James L. Paris's Blog, page 169

Commercial Flight Turns Back When Passenger Gets Violent Over Not Being Allowed to Continue Yoga

I���ve written before about the increased dangers of flying, in no small way a product of the equation that multiplies lower-priced fares with a passenger group that is better suited for taking the bus. The fact is that as the portion of the citizen demographic that seems to have less in the way of basic regard for its fellow man continues to grow, circumstances like sitting in an enclosed space with those folks while hurtling through the sky in a thin, metal tube���can now be ever more challenging.

The latest, high-profile incident of which to take note involved a United Airlines flight that departed Honolulu, Hawaii on March 26, bound for Narita, Japan. After the flight was airborne and the meal service (they still serve meals on flights?) commenced, passenger Hyongtae Pae went to the back of the plane to do yoga. When asked by flight attendants to return to his seat, Pae became angry and violent. At one point in the altercation, some Marines who happened to be on board intervened and tried to force Pae back into his seat when he began to headbutt and even bite them. Pae is also alleged to have threatened to kill passengers during his violent outburst. When the plane returned to Hawaii, he was taken into custody by federal authorities, and even placed on a suicide watch. Wow!

This incident is just one more that underlines our distinct vulnerability when traveling on commercial airlines. Passengers are strapped in their seats, doing their best to relax���and not expecting an outburst of physical violence so great that it threatens the safety of the flight itself. However, we surely know now that not only can those problems arise, they appear to be doing so with increasing frequency.

Nowadays, it you have to take a heightened interest in your physical safety, whether walking on terra firma or flying through the air. On that note, you would be well-advised to develop at least some rudimentary skills in unarmed combat, if you do not possess them already. If you would like to do so, but have no inclination to enroll in an ongoing, formal course of self-defense instruction, one helpful alternative may be to learn and practice some relatively simple techniques, like those taught in a fine product called 15 Brutal Fight Enders.

This is a solid training video���a two-DVD set���that teaches simple moves designed to quickly and effectively end a street conflict. A wide variety of techniques are demonstrated by a host of quality instructors, including former U.S., Israeli, and Russian military special operators, hall of fame martial artists, even a one-time federal prison inmate (there���s a total of 18 different instructors who teach on behalf of this product). There are so many scenarios and defenses covered that it���s not possible to describe them all in this space, but they include techniques to defend against punches, bear hugs, headlocks, as well as many other kinds of threats - also demonstrated is how to effectively use improvised weapons, including a comb, to defend yourself.

 

One of the best features of 15 Brutal Fight Enders is the price - FREE (just pay your own shipping and in some states sales tax); that���s it. You not only the 15 trainings, but four more bonus trainings, as well as another bonus item all about the application of non-verbal cues in a threat environment. Additionally, not only do you receive the physical DVDs, but you also get immediate access to the material through digital downloads, as well. With all of that, the product comes with a money-back guarantee, so if you decide within two months of your purchase that this isn���t for you, no sweat ��� just ask for a refund. Interested? Click Here to learn more.

 

 

By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

Trump Predicts Massive Recession

The latest Donald Trump controversy is his prediction of an imminent recession and his claim that we are in a financial bubble, but is he right? Jim discusses his latest article on The Wounded Warrior Project and what he calls non-profit millionaires, how to recover a lost Bitcoin wallet password, a new digital currency called Ethereum that is taking the cryptocurrency world by storm, the FBI puts Apple in its place by offering to unlock iPhones for local law enforcement agencies nationwide, and the new spate of scams involving people impersonating government officials.

Was Legendary Jazz Trumpeter Chet Baker Murdered?

With the release of the jazz biopic Born To Be Blue (starring Ethan Hawke), the life and music of legendary jazz trumpeter Chet Baker is back in the spotlight, nearly three decades after his death. Was Baker murdered in 1988? Artt Frank, his drummer and longtime friend says that Baker's death was not accidental (as reported by authorities). He shares in this chilling interview how Baker told him the day before he died that he was in danger and being followed, and that Chet's widow, Carol, believes he was murdered. Frank discusses Baker's timeless musical style, his battle with drugs, family life, his comeback, selfless generosity, and mysterious death in Amsterdam on Friday May the 13th 1988.

 

Hollywood Power Couple Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson Sued Over Son���s Alleged Auto Accident

Hollywood husband-and-wife team Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson have found themselves on the wrong end of a civil suit in the wake of their troubled son Chet���s auto accident last year. Chet Hanks is alleged to have rear-ended the vehicle of a man now suing all three Hanks family members, a fellow by the name of Terry Moogan.

In a lawsuit filed March 25 in Los Angeles County that names Tom and Chet Hanks, as well as Rita Wilson, as defendants, Moogan claims that Chet was operating a vehicle under the influence of ���drugs and/or alcohol��� when he struck Moogan���s car. The filing claims that Hanks and Wilson are the owners of the car Chet Hanks was driving, and that the parents knew their son remained a habitual drug and alcohol abuser when they permitted him to use their car. Here is a brief excerpt from the filing:

"Despite knowing that Chester Hanks was a careless and reckless driver and a habitual user of drugs and alcohol, they negligently permitted Chester Hanks to operate their vehicle and thus, in addition to Chester Hanks, are responsible for the physical and emotional injuries Mr. Moogan sustained as a result of the accident."

This incident highlights a couple of the liability issues associated with loaning one���s car for use by another adult. Most take it for granted that parents can be held civilly liable when a minor child causes an accident while driving a family car, but not only is Chet Hanks not a minor, the familial relationship is really not the key component here at all. Rather, it is that Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson allegedly let drive their car a person with an established record of drug and alcohol abuse - that has long been an established basis for successful suits brought by car wreck victims.

Another dynamic at play in this case is the legal principle that ultimate liability in an auto accident follows the car and not the driver. Many assume that the greatest degree of liability follows the driver, but that is not true. When liability damages exceed policy limits of both vehicle owner and operator, it is the vehicle owner who will typically be on the hook for any additional amounts.

 By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

 

Govt. Gives Raytheon Almost $5 Million to Develop Drone That Can Tactically Deploy EMP Attack

 Unmanned drones have been the subject of much controversy for years now for their use both within and without U.S. borders. As for as their on behalf of the Global War on Terror (or whatever it is being called these days), drone strikes made as efforts to (ostensibly) kill terror targets have resulted in numerous civilian casualties in a variety of countries, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.

While debate continues over the collateral damage wrought by U.S. military drone strikes against America���s enemies abroad, there is as much discussion over the increased use of drones by government agencies���at all levels���within U.S. borders. Recently, the U.S. Department of Defense admitted that Reaper and Predator military drones have been operational within U.S. borders since 2006. The reason the revelation about Reaper and Predator drone use, specifically, is so disconcerting, is that it is these particular drones that are deployed to engage in the targeted killings referenced above.

Now, as if this was not enough, word comes that Raytheon Missile Systems has been awarded a $4.8 million contract to develop a specialized drone technology that would actually be capable of emitting an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) capable of disabling the electronics systems of America���s enemies. Known formally as the Counter-Electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile (CHAMP), the ���flying blackout,��� as it is called, would act as a targeted EMP generator that could be used to tactically shut down the electronics of a terrorist operational center.

It sounds good���until you remember that the U.S. seems to have no problem deploying its drones, with increasing frequency, inside of U.S. borders and against its citizens. Could the same EMP-generating drones now in development for use against America���s external enemies one day be used against her own people?

It���s a scary thought, and reminds us, once again, about the importance of being prepared to defend against an EMP attack, regardless of by whom it is initiated. An EMP attack, depending on the level at which it is deployed, has the potential to plunge an affected region into a world of darkness, and it is estimated that it could take years for an area to recover from an EMP attack.

We have mentioned a couple of excellent resources in this space on the subject of how to prepare to survive an EMP attack. One of those is Darkest Days, a 177-page, spiral-bound, fully-illustrated manual (8 1/2 x 11 page size), that goes through the A to Z of how to survive an electromagnetic pulse attack. This is a terrific piece of material, and one that will serve you well either as a stand-alone EMP survival resource, or as a complement to other EMP survival information you may already possess. Additionally, not only is Darkest Days available for a great price, but the purchase comes with a 60-day, money-back guarantee, so that if you are not satisfied for any reason, you can get a no-hassle refund. To learn more about Darkest Days, or to pick up your copy directly, Click Here.

By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

 

ISIS Now Using Christians as Human Shields as Govt. Troops Surround Syrian City of Raqqa

In more good news for Christians already under siege throughout much of the world, ISIS terrorist-soldiers have seen fit to resort to using those Christians who have managed to remain alive thus far in the city of Raqqa, a Syrian city overrun in 2013 by ISIS forces and now a stronghold for the group, as human shields.

According to the journalist group RBSS (Raqqa is Being Silently Slaughtered), the handful of Christians who still remain in the city are being prevented by force from leaving, in what has been a deemed a move to use the now-captive Christians as human shields. The city has served as ISIS headquarters in Syria for roughly three years now, with the terror group having taken full control of Raqqa in January 2014. However, ISIS now finds itself surrounded by Syrian government forces, working with the assistance of other, various, U.S.-backed militias, in their bid to retake the city, prompting the desperate move by the terrorists.

Before the beginning of the civil war in Syria, Christians were said to have made up roughly 10 percent of the population of Raqqa, but most have long since fled. Until recently, Christians were told by ISIS that they must pay tribute to the group or get out, but it is now clear that their option to leave is essentially nonexistent.

 By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

 

Catholic University Punishes Professor Who Stood Up for Catholic Values

Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which is supposed to be a Catholic, Jesuit university, is taking steps to fire a professor who blogged his disagreement���back in 2014���with a colleague, a philosophy professor, who is alleged to have accused one of her students of homophobia when the student expressed disagreement with a position of hers.

Professor John McAdams has been the subject of an investigation by school officials since November 2014, when he wrote on his Marquette Warrior blog about the other professor, Cheryl Abbate, saying that she was ���just using a tactic typical among liberals now. Opinions with which they disagree are not merely wrong, and are not to be argued against on their merits, but are deemed ���offensive��� and need to be shut up.���

Marquette finally announced this week that McAdams is suspended without pay through the fall of 2016, and will lose his job entirely unless he confesses his ���guilt��� and apologizes within two weeks. In response, McAdams has said, in part: ���These demands are reminiscent of the Inquisition, in which victims who ���confessed��� they had been consorting with Satan and spreading heresy would be spared execution. Is free speech a ���guiding value��� of Marquette? Apparently not. Is protecting students who want to argue for Catholic teaching about marriage from bullying a ���guiding value��� of Marquette? Apparently, it���s not either. The Philosophy Department treated the student with hostility when he complained. Marquette had no problem with that. Not only was Abbate not even admonished that she had erred, it was conveyed to her that she had done nothing wrong.���

McAdams is clearly not taking any of this lying down, as he���s indicated that he has lawyers at the ready to take on Marquette. It will, of course, be of great interest to all those concerned about the loss of genuine free speech on college campuses to see how this eventually plays out.

 By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

VA Gov. McAuliffe Vetoes Religious Liberty & PP Defunding Bills in Span of Two Days��

To the surprise of really no one, the Democratic governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, used the power of the pen to prevent two bills, oriented in what might be called ���traditional Christian values,��� from becoming law in that state over the course of this Tuesday and Wednesday.

On Tuesday, the governor put the kibosh on a bill that would have divested Planned Parenthood of the taxpayer monies of Virginia citizens. Leaving no doubt as to where he stood on the issue, McAuliffe went to a Richmond PP abortion clinic for the veto ceremony. McAuliffe, in his address, made no reference to abortion, and instead framed the narrative in terms of the purposely-vague notion of ���women���s health,��� saying, in part, ���We are here today to smack down the latest attack on ladies��� healthcare rights.���

The next day, Wednesday, the governor vetoed a bill that would have given religious parishes and wedding vendors the right to refuse service to same-sex couples. According to McAuliffe, the portions of the bill that exceeded the ���legitimate��� protections afforded by the First Amendment were discriminatory against the gay community.

Publicity on behalf of the fight over similar ���religious liberty��� measures sought in Georgia and North Carolina was much greater in those states, as it was not certain, as the bills were winding their way through the legislatures, how each of those states��� governors would ultimately act should the measures end up on their desks. As it turned out, North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory signed into law the proposed measure in his state, while Gov. Nathan Deal of Georgia vetoed the ���religious liberty��� bill proposed in his.

By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large

Research Shows We Care More Than Ever About Internet Privacy���but What are We DOING About It?

According to a survey of 3,000 Internet users in the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany, 80 percent of us flatly believe we have a right to privacy when going about our business on the Internet. The survey also revealed that the number of people who think technology companies have no right to share a user���s personal data is on the rise ��� 57 percent of those surveyed said that.

The survey also showed that Americans, in particular, care about what an elected official���s stance is on Internet privacy, with 81 percent of U.S. respondents saying that the presidential candidates��� positions on privacy are relevant issues. As a matter of fact, the majority of American respondents said that a candidate���s position on the subject of data privacy would actually influence their vote.

One of the figures that particularly struck me was that, among all survey respondents, a full 88 percent said they would be interested in a simple, ���one-click��� type of encryption mechanism that would allow for the encryption of outgoing email, or that might be made a standard feature of various platforms and applications. In part, this information tells us that the interest, at a groundswell level, in useful Internet privacy solutions is there, but that most Internet users struggle with how to secure for themselves even the most basic of privacy protections.

While I think, for a wide variety of reasons, encryption as a standard feature of Internet applications is a long way off���and may likely never be realized���there are things that you can do today, right now, to greatly insulate yourself from prying Internet eyes. They may not be ���one-click��� solutions to your privacy concerns, but they don���t take much time or money at all to implement, and can go a long way to provide you with the peace of mind you���ve likely long been without when surfing the web. A fantastic resource for those answers is The Patriot Privacy Kit ebook, something we have previously recommended. The Patriot Privacy Kit provides a ton of useful information on how to stay safe online, including how to secure your computer hardware and software platforms, how to be a good steward of your all-important passwords, how to use email more securely���even how to surf the web anonymously.

This ebook also looks at what you need to know to be safe as a regular user of social media, including the ubiquitous Facebook, and also includes great information on how to secure your sensitive information offline (even in this ���Internet age,��� most ID theft still takes place that way, from the compromise of documents in a physical form). Something else - The Patriot Privacy Kit comes with a fantastic money-back guarantee, which means you can read and use the information through and through���and if you���re still not satisfied, you can get all of your money back, with no fuss. If you want to learn more about The Patriot Privacy Kit, Click Here. 

 By Robert G. Yetman, Jr.

So Much for That ��� All Contending GOP Candidates Walk Back Pledge to Support Eventual Nominee

Did you watch Tuesday night���s CNN town hall, hosted by Anderson Cooper, with the remaining Republican candidates for the GOP nomination? If so, you learned that Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich have each decided to forsake their earlier commitments to support the eventual Republican nominee, who will be anointed in July.

For those who have been following the events of this year���s campaign, it is clear that when Cruz and Kasich say they will no longer honor the pledge, that declaration particularly applies to Donald Trump. In the case of Trump, it is now likely that he will not support any other nominee besides him; Trump has not been shy about voicing his opinion that he���s been the victim of a strategic, concerted effort to deprive him of a nomination that would otherwise easily be his if the campaign was left to play out purely by virtue of voter preference.

Town hall host Anderson Cooper queried each of the candidates as to their feelings on honoring the pledge now, after such a prickly campaign���and I would say that���s putting it nicely���has ensued. John Kasich said flatly that, ���All of us shouldn���t even have answered that question.��� Trump, when asked if he would still pledge to support the eventual nominee, responded, ���No, I don���t anymore.��� Trump said that he���s ���been treated very unfairly��� by the Republican National Committee and other high-profile, so-called ���establishment��� elements within the party. The current frontrunner for the nomination also implied that he was further justified in walking away from the previous commitment by virtue of the fact that his chief rival, Ted Cruz, had basically said during the same town hall that HE would no longer the pledge. Trump was referring to Cruz���s earlier response to the pledge question, when he told Cooper that, ���I���m not in the habit of supporting someone who attacks my wife and family���I think nominating Donald Trump would be an absolute trainwreck������

I have written previously that the pledge has long been moot since the campaign among the GOP contenders has become so acrimonious, and each has said things about his rivals that go well beyond the ���garden variety��� sorts of criticisms considered acceptable during primary season. The plain fact is that not only would Ted Cruz, for example, have zero credibility in campaigning for Donald Trump after all that has transpired, but that what has been said by the Republican candidates about one another up to this point already provides the eventual Democratic Party nominee with terrific ammunition during the general election campaign.

 By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large