Daily Ramblings:
Dear Mr. Ahmed ...05/27/2005 08:52:57 pm
Anyone with a common email domain - eg. Yahoo!, Hotmail - has surely received those intriguing offers from friendly Nigerians with too much cash and too few bank account numbers. Today I received one such offer, but with a new twist. The email was addressed to me at my Yahoo! address by my first name (let's say "Bob"), under the assumption that I must be next-of-kin to the recently deceased "Mr. Fredrick Bob" - and therefore entitled to a share of his multi-million dollar estate - if only I would reply with my relevant "informations."
As you would immediately understand, this demanded a reply - and herewith is both that email and the reply in full (hat tip to my friend Chris, the first person I knew of to see the value of haggling with the Nigerians):
Email received - 05/27/2005, 15:32:39 GMT:
SUBJECT: GOODDAY BOB
FROM THE DESK OF AHMED / WILLIAMS CHAMBERS.
FOR SECURITY REASONS. AND PLEASE DONOT LET ANYONE KNOW ABOUT THIS TRANSACTION TILL WE HAVE THIS TOTAL SUM IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT.
GOODDAY BOB,
I am BARRISTER ALHAJI AHMED (ESQ) Solicitor and Notary Public. I
am the Personal Attorney to Mr. FREDRICK BOB, who is a National of your country,who used to work with Oil Company in Nigeria. On the 21st of April 1999,my client, his wife and their only son involved in a caraccident along Sagamu/Lagos Unfortunately, they all lost their lives in the event of the accident, Since then I have made several enquiries to locate any of my clients extended relatives and this has also proved unsuccessful.
After these several unsuccessful attempts, I decided to trace his
relatives over the Internet, to locate any member of his family but of no avail, hence I contacted you. I contacted you to assist in repatriating the money and property left behind by my client before they get confiscated or declared unserviceable by the bank where these huge deposits were lodged. Particularly,the Bank where the deceased had an account valued at about $10 million dollars.Conseqently,the bank issued me a notice to provide the next of kin or have the account confiscated within a short time.
Since I have been unsuccessfully in locating the relatives for over
some years now, I seek your consent to present you as the next of kin of the deceased since you bear the same name with him, so that the proceeds of this account valued at $10 million dollars can be paid to you for both of us to share the money; 55% to me and 35% to you, while 10% should be for expenses or tax as your government may require.I have allnecessary legal documents that can be used to backup the claim.
All I require is your honest cooperation to enable us see this deal
through.I guarantee that this will be executed under a legitimate
arrangement that will protect you from any breach of the law. Please get in touch with me through my email to enable us discuss further and i will also like you to indicate your interest by sending your:
(a)Full name and address,
(b)Your private telephone and fax number,
(c)Age and sex.
With these informations from you,we will proceed with this transaction as the next of kin to late Mr Fredrick.
Best regards,
BARRISTER ALHAJI AHMED (ESQ)Reply sent later the same day:
Subject: RE: GOODDAY BOB
Dear Mr. Ahmed,
I am devastated to hear of the tragic death of my dear brother, Mr. Fredrick Bob, along with my sister-in-law and beloved nephew.
Yet, I have to admit that the cause of death does not surprise me. Fred always had a lead foot and a schoolboy's disregard for the rules of the road. That, coupled with the lack of so much as a Christmas card from him during these past 6 years, had already made me fear the worst.
I just wish that he had restrained his daredevil inclinations while transporting his precious wife and son. Sadly, this is an end that is all too in character for a man whose life was devoted largely to acts of dissipation, degeneracy and extreme selfishness. Indeed, it was a surprise to the rest of us Bobs on this side of the Atlantic that his marriage held out as long as it did. He always said that he was not cut out to be a husband or father, and it was an assertion vouchsafed by his behavior.
During a tear through the Ivory Coast and Liberia, back in the early 90's, I have it on firm authority that he was responsible for the deaths of at least 22 men, and the birth of perhaps twice that many. (Fortunately for you and I, Mr. Ahmed, my brother was of-course not the type to be pinned down by any paternity suits.)
Despite his shortcomings, however, my brother will be missed not only by his family but by friends and acquaintances scattered everywhere from Monte Carlo to Bali. He lived a life both passionate and fast paced, and in the satisfaction of his many appetites he spread his wealth widely amongst innumerable comrades and service professionals. Of-course, when I say "his" wealth, I really mean the family's - it being a fortune accumulated through generations of success in the tartar sauce industry. Fred never earned an honest (or for that matter dishonest) dime in his whole life. Making money was the one vice that left him entirely unsullied. The $10 million you mention was itself wired to his account by my very self in April of 1999. As much as we disapproved of his lifestyle, we Bobs are nothing if not believers that blood is thicker than water. Besides, he had a wife and son to support. The $10 million was expected to last him through June. His failure since then to request more money was certainly another very bad omen as to his health. Ah, Fred, rest in peace, beloved and terrible brother of mine!
Of-course, Mr. Ahmed, given the facts as you now know, you understand that any split such as you described, with 55% of the money going to you and only 35% being returned to me, would be entirely inappropriate. Indeed, in some quarters it might even be considered to have a whiff of illegality. I will inform our accounting department that you have $10 million dollars belonging to the Bob family and they will be in touch to arrange your timely and complete payment. I understand, however, that your intentions were the best, and I do appreciate the great industry you have shown in tracking me down via the internet. My brother never was one to keep neat records. In recompense for your time and effort I propose to make a payment to you of $100 (U.S.), and to send to you via air mail a beautiful gift pack of assorted tartar sauces. I can also ensure that your name is added to our mailing list of preferred individuals so that you will not miss out on our many special offers.
All I need for now is your full name, address, date of birth, bank account number and mother's maiden name. As soon as you furnish these "informations," my agents will be in touch with you to arrange the satisfactory conclusion of our business.
Regards,
R.W. Bob
Do Right To Me, Baby ...05/25/2005 04:57:46 pm
"Who can say that prolonging a life is not pro-life?" So spoke Republican Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson, before voting in favor of a bill overriding President Bush's ban on Federal funding of new embryonic stem cell research. She boasted of having a perfect pro-life record. She and other pro-life Republicans who voted this way are demonstrating that lazy illogicality is far from being the sole property of Democrats.
The argument that has clearly swayed these members of Congress is the one that says that the embryos in question would have been discarded anyway, so why not use them for good? They are excess; left over at fertility clinics. The current treatments demand that many embryos are created, because the chance of a successful pregnancy with any one given embryo are so small.
So, while these pro-life Republicans consider each one worthy of respect as human life, they wish nonetheless to be practical, and to make some good come of what they see as the embryos' inevitable destruction.
President Bush, in what has to count as the most dramatic possible answer to this argument, met with 21 of these embryos - 21 who weren't destroyed after all but were adopted and born and now have names like Tanner and Noelle, and got to eat birthday cake at the White House.
The ultimate flaw in the thinking of pro-life members of Congress who nevertheless support Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research is really a failure to understand basic economics (and too much time in Washington will certainly do that to you). If you believe that "spare" embryos do each constitute a unique human life, then the position to take is that we should move away from the current situation where there is such a thing as a "spare" embryo. We need the science of fertility treatments to advance so that there are no "excess" individuals created in the effort to help an infertile couple have a baby.
What you absolutely don't want to do is to create a built-in use for these "spare" embryos. If they are being used for speculative life-saving research, there will be that much less motivation to minimize their creation in the first place. And, yes, if such research should finally succeed in actually achieving the cures that continue to elude it (not for want of international trying) then what you have arrived at is a justification for their mass production.
It's a matter of incentives - something with which the creators and stewards of our nightmarish tax code should be instinctively familiar.
Meanwhile, the whole issue continues to be blurred by what passes for the mainstream media these days. The real successes with adult stem cells and umbilical-cord-blood stem cells get far less attention than the utopian predictions of the advocates for embryonic stem cell research. The distinctions between the three types fail to be emphasized - if they're not being wilfully obscured - as in this CBS story:
A majority of Americans approve of using embryonic stem cells in medical studies, according to a CBS News poll. Fifty-eight percent say they support stem cell research, while 31 percent disapprove.
Approval is higher now than it was last August; then, 50 percent approved and 31percent disapproved, but 19 percent had no opinion.
Republicans are less likely than Democrats to approve of it, although half do. Approval of stem cell research among Republicans has risen significantly since last year; then, 37 percent approved of it, now 50 percent do. Approval has risen among Democrats as well, although less dramatically, from 57 to 65 percent now.(emphases mine: RWB)So, what is it exactly that these people in the poll are really approving? Stem cell research, including adult and umbilical? Or strictly embryonic stem cell research? CBS doesn't bother to make the distinctions in these paragraphs. Are we to trust that their pollsters made the issues clear?
Forget gerrymandered polls and news organizations that store their credibility in the toilet. The true politics of this question (crass it it may seem to reduce it to that) were illustrated in the poll that counted - on November 2nd last. As yours truly RWB helpfully explained a few days later, embryonic stem cell research was the issue that no one pointed to in the aftermath of the Democrats' defeat, but which should indeed have been noted, given the degree to which it was emphasized by the Kerry/Edwards ticket during their convention and campaign.
In the event that the Senate also passes this misguided bill, President Bush will make it the victim of his first veto, and he'll do so without hesitation. His leadership on this issue is more than just admirable. It may be forgotten now, but before September 11th came and turned the page - in August of 2001 in fact - this President was already willingly defining himself by this issue, and the broader issue of a culture of life. It was in August of 2001 that the President made a very unusual address to the nation - one I wrote a little about at the time on a now defunct website - in which he strove to bring these ethical questions directly to the table of ordinary Americans.
His continued rejection of the lazy illogicality that seeks to overwhelm us on these issues may yet be one of the most treasured legacies of his Presidency.
NOTE: Having had some difficulties with spam in my "COMMENTS," I've disabled them, at least for new posts. As much fun as it is deleting the stuff, it's not the most lucrative way to spend my time. I'm thinking about what to do - requiring registration seems like overkill for RightWingBob.com, but maybe I'll come to do something like that. In any case, I will continue to welcome and cherish comments sent to rightwingbob@gmail.com
When I'm Sixty-Four ...05/24/2005 09:22:15 am
Happy birthday to the man himself.
Not much time to type right now, so here's some pictures of my dog.
Inspiration To Murder ...05/20/2005 02:11:23 pm
During an appearance today with Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen, the press surprisingly avoided asking President Bush anything concerning the complex nuances of Danish/U.S. relations (and by the way, doesn't its possession of Greenland effectively make the Kingdom of Denmark the largest country in Europe? How does all that work?). He was however asked if he was worried that the publication of illegally released photos of an underwear-clad Saddam Hussein would inspire more violence. His answer included this:
You know, I don't think a photo inspires murderers. I think they're inspired by an ideology that is so barbaric and backwards that it's hard for many in the Western world to comprehend how they think. But I would just remind people, if you want to know how ideologically grim their vision of the world is, just remember the Taliban. They said, if you don't agree with our religious views you'll be prosecuted; if you're a woman who seeks freedom, you'll be beaten. So these people are motivated by a vision of the world that is backward and barbaric.
I would say that he was cognizant of the fact that you could substitute "damage to a book" for a "a photo" and make the same argument with regard to the violence "inspired by" the Newsweek smear against the U.S. military. Cognizant, but still aware that were he to make that comparison directly, as President of the United States, he would be stepping onto ice of unknown thickness.
And four days after Newsweek retracted their story, Islamic protesters in London today displayed their good sense of both timing and taste by showing up outside of the American Embassy and chanting, "Bomb, bomb New York," and "USA watch your back, Osama is coming back," in response to the magazine's tale of Koran desecration. LGF has the story and photos.
Fit To Print ...05/19/2005 08:34:25 pm
And David Brooks, who I'm not accustomed to reading with satisfaction, manages to squeeze out a little truth today on the Op-Ed page of the New York Times:
The rioters are the real enemy, not Newsweek and not the American soldiers serving as prison guards. Just to restore some proper perspective, let me quote a snippet from a sermon delivered by Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris, which ran last weekend on the Palestinian Authority's official TV station:
"The day will come when we will rule America. The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world - except for the Jews. The Jews will not enjoy a life of tranquillity under our rule because they are treacherous by nature, as they have been throughout history. The day will come when everything will be relieved of the Jews - even the stones and trees which were harmed by them. Listen to the Prophet Muhammad, who tells you about the evil end that awaits Jews. The stones and trees will want the Muslims to finish off every Jew."
These are the extremists, the real enemy. Let's keep our eye on the ball.
Chiming In ...05/18/2005 02:49:52 pm
It's Right Wing Bob echo syndrome again, as some brave columnists begin to offer the take on the Great Toilet Riots of 2005 that was seen in this space 3 days ago. Notable is Robert Spencer:
There is no excusing Newsweek’s irresponsibility in this. But this is not really a story about media bias or carelessness at all. There is a much larger story that is getting hardly any attention at all. The gorilla in the living room that no one wants to notice, is that flushing a Qur’an down the toilet should not be grounds to commit murder.
He even offers his own version of a Roman Catholic parallel:
When in April EBay offered a consecrated host for sale, imagine if Catholics had rioted and seventeen people were killed.
The media would have been full of stories about the dark side of the “Christian Right.”There's one more thing I'd like to add, in terms of comparing how the mainstream media treats Islam, versus how it treats religions that don't prescribe death as the punishment for a long laundry list of infractions. That is: how many times did you hear and see Cardinal Josef Ratzinger described as a "hard-liner," both before and after he was named Pope?
Now, how many times have you heard the term "hard-liner" used to describe Islamic clerics (for example the ones all across the world who reacted to the alleged Koranic damage by inciting violence with their furious rhetoric, instead of using their positions to cool the self-destructive passions of their faithful)?
I guess that strongly advocating for the protection of life, from conception to natural death, makes you a hard-liner. Calling for a jihad against the United States Of America because some individuals allegedly damaged one of millions of Korans currently in print makes you ... what?
Devout, I guess.
Addendum 05/18/2005 09:35:17 pm: And Ann says it with all of her usual charm and good humor.
I Can't Even Touch The Books You've Read ...05/17/2005 04:15:14 pm
Following up on the question of why so few in the media seem interested in and/or horrified by the notion that people should be killed in the event a book gets flushed down a toilet, Paul Marshall in NRO Online has a neat round-up of the prevailing penalties for Koran desecration in various parts of the world. However, his remarks are more aimed at questioning why no one at Newsweek realized with what kind of dynamite they were playing:
There seems to have been nobody there that knew that death is the penalty for desecrating a Koran in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Egypt is milder, there one would be sentenced to several years in prison under Article 161 of the penal code for “publicly insulting Islam,” or perhaps Article 98, “inciting sectarian strife”; similar patterns are followed in more moderate Muslim countries.
In Pakistan, Article 295-B of the penal code calls for life imprisonment for desecrating the Koran or any extract from it. Last September, mentally handicapped Shahbaz Masih was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment, convicted of tearing up some leaflets that contained verses from the Koran. In 2003, the same judge sentenced Ranjha Masih (no relation) to life in prison for allegedly throwing a stone at a Muslim signboard with a Koranic verse on it during a bishop's funeral procession. Dozens of other Pakistanis have met similar fates.
In all of these countries, the greatest danger is not from the courts, but from vigilantes and mobs. In Pakistan in 1997, Shantinagar, a Christian town of some 10,000 people, was burned to the ground after a man there was accused of tearing pages from a Koran. In the Netherlands last fall, the documentary producer Theo Van Gogh was butchered after he produced a documentary Submission featuring Koranic verses on women’s bodies.
And just for a wee bit of perspective, as this helpful tourist guide warns: if you should bring a Bible with you when visiting Saudi Arabia, the customs officials will confiscate it and put it through a shredder.
I have as yet failed to ascertain the number of Saudi customs officials who have been injured or killed by enraged Christians.
Original text copyright © 2005 by RightWingBob.com
Quotes from the works of others are linked to their source or are as otherwise attributed, and are used in accordance with Fair Use guidelines. Contact: rightwingbob(at)gmail.com
Serious Dylan Related Things:
Right Wing Bob On:
Who Am I And What Is This Site About?
The Whole Wide World Is Watching
More to come ...
Email: RightWingBob@)gmail.com