About Me

Name:Gray Ghost
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

On the Funnier (?) Side

Fox News is reporting that Burmese Pythons are starting to spread North from the Florida Everglades. According to game biologists, there are presently approximately 30,000 of these snakes in the Everglades; and they seem to be expanding their range. These same game biologists estimate that this particular snake could easily exist all the way to Tennessee.
 
Great. This is what I need. Now when I go hunting in Mississippi in the early fall of the year, not only do I have to watch out for rattlesnakes and cotton-mouths. Now I have to watch out for twelve foot long Burmese Pythons. The only possible "bright side" to this story is that perhaps the PETA-nuts might be too scared to wander around in the woods trying to "defend" the rights of deers and squirrels.
 
Can you BBQ Burmese Pythons? 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

I Lied: It Was Just as Bad on May 9, 2008

I decided to do this entry as close as possible to my previous article:
 
Saturday night, May 10, 2008, in Clarksdale, Mississippi, was very exciting. From approximately 8:30pm CST to approximately 10:30pm CST, Coahoma County (and Clarksdale) was under almost a constant state of "Tornado Warning". A tornado touched down at King, MS (approximately 5 miles NNW of Clarksdale). Others were sighted in Tate and Marshall Counties.
 
My son-in-law and I went outside during the time that this tornado was on the ground; and could distinctly hear it. A few minutes later, my wife, my daughter, my son-in-law, my 3 grandchildren, and I (and our dog Heidi) got in our hall and hallcloset with four blankets, six pillows, two pistols, three umbrellas, and our wallets. In the hall, the sound of the storm was clearly audible and our house shook violently.
 
Again, we were luckier than some of our Arkansas and Oklahoma neighbors, where several fatalities were reported. Several trees were damaged or up-rooted in the northern part of the city. At least seven houses suffered severe roof damage. So far, I have not heard of any fatalities in Mississippi; but that does not mean there weren't any.
 
Speaking with my mother on Sunday afternoon, she expressed her gladness that we were spared. She also expressed her saddness at the homes which were damaged. (She knew one of the families who owned these homes.)  
 
God was watching out for my family again; and we had no damage.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (7) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It Ain't Been This Bad in Fifty Years

Friday night, May 2, 2008, in Clarksdale, Mississippi, was very exciting. From approximately 7:30pm CST to approximately 11:45pm CST, Coahoma County (and Clarksdale) was under almost a constant state of "Tornado Warning". Tornados were sighted at Dublin (approximately 8 miles south of Clarksdale), Sherad (aprroximately 6 miles west of Clarksdale), Belen (approximately 12 miles east of Clarksdale), Lula (approximately 18 miles north of Clarksdale), and Jonestown (approximately 9 miles northeast of Clarksdale).
The storm that produced the Jonestown tornado moved right over Clarksdale at about 10:20pm CST. A few minutes before this storm moved through, my wife and I (and our dog Heidi) got in our hall closet with two blankets, three pillows, my pistol, an umbrella, and our wallets. In the closet, the sound of the tornado was clearly audible.
 
We were luckier than some of our Arkansas neighbors, where several fatalities were reported. This tornado never touched down in Clarksdale. Only a few trees were damaged or up-rooted in the city.
 
Speaking with my mother on Saturday morning, she reminded me that some fifty years ago Clarksdale had a similar occurrence. In either 1956 or 1957 (at 84 years of age, she wasn't sure which year), a similar series of tornadic storms swept through Clarksdale. Only that time the city took a hit on the eastern side of town. Several houses were destroyed; and there were fatalities. (I vaguely remember sitting in bed with her and my older sister while the house shook.) My father, Operations Manager of the Clarksdale Water & Light Department, was out in the storms directing repair operations. 
 
Except for my street looking like a river (and water extending up into our yard almost to our flower beds), God was watching out for my family and we had no damage.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (34) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The State of Mississippi: A Model for Fiscal Discipline

The following was issued by the Governor of Mississippi office on April 29, 2008:

When Haley Barbour became Governor of Mississippi in January 2004, Mississippi was in its worst financial shape since the Great Depression. The State was in a $720 million budget hole; the State’s Rainy Day Fund reserves had dropped 90%, to less than $25 million; and there were loud calls for tax increases.

Four years later, without raising anybody’s taxes, Mississippi has a balanced budget, has rebuilt its Rainy Day Fund to the amount called for in law, and important priorities like education and law enforcement have received record funding increases. How?

Working with the Legislature, Governor Barbour controlled spending and increased revenue through economic growth, not tax increases. During the previous Administration, state spending increased 36% faster than General Fund revenue. In the five budgets under Governor Barbour, the opposite has occurred; General Fund revenue is growing 29% faster than General Fund agency spending, without raising anybody’s taxes. In the budget just adopted for FY ’09, for the second time in Governor Barbour’s tenure, appropriations will increase by less than 1% compared to this year.

When Governor Barbour took office, the State’s savings account - the "Rainy Day Fund" - had been depleted to pay for increased spending. In Governor Fordice’s last year, Mississippi had $233 million in its Rainy Day Fund. During the Musgrove administration, the state spent that down to just $22.6 million. At the end of the current fiscal year (June 30), Governor Barbour’s fourth budget, the Rainy Day Fund will contain $378 million, an amount equal to the statutory cap of 7.5% of the General Fund budget.

Although Mississippi’s bonded indebtedness exploded between 1990 and 2004 - increasing from $589 million to $3.1 billion - Governor Barbour has stopped State Government from swiping its credit card at every opportunity. In 2005, for the first time since 1987, the State paid off more debt than was issued, providing financial relief for generations to come. In the last five years, State debt has increased by only 1.6% after increasing 44% in the previous five years. This year, the Legislature approved only $8 million of net new debt available for future issuance.

A conservative governor, committed to fiscal discipline, can implement Republican principles.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Deaths in the Military on a Year By Year Basis (Updated April 10, 2008)

In October of 2007, I posted some of this data. However, some of the years were incomplete at the time. This data come from a CRS Report for Congress, titled American War and Military Operations Casualties:Lists and Statistics.

===============================================

 Military losses: 1980 through 2007  

The annual fatalities of

military members while actively serving in the armed forces from

1980 through 2006:

1980 ......... 2,392 (Carter Year)

1981 ....... 2,380 (Reagan Year)

1984 ....... 1,999 (Reagan Year)

1988 ....... 1,819 (Reagan Year)

1989 ........1,636 (George HW Year)

1990 ....... 1,508 (George HW Year)

1991 ....... 1,787 (George HW Year)

1992 ....... 1,293 (George HW Year)

1993 ....... 1,213 (Clinton Year)

1994 ........1,075 (Clinton Year)

1995 ....... 2,465 (Clinton Year)

1996 ....... 2,318 (Clinton Year)

1997 ......... 817 (Clinton Year)

1998 ...... 2,252 (Clinton Year)

1999 ...... 1,984 (Clinton Year)

2000 ...... 1,983 (Clinton Year)

(1993-2000): 14,000 deaths
 

2001 ........ 890 (George W Year)

2002 ..... 1,007 (George W Year)

2003 ..... 1,410 (George W Year)

2004 ..... 1,887 (George W Year)

2005 ....... 919 (George W Year)

2006........ 920 (George W Year)

2007.........899 (George W Year)

(2001-2007):      7,932 deaths

 

These figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in

the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel

during Bill Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even

involved in a war!

Consider the latest census, of

Americans. It shows the following FACTS about the distribution of

American citizens, by Race: 

European descent .......................... 69.12%

Hispanic ........................................ 12.5%

Black ............................................ 12.3%

Asian .............................................. 3.7%

Native American .............................. 1.0%

Other .............................................. 2.6%

Now... here are the fatalities by Race; over the past three years

in Iraqi Freedom:

European descent (white) ............74.31%

Hispanic ................................... 10.74%

Black ......................................... 9.67%

Asian ......................................... 1.81%

Native American .......................... 1.09%

Other .......................................... 0.33%

(These statistics are published by Congressional Research Service,

and they may be confirmed by anyone at:

 
          Check out the report yourself.  See page CRS-7 for example for the data.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (38) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Plot Thickens: Part 2

For the last month I have been watching and reviewing all the information I could find on the Israeli air attack on Syrian facilities at Dayr AZ-Zawr. This air raid occurred on September 6, 2007. I have come to the following conclusions:
 
   1. Turkey knew about the air raid in advance.
   2. Before the air raid, the Israeli "Sayeret Matkal" (their version of our "Delta Force") made incursions into Syria.
   3. The Sayeret Matkal stole nuclear material from the site to prove that it was actually there.
   4. US Secretary of State (Condi Rice) knew about the results of the Sayeret Matkal incursions prior to the air raid.
   5. During the air raid, military assests at the US Base at Incirlik, Turkey, provided assistance.
   6. The Sayeret Matkal "painted" the structures during the air raid to pin-point their location.
   7. In October of 2007, Russia sent technicians to Syria to analyze and possibly repair Syrian air defense systems.
 
I have gleaned this information using such varied sources as: The Middle East Research Institute, Defenselink News Releases, Drudge, The Jerusalem Post, Gas Week, IAEA news releases, Dr. Jack Wheeler, The Times of London, Islam Watch, Jane's Defense Weekly, Reuters, and a host of blogs from all over the world.
 
One interesting item is that the IAEA (a UN "watchdog" that has a Syrian co-chairman) keeps saying that there was no nuclear materials at Dayr AZ-Zawr. As I mentioned in an earlier article on this subject (The Plot Thickens: Events of 09/06/07, published on December 14, 2007), the Arab news sources are absolutely bizarre in their reporting of this air raid. In one article, I read that the Syrians had no nuclear material at the site. However, this same article said that the Syrian military was warning civilians not to get near the site due to "nuclear residue from the bombing".
 
Of further interest is that two Christian Middle East News Sites have concluded that the air raid delayed the start of World War IV by destroying nuclear material that was going to be used by North Korea, Syria, and Iran (the new "Axis of Evil") to hit Israel. I have not included their names in my above list because they are doing the same thing I am doing, i.e., gathering facts and making conclusions.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (48) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs

I received this article from an old friend today and wanted to share it:

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs


By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of "On Killing."


"Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always, even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? "


William J. Bennett (in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997)


One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this: "Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
 

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people, who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep. I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep.

To me, it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators."


"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy. Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial."


"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf." If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.


Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.


But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
 

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.


Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."


Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.


The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
 

Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?


Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.


Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.


There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.


Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
 

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
 

There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke


Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.


If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
 

For example, many officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs. Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
 

During the training of a group of police officers in Texas, during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"
 

Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.
 

Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"


It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.
 

Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.
 

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling."


Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.


And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...

"Baa."


This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (56) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Battle of Cowpens

Late in 1780, Major General Nathanael Greene assumed command of America’s Southern Army. One of Greene’s first actions was to place the best men of the Southern Army under the command of General Daniel Morgan. General Greene proudly wrote to the Marquis de Lafayette that he had given the name of the "Flying Army" to Morgan’s detachment. On Dec. 16, 1780, Greene ordered Morgan to march the Flying Army west and deep into the backcountry, beyond the Catawba River. Greene wrote to Morgan in his orders: "The detachment is to give protection to that part of the country and spirit up the people, and to annoy the enemy in that quarter."


At the outbreak of the Revolution, the sum of Nathanael Greene's military knowledge had been confined to what he could glean from books. In dividing his already small force in the face of a superior army, Greene threw the books out the window. Napoleon Bonaparte, who later coined the maxim "divide to live, unite to conquer" was then just 11 years old. Conventional theory still held that a general did not risk his army by splitting it. In his two-volume history of the Revolution, 20th century historian Christopher Ward called Greene's deliberate splitting of his army "the most audacious and ingenious piece of military strategy of the war."


Greene's decision was not the lucky mistake of a novice; he did it deliberately. Greene wrote: "It makes the most of my inferior force, for it compels my adversary to divide his, and holds him in doubt as to his own line of conduct. He can not leave Morgan behind him to come at me, or his posts of Ninety-Six (an oddly named but important frontier outpost) and Augusta would be exposed. And he cannot chase Morgan far, or prosecute his views upon Virginia, while I am here with the whole country open before me."


Cornwallis detached Colonel Banastre Tarleton with all of the British light troops and cavalry to chase Morgan’s "Flying Army". By January 16, 1781, Morgan and the "Flying Army" had reached an area on the South Carolina and North Carolina border known as "Cowpens". (Local farmers used the area to graze their cattle.) Tarleton and his troops were in "hot" pursuit.


Early on the morning of January 17, 1781, General Daniel Morgan arranged the approximately 1800 soldiers of his "Flying Army" according to an imaginative battle plan. This battle plan called for three separate lines. The first was a skirmish line of American militia armed with rifles and numbering approximately 200 men. The second was the main line of American militia and composed of approximately 650 men. The third line was composed of approximately 600 Continentals, Morgan’s best troops. Morgan stationed both his Continental Dragoons and mounted militia (approximately 350 men) behind the left flank of the Continentals.


All of these soldiers had a good night's sleep and some food. Of real interest was the location of the Continental infantry. These soldiers were down hill from the main militia line and were hidden from the view of the British as they moved to attack the American position.


Colonel Banastre Tarleton marched his men all night to reach Cowpens, with only one brief rest stop. Early in the morning of the 17th, Tarleton finally found the "Flying Army" and arranged his troops to attack. His main line consisted of about 600 infantry, with cavalry flankers of about 50 per side. He kept in reserve the 71st Highland infantry regiment (approximately 250 men) and the British Legion Dragoons (approximately 225 men). Both of his artillery pieces (3 lb. cannon, called "Grasshoppers" because of their small size and carriage) were placed on his main battle line.


Perhaps you can understand the trap that Morgan had set for Tarleton. The Americans had three separate battle lines, each one tougher than the one before it. As the British hit each line in succession, more of their "attack power" would be lost. By the time they got to Morgan's strongest line (i.e., the Continentals), the British infantry would be exhausted.


The battle proceeded exactly as General Morgan had planned. As the British got in range of the American militia skirmishers, these riflemen started picking off the British officers and noncoms (British casualties: approximately 20 killed and 30 wounded). After firing 3 or 4 shots, the American militia skirmishers fell back to the main militia line.


Morgan had told the men stationed on the main militia line that they only had to fire 2 shots and then they could fall back to regroup behind the Continentals. He knew that his militia was no match for the regular British infantry in a standup type of fight. This was proven time after time during the American Revolutionary War. However, the militia rifle and musket fire was much more accurate than the British musket fire. If the American militia knew they only had to fire twice and then retreat to a place of safety, they would not panic. The British line next hit the American main militia line. The militia fired 2 shots and then retreated (British casualties: approximately 30 killed and 70 wounded).


This was just what Tarleton was waiting for! He could not see the third line of Continentals; and he believed that Morgan's army was in complete retreat. Tarleton ordered all of his troops (including his reserves) into an all-out charge. Morgan's trap was set. As the British battle line went over the hill in pursuit of the American militia; it found itself up against the strongest line of all, the American Continentals. The American militia regrouped behind the Continentals. The British cavalry tried to get around the American flanks, only to be destroyed by the combined American cavalry. The British infantry (weakened by a night march, no food, and the attacks against two American battle lines) struck the Continentals and fell apart (British casualties: 60 killed and 100 wounded, approximately).


What followed was an American "Turkey Shoot". Tarleton's army of 1200 men lost about 120 killed, 220 wounded, and 510 captured (including both artillery pieces). This constituted a 70% loss. American losses were about 25 killed and 110 wounded, a 7.5% loss. Tarleton, with what was left of his army, fell back to the main British army under General Cornwallis.


Without the combined arms task force of Colonel Tarleton, the British army of Cornwallis did not have an adequate means of obtaining intelligence of American movements. Most of their light troops and cavalry had been destroyed at Cowpens. Cornwallis moved "blind" through North Carolina into Virginia and was trapped at Yorktown. (Note: General Cornwallis broke his own sword in a fit of anger after hearing the results of the Battle of Cowpens.)


I highly recommend the reading of A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens, by Lawrence E. Babits. This battle, though not well known, was one of the most important battles of the American Revolution.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (12) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

My Favorite Christmas Movies

With it now being a short time to Christmas, I thought I would list my five favorite Christmas Movies. All of these movies I can recommend as great entertainment. I know many are in "Black and White"; but they are all worth watching!

 

  1. Miracle on 34th Street (1947; Rated G): This is my favorite Christmas movie of all time. Edmund Gwenn is convincing as Kris Kringle; and Maureen O’Hara is believable as a woman who has lost her faith in the "wonder and magic" of the "real" world. (When I was twelve years old, I knew I was no longer a child because my parents allowed me to stay up Christmas Eve night and watch this wonderful movie.)
  2. The Lemon Drop Kid (1951; Rated G): I have always had a fondness for Bob Hope. This movie is very funny; and the singing of "Silver Bells" by Hope and Marilyn Maxwell is worth watching this movie if only to see this rendition of this song.
  3. Three Godfathers (1948; Rated G): John Ford and John Wayne are at their "Western Story-Telling" best. The photography is beautiful; and this is Director John Ford’s best movie concerning redemption.
  4. Christmas in Connecticut (1945; Rated G): Barbara Stanwyck is a "fake" housewife who writes "homemaking" articles for a nation-wide magazine. Her boss invites himself and a WW2 veteran to her non-existent home for Christmas. Then the fun begins. Hollywood is missing a bet in not re-making this movie with a returning Iraq war veteran. (By the way, this is my wife’s favorite Christmas movie.)
  5. A Christmas Carol (1984; Rated PG): George C. Scott is magnificent as Charles Dickens’ Ebenezer Scrooge. His "Scrooge" is not some money-grabbing miser; but a man who has lost faith in everything. To me, this version of "A Christmas Carol" is the best made in the last sixty years.

 

                          Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (12) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Plot Thickens: Events of 09/06/07

Was it nuclear or chemical weapons the Israeli raid on Dayr AZ-Zawr destroyed? Was the USAF involved in the attack? What are the repercussions of this attack? An interesting article appeared in the "Middle Eastern Times" on November 19, 2007. This article, written by Oliver Guitta, made a fascinating observation: "What if Iran was behind the Syrian nuclear program?" The Iranians would be setting up "Plan B". By helping develop nuclear sites in Syria, air strikes on Iran might turn out to be useless. This was a good plan, until Israel bombed the site on September 6.


The Arab news reports are pretty bizarre (Al-Jazeera reported that two USAF planes participated in the raid; and one of them dropped a tactical nuclear bomb on the site!); but one thing is certain:


                 Hold on to your seats, this is going into extra innings!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CONFEDERATE MAJOR GENERAL PATRICK CLEBURNE: Personal Details, Interaction with Confederate General Hood, the Battle of Franklin, and His Ghost in Franklin

 

(Written with respect for my favorite General of the War Between the States and the Anniversary of his death on November 30, 2007.) 

 

Patrick Cleburne immigrated to the United States of America from Ireland approximately eleven years before the start of the War Between the States. He settled in Helena, Arkansas, on the Mississippi River to the South of Memphis, Tennessee. In Helena, he became an attorney, and was a highly respected citizen.


Cleburne had military training, having served in the British Army. At the start of the war, he helped raise an infantry regiment in Eastern Arkansas for the Confederate States of America. His "baptism of fire" during the war occurred at the Battle of Shiloh. His leadership qualities were quickly recognized by the Confederate States Army; and by 1864, he had risen to the rank of major general and was a divisional commander in the Army of Tennessee.


Patrick Cleburne was also known for his bravery. Confederate newspapers during the war called him the "Stonewall of the West". In the Confederate Army (both in the Eastern Theater and the Western Theater), his by-name was the "Ney of the Confederacy, the bravest of the brave". (This comparison to Marshal Ney of Napoleon’s Army was a high honor for the day and time. Marshal Ney was literally "worshipped" by the Confederate Military.)


At the Battle of Spring Hill on November 29, 1864, due to confusing orders by Confederate General John Bell Hood (and in one case, the absence of any order), a small Federal Army was allowed to escape. This small Federal Army consisted of two corps (under the command of Major General John M. Schofield). During the night of November 29th and the morning of November 30th, Schofield and his little army fell back to Franklin, Tennessee. During this small affair at Spring Hill, Cleburne’s favorite mount (a chestnut colored horse named "Red Pepper") was wounded, giving General Cleburne a bad fall.

Early the morning of the 30th, when General Hood realized that Schofield had escaped, he severely reprimanded his corps commanders. This included Cleburne’s corps commander, Confederate General Benjamin Cheatham. Cleburne, and fellow divisional commander Major General John C. Brown, tried to defend General Cheatham with General Hood, but to no avail. General Hood was so mad (and probably not thinking correctly due to his liberal use of opium based painkillers) that he called both Cleburne and Brown a "pair of mincing toe-dancers". (In 2007 this would be the equivalent of calling a US Army Ranger a "limp-wristed p*ssy". In 1864, duels were fought for less.)


The affair almost went to pistols, as both Cleburne and Brown were both known for their courage. However, in the end both sides just let everything pass. General Hood moved on Franklin, and ordered a "Pickett’s Charge" type attack on the Federal Army. Again, one has to wonder if General Hood was thinking straight. Intelligence reports by no less than General Nathan Bedford Forrest showed that Schofield’s flank could be easily turned. A quick flanking movement by Hood and his army could capture or destroy the entire Federal army. For whatever reason, Hood decided on a massive frontal assault, with no artillery preparation against the Federal lines.


Cleburne went into the battle on a new horse; but he expressed anxiety about the attack orders with his staff. Almost to the Federal lines during the attack, Cleburne’s new horse was killed. He again received a nasty fall. A staff officer (Lt. James Brandon) dismounted and gave his horse to General Cleburne. As Cleburne tried to mount, this horse was also shot and killed. Cleburne was last seen on foot with his sword drawn and moving towards the Federal lines.


After the battle, General Patrick Cleburne’s body was found directly South of the Carter family’s cotton gin, about 50 yards East of the Columbia Pike. He had been shot once in the chest. The bodies of Confederate soldiers from his division surrounded his body.


His remains were first buried, after the Battle of Franklin, at the Rose Hill Cemetery in Columbia, Tennessee. A short time later, his remains were moved to the cemetery at St. John’s Chapel in Ashwood, Tennessee. In 1870, they were finally moved to the Evergreen Cemetery in Helena, Arkansas. His loss was a severe blow to the Confederate Army of Tennessee.


On a personal note, in early November of 1989, a Pizza Hut and its parking lot were located in Franklin, Tennessee, on US Highway 31 (formerly the Columbia Pike). The site of this restaurant was the exact spot of General Cleburne’s death. The writer and his best friend had eaten supper in this restaurant. While the writer was paying the bill, my friend walked out to my automobile, parked in the parking lot. When I got outside, I saw that my friend was noticeably shaking. I asked the reason for this (the night was chilly but not cold). My friend said that he had seen a "misty figure" walking besides the parking lot. This apparition walked towards the North, and slowly vanished.


My friend later said that when this figure was very close to him (no more than ten feet), he felt a profound sadness and a feeling of deep impending doom. (Others, who have visited the Franklin Battlefield, have voiced similar stories.)


It should be noted that my friend’s entire knowledge of the War Between the States could be expressed in three words: The South Lost. He had never heard of General Patrick Cleburne, much less knew where he died. I do not believe that he made up this story that he told me almost twenty years ago.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (14) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Deaths in the Military on a Year By Year Basis


You will never see this in the newspaper, or hear it from a liberal.
THIS REPORT HAS BEEN VERIFIED AS CORRECT
 
    Deaths in the Military (On a year by year basis)

 
    1980 ........ 2,392
    1981 ........ 2,380
    1982 ........ 2,318
    1983 ........ 2,465
    1984 ........ 1,999
    1985 ........ 2,252
    1986 .........1,984
    1987 ........ 1,983
    1988 ....... .1,819
    1989 .........1,636
    1990 ........ 1,508
    1991 ....... .1,787
    1992 ........ 1,293
    1993 ........ 1,213
    1994 ........ 1,075
    1995 ........ 1,040
    1996 .........    974
    1997 ..........   817
    1998 .........    826
    1999 ..........   795
    2000 ..........   774
    2001 ..........   890
    2002 ..........1,007
   2003 ........  1,410  [534*]
    2004 ........  1,887  [900*]
    2005 .......               [919*]
    2006 ........              [920*]

 
    Figures so noted with an asterisk (*) indicates
  deaths as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom and
  Operation Enduring Freedom.

 
    You may initially feel confused when you look at
  these figures --especially when you see that in
  1980, during the term of President Jimmy Carter,
  there were 2,392 US military fatalities. What this
  clearly indicates is that our media and our liberal politicians pick
  and choose and tend to present only those facts that support their
  agenda driven reporting.  Another fact our left media and
  politicians like to slant is that these brave men
  and women losing their lives are minorities. Wrong
  again - The latest census shows the following:

 
    European descent (white)  69.12%;  Hispanic
   12.5%;    African American 12.3%;  Asian  3.7%;
  Native American 1.0%;  Other ... 2.6%.

 
    The fatalities over the past three years in Iraqi
  Freedom are:

 
    European descent (white)  74.31%;  Hispanic
  10.74%;  African American 9.67%;  Asian 1.81%;
  Native American 1.09%;  Other ... 2.33%
    These statistics are published by DOD and may be
  viewed at:

 
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (13) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Five Best Halloween Movies of all Time

Since we are so close to Halloween, I thought I would list my personal list of the 5 best Halloween movies of all time (with an honorable mention). I hope you will enjoy this list; I will personally guarantee that all of these movies are worth watching. However, you are advised that "Signs" is very intense so it might not be a good movie for children under the age of ten(10).

I have doing this list of movies for over ten years. So far, the only change I have made is to add an "Honorable Mention". 
 
 
1. Arsenic and Old Lace (1944, Rated G)
    It doesn't get any better than this Cary Grant movie. The scene is Brooklyn. It is Halloween night. The Brewsters have a few family secrets and more than their share of relatives that are not playing with a full deck of cards. This is a truly classic movie.
 
2. Spaced Invaders (1989, Rated PG)
    The Martians have invaded the USA (Prepare to die Earth Scum!) on Halloween night and a small town fights back. Don't ask questions, just sit back and enjoy the fun. In many ways, this movie represents "Small Town America" and its values (on a comedy scale anyway).
 
3. The Adventures of Icabod and Mr. Toad (1950, Rated G)
     Walt Disney knew how to do cartoons. This is one of his best. The second half is on the "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" and the headless horseman, with Bing Crosby singing and doing the narration. I have been to the real Sleepy Hollow on the Hudson River in New York. The animators of this cartoon have shown it correctly.
 
4. The Ghost Breakers (1940, Rated G)
    This is one of the movies that gave Dan Akroyd and Harold Ramis the idea for "The Ghostbusters". Bob Hope, pre WW2 Cuba, a haunted castle, and a hidden treasure.
 
5. The Thing from Another World (1951, Rated G)
     With actor James Arness as a giant "carrot" man from outer space, this movie is both funny and "campy". (By the way, the title of this movie, and the year it was released, have nothing to do with me; regardless of what any of my relatives have said.)
 
Honorable Mention: Signs (2002, Rated PG13)
     Mel Gibson is a preacher who has lost his faith in God due to the death of his wife. However, events are starting to happen in the world that will shake his quiet existence in Pennsylvania. I will give you a prior warning: This movie is intense. The first time I saw it, my wife had gotten it for me to watch while she went to a school meeting. I knew nothing about the movie at all and watched it only because she had gone to all this trouble to do something nice for me. About a quarter of the way through (after turning on all the lights), I realized I was looking at a true classic.  
 
 
 
TRICK OR TREAT!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why What Happened in Syria on September 6, 2007, Might Have Affected the US Election of 2008

  

For several weeks, I have been trying to understand what actually happened on September 6, 2007. The Israeli raid on Dayr AZ-Zawr in Syria was breath taking. Even more breath taking has been the lack of talk in all the major newspapers, main stream media, and news organizations of the world. This news "black-out" would appear to be significant. Something big happened.

Since the second week in September, I have been examining all the data I could find. I have looked at reports from such varied sources as: The Washington Post, the Pakistan Daily Times, the Jerusalem Post, the IMRA, the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, the AXIS Global Research and Analysis web site, and the Global Security.org web site. I have "haunted" such sites as the "The Middle East Media Research Institute" trying to find any shreds of information on what happened. Sadly, I could find little.

As an engineer, I was trained to look at a problem, acknowledge the facts, and postulate a solution that meets the facts. Here are the Facts that I have:

  1. Israeli aircraft, with US help, destroyed a Syrian military facility at Dayr AZ-Zawr.
  2. The freighter, Al-Hamad, (flying a North Korean flag) had recently docked at a Syrian port. It was supposedly loaded with cement. What it actually off-loaded was not clear. The freight it carried originated in North Korea.
  3. The Syrians have at least 50, North Korean "No-Dong" missiles. These missiles were obtained in the last 7 years, and are capable of striking deep into Israel.
  4. North Korea is facing all types of sanctions if it does not stop its nuclear arms program. Some type of inspections will probably be a part of any agreements reached in any settlement.
  5. In the last 2 weeks, the top 3 Democrat presidential candidates for the 2008 presidential race have changed their position on the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. (They do not see withdrawing all troops until at least 2012.)

I didn’t include Fact #5 in my list until a few days ago. I didn’t include it because I didn’t believe it was relevant to the problem. However, what if this fact is related to this problem?

Assumption: Let’s assume that the cargo delivered by the Al-Hamad was either nuclear bombs or radioactive material. With North Korean technical help, Syria could arm its "No-Dong" missiles and become the 2nd nuclear power of the Middle East. Suddenly, the current US Middle East policy (and Israel) becomes untenable. Syrian nuclear strikes on Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi oil fields would cause a worldwide economic nightmare. Syrian nuclear strikes on Israel would cause World War IV to begin.

I am a Conservative, and do not support or agree with anything the top three Democrat presidential candidates say, do, or support. However, these three people are not stupid. If my Assumption is correct, perhaps Fact #5 is the proof.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (13) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Liberal Trolls on Townhall.com

Most Conservatives are having to learn one basic fact when they post comments at any Conservative Web Site; Liberal Trolls are waiting for you. For those of you who do not have a clue as to what I am talking about, let me explain.

A "Liberal Troll" is not a monster from the book The Lord of the Rings (although they sometimes act like them). A "Liberal Troll" is not an imaginary creation from a "Dungeons and Dragons" game (although you wish they were imaginary). A "Liberal Troll" is a person with a Left-wing political agenda who watches Conservative Web sites. He has one purpose; i.e., to interject his beliefs into an online discussion in an almost violent manner. He sometimes calls the other commentators names. He harshly denounces Conservative writers. He acts as if all Conservatives are stupid; and only he knows the "real truth".

Most Liberal Trolls are almost cartoonish in their writings. One infamous Liberal Troll, that regularly "haunts" Townhall.com, has stated or implied that he has been: a Navy Captain, a former Navy test pilot, a former Boeing test pilot, a former FAA designated Airline flight examiner, a former vice cop, a columnist for the National Review, a pilot for the US border patrol, and hinted at being an astronaut. However, they do cause problems in that they slow down the actual exchange of thoughts.

The following is a series of posts that were started on an article concerning the very successful Conservative writer Ann Coulter. Please note the times and comments of both "Malibu Ken" (a Liberal Troll) and myself:

Malibu Ken writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 3:42 PM
If I were to talk about Screamboat Annie
the way she talks about others, I'd be booted from Townhall.

She's nothing more than a partisan Don Rickles.

Gray Ghost writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 4:12 PM
Malibu Ken 3:42pm
And Senator Reid is nothing more than another Vidkun Quisling.

Even though I liked Don Rickles (He was great in "Kelly's Heroes".), his humor is based more on a caustic attitude. Ann Coulter's humor is based more on taking the PC talking points and showing how stupid they are (i.e., more the "in-your-face" type, backed up with facts).

But seriously, why do you want to post at TH? You are obviously a Liberal. You do not express any thoughts to be debated or discussed. Are you just here to make a glib remark, and then run away?


After waiting for a reply to my post of 4:12pm for over an hour, I assumed that this Liberal Troll had "left the building". Later that same night, by pure chance, I happened to check the Ann Coulter article. To my surprise, I learned that Liberal Trolls are sneaky. At 6:11pm, "Malibu Ken" had answered me (after almost 2 hours). Here is his reply:


Malibu Ken writes: Tuesday, October, 02, 2007 6:11 PM
Annthrax and the Ghost
Grey Ghost: "Ann Coulter's humor is based more on taking the PC talking points and showing how stupid they are (i.e., more the "in-your-face" type, backed up with facts).
--------------------
Somehow, I don't find advocacy of the poisoning of a Supreme Court justice simply because you don't like his rulings particularly hilarious.

====================
GG: "But seriously, why do you want to post at TH? You are obviously a Liberal."
--------------------
On what basis do you deduce that?

====================
GG: "You do not express any thoughts to be debated or discussed. Are you just here to make a glib remark, and then run away?"
-------------------
With respect to Annthrax, there isn't a lot of substance to discuss. She's merely a high-priced political streetwalker, using the verbal equivalent of hot pants and bright leather boots to draw attention to herself. What anyone sees in her is beyond my conception.

Well, okay, on second thought, Bill Maher and Bob Guccione, Jr. are almost as kinky as a Republican senator (which is why they dated her).... :)