Out of Kilter

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Bad Guys

Forum trolls:



Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Moraccan Hackerz

I fail to see why you think you are helping your cause. You hack a bulletin board?? You could have signed on to the boards and stated your case. If your case is sound you would have changed some minds.

Instead you proved yourself to be merely a bully. And, like all bullies, you are a coward.

I have less respect for Islam now because of you.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Ayn Rand

My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

1. Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.

2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses) is man's only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.

3. Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others.  He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself.  The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.

4. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism.  It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit.  It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others.  The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders.  In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

Sunday, May 07, 2006

Weighing in on the immigration problem

What we do with respect to our immigration "laws" is tantamount to saying to your fourteen year old daughter who hates school and loves her boyfriend: "Darling, if you get pregnant it will mean you're a lawbreaking hussy tart. It's wrong to get pregnant at your age. BUT if you do happen to get pregnant we'll buy you a house and a car and you can stay home and not go to school."

We tell foreigners that it's illegal to enter the country the way they are doing it BUT we reward them for their efforts.

They're the criminals.

We're the idiots.

We need to stop being politically correct and start being smart.

Monday, May 01, 2006

Missed our chance

Well, there they all were, parading in the streets on Beltane.

Illegal, and proud of it.

Why didn't we show up with guns and cattle cars?

Beats me.

Friday, December 23, 2005

Merry Season

What the bloody hell is wrong with everybody?

Seems no matter what good wishes you issue somebody wants to take offense.

So listen up.   If somebody says "Merry Christmas" to you and you, like me, aren't Christian don't get your knickers in a knot.  Why take offense when none is meant?

And if some store employee wishes you a "happy holiday" there's no need to bark at him that it's Christmas and he can bloody well say "Merry Christmas" because, in fact, he can't - because there's some other imbecile just like you on the other side of the issue that will bark at him if he does.

Friday, September 16, 2005


Governments that have a separation of powers like the United States and Aruba attempt to protect the judiciary from the force of public opinion or other influences. When the results are abhorrent to the public, changes usually come from a change in leadership, legislation or a process of judicial review.

When OJ Simpson was tried for murder, prosecutors had the bodies, blood, DNA evidence, a prime suspect and the American media behind them. Still, they could not carry the case. No amount of public pressure could alter the result. In the end, it was the quality of the evidence, its presentation and a jury who had the final word.

No one asked for the mayor’s ouster. There were no boycotts of Los Angeles. And the Goldman family found justice in a civil case.

In our system the Kalpoes and Joran would have been charged and tried. But the result would have been very uncertain.

Public pressure rarely changes the course of the judiciary in an open system. The Dutch system is opaque. No jury and the judge must weigh all evidence BEFORE a trial rather than during a trial. It is an exacting and, for Americans, exasperating system.

Still the economic burden of a boycott will only serve to hurt thousands of Arubans who have done nothing wrong. And will have no influence on the courts. Most of these people supported Beth and the family and still do. They want the same result - justice for the family.


The case was flawed. It was difficult to make after what appears to be errors in pursuing evidence quickly. But, with varying stories, and no confession or body, they were stymied.

You can blame the system. You can blame the prosecutor and the judge. But you cannot claim that there was corruption or collusion. And you cannot ask for the “government” to intervene, anymore than President Bush would tell a federal judge to get a conviction on a case “or else.”

There is an injustice here that hopefully will be righted over time. But asking for a boycott will solve nothing, only evidence will.

from arubatruth.com