Why I Haven’t Lost A Bet

My Great Good Friends,

For years we have been listening to Israeli’s leadership threaten ( with the false bravado of those who know themselves to actually be impotent ) military action to stop Iran’s nuclear programs. And, beginning about four years ago, after a luncheon with General Petraeus where these threats were discussed, I began laying six month rolling wagers with pro-Israel vicariously phony tough loudmouths and have cleaned up.

{ Aside to Jack : Your radio station owning friend is zero for three years and has not paid up. ]

Well now comes Mr. Edward Snowden, and irrespective of your opinion of his motivation, no one has challenged the veracity of the documents he has leaked.

Documents which put a little sharper point on the Obama Administrations motivation for being the most even handed on Middle East policy since the first President Bush.

Where I could only site events like Jonathan Pollard’s life sentence for espionage against us on behalf of Israel, or the Israeli’s combined air and sea attack on the USS Liberty killing 34 crew members ( 31 sailors, 2 Marines and 1 civilian ) and wounding 171 others, or their squandering a solely US strategic advantage by employing a Stuxnet precursor, , or misappropriating US intelligence for their bombing of Osirak ( which by the way, was the public reason Admiral Inman, then second at the CIA, stated for limiting shared intelligence to within 250 miles of their border) to support my contention, now thanks to Mr. Snowden we have this:
From the FY 2013 secret congressional budget justification for intelligence program funding:

“To further safeguard our classified networks, we continue to strengthen threat detection capabilities across the Community.
We are investing in surveillance and offensive CI (counterintelligence) against key targets; China, Russia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan and Cuba.”

So, in spite of AIPAC buying Congress, it looks like the Obama Administration understands our ‘allies’ are to be judged by their actions not their lobbyists and apologists.

And, thanks to a pro Zionist media the naïve continue to take my bets.

Have a Great Holiday Weekend, and remember: Labor without Capital is just a Hobby.


Returning to the Second Amendment

My Great Good Friends,

In the widening gyre of scandals and cover ups the Obama administration’s (post Newtown Connecticut massacre) focus on gun control seems to have attenuated. Well, not for me.

Recently in Texas, I found refreshing campaign advertising reminding voters the candidate had supported broadening concealed carry opportunities ten years ago and the concomitant reduction in all categories of violent crime since.

Coincidently the time frame coincides with the City of Chicago’s prohibition on gun ownership, and interestingly the increase in violent crimes there is in proportion to the Texas experience. Just in the opposite direction.

So, while there is a lull in the hysteria I thought I would share a few conclusions from an authoritative study.

The Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy ( Vol. 30, pgs. 650 – 685 inclusive ) has recently published an article entitled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?”

Interestingly comparisons across domestic jurisdictions; i.e., the 40 States where qualified citizens may obtain handgun permits versus the others, mirrors supra national statistics in all OECD countries. For example, Luxembourg where handguns are banned has a murder rate of 9.01 per 100,000 persons. Which is eleven times Norway’s ( 36% of population armed), nine times Germany’ (30% of population armed) and seven times Denmark’s ( 19% of population armed).

Even more dramatically Russia, (where extremely stringent gun controls are effectuated by a police state apparatus) has a murder rate of 20.54 per 100,000 versus Luxembourg’s 9.01 used in the comparisons above.

The study concludes the decisiveness of social factors are orders of magnitude more compelling in murder rates than the availability of weapons.

The study also debunks the often repeated allegation that availability of weapons increases suicide rates. I will not bore you with another statistical citation from the report because the contention is one of the fucking stupidest examples of liberal dogma extant.

Imagine some poor soul so desperate they have decided to take their own life. The statistics on their use of weapons confuses cause and effect. If he or she did not have a gun would they magically be restored to sanity, or would they find a knife, or bridge, or car, or bottle of pills ?

In addition to sociological cross jurisdiction comparisons the article also utilizes longitudinal data. For example:

In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban on all handguns. Hundreds of thousands were confiscated from owners law abiding enough to turn them in to authorities. The ban’s ineffectiveness was such that by the year 2000 violent crime had so increased that England and Wales had Europe’s highest violent crime rate, far surpassing the United States.

Anyhowitzer, thought you might like to know the Harvard Journal article is available.

Best Regards, enjoy the long holiday weekend, and remember; Labor without Capital is just a Hobby.