Friday, October 25, 2019

US Justice Department Opens Criminal Probe into the Origins of the Fake Russian Investigation

Justice Department's Russia origins probe now formal criminal investigation. It's about time. The real story for me is the reaction of Schiff and Nadler. Schiff, Nadler condemn elevating Durham's Russia probe into criminal investigation. Of course they will condemn this action because they were instrumental in using the fabricated Mueller investigation as the vehicle to oust Trump from the Presidency. The Mueller "investigation" was not a real neutral investigation into how the Russians might have interfered in the US political process but an outright partisan attempt find a criminal act that could be pinned on Trump. 'Very substantial evidence' Trump is 'guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors,' House Judiciary Chair says. Well that failed because it was a corrupt action and no evidence was found.

Given that the Democrats have used the "Power of the State" to attempt to undo the 2016 election, a criminal investigation is warranted. Particularly, dishonest; the Democrats claim that they want to protect the US political process from manipulation and corruption. But, they have shown shown through various actions that it is the Democrats who have attempted, through corrupt acts, to manipulate the US electoral process.

Thursday, October 24, 2019

APCUPSD and Establishing a Browser Interface (CGI)

I have an American Power Conversion UPS. These power supplies can be manged through your computer either by the command line or through a browser interface. Getting the computer to communicate with the UPS through the command line was not difficult. Ubuntu directions here. What proved to be difficult was attempting to get browser interface to work. It never did.

The inability to get the browser interface to work can be attributed to:
  1. The browser interface program "apcupsd-cgi" appears to be outdated in the Ubuntu repository. I was able to get, with much difficulty, other programs to work in the "/usr/lib/cgi-bin" directory. Which is good news in a way.
  2. The tutorials for installing the browser interface have left out crucial steps that must be taken prior to installing "apcupsd-cgi". This led to a lot of "why doesn't it work" anguish. Eventually, I was able to uncover these "missing" steps.
  3. Programs, overtime, are subject to revision. That is normal  However, at times these revisions may be incompatible with "old" tutorials. This was the case with my installed version of Apache2.
The first undisclosed hurdle to overcome (Point #2) is enabling the CGI module in Apache. How To Enable or Disable CGI Scripts in Apache 2.4. I was able to invoke the CGI module through issuing "sudo a2enmod cgi" at the command line.

The next undisclosed hurdle related to the file: "/etc/apache2/sites-available/000-default.conf". This file contained the link for designating the location of CGI files. See the sample script below. Warning. Do not copy the script below without reading Apache Tutorial: Dynamic Content with CGI. As I noted in Point #3, programs/tutorials change over time and the Apache tutorial is outdated by using "LoadModule", you need to use "sudo a2enmod cgi".

# --------------------------------------------------------
  ScriptAlias "/cgi-bin/" "/usr/lib/cgi-bin/" 
<Directory "/usr/lib/cgi-bin">
    Options Indexes FollowSymLinks Includes ExecCGI
    AddHandler cgi-script .cgi .pl
    AllowOverride all
    Allow from all
    Require all granted
# --------------------------------------------------------

Additionally, I recommend that you undertake an internet search on the terms used in the script sample above. The reason is that there is a lot of conflicting advice concerning which terms to use. The above example may work for me in Ubuntu 16.04, but it may not work for you. Who knows, there may yet be an undiscovered option that would get "apcupsd-cgi" to work.  Though I was never able to get "apcupsd-cgi" to work, I was able to enable CGI scripting. Which is good news in the end.

PS: As an aside, you need to use HTML entities to prevent the "<" and ">" from being interpreted. Click here for more information on Common Gateway Interface (CGI).

Kick Turkey Out of NATO

Turkey is not a US ally. The Middle East is politically unstable. Consequently, the US needs to terminate its (unfortunate one-sided) alliance with Turkey so that the US is not "forced' to come to the aid of Turkey, a country which has not demonstrated any recent support for US interests. Furthermore, when ISIS was running rampant, Turkey refused to participate in bringing down ISIS. Now that ISIS has been largely defeated, Turkey amazingly finds the military capability to attack the Kurds. The Kurds recently were US allies. A very dishonorable act by Turkey.

recently wrote: Why is the U.S. still an ally to Turkey? This is an excellent article, so I would encourage you to read it as I won't be highlighting it. The quick summary by Hanson: "Country opposes American allies in the region and befriends almost every U.S. enemy." I will however highlight the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974. The US, in 45 years has failed to get Turkey to withdraw from Cyprus. That is a major failure in US foreign policy and also highlights Turkish disregard for world peace.

It may be even possible to compare the Turkish invasion of Cyprus with the current Turkish attacks on the Kurds. The Turks are demanding a "safe zone" in Northern Syria. Since the Turkish invasion of Northern Syria has just occurred, it would be premature at this time, to assume that Turkey would continue to perpetually occupy Northern Syria. But given Cyprus, it may happen.

One has to also wonder about this "safe zone". The Turks are noted for genocidal atrocitiesErdo─čan threatens to 'crush the heads' of Kurdish fighters refusing to withdraw. Syria: Damning evidence of war crimes and other violations by Turkish forces and their allies. The Turkish invasion of Northern Syria has also re-ignited the refugee crises in the region. That is not progress in terms of stabilizing the region.

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Lynching, a Purposely Misconstrued Word Twisted for Democratic Political Gain

I ran across a post today were the author lamented over President's Trump use of the word "lynching". The Democrats have been asserting with faux outrage that Trump's use of that word was a racist and depraved act. According to, the word "lynch" is defined as: "to put to death, especially by hanging, by mob action and without legal authority."

What the author unfortunately missed, is that President Trump is the victim of the Democrats attempts to impeach him without proper legal authority. Consequently, Trumps verbal backlash can be considered appropriate, even if coarse. This also suggests that it is the Democrats who are being depraved racists by smearing Trump with the racist label. So it is not Trump who should be demonized, but the Democrats.

The Democrats have been running on the platform of protecting the integrity of the US political process. The Democrats by attempting to smear Trump through the Muller Report, Russian Collusion, Ukrainian quid pro quo, and a questionable impeachment process have demonstrated that the Democrats have no interest in protecting the integrity of the US political process. The appropriate way that protects the integrity of the US political process is to vote Trump out of office, not through a Kangaroo Court.  Given that, it can be seen that the smearing of Trump over the word "lynching" is simply political grandstanding and very unethical.

Flashback: Top Dems, including Biden and Nadler, called Clinton impeachment 'lynching'

At least 5 House Democrats compared Bill Clinton’s impeachment to a ‘lynching’ in 1998

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

The Laughable Democratic Presidential Debate

Last night the Democrats held another debate for purposes of who will be the Democratic candidate for the Presidential election in 2020. Themes being pushed by the Democrats include taking the moral high-ground and being honest. Biden has claimed that the soul of America is on-the-line. This is simply bizarre since many of the Democratic candidates have already demonstrated their unethical lying behavior. Their behavior is an outrageous  subversion of the soul of America.

Elizabeth Warren refused to answer the simple question on whether her health care proposal would raise taxes. Previously I wrote: Elizabeth Warren's Laughable Ethical Proposal

Kamala D. Harris wants to take down Trump's Twitter account. This implies that Harris would be willing to take away free speech rights for anyone that does not agree with her. Harris also claims that Trump is despotic, yet Harris herself proposes despotic actions that would diss the US Constitution and would ignore the US Congress. Harris has repeatable publicly smeared those she does not agree with, such as Justice Kavanaugh. Harris is lawyer, who should be abiding by high ethical standards and the law. it is quite troubling that she is proposing underhanded and dishonest actions.

Turkey. An unrecognized "winner" in the debate was Turkey. The Democrats were quick to blame Trump for the Turkish attacks on Kurds in Syria. Trump made a mistake by withdrawing US troops, but it was Turkey that initiated aggressive military action against the Kurds. Turkey also has a history of genocide against ethnic minorities. Turkey invaded Cypress in 1974. The failure of the Democratic candidates to mention Turkey shows that they have little knowledge and understanding of the Middle East.

Impeachment. The lead-off question for the debate concerned impeachment. Virtually all the Democratic participants said that the impeachment process against Trump should continue. Essentially, the Democratic candidates for President want to overturn a legitimate US election. Though not a Presidential candidate, Rep. Al Green (a Texas Democrat) made the ridiculous assertion on MSNBC:  “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected … the president does not have to commit a crime to be impeached …,”.   To think, the Democrats want to accuse Russia of meddling in the US electoral process and here they are doing exactly that. It is not the job of the US House of Representatives to overturn the election of the President. That is the job of the electorate, at election time.

Julian Castro.  He did not get to say much at the debate. But what was interesting is that Castro was asked a gun control question that should have gone to Beto O'Rourke. Castro, side stepped answering. O'Rourke needs to be asked how he will take away the guns of those inner city urban areas. O'Rourke claimed that people would be willing to give-up their guns. I doubt that those in the inner city urban areas would. To change gears, Julian Castro's brother, however, released the names of Trump donors. This raises the question of whether this release was meant to intimidate Trump donors. Recall Maxine Waters demands that Democrats get in the face of Trump supporters to intimidate them. Whether Julian was involved in this vile disclosure is obviously unknown, but worth investigating since politicians are known for playing dirty politics and how to disguise those reprehensible actions.

Beto O'Rourke.  Has called for the confiscation of assault rifles as a means of reducing gun violence. Beto O'Rourke: Someone who refuses to turn in gun can expect visit from law enforcement. On the surface that may seem to be reasonable, but it ignores the daily gun violence in cities such as Chicago and Baltimore. At the debate, O'Rourke was asked how he would confiscate the guns. He lamely responded that people are lawful and would be willing to give-up their (assault) guns. Unfortunately, the follow-up question of gun violence in the inner cities went to Castro, who punted. O'Rourke, like other Democrats, speaks "big", but when asked to explain, fumbles.