Sunday, January 22, 2006
Minutemen release video of Mexican Army incursion at U.S. border
Minuteman Civil Defense Corps ^ | 2006-01-20 | No author specified
(SCOTTSDALE, AZ) January 20, 2006 – The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (“MCDC”) announced the release today of video footage of an incursion by a unit of the Mexican army across the U.S. border in Arizona.
Chris Simcox and a group of Civil Defense Corps volunteers encountered a squad of approximately eight armed Mexican soldiers about 500 yards inside American territory.
The Mexican soldiers started running back through the brush to Mexico when they realized they had been spotted.
The video shows a uniformed Mexican soldier climbing through a barbed wire fence on American soil to return to the Mexican side of the border as he races to catch up with the other Mexican soldiers who had also climbed back through the fence as they retreated back into their country.
The soldiers raced up a hill to a group of abandoned buildings at a ranch where military transport vehicles with more soldiers were located.
A group of armed Mexican soldiers then returned to the barbed wire fence (on American soil) and confronted Simcox and the volunteers. A discussion in Spanish ensued, with the agitated soldier 'in charge' saying the Americans had no business being there.
Simcox and the volunteers did not budge. The Mexican soldiers left and drove off. Judging from earlier activity observed at the ranch that morning, Simcox is of the belief that a trafficking operation had been disrupted by the volunteers.
The footage, filmed in 2004, was sent to then Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge. His office did not respond. The video has remained in the Minuteman video archive and is being released in response to recent news reports that over 200 cross-border incursions by the Mexican army have been documented since 1996.
Click here to watch the video
FreeRepublic's take on the matter
Minuteman Civil Defense Corps ^ | 2006-01-20 | No author specified
(SCOTTSDALE, AZ) January 20, 2006 – The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (“MCDC”) announced the release today of video footage of an incursion by a unit of the Mexican army across the U.S. border in Arizona.
Chris Simcox and a group of Civil Defense Corps volunteers encountered a squad of approximately eight armed Mexican soldiers about 500 yards inside American territory.
The Mexican soldiers started running back through the brush to Mexico when they realized they had been spotted.
The video shows a uniformed Mexican soldier climbing through a barbed wire fence on American soil to return to the Mexican side of the border as he races to catch up with the other Mexican soldiers who had also climbed back through the fence as they retreated back into their country.
The soldiers raced up a hill to a group of abandoned buildings at a ranch where military transport vehicles with more soldiers were located.
A group of armed Mexican soldiers then returned to the barbed wire fence (on American soil) and confronted Simcox and the volunteers. A discussion in Spanish ensued, with the agitated soldier 'in charge' saying the Americans had no business being there.
Simcox and the volunteers did not budge. The Mexican soldiers left and drove off. Judging from earlier activity observed at the ranch that morning, Simcox is of the belief that a trafficking operation had been disrupted by the volunteers.
The footage, filmed in 2004, was sent to then Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge. His office did not respond. The video has remained in the Minuteman video archive and is being released in response to recent news reports that over 200 cross-border incursions by the Mexican army have been documented since 1996.
Click here to watch the video
FreeRepublic's take on the matter
Thursday, January 19, 2006
ACLU Caught in Massive Coverup while Suing US for Wiretapping
The ACLU had announced on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 that it will create a website called “www.echelonwatch.org“. This website would chronicle all uses of the Planetary Evesdropping system used by the United States to monitor Phone Calls, Cell Phones, Satellite Communications around the world. This is the “NSA Evesdropping” system that’s in the news today.
The ACLU had an extensive Library of documents, archives, news articles, links to congressional testimony and was the place to go for this information. That is until now. The ACLU is deleting all this information off the website. It had chronicled all this information and is now hiding it from the public.
Why?
-snip-
Why would the ACLU delete their extensive website on Project Echelon? The answer is simple, they are arguing that all this “Spying on American Citizens” started with the Bush Administration, they do not want evidance unearthed that proves that the Clinton Administration and every Administration has used these “Wiretaps” to protect American Citizens since the invention of the Telephone.
http://www.leftwinghate.com/?p=59
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1559595/posts
Well, well well.
The ACLU had announced on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 that it will create a website called “www.echelonwatch.org“. This website would chronicle all uses of the Planetary Evesdropping system used by the United States to monitor Phone Calls, Cell Phones, Satellite Communications around the world. This is the “NSA Evesdropping” system that’s in the news today.
The ACLU had an extensive Library of documents, archives, news articles, links to congressional testimony and was the place to go for this information. That is until now. The ACLU is deleting all this information off the website. It had chronicled all this information and is now hiding it from the public.
Why?
-snip-
Why would the ACLU delete their extensive website on Project Echelon? The answer is simple, they are arguing that all this “Spying on American Citizens” started with the Bush Administration, they do not want evidance unearthed that proves that the Clinton Administration and every Administration has used these “Wiretaps” to protect American Citizens since the invention of the Telephone.
http://www.leftwinghate.com/?p=59
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1559595/posts
Well, well well.
Friday, January 13, 2006
Damn. Didnt hear about this untill today:
Candy Barr, 70; 1950s Stripper and Stag Film Star Personified the Joy and Danger of Sex
Chicago Tribune ^ | 1/3/2006 | Myrna Oliver
Candy Barr, infamous 1950s stripper and stag film star once romantically linked to mobster Mickey Cohen and associated with Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby, has died. She was 70.
Barr died Friday of pneumonia in an Abilene, Texas, hospital. She had lived quietly in her native south Texas for several years.
Born Juanita Dale Slusher in Edna, Texas, on July 6, 1935, Barr forged a life exotic enough in the mid-20th century to inspire a biopic. (One was contemplated but never produced in the late 1980s, with Farrah Fawcett portraying Barr.)
Before the dancer's career was derailed in 1960 by a prison term for marijuana, she was earning $2,000 a week in Los Angeles and Las Vegas clubs.
It was Barr who trained actress Joan Collins for her role as an exotic dancer in the 1960 movie "Seven Thieves," earning her a credit as technical advisor.
"She taught me more about sensuality than I had learned in all my years under contract," Collins wrote in her autobiography, "Past Imperfect." Collins went on to describe Barr as "a down-to-earth girl with an incredibly gorgeous body and an angelic face."
Barr became a landmark in the sexual liberation of Texas men in the 1950s, Gary Cartwright wrote in a 1976 Texas Monthly magazine article, the same year the 41-year-old but still shapely Barr posed nude for Oui men's magazine.
Cartwright wrote that in her early career, Barr had epitomized "the conflict between sex as joy and sex as danger. The body was perfect, but it was the innocence of the face that lured you on."
In 1984, Texas Monthly listed Barr among such luminaries as Lady Bird Johnson as one of history's "perfect Texans."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com
Candy Barr was one of those little known underground icons of the 1950s. Her first claim to fame was appearing in a 1951 stag film called "Smart Alec" when she was only 15 years old. Candy claimed that she was forced to do that film at gunpoint.
Anyways, years ago I was selling on ebay a videotape which contained many clips of burlesque strippers, and short stag reels (all strictly R rated at best, mind you.). The main selling point for this video I used was the fact that one of the clips contained a strip by Candy Barr. Candy was dressed in a slinky teddy, and facing a full length mirror. Slowly she would undo her top, revealing her breasts, then turning to the camera. Without a doubt, it was the best clip in the entire videotape.
After it had been sold, one of the losing bidders emailed me to see if I had anymore copies. I didnt, but I pointed him in the direction of where he could still obtain a copy (which was cheaper than the winning bid in my auction). The guy also told me that he personally knew Candy back in the 1950s And had a couple of items that he wanted to sell on eBay, asking me if I had any idea of their value (a 16mm copy of Smart Alec and an autographed book of her poems). I asked him how he knew Candy and he claimed that he used to book her for Bachelor Parties and such. He also claimed thst Smart Alec was not her only X-rated stag film. He claimed that he had a friend on the Dallas Vice Squad who showed him stills from another X-rated stag film which showed Candy Barr giving yet another X-Rated performance.
I have NO idea if the guy was telling the truth or if he was telling the truth, or if his memory had gotten a little hazy since the years passed and if he was getting a few details mixed up here and there since Smart Alec purports to be Candy's only X-rated stag film.
1/21/06 UPDATE: I found the emails exchanged between me and this guy buried within my computer:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:49:31 -0500 William Jowell
writes:
I have an 8MM film of Candy when she was minus 18 plus an autographed copy of the book of poems she wrote when she was about 35: A GENTLE MIND....CONFUSED Dulce press 1972. I knew (know) this lady personally. AND I know where she is today. Is there a market for the movie and/or the book. I am considering putting both on eBAY as a package.
_____________________
From: bmovies
To: XXXXXXXXXXX@XXX.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: Candy Barr
Hi William,
Yes, there is a market for both the movie AND the book. It seems that there is quite a few Candy Barr fans out there. Including those who weren't even born yet during her heyday.
Candy's items, like say a mens magazine that she appears in, seems to attract a handful more bidders than other men's magazines of the same era.
I don't know how much your stuff is worth, but don't expect to get more than 20-30 bucks for each of your items on eBay if you sell them
seperately. IF (a BIG if), you're lucky, you could get as much as 60
bucks for the film. Not much more (Is the 8mm film her famous X-rated
1951 stag film: Smart Aleck?). IF you decide to sell them together as a package, there's a strong chance you will more likely get less. Best to sell them seperately.
That has nothing to do with how many or how few fans Candy has (She has plenty. I can tell by the above average number of bids her items get). It's just rare for collectible items on eBay go for what they are worth or more. Almost all collectibles on eBay go for much less than what they are really worth. For example, a couple years ago I bought off of eBay several hundred bucks worth of 1950's TV Guides for only twenty bucks. Cheap deals like that are quite common on eBay.
By the way, if you don't mind answering, out of curiosity, how did you come to know her and where is she today? What has she been doing with herself the last decade or so?
Thanks,
Marc
__________________________________
9/24/00
Yes, the film is "Smart Aleck" the only film I know of. Probably more, since, years ago, I had several porno stills that I got from a buddy on Dallas's vice squad. This was about 1956/7.
I met Candy in the fifties. I arraingned several stag parties for her through her local agent. Ran into her again when she published her book here in Midland. Then again about the time she did her OUI spread. The last I heard she is living in Brownwood, Texas. I have searched for her there but do not know which name she uses now. She formally used her name and her first (?) husband's name: Jaunita Dell Phillips. She is truely a beautiful lady -- in and out.
I have checked voter rolls but doubt that she can vote. I "believe" the marijuana charge was a felony at the time.
Thanks for the imfo about the items. Other than eBay where would you
suggest?
Someone seems to want your video as much as I do. I keep raising and they obviously have a high limit entered. Do you have other copies available if I miss on this one?
______________________________________
9/25/00
Thanks for the info! You can also sell your Candy Barr items on Amazon.com and Yahoo.com. They have auctions as well, but the best place is eBay because eBay has the most bidders when it comes to auctions. Still, Amazon and Yahoo are the best auction sites next to eBay.
As for copies of my item, sorry but I dont have any other copies BUT you are in luck! Something Weird Video is still selling it for 15 bucks!
Go to http://www.somethingweird.com
On the menu at the left, click on the word video, it will give you their video page. Do a search by clicking on the letter N. It will give you all their titles starting with the letter "N".
The title of the video is Nudie Cutie. You will notice that there are hundreds of Nudie Cutie videos. Mine is Vol. 23
You will also notice that the Nudie Cutie videos doesn't have a description for each video on their website. When I bought my copy from them I bought it through their mail order catalog which had a description of each and every Nudie-Cutie video. That's how I knew Candy Barr was in the one I bought. I'm not certain, but she could be in more nudie short films in the other Nudie Cutie videos, so when you go to their website, you can request them to send you a catalog.
Thanks,
Marc
Candy Barr, 70; 1950s Stripper and Stag Film Star Personified the Joy and Danger of Sex
Chicago Tribune ^ | 1/3/2006 | Myrna Oliver
Candy Barr, infamous 1950s stripper and stag film star once romantically linked to mobster Mickey Cohen and associated with Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby, has died. She was 70.
Barr died Friday of pneumonia in an Abilene, Texas, hospital. She had lived quietly in her native south Texas for several years.
Born Juanita Dale Slusher in Edna, Texas, on July 6, 1935, Barr forged a life exotic enough in the mid-20th century to inspire a biopic. (One was contemplated but never produced in the late 1980s, with Farrah Fawcett portraying Barr.)
Before the dancer's career was derailed in 1960 by a prison term for marijuana, she was earning $2,000 a week in Los Angeles and Las Vegas clubs.
It was Barr who trained actress Joan Collins for her role as an exotic dancer in the 1960 movie "Seven Thieves," earning her a credit as technical advisor.
"She taught me more about sensuality than I had learned in all my years under contract," Collins wrote in her autobiography, "Past Imperfect." Collins went on to describe Barr as "a down-to-earth girl with an incredibly gorgeous body and an angelic face."
Barr became a landmark in the sexual liberation of Texas men in the 1950s, Gary Cartwright wrote in a 1976 Texas Monthly magazine article, the same year the 41-year-old but still shapely Barr posed nude for Oui men's magazine.
Cartwright wrote that in her early career, Barr had epitomized "the conflict between sex as joy and sex as danger. The body was perfect, but it was the innocence of the face that lured you on."
In 1984, Texas Monthly listed Barr among such luminaries as Lady Bird Johnson as one of history's "perfect Texans."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com
Candy Barr was one of those little known underground icons of the 1950s. Her first claim to fame was appearing in a 1951 stag film called "Smart Alec" when she was only 15 years old. Candy claimed that she was forced to do that film at gunpoint.
Anyways, years ago I was selling on ebay a videotape which contained many clips of burlesque strippers, and short stag reels (all strictly R rated at best, mind you.). The main selling point for this video I used was the fact that one of the clips contained a strip by Candy Barr. Candy was dressed in a slinky teddy, and facing a full length mirror. Slowly she would undo her top, revealing her breasts, then turning to the camera. Without a doubt, it was the best clip in the entire videotape.
After it had been sold, one of the losing bidders emailed me to see if I had anymore copies. I didnt, but I pointed him in the direction of where he could still obtain a copy (which was cheaper than the winning bid in my auction). The guy also told me that he personally knew Candy back in the 1950s And had a couple of items that he wanted to sell on eBay, asking me if I had any idea of their value (a 16mm copy of Smart Alec and an autographed book of her poems). I asked him how he knew Candy and he claimed that he used to book her for Bachelor Parties and such. He also claimed thst Smart Alec was not her only X-rated stag film. He claimed that he had a friend on the Dallas Vice Squad who showed him stills from another X-rated stag film which showed Candy Barr giving yet another X-Rated performance.
I have NO idea if the guy was telling the truth or if he was telling the truth, or if his memory had gotten a little hazy since the years passed and if he was getting a few details mixed up here and there since Smart Alec purports to be Candy's only X-rated stag film.
1/21/06 UPDATE: I found the emails exchanged between me and this guy buried within my computer:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:49:31 -0500 William Jowell
writes:
I have an 8MM film of Candy when she was minus 18 plus an autographed copy of the book of poems she wrote when she was about 35: A GENTLE MIND....CONFUSED Dulce press 1972. I knew (know) this lady personally. AND I know where she is today. Is there a market for the movie and/or the book. I am considering putting both on eBAY as a package.
_____________________
From: bmovies
To: XXXXXXXXXXX@XXX.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: Candy Barr
Hi William,
Yes, there is a market for both the movie AND the book. It seems that there is quite a few Candy Barr fans out there. Including those who weren't even born yet during her heyday.
Candy's items, like say a mens magazine that she appears in, seems to attract a handful more bidders than other men's magazines of the same era.
I don't know how much your stuff is worth, but don't expect to get more than 20-30 bucks for each of your items on eBay if you sell them
seperately. IF (a BIG if), you're lucky, you could get as much as 60
bucks for the film. Not much more (Is the 8mm film her famous X-rated
1951 stag film: Smart Aleck?). IF you decide to sell them together as a package, there's a strong chance you will more likely get less. Best to sell them seperately.
That has nothing to do with how many or how few fans Candy has (She has plenty. I can tell by the above average number of bids her items get). It's just rare for collectible items on eBay go for what they are worth or more. Almost all collectibles on eBay go for much less than what they are really worth. For example, a couple years ago I bought off of eBay several hundred bucks worth of 1950's TV Guides for only twenty bucks. Cheap deals like that are quite common on eBay.
By the way, if you don't mind answering, out of curiosity, how did you come to know her and where is she today? What has she been doing with herself the last decade or so?
Thanks,
Marc
__________________________________
9/24/00
Yes, the film is "Smart Aleck" the only film I know of. Probably more, since, years ago, I had several porno stills that I got from a buddy on Dallas's vice squad. This was about 1956/7.
I met Candy in the fifties. I arraingned several stag parties for her through her local agent. Ran into her again when she published her book here in Midland. Then again about the time she did her OUI spread. The last I heard she is living in Brownwood, Texas. I have searched for her there but do not know which name she uses now. She formally used her name and her first (?) husband's name: Jaunita Dell Phillips. She is truely a beautiful lady -- in and out.
I have checked voter rolls but doubt that she can vote. I "believe" the marijuana charge was a felony at the time.
Thanks for the imfo about the items. Other than eBay where would you
suggest?
Someone seems to want your video as much as I do. I keep raising and they obviously have a high limit entered. Do you have other copies available if I miss on this one?
______________________________________
9/25/00
Thanks for the info! You can also sell your Candy Barr items on Amazon.com and Yahoo.com. They have auctions as well, but the best place is eBay because eBay has the most bidders when it comes to auctions. Still, Amazon and Yahoo are the best auction sites next to eBay.
As for copies of my item, sorry but I dont have any other copies BUT you are in luck! Something Weird Video is still selling it for 15 bucks!
Go to http://www.somethingweird.com
On the menu at the left, click on the word video, it will give you their video page. Do a search by clicking on the letter N. It will give you all their titles starting with the letter "N".
The title of the video is Nudie Cutie. You will notice that there are hundreds of Nudie Cutie videos. Mine is Vol. 23
You will also notice that the Nudie Cutie videos doesn't have a description for each video on their website. When I bought my copy from them I bought it through their mail order catalog which had a description of each and every Nudie-Cutie video. That's how I knew Candy Barr was in the one I bought. I'm not certain, but she could be in more nudie short films in the other Nudie Cutie videos, so when you go to their website, you can request them to send you a catalog.
Thanks,
Marc
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
I've just seen a DVD (rented it from Blockbuster*) called "Scary True Stories: Ten Haunting Tales from the Japanese Underground. Originally it came out in Japan as a series of videotapes back in 1991, and it was a big hit, but the reason why more stories weren't made was because the company that made them fell into financial difficulties and pulled the plug. Years later, in November of 2005, it was re-released on DVD.
I never heard of this movie before, (which is credited with creating what is known as the "J-Horror" craze. The "J" obviously standing for "Japanese".). I'm not a particular fan of foreign films. But I love ghost stories. True ghost stories regardless of where they are from.
I had already rented a couple of Asian ghost story films before. A Tale of Two Sisters and The Sisters. ("The Sisters", made in Thailand, is presumably based on a true story.)
So, while looking around for similar films, I ran across this DVD in a search on Netflix. I put it in my queue, and waited. It seemed to be a very popular film because it immediately went into a "long wait" status, but much to my excitement, Netflix sent me a copy on November 25, only a few days after it had been officially released! And much to my anger, it seemed to have gottten lost in the mails on its way to me.
On December 1st, I still didnt get the movie in the mail and I reported it to Netflix as "missing" that very day. Netflix gave me the option of resending the same movie or the next movie listed in my queue. Naturally, I chose for them to resend me the very same movie. But instead, they sent me my next selection listed in my queue. Irritated and angry at Netflix, I fired off an angry email asking them why they did that to me. I got an email back, apologizing, explaining that they cannot gurantee the availability of every movie (apparently they had no more discs of this particular movie currently available). They sent me a free extra DVD (I'm on the 4 out at a time plan and this free extra one would make it, temporarilly that is, 5 out) and they put Scary True Tales back into the number one spot in my queue for me. However, I noticed that it had a "long wait" status on it. Time went on, I left it in my number one spot, yet everytime it was time for Netflix to send me another movie, "Scary True Tales" kept getting passed over.
I went over to the Blockbuster website where I also rent DVDS by mail (3 at a time plan). They also had Scary True Stories, but also on a "short wait". (For a movie that I've never heard of before, this seemed to be pretty popular!). Occasionally, over at Blockbuster, when a movie is in a "short wait", I still manage to get the movie I want. So I put Scary True Stories into the number one spot in my queue at Blockbuster and removed it from my queue at Netflix.
Hallelujah, one day last week, Wed. the 4th Blockbuster sent me Scary True Stories. Only problem is that their shipping times are usually twice, even three times as long as Netflix. They informed me that I would not be getting the DVD in the mail untill Saturday the 7th. Saturday's mail came, and no DVD.
I felt as if I was never going to get to see this movie!
After the mail came and no DVD, I reported it missing to Blockbuster, who like Netflix gave me the option of resending me the same movie or sending me my next selection in my queue. I chose for them to resend the same movie, and just like Netflix, they ignored my instruction and instead sent me the next selection in my queue. I did not write an angry email to Blockbuster. It wouldn't have done any good. I couldnt blame them. Just like Netflix, this DVD was in short supply with Blockbuster as well.
HOWEVER, on Monday the 9th, the DVD Scary True Stories came in the mail from Blockbuster!!!!
Finally! I watched it that very evening. (I would have watched it during the day, but the mailman doesnt get around to my neighborhood untill late in the afternoon).
Here are the stories in their order:
*****************
Segment #1 “The Lonely Girl” Mariko is not as good as a swimmer as the rest of the class and one day she stays later to practice with her instructor while her friends leave before her. When she returns to the dressing room to shower and change back into her street clothes she is confronted by the ghost of a girl who had died at this location one year before.
Segment #2 “Spiritual Flight” A young girl is confronted by a spiritual force on her way how from school one day. Later that evening she encounters the same force this time in her room and she is taken on an out of body experience the leads her to a graveyard by the spot she walked by earlier that day. Only one problem there never was a graveyard there. Was someone from beyond trying to tell her something or was it all a dream?
Segment #3: “Mystery of the Red Earring” Keiko is afraid to be all alone and since her parents are out of town she invites her friend Masayo over for a sleepover. Keiko tells her about a red earring that she found one day while walking home and for the past two weeks she has tried to get rid of it only for it to reappear once again in her possession. Masayo not fully convinced of her friends’ tale soon discovers the truth thanks to things that go bump in the night.
Scary True Stories: Night Two (1991)
Segment #4 “The Gymnasium in Summer” Three friends Chima, Akimi and Yuma decide to break into the schools gym after they hear about an urban legend concerning a death that happened there last summer.
Segment #5 “House of Restless Spirits” Yuko and her family move into a new home after her dad is transferred to a new city because of his job. Each of the three family member encounter spirits who are not friendly and Yuko’s father hires a spiritualist to ride the house of these evil spirits.
Segment #6 “The Hospital at Midnight” Nurse Ogura during her frequent rounds on the midnight shift at the hospital encounters an invisible presence that appears to be almost as real as her as its grasp her in its clutches.
Scary True Stories: Realm of Specters (1992)
Segment #7 “Be Gone Crone!!” Yuka is visited by an old woman who knocks insistently at her window. Unable to ignore the woman’s knock Yuka soon comes face to face with pure evil.
Segment #8 “My Friend at the Stairwell” Yano and her friend Nami on their way to class one day pass what looks like blood a blood stain and a young ghostly looking boy on the schools northern staircase. Yano unable to get the image of this young boy out of her head wants to help him and when she offers a helping hand she soon discovers that she has taken on more then she can handle.
Segment #9 “Paralysis” A young women while sleeping one evening has a disturbing nightmare that leaves her paralyzed.
Segment #10 “The Black Hair in the Abandon Building” Three friends enter an abandon building and while going through the various rooms come across some discarded black hair. Takeshi one of the boys as the insistence of his girlfriend puts the hair they found back into the box they found in it when in the mirror where the hair was hanging a skeleton looking woman appears. The three friends then run for their life and try to escape the abandon building and its evil presence that is now stalking them.
***************************
And here is a neat little piece of trivia about the film, from the director himself:
At one point, SCARY TRUE STORIES even had its own mythology tossed back in its face. “In ‘House of Restless Spirits,’ we shot in an old home that was said to be haunted by the ghost of a girl,” Tsuruta reveals. “After the video was released, I started getting letters from viewers saying that you can see a face in the back. Sure enough, in the scene where the exorcism is being performed, in the shot with the mother, father and priest woman, you can see a girl’s face peering out.”
Wow. How's THAT for a movie about true ghost stories? :-)
I never heard of this movie before, (which is credited with creating what is known as the "J-Horror" craze. The "J" obviously standing for "Japanese".). I'm not a particular fan of foreign films. But I love ghost stories. True ghost stories regardless of where they are from.
I had already rented a couple of Asian ghost story films before. A Tale of Two Sisters and The Sisters. ("The Sisters", made in Thailand, is presumably based on a true story.)
So, while looking around for similar films, I ran across this DVD in a search on Netflix. I put it in my queue, and waited. It seemed to be a very popular film because it immediately went into a "long wait" status, but much to my excitement, Netflix sent me a copy on November 25, only a few days after it had been officially released! And much to my anger, it seemed to have gottten lost in the mails on its way to me.
On December 1st, I still didnt get the movie in the mail and I reported it to Netflix as "missing" that very day. Netflix gave me the option of resending the same movie or the next movie listed in my queue. Naturally, I chose for them to resend me the very same movie. But instead, they sent me my next selection listed in my queue. Irritated and angry at Netflix, I fired off an angry email asking them why they did that to me. I got an email back, apologizing, explaining that they cannot gurantee the availability of every movie (apparently they had no more discs of this particular movie currently available). They sent me a free extra DVD (I'm on the 4 out at a time plan and this free extra one would make it, temporarilly that is, 5 out) and they put Scary True Tales back into the number one spot in my queue for me. However, I noticed that it had a "long wait" status on it. Time went on, I left it in my number one spot, yet everytime it was time for Netflix to send me another movie, "Scary True Tales" kept getting passed over.
I went over to the Blockbuster website where I also rent DVDS by mail (3 at a time plan). They also had Scary True Stories, but also on a "short wait". (For a movie that I've never heard of before, this seemed to be pretty popular!). Occasionally, over at Blockbuster, when a movie is in a "short wait", I still manage to get the movie I want. So I put Scary True Stories into the number one spot in my queue at Blockbuster and removed it from my queue at Netflix.
Hallelujah, one day last week, Wed. the 4th Blockbuster sent me Scary True Stories. Only problem is that their shipping times are usually twice, even three times as long as Netflix. They informed me that I would not be getting the DVD in the mail untill Saturday the 7th. Saturday's mail came, and no DVD.
I felt as if I was never going to get to see this movie!
After the mail came and no DVD, I reported it missing to Blockbuster, who like Netflix gave me the option of resending me the same movie or sending me my next selection in my queue. I chose for them to resend the same movie, and just like Netflix, they ignored my instruction and instead sent me the next selection in my queue. I did not write an angry email to Blockbuster. It wouldn't have done any good. I couldnt blame them. Just like Netflix, this DVD was in short supply with Blockbuster as well.
HOWEVER, on Monday the 9th, the DVD Scary True Stories came in the mail from Blockbuster!!!!
Finally! I watched it that very evening. (I would have watched it during the day, but the mailman doesnt get around to my neighborhood untill late in the afternoon).
Here are the stories in their order:
*****************
Segment #1 “The Lonely Girl” Mariko is not as good as a swimmer as the rest of the class and one day she stays later to practice with her instructor while her friends leave before her. When she returns to the dressing room to shower and change back into her street clothes she is confronted by the ghost of a girl who had died at this location one year before.
Segment #2 “Spiritual Flight” A young girl is confronted by a spiritual force on her way how from school one day. Later that evening she encounters the same force this time in her room and she is taken on an out of body experience the leads her to a graveyard by the spot she walked by earlier that day. Only one problem there never was a graveyard there. Was someone from beyond trying to tell her something or was it all a dream?
Segment #3: “Mystery of the Red Earring” Keiko is afraid to be all alone and since her parents are out of town she invites her friend Masayo over for a sleepover. Keiko tells her about a red earring that she found one day while walking home and for the past two weeks she has tried to get rid of it only for it to reappear once again in her possession. Masayo not fully convinced of her friends’ tale soon discovers the truth thanks to things that go bump in the night.
Scary True Stories: Night Two (1991)
Segment #4 “The Gymnasium in Summer” Three friends Chima, Akimi and Yuma decide to break into the schools gym after they hear about an urban legend concerning a death that happened there last summer.
Segment #5 “House of Restless Spirits” Yuko and her family move into a new home after her dad is transferred to a new city because of his job. Each of the three family member encounter spirits who are not friendly and Yuko’s father hires a spiritualist to ride the house of these evil spirits.
Segment #6 “The Hospital at Midnight” Nurse Ogura during her frequent rounds on the midnight shift at the hospital encounters an invisible presence that appears to be almost as real as her as its grasp her in its clutches.
Scary True Stories: Realm of Specters (1992)
Segment #7 “Be Gone Crone!!” Yuka is visited by an old woman who knocks insistently at her window. Unable to ignore the woman’s knock Yuka soon comes face to face with pure evil.
Segment #8 “My Friend at the Stairwell” Yano and her friend Nami on their way to class one day pass what looks like blood a blood stain and a young ghostly looking boy on the schools northern staircase. Yano unable to get the image of this young boy out of her head wants to help him and when she offers a helping hand she soon discovers that she has taken on more then she can handle.
Segment #9 “Paralysis” A young women while sleeping one evening has a disturbing nightmare that leaves her paralyzed.
Segment #10 “The Black Hair in the Abandon Building” Three friends enter an abandon building and while going through the various rooms come across some discarded black hair. Takeshi one of the boys as the insistence of his girlfriend puts the hair they found back into the box they found in it when in the mirror where the hair was hanging a skeleton looking woman appears. The three friends then run for their life and try to escape the abandon building and its evil presence that is now stalking them.
***************************
And here is a neat little piece of trivia about the film, from the director himself:
At one point, SCARY TRUE STORIES even had its own mythology tossed back in its face. “In ‘House of Restless Spirits,’ we shot in an old home that was said to be haunted by the ghost of a girl,” Tsuruta reveals. “After the video was released, I started getting letters from viewers saying that you can see a face in the back. Sure enough, in the scene where the exorcism is being performed, in the shot with the mother, father and priest woman, you can see a girl’s face peering out.”
Wow. How's THAT for a movie about true ghost stories? :-)
The Jack Abramoff scandal, the worst scandal in history?
Yeah, if history started around 1999.
http://newsbusters.org/node/3543
Yeah, if history started around 1999.
http://newsbusters.org/node/3543
Monday, January 09, 2006
Dear Mr. Harry Belafonte,
Allow me to be of service to you......
___________________________
Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship by Persons Claiming a Right of Residence in the U.S.
RENUNCIATION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY PERSONS CLAIMING A RIGHT OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES Section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1481] governs how a U.S. citizen shall lose U.S. nationality. Section 349(a) states:
A person who is a national of the United States whether, by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality: (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense.
Renunciation is the most unequivocal way in which a person can manifest an intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Those contemplating a renunciation of U.S. citizenship should understand that renunciation is irrevocable, except as provided in Section 351 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and cannot be cancelled or set aside absent successful administrative or judicial appeal. Consequently, renunciation of U.S. citizenship is not a step to be taken lightly. Because renunciation is a serious matter to be undertaken soberly and advisedly, persons contemplating renunciation are advised by U.S. consular officers to consider the matter carefully and, if they chose to proceed, to come back to the U.S. embassy or consulate after a period of reflection. In accordance with Section 358 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, while persons seeking to renounce U.S. citizenship submit the necessary documentation to a U.S. consular officer at a U.S. Foreign Service post abroad, the decision whether to approve the renunciation is made by the Department of State in Washington, D.C. Accordingly, unless and until a certificate of loss of nationality is approved by the U.S. Department of State, the oath of renunciation, even though signed by the individual is not/not legally effective in terminating the person's U.S. citizenship.
In order for a renunciation under Section 349(a)(5) to be effective, all of the conditions of the statute must be met. In other words, a person wishing to renounce American citizenship must appear in person and sign an oath of renunciation before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer abroad, generally at an American Embassy or Consulate. Moreover, Section 349(b) of the Act provides that:
Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this of any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntrily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.
In addition, please be aware that: The U.S. Department of State has concluded that the intention to relinquish U.S. nationality required for purposes of finding loss of nationality for the purposes of Section 349(a) of the INA does not exist where a renunciant plans or claims a right to continue to reside in the United States, unless the renunciant demonstrates that residence will be as an alien documented properly under U.S. law.
Renunciations which are not in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State have no legal effect. Because of the way in which Section 349(a)(5) is written and interpreted, Americans cannot effectively renounce their citizenship by mail, through an agent, or while in the United States. Section 349(a)(6) provides for renunciation of United States citizenship under certain circumstances in the United States when the United States is in a state of war. Such a state does not currently exist. Questions concerning renunciation of American citizenship under Section 349(a)(6) should be addressed to the Attorney General.
Persons who contemplate renunciation of U.S. nationality should be aware that, unless they already possess a foreign nationality or are assured of acquiring another nationality shortly after completing their renunciation, severe hardship to them could result. In the absence of a second nationality, those individuals would become stateless. As stateless persons, they would not be entitled to the protection of any government. They might also find it difficult or impossible to travel as they would probably not be entitled to a passport from any country. Further, a person who has renounced U.S. nationality will be required to apply for a visa to travel to the United States, just as other aliens do. If found ineligible for a visa, a renunciant could be permanently barred from the United States. Renunciation of American citizenship does not necessarily prevent a former citizen's deportation from a foreign country to the United States.
Persons considering renunciation should also be aware that the fact that they have renounced U.S. nationality may have no effect whatsoever on their U.S. tax or military service obligations. Nor will it allow them to escape possible prosecution for crimes which they may have committed in the United States, or repayment of financial obligations previously incurred in the United States. Questions about these matters should be directed to the government agency concerned.
Those persons who, after careful consideration of the contents of this letter and its enclosures, desire to renounce U.S. citizenship may contact the U.S. embassy to make an appointment, bearing in mind that they will be asked to demonstrate poof of foreign residence, or failing that, evidence that they intend to enter the United States as an alien with documentation t that effect. Moreover, a person in possession of a U.S. passport will be asked to submit that passport to the U.S. consular officer for cancellation. If the certificate of loss of nationality is approved by the U.S. Department of State, the individual's name will be entered in the Department's name check system and they will be ineligible for U.S. passports in the future.
As previously stated, persons contemplating renunciation of U.S. citizenship are reminded that renunciation is irrevocable, except as provided in Section 351 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and cannot be cancelled or set aside absent successful administrative or judicial appeal.
If you have any questions, contact a U.S. consular officer at the U.S. embassy or the Department of State (CA/OCS/PRI) at 202-647-3666.
5/98
http://travel.state.gov/
PS: Please be sure to post your new address in Venezuela.
Allow me to be of service to you......
___________________________
Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship by Persons Claiming a Right of Residence in the U.S.
RENUNCIATION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY PERSONS CLAIMING A RIGHT OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES Section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1481] governs how a U.S. citizen shall lose U.S. nationality. Section 349(a) states:
A person who is a national of the United States whether, by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality: (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense.
Renunciation is the most unequivocal way in which a person can manifest an intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Those contemplating a renunciation of U.S. citizenship should understand that renunciation is irrevocable, except as provided in Section 351 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and cannot be cancelled or set aside absent successful administrative or judicial appeal. Consequently, renunciation of U.S. citizenship is not a step to be taken lightly. Because renunciation is a serious matter to be undertaken soberly and advisedly, persons contemplating renunciation are advised by U.S. consular officers to consider the matter carefully and, if they chose to proceed, to come back to the U.S. embassy or consulate after a period of reflection. In accordance with Section 358 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, while persons seeking to renounce U.S. citizenship submit the necessary documentation to a U.S. consular officer at a U.S. Foreign Service post abroad, the decision whether to approve the renunciation is made by the Department of State in Washington, D.C. Accordingly, unless and until a certificate of loss of nationality is approved by the U.S. Department of State, the oath of renunciation, even though signed by the individual is not/not legally effective in terminating the person's U.S. citizenship.
In order for a renunciation under Section 349(a)(5) to be effective, all of the conditions of the statute must be met. In other words, a person wishing to renounce American citizenship must appear in person and sign an oath of renunciation before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer abroad, generally at an American Embassy or Consulate. Moreover, Section 349(b) of the Act provides that:
Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this of any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntrily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.
In addition, please be aware that: The U.S. Department of State has concluded that the intention to relinquish U.S. nationality required for purposes of finding loss of nationality for the purposes of Section 349(a) of the INA does not exist where a renunciant plans or claims a right to continue to reside in the United States, unless the renunciant demonstrates that residence will be as an alien documented properly under U.S. law.
Renunciations which are not in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State have no legal effect. Because of the way in which Section 349(a)(5) is written and interpreted, Americans cannot effectively renounce their citizenship by mail, through an agent, or while in the United States. Section 349(a)(6) provides for renunciation of United States citizenship under certain circumstances in the United States when the United States is in a state of war. Such a state does not currently exist. Questions concerning renunciation of American citizenship under Section 349(a)(6) should be addressed to the Attorney General.
Persons who contemplate renunciation of U.S. nationality should be aware that, unless they already possess a foreign nationality or are assured of acquiring another nationality shortly after completing their renunciation, severe hardship to them could result. In the absence of a second nationality, those individuals would become stateless. As stateless persons, they would not be entitled to the protection of any government. They might also find it difficult or impossible to travel as they would probably not be entitled to a passport from any country. Further, a person who has renounced U.S. nationality will be required to apply for a visa to travel to the United States, just as other aliens do. If found ineligible for a visa, a renunciant could be permanently barred from the United States. Renunciation of American citizenship does not necessarily prevent a former citizen's deportation from a foreign country to the United States.
Persons considering renunciation should also be aware that the fact that they have renounced U.S. nationality may have no effect whatsoever on their U.S. tax or military service obligations. Nor will it allow them to escape possible prosecution for crimes which they may have committed in the United States, or repayment of financial obligations previously incurred in the United States. Questions about these matters should be directed to the government agency concerned.
Those persons who, after careful consideration of the contents of this letter and its enclosures, desire to renounce U.S. citizenship may contact the U.S. embassy to make an appointment, bearing in mind that they will be asked to demonstrate poof of foreign residence, or failing that, evidence that they intend to enter the United States as an alien with documentation t that effect. Moreover, a person in possession of a U.S. passport will be asked to submit that passport to the U.S. consular officer for cancellation. If the certificate of loss of nationality is approved by the U.S. Department of State, the individual's name will be entered in the Department's name check system and they will be ineligible for U.S. passports in the future.
As previously stated, persons contemplating renunciation of U.S. citizenship are reminded that renunciation is irrevocable, except as provided in Section 351 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and cannot be cancelled or set aside absent successful administrative or judicial appeal.
If you have any questions, contact a U.S. consular officer at the U.S. embassy or the Department of State (CA/OCS/PRI) at 202-647-3666.
5/98
http://travel.state.gov/
PS: Please be sure to post your new address in Venezuela.
Democrats Prepare to Launch ‘Honesty’ Message (Reid Memo Leak Dems Intend to Use Abramoff Scandal)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1554732/posts
Sure enough...
Time for capital cleanup (Senator Harry Reid)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1554998/posts
That Harry Reid is such a (hypocritical) card. One wonders when he'll get around to cleaning up his own ethical mess as well as that of his party. I shall not hold my breath.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1554732/posts
Sure enough...
Time for capital cleanup (Senator Harry Reid)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1554998/posts
That Harry Reid is such a (hypocritical) card. One wonders when he'll get around to cleaning up his own ethical mess as well as that of his party. I shall not hold my breath.
YAHOO censoring negative reviews of "Brokeback Mountain"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1555036/posts
Please help yahoo is going to take away my account due to my review of Brokeback mountain
Jonathan Baird
Posted on 01/09/2006 6:14:06 PM PST by Sentis
Basically, yesterday I wrote a review of Brokeback Mountain I was very honest and not derogatory in anyway. I stated that the advertising for the movie was misleading and that the movie itself ignored the fact that these men destroyed the families they created rather than making a choice not to have those families when they realized they were gay.
I gave the movie the rating of F on the Yahoo scale.
Now the yahoo people have sent me a threatening email and have said they are going to close my account if I engage in any more of these activities. Well I guess they better close the account because they aren't going to threaten me. In fact I may take an entire day one day and open hundreds of free yahoo accounts to waste their bandwidth and find someway to get all those accounts spammed so it wastes more bandwidth. I am so sick of the leftists that run Yahoo.
_________________________
It seems they remove ever review that gets reported as abuse. Basically almost all the negative reviews over a day or two old have been reported and removed.
43 posted on 01/09/2006 6:53:40 PM PST by Sentis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1555036/posts
Please help yahoo is going to take away my account due to my review of Brokeback mountain
Jonathan Baird
Posted on 01/09/2006 6:14:06 PM PST by Sentis
Basically, yesterday I wrote a review of Brokeback Mountain I was very honest and not derogatory in anyway. I stated that the advertising for the movie was misleading and that the movie itself ignored the fact that these men destroyed the families they created rather than making a choice not to have those families when they realized they were gay.
I gave the movie the rating of F on the Yahoo scale.
Now the yahoo people have sent me a threatening email and have said they are going to close my account if I engage in any more of these activities. Well I guess they better close the account because they aren't going to threaten me. In fact I may take an entire day one day and open hundreds of free yahoo accounts to waste their bandwidth and find someway to get all those accounts spammed so it wastes more bandwidth. I am so sick of the leftists that run Yahoo.
_________________________
It seems they remove ever review that gets reported as abuse. Basically almost all the negative reviews over a day or two old have been reported and removed.
43 posted on 01/09/2006 6:53:40 PM PST by Sentis
Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
CNET ^ | January 9, 2006 | Declan McCullagh
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com
To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.
CNET ^ | January 9, 2006 | Declan McCullagh
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com
To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.
Sneaky bastard.
