COINTELPROĀ (syllabic abbreviationĀ derived fromĀ Counter IntelligenceĀ Program; 1956ā€“1971) was a series ofĀ covertĀ and illegal[1][2]Ā projects actively conducted by the United StatesĀ Federal Bureau of InvestigationĀ (FBI) aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic AmericanĀ political organizations.[3][4]Ā FBI records show COINTELPRO resources targeted groups and individuals the FBI deemedĀ subversive,[5]Ā includingĀ feministĀ organizations,[6][7]Ā theĀ Communist Party USA,[8]antiā€“Vietnam WarĀ organizers, activists of theĀ civil rights movementĀ andĀ Black power movementĀ movements. (wikipeadia)

Well, it wouldn’t be the first time they did it.


Another mass shooting at a school and everyone is up in arms about…hmmm.. arms. I don’t know what to think here. I don’t think that the kid was a happy kid, turned 18… bought a gun and that polymer blend turned him into a mass killer as soon it touched his skin. I’ll let the scientists confirm that theory. In a world where technology has surpassed our ability to reason or make sane decisions, I think that technology is more to blame then a piece of metal.

In a country where insta is the sought after remedy, insta-famous, insta-rich, insta-strong (steroids), insta-popular, insta-sex appeal (phones), the building blocks of hard work and work ethic is quickly diminishing, quickly eroding the fabric of a civil society. People want everything and they want it delivered the next day by Amazon. There is no sex appeal in working for what you want anymore, its only sexy if you can get it quickly. It used to be that family and education were the important things, now, with the progression of technology, family and education are no where to be seen, only the next tik tok challenge is important. Or being the next big influencer. What people don’t get is that even those people had to work hard to get where they are and depended on family. Family, education and hard work are no longer a priority and the government doesn’t help because they no longer feel like protecting those family values and in some instances they are the ones that defile those ideologies with their high tech solutions to having to be liked. Their lack of self control bleeds over to society, who sees them as how to achieve things, right. All these TV shows that portray government officials as these moral and respectful people, only to be let down, sometimes, by the real version. (not all of them, there are still some that are admirable)

I’m not saying that gun control isn’t right, I don’t know why you need a fully automatic weapon, they don’t even go fully auto in war, we’re taught short bursts. but maybe a return to praising work ethic and keeping families together. This country leads industrialized world countries in divorces, incarcerations and mass shootings. That can’t be a coincidence. Maybe keeping families together should be more important than who tweets what.

There’s the government conspiracy portion of this story, MKUltra and what Justice Thurgood Marshall called mind control techniques and technology coupled with pseudo psycho doodads and thingamajigs not to forget the mumbo jumbo and hooohaaas watchamacallits, but I won’t get into it. It will just make my head hurt. I’ll wait to comment on that when they run out of lithium and the electrical grid goes offline.


With abortion seemingly on 9 of a 10 count, people have taken the streets to try and save the Roe v. Wade decision. The conservative court put on its fight gear and is getting ready to take on the protestors, not to mention putting up fences around the building, which, nowadays, seems like a recurring occurrence. Right????, now do those fences designate a land border and can we be deported to crazy America from normal America if we are caught inside those fences. Reminds me of the movie Escape from New York, where they fenced off NYC and people that committed crimes were deported to NYC America from Normal America. While this is all very exciting, I’m old and like the law, in terms of legalities and illegalities, it does beckon another question, are they saying abortions are illegal or are they saying that States can ban the medical procedure, because abortions, by all intent and purpose, is just a medical procedure. Do the States have the right to ban a medical procedure? And does that mean my State can ban treatments or medical procedures for, lets say, incurable diseases or maladies that would be too expensive and put that money into helping the poor, building infrastructure, bettering schools and or maybe making roller coasters all the while forcing people with these diseases and maladies to go to other states to get help and relieving my state of money that would be spent on helping the final moments of the citizens that helped their state to become a better place. Is that right? Can States say which medical procedures are legal and which are illegal without it being a national ban?

Now, I’m not taking sides on the legality of abortion, I’m wondering if the different States can, that’s all. I don’t know that allowing the different States to make decisions on what can be considered a legal medical procedure and what can’t is a smart idea. If one State allows abortions then all states should, unless abortions are deemed illegal across the board, which is where this could be heading. While that is a loss for one political side, ultimately, it will be their biggest win, that’s just my prediction. My only concern is this two Americas scenario that keeps popping up, which seems to putting a strain on the unity of this country… man, where are those damn Martians when you need them, is becoming violent with protests and insurrections instead of just waiting for the day to vote and casting your ballot, like it should be. This country, I guess a lot like a lot of other countries, seems to be in constant conflict because they fear that they might just be happy if they weren’t and who wants that. It would be nice if it just was over a sports team because politics is extremely divisive, but you can’t always get what you want.

In my opinion, abortions will eventually be codified into law, because most people are in favor of it. Abortions are more of a moral question, especially with the older crowd, I’m not calling the Justices old, then a legal one, that’s why I’m surprised by the supposed decision. Small victories can lead to big losses. Again, I can be wrong. Nevertheless, I don’t think it’s a reason to picket, riot or protest (not their homes, by all means run amok outside the Court), but if you feel that strongly about it, it’s a great reason to vote. Here’s an interesting stastitc:

Demographics of abortion

A 2014 survey of 8,380 U.S. women who had abortions shows how their characteristics compare to the general population of U.S. women ages 15 to 44.

Age group

Under 20 – 11.9%

20 to 24 – 33.6%

25 to 29 – 26.5%

30 to 34 – 15.9%

35 to 39 – 9.1%

40 or older – 3.1%


White – 38.7%

Black – 27.6%

Hispanic – 24.8%

Asian/Pacific Islander – 5.5%

Other – 3.4%

Educational attainment

No high school diploma – 8.9%

High school graduate/GED – 27.0%

Some college/associate degree – 40.9%

College graduate – 23.1%

Number of prior births

0 – 40.7%

1 – 26.2%

2 or more – 33.1%

Religious affiliation

Mainline Protestant – 17.2%

Evangelical Protestant – 12.8%

Roman Catholic – 23.7%

Other – 8.2%

None – 38.0%

In other sidebar news… it’s sort of a pun…. Does anyone else believe that the leak could of came from anywhere, either side for varying reasons. I’m going with it was done on purpose with all in agreement to gauge public reaction. It could be…. you never know.


I haven’t been following the trial of Kim Potter, the Minneapolis Police Officer who was recently convicted of the manslaughter of Daunte Wright, a Black motorist. I try not to pay attention to these court cases because a lot of the times the results of the trials are not want you really want. It erodes the idea of democracy and that everyone gets treated the same under the law. This case is no different. Potter, a veteran officer without any other disciplinary actions to speak of or that was reported, was convicted of first degree manslaughter. This is not to say that the family of Daunte Wright doesn’t deserve justice, but the charges against Potter doesn’t fit how the law reads. To be guilty of first degree manslaughter, it requires intent to harm but not necessarily an intent to kill, or that the action that preceded it was unlawful, i.e. a guy approaches someone at a bar and punches him because of an off color remark where the intent was to create harm but not to kill. Potter was doing her lawful duty when the incident occurred therefore negating any possibility of it ever being first degree manslaughter. She was there, doing her job. The second degree charge required prosecutors to prove Potter caused his death ā€œby her culpable negligence,ā€ meaning that Potter ā€œcaused an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harmā€ to Wright, but Wright was refusing to follow the officer’s orders creating the necessity to use an intermediate weapon. Here’s the tricky part, the prosecution admitted that Potter actually thought she had her taser and not her service weapon when she shot. That statement by the prosecution negates the officer creating great bodily harm or consciously trying to cause anyone’s death because Taser’s are seen as non lethal intermediate weapons, by the same people that prosecuted Potter. I’m not saying Potter isn’t guilty of something, just not what they charged her with.

Potter was railroaded, not by the prosecutors or Daunte Wright’s family, but by every officer that should have been charged for manslaughter and got away with it. She is a victim (don’t know if that’s the right word) of circumstances that are out of her control. In Florida, back in the 1950’s, a Sheriff took three black inmates from the jail to the court. He stopped in a secluded area and put three bullets in each one before they reached the court room for trial. That was the treatment. No one questioned him about it and he merely stated that the still handcuffed dead black youths tried to escape. You don’t even have to go back that far. Recently, the Supreme Court just found that a black inmate that died in a jail after a tussle with the police, inside the cell, was justifiable because somehow the definitions, literally just the words from a previous case, didn’t line up to find a conviction of the officers.

With all the protests, bad publicity, screams for justice because of what I believe to be bad decisions or rulings, in my opinion (which doesn’t mean much), all, by the way, seemed right to me and I agree with (the protests and bad publicity not the rulings, wanted to make that clear), except for the looting ( I don’t agree with looting), Potter was fighting a battle she had no way of winning even though she should have, easily. This a rebound effect, where you pull on something and then you let go, it snaps to the other side with ferocity, until you can come to a center or mutual understanding of how things should work. I see a lot of reporting on what newspapers call bad policing but when I read the circumstances, it seems like that the officer was right in his decision. The fight is on against qualified immunity, but you have to be careful that when presenting your opposition, that the case does, in fact, show that qualified immunity is the reason for the non conviction and not the circumstances.

I don’t blame Wright for his fear of the police, given the previous example about how you could die in a jail cell, where you are ultimately in someone else’s care, or for him running, but it was still wrong according to the law. The courts are ultimately responsible. They have to see the facts for what they are and not impose a requirement for accountability that is so absurd that it creates fear in the public of predators with badges that run wild doing what they want when they want. Accountability is a cornerstone of a civil society. For this experiment, democracy, to work, you have to make sure that everyone follows the rules, not just a certain segment of the population.

My blarticle states that both sides are right and that both sides are wrong. Until someone with good common sense comes and resolves this, and it has to come from the Supreme Court, this will be what happens in this country, bad people staying out of prison running everything and good people locked up. This case should have been resolved by a payout to the Wright family and the retirement of Officer Potter.

Please click up or down to show if this makes sense to you or not.


That young man, at the age of 15, had no chance to lead a normal life.

As reported by NBC ” On Tuesday, prior to the shooting, another teacher alerted school officials to a drawing the teacher found on Ethan Crumbley’s desk. It contained a drawing of a gun pointing at the words ā€œthe thoughts wonā€™t stop, help me,” the prosecutor said.”

This young man was bullied by means unknown to him and now there are 5 families that will spend many Christmas without their sons and daughters and he was born just to live in a cage. The people really responsible will go home and open their presents with their kids and this is the country we live in.

Now, why wouldn’t anyone that feels that this could happen to their kids not want to get an abortion in a country that doesn’t give a crap about anyone but themselves. This is ridiculous.

So many stories about external devices that create inhumane thoughts through extraordinary means and that the government has deemed fantastical even though so many people know. This is crazy as hell, which by the way, for those that believe, a lot of people will be headed towards. Good luck. At least he has a good chance for an insanity plea.

Please stop harming our children!!!!!


In one of my blarticles, I wrote that I didn’t think that Rittenhouse should have been charged with murder. The jury came back and found him not guilty. I think that is the right decision. I understand the feelings of half the population that felt otherwise, I mean two people are dead and one was injured. How is it that no one is responsible. Sometimes, the people responsible are the people that were injured. I know that might seem callous but it is the unfortunate truth. I try and put myself in Rittenhouse’s shoes and thought what would I have done if people started to chase me and wanted to take my gun, what would I do? Especially if I couldn’t outrun them. Defend myself seems the most likely scenario. The truth is I would never be in that situation because I would never go to a riot with a gun but that isn’t illegal in Kenosha. The outrage should be at the circumstances. How is it that a person that can not legally buy cigarettes, can’t legally buy alcohol, and in some states can’t legally drive by himself, can open carry a weapon? The government has deemed that people of his age at the time of the incident aren’t mature enough to make those decisions but they think they are mature enough to carry a weapon that can end someone’s life. Rittenhouse was and maybe still is, undoubtedly, immature and little bit of a dumb dumb but the law that allowed him to carry a weapon wasn’t his fault. It’s the fault of older people who should have known better. Right now is the perfect time to have perspective and attack silly laws like that one. It isn’t the time to pile on an immature dumb kid that saw to many war movies. Use what your given not what you don’t have. Use the circumstances of how this could have happened in the first place, not a verdict that was fair, even though sad. I know some might disagree, but piling on this kid is just going to turn off what leverage you might have. Be smart so this doesn’t happen again. Pass laws that would stop this from happening again and use this case as the reason or example why.

So funny, not the incident, but the fact that he can’t even vote or join the military without his parent’s permission, but somehow the laws in Wisconsin allow him to open carry. Crazy.


The Supreme Court is taking up a case of concealed carry in the State of NY, one of the strictest states for carrying a weapon outside the home. This case will decide how people across the country can carry while in public and that decision will have ramifications across the country, I’m aware I said it twice. This case is not an easy case to decide and I don’t envy the Justices because no matter what you do or decide, you will have detractors. The left will cancel you, while the right will, well, maybe, riot and take over your court. This is definitely a lose lose case. No one will be happy with the outcome as one side will say that you didn’t go far enough and the other side will just say you got it wrong, that’s why I’m confused that they took it up in the first place. The best solution, in my expert legal opinion, which is equivalent to a drunk person trying to pee into a shot glass, I might get some of it in but most of it is going on all over the woman’s shoe next to me while she slaps the shit out of me, would be to kick it back to the State and let them make the decision for their borders. If people don’t like the decision, their are other borders to live in. This case is fraught, fraught I say, with pitfalls and backlash. Personally I believe that choosing who can and who can’t carry concealed is crazy because sometimes that is based on more factors other than stated. Money, in this case large donations, has it’s privileges. No bureaucracy is ever 100% legit. There is always a little corruption.

Plus, carrying concealed is kinda crazy. Florida is a perfect example of that. People get this courage that they never had before and they start to want to be defacto law enforcement. Looking for problems to solve. This is going to sound bad, but I am ex-law enforcement and in 20 years I carried concealed, while not working, maybe a total of five times. Excluding that one year after I retired. Never needed it. Didn’t even like to carry it while not working. Sounds crazy right. Like the young man doing somersaults at the party and dropping his service weapon that accidentally shot someone in the leg, I felt like it took away from my time with my family. Just the fact that I had it with me, felt like a burden. I understand for some it makes them feel empowered, but that’s the wrong kind of empowerment.

On the other hand, if you are going to allow concealed carry, then let everyone carry concealed. Like I stated prior, sometimes it’s bureaucratic nonsense that allows some people to carry and some people not to carry. Or maybe we just let elderly people carry concealed, those that hit retirement age, 67, and let them be the Wild Bill Hiccups of our generation as they squint through their reading glasses an unload a barrage of gunfire after you parked in their handicap parking spot. Their the ones that get assaulted the most. Or how about if everyone just kept their guns in their cars and houses and didn’t carry at all. The fact that you think that you need to carry concealed says a lot about your confidence in your fellow human beings, doesn’t it.

One thing is for sure, looking at history to decide whether to allow concealed carry is the wrong way to do it. They didn’t have cell phones in Wyatt Earp’s time. And I’m here to tell you that wireless technology might be more dangerous then guns. The technology out there these days should be considered when ruling on cases like this. People seem to get a little crazy around those wireless technology based items. Last thing anyone needs is a plethora of people that all of a sudden become “allergic” to wireless devices and go unhinged. Everyone knows what I’m talking about, thumbs tingle, palms itch, feet vibrate, noses twitch… It’s going to be a mad mad mad mad world, loved that movie, out there if you start to mix weapons with wireless technology. No… I say let each State decide for themselves. That’s the safest way not to let this snake bitten case come back and bite you in the ass, because they will blame you the first time someone goes unhinged and it will start to erode your credibility.


I don’t know how the Supreme Court is going to handle the current challenge to abortion, but, in my legal opinion, which won’t get you a cup of coffee even if you have the money to pay for it, the male judges should recuse themselves. I wouldn’t want to be the person telling a woman what she can and can’t do. If the ruling only affects women, shouldn’t only women be the judges? A man telling you what your duties as a woman are…. feels sort of 19th century. Most likely won’t happen.


After reading the Washington Post article and thought how cool that whole conspiracy theory guessing game was, I thought I would give it a try.

Can you guess which of these statements are true?

  1. The earth is neither flat or round, it’s actually a triangle.
  2. The sun is made of American cheese, that’s why the Russians hate us, unlike the moon which is mozarella
  3. A DHS Agent once overdosed a colleague with sleeping pills in an attempt to keep him from talking about criminal activity that he was involved in, same agent would then try and force himself on his colleagues wife after telling the other agent they were going to turn him in because they knew his wife was in the country illegally prior to their marriage, that same agent would then ignore his colleague about a possible terrorist incident because he was busy trying to find out what hotel a flight attendant was staying in, the possible terrorist incident, people involved, turned out to be tied to the December 2009 Christmas bombing, all while the agent was taking illegal steroids. That same agent would later seemingly hit on his colleague by asking him what was the size of his appendage. That agent is now retired early collecting a full pension. The other agent is retired with full benefits as well, even though he met his wife in the U.S..
  4. Godzilla is real and running for President of the United States.

Alright, if you can’t guess which one is a fact, I’ll give you a clue, Godzilla isn’t running for President, she, most likely a she, is a fictional animal created for movies. One of them is 100% true.


The fight for abortion rights is under way and it looks like it will decide future political outcomes. What I don’t understand is why this is an issue in the first place. The Governors of these States that want to abolish abortion have a rationale that doesn’t make sense to me. They are saying that they can force a woman to be a mother but some of these women don’t want to be a mother. So can they force a man to be a dad? I know they can force them to pay child support but that’s not really being a dad, is it. The majority of the reasons for wanting an abortion are, as listed by the National Institute of Health are:

  1. Three-quarters said that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities;
  2. two-thirds said they could not afford to have a child;
  3. half said they did not want to be a single parent;
  4. and they were not mature enough to raise a child.

Let’s all assume that proper measures were taken to prevent pregnancy, my son was born even though contraceptives were being used but I was older, making good money, and I actually loved the woman that I would marry while she was (just in case you didn’t know who was the pregnant one) 8 months pregnant, but that’s not always the case. Telling a woman that she has to have a child in a place where there is still no medical insurance for everyone, their child could end up like George Floyd or Dulce Alavez, to be born into poverty, to be born into a community where the school system more resembles a day care and not an educational institute, where systematic racism (pretty much the same as systemic but a little less intentional and more ingrained in how the system works) still exists, is wrong. Why don’t we fix these problems that I listed before we force people to do something that they find morally objectionable, bringing a child into a place that doesn’t care about them but only cares about telling people what to do. Sometimes forcing people to have a child is more like feeding a prison system than it is complimenting humanity. These women know what’s best for them and what they are and aren’t capable of doing and handling and sometimes, at that point in their lives, being a mother isn’t one of them.

As I write this I know that I won’t change the minds of everyone, I might just change the mind of one person, but if it is the right person, a Supreme Court Justice maybe (here, I tremendously over assert that my blog is note worthy and not something people accidentally click on by accident when looking for recipes on how to remove stains from clothes), then it can have the outcome desired. As for the religious beliefs go in this situation, I urge you to keep those thoughts personal and not let them interfere with legal decisions. Not everyone has religious beliefs and the separation of church and state is important, plus God, who I do believe in, can pretty much handle things on his? her? own without our help, I hear that the omnipotent one is pretty powerful. Unless you are telling me God speaks to you, than that’s a conversation you need to have with mental health care workers or the FBI.

It doesn’t escape me that the people making these decisions are mostly male and well to do and they want to make the decisions about women, most that are struggling to survive financially. I don’t think anyone in the Governor’s Office are missing a meal (at least by the way they look) or lack any medical insurance or worry about affording that private school. Abortion is one of the few cases where someone asserts themselves into someone else’s life but it hasn’t anything to do with them. Most cases you have to show the outcome will affect you for you to have a voice, in this case you don’t even have to know the person to have an opinion on what she can do.

And as far as the people that say that I’m glad that my mother didn’t have an abortion, I bet there are a shit load that wish that Jeffery Epstein’s mother had decided to get one. For that matter any person that sexually assaulted a person that their mother had decided to get one.