Tuesday, April 28, 2009

.50 Caliber FLDS Dreams

I know it's slow. I've seen a few droughts when it comes to "New Things To Blog About" regarding the FLDS. This takes the cake though. First there is the brainless purely sensational accusation that the FLDS are killing babies. What is the most obvious proof that they are not? Arizona, Utah and Texas would have been all over the issue from day one, and would have exhumed every tiny body in the "Baby Cemetery" referred to by "Boots" at her tedious, shrill and vacuous blog. It probably doubled it's "hit" total when I pointed to it. Believe me, I have my regrets. So here is my next regrettable link.
I won't even discuss the muck raking shill that alerted me to the post, but here it is. From FLDS Texas, rumored by some to be the blog of Natalie Malonis.* This information is gleaned from a recent issue of Eldorado Success, discussing Brooks Long’s deposition:
" '(Brooks) Long further acknowledged finding a cache of firearms, including .50 caliber rifles and a night vision scope.'

I have seen statements made many, many times that there were no weapons found at the Ranch and that the FLDS are known to be peaceful and would never resort to any kind of violence. The description of this find as a 'cache' is a little troubling. I’d like to know more about just how many were in that cache and who they were registered to. And what’s the need for a night vision scope? Is this hunting equipment?"
First of all, the term "cache" simply refers to a place something is stored together with something else, usually secret. Frankly, this is what firearms safety whiners always tell us we should do with our firearms. Store them secretly and securely under lock and key.

Next, the term is has been spun in the media to mean something large, despite the fact that it's origins are more for something small. Terrorists for instance stash caches of weapons for later nefarious and destructive purposes. What Brooks Long, et al discovered was a legal gun safe with legal weaponry in it. The "night scope" was probably an expensive low light telescopic site. You don't play with .50 cal weaponry with low resolution optics, it makes no sense. Whatever you have your .50 for, it's to "reach out and touch" something. Something a long way away. The owner was probably a shooting enthusiast. It brings up the related question of whether or not we would find a similar rifle in the possession of any of the Texas Rangers as a privately owed gun? Care to lay any bets?

Then there is this rather sensational omission. The real reason we haven't heard anything about the "arms cache" that Brooks discusses. Right after the discussion of the "firearms cache."
"None of the firearms were illegal, however, so none of them were taken into evidence."
Well, there you have it. Had the owner been arrested, or had this (these) weapons(s) been anywhere close to alleged evidence, also confiscated, they would have been laid out and photographed and paraded around like trophies. Read this way we know of a certainty, they were given back to their owner because they were legal, properly stored, rightfully owned (this is the United States) and their owner couldn't be tied even remotely to any crime.

*Those in the know, or who should be in a position to know the blogs author, refer to the author as male.

Sphere: Related Content


ztgstmv said...

I didn't even bother to read TBM's latest blog on this. However, I suspect he's bloggin' angry about white supremacists having guns.

The Pharisee said...

BTW, on my list of "cool things to own" would be a .50 cal. Of course, I would have to be FABULOUSLY wealthy and there are a few other items on my list prior to the .50.

A PBY "Catalina" WW2 era "flying boat."A de Havilland DHC-2 "Beaver."A retrofitted (with turboprops and modern avionics) DC3.

A 1967 Mustang 2+2, 289 V8.

A 1957 BelAir......

But I digress, somewhere in there would be a .50.

ztgstmv said...

About that blog, TexasFLDS, being by Malonis, I highly suspect that's the case. I posted a comment not too long ago mentioning my suspicion that the blogger is none other than Natalie, and lo and behold, my comment was removed almost instantly. In its place was another comment by the blog owner stating a rule that no one shall guess her identity.

Now the only way I can explain this peculiar behavior is that my comment struck a nerve somewhere and thus was very apt. At any rate, I thought the quick, cutting, response was very Malonis-like.

The Pharisee said...

Then those closely associated with it are not just covering up who they are, they are actively lying about who they are.

ztgstmv said...

Well, I should add, I'm assuming it was a "her" that replied to my comment. It sure sounded like a woman anyway. Awful bitchy for a guy, if you ask me.

The Pharisee said...

We're dealing with people who pretend to be things they're not. It's hard to say who they are. I'm not sure I care about them in view of their cowardice.

It's not fun to be on the front lines. You have only one assurance, and that is that no one will "find you out," because you're already out.

These people are without honor or courage. I don't care what their excuse is. If they don't wish to be known, they should just cxrawl back into the hole they like to hide in and shut up.

Carol said...

After all this length of time, I had not looked at the TexasFlds blog. After seeing the link on your blog, I did.
What a sickening bunch of people. What they do not know they make up. There is also a post that is threatening to the FLDS.
How can anyone hate, scorn and lie about people they do not know?
I will not return to the blog, I feel as though I need a shower.
I cannot comment on the guns, I know nothing about them, though my husband was a collector.

The Pharisee said...

I repeat that the Anti FLDS are a skulking, anonymous lot, who delight in "revealing" things about those they hate.

For all we know they're the same person masquerading as several. Kinda like a "toadie" or puffer fish.

Puck said...

ztgstmv said...
"About that blog, TexasFLDS, being by Malonis, I highly suspect that's the case. I posted a comment not too long ago mentioning my suspicion that the blogger is none other than Natalie, and lo and behold, my comment was removed almost instantly. In its place was another comment by the blog owner stating a rule that no one shall guess her identity."
ztgstmv - You are quite correct about Malonis' connection with and ownership of TexasFLDS. Prior to her putting it up, she announced such to selected individuals.

It is somewhat questionable conduct for Malonis to insist upon "protecting" Teresa Jeffs privacy when Malonis has used that site to infringe upon that very privacy (once, even, immediately after being paid her fee as attorney ad litem). It is also somewhat questionable for someone so anti-FLDS (she has vowed to "bring them down"), to be in a position to "protect" a FLDS child.