Add to Technorati Favorites

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Polanski you can run but you can't hide

I found a interesting twist to the whole Roman Polanski melodrama. His mother died in a Nazi concentration camp and though Polanski is no Nazi criminal he is nevertheless a criminal that pleaded guilty to sodomy and rape of a 13 year old girl. To those that say let bygones be bygones since 32 years have passed for Polanski I wonder if those same people would say the same thing towards a Nazi criminal that was caught 32 years after world war II ended?
Consider the comment by the French Foreign Minister in defense of Polanski “A man of such talent, recognized in the entire world....all this just isn't nice”. What isn't nice is this man gave a 13 year old alcohol and slipped her drugs then raped and sodomized the girl while she pleaded with him to stop.
What if this man was not a world renowned film Director? Say he was a unemployed bum? Would the French Foreign Minister still announce that the whole episode “isn't nice”?
Polanski struck a plea deal which would have put him in jail for only 42 days. He decided to not do the 42 days and fled the country. He escaped punishment of raping a 13 year old girl and continued directing movies and living in a rich and famous lifestyle. He acted like he was untouchable because of that fame and money and it seems a lot of people agree with him that yes, he should be left alone.
Criminals always must know that they can't just run away from the legal system and after so many years all is forgiven. If that was the case it would diminish our whole legal system, not make the system a solid respected structure.
Polanski you can run but you can't hide. You should have done your 42 days. Now here's hoping its 42 days and much longer for the evading justice charges.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Rape case on Notre Dame Campus?

I came across a interesting article concerning two Notre Dame students in the South Bend Tribune Aug 28th 2009. Patrick Augustyn age 20 was accused of raping an intoxicated female student in his room. Maybe he did or maybe he didn't but just by reading the story in the South Bend Tribune I found it ridicules he was ever arrested. I'm not trying to make light of rape but just basing my opinion on what was in the newspaper story. You decide.
Police were called to investigate a partially dressed intoxicated female student sleeping in the hall of a men's dorm. The shirt she was wearing happened to belong to Augustyn. Hmmm. When the police found Augustyn in his room he admitted the two had met at a party and “hooked up”. I would guess that they were both drinking and “hooking up” and having sex I think is not too uncommon for young people especially when alcohol is involved.
Oh oh the intoxicated female student who had a alcohol content of .13 said she doesn't remember much of what went on that night and would never have consented to have sex with him. She probably doesn't remember much of what went on that night but then again if I was found passed out half naked in a dorm hall I think I would have said the same thing. I don't remember much.
So I guess if Augustyn didn't freely admit he had sex with her then everything would have been ok since she didn't remember anything. I wonder why then he freely admitted to having sex with her if he knew it was rape.
What I have never understood is when you have two people of opposite sexes drinking only one person is held responsible for their actions. The Man. I understand if she was passed out and he forced herself on her. Yes I see that as rape but if she gets so drunk and consents to sex then later says she would have never have consented to sex I don't see that as the same thing. I guess I just see it as a responsibility issue. I like most people have done a lot of things that I have regretted after drinking.
I also don't know too many rapists who give their victims a shirt after raping them.
His plea deadline date is set for Oct. 23 and tentative trial date Jan,. 25th.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Navy Sub Killer Idea

So the United States Navy wants both sexes on Subs. Great idea. Where else in the world would you think it would be a good idea to have 150 people of opposite sexes in the same space as a three bedroom house? Throw in months at sea with most of that time underwater and the stress of very long days and the worry of enemy action and you have a boiling pot ready to spill over.
As a former Marine stationed on both Marine and Navy bases there were always one or two major cases involving sexual harassment or perceived sexual harassment, adultery, or improper relationships such as higher ranks dating lower ranking personal. Does this make our military look bad? Of course not. I don't care how much discipline you have human nature will always win.
Another worry that critics stress is the big disparity of retention rates for females versus males in the Navy. Males are much more likely to reenlist then females and since the submarine force is relatively small (3,600 officers and 16,000 enlisted) this could lead to gaps in the submarine personal force.
Besides the lower retention rates the Navy already allows female sailors a year on land after the birth of a baby. Imagine having 50% of sub personal being female who have a much lower retention rates and pregnancy issues that can put them on land for a year and you would see the already small personal submarine force at risk of being seriously undermanned (no pun intended). Then on top of those issues you have the passion and friction of opposite sexes in very small quarters under stressful conditions.
Adm. Mike Mullen chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is giving this idea a ringing endorsement. I wonder who under his chain of command will tell him this idea is absolutely nuts?
I'm sure most liberals would consider me a sexist and would bellow that this is discrimination. In my defense I would reply let common sense prevail and don't undermine the military in protecting our country.

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Beware of JPMorgan Chase

I kind of took it personal when Chase canceled my credit card after acquiring the card from Washington Mutual. I needn't have worried though because after very little research I found countless examples of Chase screwing their good customers and this is after Chase was granted a $25 billion bailout from the government.
Here are the facts. I have several credit cards and have never been late on any of them, ever. I pay more then the minimum each month on every card. I thought there may have been a mistake but nope. That's the way Chase treats their customers. As recently as last week Chase was cited in a front page USA article on how the company is canceling credit cards of good customers. One, Mary Lou Reid of Arcadia, Ca had a perfect payment record and was a financial planner. Chase closed two of her accounts.
Other disturbing accounts show up all over the web, details an account of a Chase customer who had his cards canceled and couldn't get through to a supervisor. I can relate to his problem. Most of the chase reps spoke poor English and one of them flatly denied me the chance to talk to a supervisor.
Speaking of the language skills of their reps here is a interesting fact. After receiving a 25 billion government bailout JPMorgan has continued to outsource jobs to India with contracts totaling almost 400 million for 2009 Here is a link to this information Chase outsourcing jobs .
At a employee-only confrence call a question was asked how the government bailout would be used. JPMorgan Chase chief executive, Jamie Dimon admitted that the massive 25 billion dollars given to it by the tax payers will not be used to free up credit and make new loans but to acquire other companies. Here is the full story in the New York Times
Full Story .
Here is another link to a slew of complaints about JPMorgan Chase who were mostly customers with Washington Mutual which Chase acquired Consumer Affairs .
I have other credit cards so the only way this is hurting me and other people who have been treated like shit by Chase is the effect of your credit score getting lowered by FICO because with the cancellation of your chase card you now have less credit available.
Other web sites that have numerous complaints against chase are Complaints board and horror stories at watch your chase card .
My Chase account online still shows I have over a 1,000 dollars available credit even though my card was canceled. Is this a scam to get you to use your canceled card then you get charged fees?
What our the options available to us? I for one I'm sending a link to this blog posting to anyone that has a email address at JPMorgan Chase. Basically they took out money through taxes (25 billion worth) then shut your accounts down as they proceed to buy other companies. Another example of how big business and government use your money and give you very little in return.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

G20 protesters or Taliban in Disguise?

I think the G-20 protesters in Pittsburgh this past September have much more in common with the taliban then the average man in the street. Consider this: You have self-described anarchists wearing dark clothes and bandannas carrying black flags and smashing windows of businesses and shouting slogans such as “No hope in Capitalism” while banging on drums and throwing rocks.
What do these people want? What do the Taliban want? They both seem to hate Western governments, have no use for structure in peoples lives and they both have as many “causes” as their fanatics can come up with to justify their behavior.
The Taliban on any given day tells us that they justify their actions because there against democracy, women's rights, Christians, infidels on Muslim land, against certain other kind of Muslims, the list goes on. Now we have the so called self -described G20 anarchists. They want to abolish capitalism (like the Taliban wishes), rejection of corporate subsidies, global warming, different types of child-labor laws, no more corporate bailouts and African debt relief among other far ranging causes that they use to justify their anarchy.
I'm not exactly for corporate bailouts either but a lot of these G20 protesters
profess they are for the poor people, the small guy. Where do they think these low to middle income people will be once businesses like GM and Chrysler close down? Then you have the trickle down effect of people making minimum wage that supply parts to these companies and other surrounding businesses who cater to the employees of these companies such as the restaurants, mom and pop stores and such. Do they consider where these people will be without the bailouts?
What is also interesting is how they can justify African debt relief but not corporate bailouts. They want to bailout a African system that has fostered corruption, war, greed and human slave trade on its own people year after year. Isn't that what enablers do? Lets do away with their debt to help prop up these corrupt power systems in Africa.
These G20 protesters need to get a life and if they want to help mankind then go find a good charity where they can donate their own money and leave the world's problems to the mostly elected officials voted in by their own population, the common man, of the G20.


Subscribe in a reader