Sunday, October 30, 2011
I have long since grown weary of pointing out the sheer hypocrisy which oozes from the Looney Lefty, the media, and the Obama Regime. But I repeat myself.
Thank God for the Real World Libertarian. Jim has a post that says it all, short and sweet.
Richmond Tea Party wants its money back.
Monday, October 24, 2011
They're baaacccckkkkk! Top RINO idiots, our old pals Juan McStain (R: Sonora) and Lindsey Grahamnesty (R: Wolkenkuckucksheim), angry that the Dems are trying to gain a completely monopoly on stupidity and waste, are trying to make a comeback...and some m0ney, I'm sure...and get some face time on TV.
Figuring we haven't butted into everyone else's business around the globe and pissed enough countries off yet, and that we have too much taxpayer money and need to spend some more, these two RINOs are leading the charge to have the U.S. rebuild Libya. More "nation building"! Yeah! It worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan, let's try it again.
Wasn't Einstein's definition of insanity doing the exact same thing over and over again but expecting a different result?
Ah, there's nothing to make you feel powerful like a little "nation building". Bomb the shit out of them, force some good ol' American "democracy" and "freedom" down their throats whether they want it or not, spend billions of borrowed money we don't have rebuilding their country, wind up occupying it for a decade or two until not just the new regime, which has already adopted Sharia law, but the man in the street also starts blowing up our troops and exporting terrorism here because we've long since worn out our welcome, if any. Meanwhile, our own debt skyrockets and our own infrastructure crumbles while whatever regime in power in our own country slides swiftly towards a police state to assure the government keeps accumulating power and money no matter how badly they &$%# things up. Did I miss anything in the process?
Oh yeah, "nation building" calls for lots of no-bid contracts for "entrepreneurs" like Halliburton, Brown, and Root to send in their "private contractors" to make obscene amounts of money hand-over-fist, much of which will probably find its way into the pockets of people like, well, like...McCain and Graham for instance. Happy ending again.
McStain, putting down his crack pipe, told Faux News “They’re willing to reimburse us. It’s not a matter of money."
Senator Grahamnesty apparently dropped acid before explaining, “So we’ll get our money back, but the one thing we can’t get back is an opportunity. And this is an opportunity to take a dictatorship, the mad dog of the Mideast, and replace him with people who live in peace with us. “We can do business, have economic ties that will allow American business to prosper from a free Libya. So I know we’re broke [obviously he doesn't], but if you disengage the world, you’ll regret it and if we miss this opportunity, we’ll regret it.”
McCain then said, "It won't cost the U.S. taxpayer a dime!" Both Senators stifled laughs.
"The check's in the mail." This, from Grahamnesty, caused them both to snort and snigger.
"I won't come in your mouth!"
"We won't raise taxes!"
The senators then chanted in unison, "Free trade with all, entangling alliances with none!" Immediately afterwards they rolled on the floor in uncontrolled mirth and laughter."
Finally they were able to regain their composure and take their seats again, gasping and still wiping tears of helpless laughter from their eyes. Before the commentator could ask them another question, McCain leaned toward Grahamnesty and whispered, "Constitution."
At which point they again fell out of their chairs doubled over with weeping, hysterical laughter, clutching at their sides and kicking their feet in the air.
Finally, they ended the interview by picking up a pair of fiddles. "This is a little number I like to call Rome is Burning," said McCain, "And a one, and a two..."
At least their fiddles were in tune with Obama's.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
So, in the name of sociology and international goodwill, I began my study. After watching the Mad Max trilogy and all 11 seasons of The Paul Hogan Show back-to-back, drinking Foster's at an Outback Steakhouse and spending countless hours of close analysis of an Elle MacPherson swimsuit calender, I dare say that I now know so much about the country that I should rightfully be declared the new king of Australia (or President or chieftain or whatever they have down there).
|Australians (Photo of entire population.)|
Unfortunately, I must have purchased an out of date world globe because I was unable to find Australia on it. However, I was able to find Madagascar or Italy or some shit. I quickly claimed this new found land for myself. (It is now called Benonia. Please use a permanent marker to update your own world globes at home.)
In my research I found that one of the main differences between the Australians and the Americans is our language. For instance the Australians call a fight a "blue" and a sandwich a "sanger." When you string words and phrases like these together into what we masterful wordsmiths call "sentences," the end result can be quite different in Australian and American. Consider the following two examples:
Friday, October 21, 2011
Nope, it just wasn't enough for fed.gov to arm drug dealers and street gangs on the taxpayer's dime with the Fast & the Furious. With the ATF vying hard for the prized honor of the Most Incompetence Government Agency Award, the US State Department is stepping up its own efforts to get back in the running.
First, we just can't keep our nose out of other people's business, and the U.S. supplied conventional arms to the rebels and "liberators" (which included al Qaeda) who sought to overthrow crackpot Libyan dictator "Hey Moe" Gadhafi's regime. In the aftermath of the fighting, unguarded Libyan military warehouses and arms depots were looted at will. And just what kinds of weapons have the righteous warriors of the Religion of Peace gotten their dirty little mitts on? Among lots of other ordnance, SAMs. From ABC News:
"Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch first warned about the problem after a trip to Libya SIX MONTHS AGO. He took pictures of pickup truckloads of the missiles being carted off during another trip just a few weeks ago.
"I myself could have removed several hundred if I wanted to, and people can literally drive up with pickup trucks or even 18 wheelers and take away whatever they want," said Bouckaert, HRW's emergencies director. "Every time I arrive at one of these weapons facilities, the first thing we notice going missing is the surface-to-air missiles."
That's right folks, shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles. As many as twenty thousand of them. They used to just call them SAMs, but now they are MANPADs, Man-Portable Air Defense Systems. I really doubt they will see much "defensive" use.
For those unfamiliar with the SA-7 missile, the originally Soviet weapons were right up there with the Kalashnikov for exporting to Third World Hellholes. Now copies are made in numerous countries. Known as the Strela (arrow) by the former USSR, and dubbed SA-7 Grail by NATO, these are undoubtedly the improved Strela-2M or SA-7b models, weapons so simple even a jihadists can run one.
The gunner visually acquires the target, powers up the electronics, and tracks the aircraft with either open sights or improved optical sights. When or if the missile's IR heat-seeker locks onto the target, the gunner gets a light and buzzer to tell him to launch. Sa-7s are "tail chasers"; the aircraft has to have already passed by for the seeker to lock onto the hot exhaust. Then the 22-pound missile chases the aircraft for over 4 kilometers or to a 7,500 ft ceiling, where a 2-1/2 pound warhead detonates by impact or graze fuse or a timer. They're not too big of a threat to fast movers, unless fired in large numbers, but they're rough on helicopters and hell on civilian airliners. Which, of course, is a terrorist's favorite target.
One of the most infamous examples of this was the September 1978 shoot-down of Air Rhodesia Flight 825, a Vickers Viscount passenger plane out of Kariba, a popular tourist and vacation spot. The glorious "freedom fighters" of Joshua Mqabuko Obama Nyongolo Nkomo's Red-backed ZIPRA (Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army) fired a Soviet-made Sa-7 and hit the Viscount shortly after take-off, destroying both starboard engines and setting the bird on fire. The crew made a good belly landing in a farm field, but then hit an unseen dry creekbed, causing the plane to flip over and burst into flame.
In February of 1979, ZIPRA shot down another regularly scheduled passenger flight with an Sa-7. All 59 civilians aboard were killed when the plane crashed into a ravine and exploded.
So now there's 20,000 of these damn missiles floating around Libya (or already out of the country). Gee, you think maybe terrorists might just get their hands on a few of these things?
Not to worry, though. At the end of September, the White House assured reporters that they had ONE State Department official and FIVE private contractors on the ground in Libya looking into the problem. That comes out to about 1.1 million people, 113,226 square miles, and 3,666 missiles for each one of them to check. No problem.
Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro comfortingly reassures us that the government, "does not have a clear picture of how many missiles they're trying to track down." Not to worry, though. Now that the horses are all gone over the horizon, our government is talking about maybe considering looking into closing the barn door. A White House spokesman assures us:
"We expect to deploy additional personnel to assist the TNC [Libya's "transitional government"] as they expand efforts to secure conventional arms storage sites. We're obviously at a governmental level -- both State Department and at the U.N. and elsewhere -- working with the TNC on this."
Wow. The State Department, the United Nations, and a bunch of Muzzie revolutionaries all working together. If that's not a recipe for a giant cluster fudge, I don't know what is.
Meanwhile, TSA is probing toddlers at the airports, INS and the Border Patrol have instructions from on high to "catch-and-release", the ATF is arming criminals, the USDA is going after children's bunny rabbits, the FDA is beating down Amish dairy farmers, the FBI continues to investigate and/or create crimes by clowns like the Hutaree Militia, New York City Police are framing people on drug charges to make their arrest quotas, and the White House and DOJ are deeply concerned about "islamaphobia" and "domestic terrorists".
Don't you feel safer now that the government's on the job? You may have to worry about your flight being shot down in flames by a terrorist missile, but at least you know you're not carrying a bomb attached to your junk.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
While the Tea Party has long been dismissed as an “Astroturf” movement, marching in lockstep to a secret cabal of Republicans pulling strings behind the scenes, the media has gone out of their way to either vilify members or squelch coverage of Tea Party events.
But lo and behold, the Occupy Wall Street gang is being touted as a popular “Grass roots” movement that just happened to spring up spontaneously without any political agenda or professional agitators and organizers involved. Yeah, right. You probably won't recognize the names of any of the totally objective, agenda-less, non-partisan everyday citizens involved.
"Big Journalism has learned that the Occupy Washington DC movement is working with well-known media members to craft its demands and messaging while these media members report on the movement. Someone has made the emails from the Occupy Wall Street email distrop public and searchable. The names in the list are a veritable who’s who in media.
Journalist 2.0 includes well known names such as MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan, Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi who both are actively participating; involvement from other listers such as Bill Moyers and Glenn Greenwald plus well-known radicals like Noam Chomsky, remains unclear. The list also includes a number of radical organizers, such as Kevin Zeese.
In these emails we see MSNBC’s Ratigan, hawking his book in the footnotes, instructing occupiers on how properly to present their demands and messages while simultaneously appearing on television reporting “objectively” on the story (when he’s not taking part in the protests himself as content).
...We’ve only begun to discover the full scope of MSM’s involvement and are still combing through the archives after the list was brought to our attention late last night. (If you find something interesting that we have missed, please leave us a note in the comments.)
We know that the original movement was kicked off by a [George] Soros-funded group called Adbusters; that union groups and radicals routinely overthrow leadership unfriendly to an occupation of the occupation (check out how Occupy St. Louis was hijacked by ACORN off-shoot MORE); and now we know that media, including MSNBC itself, is apparently helping occupiers better influence the public by both writing their messages and giving them a platform.
So how long are we going to pretend that this is a “grassroots” uprising?
And how can the media continue to report on the occupy movement objectively when it’s part of it?"
PMSNBC's Joe Scarborough has gone so far as to defend rioters for creating jobs. I thought only government could create jobs. Anyway, H/T Jim at Real World Libertarian for this.
"MIKA BRZEZINSKI: … 951 cities in 82 countries were scheduled to take part in demonstrations after online organizers called for a worldwide rally. The mayor of Rome said $1.4 million in damage was caused after rioters who broke away from a peaceful protest smashed windows and torched vehicles around the city.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Now, see, that will help with the construction industry in Italy.
SCARBOROUGH: No, you have to rebuild Rome because people burned it down. That’s actually a plus up. This Occupy Wall Street group, look at that, they are creating new jobs."
That's right up there with a general in Vietnam saying, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."
The ghost of William Randolph Hearst, who boasted a tad bit more integrity than our current mainstream press manipulators, also briefly flickered onto the screen at one point, saying, “We should invade Cuba, too!”
PMSNBC also brought in their often used “expert” Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy “Malaise” Carter’s National Security Adviser and, by mere coincidence, host Mika Brezezinski’s daddy. He waxed eloquent on the "distribution of wealth", aka Socialism. Guess what his favorite word is:
Brzeznski said we need a “list” of the rich to be publicly disclosed by the media because, “Public pressure, public condemnation, public shame can be very effective.”
“When it comes to government…Congress has to realize the fact that the financial economic system cannot operation autonomously.
“We have to have disclosure.”
“We have to have transparency.”
“We have to have control.”
“So, more control over banks.”
“More control over hedge funds earnings particularly.”
“We need more control over earnings.”
“More fair distribution of social responsibility through taxation…”
“And Pressure even on the rich to avoid flaunting their wealth.”
This, of course, would not apply to rich politicians, the lobbyists who own them, Hollyweird celebrities, or media figures, such as his daughter Mika, who’s worth $4 million.
At a Saturday rally, with no hate-filled rhetoric or calls of violence like those nasty Tea Party folks, Professional “Grass Roots”™ Agitator the “Reverend” Al Sharpton fired up the crowd.
A succession of speakers [including completely spontaneous non-agenda-driven apolitical “Grass Roots”™ concerned citizens such as] American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten and Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis, offered support.
“They warmed up the crowd for Sharpton, whose raspy voice rang out, “No justice? No peace!” as the crowd shouted along with him, over and over.
“If you won’t get the jobs bill done in the suite, we will get the jobs bill done in the street!”
“This is not about Obama! This is about my mama!”
[Another speaker at the rally said, without any hate-filled rhetoric], “I’m not sure why the Republican Party has become such a mean and vicious entity in this country.”
As an aside, notice the appeal to the Left’s well-known towering intellect with short, semi-meaningless easy-to-chant phrases, often with rhymes. Catch phrases similar to, “Yes we can!” “Hope and change!” “I wants money!”
So, as I've said before, I must conclude with "Grass Roots" my ass.
Monday, October 17, 2011
No matter if you’re packing a poodle shooter or a real rifle, getting a hit at long range requires accurate range estimation, which has traditionally been one of the hardest things for a solider or hunter to learn.
It goes back to ballistics why this is all so important at ranges beyond your battle sight zero, ranges which are being encountered every day in Afghanistan where the average engagement range in the hinterlands is 500 meters.
Even being 50 meters off on your estimate makes a big difference when you get to shooting “way out past Fort Mudge”, as Jeff Cooper would say. Say you’re shooting a .308 at a target you estimate to be at 400 meters, but it’s actually 450 meters. Due to that seemingly small error, your trajectory at the target will be a full foot lower than your aim point. Still close enough for minute-of-badguy (shoot him in the nards) but not close enough for a shot into the vitals of a deer.
Further out, estimating a 650 meter target to be 600 meters, you’ll be shooting two feet low. A fifty meter error at 800 yards is a 32-inch difference in your bullet’s trajectory.
As Dirty Harry says, “A man’s got to know his limitations.” Which is why I consider myself perhaps a designated marksman; I don’t shoot over 600 meters and that’s the limit of the BDC on both my scopes anyway. I might try a 700 meter shot with hold-over in an emergency, but that would be the absolute max.
At those ranges, a real sniper, which I’m not, with a real sniper rifle, which I don’t have, is just coming into his own. I leave that to the experts. I’m not that guy who wants to “make a 1,000-meter shot so I’ll look cool on the Internet”.
Nowadays, we have very affordable and compact laser rangefinders as well as the Mil-Dot system in some optics. But let’s say you don’t have a scope with Mil-Dots because you’re not a sniper type. Neither do you have a laser rangefinder. Or the battery in you rangefinder goes dead in the cold or you drop the thing down a scree slope into a creek or the darn thing just stops working.
I had a GPS for all of two weeks. I accidentally dropped it on a gravel road once and it never worked again. Good thing I wasn’t five miles back in the mountains and depending on the thing to get me home. As for myself, I have always been adept at land navigation via map and compass, especially terrain association here in the mountains. I’m weird enough that I look at topo maps and Google Earth for fun, finding good places to hunt or places to explore deep within my warped little brain.
If you’re good at land navigation, a map can be right handy to estimate range pretty close. Here’s what I mean with the following example.
Your position is in the center of the black circle as you sneak through the low point of the saddle in the ridge to take a peek at the country beyond. You see Bruno the Great Wapiti come ambling out of the woodline down by the creek bottom, the middle of the red square. With a piece of paper or any straight edge you can put a mark on, you measure the distance from the circle to the square and then slid your straight edge down to the distance scale at the corner of your map and measure it. The blue line represents this. So, ol’ Bruno is about 800 meters away, too far for a shot.
The most common unaided eyeball method of range estimation is the “Unit of Measure” method, which was the first one taught when I was in the service, going on the theory that every red-blooded American boy should have been on a football field and know how long it looks. One hundred meters is a football field with both end zones included.
100-Meter-Unit-of-Measure Method. To use this method the sniper team must be able to visualize a distance of 100 meters on the ground. For ranges up to 500 meters, the team determines the number of 100-meter increments between the two objects it wishes to measure. Beyond 500 meters, it must select a point halfway to the object and determine the number of 100-meter increments to the halfway point, then double it to find the range to the object.
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING RANGE BY EYE
OBJECTS APPEAR CLOSER THAN THEY REALLY ARE
OBJECTS APPEAR FURTHER THAN THEY REALLY ARE
The target—Its clearness of outline and details.
When most of the target is visible and offers a clear outline.
When only a small part of the target is visible or is small in relation to its surroundings.
Nature of the terrain or position of the observer.
When looking across a depression, most of which is hidden from view.
When looking across a depression, all of which is in view.
When looking downward from high ground.
When looking upward from low ground.
When looking down a straight, open road or along a railroad track.
When field of view is narrowly confined, as in city streets, draws, or forest trails.
Light and atmosphere
When looking over uniform surfaces like water, snow, desert or farm fields. In bright light or when the sun is shining from behind the observer.
In poor light such as dawn and dusk; in rain, snow, or fog, or when the sun is in the observer’s eyes.
When the target is in sharp contrast with the background or is silhouetted by reason of size, shape, or color.
When the target blends into the background or terrain.
When seen in the clear atmosphere of high altitude.
The British and former Commonwealth nations still use the appearance method. And have been doing so for a long time. I first became aware of it from an episode of Sharpe’s. It’s mentioned in American manuals, but it’s vague as hell and doesn’t sound too useful, not made simple and easy like the Canadian Army example below.
The appearance method compares the way an object looks at 100 metres and at greater distances. By comparing the appearance of a man in several positions—at 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 metres—observers can establish a series of mental pictures. They will find that, as distances increase, a man's figure becomes smaller, his outline becomes increasingly blurred and his other features gradually fade out. The following may be used as a rough guide to determine the distance a soldier is from the observer:
a. 200 metres—all parts of the body are distinct;
b. 300 metres—outline of the face becomes blurred;
c. 400 metres—outline of the body remains, but the face is difficult to distinguish;
d. 500 metres—the body appears to taper from the shoulders; movement of the limbs can be observed;
e. 600 metres—the head appears as a dot with body details invisible and tapering noticeably.
That’s pretty easy to remember with some practice. In the same way, the appearance of other familiar objects can be learned. For instance, I know if I can no longer see Ben’s willy, he is beyond 500 meters.
This is from the 1942 Red Army sniper manual, but I don’t find it very useful. I mean “400-1000” meters or “8-11 klicks” is not real precise.
Something else I never heard mentioned, except at an Appleseed shoot, is the use of the front sight of your M1/M14 to measure range fast and easy for the average rifleman. If the body of the target is as wide or wider than your front sight post, he is within your 250 meter battle sight zero and you don’t even have to worry about elevation, just hold center mass and shoot.
The Brits took this method a step further, using the front sight blade of the Lee-Enfield rifle to help measure range.
You can figure out the same thing for your own rifle, whether using open sights or a scope. I placed man-size silhouette targets at known distances in 100 meter intervals then move around sighting in on them. You may find, for instance, that the small part of a duplex crosshair up from the horizontal wire is the height of a standing man at 100 meters or that the thick portion of a duplex reticle covers the width of a man-sized target at 300 meters, or whatever. It’s something you have to figure out in practice not in theory.
I was lucky with my German Hensoldt Z24 scope on my FAL, as it has a goofy multi-line vertical post reticule. I figured out how many lines were needed to span the width of a silhouette target at what ranges.
I don’t have a manual for my old Z24 Zielfernrohr fur Sturmgewehr (1 each), and my German isn’t good enough to be of much help if I did, but I have found that at 300 yards, a man-sized silhouette fills all the pointer lines. At 500 yards, a silhouette fills three of the lines.
For quite some time, a common military method used in range estimation was averaging. Every man in the squad estimated the range to the target and the total was averaged. This can provide a more accurate estimation, but only if the individuals at least generally know what the hell they are doing.
One should know one’s own pace count, the average number of steps required to cover 100 meters, counting each time the left foot hits the ground. Mine is 65, and pacing distances to place targets I find, upon verifying with the range-finder, I am almost inevitably within 10 meters of the desired distance.
With a pace count, in a static position, you can figure ranges with a pretty decent amount of accuracy. Of course, this method won’t work too well in a tactical situation. At any rate, you can pace out the ranges to various landmarks in your field of fire, and these landmarks provide “key ranges” from which you can much more easily estimate the range of any target which appears in the vicinity. I’ve used this hunting before, pacing and marking and then setting up on a good vantage point well before dusk to wait for the deer to come out.
Something I’ve always used is what I call the fenceline method. Growing up on a farm and in farming country, I kind of take for granted the size of a piece of land; quarter section, half section etc. Fenceline to fenceline on a quarter section field is exactly a quarter mile, or 440 yards. For the half sections it’s a half mile or 880 yards.
I have heard often of knowing the standardized distance between telephone or powerline poles, which is pretty much the same thing. It does work pretty well, where such things are present. I used it on antelope once by counting highline poles. If the target is in between the fencelines or power pylons, the bracketing method can be used.
Bracketing. If the target is known to be located between two reference points of known distance then the bracketing method may be used. Simply add the two known distances (X and Y) and then
halve the sum for a close approximation of the range. For example, if X is 1000 metres and Y is 600 metres, the sum is 1600 metres, halved is 800 metres, which is the range. The further away the
target, the larger the bracket should be.
Obviously, if the target is visibly closer to X than to Y you would have to take that into account to get a more accurate fix, using more the key range method.
Here’s a few handy methods you can use if you have the distinct displeasure of someone shooting at your ass.
NOISE AND MUZZLE FLASH
FLASH TO BANG
Since sound travels through the air at a fairly constant speed (330 metres per second), it is possible to estimate the distance from a weapon that has been fired if the traveling time of the sound from the weapon is known. The traveling time is the period between observation of a muzzle flash, backblast, smoke or dust raised by the concussion and hearing the round being fired. The time can be measured accurately by counting at a rate of three beats per second during the period. Counting starts as soon as the visual effects of the weapon firing are observed and cease when the report of the weapon is heard. The number reached will be the approximate distance to the
weapon in hundreds of metres. If the count of eight has been reached when the report is heard, the distance to the weapon is approximately 800 metres.
CRACK AND THUMP
(No, crack and thump does not relate to being constipated in the field.)
When a bullet passes near, one hears two noises: first, the crack of the bullet passing, then the thump of the weapon being fired. The crack is heard before the thump because the bullet travels faster than sound. The thump indicates the direction of the weapon. The distance to the weapon can be estimated by timing the interval between the crack and the thump. The further away the weapon, the longer the interval between the crack and the thump. The time between the crack and thump at the following ranges is:
a. 300 metres — 2/3 of a second;
b. 600 metres — 1 1/3 seconds; and
c. 900 metres — 2 seconds.
If it only takes a quarter of a second, you’d better have bayonet your bayonet already fixed.
Undoubtedly the least desirable method of range-finding is the bullet hole technique. This comes into play when someone is not just shooting at your ass, but coming real close to outright hitting it.
After an enemy bullet parts your hair, you can find the bullet hole, hopefully in a wall or the dirt rather than your buddy’s head, and insert a pencil, stick, section of cleaning rod, etc. into the hole. The stick, of course, points straight back at the shooter. You either visually use the stick to determine the correct direction of the enemy or, better yet, stay hunkered down under cover and shoot an azimuth of the direction with a compass or GPS.
Then you can use the angle at which the bullet struck to get a rough estimation of the distance from which your opponent is firing. I got these angles using a ballistics graph of a 7.62x54R 174-grain heavy ball round’s trajectory, assuming some goat-smelling jihadist is firing at you with an SVD, PKM, Mosin, etc.
So, an example. You and your partner are sitting in the old barn marked “A”, minding your own business, warm and dry for once, and observing traffic on the road across the creek. Then a bullet whips past your head and into the wall behind you. Of course the first thing you do is hit the deck and stay there and say a bunch of bad words. After the cussing, you crawl over to the bullet hole, put a pencil in it, the angle of which indicates a 400-500 meter shot. Then you get a compass azimuth of 38-degrees (just an example: I’m not going into back azimuths and magnetic declination today) from the direction the pencil is pointing.
With the direction and distance plotted out, you can figure out on the map that the little bastard who took a potshot at you is probably up in the trees on that finger spur marked “B”. You can do roughly the same thing by Mk. I Eyeball, provided you don’t stick your head out to do so. At any rate, you have a pretty good idea where he’s at now so you can move to better cover and/or concealment to start glassing the area to find him.
I am very happy to say I’ve never had to make use of this method, although one time a nice mule deer buck tried to lay down fire on me with an old Russian Goryunov machine gun. But that’s a whole other story.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
I generally take the hysteria of Alex Jones with more than a few grains of salt as I think the guy is about a half a bubble off plumb. I do read some of his articles, however, and there is sometimes considerable wheat mixed in amongst the chaff. Such as this discourse on a new House Bill, H.R. 3011.
House Bill Would Criminalize Satire of TSA.
On September 22, 2011, H.R. 3011 was introduced in the House. It is entitled the “Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act of 2011” and it contains some curious language.
Two thirds of the way through the ponderous bill, in Sec. 295, we find the following:
Whoever, except with the written permission of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Security (or the Director of the Federal Air Marshal Service for issues involving the Federal Air Marshal Service), knowingly uses the words ‘Transportation Security Administration’, ‘United States Transportation Security Administration’, ‘Federal Air Marshal Service’, ‘United States Federal Air Marshal Service’, ‘Federal Air Marshals’, the initials ‘T.S.A.’, ‘F.A.M.S.’, ‘F.A.M.’, or any colorable imitation of such words or initials, or the likeness of a Transportation Security Administration or Federal Air Marshal Service badge, logo, or insignia on any item of apparel, in connection with any advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet, software, or other publication, or with any play, motion picture, broadcast, telecast, or other production, in a matter that is reasonably calculated to convey the impression that the wearer of the item of apparel is acting pursuant to the legal authority of the Transportation Security Administration or Federal Air Marshal Service, or to convey the impression that such advertisement, circular, book, pamphlet, software, or other publication, or such play, motion picture, broadcast, telecast, or other production, is approved, endorsed, or authorized by the Transportation Security Administration or Federal Air Marshal Service .(Emphasis added.)
In other words, if you print a t-shirt or produce a publication with a TSA logo, the government may soon be able to arrest and prosecute you.
The language states that it would be illegal to “convey the impression” that you are representing the TSA, but this interpretation would likely be left to federal prosecutors.
In the past, satire was protected under the First Amendment, but it may soon be illegal to poke fun at the TSA or use its logo or even utter its name. Notice there is no exception in the above language for parody.
Political satire is as old as the Greeks and the Bible. But it may now become a punishable crime if this legislation is enacted.
The TSA and the Justice Department are obviously serious about making sure we don’t criticize their Gestapo operation. Since they began irradiating citizens with naked body scanners and shoving their hands down the pants of old ladies and grade school kids, public outrage has reached a crescendo.
Some scoff at the idea that this law could be used to outlaw parody and satire, but I wouldn't be so sure. If it's left to Federal prosecutors (persecutors?) and judges, even the most unambiguous prose in a law can be twisted and warped and stretched so that it hardly resembles the law's language, let alone intent.
Case in point: The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition to government for a redress of grievances."
Now, carefully examine the above for these phrases.
"clear and present danger"
"imminent lawless action"
"separation of church and state"
"free speech zone"
"foreign trade zone"
I must be pretty out of it, as I cannot find a single one of those court/government-approved "interpretation" phrases in there. It all seemed to be written in plain English and pretty clear cut to me. But then, unlike the vast majority of Congresscritters, I am not an attorney, as evidenced by the fact that I don't chase ambulances nor excrete slime from my pores.
When Jim and I commented on the current American administration putting satirists out of business, this isn't what we were thinking of. This one is truly dangerous.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
RANGE ESTIMATION PART I:
"That prairie dog is at precisely 327 yards...and next time you get to carry this sonofabitch!"
Rangefinders actually aren’t a brand new thing. They’ve been around for better than a century. Unfortunately, they were coincidence rangefinders, also known as stereoscopic or parallax rangefinders. These worked by triangulation, just as you would use with a compass, with a prismed lens on each end of a long tube with a central eyepiece. The longer the tube, the more accurate the rangefinder.
Sure, they worked great and could be accurate indeed, but you needed a nice battleship or an artillery battery to lug them around with. They weren’t very well suited for use by the average infantryman or hunter.
Years ago, before laser rangefinders, when pterodactyls ruled the skies, I actually had a commercial sporting coincidence rangefinder. It was about a foot long and light enough, but when it came down to ranging it performed in a manner experts refer to as a “big pain in the ass”. You absolutely needed a straight line to range on, and it seemed like you had to recalibrate the fool thing every other day.
Now, I have a laser rangefinder. Yes, despite all my preaching about not relying on things that use batteries in the field, I have and use a laser rangefinder all the time. But remember Murphy? A few years back, I lost my Bushnell rangefinder out in the middle of a hay field despite the aptly-named dummy cord. Long story.
Fortunately, this turned out to be a good thing. I replaced it with the Nikon ProStaff 550 and I am much happier with that rangefinder. It’s only rated to 550 yards, but I’ve occasionally gotten ranges out to 750 under good conditions with it. It’s light and compact and handy, measures for yards or meters (me and my furrin’ military rifle scopes), and also calculates actual ranges on up and down angles, always handy in the mountains. I can highly recommend it.
In hindsight, I would have gotten a 1200-yard model, but they cost about twice as much and it would have just been for playing with my toys. The average hunter has no business shooting beyond 300 yards, if that.
I’m not to person to explain the inner workings of any electronic device. There’s stuff like diodes, non-visible wavelengths, infrared spectrums, nano-seconds and nano-meters, and, I think, dilythium crystals involved. (Ach, she canno’ take it, Cap’n. The toilets are backed up in the warp drive now!) Ben says it’s magic, but I lean more towards sorcery.
Anyway, here are just a few observations I’ve noted from using a laser rangefinder for several years now, mostly in hunting situations. They apply to pretty much any laser rangefinder. I hope some of these notes may be of use to some of you. Just my opinion and observations though; worth what you paid for ‘em.
As with your rifle or binoculars, the steadier the better. I often carry a walking stick while antelope hunting out in the big wide open, and can brace the rangefinder on the top of that to steady it. Going prone, sitting down with your elbows on your knees, bracing on a fencepost, whatever is going to make it much easier to get a precise reading.
It can be hard to range an actual animal, especially as range increases, as their pelt kind of soaks up the laser light rather than reflecting it. I often find it’s more effective to laze a juniper, clump of sagebrush, big rock or patch of bare dirt in close proximity to the critter.
Reflectivity is a weird thing. They say the more reflective, the better. I’ve found that ain’t necessarily so. I have a helluva time lazing my own truck, which is dark blue. I can laze and laze, trying different areas and the shady side, and get no reading off it. An instant later I can laze my range bag sitting on the ground near the truck or a nearby sagebrush and get a good reading right off the bat.
In bright sunlight, a rangefinder loses a bit of performance. On the other end of the spectrum, fog and mist disperses the laser and degrades performance to varying degrees. Dropping your rangefinder down a steep, rocky slope into a mountain stream really degrades performance.
Rangefinders work well in the dark. Unfortunately, the commercial models have an LED read-out inside the tube which you can’t see in the dark. I’ve found I can laze in very little light, then point the rangefinder at the sky and be able to read the LED against that lighter backdrop. Thus I can set up on my shooting position long before daylight and laze various objects to determine general ranges and have a pretty good idea of what I’m dealing with well before shooting light rolls around.
Of course, I’m not talking an overcast moonless night when it’s blacker than the inside of a cat; you have to be able to see what you’re lasing too. You have to have some light. This paragraph just made me think I should try using my rangefinder under a full moon some night. I’ll bet it would work. Update at a later time.
In a tactical situation, however, it should be noted that laser rangefinders show up bright and clear to someone with night vision device, pointing a straight line right back to your location.
While laser rangefinders work just fine in the dark, most commercial models have an unlit LED readout. While you may be able to laze the target, accurately, you can’t read what it says. In these situations, you can laze the target, then raise the rangefinder up to the sky to be able to read the LED numbers against the lighter background.
Usually, you cannot laze a game animal directly at a distance due to the non-reflectivity of it’s hair. The solution is to laze something very close to the actual target to get the range. We have a lot of dark green juniper bushes where I hunt and I find I can laze these quite well when nothing else seems to work.
Angle has some effect, too. You want to try to laze something as close to 90-degrees flat on as you can. Like a bullet ricocheting at a flat angle, the laser kind of can too.
The more solid the object ranged the better. If you have a choice of say an exposed rock, a juniper, and a clump of sagebrush you’d obviously try to laze the rock first since it will reflect the most light without diffusing it like the multiple small branches of a sagebrush.
Tall grass between you and the target can be a pain in the ass, too. You have to make sure you’re high enough so that the laser doesn’t hit those barely visible stalks and give a false reading.
A field of fresh snow is also a problem. Look for some kind of dark object like a tree, bush, or dead Commie which stands out in sharp contrast to laze.
One of the best things you can do with your rangefinder is to just carry it along with you on your walks. Estimate the distance to some point by eye, and then check the range with the laser to see how accurate (or inaccurate) you are. Constant practice playing like this will do wonders for calibrating your own Mk. I Mod 0 Eyeball if you have to estimate range the old-fashioned way someday.
I don’t know if this is worth anything, but I am more used to hunting wide open spaces so I tend to greatly over-estimate ranges when I’m in the dark timber high up bow hunting. I look at a certain tree up ahead along the trail and think, “That’s about 40 yards.” Nope. Nikon says 23. D’-oh! In the big wide open, however, I tend to under estimate range. That’s why it’s so good to take your rangefinder along on your hikes and test yourself.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
These guys never cried when Ol' Yeller died.
Muslims are suspected of poisoning dogs in Spain because of the Islamic teaching that such pets are unclean, according to a report from Soeren Kern, an analyst with the Strategic Studies Group based in Madrid.
“All of the dogs were poisoned in September … [in] Lérida's working class neighbourhoods of Cappont and La Bordeta, districts that are heavily populated by Muslim immigrants and where many dogs have been killed in recent years.”
Dog owners in the city say the dogs are poisoned because Islam regards them as “unclean.” Indeed, Islam teaches that dogs are “najis,” meaning ritually unclean, and that “Islam forbids Muslims to keep dogs,” according to the Islam Q&A website.
Unsurprisingly, Kern reported, “”Residents taking their dogs for walks have been harassed by Muslim immigrants opposed to seeing the animals in public. Muslims have also launched a number of anti-dog campaigns on Islamic websites and blogs based in Spain.”
So bad has the Muslim jihad against dogs become that more than four dozen residents have formed six-man patrols to escort dog walkers.
For their part, the city’s 29,000 Muslims, about 20 percent of the city’s population, want dogs banned, Kern noted, citing a newspaper report. “In July, two Islamic groups based in Lérida asked city officials to regulate the presence of dogs in public spaces so they do not ‘offend Muslims,’ ” Kern said, adding, "Muslims are demanding that dogs be banned from all forms of public transportation including all city buses as well as from all areas frequented by Muslim immigrants."
Nothing like that peaceful assimilation of cultural diversity.
"The military regime ruling Egypt is under fire after it responded to weekend protests by Coptic Christians in Cairo with deadly force, leaving hundreds wounded and dozens dead. An official investigation is ongoing.Being ground into the pavement is, apparently, perfectly acceptable as long as you're not Muslim and not "offended" by the action.
Following another church attack last week blamed on Islamist extremists, Christian activists marched to the state-run TV station headquarters in the capital. The demonstrators were demanding government protection from Muslim attacks and the resignation or firing of a provincial governor...
According to news reports, thugs in civilian clothing unleashed a wave of violence against the Christians using swords, clubs, and other weapons. The government then sent armored personnel carriers and mowed down dozens of protesters. At least 25 were killed, probably more — some crushed under tanks, others shot.
"Several reports, citing witnesses, said club-wielding men were helping to brutalize Christians, shouting slogans such as “No God but Allah” or “Islamic, Islamic.” The New York Times reported that some Muslim civilians appeared to be working with police and soldiers while chanting “The people want to bring down the Christians.”
Speaking of being "offended", Muslim immigrants to Switzerland, whose confederacy of cantons was formed in 1291, are offended by the white cross on the national flag. The white cross first came into use with the Old Swiss Confederacy as an identifying mark for their uniform-less militia soldiers in the Battle of Laupen in 1339 and first appeared on a red flag at the Battle of Arbedo in 1422. Well, say the Islamists, screw your history, it "offends" us and it has to go.
"An immigrant group based in Bern has called for the emblematic white cross to be removed from the Swiss national flag because as a Christian symbol it "no longer corresponds to today's multicultural Switzerland."
In a September 18 interview with the Swiss newspaper Aargauer Zeitung, Petrusic [the guy who started all this] said the cross has a Christian background and while the Christian roots of Switzerland should be respected, "it is necessary to separate church and state" because "Switzerland today has a great religious and cultural diversity. One has to ask if the State wants to continue building up a symbol in which many people no longer believe."
In the interview, Petrusic said Switzerland needs new symbols with which everyone, including non-Christians, can identify. As an alternative to the current Swiss flag Petrusic proposed the former flag of the Helvetic Republic...which consisted of green, red and yellow colors. "Those colors are similar to the current flags of Bolivia and Ghana and would represent a more progressive and open-minded Switzerland," Petrusic said.
[Progressive and open-minded!?!?Ghana and Bolivia!?!?]
The proposal to change the Swiss flag has been met with outrage across the political spectrum and is sure to fuel anti-immigrant sentiments in Switzerland.
"An Islamic Sharia law court has been established in Antwerp, the second-largest city in Belgium.What can you ladies look forward to under Sharia law?
The Sharia court is the initiative of a radical Muslim group called Sharia4Belgium. Leaders of the group say the purpose of the court is to create a parallel Islamic legal system in Belgium in order to challenge the state's authority as enforcer of the civil law protections guaranteed by the Belgian constitution.
The Sharia court, which is located in Antwerp's Borgerhout district, is "mediating" family law disputes for Muslim immigrants in Belgium.
The self-appointed Muslim judges running the court are applying Islamic law, rather than the secular Belgian Family Law system, to resolve disputes involving questions of marriage and divorce, child custody and child support, as well as all inheritance-related matters.
Unlike Belgian civil law, Islamic Sharia law does not guarantee equal rights for men and women; critics of the Sharia court say it will undermine the rights of Muslim women in marriage and education...
Sharia4Belgium says the court in Antwerp will eventually expand its remit and handle criminal cases as well.
The Sharia4Belgium group consists of Islamists who are committed to bring everyone living in Belgium (including all non-Muslims) under the submission of Islamic Sharia law."
"She was arrested in June after black market copies of the film began circulating in Tehran, showing Vafamehr in some scenes without an Islamic hijab which covers the hair and neckHere's what an Islamic lashing is all about. This Sudanese woman was sentenced to 40 lashes for being convicted of the terrible crime of wearing pants. Just last month, a Saudi Arabian woman was sentenced to 10 lashes for driving a car. And this stuff goes on all the time all over the world.
The movie's plot is based in part on (the Director) Moussavi's own life and that of her friend Vafamehr but also on stories the Flinders University film graduate was told when she volunteered as a translator at the Woomera detention centre.
Internet images of officially administered lashings in Iran show victims being placed face down in a prone position and then being whipped with a long stick on the upper legs, back and buttocks. …
Vafamehr plays the character of a young actress in Tehran whose theatre work is banned by the authorities. She is then forced to lead a secret life in order to express herself artistically while at the same time trying to migrate to Australia.
The 2009 film was highly controversial in Iran only because it showed footage of uninhibited modernised Iranians at Western-style rave parties. Footage of those scenes would normally be censored by authorities for being subversive."
And, as always, from the mainstream press and the women's lib gang...THUNDEROUS SILENCE.
Yes, practitioners of the Religion of Peace are just assimilating like hell over in Europe, wanting to supplant constitutional law with Sharia law. Why would anyone object to that? At least a few European leaders are starting to speak out.French President Nicolas Sarkozy has called the left wing cult of multiculturalism a "clear" failure. He's also said:
"If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France."
“The French national community cannot accept a change in its lifestyle, equality between men and women ... freedom for little girls to go to school.”
“We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”
Boy does that sound familiar. Other world leaders such as British Prime Minister David Cameron, Australian ex-Pime Minister John Howard, and ex Spanish Premiere Jose Maria Aznar have expressed similar sentiments.
Last year about this time, German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared, "Multiculturalism utterly failed in Germany." It would seem that an rapidly increasing number of the country's citizens agree.
The German government is debating whether to increase surveillance of German citizens who are trying to prevent the spread of radical Islam in Germany.
The move comes in reaction to a three-week-long smear campaign by members of the German mainstream media, who have been relentless in their efforts to discredit the so-called counter-jihad movement in Germany...
Opinion polls show that growing numbers of Germans are worried about the consequences of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged mass immigration from Muslim countries.
Germans are especially concerned about the refusal of millions of Muslim immigrants to integrate into German society, and about the emergence of a parallel legal system in Germany based on Islamic Sharia law.
In an effort to reverse this tide of public opinion, the guardians of German multiculturalism have been working overtime to regain the initiative, mostly by trying to intimidate the critics of Islam into silence.
A particular object of wrath is a highly popular German-language Internet website called Politically Incorrect (PI), which over the years has grown into a major information resource for people concerned about the spread of Islam in Germany.
PI's motto reads "Against the Mainstream, Pro-American, Pro-Israel, Against the Islamification of Europe" -- which represents everything the German left abhors. Not surprisingly, many German media elites want PI shut down...
And OF COURSE Politically Incorrect is being treated about like the Tea Party by the lamestream media, complete with the allusions to Hitler and Nazism. Typical "news" article about PI are stories with titles such as these.
"Politically Incorrect: Vulgar, Uninhibited, Racist."
"PI News: Prototype of the New Right."
"Politically Incorrect: Where the Internet Stinks."
"Rightwing Populists: United in their Hatred of Muslims."
"Politically Correct Hatred."
"Politically Incorrect: Inside the Network of Islam Haters."
Fewer than 5% of the Germans think Islam is a tolerant religion,
Only 30% say they approve of the building of mosques.
Only 7.5% of Germans believe Islam is a "Religion of Peace."
79% think Islam is "the most violent" religion.
Only 20% of the Germans believe that Islam is suitable for the Western world.
More than 80% of the Germans agree with the statement "that Muslims must adapt to our culture." (More than one million immigrants living permanently in Germany cannot speak German.)
54% say the impact of immigration is negative rather than positive.
60% say it has placed too much pressure on public services.
What can be gleaned from these numbers?
Der Spiegel magazine, in an article titled "Germany's Anti-Muslim Scene: Authorities Debate Surveillance of Islamophobes," asserts that right-wing populism is a new form of extremism: "Islamophobes in Germany could come under increased surveillance by the country's domestic intelligence agency. There are concerns that the anti-Muslim scene is becoming increasingly dangerous. In essence, the question is whether the hatred of Muslims is enough to endanger freedom of religion and international understanding, or whether it is a radical but legitimate expression of opinion by individual authors within the limits of the constitution."
That's right folks, it's just a handful of right-wing extremists who refuse to listen to their liberal betters. Time for law enforcement to crack down on those "domestic terrorists" who dare to express their opinions. Just because they're not actually engaging in violence, rioting or bomb-throwing (like Muslims in France) is no reason not to put those Nazi bastards in jail. Maybe Janet Incompitana and Eric Holder can work weekends in Germany to show them how it's done.
Moving on to Afghanistan, which we "liberated" so we could station occupation forces there, apparently, for as long or longer than we have on the Korean DMZ. Since we "freed" the people from the mean nasty old Taliban and shoveled in some $440 billion to prop up "good" Islamic warlords, there is no longer a single Christian church left in the country, according to the State Department.
No need to worry, though because the State Department also said:
“The U.S. government regularly discusses religious freedom with government officials as part of its overall policy to promote human rights.”
And right here at home, right here in River City, well actually in Wausau, Wisconsin:
"A Wausau man was hospitalized Friday after he was attacked and beaten with a tire iron in what witnesses said was an argument over religion, according to police...
A witness told a Wausau Daily Herald reporter at the scene that he was sitting on the back porch of a home when the suspect pulled up in his vehicle, got out and accused the victim of criticizing his Islamic religion.
The victim denied that he had been critical of Islam, but the suspect then grabbed a tire iron, hit the victim in the head and punched him before speeding off in his vehicle, witnesses said."
There are moments when I'm tempted to covert if it means I get license to go running around beating or killing anyone who's ever "offended" me. Then again, that whole "eternity in Hell" thing is always enough to bring me back around.