“The growing prevalence of incendiary discussion groups is forcing the popular social-networking site to wrestle with the Web’s more antisocial aspects. This week, it sparked a larger debate outside Facebook as well, prompting the site to yank two groups catering to Holocaust denial but allow a few others to remain.”

Brian Cuban’s open letter to Facebook, which implored Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to rid Facebook of all holocaust denial groups, was mentioned in the article. Corilyn stated that Brian, an American of Russian-Jewish descent, takes “Holocaust-denial” personally and has commented that “(Facebook) should not be picking and choosing who they think hates Jews and who doesn’t. All of these groups should go”. She went on to say:

“By policy, Facebook prohibits users from posting content that is “hateful, threatening, pornographic or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.””

The debate rages on…

The Huston Chronicle, like many sites, offers the chance for its readers to respond to their articles. There are many responses that tend to support removing pages for hate groups Facebook, some responses do not. One such response stood out to me, in brief it the writer asked if those supporting the removal of the pages from such groups as the “Holocaust-deniers” ever heard of the “Freedom of Speech”. The author when on to say:.

“If you do not like it, do not respect it, pack your things and head out to where you are allowed to think like a robot.”

Apparently “The Freedom of Speech”, to this person, means that you only have the freedom to say things that concurs with his/her opinion. In addition anyone disagreeing with ideologies that the writer agrees with is nothing short of being a “Robot” and must “pack their things” and “head out to where a person is allowed to think like a Robot”.

As Artie Johnson was fond of saying, “Very interesting, but stupid!” The last time I checked any American was allowed to think however they wished. If it pleased a person think, and speak, as a ‘Mindless Sheeple”… then that was permissible within the boundaries of the United States of America. That is why I have suffered for so many years defending the right of people like the author of this response, if I knew “Sheeple-like” activities were illegal under U.S. law then I would have made the attempt to have about half the population of the country deported over the course of the last 30 years or so. (Oops, I’m bad!)

Enough jocularity, this is a serious subject.

The author of the response went on to state how s/he holds the “Freedom of Speech” dear and claims that we all are entitled to voice our opinions… even if that opinion is about something that s/he doesn’t agree. Then s/he goes on to state:

“It is time that many of you learn to “RESPECT” frredom of speech.”

In order to “respect” (the) freedom of speech, you first must know what it is and what all it entails. This also includes having the ability to understand the concept that all speech is not free and there are legal exceptions to the first amendment.

In an article called “The Neutral Zone of Free Expression” on the Ashmadai Blog, the “Freedom of Expression is discussed in brief. In that article Ashmadai outlines the fact that there are exceptions to the freedom of speech, making the point rather well that “All Speech is not protected by the First Amendment”. In other words we do not have the right to simply say anything we wish, we have a ‘responsibility’ that goes along with the Freedom of Speech and all of our rights. It is also pointed out that Facebook is a private entity that allows people to join its site, therefore Mark Zuckerberg and Company do not have to grant the millions of Facebook Members the Freedom of Speech.

Facebook is attempting to mirror the ‘Freedom of Speech’ rights that we have in the US under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, or so it was claimed. If that is true, does that mean that Facebook is also attempting to mirror the other rights that we in the US enjoy (where they apply, of course)? If so does that mean that if someone has the right to promote their “holocaust-denial” group on Facebook, then someone else has the right to promote an “Anti-holocaust-denial” group or even a “Anti-Muslim” group on Facebook.

I do not urge the creating and promoting of pages on Facebook that deal with hate or unfounded anti-government conspiracies. I prefer things that are a little more realistic, or things that are so absurd that it is obvious the topic is humor. However if Facebook allows the “Holocaust-deniers” to remain, then where will it end and how far will it go?

Will Facebook allow a “Holocaust-denier” page that does nothing but make a mockery out of the “Holocaust Denial”? To do so could prevent problems because many holocaust-deniers have little or no sense of humor and would claim the page is offensive.

Will Facebook allow an “Anti-Holocaust Denial” page that promotes the idea of the holocaust and put down the ideas of these ‘Holocaust-deniers”? That could cause it’s own problems, one of which is all out war between the opposing groups.

A Final Word!

The proper handling of a forum or social site, like Facebook, isn’t easy. There will always be someone out there testing the limits and claiming what they say and do is one of their ‘protected freedoms’ and by Facebook telling them that they can’t say or do what they want… their rights are being violated. Trolls are good at such things and a good troll will go to great lengths to give the forum or social site as much trouble and bad publicity as possible. However those at Facebook must think this through and be stand-up Netizens by doing what is fair and just. If Facebook decides that the “Holocaust-denier” pages can stay then they must be willing to use the same litmus test for any other page that arises.

In response to the person responding to the Huston Chronicle article, I agree that we must respect the “Freedom of Speech”… we also must respect the “Freedom of Expression” as well. This works both ways and is not a one-sided thing. The person must realize that not everything they say is considered as ‘protected’ under the Freedom of Expression and refrain from saying hateful things. It’s as simple as that, but don’t hold your breath expecting such things to happen. People who hate rarely concern themselves with what others think and feel.

“Part of the power of social networking is the ability to form communities with like-minded individuals.
But what happens when those communities are offensive to others?

The Holocaust Denial movement seeks to deny or minimize the Holocaust, in which Nazis killed about six million European Jews during World War II.”

Brian Cuban’s Position

According to the article, Mr. Cuban, the brother of Dallas Mavericks team owner Mark Cuban, has been attempting since last year to have Facebook remove pages from their site with names such as “Holocaust: A Series of Lies” and “Holocaust is a Holohoax“. Brian points out that Facebook has removed pages in the past from their site based upon complaints they have received and said Facebook is “setting the subjective standard on what they remove and what they don’t.”

Facebook Responds to Brian Cuban

Barry Schnitt, a Facebook spokesman, stated that they agree with Mr. Cuban on the fact that these Holocaust-denial pages are “Offensive” and “Objectionable”, however Facebook disagrees with Mr. Cuban over the issue of “whether the people have the right to discuss such ideas on Facebook”.

“It’s a difficult decision to make. We have a lot of internal debate and we bring in experts to talk about it,” Schnitt said. “Just being offensive or objectionable doesn’t get it taken off Facebook. We want it [the site] to be a place where people can discuss all kinds of ideas, including controversial ones.”

According to Schnitt, Facebook has drawn the line with pages or groups that attack an individual or incite or threaten violence.

Other Stances

The Jewish International Defense Force stated:

“Facebook should not provide a platform for hatred, especially as it is against their TOS [terms of service],” David said. “Holocaust denial is illegal in 13 countries and represents a form of Jew hatred and hate speech in general.”

Deborah Lipstadt, the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University and an expert on Holocaust denial, claims that social-networking sites like Facebook are attractive to deniers. She stated:

“It (Facebook) allows people to find one another, both for good and for bad,” she said. “People who are drawn to Holocaust denial tend to be fringe kind of people who might not otherwise be able to find a group, but this way they can find other like-minded people.”

Deborah Lauter, director of Civil Rights for the Anti-Defamation League, states the issue of anti-Semitism and hate speech online is a growing one.

One reason for the rise of such groups is directly due to the anonymity that the web provides. According to Lauter… Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities says that users “will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.”

Our Rights, according to Facebook

All sites on the net have a set of rules, you may find these rules under such names as “Terms of Service” (TOS) or “Terms of Agreement” (TOA) – Facebook calls their rules by the title of “Statement of Rights and Responsibility”. I went to Facebook’s SRR, to double check Ms. Lauter’s claim. In Section 3: Safety it states quite clearly and concisely:

“6. You will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.”

The question that remains is over whether “Holocaust-denial” is hateful or whether it is simply citing facts. We will come back to this later because another item of importance is that Deborah seemed to have missed item 8, Section 3:

“8. You will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful, misleading, malicious, or discriminatory.”

Deborah also seemed to have overlooked article 1 in Section 5 of Facebook’s Rights and Responsibilities, which clearly states:

“You will not post content or take any action on Facebook that infringes someone else’s rights or otherwise violates the law.”

Hate Speech: Is that the best way to go?

In the US we are guaranteed certain inalienable rights and one of those rights is the “Freedom of Speech”. Our Bill of Rights states in the First Amendment:

“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 peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

However, according to Wikipedia:

“Hate Speech is a term for speech intended to degrade a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, hair color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some as a liability”.

In the US there are laws concerning Defamation (of Character) and we do have laws governing “Hate Crimes”, however ‘Hate Speech’ Laws are virtually non-existent. Brian Cuban seems to have another solution, whether he realizes it or not, he is trying to attack this Holocaust-denial form of hate speech outside the realm of our First Amendment rights by saying:

“There is no First Amendment right to free speech in the private realm,” Cuban said. “This isn’t a freedom-of-speech issue. Facebook is free to set the standard that they wish.”

Internet sites, like Facebook, are privately owned sites opened to the general public to utilize and enjoy. Most of the owners of these sites want to make a profit, in fact they want to make as much money as they can from their ‘brain child”, but they often will make their money by selling things (such as advertising space) on their site.

These places are not government owned, nor are they government operated or sponsored. Private individuals, or companies, put up large amounts of money to pay for these sites and they offer the use of their sites to the general public.

This translates into the owners retaining the right to set their own rules – as long as they do not violate the laws that govern them. They may set rules concerning flaming (personal attacks), cussing, hate speech, etc. as they like. Unless the site is really promoting crimes or other serious problems, the government will not interfere with the running of these sites.

Whenever a person joins a site like Facebook, he or she to the rules set by the site owners. Call these rights “Terms of Agreement (TOA)”, “Terms of Service (TOS), or “(Member’s) Rights and Responsibilities” – the fact still isn’t diminished that these are the rules of the site and that by our logging on and joining as members, we acknowledge those rules and agree to adhere to them. These rights set by the owners are the only rights that we, the members of the site, have the right to claim… and that can be argued too for the owners have the right to change their rules whenever and however they wish. In other words… our rights on these Internet sites are whatever the site owners say they are.

This means that “Facebook” doesn’t need to worry too much about the US Bill of Rights or “Our Civil Rights” that are set by the courts and legal documentations across the land, they can control what content they want on their site through their own TOS (Terms of Service) and they can change these rules as often as they wish – with-out notification. They also can close their site completely or make their site a “Private Site” open to only specific types of people.

I still have “Rights”, Dammit!!!

Sure you do, you just may not have the rights that you think you have. According to Law.com, a right is “an entitlement to something, whether to concepts like justice and due process or to ownership of property or some interest in property, real or personal. These rights include: various freedoms; protection against interference with enjoyment of life and property; civil rights enjoyed by citizens such as voting and access to the courts; natural rights accepted by civilized societies; human rights to protect people throughout the world from terror, torture, barbaric practices and deprivation of civil rights and profit from their labor; and such U.S. constitutional guarantees as the right to freedoms of speech, press, religion, assembly and petition”. Civil Rights, according to Law.com, are “those rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, including the right to due process, equal treatment under the law of all people regarding enjoyment of life, liberty, property, and protection. Positive civil rights include the right to vote, the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of a democratic society, such as equal access to public schools, recreation, transportation, public facilities, and housing, and equal and fair treatment by law enforcement and the courts.”

Rights are not all encompassing

In America we are taught from a very young age about the importance of “Our Rights”. We, Americans, never disagree with each other about whether we have rights – our disagreements are over the specific rights themselves. In other words we don’t always agree with each other about “Our Rights”, but we do agree upon the point that “We all have rights”.

Over the years, especially since the age of the Internet, I’ve noticed that the most common mistake people make about rights is the fact that they are “not all encompassing”. “All-encompassing” basically means “including everything” or “universal”. The Human Rights Centre states “By their nature, human rights touch upon all spheres of life and, therefore, it is not possible to compile an all-encompassing overview.”

Our Rights” are for everyone, not just the individual or the few. We cannot set up a set of “Rights” for everyone to enjoy and not have the effect of “Conflicting Rights” appear. Normally whenever one person screams that they have the right to say or do something, someone else yells about their rights being violated. This is where the courts come into play and try to resolve these conflicts in a fair and just manner”.

Thanks to Reg Saddler for notifying me of this story.

What is the Swine Flu?

According to sources, the 2009 flu outbreak in humans is due to a new strain of influenza a virus subtype H1N1 that derives in part from human influenza, avian influenza, and two separate strains of swine influenza.

Where did this Swine Flu come from?

The origins of this new strain are unknown. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) reports that this particular strain of Swine Flu has not been found in pigs, instead it seems to pass from human to human. The strain in most cases causes only mild symptoms and the infected person makes a full recovery without requiring medical attention and without the use of antiviral medicines.

The History of this strain

The earliest case involves a 5 year boy from La Gloria, Veracruz state, Mexico, who lived near a pig farm that raises almost 1 million pigs a year. Residents of La Gloria have long complained about the clouds of flies that are drawn to the so-called ‘manure lagoons’ created by such mega-farms. The 5 year old was thought to be suffering from ordinary influenza but laboratory testing revealed he had contracted swine flu. The boy went on to make a full recovery.

La Gloria, Perote, Veracruz is a small community, surrounded by large pig farms. Reports indicate that during February 2009 over 400 persons in the town had flu like symptoms and 2 infants died of ‘pneumonia’.

It is reported that the people of La Gloria frequently traveled to Mexico City ‘to work’, which could very well include taking their wares into Mexico City to sell.

Reactions to the Swine Flu

The United States and World Health Organization elevated this strain of Swine Flu to a Phase 5 pandemic virus.

Is this Swine Flu for real or Media Hype?

The best answer to this that I have seen comes from the National Geographic article “Swine Flu Facts, Swine Flu Myths”:

Q. Is this just another media health scare? How worried should we be?

A. The truth lies somewhere in between panic and eye-rolling.

Making the jump from animal-to-person to person-to-person transmission is a rare skill for a flu virus to “learn.” This ability makes H1N1 swine flu potentially dangerous—and makes the concern about it a bit different from the worries over bird flu, which has yet to make such a transition.

“However,” he said, “it certainly merits the public paying attention, and it warrants the public health efforts that have been going on in terms of monitoring and research.”

Is the Swine Flu a virus created by ‘the government”?

There are many unsubstantiated claims concerning the idea that the US Government has concocted the swine flu virus and is using it as a form of population control or to control the number of illegal immigrants coming into the US by Mexico. While researching the net, I’ve found very few valid sources that even approach this subject. One such source is the TimesOnline site, which posted an article called “Ten Facts About The Swine Flu”. The article states:

In 1976, an Army recruit at Ford Dix, New Jersey, complained that he was feeling tired and weak. He died the following day. After Swine flu was diagnosed panicked officials persuaded Gerald Ford that the entire population needed vaccination. About 40 million people were vaccinated before another fear took hold - that the vaccine was more dangerous than the disease - and the programme was aborted.

Fort Dix is an army base in New Jersey and is a major training and mobilization center for reserve component soldiers., but back in 1976 it was a part of the US Army Training and Doctrine Command. Quite often I hear Fort Dix being confused with Fort Detrick in Frederick, Maryland. Fort Detrick is an Army Medical Installation. They are home to the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI-Frederick) and 37 mission partners. Their primary missions include biomedical research and development, medical materiel management and global telecommunications. We are also home to a National Interagency Confederation for Biological Research and National Interagency Biodefense Campus.

Why the soldier at Fort Dix in 1976 became sick and died had nothing to do with the things going on at Fort Detrick… most likely. At the very least a scenario as we find in Stephen King’s “The Stand” isn’t apparent without a total stretch of the imagination.

What is “The Stand”?

In case someone has no concept of “The Stand” by Stephen King, it is perhaps one of the best works of fiction I’ve ever read. The story is a story of Good versus Evil and involves the survivors of the superflu epidemic where only a small portion of the United States population survived. The Superflu was a bioweapon being developed by the US Army at a base in California and due to human error it escaped into ‘the wild’ and spread like wild fire. The first half of the book dealt with the government’s attempts to cover up the virus, as well as showing us a glimpse at how the majority of America died from the flu. It also set up the protagonists and antagonists for the ‘showdown’ in the second half of the book. Many of the items I have read on the Internet about this Swine Flu sounds like something taken right out of Mr. King’s work of fiction, instead of being based on hardcore evidence of their claims.

Summary

Let’s take into consideration the fact that most of us ‘common citizens’ are not in the position of being able to make ‘expert medical decisions’ about this pandemic. There is no shame in acknowledging this fact because most of us are not trained in medical science. We may be smart enough to understand what the experts tell us, to one degree or another, but that doesn’t mean we have the expertise and knowledge to be able to call the shots. Therefore we must assume that there is something to this outbreak of “Swine Flu’ that worries the experts.

In addition let’s consider the fact that most of us are not a part of the political circles that makes decisions upon such things as this outbreak of “Swine Flu”. Even if we are familiar with, or trained in, things pertaining to the political arena… that does not mean we are privy to all of the facts that are presented to the people responsible for making the decisions that are made. Once again, we must assume that there are things about this situation that worries the experts to the point of doing the things they are doing.

Taking these considerations in mind, we can still make judgments based upon the information we are given and utilize our own areas of expertise to aid us in our decision making processes concerning this situation. The bottom line of this reasoning is that we still can make halfway decent judgments about the situation, even if our judgments are wrong in the end.

Looking at the big picture, this situation warrants us all to be smart, take precautions and remain alert for new input. This doesn’t mean that we should panic, or get paranoid over the situation… it only means that we should remain aware of the situation and make changes in our lives if and when necessary.

It seems that the major reason for the government to declare this as an emergency is for the purpose of them being able to get things into motion in case things worsen. Our lawmakers might work on using a better word than “emergency” in cases like this, but at this moment in time ‘emergency’ is the word they use for such things. WHO, and other Health Organizations, are reacting for much the same reason… they want to head things off at the pass, so to speak, and be ready in the event things go sour quick.

The media is accused of hyping the situation for one reason or another. It’s a good possibility that the media is over reacting to the situation for whatever reasons they have, but on the other hand – if they downplay this and don’t give us the information they have on this situation, if things go bad then they will be accused of not reporting the news properly and endangering the lives of people. The only thing I would advise to those in the media is not dwell on this subject as if this outbreak is worse than it is, yet insure you get the information out in a timely manner. That’s not much help, I know, but it’s all I got at this point in time.

The number one thing that we all should strive to do is refrain from being suckered into conspiracy theories. Such reactions do not help the situation and may even impede the government from being able to respond properly. It’s very easy to fall prey to a conspiracy theory, especially if that theory is appealing to our personal beliefs. It’s even easier to fall prey to the pseudo-logic that conspiracy theorists commonly use, just as it’s easy for us to want to blame the government for things.

Whether the U.S. Government, or any government or group, concocted this virus and were responsible for it getting out in the wild (whether on purpose or by accident) isn’t really the important issue right now. The important issue lies in handling the situation properly and trying to stop the outbreak before it gets worse – if we can. We need to treat the situation seriously, yet avoid panicking and doing things that may make things worse.

According to an article found on the Fox10 Phoenix site, entitled “Photo-Radar Van Driver Shot to Death”, the outrage against the photo radar cameras put along our highways was taken to another level. Fox10Phoenix reported:

“A suspect was arrested Monday in connection with the shooting death of a man operating a photo radar unit in Phoenix, but police said it’s too soon to know the motive.”

According to the article:

“Thomas Patrick Destories, a 68-year-old Phoenix man, was booked into Maricopa County jail on suspicion of first-degree murder after he made “incriminating statements,” Phoenix police spokesman Sgt. Andy Hill said..”

It was also stated:

“Doug Georgianni, 51, was shot Sunday night as he operated a photo radar van on a Phoenix freeway and later died at a hospital”.

According to the article, Sgt. Hill said investigators believed that Destories pulled his Blazer up behind the photo-radar van around 9 PM on Sunday and when he felt it was the right time… he slowly pulled alongside of the van and then fired a gun into the vehicle multiple times. At the time, Mr. Georgianni, a RedFlex Employee, was sitting in the driver’s seat and was hit several times by the gunshots.

This article was picked up on the social media site called Digg, commonly known as “Digg” by it’s members, in a submittal to the site called “Violence goes too far with photo radar cameras in Phoenix” where it referred to the MyFoxPhoenix article and stated:

“A man operating a state police photo radar unit was shot to death while parked in his vehicle along a stretch of a north Phoenix freeway. Police say the victim died a short time after he was taken to a hospital. He worked for RedFlex Traffic Systems Inc., which operates photo enforcement vehicles on state highways.”

Who’s to Blame?

One of the first reactions people have, whenever some tragedy occurs, is to try to understand what has transpired and to levy blame. Many people will make an honest attempt to lay the blame where it belongs in a logical and reasonable way, while others will use such an event to try to further some personal or political agenda they wish to promote.

In an editorial on the AzCentral site, entitled “Who’s to blame for photo-radar killing?”, the Arizona Republic editorialist Laurie Roberts stated:

“The escalating war of words boiled over, onto a guy who was just trying to make a living. Since then, there’s been a knock-down-drag-out fight under way in this state about who is to blame for Doug Georgianni’s death.

She outlined the situation rather well by saying some want to blame the Department of Public Safety and Redflex, while others wanted to praise the act as some type of patriotic thing. Laurie summarized her answer in a more rational way. She stated:

“The real answer, of course, is that neither group is responsible for Sunday night’s tragedy. The blame rests with one nut job who saw a photo radar van on the side of the road and decided to end a man’s life.”

Although it is true that Mr. Georgianni’s death may never have occurred if he worked for someone else, if Redflex never had the contract to handle these photo-radar units, or if the State of Arizona didn’t put these photo-radar cameras out on our highways… a rational and logical person could not lay blame with Mr. Georgianni, Redflex or the State - unless what was being done was deemed illegal by a court of law prior to the shooting incident. Even if the cameras were deemed illegal the fact is that it’s illegal for average “Joe Citizen” to take the law into his or her own hands – such acts are considered as vigilantism.

Vigilantism

According to The Free Dictionary by Farflex, Vigilantism is the:

Taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s own understanding of right and wrong; action taken by a voluntary association of persons who organize themselves for the purpose of protecting a common interest, such as liberty, property, or personal security; action taken by an individual or group to protest existing law; action taken by an individual or group to enforce a higher law than that enacted by society’s designated lawmaking institutions; private enforcement of legal norms in the absence of an established, reliable, and effective law enforcement body.

Although it is claimed that the history of vigilantism in the United States began with the American Colonists on December 16, 1773 with the Boston Tea Party, it is deemed that with each case of vigilantism the vigilantes risk starting a cycle of lawlessness and violence in which the victims of vigilantism take the law into their own hands to exact pay-back. This is one of the reasons why no state or federal jurisdiction offers any kind of “vigilante defense” to criminal prosecution and vigilantes must rely on the moral rectitude of their cause to justify their acts.

The foundation of the American legal system rests on the Rule of Law, a concept embodied in the notion that the United States is a nation of laws and not of men. Under the rule of law, laws are thought to exist independent of, and separate from, human will. Even when the human element factors into legal decision-making, the decision maker is expected to be constrained by the law in making his or her decision.

Anonymity and Responses

Mark Curtis, of 12 News in Phoenix, wrote a very good article called “Not da man” on his AZCentral Blog. It’s a short article, something that I obviously have a hard time doing, but never the less it’s a good article. In that article he stated:

“I want to talk about anonymity. Writing this blog, doesn’t afford me the luxury of putting my views out there anonymously. Everyone who reads what I write, whether they like it or not, whether they like me or not, knows who I am”.

Mark then went on to tell us how this observation pertains to the news story about the photo-radar shooting:

“The same can’t be said for those of you who respond. Most of the time, that’s not a problem. I take the good with the bad, and appreciate your honest responses. But that’s not what this blog is about. It’s about spineless anonymity from folks like “Todd-Da Man” who wrote in to the anti-photo radar website “CameraFraud.com” praising the killing of Doug Georgianni. There’s no way a guy like “Todd” would ever show some backbone by signing his real name or going in front of TV cameras where someone could see his face. It’s only because “Todd Da Man” knows he can remain anonymous that he felt secure in spewing his venom.”

On the personal level, I’ve watched Mark Curtis doing his news and sports reports over the years and in my opinion he always seemed like a decent sort of chap. He always gave an air of being a nice and unflappable type of guy. So what exactly did “Todd da Man” say to make this “mild-mannered reporter” upset enough to lose his composure on a public blog site? According to Mark’s Blog, Todd stated:

“The more these radar vans get shot up and/or burned, the better!! This will be our version of the Boston Tea Party; only this will involve shooting up DPS enforcement vehicles!! Hooray for guns!!”

Reflections Upon Change

In the 60s and 70s public responses to the news and information we heard or read was pretty much limited to writing letters to the editors of the newspaper or reply to the station managers of their local TV Stations. Some areas did have evening radio talk shows, but other than people talking to workmates or family and friends – writing letters were pretty much the only way for Joe Citizen to voice their opinions in a public forum.

The past 15 to 20 years changed all of that with the rise of “The Internet”. The Internet offered chat rooms, message forums and other online social communities where anyone with a connection to the Internet could voice their opinions publicly to others in the community they belonged. This phenomenon took the nation and world by storm and Internet Communities sprung up by the tens of thousands. Today millions of people use the various forums and communities on the net. ICQ (pronounced “I Seek You”) has boast to having anywhere from 40 to over 100 million users, while Digg shows a membership of over 5 million (according to the last number I’ve heard).

Many of these forums allow it’s members to use ‘Nicknames’ or “Handles’ in place of their real name and they boast about guarding it’s members private information faithfully. In theory the only way one member knows who another member is, or where they are located, is if the member gives out his or her personal information. Those who are more experienced at the Internet Messaging game know that this isn’t always the case, but still many users of the net out there feel confident that their anonymity is in tact and no one has any idea of who they are. This ‘sense of anonymity’ and ‘feeling of security’ on the net has given rise to the type of Internet user known as “The Troll’.

What is “A Troll”?

According to Dictionary.com, an (Internet) Troll is:

An individual who regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net.

In short a Troll is a person who intentionally and regularly makes deceptive arguments and insulting remarks meant to incite anger in order to cause upset with other members of a community or insight disharmony and discord within the forum. According to what I have read about Todd da Man, I think he stands as a fine example of the entity known as the “Internet Troll”. Todd, to me, sounds more like a younger teen, or immature adult, who is trying to present himself as some type of “big man on campus” by making comments that he doesn’t fully understand that sound ‘tough’ and ‘patriotic’.

Caution: Trolls at Work

Todd da Man isn’t the only one on the net spouting inane comments. If you bother to look around the net then you will find that there are many like him and worse who are using this tragedy to spew inane and venomous commentary that have little or nothing to do with the story. They are simply using the story to further some political or personal agenda.

For example… Digg is a social media site that allows its members, commonly known as “Diggers”, to not only submit and “Digg” (vote on) items… but the site also allows for comments to be made about the items submitted by the members of Digg. The item concerning the photo radar story harbored, at least, two responses of a similar nature to the comments made by Todd da Man. Take a quick look at the two responses I selected for my examples.

“To me this is the Arizona government using a ‘Human Shield’ system to keep the cops out of harms way and put regular citizens in the cross hairs of the public’s obvious anger. If you are going to treat everyone like criminals, then you ought to have police officers out on the front line doing the work, not regular citizens.”

And:

“This is simple physics - the state pushes, the people push back. Of course there are more civilized ways of pushing back….this is just one approach.”

These two responses are similar to Todd’s in respect to the comments totally ignoring the content of the original story. The commentators opted to ignore the fact that the story was about a man who was murdered by another and this act indicated a rise in violence against photo-radar units. The story was not about the moral ramifications of the photo-radar camera upon our way of life, but rather the fact that some misguided idiot decided in his infinite wisdom that it was proper to go out to destroy or damage property that he did not own and murdered a man in the process.

Now notice that all three posters above made a feeble attempt to justify a murder of an innocent man in order to push their own opinions about the photo-radar unit use on our public highways. These people don’t even mention that cameras are used to keep track of shoplifters or used for security in public places on a regular basis. Their only concern is the camera use on the highways. So I guess it’s ok to ‘spy’ on shoppers or people walking through parking lots, but it is some constitutional crisis to take a picture of someone who is breaking the law by speeding.

Let’s move on to other sites on the net and see what types of comments are being made. A comment on the Fox10 Comments page states:

“The Second Amendment is to blame. Another senseless act of gun violence has claimed an innocent person’s life.”

Another person replied to the Fox10 site:

“I’m glad to see that the guy was killed. Anyone that works for RedFlex should be gunned down like a dog. These people are out to make a profit on the mistakes of others. They make the red light cameras, speeding cameras on freeways, and pretty soon sidewalk cameras so they can make a profit if you spit on the sidewalk.

No pity from me. The dead guy deserved it for working for RedFlex. I hope that criminals kill them all. In my opinion there is nothing better than a dead RedFlex employee and I hope the guy that killed him is never found.

Good to see an American take up arms against a repressive government. The state and police will whine that they are only trying to protect you. You know they are only doing it for money. There is no question of this. Are you going to be their ATM machine?”

Yet a 3rd person on the Fox site stated:

“I went through Phoenix at 77 MPH at 11 PM on a Sunday night and received two tickets in the mail. The camera operator was killed. That’s good. The killer should be given 72 virgins and a million dollars.”

All of these people fared no better in understanding the story that Todd da Man and the two Diggers. My favorite is the person who was caught going 77 MPH through Phoenix. I presume this person was not driving down Central or Adams in Phoenix, but rather on the 10 or 17 where the speed limit is 65 MPH. If this person would have used more sense and kept to less than 10 MPH over the limit, i.e. 65 to 70 MPH, then the cameras would have never caught the speeding driver. At any rate the laughable, but sad, part is that this person thought that the Killer did a great thing and should be awarded for killing an innocent camera operator.

The Point

The point needing stressed is that the original article was not concerning Redflex, its employees or whether photo-radar cameras are illegal, immoral or just plain fattening. It wasn’t about gun control or the 2nd amendment or some political agenda. It wasn’t even concerning the moral or ethical issues of the photo-radar unit. The article was about a person who took it upon himself to not only try to destroy or damage property, which was not his to destroy or damage, but also that he shot and killed a man in the process.

What’s not to understand about these simple facts?

When reading such replies I wonder what views these people making some of these comments have on such issues as the Iraq War, the war in Afghanistan, ‘drive-by shootings’, or the taking of a life for the preservation of children or innocent people?

I can’t help to wonder how they would respond if a loved one of theirs was shot and killed because someone decided that he or she didn’t like something that involved the job the loved one was doing.

Most of all… it makes me wonder what type of hypocritical answers one would get from these ‘Trolls’ spewing their venomous commentaries or twisted views about this particular incident.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.

Noli nothis permittere te terere, or as commonly put “Non Illegitimi Carborundum” is about the way to sum this up because (as we all seem to know) everything sounds better in Latin, or pseudo-Latin. In English I would say with a sigh “Don’t let the bastards grind you down”. Mark put it well by saying, “take the good with the bad”.

I firmly believe everyone has a right to his or her opinion, we should all be able enjoy the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. On the other hand this doesn’t mean that if you or I say something that there won’t be some form of repercussion coming our way for saying it.

On the Internet the repercussions we receive for our words are angry words in reply, rarely does one Internet user take the time and trouble to seek out another to give him or her a good old-fashioned punch in the mouth for the words that were spoken. Many on the net realize this and it instills a false sense of security in them, which makes them ‘brave”. In the world outside of the net many people would think twice about what they say before saying something that could send them to the hospital by the person they have angered.

The coward that Mark referred to most likely never thought in terms of cowardice or bravery, however Todd da Man probably did feel pretty proud of himself for the words he wrote. People like Todd most often will have a blustering retort to being called a coward, but the reality of it all is that he probably didn’t have the ability to think of his comments as being brave or cowardly. The comment itself shows he didn’t think much at all.

On the Internet you find people like Todd quite often, it’s just the way life is in the world of Internet messaging. Take heart, people, not everyone on the net is a blithering idiot. Digg, like every other community on the net, has it’s own brand of trolls, nut jobs and normal people simply citing their own opinions. On such reasonable Digger stated:

“This isn’t about whether or not traffic cams are right. I don’t like them either, but the fact is that someone who doesn’t even have any traffic tickets chose to act violently and now there’s a widow, a bunch of other camera operators not working, a previously successful business which will surely now fail (his jeep tour company), and even more anger from the general population. What did this act accomplish? Don’t blame the cop or the state for this.

A question I had. If he didn’t know that someone was in the van, why did he choose to shoot into the window, rather than shoot at the side or back?”

“What did this act accomplish?”

I can only give my opinion on this, and I am sure there will be many who disagree with me, but I can say with confidence that this act accomplished absolutely nothing… unless you figure that the incident set back any progress made by the anti-photo-radar crowd.

The photo-radar cameras are still in use along the highways and streets, the lawmakers seemed to have wavered on the idea of removing these cameras entirely, and the people became outraged over the incident – even numerous people who are against these cameras find the crime so heinous that they refuse to use the incident in their battle against these units.

… And People Wonder Why?

Now we have come full circle and back to the question with which we started.

In today’s society we find that Morals and Ethics seem to be a thing of the past. The sheer numbers of people who protest against anyone teaching their children any type of morality, then don’t bother to teach their children the proper morality themselves, are rising at alarming rates. The question of “whose Morality?” often only serves the teaching of no morality at all. It also seems that Good Manners and Common Courtesy seems to “have gone by the wayside” as well, along with Respect for self and Respect for others. It seems that everyone wants these things, but not everyone wants to give it.

As far as Spirituality and Religion are concerned, the right guaranteed us by our founding fathers for the Freedom of Religion seems to have been replaced by “The Freedom From Religion”. Unless you happen to be a member of ‘the religion of the week”, then religion is generally put down and one of the things to blame for anything from constipation to murder. Spirituality seems to be still all right, as long as you don’t preach your spirituality too much and it’s of one of the philosophies that are deemed acceptable to the anti-religion crowd.

The idea of Consideration for Others is something often brought up when one feels that others are not being considerate enough of them personally or their views, however it is something completely different when one is expected to give it to others.

The concept of Selfishness and the wants of the Individual have became far more important than the needs and wants of the group. People have always been self-centered and selfish for as long as I can remember, however over the past 20 years or so the “Me First” ideology seemed to just blow the ideology of ‘everyone has rights’ right out of the water.

Most of all it seems that People want to find blame in others for everything, while they go to great lengths to exonerate everything they do wrong. People simply do not want to feel responsible for the continuing problems. It seems that people are more susceptible to the belief of great conspiracies going on than to be willing to say “Hey, I contributed to this mess”.

Final Word

It may not be apparent to many readers out there, but all of this and more contribute to the way things are today. There are approximately 300 million people in America today, according to the US Census Bureau. The American Society is one of the most diverse groups on the face of this planet. That means that people will disagree with other people and most will honestly believe their views are the right views, but more so it means that everyone has rights to be protected.

Rights are not all encompassing, nor are they permanent. The only reason why it seems as if our rights are “God-given” or a “Birthright” is because our society and our government (to some extent) have demanded that it be that way. A truly knowledgeable person knows that many times this idea of “rights” fall into a gray area where if the rights of one conflicts too badly with the rights of another then that issue has to be resolved in a court of law. In order to make the decision of the court truly binding then all parties involved must accept the decision of the court on a permanent or temporary basis until the ruling can be overturned. This is what makes the rule of law work and helps keeps us from falling into utter chaos.

What is Property Owner Responsibility?

Each and every property owner has certain rights and responsibilities… as well as there being things of which we should be aware. The responsibility of owning a property doesn’t stop at the owner paying taxes once a year and the rights of the property owner doesn’t end at allowing who is allowed on his property or who is not. Some of the things that the property owner should know, for example, includes such things as knowing exactly where their property is located and being familiar with the various “property laws and ordinances” for the areas that affect the property in question. The ‘property laws’ that affect the property owner might be found in federal or state statutes, county ordinances or local and zoning laws. This paper will discuss some of the things that the responsible property owner should know or do.

A Few Basics

First let’s discuss a few of the basic things that every property owner should know.

The Right of Access

The ‘Right-of-Access’ is something that isn’t always found easily when search for the various laws and ordinances, in fact a person may find little or nothing on the subject with in the laws they research… however the “Right-of-Access” is still an idea that many laws and courts support.

The “Right-of-Access’ stipulations may include, but is not necessarily limited to, the legal right to walk (or drive vehicles) from the public roads and highways to the land they own — as well as the ability to turn or park safely. When a person has no legal access to their property this creates the situation where the land is ‘landlocked’, many areas have laws forbidding properties that are bought or sold to be landlocked. In other areas the states do allow ‘landlocked’ properties to be bought and sold. It is the property owner’s responsibility to insure that any property they own or want to buy has legal access through either a thing known as an “Easement” (such as a private street) or a “Public Right-of-Way”.

What is an “Easement”?

An “Easement” is a right to use another person’s real estate for a specific purpose. The most common type of easement is the right to travel over another person’s land. In addition, property owners commonly grant easements for the placement of utility poles, utility trenches, water lines or sewer lines. The property owner of a parcel of land that is subject to an easement is claimed as being “burdened” by the easement, due to he or she not being allowed to interfere with its use.
For example, if the deed to a property permits a utility company to place it’s utilities in an area crossing the property; the property owner cannot do anything to block the easement of place permanent structures upon the easement. On the other hand, the utility company cannot do anything that exceeds the scope of her easement, such as building outside of the designated easement.
An easement usually has a width of 3 or 5 feet, however certain easements can be 15 foot wide or greater.

What is the `Public Right-of-Way’?

The “Public Right-of-Way”, also known as ROW (sometimes R/W) or Right-of-Way, is most often defined as a type of “Easement”, but the true definition is actually closer to it being “a piece of land ‘dedicated’ for a specific purpose or set of purposes”. It is the area of land that includes Sidewalks, Curb & Gutter, Street or Alley, and sometimes even the landscaped area between the Curb & Gutter and the Sidewalk or the Sidewalk and your Property Line.

The ROW is a public thoroughfare that allows people or vehicles the “right” to travel through an area. It is a part of something called “the Public Domain”. A typical definition for the term “Public Right-Of-Way” in the local ordinances may read similar to the following:

RIGHT-OF-WAY, PUBLIC: An area of land which by deed, conveyance, agreement, easement, dedication, usage or process of law is reserved or dedicated to the City for public purposes including, but not limited to, street, highway, alley, public utility pedestrian walkway, bikeway, or drainage. Within public rights-of-way, the City coordinates the locations of public or private improvements, underground or overhead; including electricity, gas, steam, communication, telecommunications, data transmission, cable TV, water, storm drainage, sewage, sidewalks, landscaping, traffic signals, streetlights, flood control, pedestrian, roadway purposes, etc. owned and operated by any person, firm, company, corporation, municipal department, or board duly authorized by federal, state, or municipal regulations.

The property owner may be allowed to plant vegetation within the R/W when safety isn’t compromised due to the items affecting your ability to clearly see the road and have traffic and pedestrians clearly see you. Usually fencing is not permitted in the public right-of-way, but some areas do allow (or overlook) temporary fencing (such as chain link fences) to exist within the R/W. The property owner usually is responsible for:

1. Keeping the ROW adjacent to their property clear of obstructions.
2. Keeping the ROW adjacent to their property cut and clear of weeds and garbage.
3. Not planting or placing permanent objects within the ROW.
4. Not planting or placing objects that block the view.

A quick and easy way to describe the difference between an Easement and a Public Right-of-Way is to say that an easement is an agreement that allows others to utilize a part your property, whereas the Public Right-of-Way transfers a piece of the original property into the public domain. In short, the property owner still owns the land within the easement, but they don’t retain ownership of the land within the right-of-way.

Setbacks

In many areas there are Zoning Ordinances concerning building of structures on the property, these things are called “Setbacks”. The setback is basically an invisible line offset a certain distance from the property line. This line dictates where structures can and cannot be placed. Side yard setbacks, for example, are usually 5 or 10 feet from the property line, whereas front and back yard setbacks are a greater distance from the property lines. Some areas allow for a Zero Line Setback, which is where the governing agency allows structures to be built on the property line.

Property Lines

It would be relatively safe to assume that everyone, or most people, know what a property line is… or at least heard the term. A Property Line is an invisible line that stretches between two points that denotes where one property ends and another begins. No one owns the property line, yet it can be argued that both owners of adjacent properties own the property line. When building on a property line it is important to get both owners to agree that the fence or item being built can go there, otherwise a property owner putting up the fence has to put it on their own property and at a place where the construction does not damage the other property.

Covenants and Conveyances

There are other things that a property owner should be aware, such as a thing called “Covenants and Conveyances”. These things are basically restrictions concerning the things one can do with their property. Make sure you are told about such things prior to buying the property. Also be aware that there are such things as “No Vehicular Crossing” strips that run across some properties. A good realtor or civil engineer can find out about such things that affect the property in question.

Buying Property

When buying property there are certain things that the future property owner should do or insist upon as a “condition of sale”. In addition to whatever items the law dictates, the future property owner should insist upon obtaining copies of certain plans and maps relating to the property being sold. These plans should be legible and include, but not limited to, the following:

· Final Map(s) for the Subdivision
· Parcel Map(s) for the Property
· Any and All Survey Map(s)
· Utility Map(s) for the Property
· Flood Maps
· Grading Plans
· Street Map(s) for any streets adjacent to the property
· Floor Plans
· Electrical Plans
· Plumbing Plans

Note: Some of these maps or plans may be included on other maps or plans.

The buyer can consult a Civil Engineer to find out which items he or she should obtain prior to the sale. In some cases an Engineer may tell you that you don’t need a particular item, but stress the point that you would like to get the items most often used by the Civil Engineers in the event that the maps and plans get misplaced or destroyed. I am sure that many Engineers would understand and applaud your foresight. They may even offer, for a fee, to obtain the things you want or need.

Land Surveys

Prior to signing anything, or finalizing the sale, the buyer should demand upon the property being surveyed by a Registered Land Surveyor. The Land Surveyor should be required to not only find the property corners, but also set the corners of the property. The surveyor will usually mark the corners by using a piece of rebar, 2”x2” wooden stake, or driving a PK Nail at each property corner. If the markings for the property corners exist then demand to see how recent the survey was done and if any doubt arises about the corners being disturbed due to age or physics signs around the corners, then request for a new survey to be done as a ‘condition of the sale’.

During the “Property Purchasing Phase”, the potential buyer should find out where the property corners are located. When inspecting the site ask the realtor to physically show you the property corners, these should be easy enough to find for they are usually marked by PK Nails or Rebar. Remember that fences and other physical landmarks may not be placed along the property lines. If you don’t see the property corners marked, then make it a condition of sale for the property to be surveyed by a registered land surveyor prior to any documents being signed and request a legible copy of any Surveys and Plans for the property as a part of the sale agreement.

Monuments

It may be an added expense, but one option a property owner has is to monument his or her property corners. The monument is basically a property corner protected by concrete; which makes it harder for the corners to be disturbed once they are put in place. A surveyor will tell you whether monumentation is a good idea for you or not.

Whether a property corner is Monumented or not, it’s a good idea to protect them, ask the surveyor to place guard stakes around the corners he or she sets. You may also mark the area of the stakes with a brightly colored ribbon. Once you find the property corners then keep an eye on the corners fairly frequently and don’t feel embarrassed about chasing kids or adults away from them, land surveys are expensive – why waste money because someone didn’t know what the stakes were and disturbed them.

If a survey stake, pin or mark is disturbed… do not try to reset the stake yourself. If you do then do not consider that property corner as being accurate. Surveyors buy expensive equipment and they adjust the equipment for accuracy every 3 months to a year to insure their surveys are legal… you can’t duplicate their accuracy by eye balling a stake or survey point.

Investigate for other ways to protect your property corners for some ideas for protection are better than others. If a survey has been done recently on the property then have the person showing you the property take you to each property corner for your personal inspection. Also make getting a copy of the survey as a condition of sale.

Property Investigations

In some places a property being sold or transferred undergoes a thing called a “Property Investigation”. The Property Investigation is not to be confused with what the government agency responsible for deeds and such may do, but it may include whatever these agencies find out. A property investigation usually will provide research into the deeds and other legal documents for the purpose of creating a history of the parcel of land and it may show ‘problem areas’ concerning the property. The outcome is to provide as free and clear ownership of the property as possible and to help limit things like “Insurance Fraud”.

Property Inspection

Many areas of the United States demand that a property has to undergo an inspection for the purpose of the property and any structures on the property being ‘up to code’. It pays the person who wishes to buy a home or property to consult with their own inspectors prior to finalizing the deal for sometimes city or county inspectors ‘miss things’ that should have been found out. There are many homes in the US that were sold with the idea that a property was inspected and passed, but shortly after buying the home… the new homeowner found problems that should have been fixed before the sale of the home.

Summation

It pays to be aware of your rights and responsibilities of home and land ownership before purchasing a parcel of land or a home for it will save you disappointment and problems in the long run. There are a few beliefs about land ownership that seem to run rampant through-out our society and they are often reinforced and spread by people lacking the knowledge of property ownership who set themselves up as ‘experts’. Always take what you are told and check it out for yourself, but there are a few things to keep in mind:

1. The property owner doesn’t necessarily own ‘the street’ in front of their home.
2. The property owner doesn’t necessarily own ‘the sidewalk’ in front of their home.
3. The property owner is not necessarily legally responsible for injuries occurring in front of their home.
4. The property owner is often responsible for keeping the sidewalks around their home free of snow or ice or even trash.
5. The property owner is not necessarily responsible for repairing sidewalks and streets around their home.
6. The property owner may, or may not, be responsible for trimming bushes in the public domain.
7. The property owner has to conform to laws and zoning ordinances affecting the area where the property is located.
8. The property owner has normally has the right to access or exit their property safely.
9. The City, County or State does not have the right to take even 1 foot of your property without proper and fair compensation for your loss.
10. The Controlling Government Agency is not always right, but they are right more often than wrong.

There are many properties across the nation that are a ‘violation of the code’ due to the property owner thinking they had the right to put up fences or build closer to the property lines than the ordinances allowed. Additionally there are numerous illegal driveways or illegal structures built on properties across America simply because the property owner never checked out the laws and ordinances first. A property owner may get away with a code violation for years before the city or county notices the violation and deems it worthy to do anything about it. This doesn’t mean that whatever the property owner has done is legal; it simply means they are breaking the law and not getting caught. Do yourself a favor and take the time to find out what the laws state before you set yourself up for a future problem with a government agency.

Avoid the pitfalls of property ownership by listening to ‘the experts’ and the ‘experienced landowner’ and then check out their advice prior to doing anything. Remember that the City or County is not necessarily always right, but usually they are right more often than the average “Joe” on the street who hasn’t checked out the law thoroughly.

The disabled vet may have received their disability through some wartime act, such as a bomb going off and taking an arm or leg. The disabled vet may have come in contact with some disease while in service and force to live the rest of his life with a condition that may, or may not, have afflicted him if he never joined the military. The disabled vet may have received the disability that he or she has to deal with for the rest of their life through some medication or drug given to him by the doctors in the military.

The disabled vet is disabled to varying degrees, often called ‘disability ratings’ by such organizations as the U.S. Military Disability Systems and the Veteran’s Administration. Their conditions may be easily seen. Their skin could be badly burned or they could be missing a leg. The condition may also be ‘hidden’, such as those with heart problems or diabetes.

The disabled vet are not all the same and can be as different from each other as night and day, but they all have one thing in common… they have served our country and somehow through that service they have become disabled.

I will not sit here and try to make everyone think that each and every disabled veteran is the perfect role models or some type of hero. They are simply people and even though most of them are decent and honest enough people, you do have the bad ones who don’t give a fig if what they do harms another person. Whether the disabled vet is a good or bad person doesn’t change the fact that he or she gave up something in the service of our country. It is a debt of honor and gratitude to make sure the disabled vet is given proper care and compensation for past services that they deserve.

During my lifetime I have often felt disheartened by the views and attitudes of my fellow citizens towards the military member, veteran and disabled veteran. I’ve seen my fellow Americans spout views of the soldier being nothing but rapists and baby killers, spout views amounting to the Vet being nothing more than a leach on society and told to get a jobs because people on welfare needed our tax dollars, and treat the disabled vet as if he was some sort of con artist consuming funds needed for such important things as art made from elephant dung or displays showing our country’s flag partially stuffed into toilets. I’ve often wondered if things were always this way or if this is a relatively new thing stemming from the cultural changes of the 60’s.

I had the pleasure of stumbling across a Facebook group called the “Disabled Veterans Awareness Group” run by a man named Todd Marshall of Tampa Bay, Florida. The Group is “a focus group aimed at helping other disabled vets who have been hit hard in these dire times. This group is focused on vocal and public support for one another and other established programs to help Disabled American Veterans avoid homelessness, foreclosure, reduction of benefits,unemployment and so on. We will put pressure on the Disabled American Veterans Organization and Veterans Administration to insure that they are dealing with these specific.”

Further reading of the page shows Todd as saying:

“Due to tough economic times for all, it has been exceptionally painful for me to watch veterans from all wars and peacetime, become forgotten by our United States Government when we need their help the most. At the present time, there is currently no legislation that protects disabled veterans from losing their homes due to bad mortgages, layoffs, or increased injuries that are still being evaluated by the Veterans Administration. Veterans who have VA Home Loans are not protected by our government if they are laid off or simply now cannot afford payments, and because of their disabilities, are not able to find work. We as a nation and as Disabled Veterans, need to voice our feelings because almost all families have had a relative in our military at one time. We cannot allow our government to forget the men and women who were hurt or wounded while serving, and who took the oath to protect this nation from enemies foreign and domestic in this time of crisis.”

I can appreciate the sentiment shown in Todd’s words and after a hour of poking around I joined his group in the hopes of showing him that people are still interested in such things. I am a bit anxious to see what becomes of his group and the movement that is being started.

In the Discussion Board for the Group, Todd posted a thread entitled “Congress” where he asked:

“What should Congress and the Veterans Administration be doing to help Disabled Veterans from losing their jobs or facing foreclosure during this tough time?”

Anyone who is interested should go to Todd’s page and check it out, and maybe even join in on the discussion.

Over the past few weeks I racked my brain and did a little research about how the individuals can help themselves. I realize that not everyone will agree with me for one reason or another, but that doesn’t make what I saw any less valid. I will simply point out some of the things that have been time tested as true and where I cite new ideas then I will make that clear. The rest I leave up to you, feel free to add your input upon how we can make things better for ourselves. Thanks.

Pay Yourself First!

Over 25 years ago a man once told me that the key to successfully keeping to any budget is “Paying yourself First”. He said that you by paying yourself first could give you a sense of accomplishment in your life, no matter how little that feeling of accomplishment is. You can ‘pay yourself” by incorporating into your budget the buying of a pack of cigarettes every payday or a can of beer, and if you can truly afford it then you can set the money aside for more expensive things like going out to dinner once a week or taking a class at the local College.

You should know roughly what you could afford with out outlining it in a budget enough to know what you can easily spare for yourself. If you think that you can afford a carton of cigarettes every week, then write that down in your list of things that you are going to incorporate into your budget – you can always readjust that item later when you find out if you truly can afford it or not.

Know the Difference Between “A Need” and “A Want”

:”A Need” is something vital to your existence, something necessary to your survival. A roof over your head (A place to live), food in your belly, and clothing to keep warm are all good examples of “A Need”. Although these things are generally thought of as “Needs”, just because something fits the general category doesn’t mean it’s actually a need.

For example: That $300,000 2,000 square foot, 4-Bedroom Home that you are thinking of buying may not be a need, not if you could suffice with a smaller or less expensive place.

“A Want” is something that you could do without, yet you would like to have it anyway. Computers, Cell phones, Cars, Cable TV and Tickets to the Super Bowl are all good examples of “A Want”. Once again, just because something fits into the category doesn’t mean that it’s “A Want”.

For example, if you live in a place where the nearest Public Transportation is 3 or 4 miles away then a car may actually be “A Need” or “A Necessity”. This doesn’t mean that you have to go out and buy a $50,000 car to fill that need, perhaps something that costs 1/3 to ½ the price would suffice.

So set up your budget in two lists. Make one list “Needs” and make the other “Wants”. Budget the “Needs” first and then fill the budget in with the “Wants” after your needs are covered.

Don’t Fear The Banker!

Don’t fear storing your money in banks, they are still one of the safest places in the world to keep your money… but don’t blindly trust them either. Keep aware of how well your Bank is doing and if things really look that bad then you may opt to withdrawal your money or move it to a safer bank. Normally I would advise trying to keep a small amount of money at home, but in today’s world if a portion of the populous knew people kept $100 or more in their homes then that could increase the crime rate for home robberies or home invasions. So to be on the safe side I will say, “Don’t keep large sums of money at home or in your car.” – instead find a bank that is relatively stable and place that money you would keep at home in a normal savings or checking account. Today’s world gives us things like Debit Cards and Credit Cards to use; also banks are now open 6 days a week (with Saturday being a short day). We can access our money a lot easier than we could 30 years ago. Just keep in mind that even though I urge utilizing the banks, I also urge to not blindly trust them as well.

Use of Credit Cards

Avoid using your credit cards to buy things you could not normally afford otherwise. I know I won’t make friends in the credit industry for this, but that really isn’t my problem… it’s theirs. When you use credit cards, use them wisely. Check to see how the credit company charges interest and if you can avoid paying interest by paying off your purchases as soon as payday arrives, then by all means use the card if you want… but remember to pay off what you place on the card as soon as possible and before any interest kicks in. If at all possible use your debit card instead of a credit card, if you don’t have the cash on you at the moment of purchase. There is no greater feeling than being “Debt Free”.

In certain cases you can make bigger purchases that you may not be able to afford in one or two paychecks, like computers, and there is nothing wrong with paying the Credit Card company interest on using their money… but remember, you can use your money as much, or more, than they can.

Save A Portion Of Your Own Income

I suggest that everyone tries to save 10% to 25% of the money they make for the future, but I realize that not everyone can do this. This doesn’t mean that just because you can’t save 10% that it means you can ‘blow it’, even if you can only save $5 or $10 a paycheck – you will find that it adds up over time. When times get better you can save more and in the meantime you will get the training to not spend every cent you make.

Spend Your Money Wisely

Don’t pay the high dollar for what you want or need and don’t buy when you can get what you need for free legally. Look around and spend a little time researching, quite often you can get some pretty good deals. Where information is concerned then take the time to research things yourself, most often you don’t need to pay someone for information you want – odds are it’s out there somewhere for free. If the item or information isn’t out there for free then look around to get the best price you can.

Don’t let ego stand in your way, find and utilize coupons for the items you want. Coupons can save you a ton of money in the long run.

Join ‘Discount Clubs’ at places like the Grocery Stores you visit, these things are often free and can save you lots of money.

Look into places like Price Club, Sam’s Club or Costco. Most often these types of clubs really don’t save the average person money because of their membership fees and the amount of items you have to buy to get the savings… but they may be worth your while and it costs you nothing to investigate the possibility.

Don’t fall prey that by going to several stores to save a few dollars is saving your money. Remember there is a cost for gasoline and ‘wear and tear’ on your car. Shop wisely, sometimes it’s better to pay more for one or two items at one place that offers you a lot of savings on most of the things you are buying than it is to go to 3 or 4 stores for a few items.

Don’t Fall Prey To The “Seller’s Gimmicks”

It seems as if ‘everyone’ wants your money and sometimes they will devise some pretty ingenious ways to get your hard earned dollars from you… “Don’t become a victim”. You are the master (or mistress) of your money, it is you who decides what you need and want and due to you being the one in control of your money – you hold a certain amount of power.

Every day I get saturated with Internet Marketers telling me that I ‘have to buy this item” for whatever purpose they opt to use. The fact is that I don’t need their product or service to survive, but they need my money. It doesn’t hurt to see what anyone has to say, but keep in mind the question of “Do I really need what they are offering?”.

Don’t Let Ego Get In Your Way Of Getting What You Are Entitled

If you are eligible for Food Stamps then don’t let Ego stop you from missing out on what you are entitled. There are millions of people across America that could work, but don’t, and these people take advantage of benefits that you also are entitled to get. Check out your benefits and entitlements, they are there for a reason.

I realize this sounds as if I am saying “Live off the Government”, but I am not. No one is more against the abusive of services like Welfare than I am… but I also feel that if others utilize these services for benefits, they why shouldn’t you be able to get what you are entitled. Once again, it doesn’t hurt to check things out and then decide what you wish to do.

Don’t Make Trips That Are Unnecessary

If you walk or ride a bike, then this really doesn’t apply as much as if you are using a car or motorcycle. Try to combine the trips you make, especially if the places you have to go are ‘on the way’. Every time you use your vehicle then you are not only using gas or some type of petrol… you are placing some ‘wear and tear’ upon your car. If you are able, then walk to that corner store for your six-pack of beer or soda… the walk will do you some good.

I was just over at Ashamadia’s Blog reading the latest post called “Thanksgiving 2008: ‘Just What In The Hell Is There To Be Thankful For?“. The words written there made me stop and reflect upon the past.

In 2008 I went over the half-century mark. 50 Years isn’t really such a long time to be upon this earth, for many people have spent more time than I here, but it is long enough for any person to see how things changed. During the course of my life I have seen push button transmissions on cars, TV Shows changing from Black and White to Color, the rise of the CB Radio as a mode of communications, the rise of the PC and Video Games, the advent of the VCR, Man, the cell phone and many other forms of technology come of age (such as the Transistor Radio). During my life I recall The Cuban Missile Crisis, The Assassination of JFK, The Escalation and end of the Vietnam War, Man walking on the Moon, The Fall of Nixon, The Gas Shortages of the 70s, The Gas Shortages of the 80s, Grenada, The Iran-Iraq War, The Rise of Terrorism in Europe, The Rise of Terrorism through out the world. The WTC Bombing, 911 and more. I was born during the Eisenhower Administration and lived through JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and hopefully will see Obama (our first black president) take the helm of control. I’ve seen Gas raise from 38 cents a gallon to over $4.00 a gallon. I’ve seen a “decent” wage rise from about $4,000 a year to around $65,000 a year. I’ve seen, or lived in, the US, Europe, Central America, South America, Mexico, Canada, the mid-east and Northern Africa (to name a few places). I’ve seen the decline of social mores and mutual respect. I’ve seen the age of Aquarius turn into the age of “Me First”. Life has been interesting, to say the least.

This Thanksgiving I can be thankful for my family and friends around the world, even those I don’t speak to as often as I should or would like. I can be thankful for living in a country where my basic rights are in tact, despite the occasional lapse. The US has been pretty good to me overall, as it has been to most others of many different races or creeds. Life is not perfect here in the states, but it sure isn’t perfect anywhere else either. The saying of “The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence” has always applied to America and other countries. We live here and see it’s faults daily, but we only really catch glimpses of how others live throughout the world… they don’t have it so easy either, folks.

Most of all I think I am thankful for living in a world where the majority of people really wants to make things better. They sometimes go about achieving that goal wrong, or their vision of a better world may be different than yours or mine… but not many wants to live in a world worse than they are living in now.

This Thanksgiving season take the time to reflect upon how good we actually have it, even though we may live in a daily world of problems. Take the time to think about how you contributed to the problems of today… and how you can help make it better for next year. Stop pushing the entire blame on everyone and everything else, remember if everyone makes a small contribution to improving things then like the snowball rolling downhill - those small things will grow into something big.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.

Mark Cuban is a man who seemingly in good condition, apparently in good health, intelligent, ambitious, successful and rich. I hate Mark Cuban, even though I never heard of the man before May of 2008, at least I should hate him — shouldn’t I? Isn’t that the “American Way” to despise and put those down who comes from beginnings not unlike our own — yet who attained greater success and wealth than we have? Isn’t that the way people are supposed to be? Maybe, but it’s a way of being that I have disagreed with for over 30 years and I am not about to change now. I am getting far too old for such nonsense… either that or I am simply not old enough to embrace senility as an excuse for illogical and unreasonable behavior.

In case anyone missed my point, it’s simple… “I am not going to try Mark in the “Court of Public Opinion” before the facts are known and the evidence is shown in a ‘Court of Law’ or other proper setting.” I refuse to make the judgment of his innocence or guilt based upon half-information, rumors and perhaps even the petty jealousy of people. We, as a collective group known as “The Human Race” have done that far too often in the past. People will read or hear things ‘in the media’ and think they know all about the situation, or have enough information to make an informed judgment at any rate. They will then make judgments against those who only stand accused of some crime or heinous act without the proper facts and evidence to make a well-informed judgment. I realize doing such things are easy to do and considered as ‘being human”, but enough is enough already - one would think that in all this time we would learn.

It’s sort of a scary idea to think that anyone of us could be accused of wrong doing and have the news blasted through out the media. I don’t think any one of us would like it a great deal if we knew we were innocent of an allegation and the media, along with tens of thousands of people, would cast us as the Villain without due process of the law. Mark shouldn’t be held to a different set of standards than we hold for ourselves just because he worked hard and succeeded.

“It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service. …

Here’s how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They’ll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we’re hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities’ most pressing needs.“

I had questions about this, so I went and looked up this idea presented by Rahm Emanuel on the net. I found numerous items, but sadly most of them were garbage and only posted the little quote by Rahm and dozens of opinions by the readers. I did, however, find an article “Rahm Emanuel recommends Israeli-styled forced national service for 18-25 year-olds” that stated:

“Emanuel, who is an Israeli-American, served in the Israeli Defense Forces in 1991 during the Persian Gulf War. Recently, Emanuel co-wrote a book in 2006 called “The Plan” where he suggests that young people should be forced, Israel-style, into serving the country.”

I went and researched the Israeli Defense Force requirements and found:

“National military service is mandatory for Jewish and Druze men and Jewish women over the age of 18, although exceptions may be made on religious, physical or psychological grounds.

Men serve three years in the IDF, while women serve two. The IDF allowed women who volunteer for several combat positions to serve for three years because combat soldiers must undergo a lengthy period of training. Women in other positions, such as programmers, who require lengthy training time may also serve three years. Women in most combat positions are also required to serve as reserve for several years after their dismissal from regular service.”

According to Wikipedia:

“Rahm Israel Emanuel (born November 29, 1959) is an American politician who has been a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives since 2003, representing Illinois’s 5th congressional district, which covers much of the north side of Chicago and parts of suburban Cook County. Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the 2006 elections. After the Democratic Party regained control of the House, he was elected as the next chairman of the Democratic Caucus. He is the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Leader Steny Hoyer and Whip Jim Clyburn.”

Now I realize that some people do not like Wikipedia and have the automatic urge to discredit Wiki at the drop of a hat, but Wiki is a great place to go for information to be followed up on at the researcher’s whim. In this case I don’t think the Wiki information provided warrants further investigation… but if you feel compelled to check out the information further, then please do so and let me know where the facts and Wiki differ.

Wiki provided other facts about Rahm, which I will briefly touch on:

1. Rahm Emanuel was born in Chicago, Illinois.
2. Rahm’s surname was adopted by his family in 1933.
3. Rahm’s paternal uncle, Emanuel Auerbach, was killed in a skirmish with Arabs in Jerusalem.
4. Emanuel’s father, Benjamin M. Emanuel, is a pediatrician.
5. Emanuel’s father was born in Jerusalem.
6. Emanuel’s father was a member of the Irgun, a militant Zionist group.
7. The Irgun, a militant Zionist group, operated from 1931 to 1948 during the British Mandate of Palestine.
8. Rahm’s mother, Martha Smulevitz, worked as an X-ray technician.
9. Rahm’s mother was the daughter of a local union organizer.
10. Rahm’s mother became a civil rights activist.
11. Rahm’s mother was once the owner of a Chicago-area rock and roll club.
12. Rahm’s parents met in Chicago in the 1950s.
13. Emanuel’s older brother, Ezekiel J. Emanuel, is an oncologist and bioethicist.
14. Emanuel’s brother, Ari Emanuel, is a talent agent in Los Angeles who inspired Jeremy Piven’s character Ari Gold on the HBO series Entourage.
15. Emanuel himself is the inspiration for the character Josh Lyman on The West Wing.
16. Emanuel also has a younger adopted sister named Shoshanna, 14 years his junior.
17. Rahm attended Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School, a Jewish day school.
18. After his family moved to Wilmette, he attended public school: Romona School, Wilmette Junior High School, and New Trier West High School.
19. He and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel.
20. At some point during his high school years, while working at an Arby’s restaurant, Emanuel severely cut his right middle finger. He sought medical attention only after suffering severe infection as a result of the wound, resulting in the partial amputation of the finger.
21. Rahm graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in 1981.
22. Rahm went on to receive a master’s degree in Speech and Communication from Northwestern University in 1985.
23. While still an undergraduate, he joined the congressional campaign of David Robinson of Chicago.
24. Emanuel was a civilian volunteer in the Israel Defense Forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel’s northern bases.
25. Emanuel’s wife, Amy Rule, converted to Judaism shortly before her wedding.
26. Rahm and his wife are members of Anshe Sholom B’nai Israel, a Modern Orthodox congregation in Chicago.
27. The Emanuels have three children, son Zachariah and daughters Ilana and Leah.
28. Emanuel is a close friend of fellow Chicagoan David Axelrod, Chief Strategist for the 2008 Barack Obama presidential campaign.
29. Axelrod signed the ketuba, a Jewish marriage contract, at Emanuel’s wedding, an honor that goes to a family friend or distant relative.
30. Rabbi Asher Lopatin of Anshe Sholom B’nai Israel Congregation is quoted as saying: “It’s a very involved Jewish family”; “Amy was one of the teachers for a class for children during the High Holidays two years ago.”
31. Emanuel has said of his Judaism: “I am proud of my heritage and treasure the values it has taught me.”
32. Emanuel’s family lives on the North Side of Chicago, in the North Center neighborhood.
33. Emanuel trains for and participates in triathlons.

What we learned from this information is that Rahm is a proud Israeli-American who is proud of his Jewish heritage. I, personally, can’t find fault with that… everyone ought to be proud of their heritage for their heritage is an important part of what they are. I, actually, find it more disturbing that Rahm has been a part of the Chicago Political Machine more than I am disturbed over his ethnicity and heritage. My questions about Rahm more lie with his affiliations to a political machine that historically has the reputation of the one from the Chicago area. What concerns me is what deals were made for Rahm, and any other Chicago politician make, to rise so far - so fast.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying there is anything wrong with Rahm Emanuel. The only thing I am saying is that I am more concerned over his political affiliations than his heritage or ethnicity. I am sure if I sat down with the man that we would have many points we agree on, but we would also have many points we would disagree on as well.

The reason for this article is not an evaluation of Rahm, but in order to understand his ideas more fully - it doesn’t hurt to know a little about the man, himself. So now it’s time to go back to Rahm’s Ideals.

When I was in Germany, the German’s had a mandatory system set up where every German Citizen (between the ages of 18 and 21 or 25) had to either spend so much time in the military or they could try to get into Civil Service. So the idea of a ‘forced” national service is not an Israeli Idea alone, other countries adopted a similar type of system. To call this National Service an Israeli-like National Service is unfair and possibly incorrect.

My questions over this “National Service” is due to the fact that everyone between 18 and 25 has to join up for 3 months and during this time they get trained on various things. There is no talk of how long a term in this National Service will be. Is it like a reserve force where basic training is 3 months, but they have to devote 1 weekend per month for so many years to fulfill their obligation? Does the government expect to train these people one time and then, if called upon, show up and remember what they were taught 2 or 3 years ago? Is there a mandatory refresher course these people have to take on a semi-annual or annual basis? Is there a requirement for them to actually serve so many months in an active duty type scenario, then go into a reserves?

If this system only entails our 18 to 25 year olds spending 3 months in a basic training setting, then what good will that do? Many will forget most of what they are taught shortly after being taught, if that knowledge is not used. It happens with First Aid Training when the people sign up for the courses willingly, why wouldn’t it happen with this too? It happens in the Military where the military members have to undergo a refresher course every year, so what makes this national service any different? It even happens in classrooms around the country on a daily basis. No, the system has to not only teach, but also make the students want to retain the knowledge taught to them. The system has to also have refresher courses to teach these people the new methods that will arise from time to time. It has to be more than a one - 3 month basic training course and then nothing for it to be of any real use. The problem is that I find nothing mentioned of what happens after the 3 month mandatory time.

I am sure there will be more to come on this, it may not even be a thing that happen at all. Still, whether this happens or doesn’t happen, we have to open our eyes beyond our political affiliations and look at the issues. If an idea is a good one, then it is a good one whether Obama or his Opponents bring it up…. however if it’s a bad idea, it’s a bad idea too.

I do not oppose a draft, the selective service, or even a form of National Service where our young has to spend so many years of their life doing Civil or Military Service. I personally think it’s good for our youth’s to broaden their horizon and learn about the real world outside of the classroom and what some academic might think.

I do oppose mindlessly starting any program like these without thought or consideration for the future. The government wastes enough of our taxpayers’ dollars, they don’t need to waste more of our money.

I don’t believe that just because something is a national service that it means the politicians responsible are forming a “Hitler Youth”. I especially don’t believe in the mindset that just because a politician I don’t like is in control that automatically he or she is trying to undermine America and it’s values… just as I don’t believe that a politician I like does everything for “We, the people”. Politicians are politicians, they live and act within their own neat little world where if any resemblance occurs between their world and the real world - then it’s purely accidental. Our politicians have their view of “Life in America” and it’s mostly based upon their personal experiences, most of them can’t really relate to the little man and woman on the street… but they all can talk a pretty good game. That is a huge part of their job… to talk and say things they think the people want to hear.

So, this idea of a National Service may be a good one… but I still am uneasy about it for it does sound too much like the start of something that can go wrong with surprising speed. I would have to find out more about it and even then realize that I might not be told everything about it.