Just Plane Ridiculous

Picture if you will downtown New York City. Manhattan area. Business district. It's early on a Monday morning and the workday is in full swing. You look up and, in an unwelcome moment of deja freaking vu, you see a large plane, a 747, flying ridiculously low and just a bit too close to buildings for the comfort of anyone and everyone downtown at that moment. And if you were going to try to talk yourself out of panicking at that moment, whatever it was you were going to say to yourself became obsolete the second that you noticed the two F-16 fighter planes following the 747. Insert mass hysteria and 'holy shiite' right about here.

Or don't. Yeah, don't. That's because "Two officials told CNN that "the White House Military Office was trying to update its file photos of Air Force One." Later they said "The flyover...was a training mission....it was also a government-sanctioned photo shoot." And later than that the FAA said that the 747 "...was taking part in a classified, government-sanctioned photo shoot." Well, whatever it was, it wasn't because we were under attack again. It was because there are dumbasses in high government positions that don't think New Yorkers need to be informed ahead of time that a low flying jet will be circling Manhattan and to not be alarmed because it's only a photo shoot for publicity photos. What a bunch of morons.

This whole incident was so wrong on so many levels. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that an incident like this could very well set off a riot, a fracas, a small melee or a number of other scenarios in which the entire public is consumed by fear and reacting to it in a complete state of panic. They had to plan out the whole photo shoot to begin with. They couldn't add to that plan a little part about alerting the public that "this is just a drill"?

Now, this 'photo shoot' was to take some 'public relations photos'. Why is it that we need 'public relations photos' of Air Force One? Are we selling rides on it? Are we putting the plane up for auction on eBay? Are we trying to encourage more tourists to visit the plane during the summer family travel months? What are we publicly trying to relate the plane to? I don't get it.

Of course, when all was said and done and everyone had a full head of steam, the White House apologized, but they did so in a way that made it sound like it was a totally honest mistake that, really, anyone could have made. Anyone who is just visiting this planet, perhaps, but other than that? I wouldn't have thought anyone could be so freaking ignorant, but I guess they can and I guess they work for the government. Good to know. As for who has been held accountable for this, well....so far "A New York City employee was disciplined for failing to pass on the FAA fly over information when it arrived on the employee's desk at City Hall."

Huh. Disciplined. Disciplined HOW? According to city officials, "...the employee was "reprimanded" and a "letter was placed in his file." " GASP!!! Not a letter! Not in his file! His permanent file? Oh, dear God, however will he go on?1 That poor, poor pinheaded dumbass.

:::: sigh ::::

So where are these photos? If they were 'publicity photos', let's give them the 'publicity' that they wanted them to have and let's see them! Uh, no. No? No.
That's because according to the fine folks over there at Politics Daily, the White House has said that they will not be releasing any of the photos from the incident. They continue to blow smoke up our collective arse by saying that "...this is not a new decision and the plan not to release the photo has remained the same since news of the incident broke last week." Wait. THE photo? As in singular? As in one? ONE?

This waste of someone else's money (which is clearly how those who are in charge of these things must think about it, otherwise they'd be a little more careful with it) ended up costing the taxpayers $328,835, $35,000 of which went for fuel! 300 grand and you only have ONE photo and you're not even going to show it to me?? It's MY money! That's MY photo! Gimme!

But seriously, how much sense does any of that make? None! The sole purpose of this Three Stooges-esque caper was to take new publicity shots of the presidential jet over the city. Publicity. As in "for the public?" Well, not if you're asking Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. He explains (as if he's speaking to morons) "The photos . . . are classified -- that's ridiculous." No, what's "ridiculous" is that you seem to think that "publicity" and "classified" are interchangable. Seriously, Pete, what is it? A big Federal Government game of "I've Got A Secret"?

But the aspect of this fiasco that I love the most is this: To take public pictures for the public and then hide them from that same public and do so under the fake pretense that the public photos are classified, cost the taxpayers over $325k and it also scared the living daylights out of every single person in Manhattan that morning. Could they not have saved all of that money and eliminated all of that fear and terror by just Photoshopping the damned jet in front of the Statue of Liberty or anything else that they wanted? Duh.

Of course they could have! But that's how much those folks seem to care about how efficiently they spend taxpayer money, which is to say not at all! Of all of the people that it took to organize that thing, not ONE of those folks said, "Can't we just Photoshop this and save the time and the money?" Even if they're so stupid that they never would have even considered the emotional impact of a low flying 747 followed by F-16 fighters over the business district, wouldn't you think that perhaps at least ONE of them, just ONE might have thought about Photoshop? Even if they only suggested it because they were so freaking lazy and figured Photoshop would be easier, I wouldn't have cared. It's the most obvious solution to this need.

You could put Air Force One flying over the G-D moon with Photoshop! OH, look. I just did. Behold!

How about Air Force One at the maiden voyage of the Titanic? Ta-DA!

Air Force One and the Hindenburg?
I said AND the Hindenburg! Not AS the Hindenburg! But whatever. What about under the sea?
Not bad. How about the Taj Mahal
Whoa! That was close! OK, this one is tricky. The view from my window.

Very impressive! Now what about some of those landmark figures that they wanted to get pics of Air Force One in front of? Let's start with the Empire State Building.
Not exactly what I had in mind, but it makes the point. How about the Statue of Liberty? Done!

Whoops! Got a little too close there. Let's try that again. Behold!

No! No! No! Just let it go by this time. Behold!
That first time was just an accident. It won't hit you. Once more. Behold!

Oh, for cryin' out loud, never mind! You see my point though, right? Of course. And I don't know if the White House saw my point or not, but it turns out they are going to release at least ONE photo and they claim that they'll be doing it soon. Whatever. All I know is that if whatever picture they show us, if it has even the slightest hint of being Photoshopped, I'm pretty sure my head will explode.

Sphere: Related Content

Bye-bye birdie

OK, I don't know if this story is all that great, but I do know that the main photo that comes with this story is absolutely spectacular. Where to begin? Where to begin?

I guess the best place to start would be with the smoky folks over there at The Smoking Gun. They bring us the story of two California men, a one Sony Dong (nice name) and a one Duc Le (not quite as pretty sounded as Sony Dong, but a fine name) who were indicted on multiple counts of conspiracy, with Le also earning charges of making false statements to the US Fish & Wildlife Service (never lie to Fish & Wildlife! It will always come back to haunt you. THey don't mess around when it comes to the fish, not to mention the wildlife.) and Dong being charged with multiple counts of importing goods by means of a false statement. All charges stemmed from the allegedly smuggling of Asian songbirds, apparently from Vietnam, into the United States.

OK, bird smuggling. An odd way to make a living, I'm thinking, but I suppose you find your niche in life and you go with it. Preferably you're going to want to go with it better than these guys did as to not get arrested and face between 10 to 28 years in Federal prison, but you do want to hone your talents. I don't know, I guess when I hear 'smuggling', I think drugs. I don't hear 'smuggling' and think Tweetybird. Though I don't remember Tweetybird being Asian. He did have a unusual speech pattern, though, so maybe he was.

Here's the point: If you're smuggling birds from Vietnam to the United States and you're flying here, you have to have some place to conceal the birds. And on the alleged flight that the alleged birds were allegedly smuggled on, there were allegedly 32 of said concealed birds. In case you are unfamiliar with the number to bird ratio of quantity measure, 32 birds is a lot of birds.

Here comes the math. 18 of said birds were allegedly in a suitcase. 5 of those birds ended up dying. Quite frankly, I'm surprised any of them managed to survive a flight from Vietnam to the United States in an airplane cargo hull enclosed inside of a suitcase. But wait. We're still fourteen birds short. If they weren't in the suitcase, then where were they?

I'll show you where they were. Behold!

Oh, what the hell is that?! That would be a photo of the man's legs and what would appear to be his bird smuggling support hose. According to The Smoking Gun, Customs and Border Protection stopped the man at LAX and when they "inspected Dong and "found bird feathers and droppings on his socks, as well as birds' tail feathers visible under his pants." " Ewww! Ewww, but DUH! Feathers and poop on his socks?!

The CBP agents, upon further investigation and pantleg lifting, discovered "14 live birds attached to two flat pieces of cloth that were wrapped around his calves. The birds each appear to have been placed in sleeves that were hooked on to the cloth around Dong's legs." Yes! That is exactly what it appears is going on there! I know that they have to be thorough for the reports and for accuracy and to ensure that evidence is presented fairly at any trial that may occur, but my God, sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words (even if most of those words are "Holy crap!"

In case you were wondering, "The birds included three red-whiskered bul-buls (which is listed as an injurious species under federal law), four magpie robins and six shama thrush." " So there you have it! Me, I know what none of those birds look like or ARE, for that matter.

The part that surprises me the most? I'm not so sure that it's the fact he has 14 live birds strapped to his legs. Sure, that's surprising, but I don't think that it's more surprising than the fact that he was able to BOARD THE PLANE in Vietnam in the first place! And if you think I"m impressed that they caught the guy at LAX, I'm not! As the press release statement says that when a search warrant of Le's residence was executed, they found 70 large birdcages and 51 Asian songbirds. Dong said that the birds were purchased for about $50 apiece and that they resold them in the US for around $300-$400 apiece. So obviously, they had done this BEFORE and it worked!!

Grand! Here's the picture that we've painted. We've got a guy from Vietnam getting on a plane. He has 14 SONGbirds strapped to his legs and there are "feathers and droppings on his socks, as well as birds' tail feathers visible under his pants." I can't imagine that the SONGbirds were not want to burst into song at some point during this little caper. But aside from that, feathers out the pants, droppings on the socks, birds on the legs, so SO many clues and yet, apparently, it was working for them!

So, tell me again why in the hell I'm taking off my shoes when I'm getting ready to fly somewhere? It's obviously not to check for songbird droppings on my socks because if it WAS then those guys never would have managed to pull this off AT LEAST ONCE BEFORE!

Man, I feel safer already. Oh, wait. That's right. I don't.

And thanks to The Daily Telegraph, we have photos of other people smuggling a variety of things into a variety of countries. Here's a guy with two live pigeons taped to his legs (there's a sentence I never thought I'd write.):

You know, you really have to assume that they don't let anyone who doesn't know what's going on in the room when they're taking these pictures. Imagine if someone walked in on something like that. There's a guy standing there wearing socks and no shoes with his pants pulled down around his ankles and a bunch of pigeons taped to his legs! If you could muster up the strength to backpedal out of the room, you've probably just run off shouting, "My eyes! My EYES!"

Above is what is known as an 'egg smuggling vest'. It works just like it looks like it would work. There are little pouches on the vest and you put eggs of some kind of creature in there and then you wear it on the plane. (I'm assuming they do this by plane. I'm not imagining this for smuggling via boat.) If anyone asks, you just tell them that you have abs of steel and try to look inconspicuous when you say that.

Here are the eggs that are inside of the vest. These smugglers pay rapt attention to detail, as each egg is clearly labled. I enjoy a tidy egg smuggling vest.

Here is a woman wearing an apron that was constructured to smuggle tropical fish into the country. Did she really think that no one was going to notice that? She's like a human prize rack at a carnival.

Need to smuggle just a few eggs or even just a few more eggs into the country? Run out of room in your egg smuggling vest? Then the egg smuggling underwear are just the thing for you! Behold!

What about other animals, you ask? What about reptiles? Do they smuggle reptiles into the country in the same way that they smuggle birds? No. Not quite. Below is the picture of a snake inside of a ceramic garden gnome to be smuggled into the country. It's really the sort of image that can get you thinking. Or just keep you up all night. I think it's the latter.

You're really going to have to be more creative than whoever the guy was that just crammed some pythons into a suitcase and went happily to the airport. Too bad all of that luggage screening and x-raying got in the way there.


Or this guy who just went with the ol' standby "Frog In A Tube".



And it's cousin, "Bird In A Tube."



I'll tell you this much. After seeing all of these various ways folks try to smuggle animals into this country, if those people would put all of this energy and effort toward a legitimate business, I can guarantee they'd do just fine. AND they wouldn't run the risk of getting arrested and thrown into Federal prison for 10+ years. But that's just me apparently, as these guys don't seem to have any intention of not doing this.

Sphere: Related Content

ADHD Does NOT Cause Tattooed Genitalia

When a story comes from The Local, Sweden's News in English, you know it's going to be good. No exception here with this headline: "Boyfriend blames ADHD for genital tattoo abuse." God, I love the Swedish press.

Apparently what we have here is a 25-year old guy from Umea (that's in northern Sweden, in case you're reading this today without your globe or atlas) who has been charged with aggravated assault of his girlfriend which included, among other things, "...tattooing his name and ID number on her sexual organs." Well, that's a little murky, how about some details?

He doesn't just have the one assault charge. No, he has 17 assault charges. And he took his time to rack them up also, as they took place over a period of five years. Why it hadn't been dealt with before then is anyone's guess and it wasn't explained in the article. But that's OK because there's better stuff to get into! Hoo-boy, is there.

The man is accused of "...punching his girlfriend on several occasions between 2004 until February 2009 when the woman left him." (Maybe she was busy, we don't know.) It would seem that it really takes something fairly extreme for this woman to leave such a relationship. And I'm not talking fairly extreme by my standards or by your standards. I'm talking fairly extreme for a person who is not quite right.

Aside from the five years with all of the punching, he is also accused of "...assaulting her with a fork and re-opening the head wound as it began to heal." No word on whether or not the same utensil was used in the re-opening as was used in the initial opening of said head. He is also accused of "...forcing her to consume his medicine to ensure that she kept him company during the time that he was awake." (Translation of "his medicine": Meth. I'm guessing.)

Well, see, THAT explains it! She knew how LONELY he was, so she stayed. Or, perhaps, she's just a little fuzzy on what a healthy relationship entails. (Here's a hint: No forks in the head. Ever.) But I don't know how she'd be able to explain staying, yes staying, staying with hm after he allegedly "forced her to submit to a tattoo on her sexual organs - of his name and personal identification number." All rightee then. I don't rightly know what to say about that, other than OW!OW!OW!OW!OOWWW!!!!

Personal identification number? Like his Social Security Number? Not that it matters, mind you, I'm just curious. Was he planning on spending the rest of his life with her and went to that extreme measure to ensure that just in case he forgot his wallet, if she was with him (and remember, he sounded lonely, so she would probably drugged up and by his side at all times in his little fantasy world) he'd always have that ID number. It'd be a little awkward on days she was wearing pants, I suppose. Oh, but I'm sure he thought this thing through enough. I'm sure he had a way around that!
Since something like that is pretty hard to deny when you're on trial, he seems to have taken to just defending his actions with the most likely rationale that he could come up with. That being that he was "...suffering from the condition ADHD - attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder - and it resulted in him becoming angry at minor incidents which in turn caused him to turn violent." I see.

The problem with that defense, other than it's pathetic, is that it's kind of...um, what's the word I want? Oh, I've got it! Wrong. It's wrong. It seems to me that in order to, well, do anything, really, with a woman's genitalia requires a bit of effort and concentration. But in order to be able to TATTOO your name AND your personal identification number, um, down there, well that would seem to require a great deal, an IMMENSE deal of concentration in order to get the task at hand finished. (Good Lord, how painful must that have been? Tattooing. THAT. ON her. Yikes. Too bad she wasn't some sort of body builder because then she could have just crushed his skull between her knees like a vice. What an A-hole.)

And what, pray tell, what would be the "minor incident" that provoked Mr. ADHD there into grabbing the tattoo gun and going to town with it on her nether regions? Dinner not ready on time? Tattoo your girlfriends genitalia! Long day at the office? Blow off some steam by tattooing your girlfriend's genitalia! Can't get the bloody lawnmower to start? No worries! Just tattoo your girlfriend's genitalia and feel your problems just fade away! Are we really supposed to believe that a "minor incident" would result in a "major tattoo upon ones sexual organs"? I don't we are. I know that we can't!

So after all of that, after the cranium stabbed with fork incident...TWICE, after the five years of punching, after all of the staying awake to stave off loneliness, after all of that, none of it was enough to cause her to think to herself, "I wonder if there's something more for me out there." So what finally did it? What was the final straw? Ironically (in a way), "The woman finally decided to leave the man in mid-February 2009 when she suffered nerve and muscle damage in her legs after having been attacked with an axe."

So when he finally grabs the AXE and begins using it ON HER in an axe-like manner, that's when she begins to see the light and decides it's time to walk away from their fairy tale life together? When she's at the point where she literally CANNOT walk away, she decides to walk away? Interesting.

There are only two items in this sordid tale of 'Boy meets girl' that are encouraging. The first, obviously, is that she finally left. She might have limped away, she might have crawled away, but regardless as to how, she left. Excellent. The second is that this guy, having admitted to these actions and deciding to go with the "It was the ADHD" defense, is a pathetic moron who, I'm assuming, will likely be convicted. I mean, I know nothing is ever guaranteed or anything, especially in a legal system, but this seems like a pretty done deal in the arena of him being convicted. The only way it could be more of a lock would be if, say for instance, they found his blood with matching DNA at the crime scene and bloody gloves used in the attack behind his house and then he led police on a low-speed chase down an LA freeway. And I see this as being similar to a scenario like that, where the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in order for someone like the one in my example in order to not be convicted.

Oh. Whoops.

OK, the jury would have to be stocked full of fools in my "hypothetical" example in order to not be convicted. (Wow. Unfortunate choice to use for the sake of comparison there.)

Sphere: Related Content

No Hard Feelings

All I have to say is, in these troubled times, God bless the New York Post guys. All right, that's not all I have to say. But it's a good start considering that we're almost to the 16 year anniversary of the night when a one Lorena Bobbitt, described by the NY Post as an "unrepentant amateur surgeon", severed her then-husband John Wayne Bobbitt's manhood with a large kitchen knife. Time flies, don't it?

Lorena the Lopper (that's what I call her) was 24 at the time. Clearly old enough to know better. No one wants their manhood de-manned, as it were. Even those of us without manhood don't want it de-manned. Was that really necessary?

According to her, the schlong slicing was provoked after he had returned home extremely drunk after a night of partying and then did proceed to rape her. In which case the real tragedy here is that she didn't cut the whole damn thing off and throw in the the garbage disposal.

She recalls, "I remember driving with his severed penis in my hand, and in my other hand, I had the knife." Yep. That sounds exactly like something that someone would absolutely remember! It would definitely be hard to forget having...that in your hand and there not being a man attached to it at the time.

She doesn't remember everything though because she says, "I didn't even know how I got into the car, and apparently, I had to toss it somewhere because I couldn't turn the wheel of my car, so I got rid of the thing . . . Then I learned at the hospital later on that it was his penis." I guess she felt the need to hang onto that thing personally, thus all of the difficulty with the turning and such. You'd think that she could just throw it in the glove box or strap it into the seat next to her (Buckle up! Click it or ticket!). But wait, that couldn't have been the problem because she threw it out the window (in what must have been seen as the ultimate act of disrespect. Next to the penis severing itself, of course)..

But hey, time heals all wounds, right? Well, some. The separated unit was reunited with it's rightful owner and successfully reattached (though it did appear to have a 'knuckle' afterwards. Eww. Allegedly.). And according to an archived article over there at The New York Times "Mr. Bobbitt is one of only half a dozen Americans known to have had a severed penis successfully reattached. (One Wisconsin man who lost his in a 1989 lawn-mower accident had it grafted onto his forearm as a kind of stopgap measure until it could be returned to its rightful place.)" Holycrapholycrapholycrap!!! WHAT?!?!

Grafted to his forearm?? Lawnmower accident?! How in the hell does one have a lawnmower accident that involves one's penis? That is not an approved 'manscaping' method, I'm fairly certain of that! And the guy had it grafted (which, until it's un-grafted is rather permanent) to his forearm?! Not his upper-arm, where it would be easy to conceal! Oh, no! No, they had to stick it directly on the forearm so it would be incredibly hard to miss! Might as just as well have put it on his forehead! What year was this 1687? What?! 1989?? Clearly a bad year to have your schlong shlopped off. I've heard of scientists growing things like ears on the backs of mice, which is also quite strange, I'm not trying to imply that it isn't! But having your groin-age on your forearm is just beyond my ability to comprehend. That's mainly because a) I don't even have one and b) even if I did, I couldn't imagine having it attached to my arm. And since guys love the thing so much, that would be the epitome of wearing one's heart on one's sleeve, wouldn't it? I think it would.

OK, so now that's all I can think about! Back on track! Back. On. Track. So, she throws it out the window (of her Mercury Capri. Yes. A news article felt the need to include the kind of car that she drove off in with the severed unit still in her hand. Why that has any relevance at all is beyond me. Now if she had fled the scene in the Oscar Meyer Weinermobile, that might have had some relevance in a strange, rather ironic way, but relevant none the less.), but I haven't been able to find how it was found!

Can you imagine? You're walking out of the 7-11 with your twelve pack of Schlitz or PBR (Oh, what?! Like they're not a little white trash-y? Puh-lease. Mercury Capri? Severed penis? It all just screams 'white trash'. Well, Mr. Bobbitt just screamed.) and you're about to jump in through the driver's side window of your car and...."Hey.....What's that over there?" But then what? You whip out a Ziploc bag and toss it in? I don't get that and it wasn't explained very well anywhere either. (Damn mainstream media. At least now I have a time frame as to when things started going downhill for the press. "Mainstream Media: Sucking since at least 1994!")

Both of these lunatics were charged with crimes; him with marital sexual assault and her with malicious wounding, an understatement if there ever was one. And just to add to all of the wackiness, both of these lunatics were found not guilty; he was found just plain ol' 'not guilty', but she was found 'not guilty by reason of temporary insanity' and spent 45 days being evaluated in a psychiatric facility. She was released after 45 days, reaffirming the 'temporary' part of that verdict.

So why all of the Bobbitt hoopla? Because they are "re-uniting" for the first time since the unfortunate incident on the TV-show The Insider, of course. The Insider is billing it as the "Shocking Bobbitt Reunion" which doesn't show nearly the creativity of the folks over there at The NY Post, that's for sure. They could have gone with "The tension is so thick between the Bobbitts that you could cut it with a knife, on the next episode of The Insider." Or "Does time really heal old wounds? Find out on the next...." You get the point. The Insider clearly did not. Shocking? She didn't Taser his grundle, why use the word 'shocking'. These folks are obviously dysfunctional (probably in more ways than one in his case). Who would be 'shocked' (just shocked!) that they would agree to do an 'interview', most likely for a fee, together? No one. No one at all.

The clips that they're running to 'entice viewers' have a shot that is a close-up of Lorena as she looks into the camera and deadpans, "I severed my husband's manhood." Yeah, yeah. We know. Shouldn't you have gone away by now? Seems like you should have. Yet you're still here and you're talking! Odd. Very odd.

I was trying to decide whether or not to include a pic of the actual severed unit. They showed it in court! But this isn't court. Far from. Granted, I'm judgmental, but that doesn't make it court. Anyway, if you feel the urge (or have the hiccups and would like to try scaring them away) you can click here and you'll be whisked away to a full color photo of the wayward unit. Lucky you! And you only had to wait sixteen years to see it! Not bad! The photo, however, kind of is. Bad that is. Men, I wouldn't recommend it. You've been warned.

Sphere: Related Content