This has been one VERY busy summer for us.
As some of you know, in addition to my own writing, we also do editing and publishing for other authors, including noted paranormal investigator, Larry Wilson.
In addition to re-releasing his first two books, Chasing Shadows and Echoes from the Grave, we have also been working with Larry on the release of his forthcoming book, Dark Creepy Places.
In this new book, Larry takes you throughout the Midwest as investigates a number of locations, including the Ridge Cemetery (Tower Hill, Illinois), the Sallie House (Atchison, Kansas), The Farrar School (Farrar, Iowa), and the Granite City YMCA (Granite City, Illinois).
I spent twenty-two years in law enforcement, twenty of which were spent with the NYPD. During that time, I have chased my fair share of bad guys and never thought twice about it. So, when a book can raise the hair on the back of my neck, you know it has to be good.
That's exactly what happens in Dark Creepy Places.
If you interested in the paranormal, or just like scary stuff, then you need to read this book. I promise, I'm working as quickly as possible to get it re-released. Until then, check out his other, equally scary, books.
In reading them I have learned one important thing. I'd rather deal with the living!!
Larry likes to joke with me, asking, "When are we going to the Sallie House?" The answer to that question is: NEVER !!! I'm Irish, and I can state, unequivocally, that there is not enough alcohol, in the world, that would ever get me into that place !!! Even if Larry was buying !!!
If you are interested in learning more, checkout the following links:
Twitter: @Lwilson_UP
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Urban-Paranormal-Investigations/327088597440791
Website: http://lwilsonurbanparanormal.blogspot.com/
Saturday, August 15, 2015
Monday, July 20, 2015
The Good, the Bad & the Ugly – The Iran Nuclear Deal
For the purpose of full
disclosure, I am not a politician or foreign policy expert, although I might have
once stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.
I am just one of you, just maybe a slight bit more knowledgeable since I served
in an intelligence unit for five years, but maybe that is a good thing. It
seems that the more politicians and experts are involved in a subject, the less
positive the outcome.
Take for instance this new ‘deal’,
somberly referred to as the Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action, with Iran over their nuclear program. To be
sure, there are many who are applauding this as a foreign policy success story.
In fact, I have actually looked at the deal and I can honestly say that it is a
good deal.
Some of you might have just
fallen off your chair at that last comment, so I’ll give you a moment to get
your wits about you and perhaps get a cup of coffee or something stronger.
The idea that President Obama has
achieved something that the world once thought impossible, an end to the threat
of Iran obtaining a nuclear bomb, might seem a bit much for some to accept. I
caution however, that while that would be truly historic, and provide the
President with a much needed legacy, as the idiom goes: ‘the devil is in the
details’.
The deal assumes a radical
assumption that somehow Iran will act in good
faith, rather than an assumption of bad
faith. It goes against the known history of the past, in favor of a future
one, that at best, remains cloaked in uncertainty.
So what is ‘Good’ about this
deal? Well, quite frankly, if you are the Iranians, everything…… I haven’t seen
a deal this one-sided since the Dutch bought the island of Manhattan for $24.
Note: For those of you who are for this Iranian deal and will come
unglued about the above statement - Okay, yes, I know that’s a myth. I’m a native
New Yorker. I know that the Dutch actually traded iron kettles, axes, knives,
and cloth for the Island. I know that the Canarsee Tribe didn’t actually own
the island, so the Dutch got taken and then had to pay the Wappinger Tribe when
it was discovered that they actually owned the land….. sheesh, allow me at
least some literary sarcasm.
Getting back to the point, this
deal is truly one sided. Iran agrees to ‘shelve’ components of their program
from 8-15 years. Pardon me, but wasn’t Iran a signatory of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty? The fact that they have been working toward a nuclear
weapon, in violation of their agreement, kind of makes me believe they can’t be
completely trusted. So we are already starting off this agreement knowing that
the Iranians have a history of not following through on their agreements. With
this in mind, I can’t understand how we wouldn’t proceed under the ‘assume bad
faith’ doctrine.
So how did the feckless diplomats
handle this? Well, according to the administration we have 24/7 monitoring of
the Iranian facilities, the so-called ‘anytime, anywhere’ verification. This would
go a long way toward keeping the Iranians honest, but apparently 24/7 doesn’t
actually mean 24/7. You see, it applies only to the ‘known’ facilities. The
secret ones, which apparently fall under the category of ‘known secret’ and
those that may, as of yet, be ‘unknown’ have a different process:
If IAEA inspectors have concerns that Iran is developing nuclear
capabilities, at any non-declared sites, they may request access to
‘verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or
activities inconsistent with the agreement’, by informing Iran of the basis for
their concerns. Iran may admit the inspectors to such site or propose
alternatives to inspection that might satisfy the IAEA's concerns. If such
an agreement cannot be reached, a process running to a maximum of twenty-four
days is triggered. Under this process, Iran and the IAEA have 14 days to
resolve disagreements among themselves. If they fail to reach an agreement,
the Joint Commission (including all eight parties) would have one week in which
to consider the intelligence which initiated the IAEA request. A majority of
the Commission (at least five of the eight members) could then inform Iran of
the action that it would be required to take within three more days. The
majority rule provision (the United States and its European allies: Britain,
France, Germany and the EU, could insist on access or any other steps and that
Iran, Russia or China could not veto them. If Iran did not comply with the
decision within three days, sanctions would be automatically re-imposed under
the snapback provision.
As a result of the above, the breakout time, the time in which it
would be possible for Iran to make enough material for a single nuclear weapon,
should Iran abandon the agreement, will allegedly increase from two to three
months to one year; this would be in place for ten years.
Seriously? Think about this for a
moment. We are entering an agreement with a country that has a history of not
following their agreements. We can conduct 24/7 verification of all their
‘known’ facilities, but if we actually find
out about a secret one, then we have this rube goldberg-esque process to get them to comply.
Yeah, nothing can possibly go wrong with that scenario.
So what is ‘Bad’? Well, if the
above didn’t give you the warm fuzzies, consider this. No one is addressing the
fact that this agreement does nothing to curtail the Iranians from actually
getting the bomb, it just slows it down. To me that sounds a bit sketchy. It
would be like negotiating with the school bully, who is threating to kill you,
for a fifteen year reprieve.
On top of that, the agreement
calls for lifting sanctions and returning upward of one hundred and fifty billion
dollars to the Iranian government. Who, if you weren’t already aware of this,
is the biggest sponsor of state supported terrorism, a fact that was never even
discussed within the framework of the agreement. So I guess they curtail their overt nuclear program, but can continue
their reign of terror without any problems along with a healthy dose of new
financing. Now where do you think the bulk of this money will go? I’m not a
betting man, but I would think that a large chunk will go toward sowing the
seeds of terrorism through its surrogates: Hezbollah
and Hamas, as well as through its own
Qods Force, which has been actively
involved in Iraq, where an estimated 1,100 US troops were killed by groups
trained and equipped by the Qods, not to mention Syria, the rest of the Middle
East, Afghanistan and parts of Africa. The administration even concedes this
point.
Now to the ‘Ugly’ part. The
government of Iran is a habitual liar. That’s not a baseless slander, but
simple fact. The country possesses nearly ten percent of global oil reserves as
well as eighteen percent of natural gas reserves. Their claim that their
nuclear program was for peaceful
purposes has always been a charade. Evidence has clearly shown that, despite
their claims to the contrary, they have pursued technology to weaponize nuclear
energy.
In fact, the IAEA inspectors are
on record as saying that they (Iranians) have routinely stonewalled the inspectors and that it is entirely possible that
Iran has an undisclosed clandestine
nuclear weapons program in place. The lifting of sanctions will open Iran
up to a host of countries and their companies, including some of our allies who agreed to this deal; many of
whom were already dealing with Iran in violation of existing United Nations
sanctions.
United Nations monitors recently
issued a report that expressed frustration about the failure of United Nations
member states, including those negotiating this deal, to report back to the UN
about new incidents of Iran violating Security Council sanctions against its
nuclear program, even though some have unfolded in plain sight. I guess
reporting U.N. violations was not deemed important to risk sensitive
negotiations, during which the Iranians were promising not to violate the
provisions of the agreement.
One example in the report cited
the failure of member states to report the highly publicized presence of
Iranian General Qassem Suleimani, the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps’ elite Qods Force, in Iraq. His Iraq visit was a violation of the U.N.’s imposed
travel ban on key Iranian officials. Not that he cares much about restrictions,
as he moves freely about the region, including a lot of time spent directing
the fight against ISIS in Syria.
If you don’t know anything about
the Qods Force, I suggest reading my novel: Bishop’s Gate.
One thing I am curious about is,
once the sanctions are lifted and those countries and companies get their
fingers into Iran legally, how many will be willing to vote to snapback
sanctions? One thing I do know is that once you open Pandora’s Box, what you
unleash will not willingly go back inside.
The administration claims that
"tough, new requirements will keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear
weapon".
No it won’t. It might prolong it
slightly, but they will obtain it. The world is playing checkers while the
Iranian’s are playing chess. They are happy to let time pass by, while they
work toward their end game, which brings me to another point. Can someone
explain why their ICBM program remains intact? Isn’t anyone concerned about the
“I” in ICBM, which stands for Intercontinental?
Iran doesn’t need an ICBM to hit
Israel or Saudi Arabia, or to further its regional terrorism program, so what
is the purpose? Please spare the talking point about how Iran’s is much further away from an ICBM then they are
from a nuke. That isn’t really all that encouraging. Plus, they have two
allies, who coincidentally are their main weapons suppliers, waiting in the
wings. It is entirely possible that they might potentially expedite the ICBM
process. The lifting of weapons
sanctions is another really bad idea.
Despite all the flowery prose
coming forth from the administration and the world about this deal, the fact of
the matter is Iran is Iran. They have not changed. Ink on a piece of paper does
not change the heart of a person or a country. When you are chanting ‘death to
America’ and ‘death to Israel’ your words resonate very clearly. When you
sponsor terror throughout the region, and make no apologies for it, you show us
who you truly are.
Iran is a theocracy. It is ruled
by the nation’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, who
succeeded Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian Revolution,
after Khomeini's death.
Many will point to the allegation
that Khamenei has reportedly issued a fatwa saying that the
production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons was ‘forbidden
under Islam’. However, I am also aware that the Qur’an says that there are two forms of lying to non-believers, Taqiyya and Kitman, which are permitted under certain circumstances. Taqiyya,
which is saying something that isn't true, is permissible when it advances the
cause of Islam. If he didn’t agree with his country’s nuclear program, then why
were they still pursuing it in violation of his alleged fatwa?
On the other side of that coin, when
the Supreme Leader is quoted as saying ‘Death to America’ and ‘Death to
Israel’, and has actually taken steps to direct terrorist activities against
both countries, I tend to take him, and his words, very seriously.
None of this is a condemnation of
the President. This is not a partisan issue; if you think that way, you are
part of the problem. We are facing a grave threat, and the administrations
answer is to kick the can down the
road. What good does this do? Understand that when the provisions of the deal sunset, the breakout time for Iran to
have a nuclear weapon begins to diminish from the ‘one year’ theory. That is
if, and it is a really big IF, they don’t already have a clandestine program
place. So, theoretically, we have only bought ourselves a 10 year reprieve.
Realistically, it might be much less.
Again, I don’t trust them.
As I have said, this isn’t just an
Obama problem. The responsibility has been shared by every administration going
back to President Carter. The current regime came into power through a bloody coup,
and the world did nothing. If you haven’t, I suggest you take the time to read
up on the current Islamic Republic of Iran. You cannot begin to understand the
problem, if you don’t understand the history.
In the thirty-five years since
the revolt, they have grown to the world’s number one sponsor of state
terrorism. Their list of involvement in acts of terror is stunning in its depth
and breadth. The U.S. hostage crisis, which lasted for more than a year, the
1983 Beirut Barracks bombing, the Israeli Embassy bombing in Buenos Aires, the
Khobar Towers bombing, the training of Al Qaeda, and the list goes on. They
have also been named as being involved and complicit in the U.S. Embassy
bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, as well as the September 11th
attacks, and the Riyadh Compound bombing.
The world has allowed the current
Iranian government to grow from a simple street bully, to a global one. Iran
has never stepped back from its commitment to attack the ‘great Satan’, and yet
everyone has treated it like nothing more than baseless rhetoric, even when
those words were dripping with innocent blood.
Someone recently asked me: What would you do? As if somehow they
can justify this bad deal. My answer was: It
should never have gotten to this point.
After WWII, the United Nations
was created. It was an organization that was supposed to prevent things like
this from ever happening. Part of its mandate is maintaining international peace and security. Like its predecessor,
the League of Nations, throughout its seventy year existence, the U.N. has
proven time and again that it is incapable of doing what it was established to
do.
Consider for a moment the fact
that the four policemen, a branch of
the U.N., which was originally conceived by FDR, was to be the enforcement arm, responsible for keeping
order within their spheres of influence. Britain would oversee its empire as
well as Western Europe; the Soviet Union had responsibility for Eastern Europe along
with the central Eurasian landmass; China controlled East Asia and the Western
Pacific; and the United States was charged with overseeing the Western
Hemisphere. As a preventive measure against new wars, countries other than the
Four Policemen were to be disarmed. Ironically, this concept was originally
drafted by FDR in November 1943 at the Tehran
Conference. Guess that didn’t work out well.
Like an insolent child, Iran
should never have been allowed to arrive at where it is today. Their behavior
should have been stopped long ago. Now they are at the threshold of becoming a
nuclear power, and the best we can formulate is a plan to delay it by ten to fifteen years.
What will we do in that time
frame? Well, if history is any indicator, nothing. What will Iran do? I would
venture to guess that they will do what they have always done. They will
continue to pursue a covert nuclear program, they will continue to promote
unrest and terrorism throughout the region, and push the boundaries to see what
they can get away with.
There might be the occasional
verbal admonishment, or the threat of ‘tougher’ sanctions, but, in the end, the
west has already shown their hand. They have been judged by the Iranian’s as
being weak and unwilling to fight, eager to ‘give up’ concessions in order to
avoid a conflict.
Imagine what the world would be
like today if, instead of pursuing ‘peace in our time’, Hitler was told that if
you cross into Austria, you will be dealt with swiftly and severely? Neville
Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement
quickly led to the so called ‘flower wars’, the annexation of Austria, the Sudetenland
and Memel. Had the west stepped in and said no, to Hitler’s advances toward
Austria, would it have prevented WWII? I don’t know, but I do know that despite
their attempts to avoid it, the war eventually occurred. Bullies don’t stop
until someone stands in their way and says ‘enough’.
WWII ended with a mushroom cloud
over Japan, my fear is that WWIII will begin with one.
Only time will tell if I am
right. I hope that I am not. I hope that the ‘experts’ got it right this time.
That somehow the leopard has truly changed
its spots. However, if I am correct,
then we have just turned the corner on a journey, which ends with that mushroom
cloud appearing over the nation of Israel.
Israel won’t let that happen of
course, which means, despite the grand designs of the negotiators, the prospect
of World War III just became significantly greater, not less.
But what do I know? I’m just an
author who writes fiction novels……… Then again, as we all know, ‘Fiction is the lie through which we tell the
truth’.
Labels:
Bishop's Gate,
Geneva,
IAEA,
Iran Deal,
ISIS,
Islam,
Kerry,
Nuke,
Obama,
President,
QODS,
Secretary of State,
Syria,
Terrorism,
United Nations
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
San Francisco County Sheriff Defends Release of Illegal Immigrant
San Francisco County Sheriff Ross
Mirkarimi defended his department’s release of the suspect in the shooting
death of Katie Steinle. The suspect, Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant
with an extensive criminal history, and who had already been deported five
times, was released, from the San Francisco County jail, after local authorities
there declined to prosecute on a drug related charge.
Sheriff Mirkarimi contends that
if the feds wanted San Francisco to ‘hold’
Sanchez, then they should have issued a warrant or a court order. Since SanFrancisco is a Sanctuary City, they simply opened the door and let Sanchez walk
away.
Pardon me if I take exception to
Sheriff Mirkarimi’s statement. During the course of my twenty-two year law enforcement
career I ran a county jail. We routinely housed federal inmates, including
those that were released to us for the purpose of dealing with local charges.
This is exactly the situation that existed in San Francisco.
Sanchez was picked up by federal authorities
after he had completed a prison sentence. Since he had an outstanding charge in
San Francisco, that charge needed to be addressed before they could process
Sanchez for deportation on the federal immigration charge.
Federal inmates, which Sanchez
was, are remanded to local authorities with what is called a detainer.
Basically it directs the local agency to notify the feds when the local charges
have been addressed, either by release or incarceration. In the case of
release, the feds come and pick-up the prisoner. In the case of incarceration,
they update their records and notify the correctional facility, where the prisoner
is remanded to, that they have a federal hold in place and issue another
detainer to the facility.
For Sheriff Mirkarimi to say that
federal authorities should somehow have done more, belies the simple fact that
he did nothing. The optics on this are horrible and he knows it. He is trying
to deflect the blame instead of recognizing that San Francisco’s failed sanctuary
city policies cost the life of another innocent young person.
Most career law enforcement
officers will tell you that they often feel constrained by the politics that
seems to pervade local law enforcement policies, but Mirkarimi is not a career
law enforcement officer. He is an elected official whose law enforcement career
didn’t begin until 2011, when he was elected as sheriff. Prior to that, he was
a member of the San Francisco County Board, the same folks who are responsible for
the whole Sanctuary City debacle. A policy he vigorously defends, despite being
at odds with the members of his own department.
He is no stranger to controversy.
In 2012, just after his election, he was suspended from office after being
charged with domestic violence battery, child endangerment and dissuading a
witness, in connection with an altercation with his wife. He pled guilty to one
misdemeanor count of false imprisonment and was sentenced to three years of
probation and had to stay away from his wife for seven months. He was
reinstated seven months later, after the Board of Supervisors failed to get
enough votes to remove him from office.
He has also had to deal with internal
issues as well. In March, Mirkarimi issued a directive stating that only he
could turn them over to ICE. This was brought about because his deputies, who
opposed the policy, were reportedly secretly helping federal authorities get
illegal immigrants off the streets.
Under the circumstances, I can
understand why he would want to pawn off the blame to someone else.
This is another example of what
happens when the rule of law becomes subverted; abused and twisted to comply
with the rule of man, or, as it is in this case, the Board of Supervisors.
Mirkarimi, as well as the Board
of Supervisors, is trying to push the blame for the tragic death of Katie
Steinle to the feds, but it is a responsibility that lies squarely on their
doorstep. It was their policy that allowed this to happen and they need to be
held responsible.
Monday, July 6, 2015
San Francisco – The Dark Side of Sanctuary Cities
By now you have all heard of the
terrible tragedy in San Francisco, where Kathryn Steinle was killed by Francisco
Sanchez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Her death brought to the forefront
the tragic policy of sanctuary cities.
For those of you that don’t know
what a sanctuary city is, it is a term given to a city in the United
States that follow certain local practices designed to protect illegal
immigration. There are many who feel this is a good policy and I am sure their hearts
are truly in the right place; however this policy belies a problem that many of
these cities face, which is a growing threat from violent criminals.
We must understand that these
sanctuary cities have taken the step to intentionally violate a 1996 federal
law (the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act) which requires local governments to cooperate
with the Department of Homeland Security's, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
These ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct city employees not to notify the federal
government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities. The
policies also end the distinction between legal resident aliens and illegal
aliens, so those here illegally often benefit from taxpayer funded government
services and programs too.
Consider the ramifications to a
police department, sworn to uphold the law, who are told not to co-operate with
a federal agency. It tells them, in no uncertain terms, that the rule of man,
and not law, is the order of the day. What is even scarier is the fact that the
law becomes volatile, subject to political winds that may change to suit the
whims of those in office at the time.
One of the justifications, for creating a sanctuary city, is the alleged concern
for protecting immigrant rights, but that belies the fact that illegal aliens
are not immigrants. Immigrants come to the United States legally, often as a
result of a long and arduous process, and take the necessary steps to maintain
their legal status. A person who is illegally
smuggled into the U.S., or violates their visa restrictions, is not an
immigrant, but an unauthorized alien subject to deportation under existing
federal law.
I have heard all of the excuses,
such as “Illegal aliens, who are victims
of crimes, or who may be a witness to a crime, won't report them to police for
fear of arrest and deportation.” Okay, sure……..
I spent twenty-two years in law
enforcement. Let’s admit that this is a very convenient excuse which ignores
one fundamental fact: if illegal aliens were properly deported from the
U.S., then they would not be here to become victims, nor would the predators
that pray on them be here either. Try as I might, I could not find a spike in
crimes committed by people legal immigrants from Denmark, Netherlands or
Germany.
The truth of the matter is that
these sanctuary policies do little to protect, but actually create a thriving
environment for the criminal element, who fundamentally understands that they
are unlikely to face any serious risk of being deported.
While I probably understand better
than most, the need to protect the weak, I don’t believe that turning a blind
eye to the law is the best choice. We have a problem in this Country in terms
of illegal entry through our southern border. Simply renaming someone from ‘illegal
immigrant’ to ‘undocumented worker’ is a ruse, which should be insulting to
anyone capable of cogent thinking. How would
you feel if society decided to rename ‘burglars’ to ‘unannounced houseguests’, ‘drug
dealers’ to ‘unlicensed pharmacists’, or, better yet, a ‘rapist’ to an ‘unrequited
lover’?
Seems pretty absurd, doesn’t it?
Yet that is exactly what is occurring,
under the false guise of protection. The truth is, anyone coming over the
border illegally is a criminal. Simply changing their name does not negate
that. If you don’t believe me, I suggest trying that you illegally enter the
country of Mexico and see how well you are treated there when you claim that
you are simply an ‘undocumented worker’.
And it is not just ‘protection’
that is being offered in these sanctuary cities. Consider for a moment that NYC
recently implemented a program which allows illegal immigrants to obtain an
official NYC identification card and they won't be asked about their
immigration status. The card can be used for, among other things, to open a
bank or credit union account, and obtain residential benefits from City Hall. NYPD
officials have said the card will be used to issue summonses or desk appearance
tickets instead of arrest. Think about that for a moment. Someone, who has come
illegally, with no verification of ‘who’ they are, will be given a card that
can be used to obtain benefits and as ID in the case of an arrest……… How do you
know it’s them? Remember that the next time you are jumping through hoops to
prove who you are at a governmental agency.
Just for the record, this
nonsense is also being promoted by the same folks who tell you that getting an ‘ID’
to vote is somehow racist, because it somehow disproportionately affects
minorities, the poor, and Democratic voters. Huh? What?........ Wait, we’re
giving ID’s away to ‘poor, minority’ people, who we don’t even know, yet asking
for ID to vote is somehow bad? I’ll leave that discussion for another day, as I
digress.
For, once again, we are seeing
the folly of the sanctuary city play out in stark reality.
Kathryn Steinle, 32, died in her
father’s arms after being shot at random by Francisco Sanchez. Her last words
were “help me, Dad.” As a father, I cannot begin to imagine the pain that her
father is going through, but my heart breaks for him. It was a tragedy that did
not have to happen.
Sanchez, a career criminal with a
lengthy arrest history, should not have been on the streets of San Francisco,
or any other U.S. city for that matter. He had been in the custody of the San
Francisco Sheriff's Department last March 26, on a decade-old drug charge, but he
was released on April 15, after local prosecutors declined to pursue charges
against him. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said that at the
time they had turned over Sanchez to local law enforcement, they’d requested to
be kept apprised of any changes in his status, a common request that is
routinely conducted in other jurisdictions, but they weren't. Instead,
Sanchez was released from custody.
According to ICE records, Sanchez
had been previously deported five times, most recently in 2009, and his record
included seven prior felony convictions. ICE briefly had him in their custody
after he completed a prison sentence in California, but turned him over to San
Francisco, in March, on an outstanding warrant for a felony drug charge.
Now Sanchez sits in the same jail
he had been previously released from, but this time he won’t be leaving anytime
soon. Unfortunately, that is unlikely to be of little solace to the grieving
family of Kathryn Steinle.
How long before another family in
Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Washington, D.C., Detroit, or any of the other two
dozen more ‘sanctuary cities’ have to bury a relative because of the tragic and
misguided policies that give safe haven to criminals.
Oh, and not to let a good tragedy
go to waste, the White House has just announced that the death of Steinle,
is actually the fault of congressional Republicans. They are also apparently at
fault for the continuing gun violence in the President’s hometown of Chicago.
Maybe both the federal and state
governments need a refresher course in the rule of law, instead of trying to
play politics with the lives of American citizens.
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Uncommon Valor – Insignia of the NYPD Emergency Service Unit
As you know, since retiring from the NYPD I have
written four mystery / suspense books and a fifth one currently in the editing process. What you might not know is that, since 1985, I have
also been an avid collector of NYPD items. In addition to actively collecting,
I also enjoy the history of the Department, especially as it pertains to the
cloth insignia.
In 2011, I was provided with a photograph that showed the
nine original applicants for the NYPD’s Aviation Bureau. As I examined the
photograph I was astounded at what I saw. In that black and white photo,
appeared to be the hood cowling from an ESU truck, nearly a year before the
Emergency Service Division was created. What ensued was an exhaustive research
project that would cover the entire spectrum of the insignia of ESU, including
the pre-merger NYC Housing and Transit Emergency Units.
This 147 page book provides well over two hundred color
photos that chronicle a behind the scenes look at not only the history, but the
patches worn by this elite unit. It is a must have for any insignia collector
or anyone just interested in the NYPD or ESU.
I spent years uncovering the stories behind the patches.
From the very first patch, depicted in that original Aviation photo, to the
most current issued one. In many instances I had the privilege of speaking to
the officers and original graphic designers about their work. I even obtained
some first run artwork, to show the progression from graphic proof, to finished
product. It was a process filled with both frustration and exhilaration, often
at the same time, as each new discovery unearthed even more questions.
When the decision finally came to publish this book, I was
faced with a difficult dilemma. I could choose to go the route of most other
research books, producing it in black and white or go for full color. After
toying with the concept, and doing several pages in black and white, the choice
was clear. After all the hard work that went into creating it, it needed to be
done in color. This has affected the cost, but I truly believe that, in the
end, it was the only way to do justice to this important subject. It is the
book that I would want for my collection and I hope that you will agree.
While the E-Book is currently available through Kindle, the
print version should be released within the next few weeks.
After all this time, I am proud to present to you the
culmination of my work: Uncommon Valor – Insignia of the NYPD Emergency Service
Unit.
Monday, May 18, 2015
Prescient Author vs. Lying / Incompetent Politicians
So, I'm sitting here and I get a breaking news alert: US was running guns through Benghazi to Syria.
Wow, didn't see that one coming....... Oh wait, I did.
Then, I got another article that stated: Defense Intelligence Agency warned of rise of ISIS seventeen months before President Obama dismissed them as "JV Team."
You mean the President was wrong?
That's funny, because when I wrote the plot outline for my book, Bishop's Gate, back in January 2014, I had no idea that some of the key fictional elements would come to fruition.
Things like urban racial tensions, gun running to Syria and the rise of the threat of ISIS.
So how is it exactly that a retired NYPD sergeant was able to piece together a fictional story line that everyone in the real world was saying wasn't happening?
Am I that prescient? Perhaps.
More likely it is because I tend to be a news and intelligence junkie. I follow these things like a lot of folks follow sports. Call it an occupational hazard of having lived it. I dealt with the race hustlers up close and personal, read the global intel briefings, which shed light on just how truly screwed up this world actually is, etc.
So when I see these reports it makes me wonder: Am I all that, or are we only getting part of the story?
I'd love it if you read my books, so I will say a bit of both.
For being the most powerful man in the world, doesn't it appear a bit odd to you that he seems to find out the news the same way most of us do? Don't believe it for a moment. The President has at his disposal the most powerful intelligence apparatus in the world. If he doesn't know about an issue it is because they are intentionally creating what they call 'plausible deniability'. Simply put, POTUS doesn't want to get caught in a lie. So, someone close to him is told and then they mention it in passing, but he is never 'officially' told.
You think POTUS really believed that ISIS was the JV? If I knew what was brewing in Syria, you can bet that they sure as hell knew. He made that little story up because it didn't fit the narrative he was trying to sell.
Remember, he was a community organizer. They sell stories, not facts.
Facts are annoying. It reminds me of the 'activists' who want you to believe there is an epidemic of cops killing innocent black men, even though no actual facts back this up. In fact, the real epidemic is the that the odds are much greater that you will be killed by another black then by the police. Unfortunately for black America, those facts are ignored. There is no money to be made marching for victims of black on black crime.
The problem is, we don't have real leadership anymore.
We are not governed by principals, but by political talking points. What is trending? How can we hashtag this? Who can we blame?
POTUS tells us that the threat of terrorism is on the decline, because it fits the narrative he is pitching during the election. It's not true. He knew it, and you should have known as well. It was a tale that was propped up by the media and now we know it was lie. Just a bit too late.
POTUS, the Secretary of State and the Ambassador to the UN, tell the world the attack in Benghazi was about a video tape mocking Islam. It wasn't and they knew it. In fact, the warnings were there before the attack. No one in the media will ask the tough questions, and even when those in Congress do, they are mocked.
Four dead Americans is nothing to be mocked.
Foggy memories, 'I don't know answers,' conveniently deleted emails.
At the end of the day, it's all still a lie, just wrapped up in a neat little package, because they know the average American just doesn't care.
Like I have said: Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth.
Check out Bishop's Gate and ask yourself what else are you being lied to about.
Wow, didn't see that one coming....... Oh wait, I did.
Then, I got another article that stated: Defense Intelligence Agency warned of rise of ISIS seventeen months before President Obama dismissed them as "JV Team."
You mean the President was wrong?
That's funny, because when I wrote the plot outline for my book, Bishop's Gate, back in January 2014, I had no idea that some of the key fictional elements would come to fruition.
Things like urban racial tensions, gun running to Syria and the rise of the threat of ISIS.
So how is it exactly that a retired NYPD sergeant was able to piece together a fictional story line that everyone in the real world was saying wasn't happening?
Am I that prescient? Perhaps.
More likely it is because I tend to be a news and intelligence junkie. I follow these things like a lot of folks follow sports. Call it an occupational hazard of having lived it. I dealt with the race hustlers up close and personal, read the global intel briefings, which shed light on just how truly screwed up this world actually is, etc.
So when I see these reports it makes me wonder: Am I all that, or are we only getting part of the story?
I'd love it if you read my books, so I will say a bit of both.
For being the most powerful man in the world, doesn't it appear a bit odd to you that he seems to find out the news the same way most of us do? Don't believe it for a moment. The President has at his disposal the most powerful intelligence apparatus in the world. If he doesn't know about an issue it is because they are intentionally creating what they call 'plausible deniability'. Simply put, POTUS doesn't want to get caught in a lie. So, someone close to him is told and then they mention it in passing, but he is never 'officially' told.
You think POTUS really believed that ISIS was the JV? If I knew what was brewing in Syria, you can bet that they sure as hell knew. He made that little story up because it didn't fit the narrative he was trying to sell.
Remember, he was a community organizer. They sell stories, not facts.
Facts are annoying. It reminds me of the 'activists' who want you to believe there is an epidemic of cops killing innocent black men, even though no actual facts back this up. In fact, the real epidemic is the that the odds are much greater that you will be killed by another black then by the police. Unfortunately for black America, those facts are ignored. There is no money to be made marching for victims of black on black crime.
The problem is, we don't have real leadership anymore.
We are not governed by principals, but by political talking points. What is trending? How can we hashtag this? Who can we blame?
POTUS tells us that the threat of terrorism is on the decline, because it fits the narrative he is pitching during the election. It's not true. He knew it, and you should have known as well. It was a tale that was propped up by the media and now we know it was lie. Just a bit too late.
POTUS, the Secretary of State and the Ambassador to the UN, tell the world the attack in Benghazi was about a video tape mocking Islam. It wasn't and they knew it. In fact, the warnings were there before the attack. No one in the media will ask the tough questions, and even when those in Congress do, they are mocked.
Four dead Americans is nothing to be mocked.
Foggy memories, 'I don't know answers,' conveniently deleted emails.
At the end of the day, it's all still a lie, just wrapped up in a neat little package, because they know the average American just doesn't care.
Like I have said: Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth.
Check out Bishop's Gate and ask yourself what else are you being lied to about.
If you’d like to stay up to date on the newest releases,
then please like my Facebook page
and feel free to follow me on Twitter.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Tax Day Gift - Perfect Pawn only $.99
Well, in anticipation of Tax Day, I decided to give readers a gift.
From April 14th to April 19th you can either celebrate or drown your tears with a copy of Perfect Pawn, the first book in the James Maguire series, for only $0.99.
Whether you like mystery, crime, romance, or thriller genre books, you'll find something that appeals to you in Perfect Pawn.
From April 14th to April 19th you can either celebrate or drown your tears with a copy of Perfect Pawn, the first book in the James Maguire series, for only $0.99.
Whether you like mystery, crime, romance, or thriller genre books, you'll find something that appeals to you in Perfect Pawn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)