We need the Spirit of God, His wisdom, His power and His knowledge in order to win.

Only then will we find the strength to debate the obvious that the environmentalist and Obama supporters miss: babies matter more than beavers. I don't know the strategy that will advance the cause of righteousness, but I'm asking. And I'm seeking. I hope you'll join me in seeking God, and then obeying Him. Because one thing's for sure: If we sit on the sidelines, it won't be long before we become "a criminal" for speaking out against the next court ruling that expands "marriage" licenses beyond "Party A" and "Party B" to include also "Party C," "Party D" and "Party F."

I would also like to mention and comment on Dennis Prager's latest WND piece as well, When I was a boy, America was a better place.

Even though I'm approximately ⅙ of a century younger than Mr. Prager, America was still a MUCH better place when I was a boy than it is now. In fact, most of the heavy-handed restrictions on liberty and freedom we witness so commonly today didn't materialize on a grand scale until I was long out of high school. For instance, when I was a kid, most 8ft deep and deeper swimming pools still had diving boards in the 1970s. A kid could walk around with an air gun in public and adults could do the same with real guns. Pickup trucks often had gun racks mounted on their back windshields with guns planted in them. Not a big deal. The hysterical fear phobias folk suffer from today and the litigation frenzy coupled with the heavy hand of government regulation had yet to materialize in these matters. By the way, do 8ft deep public swimming pools even exist today? Perhaps, there are some, somewhere, but I've yet to see any since I was a kid. However, I did find deep public swimming pools (complete with diving boards) while stationed in Germany in the latter 80s.

America as it used to be is already dead, obviously, but even the vestiges of freedom that people have become accustomed to enjoying, as if what exists NOW has always been the totality of freedom America possessed throughout its existence, are also deathly ill and on life-support. The prognosis doesn't look good.

YouTube stats, a panorama of the cultural landscape?

2008-02-19T05:21:00.009-05:00

I believe it could be viewed as such. I've been thinking about this for some time and, after examining it in some detail, I've come to the conclusion that one can gauge the culture of America by examining YouTube and observing certain statistics provided by it. Yes, I know folk from all over the world can view these videos, but I think that simply means that America's overall cultural landscape is increasingly mirroring that of the rest of the world, i.e. more decadent, debauched, and corrupted. So, yes, take it as the world's cultural pulse if you like.

For instance, the most viewed video of all time is not anything pertaining to science, geopolitics, philosophy, or religion, but something "intellectually stimulating" called the Evolution of Dance with over 75 million viewers! Before anyone asks, no, I haven't viewed it as I have a near zero interest in the evolution of dance. If folk do have such interest, more power to 'em. I'm just pointing out the most viewed video of all time.

In fact, one can cycle through from the most viewed on down the list and the top contenders are nearly all celebrity-centric videos concerning hip-snot bongo-bangin' noise some call "music", movies, or about sex.

I've said many times on various blog comment forums over the last few years that the core problem with America is not the government bureaucrats, the police, or the politicians, but rather it's the regular folk themselves. The commoners, as I like to call us ;). After all, a given government is merely a reflection of the society at large, the aggregate people. However much government is involved or entangled into economics, education, philosophy, religion, etc. is a clear sign of the overall prevailing societal and cultural mindset concerning the same - economics, education, philosophy, religion, etc.

In short, the cultural landscape doesn't look pretty; in fact, it looks downright rotten to the core.

Ron Paul at Value Voters Debate

2007-09-19T01:55:00.000-05:00

Ron Paul is making sound points in his closing statement at the Values Voters Debate held in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. Monday night:

You know, it's quite telling to me that we can really only count on a 72-year old candidate with a spine of steel, among even the lot that showed (nevermind the "front-runners"), ALL of whom are Ron Paul's junior, to spell out the truth so eloquently. Yet, even at a debate sponsored by so-called "Values Voters" Huckabee wins their straw poll among this group of citizens and voters.

I say, espousing my usual negativity when it concerns America as a whole, this is a sign of America's ultimate decline culturally and politically that many, if not most, of the folk who make up this country today are sadly not cut from the same hardy cloth as the folk who made up this country 230 odd years ago. Not at all.

Motherboard joys

2007-07-15T11:59:00.001-05:00

On July 4th I ordered a Foxconn 6150K8MA-8EKRS Socket 939 mobo and an Opteron 165 1.8GHz dual-core processor in order to upgrade my grayin' FreeBSD 5.4 box from the 32-bit to the 64-bit version (amd64) of the latest 6.2 stable release. The parts were ordered from Newegg, one of the best web retailers for electronics purchases, IMHO. I've purchased several items from them over the years and ne'er a problem.

Anyway, I received the parts and slapped the system together with two 512MB DDR333 sticks I had lying around, then added the old FreeBSD box's 40GB Seagate ST340014A hard drive, its CDRW drive, and its 1.44MB floppy. Yes, I still use floppy drives ;). Fired it up and everything worked great and my private DNS, web, and mysql servers I had been running on the old FreeBSD box ran fine on the new Opteron box. No problems at all.

I decided to update the P28 BIOS (circa 11/2005) to the latest P40 (6/2006) before migrating to FreeBSD 6.2 (amd64) on the new box and that's when the fun began. I downloaded the latest 54AW1P40 BIOS and attempted to flash from floppy. In hindsight, I should of simply booted the machine and flashed it from a USB flash drive rather than the dusty floppy drive, but gee-whiz I've flashed BIOSes countless times over the years and never had an issue. This time, however, the floppy drive LED remained on for an inordinate period of time and I, naturally, suspected that the flash update was likely unsuccessful and the BIOS was now corrupted.

Nevertheless, in the vain hope that it might have flashed successfully, I commenced a hard-reset, thinking the floppy might have merely got stuck after the flashing process for some unknown reason. Nope, upon reboot the screen remained blank and no POST at all. Well, needless to say, I was a bit perturbed to say the least at that point since I needed this system up and running ASAP since it was running the aformentioned services.

I knew when it wouldn't boot and didn't POST that the BIOS was trashed. So, I ordered another PLCC BIOS chip from BIOSMAN, Inc. this past Thursday and received the new chip Saturday via mail. Now, that's fast for mail delivery ;). Plopped it in and now I gots a working board. Yay!

So if you have a "bad flash day" or need a Phoenix, Award, or AMI BIOS for any reason I highly recommend ordering one from BIOSMAN, Inc. Although my issue was concerning a newly purchased mobo, any old mobo you may be thinkin' of trashin' because of a bad BIOS may still have some useful life left in it with a replaced BIOS chip.

Oppose H.R. 1592 and S. 1105!

2007-04-26T02:39:00.000-05:00

All freedom-loving folk need to urgently contact their respective senators and representatives now and strongly urge them to oppose this anti-free speech bill that will, if approved largely intact in it's final form by both the House and Senate, criminalize, with attendant severe unprecedented penalties, targeted "politically-incorrect" speech at the federal level.

This bill is obviously targeted at Christians in particular, but also anyone else in general who doesn't abide in the "politically-correct" (i.e. State-approved and sanctioned) mindset. In other words, it's not just about speech but one's perceived thoughts, mindset, and worldview as well. This kind of targeted government repression was essentially the Pandora's box that was opened when the first "hate crimes" bill was ever passed. And when one reflects on the complete dearth of logic in such a concept as a "hate crime," why would only specifically targeted "hate" be criminalized?? Because it's not really about "hate," per se, but is a cloaked proactive attempt by reprobates, under the cover of "hate," and using the force vector of government, to stifle free speech that doesn't fit a prefabricated "politically-correct" profile across America.

The critical point, however, is that hate should never be a crime, whether it's directed at a group, individual, or organization since hate cannot be qualified or quantified and therefore is totally subjective. In other words, it cannot be proven evidentiarily that "hate" is the motivating factor of the person accused of committing the crime in question). Yet, it doesn't need to be proven conclusively in court (since it's impossible as mentioned), the "hate" aspect is simply assumed.

This leads to extraneous penalties, beyond the already on-the-books, lawfully-mandated, penalties in the various states and municipalities for real crimes committed against any/all persons or property, if the person(s) happens to be of a specially protected minority group - a certain sexual orientation (actually a chosen behavior), a certain race, or a certain religion. That's totally arbitrary and, naturally, is and has been over the years arbitrarily enforced in locales where "hate crimes" laws now currently exist.

It should also come as no surprise to find that the ACLU is also supporting and has "cheered" the recent introduction of the Senate version, S. 1105, of this legislation. The House version of the bill, H.R. 1592, was initially introduced on March 20, 2007.

Ron Paul is the only real choice in Election '08

2007-03-30T06:57:00.000-05:00

I had since 2004 decided to ignore future elections, with the possible exception of the local congressional elections, even though I have voted in elections since 1984, always had been Republican during midterm congressional elections, and for the Constitution Party candidate in presidential elections since 2000. I voted for the Constitutional Party candidate, Michael Peroutka, and his vice presidential running mate, Chuck Baldwin, in the 2004 presidential election and, of course, they lost. No surprise there! Even so, "losing" or "winning" an election for its own sake isn't the real issue, voting on principle rather than mere pragmatism is the issue.

That said, when I heard that Dr. Ron Paul was really running as a Republican candidate for President, I decided that I'd not ignore Election '08 after all; my mind was instantly made up. He's the only candidate that differs in any appreciable manner from the standard drones paraded before the commoners every presidential election cycle by the always predictable media marionettes. The establishment's marionettes can always be counted on to showcase their drones.

Anyway, again, this ain't about whether this man is a "winnable" candidate or not, since anyone with a brain, who can read and write, who has a hand to pull the lever or write in the name "Ron Paul" on the ballot, can help make that happen. Folk simply have to ignore the media marionettes and find out about the candidates on their own and know where the respective candidates stand on all the critical issues, especially constitutional issues and decide to vote accordingly. It should be quite easy, as the entire field, other than Dr. Paul, are singing from the same sheet of music.

Today's progeny of the original IBM PC

2007-03-05T05:32:00.000-05:00

I was just thinking recently and was wondering if the BIOS date was still "engraved" at the same high memory address, the 384KB system-reserved space of the 1MB total memory the 8086/88 CPUs could address (a ROM address in this case) as the original 1981 IBM PC. And, it is.

That address was/is FFFF:0005 or F000:FFF5 (remember, there are a multitude of ways to represent the same physical address within the segmented addressing scheme that can still be utilized by the x86 processors). Yes, even though modern CPUs and the OSes running on them now universally use straight linear addressing these days, the modern CPUs still retain the ability to utilize segmented addressing, maintaining backward-compatibility with the 8086/88.

Well, I remember I had written a simple x86 assembly language prog back in the early-90s (before DOS 5.0 debuted, as many folk were using DOS 4.01 and even some folk still using DOS 3.3 at the time) to display that date so that I would know how old the BIOS was (without rebooting the machine) and if it might need to be updated with new socketed BIOS ROM chips. As I recall, there were two BIOS chips on AT-class machines (286 or 386DX/SX CPUs), one called EVEN and the other ODD, representing even and odd bytes within the ROM.

They were not EEPROM chips back then, so you couldn't update them by "flashing" the chip as we do today. With certain AT-class machines you couldn't even "update" the BIOS ROM chips at all, as they were soldered onto the mobo, but with others they were socketed and could be "updated" by buying a BIOS chip upgrade and inserting them. Most home-users, of course, never bothered to perform that kind of upgrade back then, however, they simply bought new machines or a new mobo.

Granted, today there are a plethora of utilities that supply you that info, along with just about any other pertinent info about your hardware. However, to demonstrate how basic PC hardware at the low-level has remained basically unchanged in 25 years, and for those who like to dabble in assembly language, I'll post an image here showing the code typed up in the ubiquitous DEBUG utility included with MS-DOS, PC-DOS, Windows 3.x, Windows NT, Windows 9x/ME/XP (Vista?) to show how certain things haven't changed in 25 years.

Code to display BIOS date:

You can run this 22-byte program I named simply biosdate.com on any PC-compatible computer and retrieve the BIOS date because even today's machines still remain the progeny of the original IBM PC of 1981...hehe.

Another interesting tidbit has to do with the OS (Windows XP) and not the hardware. Notice that I used the the old DOS function call 40h (Write to File or Device) to display the contents of memory location FFFF:0005. Yep, even Windows XP retains many, if not all, of the "ancient" DOS function calls.

Anyway, I just thought this little irrelevant exercise might interest a few folk out there who, like me, wondered if their PC still retained any IBM PC-era baggage.

A Trip down Prophecy Lane

2007-03-02T01:59:00.000-05:00

I do not fully understand each and every prophetic nuance by any stretch and don't claim to. Personally, whatever is not clear from merely reading the text of scripture (especially in Revelation) I simply try to put two and two together: the pieces of the Word vis à vis what I see happenin' myself, coupled with logical deduction and come to a tentative conclusion.

This post is really a lengthy response to another poster’s comments (quoted below) from another blog. I’m going to use this venue (my blog), if you will, to illustrate what I mentioned above rather than the original blog’s comment thread. It was off topic there anyway.

Commenter:

…I thoroughly reject any notion of a two phase Second Coming initiated by a partial, secret return of Christ followed seven years later by His complete return i.e., the pretrib rapture.)

I'm a pre-tribulationist myself and it's a given and unavoidable that there's going to be varying views on the rapture and the Tribulation period, being that these are yet future events, but thankfully completely groking these sections of scripture are not requirements of salvation itself and/or to understanding the primary gospel message.

That said, I believe there's going to be a "rapture" or catching up of the saints because, as I alluded to above, looking at what scripture reveals coupled with logical deduction, that tentative conclusion makes perfect sense. For example, even though the word "rapture" itself isn't in the English translations of the Bible, we can examine I Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 5:1-11 and deduce how “rapture” makes sense logically and that it would most likely occur before the Tribulation period (or the time of Wrath):

I Thessalonians 4:13-18 (NIV): ¹³Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. ¹⁴We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. ¹⁵According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.¹⁶For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. ¹⁷After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. ¹⁸Therefore encourage each other with these words.

Emphasis is mine. I think this caught up together with them in the clouds is the “rapture” of the saints, living and dead, up into Heaven to be with the Lord. The spirit and soul of the saints who have passed on before us will be with the Lord already (verse 14 above) when he “raptures” the dead (bodies) in Christ to be transformed into immortality, glorified, and reunited with their spirits. Then we, who are alive and are still in our current body will be transformed into glorified and immortal bodies as well. All this, of course, occurs “in the twinking of an eye” (I Corinthians 15:52).

I Thessalonians 5:1-11 (NIV): ¹Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, ²for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. ³While people are saying, "Peace and safety," destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

⁴But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. ⁵You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. ⁶So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled. ⁷For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. ⁸But since we belong to the day, let us be self-controlled, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. ⁹For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. ¹⁰He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him. ¹¹Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.

Again, the emphasized sections are what I’m going to expound upon. If the Lord comes as a thief in the night, which implies stealth, a time when folk are not expecting it, how could this be the Second Coming, when the entire world will know it and every knee shall bow and acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of the Father? And during the Tribulation when the “bowl and trumpet judgements” are being delivered, turmoil abounds, and the wicked try to hide under rocks in a vain attempt to avoid the wrath of the Lamb: “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (Revelation 6:16-17) In other words, the people on the Earth during the Tribulation era are experiencing the "bowl and trumpet" judgements and obviously know it's the wrath of Jesus (the Lamb), yet they still reject Him.

None of that jives in my mind with coming “as a thief in the night” as in stealth to retrieve the saints. And why did I say this “rapture” must occur before the Tribulation? Because, as 1 Thessalonians 5:9 above makes clear, For God did not appoint the saints to suffer wrath, but to receive salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ. If He did not appoint the saints to suffer wrath, he must take them out of the picture before His wrath is poured out upon the Earth, ergo the “rapture” having to occur before the Tribulation or days of the Lamb’s wrath.

Commenter:

Are these the prophesied 'Ten Horns'?:
1) European Union -1993
2) African Union -2002
3) Russian Union/Federation
4) North American Union
5) South American Union
(Fox News 12-10-06)
6) South Asian Union
(India Daily 2-12-05)
7) East Asian Union
(Asia Times 4-7-05)
8) Central Asian Union
(Kazinform News 9-20-06)
9) Asian Pacific Union
(APEC to form APU?)
10) Middle East Union
(Free Trade Area of the Middle
East/FTAME to form MEU?)

That’s certainly a sensible logical deduction for the “ten horns” that I could tentatively* agree with. There’s been conjecture over the years that the ten horns were individual nations, but the European Union already has 25 nations so the “ten horns” representing nations is unlikely.

There are, of course, other varying interpretations as well. Some Christians believe that the AntiChrist, the man of Perdition or sin, and the False Prophet will arise out of the Middle East from the Mesopotamia region (present-day Iraq and the location of ancient Babylon), especially since Revelation 17:5 indicates a harlot with “MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” on her forehead. However, again using logical deduction, I can’t see how this represents the area of Mesopotamia where the real Babylon once stood because John sees upon the harlot’s forehead “MYSTERY BABYLON.” I think instead that the harlot represents the apostate church seated in Rome that will be flourishing during the early part of the Tribulation with the False Prophet as it’s titular head. And he will assist the AntiChrist.

But again, I don’t claim to be an eschatological expert, only how I see it vis à vis the way the Bible describes it. Nevertheless, on the “ten horns” concept, this is a conclusion that happens to coincide with one I would likely draw as any other.

* I say tentatively because all of this just described is, in fact, still conjecture on our part since, as stated earlier, it all pertains to future events.

Joseph Farah's imperial blinders

2007-02-13T06:10:00.000-05:00

From the head honcho warmonger of WND:

Is it that too many Americans learned all the wrong lessons from Vietnam?

Is it that our woefully broken educational system and immoral mass media have left Americans in state of self-hating denial?

Is it that we are simply incapable of remembering what happened 30 years ago?

Or is it that America's enemies have learned all the lessons exceptionally well and remembered how to apply them under new circumstances – in a war that actually means far more to the future of the U.S. and everything it means to be an American?

Maybe it's a combination of all four premises that set the stage for us now as America's elected officials and top policymakers prepare for surrender to the Islamo-fascists of al-Qaida just five years after Osama bin Laden incinerated 3,000 Americans in the worst-ever foreign attack on U.S. soil.

Or maybe it's an indication we as Americans just don't have the intestinal fortitude – or the moral courage – to stand up to people willing to fight and die for something bigger than themselves, no matter how evil that cause may be.

This is what is going through my mind today as I watch history repeat itself in Washington – as armchair generals in the House and Senate vote to go to war, authorized expenditures for that war, approve new leadership with a new plan for that war, debate whether that new plan makes any sense, then pass non-binding resolutions against the new strategy developed for and approved by the commander in chief.

If you're as old as I am, you've lived through this kind of charade before. Back in Vietnam, when the cowards in Congress finally and inevitably ended all financial support to the allies with whom our troops had fought for so many years, it ended predictably in a holocaust – millions victimized by the killing fields of Southeast Asia dead and tens of millions more enslaved by Communism for a generation.

Have we learned all the wrong lessons from Vietnam? Yes. Incredulous as it may seem that after not just one, but three, previous unconstitutional, imperial wars or conflicts - Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq War I - on behalf of the global schemers of the United Nations, Americans can still apparently be convinced to believe that we should gallop off to war against any nation who has not first attacked us or who had no preparations or even the ability to attack us. The majority support for Der Führer's Iraq War II demonstrated that beyond doubt. And yet again, the war was on behalf of the United Nations. In other words, we're the primary proxy fighting force for the U.N. tyrant cabal.

From The New American article, The UN and Iran: Here We Go Again!:

The principal reason given by President George W. Bush for invading Iraq was Saddam’s defiance of UN disarmament resolutions. “We have passed more than a dozen resolutions in the United Nations Security Council,” explained the president in his March 17, 2003 speech. “The Iraqi regime … has uniformly defied Security Council resolutions demanding full disarmament.... The security of the world requires disarming Saddam Hussein now.”

And how do I know that our military is utilized as a proxy for the U.N.? Again, from the same The New American article, The UN and Iran: Here We Go Again!:

Since the founding of the UN in 1945, the use of U.S. troops to enforce UN "police actions" or "peacekeeping operations" has resulted in large numbers of U.S. casualties wasted in no-win military ventures. The Korean War (officially a "police action") was of course waged under UN direction. Less known is the fact that the legal basis for our involvement in Vietnam was the SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) collective defense treaty. Like NATO, SEATO was a regional subsidiary of the United Nations.

Yes, the U.N. has many tentacles and all are, or were, in the case of SEATO which was disbanded in 1977, connected to the one big octapus head headquartered in New York City. Why is this so difficult to comprehend? Should it be any wonder, then, why we have "lost," by folding our tent and withdrawing or destroying our materiel, every single major conflict we've been involved in since WWII? And leaving behind devastation, insurgencies quickened by our very presence as foreign invaders, not to mention leaving intact the enemy tyrant regime in our wake? No, not at all. During the Korean Conflict, the collectivists in our State Department, working in tandem with comrades in the U.N. hierarchy, were divulging intel of our military ops to the enemy. And the betrayals as observed by a Korean War veteran himself.

The central point that needs to be drilled home, however, is that we should not have fought, or be fighting, these conflicts in the first damn place! These post-WWII wars were, and are, unconstitutional; we engage in these, I sincerely believe, for the primary purpose of draining our treasury, our wealth, and diminishing our overall power gradually over time since all of these, with the exception of Iraq War I, and including the current quagmire in Iraq, end up being loooong, seemingly indefinite wars of attrition. And this one is breaking the bank literally, culling or maiming countless men and women who could've otherwise been economic productive members of society. It's a disgrace and it's immoral!

Joseph Farah is a walking, talking dichotomy, if nothing else. He claims to be a constitutionalist, not to mention a Christian, and yet he is one the loudest cheerleaders of imperial war. If he knew anything about key members of who we now call the "Founding Fathers," he certainly wouldn't be supporting this unconstitutional offensive war. Keep in mind, when I say "offensive" here I do not mean in the midst and operation of a war, when acting offensively is critical to total victory, I'm instead talking about a type of war here, engaging in a premptive war with no justification for doing so.

George Washington, in his Farewell Address, published on September 17, 1796, made the point about "to steer clear of permanent alliances" in the foreign world:

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies. (empasis mine)

Thomas Jefferson also made reference to the same during his Inaugural Address in 1801. He said, ""Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none."

Mr. Farah needs desparately to become reacquainted with the Founders on many subject areas. He keeps yammering on that "we're at war" while he plans a 10th aniversary cruise. How quaint; the urgency of this WAR obviously must not have been imparted to him yet. It's obvious, he's quite at ease readying himself for a big bash and presumably has no family members patriotically and urgently volunteering to fight the evil "Islamo-fascists" instead. Yet everyone else should be? Please.

If we were really at war for the defense and very survival of our nation, he and most of the population at large wouldn't be, in essence, living large. There would be rationing, a mobilization of national guard and military units in preparation on domestic soil, a closing of the porous borders, an economy mobilized for war production, etc. Basically there'd be a transformation into a garrison state, in essence if not literally. None of that has occurred

Then again, perhaps Mr. Farah does indeed want this country morphing into some kind of a garrison state and everyone harboring a "siege mentality."

What’s really important in life?

2007-02-11T05:06:00.000-05:00

I have to stop and ponder sometimes what the important things in life are. I mean when you look around you and see all the philosophies and ideologies that are being disseminated about in every possible medium and the constant worry about the evils of “the State,” the growth of “the State,” and so on, one has to sometimes wonder what some of these folk think is really important in life.

For me, it’s increasingly becoming more clear to me that the most important thing in life are to spread the Gospel and explain, in the best way I know how, by the best method I know, how others may be saved and come to the knowledge of the Truth.

The obsession with “the State” and so-called “freedom” is often expressed excluding any mention of the originator of true genuine freedom itself, Jesus Christ. This is a huge waste of time, in my opinion. There is no such reality as unbridled freedom as some must think since they, by omitting the originator of freedom, by all appearances want “freedom” in the abstract. In other words, to live however you want as long as you don’t impinge upon the “freedom” of another. That’s so much nonsense. And this links into this other faux mantra of what some call “victimless” crimes, claiming that the crime, behavior, or other deed doesn’t negatively impact another person.

That’s just not true. Whatever one does or doesn’t do in their life will either directly or indirectly impact those in his/her immediate circle for good, bad, or ugly, whether it be a crime defined within man’s law or a legit deed within man’s law. Sometimes the result of said impact won’t manifest itself immediately or in short order, but only years later. Of course, naturally, if you’re an individual in a position of authority, your impact reaches far and wide. You impact many more folk than those who are in your immediate circle. In that light, deeds may indeed be victimless in the proper sense, but no act of behavior is devoid of impact, in some fashion, upon another, especially those close to us.

Frankly, the world isn’t going to get better until Jesus returns, it’s only going to get worse as the Bible predicts.

As Matthew makes clear to us:

³⁷But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
³⁸For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
³⁹And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (Matthew 24:37-39 KJV)

How was it in the days of Noah? Let’s go back to Genesis and find out:

¹²And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
¹³And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. (Genesis 6:12-13 KJV)

So, the world will be wholly corrupt and filled with violence when the Son of Man returns as it was in the days of Noah. So am I saying by this we should just give up the fight for freedom? No, not at all! I’m merely saying that genuine freedom isn’t found by merely tossing “the State” from the equation. In fact, it cannot be tossed from the equation if Jesus is absent from the equation. Everyone has a master and the master will either be man (government), or Jesus Christ (who enables self-control and the ability to self-govern). There is no middle ground.

I think Solomon speaks volumes to what I'm saying in the Book of Ecclesiastes.

Current home network config

2006-11-06T04:06:00.000-05:00

I've had a home network of 3-5 machines set up since 1999, when the terms network and networking were still largely confined to the enterprise workplace, not at home. Nowadays, they're virtually ubiquitous.

I starting home networking in 1995 with a mere null-modem serial cable b/w two PCs running Windows 95 using NetBEUI and sometimes IPX/SPX, mainly for gaming. Everyone remembers NetBEUI, right? Yeah, it was unroutable and very mundane compared to TCP/IP, but it was more than adequate for two machines or even a cluster of machines in a workgroup.

Anyway, this is currently my basic home network layout. I'm coming to the wireless table late, but I'm in no hurry to switch everything over to wireless right now. Just client machines for the time being.

New notebook, finally

2006-11-06T03:30:00.000-05:00

This is basically a continuation of the previous post as it concerns a new laptop. Ya see, when it comes to possessing a laptop, or a newer more modern laptop in my case, unlike the desktop/tower box arena, you have to go with an OEM machine. Yes, it’s possible to build a laptop from scratch about like it’s possible to build a car from scratch, but I, as do most folk just don’t have that much time not to mention skills required to engineer and construct a custom laptop. My previous laptop was a Gateway Solo 1100 that initially had Windows 98 SE on it, but I had years ago installed Windows 2000 Professional and the corresponding Win32 drivers required for the SoundMAX integrated audio and NeoMagic NM2160D integrated video. But it works quite well, yes it STILL works. The only hardware that has been replaced on it is the original 4GB IBM harddisk. And several important keys on the keyboard became dysfunctional when a drink was spilled upon the counter. To remedy the harddisk, I bought a replacement 10GB IBM TravelStar harddisk from Priority Electronics back in May 2004 and reinstalled Win2k and not had any problems since then. I haven’t bought a replacement keyboard since those run around $80 give or take at various and sundry vendors and because of the age of the machine. Instead, I’ve opted to connect a wireless fullsize keyboard I had lying around unused into its one PS/2 port and install the driver. Works like a charm.

The overriding issue with the Solo 1100, and the main impetus to purchasing a new laptop, is its age (circa 2000) and therefore it’s overall sluggishness with today's apps. I’ll probably end up installing FreeBSD on it eventually.

So, I shopped around for a new notebook recently before Halloween to take it’s place. I decided on the HP DV9008nr from BestBuy. It’s not a hardcore gaming lapper by any means, true, but it’s all I need or want in a notebook; besides, I game almost exclusively on the desktop. I do like the 17in. display, however ;). Needless to say, I’m quite happy with the assorted hardware, being pretty much exactly what I want and/or need, nothing more, nothing less. However, one big negative is that the notebook came pre-installed with Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005. There’s a number of reasons I would’ve preferred XP Professional, but the most significant reason is that it cannot join an active directory domain without modification. Since I’m not one to forgo modifications, especially if required, I did just that. I performed the well-known registry hack to make that possible and I’m good to go there. The LightScribe-capable DVD writer is nice but it wasn’t a must-have feature; nevertheless, the labeling works as advertised. It does, however, take an average of 15-25 minutes or so to fully burn a label, depending on the amount of solid black required for the grayscale image being used as a label. Not bad, though.

The one additional negative with the machine, besides the XP MCE OS, as with just about all OEM machines, be they desktops or notebooks, is the glob of software that’s pre-installed. I’ve never had to deal with that in the desktop arena since the 386 era because I’ve always built my own, but with a notebook it’s a pain. So I had to uninstall most of the crap for my purposes and install some of my own software also, of course. PuTTY was one of my first installations since I continually need to SSH to my FreeBSD boxes and that’s been for many years my main tool for doing it. That, and I use WinSCP periodically as well.

Overrall, I’m quite content with this notebook and so far have not found any defective hardware and no crashes so far ;). I always worry about such things when a notebook is involved because the entire machine has to be shipped off to be worked on.

PCs on the cheap

2006-11-06T03:28:00.000-05:00

Don’t get me wrong, I’m as much for a genuinely cheaper priced PC as anyone else, but the trend I’ve noticed since at least the dawn of the new millennium is not simply cheap PCs but pre-baked PCs with no accompanying manuals for the mobos, no software media, or anything else other than what’s imaged on the harddisk from the factory. Yes, some manuals may be included as PDFs on a system CD/DVD, but that’s about it. Oh yeah, that’s right, what system CD/DVD? You have to burn your own these days. Also, although sound and/or video integrated mobos have always been somewhat common in OEM machines, those CHEAPER PCs by contrast are virtually all built with fully integrated audio and in some cases (crap) integrated video circuitry on the mobo as well as the lack of the aforementioned items. The mobos are the lowest of the low-cost mobos that are usually tailored to a specific OEM, in fact. Surprise!

And speaking of the dearth of software media, the operating system, drivers, and pre-installed application software are not discrete packages on their own media, be it CDs or DVDs. You basically get a pre-fab’d machine with preset apps and OS and you then burn some recovery CDs or DVDs that are supposed to restore your machine to it’s initial state. Why not reduce the price even more by not installing a damn thing on the machine and let the consumer handle that aspect entirely? Then, I’d agree that PCs are really, really CHEAPER than yesteryear.

This doesn’t affect me personally, other than when I’m looking to purchase a laptop as I have recently, but that’s another post I’ll expound on shortly. Anyway, when it comes to desktops, I build my own and have done so since 1992 when I built my first, a 486DX-33 from scratch. Since that time I haven’t had a name brand PC ever and I consequently (or luckily, depending on your point of view) haven’t had many hardware failures either. Yes, I’ve had a hard disk or two grind, clank, and die, but overall no major core hardware issues with the various machine innards.

Anyhow, that’s just my warped view so I have to ask, do you folk really think PCs are cheaper now than they were, say, ten years ago? Ponder that carefully before you answer, seriously.

Road trippin' on the F650

2006-10-09T13:09:00.000-05:00

I recently traveled down to Beulaville, N.C. area on my '99 BMW F650 motorcycle. I had someone following me and happened to take some shots along the way both to and fro along Rt. 11 and 13. So I figured why not put a few up on the blog.

I went down there to help my mother and aunt with finalizing the selling of a 5 acre plot to some Mennonites who bought it. They seem like swell folk and are similar to the Amish, in fact, but with the difference that they do indulge the modern conveniences to some extent, i.e. modern transportaion, unlike the Amish. Anyway, they plan to use my grandmother's old homestead as a school and I have no regrets selling the property to them.

I was born and raised in southeastern Virginia, all my aquaintances and friends are here, and my entire life, outside of the military, centers around this area. So, there's not much of a reason to hold onto my grandmother's old homestead and it not being used and slowly decaying. Not to mention the property tax one pays on property with a dwelling. My grandmother had this house built in 1959 on a different plot of her land left to her after my grandaddy passed on in 1956. The old house where my mother grew up was originally built about 1911 and has since been torn down in the late-1970s but the land is still in our possession. The only lot we sold was the lot with my grandmother's house and packhouse, which is largely open land and some surrounding farmland, but the forested land we still own. You never can know that if things get haywire up this way there's always some land down there to put a trailer up in the wooded area.

One should always try to have something, especially land, to fall back on if/when the cost of living becomes prohibitive and/or unemployment becomes a reality.

Anyway, this be me on my hardy steed at a couple of points during the trip:

The pics without the saddlebags were the return trip back to Virginia. I put them in the car to reduce weight a bit. All in all, though, I really like this bike, although it is probably the smallest I could stand for any distant trippin'; this one being 205 miles each way, BTW. However, I was dead tired afterwards as we went down there on the 4th and returned on the 5th.

I've already been to the mountains near the Shenandoah NP and Skyline Drive and Nags Head, both of which aren't so far actually from my abode, only 150 miles and 100 miles respectively. Still, that's some traveling on a 650 single-cylinder thumper ;).

E-mail scams....sigh

2006-08-22T00:25:00.000-05:00

I have over the years received many scam e-mails and, yes, they usually have something to do with some Nigerian aristocrat desiring safe passage for millions of dollars of dough to this country. You probably know of the various scams (i.e. the 419 scam), as well; I've heard from some sources that they do indeed still manage to find suckers every single day. Gee, will folk ever get a clue?

Well, after a long hiatus, some scammer has targeted me again. "Hey! He's got a bite some day!!" So, I just today got another e-mail scam and I've decided to publish this one, examine it with a fine-toothed comb, and write some commentary on it.

To start with, here's the e-mail received in KMail, headers and all with my own Cox e-mail (the final destination) X'd out:

Return-Path: <steveb555@adinet.com.uy>
 Received: from eastrmimpi02.cox.net ([68.1.16.118]) by eastrmmtai08.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP
          id <20060821182208.TPPI10570.eastrmmtai08.cox.net@eastrmimpi02.cox.net>
          for <XXXXXXX@cox.net>; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:22:08 -0400
 Received: from eforward4.name-services.com ([64.74.96.246])
        by eastrmimpi02.cox.net with IMP
        id CiHS1V05l5Jwc000000000
        Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:17:29 -0400
 Received: from c9mailgw24.amadis.com ([216.163.188.220]) by eforward4.name-services.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
         Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:20:39 -0700
 Received: from smtp-s4.antel.net.uy (smtp-s4.antel.net.uy [200.40.30.233])
        by c9mailgw24.amadis.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F62B163806
        for <dixiedog@dixiebill.com>; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
 Received: from fe-ps02 (192.168.2.202) by smtp-s4.antel.net.uy (7.2.072.1) (authenticated as steveb555@adinet.com.uy)
        id 4474803E01820289; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:59:40 -0300
 Received: from [125.245.186.132] by www.adinet.com.uy via http; Mon Aug 21 14:59:40 UYT 2006
 Message-ID: <12276098.1156183180746.JavaMail.tomcat@fe-ps02>
 Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:59:40 -0300 (UYT)
 From: steve   Bastiaan <steveb555@adinet.com.uy>
 Reply-To: steve_b2222@uymail.com
 Subject: from steve
 MIME-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="UTF-8"
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 X-Originating-IP: 125.245.186.132
 To: undisclosed-recipients:;
 X-CTASD-RefID: str=0001.0A090216.44E9F8C4.0028,ss=1,fgs=0
 X-CTASD-IP: 200.40.30.233
 X-CTASD-Sender: steveb555@adinet.com.uy
 x-ctasd: uncategorized
 x-ctasd-vod: uncategorized
 x-ctasd-station: 
 Return-Path: steveb555@adinet.com.uy
 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2006 18:20:39.0808 (UTC) FILETIME=[818A4000:01C6C54E]
 Status: R
 X-Status: NC
 X-KMail-EncryptionState: 
 X-KMail-SignatureState: 
 X-KMail-MDN-Sent: 
 
Dear Friend
,
I am Steve Bastiaan,a merchant in Dubai, in the U.A.E.I have been 
diagnosed
with Esophageal Cancerwhich was discovered very late, due to my laxity 
in
caringfor my health. It has defiled all forms of medicine, and right 
now I
have only abouta few months to live, according to medical experts.

I have not particularly lived my life so well, as I never really
cared for anyone not even myself but my business. Though I am very 
rich, I
wasnever generous, I was always hostile to people and only focused on 
my
business as that was the only thing I cared for. But now I regret all 
this 
as I now know that there is more to life than just wanting to have or 
make 
all themoney in the world.
 I believe when God gives me a second chance to
come to this world I would live my life a different way from how I 
have lived it.
Now that God has called me, I want God to be merciful to me and accept 
my
soul and so, I have decided to give alms to charity organizations and 
give
succour and confort to the less priviledged in our societies, as I 
want this
to be one of the last good deeds I do on earth.
Now that my health has deteriorated so badly, I cannot do this my self
anymore.The last of my money which no one knows of is the huge cash 
deposit
of ten million dollars($10M) that I have in Europe for safe keeping. I 
will 
want you to help me collect this deposit and disburse it to some 
charity 
organizations and to the less priviledged.

Please send me a mail to indicate if you will assist me in this
disbursement.I hav e set aside 10% for you for your time and patience.
you can email me at: steve_b2222@uymail.com

While I await to hear from you, may God be with you and your entire 
family.
Remain blessed,
Steve Bastiaan.

Ok, next I did a reverse lookup from my home machine of the X-Originating-IP shown to be 125.245.186.132:

; <<>> DiG 9.3.1 <<>> -x 125.245.186.132
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 60580
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;132.186.245.125.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
245.125.in-addr.arpa. 900 IN SOA g.dns.kr. inverse.nida.or.kr. 2006062614 21600 900 604800 43200

;; Query time: 30 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.1.2#53(192.168.1.2)
;; WHEN: Tue Aug 22 01:04:59 2006
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 106

Since the name server for that IP, the originating IP, which conveniently has no pointer (PTR) record, is located in South Korea, indicated by the .kr top-level geographic domain of the name servers.

The fact that this IP lacks a pointer record, which for the uninitiated means no way to do an exact reverse IP lookup and obtain the machine name within the domain hierarchy in question, and usually (but not always) is indicative of an ethically-challenged ISP or IP spoofing. Only a start of authority (SOA) record is returned, listing only authoritative name servers, as we see here.

Next, the supposed sender steveb555@adinet.com.uy, which is most definitely a fake, naturally, shows adinet.com.uy, an entity (adinet.com) in Uruguay as the source of this e-mail. The following line in the header:

Received: from [125.245.186.132] by www.adinet.com.uy via http; Mon Aug 21 14:59:40 UYT 2006
 Message-ID: <12276098.1156183180746.JavaMail.tomcat@fe-ps02>

seems to indicate some sort of Java-based web-based e-mail app. When we then go to www.adinet.com.uy, we indeed see a web e-mail page in which the e-mail app itself is probably written in Java and served up on Java server pages.

Anyway, not to get into too much technical psychobabble, if you read the Received: header lines from the bottom (start) to the top (end), it's quite apparent that the person who sent this probably resides in South Korea, logged into a webmail at www.adinet.com.uy located in Uruguay, and sent this gem to my Cox e-mail (via Enom's forwarding I set up through dixiedog AT dixiebill.com) among a plethora of other "undisclosed- recipients," one or more of whom will without a doubt, unfortunately, fall for this garbage.

One wishes they could reach out and touch these basta'ds sometimes. BUT, I deal ;).

Experimenting with styles...

2006-08-20T05:38:00.000-05:00

I've been experimenting with different CSS for both Haloscan and the blog here to attempt to capture the essence of Dixie, so to speak, hence the background painting of the Battle of Gettysburg by James Walker (1818-1889). The background shown is only about ¾ of the total painting that I scanned in, which covers pages 330-331, from the book, The American Heritage Picture History of the Civil War (1960), by historian Bruce Catton.

I may change it as I'm still experimenting to determine what CSS layout I'll stick with for the long term. But for now, this will be the style. I almost always invariably dislike the default stuff supplied with just about anything, be it website templates, operating system settings, whatever, so I end up changing them to my liking.

New blogtrailer has arrived

2006-08-18T12:44:00.000-05:00

William Norman Grigg, the senior editor of the New American magazine, has now hauled in a new blogtrailer to the Blogspot Mobile Home Park. And as of right now, he has comments enabled on this blog. So go visit his blogtrailer for some excellent incisive and poignant commentary of the issues of the day!

The Birchblog was relocated from the New American website to the John Birch Society's main website at the end of July and there's been a dearth of posts thenceforth.

Anyhow, I look forward to seeing some great blog posts from him. So, again, be sure to visit from time to time.

Collectivists not limited to political realm

2006-07-29T06:39:00.000-05:00

This was an interesting, not to mention insightful, blog posting from Tom Foremski of ZDNet. He basically is preaching the superiority of thin client computing and that it's more economical overall for the processor manufacturers to concentrate on chip design and production for the server side at the expense of the client side (the bourgeois). In other words, all of this is a set of euphemisms for centralization and control of data (apps, user data, etc.) stripped away from Joe and Jane Sixpack consumer and put into the hands of a data center (Politburo) running big iron servers that it controls. What if you wish to be your own programmer? Not possible, since they will only allow canned (pre-approved) applications to run on the server big iron unless, of course, you get special permission from the data center czar.

He even lets slip a few morsels of candidness of this general mindset in the following paragraph:

And as we move ever closer to an always-connected world through ubiquitous wired and wireless connections, the thin computing model that Wyse and others advocate, becomes very practical and very cost effective. In addition, a thin computing architecture provides far more protection against viruses, spyware, and other nastyware, because the user experience is completely controlled from a central location.

Hmm, on second thought, one can't be truly much more candid and clear than that. I can't see how anyone who desires to control their own data and user experience would settle for what amounts to a computing dictatorship in essence. As for viruses, spyware, and trojans it's the same argument that's made when the subject in question is crime. Hey, let the government take care of you, the government will keep you secure. You're too stupid to take care of yourself, too stupid to secure your house, ad nauseam. In this case, replace government leviathan with central computing leviathan located in some fortress data center controlled by an IT dictator, who probably will have well-greased and mushy ties to NSA and/or other government agencies anyway.

It's amazing to me that folk still parrot collectivist control schemes cloaked in terms of efficiency, economics, or other vague notions. And, of course, those benefit arguments are on behalf of the corporations who manufacture the hardware, not on behalf of the ordinary user and what he/she may want in terms of a computing experience. I also like to control not only my own data and applications, but my own hardware as well. So the only server iron I use to dish out certain apps to thin clients will be owned, operated, monitored, and maintained by myself as well as the thin client.

It's all about CONTROL people! The preachers of totalitarian dogma not only plague the political realm, but also the economic realm in all its sectors as well.

Naked imperialism cloaked in homeland defense

2006-07-25T05:09:00.000-05:00

The loud clarion call of the neoconservative movement and other so-called "independent" thinkers like Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily is the tiresome "we're at war" or something akin to "We're in a War on Terror!"

I have come up with a new term for the changing political lexicon in America.

I've never been high on the standard political labels as they are generally used today.

I just don't see much difference between many of those who call themselves "conservative" and those who call themselves "liberal." As I've pointed out many times, those words mean different things to different people in different places at different times.

They mean almost nothing today in America. If George Bush is a "conservative," the word has lost any meaning whatsoever.

And because my views don't fit neatly into little boxes for my critics, I'm often caricatured and stereotyped in the most despicable ways.

Because I categorically reject the "conservative" label for a variety of reasons, it's amusing to me when some take it a step further – calling me a "neo-con."

Hmm, where to begin. See, this is why political discourse in America is stone cold dead and cannot be revived. Farah apparently of late finally acknowledges that there is not "much difference" between those who identify themselves as "conservatives" and those who identify as "liberals." That's a start and he's finally grabbing the clue branch firmly it would seem. But then, he loses his already tenuous grip on the clue branch completely by confusing the term "neo-con" with an authentic "conservative" as evidenced clearly by his amusement (or is it really bewilderment?) at being labeled a "neocon" by some. As if by his publicly rejecting the term "conservative" ad infinitum that that somehow encompasses all terms and meanings pertaining to the label "conservative." No, no, no! Farah needs to grab two clue branches on his next attempt and maybe he'll hold fast for a season at least. But, sigh, as the following illustrates vividly, he's left the forest completely.

"Neo-con" is the favorite epithet of people like Pat Buchanan and the anti-war crowd. These are the people who, for whatever reason, fail to recognize that America is at war. It's not a question of whether we want to be at war. It's simply the case that others have chosen to war with us. The new anti-warriors seem to think we can pretend we're not.

For many of them, this was not the way they saw the world during the Cold War. This was not the way they perceived the threat from the Soviet Union. They were anti-communists back then. Now they have changed the rules of engagement – but they accuse people like me of changing. Thus, the epithet "neo-con."

But since this group is the one who has changed the way they view real-world threats, real-world enemies, real-world totalitarians who want to kill Americans, kill Christians, kill Jews, kill infidels, I've decided it's the anti-war crowd that needs a new moniker.

So I have come up with a new term. Tell me what you think of my new name for those folks who suddenly define themselves and their worldview by their anti-war stance. I call them "neo-coms."

It's quite obvious that Joe Farah has no idea what the term neocon or neoconservative means as he's confessed as much above.

Firstly, Bill Kristol is one key figure, if not the elitist figure, who managed to elevate the term "neoconservatism" to it's current vogue status among the majority of hapless traditionalist commoners, who know no better because of constitutional ignorance and/or other writings and utterances of founders such as John Jay, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton found in the Federalist Papers. But even more amazing (and tragic) than the bliss of the commoner, in general, is the ignorance displayed frequently by media traditionalists and constitutionalists. Could it be feigned ignorance, or is it genuine? You decide. Whether the resultant consequence(s) of deception is intentional or unintentional matters not, it's still eventually realized nonetheless by the innocent and the guilty.

In short, "neoconservatism" is really just a euphemism for the same ol' global socialism/communism, albeit with a pinch of benevolence thrown in, brought to fruition through growth of government in general, but especially centralized government. In other words, the same mindset as any hardcore Marxist, but cloaked for a season with that pinch of benevolence mentioned earlier. What benevolence that does exist would cease assuredly when the ultimate goal of such elitists of that total centralization is realized.

With all this in mind, could one reason some folk label Farah a "neocon" be because he advocates war against myriad states that may or may not hate us, but who have not attacked us? Newsflash! We'll always be hated by other nations and peoples of the world. That's just the way it is and has always been since there were nations. The clarion call, and ultimate excuse for whatever government abuse, almost a cliché today, called the "War on Terror" is in essence nothing more than a Countach vehicle with which government can be expanded speedily and hastily with little to no resistance. Hey, that sure beats expansion at the pace of a Volkswagen. Anyway, it has nothing to do with a real war against a real enemy!! If this so-called WAR ON TERROR (and against Islamic jihadists as Farah loves to scream) that America is mired in was genuine, we'd have attacked Saudi Arabia with a vengeance and crushed the source of Wahhabism quicktime. Has that happened? No. Is it ever going to happen? No! Has Osama bin Laden been eliminated? No. Is it ever going to happen? No! It's amazing how fast folk forget what Bush stated just after 9/11 about getting Bin Laden "dead or alive." Also, the Bush regime has quietly closed the CIA unit dedicated to capturing Osama bin Laden.

Lastly, could one reason Farah is labeled a "neocon" by some be because he has decided himself to label "anti-war zealots" as "neo-coms?" He writes as if there is no such thing as a principled anti-war position, a position that mirrors a view Madison, Jay, Hamilton, or even Jefferson would almost certainly have shared. That would be not to entangle ourselves in alliances to start with and only attack a hostile aggressor who has first attacked us or is, by all detectible means, going to inevitably attack us. That would be the only acceptable time to decide to commit preemptive attacks upon other states. We're not doing any of that. And the desire of most self-identified neocons is to build up the U.S. military for the purpose of preemptive attacks against whatever state(s) that wish not to follow our "world democratic revolution" script. Of course, naturally, the imperial muscle-wielding and "regime changes" would only be imposed upon those banana republics and fiefdoms that are least likely to fight on anything approaching an even keel or even pose a challenge.

But that's beside the point. The inescapable reality here is that it's Farah whose true colors are more aligned with the Left, the neocons, et al not Buchanan! The only topic on which I completely disagree with Buchanan on is his Mideast madness disease, but that's blog fodder for another time.

Memo to Pat: Shut Up and Sing

2006-05-24T09:02:00.000-05:00

I obtained permission from the blogmaster of the Birchblog, William Norman Grigg, to post his recent, but now purged, blog entry from the Birchblog here in its entirety:

“If I were the president of Iran, if I were Osama bin Laden or any of the terrorist organizers and I could have my wish list totally,” stated milquetoast music icon and political commentator wannabe Pat Boone in a recent interview, “I couldn't ask for anything better than for America's entertainers to bash their president, denigrate him, make him seem like an idiot and a self-serving fool, and then have the media go along with it and promote it like crazy and try to undermine the whole war effort.”

So by Boone's calculations, “America's entertainers” are the key strategic resource in the “War on Terror,” and nothing – nothing! – is more important to the “Islamo-Fascists” than having our singers of songs and professional pretenders (also known as “actors”) criticize the president.

The occasional intemperate comment from an actor or musician has greater throw-weight than a suitcase nuke, and a deadlier capacity for contagion than a bio-weapon, according to Boone's expert assessment. That reckoning, I suspect, has a lot to do with professional narcissism: as an entertainer, Boone is inclined to see his profession as the center of the universe.

Mr. Boone's strategic insights were offered as a rebuke to Natalie Maines, lead singer for the Dixie Chicks, who famously denounced President Bush on the eve of the unnecessary war in Iraq in 2003. The Chicks' new album features a track entitled “Not Ready to Make Nice,” which hurls defiance at those who attempted to boycott the group in the wake of Maines' comment. And Maines herself has retracted an apology she had made for the remark, quite sensibly saying “I don't feel he is owed any respect whatsoever.”

“We are at war,” insists Boone, “and you don't tell even a quarterback in a football game that he's nuts and you don't respect him. You try to pull for a win, and that's what we should be trying to do.... You can disagree. You can express your disagreement, but don't attack the man who is your elected leader and say he's not owed any respect at all.”

Where do we begin in dealing with this large, reeking pile of used food?

First of all:

War isn't a football game. It is the calculated destruction of irreplaceable lives and, often, entire societies. Modern war often inflicts nearly as much damage on the “victor” as on the vanquished.

Second:

When a quarterback is stinking up the field, he can expect rough treatment from his coach, the team owner, and the fans – all of whom generally won't restrict themselves to decorously phrased critical comments like those Maines made about Bush, who shamelessly lied our nation into a needless and disastrous war. A quarterback who consistently throws interceptions or gets sacked for losses isn't entitled to respect, and won't last long in the starting lineup.

Third:

When our nation launches an unnecessary aggressive war – one not prosecuted in the fashion the Constitution prescribes -- that proves to be a strategic and moral disaster, Americans should not “pull for a win.” Yes, to revert to Boone's favored idiom, we should “root, root, root for the home team.” But when our government launches an aggressive war against a distant nation that hasn't attacked or threatened us, we are not the home team.

The only way for the American people, as opposed to the corrupt criminals who rule us, to “win” the Iraq war is to end it immediately.

Fourth:

The President of the United States is not our “leader.” He is our agent, our employee. He is not some numinous being who embodies our national will, as peddlers of fuhrerprinzip would have us believe. Unless they are active-duty members of the military, Americans have no Commander-in-Chief, and unless war is declared by Congress that occasional function of the presidency isn't operative.

In trying to isolate the most foolish thing Boone said in that brief interview, one is confronted with an embarrassment of riches. But from my point of view, the booby prize goes to Boone's apparent belief that the thing Osama bin Laden and his ilk would covet more than anything else would be public criticism of George W. Bush.

Any rational assessment of Bush's foreign policy would lead one to conclude that Osama (citing him as the figurative head of the radical Islamic movement) has no better or more reliable ally than Bush. Osama's announced intention is to bleed our economy dry – something the Bush administration is eagerly doing, with the dutiful help of the Republican Congress.

Bush is a similarly valuable ally to Iran's President Ahmadinejad. Iran is the chief strategic beneficiary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which removed Teheran's chief Persian Gulf region rival and installed an Iran-friendly Shi'ite regime.

As Pat Boone's comments nicely illustrate, most celebrities are no wiser or better informed than the rest of us. He should take the advice famously tendered by Bushbot talk show host Laura Ingraham to left-leaning celebrities: Just shut up and sing.

Since I'm a daily WND reader and see Boone's column (but find it often difficult reading beyond the first paragraph), I happen to agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Grigg's overall assessment of Boone's seemingly incessant reverence for President Bush and his dedication to the "War on Method," er, I mean the so-called "War on Terror."

Apple's new "Boot Camp" software

2006-04-16T22:11:00.000-05:00

You know, one often reads about how OSX is superior to Winders and why would folk want to run the imperial Winders instead of Mac OSX, the humble alternative? Presumptuous, to say the least, but let's examine that thought in detail.

This ZDNet article Will PC users see Apple in a new light? is basically working from a premise of Winders users becoming Mac users in a roundabout way, but the unmentioned reality of this premise is that the Winders user in question MUST have Apple HARDWARE in order to do this. First of all, as a Winders user myself, what sense does that make? I already own lots of hardware, with which I can already run Winders, why bother buying quasi-proprietary Intel-based hardware to do the same? Oh yeah, I forgot, I'll be able to run that superior Mac OSX, doh! Sigh, I couldn't care less about Mac OSX as I like running FreeBSD in addition to running Winders on the SAME hardware I already OWN, but thanks anyway Mr. Jobs and the rest of the Apple choir. Gee, has the reality sunk in yet? Now, if we're talking about Mac folk wanting to be able to run Winders apps in addition to their beloved Mac OSX, fine, have at it! More ePower to ya!

Even so, many of these folk who proclaim such have apple dumplin' brains. Again, who says anyone has to run Winders? You see, that's the catch-22, you have to buy Apple HARDWARE to run this Boot Camp software in order to install and run Winders XP (Home or Pro) and, of course, the native Mac OSX. Perhaps, it's escaped the apple dumplin' mind that while many of these same folk praise and worship open source software as a commodity so to speak, and I certainly like open source myself, nevertheless, Mac OSX is itself excluded and given a pass on that point. They, apparently, have also forgotten that HARDWARE has already been a commodity item for many years. Apple is, of course, given a pass on this point as well. Hmmm...

Well, I would say instead, why would anyone want to constrain themselves to only TWO OS choices, Mac OSX or Winders? It seems to me that some of these hardcore Apple fans are no different from some of the hardcore M$ fans, as they both are extremists in their own right. Fine, whatever, but I don't want any part of either extremist camp. Somebody wants me to try out Mac OSX, it better be able to be run on a generic Intel/AMD mobo, in other words, on what I ALREADY OWN, get it? It's just that simple, really.

Yet, some folk ramble on about Apple being a HARDWARE company and if you want to run the software, buy THEIR hardware! No thanks, keep it pal!

Whoever reads this, thanks in advance for reading. I just had to get it off my chest.

DHS implementing new surveillance program

2006-02-27T21:59:00.000-05:00

ZDNet Government reporting on the inmates being their own good stewards in the asylum:

Plenty have serious privacy concerns about such a program, and some critics like the Electronic Frontier Foundation think it smells like TIA.
In 2002, news reports revealed that the Defense Department was working on Total Information Awareness, a project aimed at collecting and sifting vast amounts of personal and government data for clues to terrorism. An uproar caused Congress to cancel the TIA program a year later.

ADVISE "looks very much like TIA," Mr. Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation writes in an e-mail. "There's the same emphasis on broad collection and pattern analysis."

But Mr. Sand, the DHS official, emphasizes that privacy protection would be built-in. "Before a system leaves the department there's been a privacy review…. That's our focus."

You know, most folk, who are often taken aback by any opposition to methodologies put forth by "holy" government couched in the claim of fighting terrorism, almost always seem to miss the entire point of the matter, the focus of most principled opposition to start with. That is, why would level-headed folk with even a modicum of common sense even consider thinking that the same government agency of the same executive branch of government can be trusted to provide truly honest oversight over surveillance matters within itself? They wouldn't, and shouldn't, but we can always count on hearing the timeless tale that the Brave New World we now find ourselves living in requires it. Meanwhile, the broken record continues to play and, in this case of "privacy," it would play something akin to the following: "Why be so anti-government and extremist-minded? Don't you understand, we want to protect your privacy."

Substitute safety for privacy or whatever term(s) you want, but the oxymoron inbred within wouldn't be any less relevant.