Delaware County Domestic Relations

Have you ever dealt with them? I received a letter (Non Certified) yesterday informing me that I had a bench warrant out for my arrest. It was from the Sheriff’s Department relating to a support order that had been vacated over 3 years ago. Apparently, I still owed $927.50 in arrears to them. Now, before you label me a “Deadbeat” let me tell you that I have paid on average $150.00 a week for 19 years for 2 beautiful children who I love, even though my ex informed me that my older daughter wasn’t mine when she turned 18.

She ain’t mine? What do you mean by that? I always had a doubt in the back of my mind about my paternity, but I still signed the birth certificate anyway. It’s called love. She will always remain my daughter to me and I will do anything for her and my (Biological Daughter, I feel no difference)

I hold no ill feelings, only that I already spent 4 days in Charlie Sexton’s famous Gulag over a bench warrant in 1999 over not showing up in 97′ for court because my Mom had a stroke that morning (Documented) and while I was WORKING at the Court House! Note to self: Contact Court House for any electrical work they need done, I’m available at a very alluring rate.

Anyway, $50.00 times 52 weeks times 18 years plus several thousand dollars given outside the court system =? Was this remaining $927.50 necessary? Could I sue for this? Not worth it… Money = Evil. While I was there, I was seated with 2 other PACES clients. One, was handcuffed and taken to jail (He owed $76,000 dollars); the other, with two warrants, was told to show up for court in November. The young woman at the computer was very pleasant, as were the four sheriff’s in the room.

A little background on my case. I had 2 children from this woman who went on welfare while living with her mom and caught her red handed (or faced) getting it on with another man. So I left. The woman that I was going to marry soon had my ass in court.

So, TMI? I don’t care, this is a big issue to me. There are many Dads out there that get shafted by the system, Women who smoke up the money on crack that they receive for the kids. Domestic Relations is a one sided money collecting unit, no more, no less. They do not care if the Mother is doing coke with your money that is supposed to be for the kids. Their job is just to collect, and lock your ass up if they cannot. So, Domestic Relations, I am done with you.I post notice. My bench warrant that was issued in November of 03 that I had no idea of until I visited the PACES web site has been rescinded. ZERO balance. To all others with Domestic Relations cases (You guys and gals who are lax in your payments to the DR. of DC.) PAY up, or shit your pants in the intake unit of Wackenhut, then on to a pod for 22 and a half hours a day until the over worked can arrange a hearing for you! And, to all you smokers out there, NO SMOKING AT WACKENHUT! NO EXCEPTIONS!

P.S. Idea to Domestic Relations: USE CERTIFIED MAIL! To You GUYS out there? Keep it in your pants,it’s cheaper…

Yesterday afternoon I went to my favourite watering hole, Thomas’s Cafe. To make a long story short, there are people in there who believe that Saddam did 911. Mr.B, a long time customer, was even getting pissed off at me and “Bruce” to the point of leaving after we tried in vain to tell him different. I asked B where he got his information. He replied, The TV. The Times… Oh, ok, the Times? You mean The Daily Times? Gil Spencer’s Daily Times?
B.went on to praise Bush for ridding the world of evil, and if it took ten thousand more dead troops to get the job done, well, so be it. Then, I have Mr. G inform me that I have no right to drive in Pennsylvania, it is a privilege.(I have to look this up, as I made a bet with him). Still another man, a stranger chimed in calling me a Democrat, whatever that is supposed to mean.

So here you have 3 guys, one a cop, another claiming to be in the military (The stranger), a third retired coming down on me and Bruce like flies on shit. These guys really believe that Saddam Hussein was the man responsible for 911. I asked them: What about Bin Laden? B replies: There all connected.. Ok, whatever B. Keep reading Gil and keep being sheep to the media. Baaaaa.

So, I ask all three one question: Do you own a computer? All three replied NO. Advice? Never discuss politics in a bar. Everybody thinks there right.

On another note, I as you all can see, have a “BlogRoll“. One site, Peter’s Blog is listed there. This is what he posted about my link.

Interesting Site? [Geeky Stuff] – peter @ 02:02:39 PM
I found my blog (what you’re looking at) listed under the “Interesting Sites” category on the Delaware County, PA Web Portal & Directory. This is totally random and weird.

Totally random and weird. Hmmmm. Let’s see. “Interesting Sites”. Yes, I think the guy is talented with web design and graphics, Anime and stuff. Shall I start censoring what sites I add? Should everybody censor their blogrolls? My blogroll has far more “random and weird” sites than his. One, stellaislaura, is a blog from some woman who knits. how did I find her? I haven’t got a clue. Must have been drinking and googling one night discussing knitting with the wife. But there it is, blogrolled forever. Hey,I wish someone would blogroll my blog. Hint to Mike…

Well it’s damn too early for me to be up, so I have time before work to googleblog some more sites that I find interesting.


‘Which Swift Boat Veteran for Truth Member Blows His Brains Out First?’

September 23, 2004

I said it months ago, and I was right. These Swifties have successfully brought up the ‘Dark Secrets and Atrocities’ that went on in Vietnam.

Regardless of who wins the Election come November 2, the fact is, Americans, Especially the ‘Children’ Will be doing more and more investigations and studying of the Vietnam War and those studies will include the hidden, well kept atrocities of that war, find out what that many of the things that John Kerry testified to back in the early 1970’s are indeed factual, but have been successfully kept away from the general public over the last 35 yrs.

Come this Holiday Season, You have to ask yourself, which ‘Swift Boat Veteran For Truth Member’ will be asked by one of their Grandchildren any of the following questions during Thanksgiving, or Christmas Dinner….

Grandpa, Did You know those guys who Cut Off Vietnamese Children’s Heads during the War When You Served?

Grandpa, Did you burn down people’s homes too?

Grandpa, Did you open fire and kill anything that moved?

Or will they say things like….

Grandpa (Sobbing) Killing Mommies in front of their Children isn’t right.

Grandpa (sobbing) you said John Kerry was a Liar, and saying things that were not true but but the teacher in school taught us about
Lt. Calley and the My Lai Massacre
What those soldiers did was very bad, wasn’t it?

Grandpa, my teacher taught us about the
‘Buried Secrets, Brutal Truths of Tiger Force’
Did you know them? Did you do things like they did?
(Sobbing) Did you ever cut the head off of a Baby in Vietnam?

Which one of these guys, members of the ‘Swift Boat Veterans for Truth’ will be confronted with what is described above this holiday season by their own families, their grandchildren. Having to look them in their eyes during ‘Thanksgiving’ or ‘Christmas’ Dinner and realize that it was the actions of himself, for hopping on John O’Neill’s bandwagon, to attempt to prevent
John Kerry from becoming President because of Kerry’s actions after he came home from the Battle Field and reported what was really going on in those jungles, reading testimony from other veterans of the horrors they have seen, or conducted. All with a one purpose, to bring an end to the madness.

Which ‘Swiftie’ is going to realize that it was himself, who is responsible for opening up the can of dark secrets, atrocities, resulting from the actions of the ‘Swift Boat Veterans For Truth Campaign’ which has successfully accomplished opening up a the ‘Pandora’s Box of Vietnam’.

As their Grandchildren, and Family are all looking at him during the dinner table, with tears coming down their eyes, and fear and horror overwhelm their faces as they discuss these things John Kerry testified about really did happen, and the issue of the Vietnam War itself, Which one of these ‘Swifties’ will feel his heart sink into his stomach, feel it being slowly digested by the his amino acids, eating away at him, destroying all he has, for his family will be watching, staring, at him with the realities of the Horrors of War overwhelming all he loves,,,, his family.

Which Member of John O’Neill’s Crew, will face this?

And which one of these Swifties will wait for dinner to be over, their families to put their jackets on and leave for their own homes, then walk into his garage, his basement, or just sit right their in his living room, reflecting, with his gun in his hand, putting it to his head, and Blowing his Brains Out?

Folcroft Cops Deserve Justice

This was posted in the Daily Times. Disgraceful to say the least,that this Truscello guy thinks he’s above the law. If I were a Cop in Folcroft, I’d be pissed!

Editorial: Officials who spied in Folcroft deserve ouster


Hundreds of police officers and their supporters stormed Folcroft Borough Council on Tuesday night, demanding to know why borough officials placed electronic surveillance equipment in their own police department — and what is happening with the county’s criminal investigation of the matter.

As an attention-getter, it was a first-rate demonstration. But a more disturbing indicator of the collapse of the Folcroft government came last month. That’s when Folcroft police moved a homicide investigation to the neighboring Darby Township police headquarters — because they were afraid any interviews that took place in their own police station could be compromised by surreptitious monitoring by outsiders.

That paranoia and accusations reign supreme in the borough can be laid at the feet of the borough manager, Anthony Truscello, a longtime Republican power in the town and its former district justice; council Vice President Joseph Zito; and his council colleagues, who say the action was necessary to investigate complaints of cops sleeping on duty. Their wildly irresponsible decision to bug their own police officers has not only rendered their town a laughingstock but has imperiled every police investigation since the spying began.

What’s to stop any enterprising defense attorney from subpoenaing all the audio- or videotapes made in the police department to bolster a case in court? Nothing. Who would beresponsible? Truscello, Zito and company. And who will pay? The taxpayers of Folcroft, of course, who already involuntarily shelled out nearly $10,000 for the surveillance equipment in the first place.

(They’ll also foot the bill for the litigation certain to be filed by the Fraternal Order of Police, which would seem to have a very legitimate claim on behalf of its members of invasion of privacy.)

The crowd was so large, and so incensed, on Tuesday night that Truscello at one point called the state police to ask for protection. That’s how bad things are in Folcroft: The former district justice — who is still certified by the state to sit on the bench as a senior district judge, and whose daughter Debbie is the town’s sitting district justice — had to call the state to ask for protection from his own police department.

Tuesday’s protesters wanted to know what the county District Attorney’s office was doing about the investigation, which has been in its hands. County detectives, armed with a warrant, hauled out the bugging equipment last May. They got no answers that night or the next day, when a spokesman for District Attorney G. Michael Green would say only that the matter is still being examined.

The criminal justice system takes its own time, as any good police officer knows. But the fact that no criminal charges have been filed doesn’t excuse the fact that a gross injustice has occurred, irrevocably rupturing the bond of trust between the people, their police department, and their elected officials.

Dismissals and resignations are in order, starting with the borough manager and council leadership. It’s time to clean house in Folcroft — and, this time, not just of electronic surveillance equipment.

©The Daily Times 2004

This is what our government is doing

The enemy is us

In war, you deny information, spread lies and use psychological warfare. An expert on military information operations explains how Bush has mastered this technique — and used it against the American people.

By Sam Gardiner

09/22/04 “” — On Thursday, Iraq’s interim prime minister, Iyad Allawi, will speak before a joint meeting of Congress, and from what he said in London on his way to the United States, it looks like Americans are going to be getting more of the strategic information operations that have been crucial to Bush’s policy on Iraq from the beginning.

On Monday, Allawi said at a press conference: “Terrorists are coming and pouring into Iraq to try to undermine the situation in Iraq … And God forbid, if Iraq is broken or the will of Iraq is broken, then London will be a target, Washington will be a target.” In those sentences, Allawi employed the basic doctrine of strategic information operations: Influence emotions, motive and objective reasoning. Use repetition to create a collective memory in the target audience. And the recurrent message of both Allawi and the Bush administration is: Iraq = terrorists = 9/11.

The Army Field Manual describes information operations as the use of strategies such as information denial, deception and psychological warfare to influence decision making. The notion is as old as war itself. With information operations, one seeks to gain and maintain information superiority — control information and you control the battlefield. And in the information age, it has become even more imperative to influence adversaries.

But with the Iraq war, information operations have gone seriously off track, moving beyond influencing adversaries on the battlefield to influencing the decision making of friendly nations and, even more important, American public opinion. In information denial, one attempts to deceive one’s adversary. Since the declared end of combat operations, the Bush administration has orchestrated a number of deceptions about Iraq. But who is its adversary?

In August 2003, the administration’s message was that everything in Iraq was improving. The White House led the information effort and even published a paper on the successes of the first 100 days of the occupation. By October the message had shifted: Things were going well in Iraq, but the media was telling the wrong story.

Then, toward the end of 2003, the message was that the whole problem in Iraq was “dead-enders” and “foreign fighters.” If it weren’t for them, the situation would be fine. Then, after Saddam Hussein was captured in December, the message shifted again: The coalition had discovered along with the former dictator documents revealing the insurgent network, which now would be broken. Once again, everything would be fine.

At the approach of the hand-over to Iraq’s interim government in late June, the administration said the event represented the worst fears of the insurgents, who did not want any movement toward democracy. The White House warned that there would be increased violence as the insurgents tried to prevent the interim government from assuming its proper role in running the country. In fact, violence did increase before the transfer, but there was even more violence afterward. But the administration’s information about the situation in Iraq sharply declined.

Denying information to adversaries is one way of maintaining information dominance. (According to the Army Field Manual, this dimension involves “withholding information that adversaries need for effective decision-making.”) In the case of Iraq, this has meant eliminating press releases and press briefings. Since the hand-over of power, the U.S. Embassy in Iraq has issued only six releases, including one on the new Iraqi environment minister’s visit to a landfill project. The most recent press release, on Aug. 12, was about a boxer on Iraq’s Olympics team. The last press briefing by the Multi-National Force in Iraq was June 25. The interim Iraqi government does not hold press conferences.

The White House Web site also reflects the strategy of withholding information. It used to actively provide content on Operation Iraqi Freedom (or as the Web site now says, “Renewal in Iraq”), but the last new entry is dated Aug. 5.

The effect of the White House’s control of information has been dramatic. The chart shows how English-language press coverage of Iraq has fallen off since July. Early in July, it was typical to find almost 250,000 articles each day mentioning Iraq. That number has dropped to 150,000. The goal of denying the adversary access to information is being realized. But, again, who is the adversary?

Before, during and immediately after the war, the White House orchestrated an intensive program of press briefings and releases to saturate media time and space, stay on message, keep ahead of the news cycle and manage expectations. The White House conference call set the daily message. The press briefings from the Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar, were designed to dominate the morning and afternoon press coverage, while the afternoon press briefing by the Pentagon was intended for the evening news.

The White House is also using psychological warfare — conveying selected information to organizations and individuals to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning and ultimately behavior — to spread its version of the war. And the administration’s message is obviously central to the process. From the very beginning, that message, delivered both directly and subtly, has been constant and consistent: Iraq = terrorists = 9/11.

The president tells us that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq so we don’t have to fight them here in the United States. But I know of no one with a respectable knowledge of the events in Iraq who shares that view. My contacts in the intelligence community say the opposite — that U.S. policies in fact are creating more terrorism.

Still, the administration has made its case for the 9/11 terrorism and Iraq connection with some sophistication. For example, on March 25, 2003, the United States renamed the Iraqi fighters in civilian clothes known as the Fedayeen Saddam. Either the Office of the Secretary of Defense or the White House (I have been told it was both) directed that they now be called “terrorist death squads” — promoting the overarching message: Iraq = terrorists = 9/11.

Recently, the purported terrorist connection was reinforced by another change in terminology. When coalition forces bomb a house in Fallujah, the Multi-National Force press releases now announce that they bombed a “safe house.” But Marines don’t come to that phrase naturally. Marines hit enemy positions. They strike targets. The implication is fairly obvious. Since terrorists use “safe houses,” the insurgents in Fallujah must be terrorists. And some of us thus come to believe that we are in Iraq to fight the “global war on terrorism.”

Appealing to the emotions aroused by 9/11 is classic psychological warfare. And repetition of the terrorist argument is utterly consistent with the theory that one can develop collective memory in a population through repetition.

Images are also essential in psychological warfare, so negative images must be defeated as quickly as possible. That’s why the images of the contractors killed in Fallujah were so worrisome to the administration. Government intelligence sources told me there was fear they would have an impact like the images of dead U.S. Army Rangers being dragged through the streets in Somalia did in 1993, causing rapid erosion in support for that war.

Although we don’t know all the facts yet, it’s almost certain that the White House or the Pentagon ordered the Marine attack on Fallujah to fight those negative images. Five U.S. soldiers were killed on the same day as the private contractors when their Bradley fighting vehicle was destroyed. But there was almost no official reaction to their deaths, no pictures; their deaths did not pose an image problem.

Now, the New York Times reports that military operations to open up the no-go areas in Iraq will not occur until November or December. The official line is that the administration wants to wait until Iraqi security forces are better trained.

My military mind only hurts when I hear this argument. The United States has been trying to train the Iraqis to take over for almost two years now. The effort began with the training camp in Hungary before the war, but that program failed. The robust training program that began in the early stages of the occupation was declared a failure with the onset of the insurgents’ offensive in April. The administration has not been able to staff the headquarters tasked to direct the training. Nor is it even certain who among those being trained are on our side. The Marines around Fallujah joke that after they take a member of the Iraqi National Guard to the firing range for practice, the sniper who shoots at them that night shows a remarkable improvement in his aim.

It’s clear the Americans will bear the major brunt of the attack on Fallujah. What could possibly be behind the administration’s decision to wait until November or December to launch it? There’s certainly no commander in the field saying, “Let’s give the bad guys another 60 days to operate freely inside their sanctuaries before we attack.” Such a decision would be particularly bizarre when attacks against coalition forces are more frequent than ever, attacks on oil pipelines are on the rise, and the United States is suffering increased casualties.

Any military officer would say that you have to take the fight to the enemy. So what can we conclude about this decision? There is only one conceivable answer — the White House is delaying military operations until after the Nov. 2 election for political reasons. In the meantime, information-denial operations must be ratcheted up to control the story. But that is becoming more difficult.

During the early part of the war, there was more deception than truth in the comments and press briefings of the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Among the fabricated stories was the early surrender of the commander and the entire 51st Iraqi mechanized division. We were told of an uprising in Basra — it did not happen. We were told Iraqis had stolen U.S. uniforms to commit atrocities — this was not true. We were told on White House and State Department Web sites that the Iraqi military had formed units of children to attack the coalition — untrue. We were told of a whole range of agreements between the French and Iraq before the war over weapons — false. We were told Saddam had marked a red line around Baghdad and that when we crossed it Iraq would use chemical weapons — completely fabricated.

We were told of an elaborate scheme by Saddam’s forces to ambush U.S. Marines on March 23 as they fought toward Baghdad. The president mentioned this incident many times. It turns out what really happened that day is that the Marines were repeatedly attacked by a U.S. Air Force A-10. It was a friendly-fire incident, not an Iraqi ruse. But building on the theme of Iraqi evil was more important than the truth.

Military intelligence officials’ prewar assertion when no WMD were found that Iraq had moved its weapons to Syria is another example of information denial. But although the Iraq Survey Group report to be released at the end of this month will announce once and for all that Iraq did not have WMD, the WMD argument already served its purpose in garnering support for the invasion. The important message now remains: Iraq = terrorists = 9/11.

The fog of war has not yet lifted. But when the strategy is to hide the war from the American people, rather than to get them to approve its instigation, fabrication is more difficult to sustain.

Karl von Clausewitz, the Prussian theorist of war, wrote, “War is an extension of politics by other means.” When I taught Clausewitz to students at various military war colleges, I told them that he meant international politics. But I may have been wrong — I fear war has become an extension of domestic politics, moving beyond influencing adversaries on the battlefield to influencing the decision making of friendly nations and, even more important, American public opinion. Why have the American people become the adversary?

Republicans AND Democrats, Think of your COUNTRY first!

Reverend Blue Jeans

I just watched a re run of “King of Queens” on TV. Doug (Kevin James) was singing the Neil Diamond song ” Reverend Blue Jeans”, or so I thought it was called. 43 years old and I sing the song the same way Doug does! My wife looked at me the same way that Carrie(Leah Remini)did. Ok, So I was misled all these years. How many people think that CCR has a song that goes..”There’s a bathroom on the right?” instead of “There’s a bad moon on the rise”? Any other songs out there?