Sign up to receive Alan's newsletter by email.

Speaking engagements

  • Invite Alan Korwin to speak at your event! Thought-provoking, entertaining, freedom-oriented topics -- your guests will thank you for the excitement -- long after the applause ends!


« November 2011 | Main | January 2012 »

Global Whining Unravels

The lamestream media told you:

"Associated Press --DURBAN, South Africa -- Brighten clouds with sea water? Spray aerosols high in the stratosphere? Paint roofs white and plant light-colored crops? How about positioning "sun shades" over the Earth?

"At a time of deep concern over global warming, a group of scientists, philosophers and legal scholars examined whether human intervention could artificially cool the Earth -- and what would happen if it did.

"A report released this month in London and discussed at the U.N. climate conference in South Africa said that, in theory, reflecting a small amount of sunlight back into space before it strikes the Earth's surface would have an immediate and dramatic effect... but no one knows what the side effects would be.

"Within a few years, global temperatures would return to levels of 250 years ago, before the industrial revolution began dumping carbon dioxide into the air, trapping heat and causing temperatures to rise."

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Howard Maccabee, Ph.D., M.D., writing for the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, notes, "Allegations of harmful effects of climate warming on health are based on increased deaths observed in heat waves, especially in European cities. Year-round mortality data show, however, that death rates during cold weather are seven to nine times greater than during warm weather.

"If the predictions of the climate modelers based on the hypothesis of anthropogenic warming were true, rising temperatures in the 21st century would save millions of lives and improve human health directly."

Download the article, with its charts and graphs:

Illegal Immigration Persists

The lamestream media told you:

According to the AP:
"WASHINGTON — Arrests of illegal immigrants along the U.S. border with Mexico are at the lowest level since the Nixon administration, indicating that fewer people are attempting to cross the border to live or work in the U.S. The development could change the debate on illegal immigration from securing the border to handling the people who are already here. It's the sixth straight year apprehensions have dropped. In the fiscal year that ended Sept.30, the Border Patrol arrested 327,577 people trying to cross the southern U.S. border.

"Arrests of people trying to sneak across the border have been steadily declining since 2006 after an all-time high of more than 1.6 million apprehensions in 2000." [If the all time high was in 2000 but numbers are declining since 2006, does that add up?]

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

1. For the umpteenth time: Decreased border arrests do not equate to fewer border crossers, it simply means authorities are catching fewer people.

2. Catching 327,000 people invading the U.S. is not a good thing, as AP implies. No accounting of the people who snuck in was included in the report because it is not known, could be much larger than the number of captures, as it has been in the past, and is also not a good thing.

3. The AP's suggestion in its second sentence that this, "could change the debate on illegal immigration from securing the border to handling the people who are already here," is blatant editorializing right where the news is supposed to go. A third of a million invaders implies no such suggestion, except perhaps to the AP, a now well-recognized frequent propaganda arm of government.

4. Peak apprehensions of 1.6 million, several years ago (implying that at least an equal number snuck in) does nothing to justify the nearly 1,000 people this year caught trying to sneak in every day.

5. If indeed the lower captures are somehow related to a reduced number of invaders, the most likely explanation has been unmentioned -- after sneaking more than 20 million illegals into the country, they're running out of people to send. Who is "they"? Good question.

Killer's Rights Defended?

The lamestream media told you:

"SAN DIEGO - A federal court is being asked to grant constitutional rights to five killer whales that perform at marine parks - an unprecedented and perhaps quixotic legal action that is nonetheless likely to stoke an ongoing, intense debate at America's law schools over expansion of animal rights," according to the Associated Press.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, is accusing the SeaWorld parks of keeping five star-performer whales in conditions that violate the 13th Amendment ban on slavery... PETA relishes engaging in the court of public opinion, as evidenced by its provocative anti-fur and pro-vegan campaigns.

The plaintiffs are the five orcas - Tilikum and Katina, based at SeaWorld in Orlando; and Corky, Kasatka and Ulises at SeaWorld San Diego. Tilikum, a 6-ton male, made national news in February 2010 when he grabbed a trainer at the close of a performance and dragged her underwater until she drowned. PETA's five-member legal team spent 18 months preparing the case.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Any questions remaining about the U.S. justice system's legitimacy, and willingness to stray from the bounds of reasonable jurisprudence, were put to death today with the acceptance of a slavery lawsuit defending animals -- that belongs instead in an obscure philosophy journal, but I repeat myself.

In days when the justice system would cling vigorously to real law, a case like this would have been summarily dismissed, its perpetrator lawyers disbarred, and the legal community in need of oxygen for laughing so hard. A simple question or two from the bench would have served to sever the nonsense and ridicule the monstrous assault on American courts.

"When did your clients retain you for this action counselor?" "What are your clients' goals?" While those questions expose the silliness, the followup would deserve punishment: "Are you saying your clients don't even know you've decided to represent them, and have not agreed to be party to this suit?" And of course, "Do we need an interpreter for this case, and what language should that person speak?" The courts no longer entertain such inquiry, no matter how bizarre a case they face. In common terms, that's malfeasance, grounds for removal from office, with prejudice.

One of the unwitting so-called plaintiffs committed murder but has not been charged. The parties remained silent on whether the murder charge would apply, if the whales are granted 13th Amendment anti-slavery human rights. The Founding Fathers could not be reached to see if they expected wild animals to be covered by the Bill of Rights or Constitution.

The Campaign!

Visit Arizona. See what real freedom feels like.

Click the billboard and visit the TrainMeAZ state training site.

1. The lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, for censoring 50 of our advertisements at public bus stops (by claiming they are non-public spaces, and our ads don't meet their speech guidelines) is proceeding, but has thrown a wrench into our plans obviously. The suit is going well, fast (as these things go, it's been a year now), and we are cautiously optimistic about a positive outcome.

2. Although the majority of the campaign is on hold while the lawsuit proceeds, trainers who bought ad listings are getting some free "override" time, still posted without an additional fee. The Contributing Sponsors are still standing firm in support of the campaign, which will kick into high gear when the dust settles.

3. THE BIG NEWS is that, as promised, we have developed a tourist map for air travelers who arrive at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport -- they get the billboard shown above smack dab in the middle of the page! We're in good company with other advertisers including Bass Pro Shops and Casino Arizona. Maps are on pads and available from every staffed information kiosk in the airport (all nine), and at both info booths at the car-rental facility. Rental companies are cutting expenses, so the TrainMeAZ map is often the only map everyone uses.

Hunters Reducing Hunger

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing. But it does frequently refer to the benign life-saving wonderful efforts of environmentally sensitive animal lovers in PETA. Read more about their wonderful exploits in item #6 later.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

"NEWTOWN, Conn. -- When you're feasting on holiday meals and leftovers, here's a story to tell -- one that would not be possible without the thoughtfulness and generosity of hunters.

"A new study commissioned by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and conducted by Mile Creek Communications reveals that last year 11 million meals were provided to the less fortunate through donations of venison by hunters. Nearly 2.8 million pounds of game meat made its way to shelters, food banks and church kitchens and onto the plates of those in need.

" 'Given our challenging economic times, hunters' donations of venison have never been more important to so many people,' said Stephen L. Sanetti, president and CEO of NSSF, the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry. 'These contributions are just one way hunting and hunters are important to our way of life in America. Learning about these impressive figures makes me proud to be a hunter. I have donated game meat during the past year, and I urge my fellow hunters to strongly consider sharing their harvest.' "

"'These figures are from confirmed sources, but annual donations could easily be double this amount if direct donations from hunters to friends and family are included,' said Jim Curcuruto, NSSF's director of statistics and research."

Often overlooked by animal "rights" radicals is the fact that laws typically make it illegal to let any edible portion of harvested game go to waste. Urban dwellers are often unaware that meat does not come from a foam tray covered in plastic wrap.

Internet Taxation Promised

The lamestream media told you:

Connecticut officials are not giving up on requiring Internet sellers to collect state sales taxes, despite signs from online retailer that it has no immediate plans to abide by the state's new Internet tax law.

National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) estimates that all states are losing $23 billion each year ($152 million in Conn.), a figure that climbs annually as more people shop on the Internet instead of their local stores, according to Neil Osten, director of NCSL's Washington, D.C., office.

"All we have to do is get in the door. Once we get in the door, there are some more opportunities that come," Dept. of Revenue Services Commissioner Kevin Sullivan said.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The Associated Press, working closely with the state governments for a change, is campaigning to suck more money out of the economy and into government hands, according to a recent report released by AP itself. Freedom from such taxes has contributed to astronomic economic growth in the Internet sales sector.

AP reporter Susan Haigh says, "states are losing $23 billion each year, a figure that climbs each year..." She fails to note that otherwise, the working people who earned that money would be the ones losing it. This way, we the people get to to keep the $23 billion of hard-earned cash, instead of forking it over to ever more hungry government tax czars, and in this case, to states where we don't even live. "If bureaucrats succeed in adding a gigantic new tax on the only vibrant star in the economic universe, the Internet, they will have again succeeded in making everyone poorer, in the name of government growth."

This is how government kills jobs. Economists and morons have long known that if taxes increase, people have less of their own money to spend and are poorer, and that's not rocket science.

The phrase "capture the sales tax revenue that goes uncollected" is how the states frame it, and the reporter parrots. "Keep huge piles of our earned cash in the economy, out of government hands, and let it work for us," is how increasingly disgruntled taxpayers generally see the effort to seize the funds. Reporters appear incapable of seeing this distinction and its huge bias.

Rewrite: "The public is saving $23 billion annually, a figure that climbs each year, by shopping on the Internet, according to information released by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), a lobbying group representing state governments. Government agents, with NCSL backing, are now drawing up plans to take that money by creating a new tax, claiming they are "losing" revenue without the new tax.

According to leading bipartisan experts, increasing taxes at a time when government is already too large and needs to shrink, is exactly the direction you do NOT want to go, according to leading bipartisan experts."

Because Walters Says

Armed American Radio talk-show host and author Mark Walters, in the latest issue of Concealed Carry Magazine, asks, "Have you ever heard the statement from someone, maybe a friend, a relative, or someone in the news, 'I support the Second Amendment, but...' ? Sure you have. Don't be fooled."

"No one who supports the right of the people to keep and bear arms ever, and I do mean ever, puts the words 'but' or 'however' in the same sentence. And if you do hear those words together in conversation, as a gun owner and freedom fighter you have a responsibility to confront the speaker or writer and correct them. They need to be called out and you need to be the one to do it. This is not a task to be taken lightly." Mark's mild-mannered approach appeals to me.

I had scoped out the underlying principle here waaaay back and have used it to this day:

A "but" statement openly reveals a person's true intentions.

You know it instinctively: "I really like your boots, but the green is awful."
Now you can know it consciously.
To see through any "but" statement:

Reverse the first phrase, and change "but" to "and."

So the above line becomes "I really don't like your boots, and the green is awful."
In poker this is called a "tell."
In real life, it's just an advantage.

Next time you hear a "but" statement,
and inflection always tells you it's coming, try it --
reverse the first part, and change "but" to "and."
Works like a charm.

Politicians reveal themselves in "but" statements all the time.
Newscasters use "but" statements constantly to reveal their biases.
They don't realize it.
Now, you do.

Holder's Hubris Stuns

The lamestream media told you:

"WASHINGTON — Republican lawmakers told Attorney General Eric Holder on Thursday to fire some Justice Department subordinates over the flawed arms-trafficking investigation called Operation Fast and Furious," according to Pete Yost, writing for the Associated Press, about Holder's testimony to Congress in early December. [Democrats, by implication and omission, see no problem here and have asked for no action.)

"Why haven't you terminated the people involved?" asked Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that is investigating the arms-tracking operation.

"The operation's goal was to follow the gun supply chain from small-time gun buyers at a number of Phoenix-area gun shops and make cases against major weapons traffickers," AP writer Yost claims.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It is widely recognized that the BATFE claims in Fast and Furious do not match the facts. There was a concerted effort NOT "to follow the gun supply chain" which BATFE helped smuggle out of the country. The conclusion, if facts matter, is that the smuggling operation increased the number of U.S.-supplied firearms to drug cartels, which were then found at crime scenes domestically and abroad. This manufactured increase was then used publicly to advance an imaginary threat, to justify increased government power, controls, and infringing on the Second Amendment.

The congressional committee, after an initial flurry of remarks and verbal jousting, stunningly refused to place Holder under oath, since he more than once said, "I'm here to tell the truth," instead of taking an oath. That made my mouth hang open. This helps insulate him from a potential charge of felony perjury before Congress. He failed to testify under oath. The "news" media failed to report this tiny insignificant fact.

What the "news" also failed to report was only the most significant parts of the hearings. Holder, who repeatedly claims he is not stonewalling, performed a "document dump" on Congress, delivering more than 5,000 documents, most of them emails, and not a single one came from or was sent by Mr. Holder, the main unindicted conspirator in the smuggling scheme and the main target of the investigation. Actually no one has been indicted, thanks to Holder's stonewalling.

That became obvious during questioning by Ben Quayle, who happens to be my representative. After noting that many in Congress seek Holder's resignation, Quayle asked, "Will you resign?" Holder said, "No." Naming and asking if the underlings just below him would resign, Holder replied "No." Naming the underlings under them with the same question, Holder said, "No," the three shortest answers he gave in the whole charade. Time ran out for Mr. Quayle, so the Chair of the committee asked the obvious last question, will anyone be forced out, and Holder continued with his terse replies, saying, "No." In the AG's opinion, as delivered to Congress, no one should be held accountable for these gross violations of law and multiple murders. This is hard news, so was unreported for reasons that remain unclear.

Nearly a year after it began, Holder has refused to identify the person who authorized the operation, a very simple task, though it might implicate him or his boss, the current occupant of the White House.

A democrat at the hearing said that "2,000 automatic rifles" had walked. The AG said, "Yes, that's correct." No automatic weapons were involved, since these were retail store purchases. Hey, it's such a small point, what do you expect. A big thank you to Rep. Ted Poe of Texas for asking some really hard-as-nails questions. The AG though ducked every one.

Daryl Issa threatened the AG with Contempt of Congress for failure to turn over documents. Contempt of Congress! This extremely serious development was also not widely reported, though Mr. Sensenbrenner's vague allusion to an impeachment of someone (unnamed) did make the "news." The AG's omitted communiques in the document dump was perhaps dwarfed by the Justice Department's flat refusal to release anything after Feb. 2, 2011, probably the most significant material. A Feb. 4 email which was a blatant lie to Congress, now admitted, has been "withdrawn."

When Holder had previously said his 4-state long-gun registration scheme is a "reasonable requirement," none of the officials challenged him -- on the fact that it's strictly illegal, he is specifically denied authority to do it by law, and in fact such action has been specifically outlawed by Congress. Maybe they didn't know. And he didn't know.

Holder and his department's preposterous position that there is no statute against gun smuggling is a naked power grab without support. Not one official challenged that statement. Making each purchase is a separate federal felony, that's 2,000 right there; lying about the nature of the purchase is a federal felony; delivering the guns to the real buyer is a federal felony; smuggling the guns across state lines is a federal felony; delivering the guns to foreign nationals without an export license is a federal felony; using undeclared income to make the purchases is a federal felony; handling illegal obtained cash is a federal felony; conspiring to do any of this with anyone is a federal felony.

Holder has acknowledged that the mess is a fiasco, inexcusable and a prohibited policy, and of course, people have been murdered as a result. In his opinion, no one pays for it. Prediction: That shall not stand.

Read what people are saying about Page Nine, or tell Alan yourself.

See the archives below, or click through to an index of Page Nine posts at

About the Author

  • Freelance writer Alan Korwin is a founder and past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Here writing as "The Uninvited Ombudsman," Alan covers the day's stories as they ought to read. Read more.

Recent Comments

Read the last 100 comments on one handy page here!