"... all US citizens in Russia and Ukraine should depart immediately."

The US State Dept. has "updated" its official instructions to US travelers in Russia and Ukraine, warning all US citizens depart either country "immediately". This seems to be the news report Jack Posobiec tweeted about earlier today.

"American nationals should immediately leave Russia and Ukraine, the State Department said Thursday, citing potential arrest by Russian security officials."

So, probably not the invasion by US/NATO troops I speculated about on the Twitter.

Thankfully.

Hopefully.

I wish the Obama Curse* wasn't real.

(*"Never underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up."

Point of Order, Ms X

In an overall quite unobjectionable post at The Adventures of Roberta X, I do feel it necessary to point out her oversimplification of the concept of "press".

Specifically, this:

When I wrote about law enforcement apparently targeting journalists, in reports a Federal judge found so credible he grated a temporary restraining order, I received a few comments.  They were...heated.  Vitriolic.  The people who wrote them are free to hold such ideas, of course.  I'm not obliged to post them on my blog, but I will quote from them in order to address the significant concerns they raise.

Followed later in the post by this:

 As for "lefty so-called journalists," there's nothing in the Bill of Rights that limits press freedom to one political leaning or another: John Stossel, Glenn Greenwald, Sean Hannity, Rachael Maddow and some nitwit with a blog are all protected from government interference, even when they're offering up nothing but opinion. " It is generally understood that the government is expected to not shoot them, especially when they have taken pains to make themselves identifiable as "press.

My thanks to Roberta X for including me in her list of protected examples.  :)

All of which to frame my question; what is the practical distinction between "press" and "activist", and does the one necessarily preclude being the other? If so, by what degree, and by what discernible measure available to the average onlooker?

As justification for my questions, I submit the documented actions of Canadian journalist/activist Lauren Southern. A paid (and therefore professional) journalist for online media companies, Southern nonetheless actively participated in the activities she was reporting on as a clearly identified member of the "press", an activity she continued to various degree in her subsequent professional iteration as a documentarian.

As Ms. Southern's past actions make clear, there is a very real distinction that needs to be made between those who "report" from within the ranks of those committing a "political action", and those who clearly, physically delineate the separation between themselves and those they are reporting on, regardless of whether, or by what means, they mark themselves and/or their apparel.

Unless and to the degree the effort is undertaken to make that distinction between press (those observing and commentating on others visible, or at least demonstrably known to them, but of which they are discernibly not a part) and activists (those who participate in the activities which they may or may not be also reporting on - regardless of any 1st Amendment-begging disguise they may affect while doing so), there can never be any practical means for police (who are by design the action arm(s) of government's enforcement efforts) to make any reliable distinction between them. Are we as a society to accept that any random seditionist or scofflaw is to be permitted carte blanche because of a questionable mastery of a Sharpie pen? Taking the opposite tack, where in the 1st Amendment is delineated the means and mechanisms by which "press" must be identified to qualify for the stipulated freedoms therein?

As should be clear by now, the concept of "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" are not at all simple in their instantiation, nor are they amenable to simplistic applications of theory or principle by any of the involved parties. Those who choose to take active part in reporting on events of the day, especially those who do so in the moment, necessarily must also assume an elevated degree of personal responsibility for what befalls them as a result of their immediate presence to events. Similarly, we citizens should make a regular practice of joggling the elbows of our state and national legislators to craft legislation that assists government (and citizens more generally) making spontaneous distinction between bystander observers, and those involved more directly, a greater degree of likelihood.

It truly is essential that a self-governing people have ready access to knowledge of events effecting the function of their society. Reliably being able to discern who said what to whom, and within which topic or activity that all took place, really has to be the minimum necessary knowledge base that any society needs to develop the means for its citizens to obtain in a clearly discernibly biased fashion. Unless and until we do that, we are going to continue to suffer examples of police applying the tactic(s) of the day (more commonly night) to all and sundry they come in contact with "in the heat of the moment", and the content of the news of the day to be opaque and misleading at best. I think we can all agree that the status quo is far less than desirable, but the currently available alternatives seem at best less than satisfactory either.

Whose Lab seems a pertinent question here

The Al Fin Next Level blog is one that I have been following for 6+ years now, largely because the posts there cover a range of topics I often have at least some interest in and the posts themselves present a well-thought-out, balanced, and well sourced approach to the topic du jour. As witness, see: It Wouldn't Be the First Virus to Escape from a Laboratory 

Some Experts Believe the Virus May Have Escaped a Lab

Viruses in the same family as Wuhan Coronavirus are routinely collected and studied at minimal protection levels, making lab accidents and viral leaks more likely.

Ebright thinks that it is possible the COVID-19 pandemic started as an accidental release from a laboratory such as one of the two in Wuhan that are known to have been studying bat coronaviruses.

Except for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, two deadly viruses that have caused outbreaks in the past, coronaviruses have been studied at laboratories that are labelled as operating at a moderate biosafety level known as BSL-2, Ebright says. And, he says, bat coronaviruses have been studied at such labs in and around Wuhan, China, where the new coronavirus first emerged. “As a result,” Ebright says, “bat coronaviruses at Wuhan [Center for Disease Control] and Wuhan Institute of Virology routinely were collected and studied at BSL-2, which provides only minimal protections against infection of lab workers.” __ TheBulletin

Which, as any blogger strives for, brings us back around to the titular point of the post; precisely whose lab had this particular strain of coronavirus get out into the world?

Which brings this post to the website Veterans Today  Billed as "Serving the Clandestine Community since 2004" may provide some useful framing for the following story:

 https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/03/26/us-athlete-intelligence-officer-in-china-games-named-as-patient-zero-for-covid-debunking-trump-rhetoric-updating/

I can't figure out how to quote from the article directly; it's in English, but not in a coherent fashion, you'll have to go see for yourself.

At first glance, the article at Veterans Today appears to be a mash-up of someone's propaganda, or equally arguably someone's public relations efforts. Not being a professional in either, I decline to speculate. In any case, the article specifically identifies US Army Reserve Staff Sergeant Maatje Benassi as a US "intelligence officer" and "an armed diplomatic driver ... for General James Jones" who is further claimed to be assigned to US Army Intelligence. Given that Fort Meade is publicly acknowledged as the home of the US National Security Agency, a General Jones - a US Army Intelligence Officer specifically - being assigned duties proximate to the NSA doesn't seem particularly noteworthy, unless said General Jones isn't publicly identified to be in that assignment. Some cooberative linkagrey would seem the least effort required to retain even a fleeting grasp on 1st amendment claims. Also, it strikes me that an "armed diplomatic driver" would almost certainly be drawn from the ranks of active duty personnel, not a reservist (unless she were to be on active duty status at the time of posting to the position).

At the very least, this reporting verges uncomfortably close to doxxing absent the links to corroborate such claims.

Adding at least the appearance of legitimacy to all of this is this article from October 25, 2019 by the US Department of Defense: https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/1998827/us-women-place-8th-despite-crash-in-50-mile-cycling-race/

A hit from behind on the final lap may have dashed the U.S. team's hopes for gold in women's cycling, but bruised ribs and a cracked helmet didn't stop Army Sgt. 1st Class Maatje Benassi from crossing the finish line.    Teammates from a trail vehicle rushed to her side to provide aid, but she refused medical care for the moment, jumping right back up on the bike. "My goal was to finish it. … I came this far, I trained this hard, I had to finish it," she said. "I was in a lot of pain, and my bike was rubbing, too. … Nothing went smooth, but I said, 'Forget it, I'm just going to finish.'" Benassi finished last among the 30 competitors from 11 nations who completed the road race.

 "But that's racing", she said. "You win some, you lose some". The Army Reserve noncommissioned officer from the 312th Observer-Controller-Trainer unit at Fort Meade, Maryland, said she won't let the setback keep her down. A few days later, she was back out training.

 It may seem trivial to non-service members, but getting the Sergeant's rank wrong is a prominent red flag regarding the factuality of everything that follows. Beyond that, is SFC Benassi's duty posting, A) correct, B) a matter of public knowledge, or did Jim W. Dean, managing editor of Veterans Today, just break operational security and subject SFC Benatti to career ending scrutiny via his deliberate doxxing of her?

It seems obvious to me that this story about the source of the COVID-19 coronavirus takes a plausible-seeming sports story from last October, associates it with nebulous claims of nefariousness (source of said claims not identified), and aligns the story presentation with known PRC/CCP propaganda that they aren't the source of this pandemic, the US Army is (there are two USAF LTC's and a US Navy Commander also mentioned in the DoD story, if infection was the objectivity why wouldn't they be included in the effort? Is veteranstoday.com officer-class snobbery showing through? Maybe PRC/CCP money is the easiest answer).

What makes this potentially something more than a moderately interesting blog post is the national security questions riddled throughout. Is this an example of PRC/CCP 4G warfare? How about "mere" collusion with a foreign power as an undeclared agent of influence? OTOH did what we know as COVID-19 get out of a lab at Fort Detrick, which is 40-odd miles northwest of Fort Meade? Not impossible, and neither is it seemingly implausible, which makes it all seem more likely as propaganda absent further facts to support such a claim.

US Army Chief of Staff General James C. McConville has the duty to his country and his fellow soldiers to investigate this matter as fully as possible, and to report his findings to the Commander-in-Chief. One direct way of starting such an inquiry is to poll the four women identified in the DoD story from last October (along with the unidentified teammates in the support vehicle) as to their physical health during the months of October and November, 2019, with medical records to support such recollections. A second line of inquiry needs to identify all of the possible means of "cross pollination" between Forts Detrick and Meade. This would be useful whether or not any member of the US team became infected with any disease. Finally, this investigation needs to happen as a matter of considerable urgency. In what I regard as on my Top 5 Worst Case Scenarios list, The USA and the PRC going Def Con 1 with each other is certainly in their somewhere. We absolutely want to know as certainly as we possibly can that we know why while we go all "duck and cover". On a different list is the names of those who get a traitors just rewards.

And you were lamenting just the other day about the lack of sports stories, weren't you? Personally, I'd rather go back to ignoring Jim Lampley.

Coming Up For Air -or- What's That Smell?

I haven't given up on writing entirely, I'm just maligning language elsewhere is all.

A couple of semi-related news items jarred my tentative thinking process recently.  One being the reporting regarding the recent vote(s) in the Texas legislature on gun carrying by non-law enforcement-type citizens in the state.

Let me just say this about that; it probably actually is possible to make your disdain for your audience more plain, but the below-quoted double error (from the opening sentence no less) written by one Nathan Kopple for The Wall Street Journal (and seemingly quoted verbatim by MarketWatch.com and Fox News) does seem to set that bar well up there:

Texas is poised to become the largest state in the U.S. to allow citizens to openly carry handguns, a change long sought by gun-rights activists.

Taking* my objections in the order of their presentation: 

(1) Alaska 

and 

(2) Alaska you moron errr, Mr. Kopple.

[and in rebuttal to the obvious first quibble, (1) could alternatively be California.  No matter how you slice it, this account has nowhere to go but up]

Calling into question my own sense of cynicism, The Dallas Morning News at least managed to avoid those obvious hallmarks of journalistic excellence flubs.  The law enforcement devil is in the details, of course; we'll see how the actual law is written before I get out either one of my nice new holsters.

A question has arisen in my mind recently about 2nd Amendment civil rights debates more generally. It has become a 21st century axiom among modern 2nd Amendment civil rights supporters (to include myself) that more guns = less crime, and I've certainly been willing to advance that contention as thoroughly well proved.  But I do have to wonder of late ...

In years past, US gun legislation debates often referenced British crime reporting statistics on gun-related questions - more pertinently, the degree of doubt in the reliability of crime statistics from the UK. The questions thus raised were put to telling effect in the dismissal of these "facts" as to their relevance in US legislative debate over the last decade+.

My concern on this matter was (completely inadvertently, I'm certain) summarized quite brilliantly by this Joe Huffman blog post because of what I have discovered in my reading elsewhere recently about US crime reporting. The US DoJ's Uniform Crime Statistics are this country's national summation of all local and state crime reporting, as broken down by a variety of categories. There have been reports for many years now about US national crime statistics not reflecting actual events:

Racial violence might be up. It might be down. Either way we may never know: A new study from the Department of Justice says victims of violent crime often do not call the police.

And if they do, police often do not file crime reports, say local newspapers around the country.

“More than half of the nation’s violent crimes, or nearly 3.4 million violent victimizations per year, went unreported to the police between 2006 and 2010,” said a Justice Department analysis.

That’s 17 million violent crimes off the books in five years.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/see-no-evil-racial-violence-underreported/#ib7ua3M0buwfFveB.99

Bearing that in mind, the ramifications of this article gives me pause:

Campus crime is easier to track than city crime because campus cops have to obey federal reporting laws -- and the Clery Act requires schools to list the full description of the suspects. And make that available at the school web site.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/10/new_cure_for_racial_violence_in_minneapolis_crack_down_on_the_victims.html#ixzz3XsPKoaEh
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

If it is fair of us to say that questionable statistics must be given no credence in making legislative decisions regarding the expression of our civil rights here in the USA, and we now seem to have more than ample evidence that our own national crime reporting statistics are at-best "questionable", what are we really basing our axiomatic civil rights claims on?

I confess I do not know what to make of all of this as of yet.  I leave it for now with my fellow citizens to begin the process whereby we have traditionally made such choices (and all of you please refrain from throwing things at each other, at least until I can take part rejoin you).  I can be as pragmatically cynical as anyone, needs must, but I think we would do better to determine our own levels of moral repugnance on this one of our own volition.

*  I don't know what I've done with the font and can't be bothered to fix it.  Consider it my effort to shield you from the fullest intensity of my intellectual brilliance.  

Stop laughing (except you Mr Kopple; et tu eh?).

Germany 1 - Argentina 0

Now that the World Cup has finally run dry, can we get back to the Baseball?

Thanks to Borepatch for this one though.  I'm not quite convinced this is how FIFA wants the tourney to be remembered, but Whoops ... there it is.

Setting The Olympic Bar As Low As It'll Go

So, it seems Putin-on-the-Olympic Games in So-Shit Russia may be best remembered for the examples of people backing away from taking any of the "glory".

And these are the people we spent 70 years being told were going to bury us.

Yes, and ...?

Following the links at Tams (query; since she quit smoking, does she still blog from the porch?) always leads to good reads; in this case by extension.  One Jason Diaz manages to shat his Pampers all over the digital pages of  Gizmodo.  Leaving for a separate discussion Jason's astoundingly naive assumptions ("China unilaterally declared the area as "restricted space" last Saturday, following a long territorial dispute over its islands, now administered by Japan."  my bold), I turned to the BBC for an adult viewpoint on the story.

It seems the US saw no reason to alter what can be reasonably assumed to have been a long planned (and unarmed) aircrew training flight that included a stint over the disputed oceanic area between Japan, Taiwan and the PRC.  The fact that the USAF doesn't see any reason to bend over for comply with some other countries last minute diplomatic minuet is hardly one for dismay or actual concern.  Should others wish to characterize this activity as "taunting" won't bother the Air Scouts too terribly much, I'm sure.  And, should the PRC send up some of its air assets the next time, we can all find out just how much of US stealth technology got sold to them by US contractors nearly two decades ago (that being a frequently chosen method to give international notice of your side having quietly deployed a technology advancement, after all).  Two things seem a given after all this; one is that you do not send up a BUFF if you intend to display even the least bit of stealth to your activities.  Two, Gizmodo needs to hire a writer with more than loose stool in his trousers.

While some adult staff member at Gizmodo changes Jason's nappy, one hopes there will be a stern talking to administered regarding the consequences of his continuing with his unthinking assertions of others agitprop.  Like, maybe, having to find some other organization to assign a staff member to wipe him after he presses "publish" on his computer.  Possibly to include introduction to the concept of including just a bit of historical background as part of his story "blog" submissions in future.

Dum Ass Duz Dallas

From the Dallas Observer, the alternative newspaper/blog of events in-and-around Dallas County, comes this story:

"Two neighbors hear gunfire coming from the alley in the 10300 block of Plummer Drive. They round the corner to find a man with a gun standing over another man [subsequently identified as convicted tweeker and suspected burglar Jerry Wayne Hale]. When the neighbors announce that they've called 911 ..."

 That's not the dumb ass part:

"The first two officers to arrive saw [57 y/o William] Hall standing over a body. They order him to drop his gun, but he moves behind a privacy fence and out of sight. One thinks he sees him go into the adjacent house.
 

Three other officers, Joshua Wilson, Daniel Summers, and Julian McDaniel, arrive. They see the body lying in a pool of blood in the alley and move to provide aid. As they approach, one of the first pair of officers to arrive runs toward them, yelling that the gunman is behind him.

They turn to see Hall emerging from some overgrown bushes. They tell him to drop the gun. He racks the slide on the weapon and points it at the cops. Wilson, Summers, and McDaniel open fire."

And there you have it.  Even though the cops likely didn't roll up in their new armored assault vehicle (because a war on things-people-do-that-the-rest-of-us-really-don't-like-very-much is such a trivial and pointless distinction after all this time - crime always deserves the Catholic Option), stepping out of the bushes and racking the slide of your pistol is always the preferred option when approaching police.  Dumb ass.

In case there was any remaining question or ambiguity regarding the outcome of events:

"Both Hall and Jerry Wayne Hale were pronounced dead at the scene."

Clearly a failure to abide by gun control rules 2 and 4 because sometimes your target is willing and able to shoot at you!

Jeff Bezos Bought The WaPo

... and consternation and apprehension are the most common result, with the usual helping of FUD to give the "news" a generous helping of misdirection and doubt.

I have no doubt Our Man From Amazon had a pretty clearly worked out plan for making the Washington Post a viable news reporting business venture again long before he started scrapping his pennies together to throw at the Graham family and their stock holders.  Many of the questioners and doubters seem to assume he simply must continue operating the paper in the established (and financially ruinous) fashion because that's how they get paid, don't you know.

My bet; NOT!

Just one easy example as to how to improve the print news reporting model follows:

Hire 250 bloggers around the country, 25 of which are experienced print reporters (columnists, etc) who have successfully continued the practice on their blog.  Pay all of them $1,000/mo and the experienced reporters twice that.  The experienced reporters "supervise" the story collection/reporting efforts of 9 of the others in a given story classification (politics, style, sports, etc).  All of a story's contributing writers/bloggers receive a percentage of a stipulated payment for each story published.  If no more then 30% of the "staff bloggers" are actually in the D.C. area, then any story, however national in orientation, would have a local and regional context included if only by dint of each contributors individual perspective.

Once this model is established (say a year, maybe 18 months tops), double the staff bloggers with the new hires being located in some other country than the USA.

At which point, The Washington Post spends a couple million a month at most and has original, unique news reporting wholly independent of any other reporting operation on (or off) the planet, all of which is for sale or syndication.  Along with the usual advertising revenue.  Probably with the actual "print" (as in on actual news print paper with all that implies) version as a premium option for the gentry readership.  I also expect to see podcast coverage of on-going or specific issue reporting to become part of the post-Bezos WaPo model too; read the initial story then download the podcast to listen to on the commute to work.

Not that Jeff needs my help with any of this, but I think this easily demonstrates that the established process to ruining a news reporting business isn't his only option; also, that I really don't know what I'm talking about here.

But this guy does.

It Must Be True, I Read It On The Internet!

Like most of Western Civilization apparently, I read Instapundit regularly.  Proving even law professors are still human, Glenn Reynolds occasionally gets it wrong (in fairness, he links a National Journal story - I don't mean to imply this is an honest example of his original writing).  While this all could prove to be a difference between filter options when straining legal gnats, I'm going with these folks who proffer a differing opinion about the legality of packin' heat in the Post Office car park here:

Legal Update: I'm sure some members are aware of news articles which are following a case coming out of a Federal District Court in Colorado. The various articles are suggesting a decision of that court now allows the possession of a firearm in the parking-lot of federal post offices nationwide. Our initial research on the decision suggests that this is simply false. First it is important to note that the ruling being referenced came from a District Court and NOT a Court of Appeals, meaning it holds no legal precedent. Also, even in this specific case, the circumstances for which the judge ruled were extremely specific and included conditions which may or may not apply in your specific case. We intend to publish a newsletter with a full legal analysis, but in the mean time, DO NOT BRING YOUR GUN INTO THE PARKING-LOT OF THE POST OFFICE IN TEXAS.

IANAL (which is why I pay those that are), so I really don't have an independently formed opinion to offer on this.  For now, better safe than sorry would seem to be the course to follow, at least until a better considered reading of this legal ruling becomes available.  I look forward to reading Glenn Reynolds further thoughts on this (along with the world of other stuff he posts daily of course).

Stop Helping The Opposition

Say Uncle says:

Gabby Gifford’s hubby continues having a rough few weeks. The latest is that he tried to buy a handgun out of state and illegally. He was denied because we already have background checks and you can’t buy handguns out of state. He went to the same gun store and tried to purchase an AR-15 illegally earlier.

In comments, I replied:

Ok, just to make sure I haven’t missed something in this saga of ineptitude, what was the illegality in the AR purchase? And please don’t say “straw purchase”; it is entirely legal to purchase a firearm as a gift as long as both the buyer and recipient aren’t “prohibited persons” (for whatever reason, criminal background, age restriction, etc). Kelly himself is still legally permitted to buy a gun (after jumping through the oh-so-noninfringing hoops we all do), the Tucson PD (the stated giftee of the AR) isn’t prohibited, so straw purchase won’t wash (see the instructions to buyers on the back of any Form 4473, something the seller might consider as well per Breitbart). The seller not wanting to deal with a dick is also perfectly legal btw, but what was Kellys crime in the AR purchase?

As to the pistol, the story clearly says the AZ ID he presented on the second attempt passed the background check; simple ignorance of the law is a more likely seeming explanation for this fool presenting an out of state ID than does deliberate subterfuge. Other than posting a misleading (if not quite outright fraudulent) video online, what crime did Kelly commit on the second attempt at a successful purchase of a pistol? He presented a legal (apparently, he did pass the background check he submitted it to) AZ drivers license and, despite speculation above, there is no evidence he didn’t surrender his TX license to get the AZ version, so again, where is the crime?

Agreed that he’s a dick (and possible wife abuser – psychologically at least) and a publisher of an apparently deliberately misleading video; neither of those fails the requirements to qualify as a gun buyer without formal legal sanction of that despicable behavior. Fault the guy deservedly all you like, but please stop promoting his name and cause falsely. That hurts the rest of us gun owners more than either Kelly or his cause ever could on their own.

Which leads me to ponder; if I were to hang a gun shaped dog turd on a hook and call it jewelry, would all of the gun bloggers line up to misrepresent the facts while helping me advertise the sale?  How is that example materially different from what so many seem anxious to do for this tosser?

C'mon people; thimk.

Habemus papum*

So the Porteneo gets the new kicks.  He's going to need every bit of that famed Jesuitical casuistry - and maybe an assist from the Greek pantheon - to get through all he faces next.  The sainted Francis likely wasn't put off by the sight of a broom and shovel, so who knows, maybe this latest one is just the man to clean out the Pauline stable.

Not being one of your team as it were I don't have a dog in this fight, but well done you anyway, Jorge.

Now go show us how it's done.  :)

* I suppose this will be the most common blog post title for this date, but I wrote mine before I read Peters so I'm keeping the title as is.  I have to say, while Peter offers much more detail, and an opinion informed as only an active insiders can be, I think our general first impressions and expectations regarding Pope Francis are quite similar given the fact I have never shared in the Catholic faith.

Past Performance Is Not A Guarantee Of Future Behavior ...

.., but it is the safe way to bet when politics are involved.

I think David Gregory, the not-quite-yet-late commentator for the NBC News organization, might want to give serious - and fairly immediate - thought to catching a flight back to 'ol Blighty in the very near future.  There's still plenty of room under the Obama bus, and him going to jail for embarrassing Obama and the Democrats violating DC gun laws on national TV could be usefully spun by his erstwhile colleagues into less politically damaging support for additional gun restrictions legislatively.

Food for thought.

Update (12/30/12):  And, of course, strategy works both ways.  :)

"... that are able to penetrate walls."*

Drudge links to an Alex Jones Poopie Pants Prison Planet story that makes eminently clear the level of lunacy that is passed off as "news reporting" these days.  If anyone still has any doubts remaining, I am convinced Alex Jones runs a professional dis-information operation very thinly disguised as the ravings of a moron.

But I could be giving him too much credit there.

In any case, Prison Planet dot com (you can waste your time actually going to the site if you want, but you'll have to take responsibility for doing so yourself ... ) "editor and writer" Paul Joseph Watson demonstrates his capacity as a Pant-Shitting Hysteric as he bemoans the purchase of some pretty spendy ammo by what eventually proves to be NOAA's Fisheries Office of Law Enforcement.  Let's look at a few numbers first.

NOAA (mistakenly identified as NWS on the .gov ammo solicitation form apparently) wants to buy 46,000 rounds of .40 S&W JHP ammo - to be distributed amongst several locations.

" A solicitation which appears on the FedBizOpps website asks for 16,000 rounds of .40 S&W jacketed hollow point (JHP) bullets, noted for their strength, to be delivered to locations in Ellsworth, Maine, and New Bedford, Mass.  A further 6,000 rounds of S&W JHP will be sent to Wall, New Jersey, with another 24,000 rounds of the same bullets heading to the weather station in St. Petersburg, Florida."

Along with "being noted for their strength", .40 cal is also noted as the issue handgun caliber for the FBI and one supposes many other .gov badge toters as well.  It is common practice for large organisations to require component agencys to use the same equipment so as to reduce the unit cost of each piece of gear bought.  Like handguns, just for instance.  Not too surprisingly one would have thought, this concept would fairly unremarkably extend to include the ammunition those guns use, but apparently not.

As to the quantities, I probably average shooting something in the near neighborhood of 6,000 rounds of all calibers of ammo for the guns I own in an average year.  Now, since I'm spending my own money to buy all that, I tend to go for the Winchester White Box or maybe the Sellier & Beloit if I'm financially more flush than is the norm.  If I had access to Uncle Sugar's checkbook (and thereby to your pockets too :)), I'd certainly be tempted to practice with the stuff I intend to carry too!  But I don't think that's whats going on here. 

It seems reasonable to me that there might be as many as 460 individual Fishy LEO's in NOAA's employ (and we can leave for another occasion the question of why NOAA).  Should that prove to be the case, then NOAA will be able to issue each of those people with a whole 100 rounds apiece (one presumes for the year).  And if it turns out there are only half that many badge toters, that's still only 200 rounds apiece.  That's a whole 4 boxes of 50 rounds each, and the damn gun will hold nearly a third of a box at a time too.  Throw in a couple spare magazines (common practice - look at any cops' duty belt) and now we see we're actually talking about a perfectly reasonable quantity of issue duty ammunition for a federal law enforcement agency to provide for its people to use (or hopefully not use) during the course of their day.

I especially like this comment:

"As the Business Insider notes, hollow point bullets have been “illegal in international warfare since 1899.”

I wonder what the Business Insider's opinion is on the law regarding domestic law enforcement's use of hollow point bullets during the course of domestic law enforcement actions?


As to the rest of the article's observations, it's pretty clear that DHS is zeroing out it's budget on law enforcement-type goodies - possibly in anticipation of a different occupant of the White House being less forthcoming with the dosh in the near future.  None of them can actually SAY that of course, but it seems at least as likely as anything the Excitable Watson can intimate.

I like a good conspiracy theory/rant as much as the next fellow (and given my family history, quite possibly more than most), but Drudge is going to have to work a good deal harder than this to get a rise out of anyone who owns and shoots a gun and has more than three working brain cells to rub together.

* So can most of my .22's, for a given value of "wall".

To Be A Fly On That Bulkhead

Via Glen Reynolds comes notice of this story about new USN air craft carriers being designed with "heads" (toilet/shower/washroom/pick you euphemism) that have no urinals. 

I can just see the faces of all (the males at least) involved in the first Captains Mast proceeding for "leaving the toilet seat up".

I wonder if they're still planning on leaving the stall doors off as was the standard?

Good Guess

I'd be more impressed if I knew how many guesses predictions were made in total. 10 for 10 is really something, 10 out of a 1000 not so much.

h/t Instapundit.

That's Their Story

And, apparently they're sticking to it.

So to speak.

h/t Instapundit.

Finally, TSA Bags One Not Their Own

I have to say, I'm kinda surprised at not reading all about this all over the gunblogosphere. It's been 48 hours since the mystery device was found in the carry-on baggage of Trey Scott Atwater of Hope Mills, Texas (as CNN made certain to reveal*) "wrapped in military grade wrapping" while said gentleman was boarding a flight for some mystery destination in N. Carolina (let's see, man in the armed forces flying to some place in N. Carolina ... hmmmm, wonder which branch of the service he's in?) (and while I'm being all parenthetical and such, what the digital-camo-blazes is military grade wrapping?).

Is this the performance bar we can expect from TSA/DHS/WTF from now on - a decadal cycle of apprehension of someone carrying something that merits being qualified as, "At no time was there any danger ..." according to FBI spokesman?


* To be fair, the local FOX affiliate wasn't coy about putting his identity out there either.

Are You Ready For Some "News"?

I'm gonna get a jump on the whole end-of-year prediction silliness and make mine now.

For the next 10 months or so, we in the USA can expect to be treated to a steady stream of "news reports" about college sports-related stories of debauchery, crime and moral titillation whenever either major political party (or their media allies) feel the desire to deflect public attention away from the latest act of stupidity committed by the Criminal-In-Chief and his cohorts or the GOP's contender for the title.

Call it the College Sports Proctoscopy Strategy.

Fast & Furious? Shocker In The Showers!

Rising Unemployment? Cheerleader Upskirts!

And if the rate of revelation of political disgrace should cause the media to burn through too many schools too quickly, expect the Olympics and the professional leagues to be offered up as well.

I mostly watch the movie channels these days anyway. That Roku box is looking a more and more attractive alternative to cable every day.

Housing Bubble Bursts

In China.

All over mainland China at that.

Residential property prices are in freefall in China as developers race to meet revenue targets for the year in a quickly deteriorating market. The country’s largest builders began discounting homes in Shanghai, Beijing, and Shenzhen in recent weeks, and the trend has now spread to second- and third-tier cities such as Hangzhou, Hefei, and Chongqing.

...

What started slowly in September turned into a rout by the middle of last month—normally a good period for sales—when Shanghai developers started to slash asking prices. Analysts then expected falling property values to move Premier Wen Jiabao to relax tightening measures, such as increases in mortgage rates and prohibitions on second-home purchases, intended to cool the market.

They were wrong. After a State Council meeting on October 29, Mr. Wen affirmed his policy, stating that local authorities should continue to “strictly implement the central government’s real estate policies in the coming months to let citizens see the results of the curbs.” Then, the selling began in earnest as “desperate” developers competed among themselves to unload inventory.

One presumes that none of Premier Wen Jiabao's family are financially invested in the Chinese residential real estate markets. One does wonder how many of his potential opposition within the CCP are?

In any case, in Mr. Wen's strategic context he and his are the only one's "too big to fail", everybody else's balls bounce along as his little baton directs.

h/t: Instapundit