Friday, March 29, 2019

Who Liked CO2?

In recent times there have been many who rage against the production of CO2. I find that a curious (And ignorant) objection,

After all, plants require that gas to grow and produce the present high production of food stuffs which  CO2 may be basic to the lack of major famines in our time.

After all, that CO2 produced by internal combustion engines allows the distribution of food as also has brought the risk of general famines to almost zero.

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Infanticide & Federal Law

      Some States have enacted or proposed laws which establish abortion and even after-birth infanticide as a "right".
      Although I am not an attorney, I must wonder if after-birth (Or when labor had begun or is due) murder of an infant is a "Deprivation Of Civil Rights Under Color Of Law Resulting In Death". That would be a violation of Federal Law as provided below.
      I must wonder if any US Attorney would, as a matter-of-duty, prosecute each-and-every complaint brought under that Law.
      I must wonder if our new Attorney General has the courage to direct all US Attorneys to do so. I must wonder if such charges would include all doctors, nurses, clinic/hospital administrators and others of that ilk.
       It might be well to force the US Courts (ie SCOTUS) OR The Congress  (After the next General Election) OR The People (By amending our Constitution) to define (Considering all modern scientific evidence) when an unborn baby has the protection of the below law.
    Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
    For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
    The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Monday, March 25, 2019

I Was A Democrat

I was a Democrat in the days of such great-and-honest men as Democrats President Harry Truman and Member of Congress Clement Zablocki. For only that reason I listened to the February 25, 2017"Victory Speech" of Mr. Tom Perez, the new Chairman of the DNC. I had hoped that Democrats would return to the reasoned policies and practices of such honest men as cited above. That would help bring all Americans back together from some extremists in the GOP and the "far out" drive of the Democratic (sic) Party' "leadership" to leave behind our ConstitutionThe Bill Of Rights and our "exceptionalism" as based on the best principles of Western Civilization (In turn based on the best of Judeo-Christian teachings and evolving away from earlier primitive practices).

I am sorry to report that I heard a speech as out-of-contact with reality as the "Victory Speeches" ranted-out by Adolf Hitler as the shells from Soviet cannon were hitting Berlin. Mr. Perez' speech had the same qualities of hysteria and pathological divorce from reality as did his earlier, hopefully unintentional, model.

He even, while calling for his Party's efforts in winning State elections, did not dare to admit that the GOP has steadily been winning control of State Houses and State Legislature against the efforts of a Party moving so far from traditional American values as to be in another universe, "far, far, away".

The Democrats elected (By mob acclamation) Keith Ellison-Muhammed as "Deputy DNC Chair". That Islamist has, as far as I know, never rejected-and-condemned the horrid, anti-civilization and unalterable teachings of Islam as command "perpetual war" (Jihad) against all "unbelievers" (99% of our fellow Americans) and allows or encourages or commands the use of murder, rape, torture, genocide, banditry and other horrors by those waging Jihad.

They would have done better to place Jabba The Hutt in that "Deputy Chair" position---Or, in the primary Chair.

Thursday, March 21, 2019

Some Wars---Updated

Nota Bene: Comments may be sent to: James Pawlak, 8706 West Oklahoma Ave. (#255),
West Allis, WI 53227, USA; Or, . For more of my thoughts (Ravings?) please go to:

Thursday, February 28, 2019

Some Revolutionary & Other Wars UPDATED

Some recent comments (eg "The New Divide In American Politics"; First Things (On Line); 23 May 2018) have pointed out the growing divide in our Republic as perhaps based, in part, on "Religion vs. Not-Religion".

I suggest that the cited division is also based on
1. Constitutional Laws and "equal justice under law" 
vs. mob rule;
2. Supporters of the intent of the
 authors of the 1789 Constitution, The Bill Of Rights and of statutory law as the standard vs. those supporting judges "making and inflicting law and amending our Constitution from the bench";
3. Such Natural Law rights as allow innocent targets of violent criminal attack to 
immediately use deadly force to stop any "clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm" when civil authorities are not able (And sometimes unwilling to do so) to put immediate halt to such threats. [This right may demand the use of deadly force in protecting those who are unable to do so; And, by extension, the right to immediate access to those weapons as allow them to exercise that right and perform that duty (ie Modern, concealable and effective firearms) as so much opposed by the leadership of the Democratic (sic) Party which disorganization is on one side of the noted divide.];
4. Those who support the fullest exercise of "free speech: (
ie The necessary, but not sufficient, basis of "Academic Freedom") as allows even the most provoking expression of ideas vs. those who would totally censor what they consider "hate speech"or, even, "disturbing", expressed, ideas.
Today's divisions, in the USA, appear to be approaching those as were existent in the 1770s and the 1850s as led to bloody war.

Those divisions have resulted in wars-between-states as in Central Europe's "Wars of Religion" and our own "War Between The States" as often putting contesting peoples in more-or-less distinct areas.

Our nation's first Revolutionary War, like Spain in the 1930s, was a "Civil War" with the various factions less clearly divided by geography---Especially in its early stages. In Spain the "left" did tend to group in-and-about Catalonia and the forces of Franco and his allies in other places. [The present divisions in the USA are nation wide, but with more weight to the left in our West Coast states and in a few other places as Illinois, New York State and Maryland along with a number of cities/counties ruled by Democrats. They, more generally follow the pattern set by Spain at the beginning of its civil war than the USA in 1860.

At this time the State government of California is in such a "resistance" to Federal authority as was the case in the South in 1859-60 lacking only one, severe, violent act to make its officials guilty of "Treason" as defined by our Constitution and place California and any supporting jurisdictions in a "State Of Rebellion" as would warrant constitutional imposition of martial law along with suspension of Habeas Corpus, military removal of illegal aliens from the USA to to internment camps, use of volley-fire to suppress mobs, courts martial, and other means towards limiting the spread of rebellion to other strongholds of "the left" (As, otherwise, might yield a true "civil war").

Such a conflict might well result in "The Right" using its great advantage in the private possession of modern firearms to privately "liquidate" their opponents---Which may be basic to the Democrats' Jihad against a well armed citizenry.
Here, please note that the vast majority of modern (ie Police & Military grade) firearms privately held in the USA are in the possession of those "on the right".

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Votes For 16-Year Olds, If & Only If ...

Some persons (ie In The Democratic-Socialist Party) are forwarding the idea of allowing 16-year olds persons the right to vote in our national/Federal elections. I might be in favor of that proposal IF, AND ONLY IF, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET:
1. They are citizens without any violations-of-law which would be felonies if they were adults;
2. They are made automatically liable for criminal prosecution, as adults, if charged with violations of the provisions of criminal-codes;
3. They are made a part of those who are subject to the military draft;
4. They are allowed to involve themselves in any sexual activities now limited to those over 18
5. They will be held to the terms of any civil contract in which they enter; And,
6. Unless found (By a court-of-law and after full "due process" is had) too criminally dangerous or too dangerously mentally ill, they must be allowed to purchase and "keep and bear arms" (ie Without "infringement").

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Mass Incarceration, Alternatives & Vicitms

I am a veteran (Survivor?) of a 34-year, professional, career with Wisconsin's Department Of Corrections I was very interested in your offering, cited above, as to "Mass Incarceration".

I must wonder if those objecting to "Mass Incarceration" have considered the following:
1. The large number of persons in our prisons are there in accordance with the democratically enacted laws of Wisconsin as reflect the will of those law-abiding citizens who have elected the other members of the Legislature and that over many years and during the majorities of both Parties;
2. The vast majority of those convicts have had opportunities (eg By probation or parole or NGOs-services) to avoid incarceration;
3. The "mass" of such offenders commit serious crimes and them frequently repeated  AND as cause untold misery to our fellow Americans;
4. As some note the dollar costs of confining such dangerous critters, everyone should remember the costs of such offenders to: Our police, court, psychological/medical services, insurance companies AND, most importantly, the innocent victims of those thugs.

Of course, some might maintain that the most effective means of preventing incarceration (Of dangerous criminals) is by: "Two to the chest and one to the head"; Or, "a double tap to the head"; Or, four-inches with the point, twist and rapidly repeat. Of course, this requires a courageous, well-armed, law-abiding (And legally presumed sane) citizenry who will take immediate-and-effective actions (Especially during those "Golden Minutes" waiting for police arrival-and-action---If, and only if, they are able to summon them) against thugs AND be awarded and not persecuted by civil authorities for doing so. 

Of course, too many have ignored the fact that such citizens have been saved from great harm, by such use (ie Often the "mere" display) of guns at a rate up to 80-times the harm caused by the criminal misuse of firearms.


Sunday, March 17, 2019

Hate, Disadvantages & Free Speech

In recent months there has been very much spoken and written about, in the USA and other places, an increase in "Hate Crimes" or "Hate Speech" as specially directed towards Jews and Muslims.

First-and-foremost, any speech (In public forums) within the USA is protected by the first article of The Bill Of Rights. ("Hate speech" may be considered as motivation in criminal or civil cases where there were attacks-against or injuries-inflicted on others.) Neither the courts nor such bodies as  public universities or other like organizations have the authority to suppress any (Even "hate") speech---Ever as vomited-out by those persons who are so ignorant or discourteous to foul the world and their minds and spirits with such speech.

Secondly, "hate" does not include appropriate disgust or reasoned distrust OR statements-of-fact.

Hate also poisons the body of the hateful person and may result in (Deserved?) physical problems as indigestion, gross stress on the heart and other self-harms.

Hate is an illicit passion. It also interferes with such licit actions as the controlled-and-accurate aiming and firing of modern-and-effective firearms against those tyrants who inflict or attempt to inflict their hate against (Legally) innocent persons by acts as "present a clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm"---OR the rationally perceived danger of that condition.

Wednesday, March 13, 2019

Responding To False Accusations (In Academia)

Those accused (Outside of our criminal courts) of crimes or violations of professional or (In academia) standards or rules should take legal counsel. (nb I am not an attorney nor do I have any financial interests in those who practice law.)

I suggest that any person so accused demand that those complaining submit their detailed statements, in writing, on oath/affirmation as makes liars subject to: Criminal penalties for "Perjury" or the like of "False Swearing"; And, to such civil actions as could result in the assignment of damages, punitive damages, attorneys fees and costs against the defendants---At bankruptcy-plus levels.

In certain academic cases, such damages (At the same level) might well be sought from university/college presidents and the regents/trustees or other governing board-members, as individuals, of those schools who fail to protect the academic-rights or contractual provisions of persecuted faculty.

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Hatred Missed By House Democrats

It appear (Please correct me if I am in error) that the specific, racist/other hatred, missed by the Democrat-initiated resolution against all other forms of various forms of hatred, were the following:
1. The documented fact that Black thugs select our, on the basic of race, Whites for their criminal attacks at a rate many, many, times the reverse---Which is a very gross, racist, hatred of Whites; And,
2. The ideological hatred of those (Often on university/college campuses) who express their hatred of those who disagree with them by such, Fascist, means: As "ringing bells" or shouting-down/speaking-over those who are attempting to exercise constitutional, free-speech, rights (eg As a form of academic-freedom); Inflicting serious injuries by very criminal acts (eg As recently demonstrated st UC-Berkeley); Threats, of physical violence as provide a "clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm" as offered by such groups as AntiFa [Whose storm-troopers seem to avoid such places as Texas and Wisconsin where law-abiding (And legally presumed sane) citizens hold thousands of permits/licences to carry concealed weapons].

That hatred also-and-clearly extends to: Such as Maxine Waters who  has, very directly, called for potentially dangerous harassment of those who are against her views---A call which has been followed by various scum-critters; And, those orthodox-and-murderous Muslims who hate all individuals, groups, organization, true-religions and nations which resist their horrid teachings and the, also, horrid actions they inflict on the World---For the last 1400-years and to this day.


Friday, March 08, 2019

DNC Vs. The Bill Of Rights

It has been reported that the DNC has banned FOX News from "Covering" (By on-site reported with
"Credentials"?) the primary debates between the, very many, members of their Party seeking its nomination for the Presidency.

It is the DNC's right, as a private organization, to do that or, at the least, demand that the usual hosts of such events allow that exclusion.

That action is a most direct and Fascist attack on the "free press" provision of the first article of The Bill Of Rights.

That attack is only another of the Democratic (sic) Party's attacks on our constitutional rights as evidenced by:
1. Obama's attack on (Political) free speech by his misuse of the terrific (Terrorist?) powers of the IRS to restrict organizations, opposing him, from obtaining, lawful, tax-free-status and other means of "reaching the People";
2. The Congress' and various Administrations' restriction of expressing political views "from the pulpit" (ie As was done in the years leading up to the War Between The States and by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.)---Such restrictions most threatened by Democrat's bureaucrats and that chiefly against those opposing Democrats, in spite of many, pro-Democrat, speakers allowed (By chiefly
"Black" churches); And,
3. The Democrats Jihad against the individual rights of law-abiding (And legally presumed sane) citizens (ie Over 18-years of age) from "keeping and bearing arms" (ie Without "infringement").

There have been other like violations of civil rights. The most gross case of these violations was the slaughter of women and children at the "Branch Davidian Estates" by the self-admitted direction of Democrat Attorney General Janet Reno (Clinton Administration). That massacre: Involved the use of pyrotechnic tear gas shells which, despite denials by the Democrat Administration, may have set fires in that compound; And, the very illegal use of military equipment and the military personnel to use OR facilitate the use of one or more, tank-like, vehicle(s).

Democrats, Islam & Member I. Omar

As of this week it appears that the Democrats, in the House of Representatives, are unable OR unwilling to attach the name of Member Ilhan Omar to a measure condemning "Anti-Semitism" (ie Hate-of or actions against Jews and, most specially, the State of Israel)---OR, even to enact such a measure without her name cited.

Here, I offer the following definition of "dhimmitude": A submission to Muslims and the teachings and commands of Islam by "unbelievers" who accept an inferior political and social status under the superior rule or status of Muslims."

Most (All?) Democrat Members have "submitted" to the (Please excuse the redundancy) Islamist-terrorists by their gross failure to cite Omar in some, enacted, measure condemning "Anti-Semitism". As far as I can determine they are also obscenely and traitorously failing to condemn the horrid-and-murderous, absolute-and-perpetual, commands of Islam (C). (Of course, they are joined in such gross obscenities by most of the "lame street media", most university administrators-and-professors and other, like, traitors to both the USA and to what remains of Western Civilization.)

Omar does not have dual allegiance to the USA and some foreign nation, she has solitary loyalty to Islam.

Among other things orthodox Muslims are: Opposed to "equal justice under law" as it allows Muslims and men only the same rights and powers as women and non-Muslims; And, in favor of the use of murder, rape, abuse of our laws-and-courts and genocide by Muslims to suppress everyone else.

Monday, March 04, 2019

Free Speech At Universities & High Schools

The law supporting free speech (ie The required, but not sufficient, basis for academic freedom) on public university campuses (And those private universities which accept any Federal monies) is extensive and clear. Lacking are those students who will bring civil suits against violating universities and, as individuals, violating university officials/administrators---And such attorneys who will risk bringing and trying such actions.

Perhaps, President Trump's, other, "Executive Order", to protect free speech on those campuses may forward the protection of the first provision of The Bill Of Rights.

The constitutional, free speech, rights of high school students are still murky. It appears that such schools may limit those rights if they disrupt instruction.

However, it also appears that that disruption must be a "clear and present threat" or actual event AND not some theoretical possibility imagined by some school officials or police officer or Fascist politician. 

In recent cases persecution of those wearing MAGA hats or showing like banners has been, in the same schools, contemporary with the display of other, very political or ideological slogans.

Even the ACLU (Now the "American Christian Loathing Union") once supported the free speech rights of high school students. (I doubt me if the ACLU would now defend students wearing MAGA hats.)


All Fascists should remember that the forceful (Attempted) taking of a MAGA hat (Or like banner) is "Robbery" a felony which (In most jurisdictions) may be resisted by all (Including deadly) force needed to prevent that crime. It is a most serious violation of American's rights that most prosecuting attorneys will not bring felony charges against such thugs who rob or attempt-to-rob citizens (Of all ages) of political materials.

The dangerous animal who "slugged" a citizen, on a California campus, should have immediately been "put down" by anyone as the university police were unable or unwilling to protect an innocent, non-aggressive, citizen from a very dangerous attack.

Letter To Islamist Congress-Critter

8706 West Oklahoma Ave. (#255)
West Allis, WI 53227
(414) 545-1884

17 January 2019 AD (11 Jumada Al-Awwal 1440 AH)

Ms. Ilhan Omar, Member
The House Of Representatives
Suite 203
404 Third Avenue-North
Minneapolis, MN 55401


You have been put forward as “Moderate Muslim". If you are indeed a “Moderate Muslim”, then you will have no problems falling within the definition of “Moderate Muslim” given below and very publicly proclaiming that as a fact.

1.A person who makes a very public proclamation that s/he is a Muslim along with giving out his/her name, address, occupation and place of employment.
2.A a person who then makes a
very public rejection and condemnation of all of the teachings within the Koran, Hadith, Sharia and other Islamic teachings which allow or encourage, and sometimes command, the use of murder (eg Killing anyone who “insults” Mohammed or the Koran), rape and enslavement, genocide (eg Killing all Jews), torture, perpetual war with “unbelievers” until they become Muslims or submit to Islam, lying to and stealing from such “unbelievers” and the very inferior legal and social status given by Islam to all “unbelievers” and to all women.
3.A person who then demands that all such teachings be stricken and removed from the Islamic texts noted above.
4.A person who then
very publicly inks-out of an Arabic copy of the Koran all those verses (eg Some of which are attached) which support the above noted and other inhumane and anti-civilization acts of Islam and orthodox Muslims.

Of course, you would be much more believable, as to the claim that you are a “Moderate Muslim”, if (And only if) you would very publicly state the historical truths that Mohammed of Mecca and Medina was a murderer, bandit, liar, treaty-breaker and the
perverted sexual abuser of a nine-year-young girl-child.

If you do not publicly conform to the above definition , I and all others must assume that you support all of the horrors commanded by the Koran and Hadith.

Please share your response with the Editors of the Minneapolis Star Tribune..

Honestly yours,
          James Pawlak

Saturday, March 02, 2019

Pope Francis Supports Tyranny

Pope Francis has failed to condemn the tyrant who mis-rules Venezuela and, by some views, supports him.

He has also, recently, betrayed the real Catholics in the "Peoples Republic (sic) of China by allowing its Atheist, also tyrants, rulers authority over the appointment of bishops and other matters.

He has recently also supported the criminal-terrorist ideology called "Islam" by his visit to Qatar as is ruled under Islamic law (Which is opposed to the best principles of justice) and by those committed to the basic goal of Islam and Muslims---The destruction of all, true, religions, rule by only Muslim males, and full civil rights to only them. That treason to truth and Christ's people was aggravated by the Catholic-Muslim statement signed during that visit.