Renewal

More than 150 years after brutal slaughter, a small tribe returns home

by Bill Donahue December 25, 2013 5:00AM ET

After losing much of their ancestry, the Wiyots are learning their traditions in preparation for a renewal ceremony

The dancers will endeavor, as Hernandez put it, “to heal the world of all the wars we’re having now, all the atrocities — to make everything fall into place.” 

The dances won’t be based strictly on Wiyot tradition. 

 “No one knows what the Wiyot dances were like,” Hernandez said. “We’ve lost that memory. So we are learning from a Yurok dancer. We’re figuring out how to do it.” 

 None of this will ruin the ceremony for Seidner, however. 

“The world has changed,” Seidner said, “and the Wiyot have changed with it. We don’t live in redwood slab houses anymore, but we still need our traditions. We need something to hold on to. And when we gather on Indian Island, we’ll be saying, ‘We’re here, and we’re trying to put the pieces of our culture together.’”

Read the rest of the article on Al Jazeera.

---

In truth, we all suffer the same 150 year old loss. We should join them in this much needed time of of renewal. Perhaps we can achieve the standing we need to make and be at peace with all peoples of this Earth. 

--Joe

Who, me? Yeah! You.

Identifying the secret elite that lurk amongst us.

Some years ago I was reading about China and the comment was made about the 800,000 elitist Chinese that run that country of a billion people. So, I began asking the question, “Who are the elitists running America and how do you identify them”?

First, most American elitists believe they are the “Exceptional People” specially blessed of God. They originate across all spectrum's of society, political, racial, religious, ethnic, class, culture and gender. So, one of the defining characteristics of an elite individual is they think and believe that they are better than everyone else. They only recognize, accept or see someone of their own kind. Everyone else and whatever they may possess is only there to serve them and their perceived needs. In many ways they are no different than the vampires of lore. Like all parasites, they make everyone believe that they (you) cannot survive without them.

Is that not what all the “professional people” tell everyone? We can't survive without them? That's why we have doctors, lawyers, preachers, priests, teachers, judges, bankers, accountants, reporters and policemen to tell us how to think, believe, live, and die. That is the second characteristic that identifies an elitist. They are the only one that knows anything and are always telling all other people what is and what is not right, good, bad, decent, moral and ethical; what is acceptable and unacceptable. The presume the right to tell you who you are and who you are not and to treat you accordingly.

In a nutshell, elitists are egotistical, self-centered, self-righteous, arrogant, self-important, and the only thing they care about is themselves and what they want. The only time anyone exists to them is when they supply sustenance to their voracious appetite. Their next identifying characteristic is their constant effort to get you to go along with what they want. It doesn't matter what idiotic scheme they dream up or what stupid and moronic issue they espouse, just as long as they can get you to agree. The more of your soul they can get you to compromise, the better.

So, who tells you how to think? Well, the “Thought Police” do, that's who. You can get a pretty good idea who they might be when you consider what's going on in the “inner” inner sanctums at County Supervisor's Chambers or at the Eureka City Hall and, lest we not forget, all the Judge's Chambers. Anyone that follows this blog Report knows I have a problem with how the Times-Standard allows their local Opinionators to try to lord it over everyone. A good example of this is by Dave Stancliff in his Sunday, March 7, 2010 mandate: “In a better world we wouldn't keep animals in captivity.” However, when I picked up my Sunday paper this weekend and began looking through the first couple of sections, I began to wonder why I continue to support the newspaper. It sure wasn't for want of something worthwhile and relevant to read, that's for sure. I guess maybe it's because the gal that delivers my paper does such a good job. It certainly isn't because I want to read this: “Hi. My name is Dave and I have a reputation for getting lost.” At first glance, you have to ask yourself, who gives a hoot? Take a second look and if a character flaw, exemplified by this statement, “normally developed adults and children,” is caused by genetic loss, it isn't much of a stretch to advocate, “bad people are born bad because of missing or flawed genes.” “Good people (elitists and their dogs) are born good because they possess “all” their genes. And that, my friend, justifies throwing a 10 year old little boy or girl, for the proper crime of course, in jail for life.

According to Dave Stancliff, a columnist for The Times-Standard and a former newspaper editor and publisher, keeping animals captive is criminal. Well, with the small exception of dogs and cats and a bird or two, maybe. We come now to James Faulk and his Tuesday, March 16, 2010: “Dog-hunting for a perfect pet for mom.” As City Editor, I guess privilege has its perks. With so many important issues affecting our community we should expect community conscious newspaper people to use their space and words accordingly. Getting a dog for one's aging mother may seem real important to the Faulk's. Personally? I could really give rat's ass. That is until I read this:

“And for a man who has had many dogs over the course of his life so far, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Adding a canine to the family is much like adding another sibling, another child -- they have emotional and physical needs, and they demand your time and affection. If you can't offer those things, you've got no business getting a dog.”

Who is going to decide what kind of "emotional and physical needs" a certain dog requires? HIM? Your neighbor or some police officer? Who is going to tell you how much if any affection you are showing you dog? Or how much time you MUST spend with it to justify the right to own a dog? You'd better get with the program folks -- he's the expert! WHY, "He's a man who has had many dogs over the course of his life." 

My grandfather, a longtime cattle and sheep rancher, were he still alive, would laugh this would-be know-it-all all right out of town. Regardless, these are the words of a self-ordained elitist using his position in the community to tell everyone HOW to THINK!

More importantly, this is how the elitist segregate our society into two classes, the general population of worthless wannabees and that select group of high and mighty exceptional people. Finally, there's one simple way to identify an elitist that was exemplified in the movie, "Avatar." They absolutely refuse to recognize and accept you or talk to you; they absolutely refuse to "see you."

This, tragically, thrusts the two classes of people into a virtual state of war.

Picture 1 & 2 sources]

--Joe

Polite Is So Boring!

That's what Susan Seaman says her 15-year-old son taught her in the Sunday, October 11, 2009, Times-Standard article, "Business Sense." That's what my 17-year-old grandson told me when he was 15 years old too. He then proceeds to demonstrate that belief by the loud and outlandish clothes he wears. At least he doesn't have tattooed on the back of his head the words, "Piss Off."

Her commentary on "opinions" is what interested us. The consequences, intended or unintended from expressing "mostly worthless opinions" has a lot to do with a person's credibility. Her closing comment says it rather well:

"And, I told him, if you really want to make your opinion known to the world through the mass media, you never know -- in a society where loud and rude is becoming commonplace, a polite, well-considered comment may be utterly shocking."

That way you won't waste your time or energy trying to "say you're sorry" when you most certainly are not.
[Photo Source]

--Joe

Defecating Dogs and Worthless Leash Laws

Defecating Dogs with their superior, arrogant masters together with the Editorial: "Honoring the fallen" seems appropriate, right?

I live in a fairly nice neighborhood, in a fairly nice home with mostly manicured lawns and nicely landscaped flower gardens. Since there isn't a lot of motor traffic, people love to walk and walk their dogs in the neighborhood. I rarely see a dog that is not leashed. What I do see are lots of piles of dog crap on my lawns. Wondering why, I began to pay attention. First, I noticed some of my neighbors turn their dogs loose at night and early morning. Other people, with leashed dogs let them use my laws for toilets and just walk away.

I've debated several options for dealing with this abuse. I figure deliberately letting your dog crap on my property is like spitting on me. You can't ignore the fact of what someone thinks of you when they do that, now can you? After rejecting most of my options, because they were probably illegal, I decided upon installing an automatic water system that would come on whenever there was a toilet call in progress. That way I could get both the human defecator and the dog defecator.

What's appropriate about the cartoon? Change the caption in the cartoon from, "My dog can go any where he wants." to "My army can go anywhere it wants." and I think you get my point.

Letting your dog crap on my property tells me exactly what you think of me and you don't even know me! But, I sure know you. If you ever wondered how people could live together for generations and then when they get the chance become genocidal to one another like they have in Iraq, well you don't have to look very far for reasons why.

Like leash laws there are littering and other appropriate laws dealing with unwanted dog crap and crappers, but that would require some law enforcement and I'm sure they've got more important things to do than cite people for dumping their garbage wherever the urge takes them.

--Joe

Follow Up to the Follow Up Question about Pot

Update :: Thursday, April 2, 2009 --

The success of drug decriminalization in Portugal - by Glenn Greenwald

The article includes a link to the just published article in the Time's by Joe Klien advocating marijuana legalization. Greenwald also details why President Obama is not releasing the "torture memos" as ordered. That's of interest to the Report because of Taser use and torture.

Citing Failed War on Drugs, Former Seattle Police Chief Calls for Legalization of Marijuana and All Drugs

Here is an interesting interview on Democracy Now with Norm Stamper about why drugs, specially marijuana, should be legal in America. Norm Stamper is a thirty-four-year police officer who retired as Seattle’s chief of police in 2000. He is an advisory board member of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and a speaker for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. He is the author of Breaking Rank: A Top Cop’s Exposé of the Dark Side of American Policing."

Here's an excerpt relating to his common sense efforts to reform marijuana laws:

NORM STAMPER: I actually support the legalization of all drugs. And in fact, the more dangerous or sinister or sensationally reported the experience of certain drugs, the greater the justification for the government, as opposed to drug cartels and street traffickers, to regulate that commerce. There’s been more harm done by the drug war than good. We have spent a trillion dollars prosecuting that war since Richard Nixon proclaimed drugs public enemy number one and declared all-out war on them.

And what do we have to show for it? While rates can fluctuate, drugs are more readily available today at lower prices and higher levels of potency than ever before. So it’s a colossal failure. And the only way to put these cartels out of business and to restore health and safety to our neighborhoods is to regulate that commerce as opposed to prohibiting it.

*****

NORM STAMPER: Last week in Minnesota, before a state house committee, a committee that is considering medical marijuana, I was accused of disrespecting police officers. I quickly corrected that police chief, who was wearing a yellow tie with the language “police lines, do not cross." I apologized if I gave the impression, because I have the deepest respect for frontline police officers. They didn’t make these laws. They are victims of the tension and the hostility that is associated with enforcing or prosecuting the drug war. So it’s not our frontline cops that we need to be concerned about.

The vast majority of police officers, I believe, would legalize marijuana today. They have varying views on the other drugs. Many officers, including police chiefs and sheriffs, have whispered their support to me. When I say, “Well, may I quote you?” the response is, “What have you been smoking? No, you cannot do that.”

You know, some have suggested that President Obama’s dismissal of the marijuana issue last week in the online town hall meeting was done because it’s the third rail. Well, we’ve made it that. Americans have, in fact, bought the propaganda of the drug war. We can’t conceive of it as a public health issue, this whole issue of drug use and drug abuse and prevention and education and treatment, as well as enforcement. We need to rethink it. We need to have the courage, the will and sort of the analytical take on the systemic implications that are associated with the drug war and recognize that there is a much better alternative out there. And I think a whole lot of cops understand it. Certainly, the 10,000 members of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition get it.

Read the complete interview here.

Any government truly sensitive to the spoken needs of the people would certainly understand that the father-knows-best approach to government imposed by the conservative elite went out with the Dark Ages. The Democratic principles embodied in a "representative" form of government requires responsible, enlightened (certainly informed) maturity in the majority of those doing the picking. That is, if the system of government is to work as Constitutionally designed. The electorate certainly do not need some wet nurse telling them when, where and how much in between diaper changes. The change in thinking observed in a few courageous people in this country is hopeful. Unfortunately, it's 40 to 50 years too late when you see the legacy we've all inherited.

--Joe

Follow Up to a Question About Pot

This article pretty much sums it all up:

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Politicians on Drugs: Explaining the Lack of Seriousness in D.C.

By Austin Cline: The question of decriminalizing some or all illegal narcotics, to a lesser or greater extent, then regulating and taxing the ensuing trade is a serious matter. There are fair arguments on all sides (because there is range of how far we could go with this, there is arguably more than just one "side") of the debate, but it cannot be dismissed as a pointless, irrelevant, or trivial matter. Yet that's precisely what Barack Obama did at a recent town hall meeting where, based on the reaction, he was surrounded by like-minded apologists for the current structures of power and liberty. Way to break outside the beltway and take it to the people, Mr. President.

Let's run quickly through some of the reasons why it's reasonable to regard the current "war on drugs" as causing more trouble than it solves. Both the violence and corruption associated with illegal drugs are more directly connected to the prohibition of drugs than to the use of drugs. The failure of drug laws to eliminate drug use has encouraged politicians to pass ever more draconian anti-drug laws, thus leading both to unnecessary suffering through harsh sentences for non-violent offenses and a decline in respect for the law when people see police and courts consumed with these cases.

Prohibition also undermines basic constitutional liberties by encouraging police to circumvent laws regulating search and seizures. No-knock warrants combined with paying for tips has led to innumerable raids on the homes of innocent people, including quite a few deaths at the hands of some over-zealous police who no longer seem to care very much about "protecting" and "serving" the public. Prohibition is a nightmare for national security, enriching those who already have a grudge against America and fueling resentment in others who are harmed by American efforts to suppress drug production.

Prohibition damages public health because there is so much resistance to the very idea that any illegal drugs might have any benefits — the prohibition mindset allows for only one response to drugs, no matter who might get harmed in the process. Prohibition is just as bad for the budget, consuming huge amounts of government resources, damaging the productivity of people caught up in the prohibition web, and excluding entire sectors as possible sources of revenue.

These reasons may not be enough to convince someone to support ending prohibition, but they are more than enough to cast doubt on prohibition and deserve stronger arguments in response. To put it another way, they are serious and substantive enough to earn something equally serious and substantive in return.

To be fair, it must be acknowledged that Obama was asked about a policy which is still viewed with suspicion and even fear by so many people in America. The case against prohibition may deserve a serious and substantive response, but that's hard to do when so many people's have been taught to react to drugs in a one-dimensional way: just say no. Opponents of prohibition thus have two hurdles: before they can convince people of their arguments, they must also convince people that any arguments should be considered at all.

Support for varying degrees of decriminalization and/or legalization has grown in recent years, but it's still a relative minority position with fierce opposition. That, however, is an argument for Obama to not wholeheartedly endorsing the idea — it's not an argument to dismiss it as a joke. Remember, decriminalization and legalization aren't just about eliminating one isolated restriction on people's liberty. It's not just about allowing people to get high as legally as they get drunk, though that's what so many tend to think about.

The question Barack Obama was asked ties into medical questions, sustainable farming and manufacturing (with hemp), new sources of tax revenues, and more. His dismissive and even flippant response suggests that he's unaware of all this; a serious response, even in the negative, would have indicated that he understands the complexity of the matter and simply arrived at a different conclusion. Something along the lines of "I understand why people argue for this idea and they make some good points, but I just don't agree with their conclusions" would have been a reasonable, respectful response. It would have avoided scaring apologists for the failed war on drugs while signaling to supporters of legalization that they should keep working on their arguments to make a better case. So why didn't he do that?

Sadly, that's a question which a lot of progressives have been asking on a lot of issues. Barack Obama has been touted as a progressive president, but it's hard to find examples which support such a label. Indeed, the Congressional Progressive Caucus — the largest ideological group among Congressional Democrats — is the only major faction which Barack Obama has not met with. Obama has managed to find time to meet with conservative and moderate Democrats, all of whom have been working against progressive policies, but not with the more reliable supporters of progressive policies.

Yes, I know it's necessary to reach out to less reliable supporters in order to make a political agenda work, but that doesn't require ignoring or taking for granted your regular supporters. It's not a progressive value — or even smart politics — to present yourself as a progressive who somehow keeps ignoring other progressives. This, combined with Harry Reid whining that liberal Democrats shouldn't pressure moderate Democrats to stop standing in the way of progressive legislation, leaves the distinct impression that Democratic leaders across the board are consistently looking for ways to ditch progressivism in favor of a more conservative agenda.

--Joe

A Question About Pot

There seems to be a general across the country priority issue with legalizing marijuana that found it's way to trump President Obama's agenda for his fancy cyberspace town hall meeting as reported on Politico: Pot takes center stage at townhall. One of the most popular questions was about legalizing drugs.

Politico's Josh Gerstein says, "While Obama’s answer was unequivocal, it was also dismissive and didn’t explain why legalization was unwise."

The question and the President's comment:

“There was one question that was voted on that ranked fairly high: that was whether legalizing marijuana would improve the economy and job creation,” Obama said, with a chuckle. “I don’t know what this says about the online audience.”

“This was a fairly popular question — we want to make sure it was answered. The answer is no. I don’t think that is a good strategy to grow our economy,” he said to laughter and applause from the live East Room audience of union members, teachers, business leaders and others.

We all know how a large number of local's feel about this issue. There was a lot of happy blogging recently when everyone thought President Obama actually heard the voices, wants, and needs of the people, to quote:

"Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the federal government would defer to state governments whether to allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes."

I wonder if they all feel so full of hope today? I doubt it. It seems more and more that there's one heck of a big difference between what President Obama says and what he does. Here's his latest shot at a California Marijuana Medical Clinic: Drug Agents Raid SF Medical Marijuana Clinic.

Then there's his promise to take ALL combat troops out of Iraq by August 2010. Today, we learn he's been feeding everyone a line of bull right from the start. You can read about this in the interview on Democracy now with Gareth Porter: Report: Despite Obama’s Vow, Combat Brigades Will Stay in Iraq

Nearly four weeks ago, President Obama declared that US combat operations would end in Iraq by August 2010. Despite Obama’s pledge, new evidence has emerged that the US plans to keep combat brigades in Iraq, but they will operate under a different name.

You can read his complete report: Despite Obama’s Vow, Combat Brigades Will Stay in Iraq here.

Wouldn't it be nice, for once, to have a President of the United States everyone could trust and honestly believe that he's working for and defending the interest of ALL people? It took the country a while to see President George Bush's true colors, but this President is laying it on the line coming right out the gate.

The Creeping Crud

A police state with doilies and lace curtains

Humboldt County (Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Branch) and local retail merchants are currently conducting classes in how to breed a Police State mentality in the innocent, our children. You militarize their environment and then criminalize them with knee-jerk laws ostensibly* for their protection and benefit. In other word, you make unauthorized and in some cases illegal conduct, common place.

[Some examples that come to mind were the universal 55 mph, mandatory helmet laws, seat belt and recently cell-phone laws, no smoking, growing or selling marijuana laws and lets not forget underage sex laws.]

Case in point however, starting with the Wednesday, March 11, 2009, Times-Standard Editorial: Show you care, show your ID is a classic example of do-gooder knee-jerk mentality that's really a pretense to inure** people to more loss of freedom and rights.

This fine group of people, this "editorial board made up of recovered, recovering and current smokers" says, in part:

It can actually be quantified -- the war against smoking is making headway. Fewer people are smoking, and fewer will be dying, as a result, from smoking-related diseases.

But the war is not over. Each and every time a minor starts puffing, it's the wrong start to a person's life. Immediately they set themselves up for a health disadvantage, and will have to dedicate years, if not decades, to recover, if and when they quit.

Did you notice that this is a "war"? How do they say we should fight this war? By getting "people to show their IDs when buying cigarettes, without being asked." -Make showing IDs common place.

Why?

"The logic is that if clerks start seeing people always showing their IDs when buying cigarettes, they'll begin to expect it. Thus, when a minor can't produce one, or produces one that looks fraudulent, the clerk will be on guard and thereby prevent the youth from buying the tobacco.

The campaign also aims to send a message to kids: You're outlawed from buying tobacco -- take the hint." (Emphasis add)

That editorial was followed up with the article, "County campaign reduces minors' access to tobacco" by Donna Tam where she explains the criminal rewards for selling cigarettes to minors. She identifies a do-gooder organization, Tobacco Free Humboldt and its Project Director Jay McCubbrey. This organization has enlisted use of 15 - 16 year old kids to see who will sell them tobacco and to "get the anti-smoking message out." One of these brilliant 15-year old kids says, "It's telling kids, 'Yes, people are looking for this so you shouldn't try to do it.'"

This is not about "telling kids" anything. This is pure indoctrination of children and adults alike! And it has absolutely nothing to do with anti-smoking. But, if it does, it's only peripheral, if not, incidental.

These teenagers see elder adults showing their ID "just to send a message" and they'll laugh the old fools right out of the store. And that IS the message sent. Certainly NOT what some adolescent teenager's take on life is.

The real crime done to these children, who are surrounded by smokers of every age and size is this statement,

The campaign also aims to send a message to kids: You're outlawed from buying tobacco -- take the hint."

with this nonsense,

We as a community have a responsibility to do the best we can by the next generation, and doing so in this case means making it hard, if not impossible, for a kid to get cigarettes. Let's set the example.

This is how you TALK to kids? By making them criminals? Penalizing everyone that smokes and forcing "store clerks" that have no say in the sale of tobacco to police our children? It was this kind of activity that produced these people, "Hitler-Jugend" 89 years ago, commonly known as "Hitler Youth." (Emphasis add)

This is what you quietly get today, Friday, March 13, 2009:

Updating the Militarization and Annexation of North America

- by Steve Lendman - Here's an excerpt:

... In other words, homeland militarization and occupation are planned using troops trained to kill.

The pretext is national security. In fact, they'll be on-call against another major terrorist attack, real or contrived, as well as civil unrest given the gravity of the economic crisis, its affect on millions, and likelihood that sooner or later they'll react. Armed combat troops will supplement militarized local police in case security crackdowns are ordered or martial law declared.

"Catastrophic Emergency" procedures are in place to react to situations, "natural or manmade," according to DHS/FEMA's March 2008 "Preparedness for the Next Catastrophic Disaster" policy paper. Should conditions warrant, initiatives to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law are in place, but militarizing America for business is also at issue.

It all started somewhere. So, lets set a real example.

---

Joe Blow, just to be clear, is for reasonable laws and law enforcement. Legislating morality, using laws, the police and juries to send messages and educating our youth with a club is out. Children learn the truth by observing who and what we are and comparing what we do by what we say. If you don't want your kids smoking tobacco then teach them what self-respect and personal responsibility means. Then give them the tools they need to be able to use that self-respect and be responsible. Problem is, you can't teach what don't have or don't know.

---

Creeping Crud : Malaise:
1. a condition of general bodily weakness or discomfort, often marking the onset of a disease.
2. a vague or unfocused feeling of mental uneasiness, lethargy, or discomfort.

* Ostensibly:
1. Outwardly appearing as such; professed; pretended: an ostensible cheerfulness concealing sadness.
2. Apparent, evident, or conspicuous: the ostensible truth of their theories.
** Inure:
To habituate to something undesirable, especially by prolonged subjection; accustom

--Joe

Time for More Gems

Any of these little GEMS work for you?

1. A man can't be judge of his neighbor's intelligence. His own vital experience is never his neighbor's.
2. Have the wisdom to abandon the values of a time that has passed and seek out the constituents of the future.
3. Social good is what brings peace to family and society.
4. The body is the shrine of divinity.
5. We mustn't confuse mastery with mimicry, knowledge with superstitious ignorance.
6. Always watch and follow nature.
7. People bring about their own undoing through their tongues.
8. To know means to record in one's memory, but to understand means to make part of oneself.
9. All thought comes from within, but the master gives the keys.
10. Everyone finds himself in the world where he belongs.
11. A man's heart holds his own truth.
12. Organization is impossible unless those who know the laws of harmony lay the foundation. [*]
13. Sound skepticism is necessary condition for the discovery of truth.
14. If you are searching for beauty, observe nature.
15. The first step to knowing wisdom is knowing your ignorance.
16. It is the passive resistance from the helm that steers the boat.
17. Have the wisdom to abandon the values of a time that has passed and pick out the constituents of the future.
18. If you search for the laws of harmony, you will find knowledge.

Joe says, "Watch out for the 'Dominator Hierarchy'." They think they are unique, exceptional people God gave the right to lord it over everyone else.

These are the people that moralize the right to butcher innocent women and children because they say "terrorists" hide among them. They justify their obscene existence by saying the deaths were caused by a bomb or two that landed in the "wrong place".

--Joe

More Gems

Some of my favorites are,

1. Ignorance is the temple of the presumptuous. [*]


2. The bad master makes the seeker into a slave.


3. There are two kinds of error: Blind credulity and piecemeal criticism. [*]


4. Envious greed must govern to possess and ambition must possess to govern.


5. Know yourself... Your beginning will disclose your end.


6. The gift of knowledge is so great that no effort whatsoever could hope to 'deserve' it.


7. In every vital activity it is the path that matters. [*]


8. What you are doing does not matter so much as what you are learning from doing it.


9. Your body is the temple of knowledge.


10. The first step to knowing wisdom is knowing your ignorance [*]


11. All organs work together in the functioning of the whole.


12. Images are nearer reality than cold definitions.


13. A house has the character of the people who live in it. [*]


14. Leave him in error who loves his error. [*]

ADDENDUM :: Thursday, January 8, 2009

Some good words on Light and Darkness I took the liberty to copy here:

There is an ancient Chinese saying “It is easy to give sinister words, but hard to utter good phrases”. In other words, human beings have tendency to criticize, condemn, and judge. Yet it takes great understanding and big heart to console, encourage, and build up.

Why our human nature has this tendency to blame others, and not ourselves? It’s because we are all prone to the self-righteous attitude. Then, why this direction and not the other way around? I’ve been pondering over this question for a long time now, and I believe the explanation can only be found from theological point of view.

There are two forces exist in and beyond this universe. Force of Light and force of darkness. The force of Light creates, nurtures, fosters, encourages, and gives meaning to otherwise mundane existence. The force of darkness destroys, depresses, demolishes, defeats, and judges. Similar notion was vividly illustrated in C.S. Lewis’s book.

Seek and walk in the Light. Everyday let’s put a smile on a child’s face, cheer up a grieving heart, and console a languishing soul.

--Joe

Humboldt Elite's Royal Baby

Great news! Read all about it. A royal baby was born! 

Two days into the new year and we're blessed with a new female Superior Court Judge by the name of Joyce D. Hinrichs. Anyone know who this woman is or what makes her qualified? By any chance, is she from a local family with roots in Humboldt County? What makes her of "royal blood" anyway?

Joe's objective interests in politics and elections are purely spectatorial. When you consider how rare it is to get a new Superior Court Judge, well that's something Joe considers really important. While these judges are elected and apparently re-elected, the history of their tenure is that they damned near die ensconced in their little kingdoms. Unfortunately, he never saw anything in or on the "media" talking about electing a new judge. Some people knew there was an election, the newspaper says the courtroom was overflowing. 

She says, "I am really honored to be joining the sitting judges here on the Humboldt County Superior Court. They are wonderful, dedicated, hard-working judges and its an on honor to sit among them." Is this what we can expect from her, gushy, but dedicated, hard work? Whatever that means!

When you consider the impact judges have on the day to day lives of everyone, you would think that the serious voter, those people that care about their homes, businesses, property and persons would make sure they know exactly what they are getting. Well, you would think so, but then the whole country just elected a new President and they don't have clue about him.

--Joe

Simple Truths beyond Pearls

On this day of Christmas, the birthday of Jesus, some say the founder of Christianity, said: 

“Do not give what is holy to dogs, neither throw your pearls before swine, that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip you open.” 

Joe offers these words to all serious bloggers and commentators of integrity that are constantly pilloried by the disingenuous, stupid, moronic and inane commentator that hopes to express his/her profound opinionated ignorance. Take solice that not all are of their ilk. These simple truths make a great response, so use them with Joe's blessings.

Pearls of Wisdom? 

1. Peace is the fruit of activity, not of sleep.
2. No discussion can throw light if it wanders from the real point.
3. To teach, one must know the nature of those whom one is teaching.
4. It is an essential thing to have a fixed point from which to check reality now and then.
5. Not the greatest master can go even one step for his disciple.
6. An answer brings no illumination unless one asks the right question.
7. You will be free when you follow your heart without perturbance.
8. Paradise is within us all, and whosoever shall know himself shall find it.
9. Experience is a journey, not a destination.
10. Every man must act in the rhythm of his time...  such is wisdom
11. Discernment of truth does not grow in empty minds.
12. Always look for a fixed point, something you know is stable  ...yourself.
13. True teaching is not an accumulation of knowledge, it is an awakening of consciousness.
14. Growth doesn't depend upon the will of the intellect, but on the intensity of the inner urge.
15. Listen to your convictions even if they seem to absurd to your reason.
16. Our senses serve to affirm, not to know.
17. Knowledge is consciousness of reality, and reality the laws that govern nature.
18. The only active force that arises out of possession is fear of losing the object of possession.
19. The nut doesn't reveal the tree it contains.
20. Seek peacefully, you will find.
21. Understanding develops by degrees.
22. We mustn't confuse mastery with mimicry, knowledge with superstitious ignorance.
23. If you would build something solid, don't work with wind.
24. Routine distorts vision...  Each man thinks his own horizon is the limit of the world.
25. All thought comes from within, but the Master gives the keys.
26. Experience will show you, a Master can only point the way.
27. By knowing one reaches belief. By doing one gains conviction. When you know, dare.
28. A Master does not teach, but guides the seeker back on course when they stray.
29. Knowledge is not necessarily wisdom.
30. The seed cannot sprout upwards without simultaneously sending roots into the ground.
31. The key to all problems is the problem of consciousness.
32. The truth that links the divine to the mundane is incomprehensible to the cerebral intellegence.
33. Every man is rich in excuses to safeguard his prejudices, his instincts, and his opinions.
34. A seed can't reach its potential without receiving corresponding energies from the sky.
35. Popular beliefs must be examined in order to discover the original thought.
36. Each truth you learn will be, for you, as new if it had never been written.
37. Grain must return to the earth for new growth to begin.

More pearls?

Pearls? No. The pearls are those insightful people that can understand and apply the meaning of these self-evident truths in their daily reality. They are a rare, enlightened being in this dark-age world. They know that everything is about something different.

--Joe

Guilty As Accused

Ever hear the expression, "A picture is worth a thousand words"? How about two pictures worth a million words?


Is Diane Batley responsible for plastering this guy's guilty mug all over the Eurek Reporter's front page as one of her first duties?





Court: Miller Trial <--------> Diane M. Batley, Editor

If so, good job. We wouldn't want to take a chance that any prospective juror that sees this picture could find this guy anything but guilty now would we? Otherwise, why is he presented before the public and prospective jurors in a prison-guilty monkey-suit all shakled up like some raving lunatic ready for his tar and feathering? He's guilty! End of story.

End of his story, but not that of Ms. Batley or The Eureka Reporter. I'm sure they will provide much grist for the mill.


ADDENDUM Wednesday, August 13, 2008: Innocent Until Proven Guilty.

This is the front page picture in the Time-Standard, "Gundersen's wife held for her safety, ..."

No monkey suit and chains here. Is that because the jury's already been selected?

-Joe

Speak Truth To ... What?

... or Joe Blow and His Observations

Joe Blow says it plain and simple, right at the top of this website: Making Comments Count -- This report is about observations and not about opinions. Opinions are mostly worthless. With that in mind, if you want to comment on something posted, please click on the "Comment" link at the end of the each post.

Just so no one misunderstands Joe adds the following a little further down the web page: More About Joe Blow -- Please be aware that the Joe Blow Report speaks for itself. You may or may not agree, but just remember, that is your issue. The Report is offered as a free gift to whomever desires to read it. Please accept it as such. The Report respects the rights of all individuals to be who and what they are. All the same there are consequences for what each individual does and does not do. If the Report stimulates a little thinking, it has fulfilled it's purpose.

Joe Blow fully understands that whatever is posted on the Internet or printed in newspapers or spoken on television or on the radio bears the responsibility for being PUBLIC property, albeit sometimes copyrighted. Let's hope that those Joe observes and reports about understand that as well. In other words, if you do not want to read or hear about someones observations, keep quiet! Or if you're going to stand up on a soapbox in a public place and spout off you'd better be ready for a rotten egg or two.

Now that's simple enough, right? He doesn't make many comments on other blogs, but when he does he follows the above criteria - no exceptions even when there's commentary that aggravates and disgusts . . . to put it mildly.

For the uninitiated, the dictionary defines "opinion" as follows:
-noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4. Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5. a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6. a favorable estimate; esteem: I haven't much of an opinion of him.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

—Synonyms 1. persuasion, notion, idea, impression. Opinion, sentiment, view are terms for one's conclusion about something. An opinion is a belief or judgment that falls short of absolute conviction, certainty, or positive knowledge; it is a conclusion that certain facts, ideas, etc., are probably true or likely to prove so: political opinions; an opinion about art; In my opinion this is true. Sentiment (usually pl.) refers to a rather fixed conviction, usually based on feeling or emotion rather than reasoning: These are my sentiments. View is an estimate of something, an intellectual judgment, a critical survey based on a mental examination, particularly of a public matter: views on governmental planning.

Observe" (root of observation) is defined:
–verb (used with object)
1. to see, watch, perceive, or notice: He observed the passersby in the street.
2. to regard with attention, esp. so as to see or learn something: I want you to observe her reaction to the judge's question.
3. to watch, view, or note for a scientific, official, or other special purpose: to observe an eclipse.
4. to state by way of comment; remark: He observed frequently that clerks were not as courteous as they used to be.
5. to keep or maintain in one's action, conduct, etc.: You must observe quiet.
6. to obey, comply with, or conform to: to observe laws.
7. to show regard for by some appropriate procedure, ceremony, etc.: to observe Palm Sunday.
8. to perform duly or solemnize (ceremonies, rites, etc.).
9. to note or inspect closely for an omen or sign of future events.
–verb (used without object)
10. to notice.
11. to act as an observer.
12. to remark or comment (usually fol. by on or upon).

—Synonyms 2. note. Observe, witness imply paying strict attention to what one sees or perceives. Both are “continuative” in action. To observe is to mark or be attentive to something seen, heard, etc.; to consider carefully; to watch steadily: to observe the behavior of birds, a person's pronunciation. To witness, formerly to be present when something was happening, has added the idea of having observed with sufficient care to be able to give an account as evidence: to witness an accident. 4. mention, say. 6. follow, fulfill. 7. celebrate, keep.—Antonyms 1–3, 6–8. ignore.

Joe says, an opinion is conjured in the mind. Most opinions today are "faith-based" beliefs, and jaded emotional judgments, rarely touching upon reality. Observations require the personal responsibility of a cognizant witness. Opinions are influenced by personal likes and dislikes either of the subject, the object or both. A casual observation, on the other hand, could care less. Furthermore, opinions have more to do with lies whereas observations deal more with truth.

Truth is defined as:
1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.
4. the state or character of being true.
5. actuality or actual existence.
6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.
8. (often initial capital letter ) ideal or fundamental reality apart from and transcending perceived experience: the basic truths of life.
9. agreement with a standard or original.
10. accuracy, as of position or adjustment.
11. Archaic. fidelity or constancy.
---Synonyms: These nouns refer to the quality of being in accord with fact or reality. Truth is a comprehensive term that in all of its nuances implies accuracy and honesty: "We seek the truth, and will endure the consequences" (Charles Seymour). Veracity is adherence to the truth: "Veracity is the heart of morality" (Thomas H. Huxley). Verity often applies to an enduring or repeatedly demonstrated truth: "beliefs that were accepted as eternal verities" (James Harvey Robinson). Verisimilitude is the quality of having the appearance of truth or reality: "merely corroborative detail, intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative" (W.S. Gilbert).

Regarding "truth" most Christian believers know about truth, right? "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14 NIV) A history of this man's life clearly demonstrates that those learned people, those arrogant, self-righteous, complicated and convoluted scholars that did not agree with him opined greatly about his "truth" or "observations."

As far as Joe Blow is concerned the following quote says it all about him and his observations, "Truth is a comprehensive term that in all of its nuances implies accuracy and honesty: "We seek the truth, and will endure the consequences" (Charles Seymour)."

--Joe

Does Patriotism Matter?

Are these people patriots or traitors?

Senate easily passes wiretap bill

Obama's 'yes' vote draws charge of flip-flop from McCain camp

McCain didn't vote.

What about these people listed on a local blog? Read "Roll Call vote on Dodd Amendment. Here's the good guys."

No mention of the bad guys, though. Are they stand up heroes or sell-out cowards?

Thomas Sowell's commentary in the Sunday, July 6, 2008 Eureka Reporter might shed some light on those representatives that believe the "end (always) justifies the means". I've included the whole article on this blog for obvious reasons even though Joe regards most of this kind of thinking right out of the dark ages. What he says is worth reading . . .

Thomas Sowell --

The Fourth of July is a patriotic holiday, but patriotism has long been viewed with suspicion or disdain by many of the intelligentsia. As far back as 1793, prominent British writer William Godwin called patriotism “high-sounding nonsense.”

Internationalism has long been a competitor with patriotism, especially among the intelligentsia. H.G. Wells advocated replacing the idea of duty to one’s country with “the idea of cosmopolitan duty.”

Perhaps nowhere was patriotism so downplayed or deplored than among intellectuals in the Western democracies in the two decades after the horrors of the First World War, fought under various nations’ banners of patriotism.

In France, after the First World War, the teachers’ unions launched a systematic purge of textbooks, in order to promote internationalism and pacifism.

Books that depicted the courage and self-sacrifice of soldiers who had defended France against the German invaders were called “bellicose” books to be banished from the schools.

French textbook publishers caved in to the power of the teachers’ unions, rather than lose a large market for their books. History books were sharply revised to conform to internationalism and pacifism.

The once epic story of the French soldiers’ heroic defense against the German invaders at Verdun, despite the massive casualties suffered by the French, was now transformed into a story of horrible suffering by all soldiers at Verdun — French and German alike.

In short, soldiers once depicted as national heroes were now depicted as victims — and just like victims in other nations’ armies.

Children were bombarded with stories on the horrors of war. In some schools, children whose fathers had been killed during the war were asked to speak to the class and many of these children — as well as some of their classmates and teachers — broke down in tears.

In Britain, Winston Churchill warned that a country “cannot avoid war by dilating upon its horrors.” In France, Marshal Philippe Petain, the victor at Verdun, warned in 1934 that teachers were trying to “raise our sons in ignorance of or in contempt of the fatherland.”

These were voices drowned out by the pacifist and internationalist rhetoric of the 1920s and 1930s.

Did it matter? Does patriotism matter?

France, where pacifism and internationalism were strongest, became a classic example of how much it can matter.

During the First World War, France fought on against the German invaders for four long years, despite having more of its soldiers killed than all the American soldiers killed in all the wars in the history of the United States, put together.

Yet during the Second World War, France collapsed after just six weeks of fighting and surrendered to Nazi Germany. At the bitter moment of defeat the head of the French teachers’ union was told, “You are partially responsible for the defeat.”

Thomas Sowell is a nationally syndicated columnist and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

What Can Joe Say?

The dumb make the stupid look smart . . .



Compliments of the Patriot Post

The Winkee!

Get Your Own Winkee!

About Patty & Karla
Dear Girlfriends,

The Winkee design evolved while we were exhibiting collaborative artwork. In addition to the usual dilemma of "What to wear?", one of us was dealing with
breast cancer.

It was then that "The Ultimate Solution For Plunging Necklines" was born!

Winkee is a REVOLUTIONARY, patent-pending bra accessory. It empowers all
women to feel confident, while maximizing their wardrobe.

We believe our thoughts and words shape who we are, and have the power to
change the lives of everyone around us. Included on every Winkee tab will be a
positive word that will be close to your heart while you wear it. The philosophy
behind our art and lives is to Pass God Given Gifts Forward!

Whenever I get to thinking there's no hope for this country, I come across something like the Winkee! So, whatever it takes, Joe wants all women to feel confident and empowered!

-- Joe