976 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

So now the democrats are saying its over, they fired that head of IRS and they'll prosecute

nothing ot see here

Obama had nothing to do with it.

Yeah and if you believe that, you can believe it was just coincidence that left-wing hacks went rogue and perverted the IRS into a machine to punish thousands of right-wing activists, and seriously tried to get away with it, on Obama's watch.  Pure accident of timing.   If these left-wing hacks had the seniority under Bush, they'd have persecuted right-wingers and tried to get away with it under his Administration.

Go to forum: Politics

977 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

haha its sad I have to ask

No he needs to kick butt over there.

Go to forum: Politics

978 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

which one?

Go to forum: Politics

979 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

no! Thx to our beloved leader for his services in the struggle for freedom!!!!/

Go to forum: Politics

980 Reply by The Yell

(56 replies, posted in Politics)

http://www.impactguns.com/data/default/ … _37201.jpg

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14Ran … s/5801.jpg

Which of those is the more "dangerous" rifle?
Neither.  They're both .223 semi-auto rifles with different furniture.

What you're talking about is a tactical rifle that people use for self-defense to own people with handguns and shotguns.
That said:

A pistol grip supposedly makes it easier to steady the rifle with one hand and a sling or a corner or fence.

A laser sight is pointless on a two-handed weapon.  You use a laser sight so you don't have to stare down the barrel of a pistol at very close ranges to aim.  If you are not very close, or are using both hands, you can look down the barrel to aim very naturally, in which case you are better served with a 40mm red-dot sight.

Flash light attachments actually make the gun safer! Instead of shooting people you can dazzle them with a tactical flashlight.  Those really hurt at night.  People who are
a) blinded
b) by a flashlight at the end of some guy's gun
tend to give up easier


As for background checks - I think I will never support any more federal gun control.  There are people who want gun confiscation like they have in big cities, which makes crime worse.  These gungrabbers want national gun policy so confiscation can happen faster like in Australia and the UK.  Anything good or reasonable regarding gun control can be done by the states individually, who coincidentally, also regulate the mentally ill and parole of most violent criminals.  If the gun control is a smart idea it will spread without a federal policy, like fire alarms in schools, and photos on driver's licenses, and the Uniform Commercial Code, all of which states took up for themselves.

Go to forum: Politics

981 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

The American Civil Liberties Union wanted insight into the Obama administration’s policy on intercepting text messages. So it submitted a Freedom of Information Act request. The Justice Department complied with the law by releasing 15 pages—but these were censored.  Every single word except the subject of the memo was shaded over in black.

Here’s the redacted memo.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/page/dep … u-19152996

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/201 … formation/

Go to forum: Politics

982 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

Hmm, well #1 is Obama saying people who warn about tyranny are a threat to democracy.

#2 is a story that HHS Secretary wants "voluntary" donations from corporations to fund the rollout of Obamacare.

#3 is story that IRS made right-wing political groups fill out extra paperwork and suffer delays and audits if they asked to set up a tax-exempt organization for political donations, deliberately.

#4 is story about Justice Dept tracking leaks in government by grabbing Associated Press phone records to see who called them for two months.

#5 is Environmental Protection Agency will find records for left-wing groups for free but charges critics for the same search.

#6 is how current boss of IRS knew the agency was making trouble for right-wing political groups, but when Republicans in Congress asked about the complaints, he forgot to tell them the IRS was specifically targeting right wingers.

#7 is how the State Dept press spokesperson shut up CIA reports on terrorist attack in Benghazi, because it made the State Dept. look bad for ignoring warnings about possible terrorist attacks.  I mean, that's the reason she gave to kill it: it made them look bad for ignoring warnings.

#8 is how the IRS not only made the right-wing groups fill out extra paperwork, name donors, wait months, etc., but it also gave their confidential applications to left-wing websites so they could attack the right-wingers for being greedy tax dodgers.

oh and #9 will be how the Justice Dept answered a mandatory request for a copy of its policy on getting text messages, by producing 15 pages of policy with every word blacked out.

Go to forum: Politics

983 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

Good thing Obama is there to stop tyranny by special interests who get good treatment the rest of us can't!

Go to forum: Politics

984 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year.

The IRS did not respond to requests Monday following up about that release, and whether it had determined how the applications were sent to ProPublica.

In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)

On Friday, Lois Lerner, the head of the division on tax-exempt organizations, apologized to Tea Party and other conservative groups because the IRS’ Cincinnati office had unfairly targeted them. Tea Party groups had complained in early 2012 that they were being sent overly intrusive questionnaires in response to their applications.

That scrutiny appears to have gone beyond Tea Party groups to applicants saying they wanted to educate the public to “make America a better place to live” or that criticized how the country was being run, according to a draft audit cited by many outlets. The full audit, by the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration, will reportedly be released this week. (ProPublica was not contacted by the inspector general’s office.) (UPDATE May 14: The audit has been released.) 
http://www.propublica.org/article/irs-o … ntial-docs

Go to forum: Politics

985 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:

“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya.  These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either?  Concerned …”

The paragraph was entirely deleted.

Like the final version used by Ambassador Rice on the Sunday shows, the CIA’s first drafts said the attack appeared to have been “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” but the CIA version went on to say, “That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.”  The draft went on to specifically name  the al Qaeda-affiliated group named Ansar al-Sharia.

Once again, Nuland objected to naming the terrorist groups because “we don’t want to prejudice the investigation.”
In response, an NSC staffer coordinating the review of the talking points wrote back to Nuland, “The FBI did not have major concerns with the points and offered only a couple minor suggestions.”

After the talking points were edited slightly to address Nuland’s concerns, she responded that changes did not go far enough.

“These changes don’t resolve all of my issues or those of my buildings leadership,” Nuland wrote.
In an email dated 9/14/12 at 9:34 p.m. — three days after the attack and two days before Ambassador Rice appeared on the Sunday shows – Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes wrote an email saying the State Department’s concerns needed to be addressed.

“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.  We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”

After that meeting, which took place Saturday morning at the White House, the CIA drafted the final version of the talking points – deleting all references to al Qaeda and to the security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said none of this contradicts what he said about the talking points because ultimately all versions were actually written and signed-off by the CIA.

“The CIA drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points,” Carney said. “The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and nonsubstantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from consulate to diplomatic facility and the like. And ultimately, this all has been discussed and reviewed and provided in enormous levels of detail by the administration to Congressional investigators, and the attempt to politicize the talking points, again, is part of an effort to, you know, chase after what isn’t the substance here.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 … eferences/

Go to forum: Politics

986 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS division the oversees tax-exempt groups, acknowledged that groups seeking nonprofit status were flagged for additional review if their applications included phrases like “tea party” or “patriot.” She told reporters that requesting donor information isn’t standard practice at the IRS.

Shulman may have been running the IRS at the time, but Miller’s role is taking center stage now. His responses to the GOP letter — and others like it — along with his new job as the acting IRS commissioner put him squarely in the cross hairs of Republican lawmakers.

The letters between Hatch and Miller are written in dry tax-speak but are shaping up as central to GOP claims that Miller hid what he knew about the targeting, even as Hatch and others asked the IRS directly — and pointedly — about whether it was going on.

“What is the specific statutory authority giving the IRS authority to request actual donor names during reviews of applications for recognition of exemption under Section 501(c)(4)?” Hatch and the other GOP lawmakers asked on June 18, 2012. “Is it customary for IRS agents to request donor and contributor identifying information during review of applications for tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(4)? Please provide the number of requests by the IRS for such information for each year from 2002 to 2011.”

But Miller’s reply gave no hint that he did, in fact, have knowledge about what Hatch was seeking.

“The applicable regulations are authorized by Section 7805 of the Internal Revenue Code, which provides general authority to prescribe all needed regulations for the enforcement of tax rules,” he wrote.

Some lawmakers, including Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) called for him to step down on Monday.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/i … z2TJqkK100

Go to forum: Politics

987 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

The Environmental Protection Agency often refuses to waive fees for Freedom of Information Act requests from conservative groups, while almost always waiving them for environmental groups.

That’s according to an analysis of a year’s worth of FOIA requests by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a nonprofit Washington, D.C.-based public policy group that advocates limited government, free enterprise and individual liberty. The waivers are significant since FOIA fees can run into the thousands of dollars – enough money to discourage groups from going forward with their requests for emails and other government documents. Federal agencies usually waive fees on FOIA requests by the media or public-interest groups.

CEI found that the EPA waived fees on 75 out of 82 FOIA requests made by environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace. But it denied fee waivers on 14 of CEI’s 15 FOIA requests. Other conservative groups also were often denied fee waivers, according to CEI.

“EPA’s practice is to take care of their friends and impose ridiculous obstacles to deny problematic parties’ request for information,” said Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at CEI.

“This is as clear an example of disparate treatment as the IRS hurdles selectively imposed upon groups with names ominously reflecting an interest in, say, a less intrusive or biased federal government,” he said.

I asked EPA about CEI's allegations, and here's the agency's response: "EPA makes waiver determinations based on legal requirements that are consistently applied to all fee waiver requests, not on the identity of the reporter."

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/ … pa-of.html

Go to forum: Politics

988 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news.

The records obtained by the Justice Department listed outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, for general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and for the main number for the AP in the House of Representatives press gallery, according to attorneys for the AP. It was not clear if the records also included incoming calls or the duration of the calls.

In all, the government seized the records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012. The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown, but more than a hundred journalists work in the offices where phone records were targeted, on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.

In a letter of protest sent to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt said the government sought and obtained information far beyond anything that could be justified by any specific investigation. He demanded the return of the phone records and destruction of all copies.

"There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP's newsgathering operations and disclose information about AP's activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know," Pruitt said.

The government would not say why it sought the records. Officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have provided information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

In testimony in February, CIA Director John Brennan noted that the FBI had questioned him about whether he was AP's source, which he denied. He called the release of the information to the media about the terror plot an "unauthorized and dangerous disclosure of classified information."

Prosecutors have sought phone records from reporters before, but the seizure of records from such a wide array of AP offices, including general AP switchboards numbers and an office-wide shared fax line, is unusual.

In the letter notifying the AP, which was received Friday, the Justice Department offered no explanation for the seizure, according to Pruitt's letter and attorneys for the AP. The records were presumably obtained from phone companies earlier this year although the government letter did not explain that. None of the information provided by the government to the AP suggested the actual phone conversations were monitored.

Among those whose phone numbers were obtained were five reporters and an editor who were involved in the May 7, 2012, story.

The Obama administration has aggressively investigated disclosures of classified information to the media and has brought six cases against people suspected of providing classified information, more than under all previous presidents combined.
The White House on Monday said that other than press reports it had no knowledge of Justice Department attempts to seek AP phone records.

"We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those matters are handled independently by the Justice Department," spokesman Jay Carney said.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the investigative House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said on CNN, "They had an obligation to look for every other way to get it before they intruded on the freedom of the press."

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in an emailed statement: "The burden is always on the government when they go after private information, especially information regarding the press or its confidential sources. ... On the face of it, I am concerned that the government may not have met that burden. I am very troubled by these allegations and want to hear the government's explanation."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130514/DA68UIS00.html

Go to forum: Politics

989 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

The IRS targeting of conservative groups is far broader than first reported, with nearly 500 organizations singled out for additional scrutiny, according to two lawmakers briefed by the agency.
IRS officials claimed on Friday that roughly 300 groups received additional scrutiny. Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that the number has actually risen to 471. Further, they said it is "unclear" whether Tea Party and other conservative groups are being targeted to this day.
The lawmakers disclosed the additional information in a letter Tuesday to Lois Lerner, the IRS official who first disclosed the inappropriate practice. They sent the letter as a highly anticipated watchdog report was released, finding "inappropriate" action at the IRS.
The Republican congressmen also revealed that the IRS itself determined their effort was biased against conservatives more than a year ago.
"The actions of the IRS are unconscionable and appalling," they wrote.
Given the advance knowledge of the program, Issa and Jordan voiced serious concerns about the honesty of top IRS officials and the lack of disciplinary action. The lawmakers said they've learned nobody has been disciplined and that one employee at the Cincinnati office where this program was supposedly started "received a promotion or 'career enhancement.'"
They also questioned why top officials never disclosed the targeting effort when the agency conducted an internal review and found, on May 3 of last year, "significant problems in the review process and a substantial bias against conservative groups."
They said "at no point" did Lerner or anyone else inform Congress of the findings. And they claimed it appeared Lerner "provided false or misleading information on four separate occasions" in 2012 on the program. They were referring to requests made last year to the IRS about its vetting of Tea Party groups. Lerner and other officials did not reveal the internal concern about the effort at the time, they said.
Lawmakers across Capitol Hill were voicing concerns about the IRS program Tuesday, as independent investigators prepared to release a more complete accounting of what they discovered at the IRS.
Attorney General Eric Holder said he's ordered the Justice Department to investigate the agency.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said what the agency did is "inexcusable," though he said the agency has also inappropriately targeted left-leaning groups in the past.
Issa and Jordan wrote their letter after receiving a briefing from IRS staff.
They claimed that the additional scrutiny from the IRS effectively placed Tea Party and other groups "in a state of purgatory where they often languished without action for periods as long as two years."
Separate documents have indicated the program started as early as 2010.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05 … z2TJp0eCwN

Go to forum: Politics

990 Reply by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has gone, hat in hand, to health industry officials, asking them to make large financial donations to help with the effort to implement President Obama’s landmark health-care law, two people familiar with the outreach said.
Her unusual fundraising push comes after Congress repeatedly rejected the Obama administration’s requests for additional funds to set up the Affordable Care Act, leaving HHS to implement the president’s signature legislative accomplishment on what officials have described as a shoestring budget.
Over the past three months, Sebelius has made multiple phone calls to health industry executives, community organizations and church groups and asked that they contribute whatever they can to nonprofit groups that are working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness of the law, according to an HHS official and an industry person familiar with the secretary’s activities. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk openly about private discussions.
An HHS spokesperson said Sebelius was within the bounds of her authority in asking for help.
But Republicans charged that Sebelius’s outreach was improper because it pressured private companies and other groups to support the Affordable Care Act. The latest controversy has emerged as the law faces a string of challenges from GOP lawmakers in Washington and skepticism from many state officials across the country.
“To solicit funds from health-care executives to help pay for the implementation of the President’s $2.6 trillion health spending law is absurd,” Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) said in a statement. “I will be seeking more information from the Administration about these actions to help better understand whether there are conflicts of interest and if it violated federal law.”
Federal regulations do not allow department officials to fundraise in their professional capacity. They do, however, allow Cabinet members to solicit donations as private citizens “if you do not solicit funds from a subordinate or from someone who has or seeks business with the Department, and you do not use your official title,” according to Justice Department regulations.
HHS spokesman Jason Young added that a special section in the Public Health Service Act allows the secretary to support and encourage others to support nonprofit groups working to provide health information and conduct other public-health activities.
Sebelius is working “with a full range of stakeholders who share in the mission of getting Americans the help they need and deserve,” Young said. “Part of our mission is to help uninsured Americans take advantage of new, quality affordable insurance options that are coming thanks to the health law.”
Young said that Sebelius did not solicit for funds directly from industries that HHS regulates, such as insurance companies and hospitals, but rather asked them to contribute in whatever way they can.
But the industry official who had knowledge of the calls but did not participate directly in them said there was a clear insinuation by the administration that the insurers should give financially to the nonprofits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won … obamacare/

Go to forum: Politics

991 Topic by The Yell

(26 replies, posted in Politics)

Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works.  They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner.  You should reject these voices.  Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can’t be trusted.

We have never been a people who place all of our faith in government to solve our problems; we shouldn’t want to.  But we don’t think the government is the source of all our problems, either.  Because we understand that this democracy is ours.  And as citizens, we understand that it’s not about what America can do for us; it’s about what can be done by us, together, through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government.  (Applause.)  And, Class of 2013, you have to be involved in that process.  (Applause.) 

The founders trusted us with this awesome authority.  We should trust ourselves with it, too.  Because when we don’t, when we turn away and get discouraged and cynical, and abdicate that authority, we grant our silent consent to someone who will gladly claim it.  That’s how we end up with lobbyists who set the agenda; and policies detached from what middle-class families face every day; the well-connected who publicly demand that Washington stay out of their business -- and then whisper in government’s ear for special treatment that you don’t get. -- Barack Obama, 5/5/13 Ohio State University

Go to forum: Politics

992 Reply by The Yell

(3 replies, posted in General)

o.O

Go to forum: General

993 Reply by The Yell

(2 replies, posted in General)

yes but somebody pointed out he's as old as the Empire State Building

Go to forum: General

994 Topic by The Yell

(2 replies, posted in General)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWp7HMbfMWA

This is so wrong on so many levels.

To start with, an Audi will NEVER have the resale value of a Mercedes.  And on maintenance, you can get Mercedes parts anywhere on earth.  Dunno about the Audi, or even if you can, how much more will you pay?  And as to performance, unless you're in the mountains you'll never notice any difference.

Go to forum: General

995 Reply by The Yell

(56 replies, posted in Politics)

Altruist wrote:

I understand.... guns... a pleasured feature not a bug.

So why aren't you merrily out there and shooting each other instead of discussing gun control in this dark room?


u priced ammo lately?

Go to forum: Politics

996 Reply by The Yell

(6 replies, posted in General)

Now he says the $25,000 reward should go to the victims cause he has a paycheck.

Go to forum: General

997 Topic by The Yell

(6 replies, posted in General)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … RU0Op5P4#!

oh yeah, you're like "Wtf"

Charles Ramsey, the man who rescued Amanda Berry, has emerged as an unlikely hero and Internet sensation after his TV interview went viral.

His heroics could put Ramsey in line for a $25,000 FBI reward posted years ago for information regarding Berry's disappearance. (If you agree, help spread the word on Twitter by using the hashtag #RamseyReward.)

Ramsey said he was eating a Big Mac when he heard the young woman's fateful screams.

"I went to McDonald's. Came home. I'm eating my McDonald's. I hear this screaming," Ramsey, who's being hailed as a hero, told the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

"This girl is kicking the door and screaming. So I go over there, with my by Big Mac, and I said, 'Can I help?'"

Ramsey, thinking it was a domestic violence dispute, kicked in the door.

"And she said, 'I've been kidnapped. I've been in this house a long time, and I wanna go. Now.' Alright."

Berry told Ramsey her name, but it didn't click at first.

"I knew something was wrong when a little pretty white girl ran into a black man's arms," he told an ABC reporter. "Either she homeless or she got problems."

He told the Cleveland Plain Dealer Amanda emerged with a little girl.

"She said this is his daughter. It didn't dawn on me who 'his' was. I didn't know she was talking about him, my neighbour. I thought she meant another dude."

In the home, police found Gina DeJesus, 23, who vanished in 2004 at 14, and Michelle Knight, who went missing in 2002 at age 18 or 19.

Amanda went missing 10 years ago when she was 16.

Of his neighbour, Ramsey told TV reporters: "You got some big testicles to pull this off, bro, 'cause we see this dude every day. I mean every day. I barbecued with this dude. We eat ribs and whatnot and listen to salsa music."

An Ohio school bus driver and his two brothers have been arrested. 
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/07/cl … sing-woman

Go to forum: General

998 Reply by The Yell

(56 replies, posted in Politics)

It should also be noted that guns aren't our first choice for self defense.  We don't like to use them.  Unless our enemies choose them.  We prefer to take you on like a man, and beat you down with our hands, and bodyslam you.

Go to forum: Politics

999 Topic by The Yell

(0 replies, posted in General)

The hippo who tried to kill me wasn't a stranger – he and I had met before a number of times. I was 27 and owned a business taking clients down the Zambezi river near Victoria Falls. I'd been working this stretch of river for years, and the grouchy old two-ton bull had carried out the occasional half-hearted attack. I'd learned to avoid him. Hippos are territorial and I knew where he was most likely to be at any given time.

That day I'd taken clients out with three apprentice guides – Mike, Ben and Evans – all in kayaks. We were near the end of the tour, the light was softening and we were taking in the tranquillity. The solid whack I felt behind me took me by surprise.

I turned just in time to see Evans, who had been flung out of his boat, flying through the air. His boat, with his two clients still in it, had been lifted half out of the water on the back of the huge bull hippo.

There was a cluster of rocks nearby and I yelled at the nearest apprentice to guide everyone there, to safety. Then I turned my boat and paddled furiously towards Evans.

I reached over to grab his outstretched hand but as our fingers were about to touch, I was engulfed in darkness. There was no transition at all, no sense of approaching danger. It was as if I had suddenly gone blind and deaf.

I was aware that my legs were surrounded by water, but my top half was almost dry. I seemed to be trapped in something slimy. There was a terrible, sulphurous smell, like rotten eggs, and a tremendous pressure against my chest. My arms were trapped but I managed to free one hand and felt around – my palm passed through the wiry bristles of the hippo's snout. It was only then that I realised I was underwater, trapped up to my waist in his mouth.

I wriggled as hard as I could, and in the few seconds for which he opened his jaws, I managed to escape. I swam towards Evans, but the hippo struck again, dragging me back under the surface. I'd never heard of a hippo attacking repeatedly like this, but he clearly wanted me dead.

Hippos' mouths have huge tusks, slicing incisors and a bunch of smaller chewing teeth. It felt as if the bull was making full use of the whole lot as he mauled me – a doctor later counted almost 40 puncture wounds and bite marks on my body. The bull simply went berserk, throwing me into the air and catching me again, shaking me like a dog with a doll.

Then down we went again, right to the bottom, and everything went still. I remember looking up through 10 feet of water at the green and yellow light playing on the surface, and wondering which of us could hold his breath the longest. Blood rose from my body in clouds, and a sense of resignation overwhelmed me. I've no idea how long we stayed under – time passes very slowly when you're in a hippo's mouth.

The hippo lurched suddenly for the surface, spitting me out as it rose. Mike was still waiting for me in his kayak and managed to paddle me to safety. I was a mess. My left arm was crushed to a pulp, blood poured from the wounds in my chest and when he examined my back, Mike discovered a wound so savage that my lung was visible.

Luckily, he knew first aid and was able to seal the wounds in my chest with the wrapper from a tray of snacks, which almost certainly stopped my lungs from collapsing and saved my life.

By chance, a medical team was nearby, on an emergency drill, and with their help I stayed alive long enough to reach a hospital with a surgeon. He warned me he would probably have to take off both my arms and the bottom of my injured leg. In the end, I lost only my left arm – they managed to patch up the rest.

Evans' body was found down river two days later. Attempts were made to find and kill the rogue hippo, but he seemed to have gone into hiding. I'm convinced, though, that I met him one more time. Two years later I led an expedition down the Zambezi and as we drifted past the stretch where the attack had taken place, a huge hippo lurched out of the water next to my canoe. I screamed so loudly that those with me said they'd never heard anything like it. He dived back under and was never seen again. I'd bet my life savings it was the same hippo, determined to have the final word.

• As told to Chris Broughton

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/ … by-a-hippo

i'll never play Hungry Hungry Hippos again

Go to forum: General

1,000 Reply by The Yell

(56 replies, posted in Politics)

Altruist wrote:

If I understand the gun supporters correctly, you think that the problem in the US is that
* you haven't got enough guns
* all problems would be solved when everybody has a gun, especially teachers, bus drivers etc. (the list seems to be quite long).
Because then everybody could defend, fight terrorists, communists and the government.

Mmmh, so basically you wish back the "good old" wild west?

Just trying to explain why I have the feeling that nobody even tries to argue with you anylonger... the whole thing is so crazy and you are so fixed on your guns, you look completly nuts.

Well it's not just the "wild west".  The whole 19th century of America was a time when every population enjoyed the individual right and responsibility of militia service in its fullest sense.  What's wrong with the 19th century?  It produced a 20th century America that saved European democracy twice.  The 2nd time, arguably, from itself.

Why is that "crazy"?  I might as well declare that European reliance on rail transport is "crazy" and a "throwback" to "outdated" values.  It worked for various reasons no longer immediately necessary (general mobilization of universally conscripted armies etc.) but it worked, it had other uses and you saved a bundle not destroying it. 

Likewise our notion that "social services" are BEST generated by the community, through committed volunteers, instead of implemented by a top-down elite based on central planning.  The experience with central planning in America since the 1960s shows its critics were generally right.

On the most basic level, you can look to Los Angeles 1992, for a city with a functional professional civic defense force, that said "mmm we pass, evacuate and let it burn".  The 'militia' in the fullest sense refused to accommodate them, and fought off the mob until the political pressure for organized government to resume its function, was overwhelming.   I see nothing to show that political tensions that led to  the crisis, have gone;  such riots will happen again.  And when they do, I don't see any reason to trust the civil authorities to make the right call in the future.  The common right to self defense remains practically necessary.

On another level, regardless of what you think of our 18th century right to form a ragtag bunch of misfits to fight the good fight, its there on paper in the highest form of guarantee possible.  If that guarantee sucks, there's a proper way to get rid of it.  That the elites want to just tear it up, is a strong sign of low character and earned distrust.

Go to forum: Politics