Going Post-Postal

Been doing some updates to Wicked Game, as one might note from some of the posts below. I’m up to chapter 11…or was…when I realized that I had borrowed my citation format from some place that was not compliant with the major acceptable formats. I certainly was not going to use APA style. I almost decided on the Vancouver style out of general protest. But the Chicago Manual of Style seems the one I should be using. I’ll have to start over and get them the way I want them.

In looking it over, I happened across this:

Goodstein, Laurie and William Glaberson, “The Well-Marked Roads to Homicidal Rage,” The New York Times, 10 April 2000: *

nytimes.com/2000/04/10/us/the-well-marked-roads-to-homicidal-rage.html?pagewanted=print

But the killers do not just snap. An examination by The New York Times of 100 rampage murders found that most of the killers spiraled down a long slow slide, mentally and emotionally. Most of them left a road map of red flags, spending months plotting their attacks and accumulating weapons, talking openly of their plans for bloodshed. Many showed signs of serious mental health problems.

Now, you’re probably thinking that I think that is complete BS. Not really. Lack of mental health care, along with an under-educated society that doesn’t know what to do with the occasional social dominator who is a sociopath and takes pleasure in rallying groups to push such individuals even further over the edge, and a big pharma complex that may not always provide products that do what they say they do or have side-effects such the potential rubberbanding effect that makes the situation on the whole worse. Certainly, this is a factor in rage shootings and other acts of violence.

However, you’ll also find a long list of things these 100 shooters were interested in. Satanism and the occult, video games, etc. A factor? Possibly, but more likely a symptom.

But is mental health the only factor? No. This article reminded me of a book having been mentioned not long ago. A book by Mark Ames, who you may note a few posts below, noticed how a bag lady wound up shooting a CIA drug money man when he was no longer useful.

Ames is, well, gonzo. And I am not in a position to judge him on that {just take a look around}. To see what I mean, just look at the photo at the top of this article:

Ames, Mark, “This Is Why Workers Shoot Their Employers,” The Exiled, 1 September 2009:

http://exiledonline.com/this-is-why-workers-shoot-their-employers/

We live in Dickensian times again, folks, except that ours is a degraded Dickens: our Dickensian victims don’t evince any of the pathos of Dickens’ 19th century characters, because officially, none of this is even happening. And if it is happening, it’s their own damn fault.

You’ll note from this that Ames does not say that CIA, subcontractors, or other agencies are responsible for every shooting that occurs. Neither do I.

While not everything that bad happens can be laid at the feet of government or the megacorporation, the point is that many of the big problems, the ones that affect many of us, actually can. Economic problems and warfare are by definition the province of these two, large, honking segments of human activity and have far more say and sway on those than the individual.

So Ames isn’t wrong either. Economic factors, I would add with the pressure of trying to comply with the many things government and Wall Street tell us that we should want to be happy, is another big factor in what sets some of us off and propels us into violent action. This is not untrue.

It is when there is a point, a profit, an enemy to squash, a loose end to take care of, a false narrative to create, that I do–and we should–look for more.

Just sitting looking through Twitter today, I ran across two articles regarding Florida. The first I saw that there was yet another shooting at a school. In this case, Florida State University.

The other was on how Southern Florida State has a growing anti-war movement, specifically targeting CENTCOM, aka JSOC, among other things. One of the most secretive and closely guarded secrets the US holds, JSOC runs covert ops utilizing at times any and all of the rest of the intelligence community and, one may rest assured, pretty much any corporate entity it decides that it needs.

Now, was the first story related to the second? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. If they had wanted to send a stronger message, I suppose they’d have arranged it on the same campus. But was the campus itself the target, or the state? Or someone else? Or was the anti-war rhetoric beginning to spill over to FSU…were the protestors looking to get a state-wide movement going? Fear immediately makes many people decline to participate in such action.

They were counter-recruiting.

Further, doing it at the same location would make even more unsuspecting eyebrows go up.

So, while I don’t know the answer…and it doesn’t matter why the shooter thought he or she was doing it…it doesn’t matter what police and the psychologists offer up for why he did it. Given ubiquitous surveillance, a general lack of respect from our defense and intelligence sectors towards humans in general, creating a psychological profile of someone and then setting them off would not be a difficult task for these people. They have been caught lying over and over, proven to have profited personally from the increase in security spending, and have done similar things in the past without a single person being held accountable for it. Which all point to it being possible and that any attempts to find out the truth would be defended with utmost effort.

It’s an asterisk right now. Maybe there will be some more telltale signs and maybe there won’t. **

See? It’s not all about the CIA and similar organizations. Just when I say it is.

* Yeah, no. Gonna use the commaless date format. Extra commas are less clear, so a modified CMOS it is.

** As I wrote this, saw an update. Friends, acquaintances of shooter puzzled, thought he was the sweetest guy.

The Truth About Torture: A Rebuttal

With regards to:

Weekly Standard, “The Truth About Interrogation: The enhanced techniques work,” Stehpen F. Hayes, 14 November 2014:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/truth-about-interrogation_819024.html

First, let me say that I agree wholeheartedly that oversight and officials who ordered, were briefed, and approved are both duplicitous and partially responsible. As I’ve noted before, I hate defending them, the CIA asked the Bush White House three times for clarification on legal points with regards to enhanced interrogation techniques. This is missing from the discussion.

However, as it was when, for example, the Nixon White House asked CIA to spy on American war protestors, there is some evidence that they were already torturing people, or having it done by foreign ISes, before the request was even made. There are layers to this entire scandal, and that is one of them.

The problem with the piece, and I am not impugning the “John Beale” here, rather that it serves as a limited hangout hinging upon a strawman argument because it does not take into account the totality of the situation. I don’t doubt that Mr. Beale’s experience lead him to the conclusions that he drew, rather that his experiences are limited to his experiences.

One indicator that CIA may be using it for this purpose:

Writing under the pseudonym Jason Beale, he has produced a provocative 39-page document in an effort to counter the narrative pushed by Democrats and amplified by journalists eager to discredit the program. The document—which Beale says was reviewed, redacted, and cleared by a U.S. government agency—does not reveal Beale’s precise role in the program. A spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency would not confirm that the CIA was the agency that reviewed Beale’s document.

And, by the way, Mr. Beale, whoever he is, is saying something very close to what John Kiriakou said initially before recanting: that the EITs worked and they weren’t trying to throw him in prison back then.

There are several problems what the article as whole is saying. I detail some of them beyond the fold.

Continue reading

Reaction to Snowden Interview Plus Stuff

A couple of brief, prefaces; only indirectly related to main points.

There is a bit of a feud going on between two media outlets. It’s been brewing for some time. They are First Look Media and Pando Daily.

First Look is the home of Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill. It is where the bulk of new reporting on NSA abuses of civil liberties is coming from. It is owned by Pierre Omidyar, who is also CEO of PayPal.

Pando Daily is the other. It writes a lot of stories about CIA abuses of civil liberties and other criminal activity. Over there, you have Paul Carr and Mark Ames. Among the investors in Pando Daily, you have Palantir CEO Peter Thiel.

Both of those outlets provide services beneficial to a healthy society. The problem largely extends from Pierre’s business dealings, and also the PayPal 14 {11 of whom were sentenced yesterday, see next part of preface}. In my opinion, Pierre is fair game. He is a billionaire, he doesn’t need anyone–not even Snowden supporters–apologizing nor defending him.

On the flip side, I think Glenn Greenwald has made his position clear and did so long ago: his concern is whether or not he can write what he wants to write, and thus far he has found that to be the case. Further, he was not even at FLM–there was no FLM–when Snowden blew the whistle.

Therefore, it is incredibly unfair–and I would argue overall unhelpful–to paint Greenwald and Snowden with whatever brush you want to paint Pierre with.

That said, and I’ve been meaning to look into this further for a long time, since I discovered Yasha Levine’s articles on Silicon Valley and their connections to the Department of Defense and CIA, for example, but just hadn’t gotten around to it until the latest FLM kerfuffle cropped up. This latest, apparently Matt Taibbi’s deal with joining FLM has fallen through.

Guess my point is that I fully understand the frustration of the Pando guys when it comes to US citizen ignorance and naiveté where the role of the US public and private intelligence community is concerned. It is, in my estimation, the proverbial giant meteor headed for Earth and, unlike most other “gold rush” over-doing it sectors, cannot be tamed or cured because at the same time it enjoys secrecy and the blatant protection of law enforcement…on top of the immense amount of propaganda it perpetuates, along with the lies, the fearmongering, and the PSYOPs. It’s a perfect storm for the end of the American Empire, which perhaps in itself wouldn’t be so bad but it is going to kill a lot of people on its way out and leave behind a nigh-to-impossible mess to clean up in its wake.

Totally get that. But then, I am fairly certain so do Greenwald, Scahill, Hussain, etc. over at the Intercept.

{Quick side note: if Snowden didn’t work on Echelon. Why should he be expected to talk about it?}

In short…GODDAMMIT CAN’T WE ALL FOCUS ON THE ENEMY INSTEAD OF EACH OTHER?!?

Re the PayPal 14…I’m still looking for the angle in taking it as easy on them as they did. Besides the obvious right-before-an-election ploy, I suspect it’s as much about releasing into “the wild” to see who else they can identify. This corrupt, criminal, inhumane government is not going to stop unless and until it is forced to. These people only care about themselves and their portfolios, they have made that abundantly clear. They don’t care–in fact want–to provoke people into violence so that they can scare and herd the rest of us into accepting still less freedoms and bill us for the pleasure. That’s what the record says, that’s how it is and how it will be again just after the first week of November until its time to pretend again in 2016.

Moving on…

You really should read this:

The Nation, “Edward Snowden: A ‘Nation’ Interview: In a wide-ranging conversation, he discusses the surveillance state, the American political system and the price he’s paid for his understanding of patriotism,” Katrina vanden Heuvel and Stephen F. Cohen, 28 October 2014:

thenation.com/article/186129/snowden-exile-exclusive-interview

Edward hits some very pertinent points, clarifies some things, and overall I tend to agree with what he says. He makes clear that he is not, an early concern of mine, one of those libertarians who is hiding behind a five-syllable label but is really just mad that the government won’t let them persecute blacks, Hispanics, homeless, etc.

For that, these people apparently need to get off their butts and go to the police academy. I say that but at the same time support their right to say whatever they want and to be ridiculed for it. Affirmative Action, whether it works/has worked or not, is not even close to our top problem. I marvel at the stupendous ignorance and isolation of thought that allows a human to think it is.

He also hits a point home that I was peddling on Twitter some time ago. That is, we have to address the issue of productivity, that is, 50 doing the work that once took 100. Hopefully, someone thinking seriously about this will realize that killing off 50 people doesn’t actually fix the problem since that means that much less work to do. Because that looks like the only “solution,” the final solution, heh, being implemented from here on the ground.

Here’s a graphic representation of what he was basically referring to:

prodsince1979

The old I-don’t-have-to-do-anything-about-it adage of “Get a job, you bum!” doesn’t work because their just aren’t enough jobs to go around. How do you deal with that?

He also defines Patriotism perfectly. He then uses that to differentiate between National Security and State Security, which was also awesome.

Where I differ from Edward, and really this may just be a matter of perspective, is on just a few things.

I would not call him naïve, it may simply be an avoidance of being “too political” or a matter of focusing on the direct problem rather than the indirect one. Or maybe he just disagrees. Reminds me of people quoting, when desiring to run down the government, Henry Ford’s statement that one need only think of the Native American. He is, of course, right. But what was the driving force behind the persecution, murder, and overall screwing of the Native American? The business interests of men like Henry Ford, I think it can safely be argued. Though it is certainly possible to have a government that is anti-business, there has not been one in this country in my lifetime…if ever. This kind of “socialist panic” only serves to make the business interests and the government even more paranoid and dangerously radical.

Yes, I said it. The Deep State is the radical, not necessarily those who oppose it.

So, that’s the first small difference: I see government power, when it serves to protect special business interests at the expense of the citizens, as being part of the private sector as much or more as the public one.

Similarly, Edward talks about Germany. Believe me, there are people here in the US who would also offer him an empty bed to sleep in {in fact, you guys can have mine. I’ll sleep on the floor}. Certainly, there are angry German citizens. Certainly, there have been German politicians publically attempting to address those citizens’ concerns.

But what is really happening behind the scenes? Germany has been, is, and will be for the foreseeable future, a partner for the Deep State. If anything, they are likely attempting to leverage the criticism into getting further in bed, access to some of the stuff we only share with the Five Eyes, in exchange for not really changing how CIA and NSA do business in the EU.

Understand fully the value of thinking positively. It’s not only beneficial, it is crucial to surviving {two bullets in the face and shoved out a plane…know the feeling}. But at the same time we are just not to that change yet. It’s a long, long way off. And this is why I don’t call Snowden naïve, he acknowledges that in the Occupy discussion.

The third thing is not so much a disagreement as it is perspective again. What is actually happening, here, within the confines and borders of this country on its own soil, is so much worse than surveillance I don’t know where exactly to begin discussing it again. Surveillance is a piece of it, a big piece of it, and tends to work as a quick way of letting a lot of people know at once that there is something wrong, but there is worse.

Which is where Gary Webb and the work of Mark Ames that I linked up recently comes in to an extent. Why is it, that the worse our government behaves, the less likely we are to talk about that worst in the behavior? We’re talking about drug smuggling or laundering, assassination {both designed to look like accidents and by directing mentally ill or drugged proxies}, and torture–genuine-no-question-torture–done by proxies. These things serve no real purpose except to perpetuate the violence so that the people who profit from pretending to fix these problems maintain that profit, those budgets, and the power that extends outwards from it.

The recent WaPo attack on Webb–to go with their help in covering it all up in the 80s–states that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. It’s a misdirection, a ploy, a cover-up. They aren’t even being that careful: Michael Hastings could have been pulled out of his vehicle and likely lived were it not for his car exploding multiple times. That’s not a coverup: that’s a warning, a threat. Even LAPD couldn’t bother to lie to us and say that drugs or alcohol played a role.

Extraordinary claims don’t require extraordinary proof. Extraordinary criminal acts require extraordinary effort to uncover, require extraordinary people to deal with them, require extraordinary attention of the public to put a stop to them.

Let’s think about this for a moment. We’re going to let the world go down the crapper because we’re afraid of being accused of being conspiracy theorists? There are worse things to be called. Dead, for example.

Where to begin again?

1} I personally witnessed what can only be called “Dirty Tricks” camp, directed not at foreign enemies, terrorists, etc. but at US citizens in New Jersey in 1989 and 1990. The theater at which this occurred was partially funded by the Ford Foundation which has a history with the CIA. Not the KGB. Not the FBI. And as much as some of that stuff resembles what I read here about DIA, not the DIA. You will note again, Deep State apologists, that this was well before 9/11. There is no excuse at all.

2} My interaction with many other people, including but not limited to people like Julianne McKinney {CIA and INSCOM}, Lynnae Williams {CIA and DIA}, “Mark” {from NSA subcontractor Technodyne} is remarkably similar to what I observed there and later experienced myself beginning in 2009.

3} There is enough similarity also with some people who I believe have long struggled with mental illness to suggest that they, like the interns and actors at the theater mentioned in item 1, have been used for target practice by the people who conduct these kinds of operations. This both helps the Deep State thugs in that the victims will never be believed and serves to make certain that there is absolutely no empathy left in the people who conduct them. In fact, I think they have the process for turning someone into a thing that only receives pleasure from inflicting torment on others down to a T. And I think there are far more of these people than we would expect.

What is the legal basis for all this? Might makes right. The power of calling people “conspiracy theorist” as the ultimate shut-up. And it works, no matter how dire the situation becomes. It’s all in the public record, has been done before and will continue until this problem is taken seriously and dealt with.

The flipside, the part I cannot seem to communicate properly, is that any other changes, no matter your political persuasion, any other changes are in jeopardy or simply will not happen because of these COINTELPRO-like practices. It will be or is in danger of being, undermined, undercut, swept away due to psychological operations conducted without your best interests in mind, in violation of Title 18 USC Section 241 – Conspiracy Against Rights. That’s what all of this, including surveillance, is violating. Case in point:

PrivacySOS, “Shocking new information in Tsarnaev case casts doubt on official story about the killing of Ibragim Todashev,” sosadmin, 28 October 2014:
https://www.privacysos.org/node/1573

Whatever happened, however it occurred, it is screwy.

Let me repeat that more simply…

If this covert harassment issue isn’t dealt with, hang it up. Hang it all up. It is over.

windolfamesvwbus

Humor: the last thing to go.

Or maybe the second to last…

Still More Wicked Game Updates – Not Quite Outliving Usefulness Edition

This time chapters 4, 6, and 14 and some other spots. Some of this cleanup and completion of some of the footnotes.

This is the centerpiece of the updates, by reporter Mark Ames on some strange events in the 1980s:

PandoDaily, “The biggest CIA-drug money scandal you never read,” Mark Ames, 26 October 2014:

pando.com/2014/10/26/the-biggest-cia-drug-money-scandal-you-never-read/

A year later, in 1985, Deak was assassinated in his Wall Street high-rise by a paranoid-schizophrenic bag lady from Seattle, who’d been hired for the job by Latin American mobsters, according to a private internal investigation led by former FBI detectives. The assassin, Lois Lang (pictured above), had previously spent several murky years in the underbelly of Silicon Valley, where she fell under the care of a famous Stanford Research Institute psychiatrist, Frederick Melges — an expert on dosing his subjects with drugs and hypnosis to induce “artificial” dissociative states. Perhaps not surprisingly, Dr. Melges was up to his eyeballs in secret CIA behavior modification programs that were going on at Stanford until they were exposed in Congressional hearings in 1977.

And:

Salon, “James Bond and the killer bag lady: New clues and a powerful Wall St. skeptic challenge the official story of CIA financier Nick Deak’s brutal murder,” Mark Ames and Alexander Zaitchik, 2 December 2012:

salon.com/2012/12/02/better_than_bourne_who_really_killed_nick_deak/

“I never believed that the whole thing was random,” said Kuhlmann, in an interview with Salon. Ditto the government inquiry that triggered the collapse preceding Lang’s rampage. “We were the CIA’s paymaster, and that got to be a little bit embarrassing for them,” he said. “Our time had passed and the usefulness of doing things our way had vanished. The world was changing in the ’80s; you couldn’t just accept bags of cash. Deak was slow at making those changes. And when you lose your sponsorship, you’re out of the game.”

Also, Lois Lang added to Shooters tab at top.

Would be great if anyone with a Lexus-Nexus could confirm and find more original copies of the two acoustic psycho-correction articles in the tab up top from Defense News and Defense Electronics. Note that I have already discussed {skip down to the first footnote and mind the rhetoric and blowing off of steam} the potential coverup of what this technology is, does and its effectiveness, and the probable involvement of Dr. John B. Alexander once of Los Alamos in that coverup on this blog last June.

Imagine what you could accomplish with that stuff. Start rivalries, for example. Get a journo so angry that he’d threaten a LEO and get jailed indefinitely for it. And so much more.

How does that Absolute Power thing typically work out, anyway?

gof1

Another Wicked Game Update: The Military Industrial God Complex

Chapter 20 this time where Squidgate gets rolling. Some edits plus the addition of Tim Shorrock’s recent piece on INSCOM, Booz Allen Hamilton, and how it relates to profit, NSA, ISIS, and SIGINT in general.

Salon, “Who profits from our new war? Inside NSA and private contractors’ secret plans: A massive war operation is being waged to track and kill ISIS — and it’s a lot more than cruise missiles,” Tim Shorrock, 24 September 2014:

salon.com/2014/09/24/heres_who_profits_from_our_
new_war_inside_nsa_and_an_army_of_private_
contractors_plans/
.

Wicked Game Update: Spying for Profit Edition

I have updated Chapter 3 of Wicked Game to include some evidence of the kind of thing I have long suspected that NSA and CIA–or individuals within said agencies–were up to where I was concerned from 1991 until 2010:

Foreign Policy, “Why Was the NSA Chief Playing the Market?: Newly released documents show the NSA chief was investing his money in commodities so obscure that most financial pros stay away,” Shane Harris, 22 October 2014:

foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/10/22/keith_
alexander_stock_trades_potash_aluminum_russia_
china
.

Note that the People’s Bank of China was one of the many tenants in the building. In fact, after the cloak-and-dagger nonsense began, my coworker and I were ordered there, rush job, to visit the office and were very quickly ushered out by the people within. I additionally note that this was just after the time that several Fortune 500 companies were hacked. We were told that these hacks originated in China. I no longer believe that because I’ve got an idea just how much we are lied to and on what topics since. Rather, I think this was a false-flag event designed to drum up more business for the Deep State and serve to further undermine the 4th and indirectly 1st amendments in order to be able to steal without any opposition.

At any rate, Alexander wasn’t the only one engaged in spying-for-profit {allegedly and} apparently. There’s been a resignation as well, though there is denial that it was due to standing on both sides of the revolving door at once:

Firstlook/The Intercept, “All the NSA Will Say About Its Alarmingly Entrepreneurial Top Spy Is That She’s Resigning,” Murtaza Hussain, 24 October 2014:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/24/nsa-official-implicated-potential-conflicts-interest-resigns/

BuzzFeed, “Exclusive: Key NSA Official Has Another Business At Her Home,” Aram Roston, 16 October 2014:

buzzfeed.com/aramroston/second-business-at-home-of-nsa-official

This, too, is exactly what has been suggested by lots of people including myself, though I was hardly the first on that.

Problematic right now is that there is a group of former military people attempting to claim that this all began with Alexander, that it is unprecedented in NSA history, etc., etc. My only reply is: prove it.

First, they have no way of knowing that. They rely on RUMINT, that is what their buddies still on the inside are saying.

Second, we found out about Alexander’s trading because of the FOIA work of Jason Leopold and the investigative journalism of Shane Harris. This was not a voluntary admission or an accident that this came out at all.

Third, it is likely that it hasn’t been quite this obvious. One can imagine spooks in the nineties and aughties using fake accounts, etc. via their training and keeping the profits from the stuff I mention in Wicked Game in foreign accounts or squirreled away some place clever.

The odd thing is, though, these complaints by these former insiders are not that far from those with whom they regularly argue. They tend to blame Snowden for anything they can, and yet he has–at least indirectly–brought more attention to this problem than pretty much anyone since the WaPo Top Secret America exposé in 2010. Though that failed to include the problems found by my acquaintance Mark, formerly of NSA contractor Technodyne, it did show that a very large portion of that $1T annually spent on homeland security is going to the private sector.

Who then lines the pockets of politicians…

Who then sit back and let them do whatever they want…

The cycle continues.

What some may be missing is the “It Won’t Hurt If I’m the Only One Doing It” principle. There has pretty much always been corruption in society, right? It has always cost the tax payers a bit to deal with, but is part of doing business. We even discount it as being a big deal and just sit back and hope as many as can be get caught.

But what happens when this happens on a large scale? Number one, the system becomes bent towards protecting the criminal practices. This in turn means that other, some critical, needs go unmet. This also ruins the economy, at least for those not fortunate enough to be able to trade on all this cloak-and-dagger gold-digging.

In short, I am saying that it is–I am convinced of it–going to seal our doom. It is unsustainable. Something is eventually going to give and when it does it is likely to be several somethings with mega-hurricane size and strength repercussions.

This is to underline my final point.

If I had not had my life ruined, been harassed, tortured, had my head messed with until I was bleeding out my ears, would I have cared that Keith Alexander may have used his position to profit personally off of intelligence obtained through national security efforts? Probably a little, but not much. I would view ebola, “lone wolf terror,” the Republicans, whatever, as a bigger threat and largely ignore it. I wouldn’t see the damage to national security that such practices are doing. I wouldn’t grep that it is going to lead to some very, very bad situations for a lot of people. It’s not one person, it’s many, interfering with the so-called free market via surreptitious means.

Further, I wouldn’t have any idea what it was like to be on the wrong end of “American exceptionalism” where a monstrous, un-American, illegal covert system is concerned. While this portion of my story may sound like an unfortunate segment of the the Twilight Zone movie, I can tell you that it is very, very upsetting and if you had been through it you would understand completely why people lose the ability to cope, to think that there is something better around the bend. You would understand why they pick up a gun or blow something up.

And then you’d have to wonder if that were a natural occurrence. I know it at least doesn’t have to be.

***

And another plug for the excellent thought-experiment scifi novel Echopraxia while I’m writing. A quote from p. 292:

echo

BBD – Yet Another Border Crossing That Wasn’t

If you thought the car coincidence in the previous post was odd, note the mention of Border Patrol.

There’s this guy. Let’s call him Herman.

Herman is about 6’5″ and likely nearly 300 pounds. But he is a simple but gentle giant. Never seen him angry, though I don’t know him all that well. Let’s call him a friend of a friend visiting from out of state.

He likes beer. The funny thing is, he is one of those people who I absolutely cannot tell the difference as to whether he is sober or has had several beers. There is no detectable difference in speech or movement that I observed. This lead me to think that there is no difference, that he holds his beer pretty well, because the guy can really slam them.

During last night’s festivities, he disappeared twice from the location where the rest of the crew were. By the end, he was basically MIA.

Eventually he called and I, as designated driver, was able to determine his whereabouts roughly. I calculated how long it would take me to reach a good landmark: the local train station. Told him I’d meet him there.

When I reached it, he was nowhere to be found. I drove down the direction he would have been coming but didn’t see him. I turned around and headed back to the train station and called him again. He said he was walking on the railroad tracks.

This was especially alarming because as I approached the train station, the railroad lights were flashing, the alarms blaring, and the mechanical arms were down.

“You might want to get off the tracks,” I said. “The train is coming.”

“You see that train?”

“Yeah. I’m right next to it,” as it zoomed in front of me. Not a passenger train, this was cargo.

He let me know when the train was going by him. After, he started on about a tunnel.

“You know where the train just went into the tunnel?”

“Not really. You do know that I can’t drive on the train tracks, right? You should just turn around now and come back–”

“I’m going into the tunnel.”

“I’d really strongly advise again==”

“I’ll make my way back. Battery is running low. Gotta hang up.”

“Uhhh…”

So I start the drive back, thinking.

Where does that tunnel even go? Let’s see…direction… Shit. Canada.

That’s it. He’s dead. We’ll get a call in the morning. Best case scenario, angry C&BP drop him home. Of he gets shot by US BP. Or he makes it far enough he gets shot by Canadian BP. Or he gets held by US for two days or Canada for two weeks..

Must have been an hour after that the phone rings again. He has met up with US Border Patrol. They had a camera somewhere near the tunnel. He’s lost his wallet in the tunnel. I get his location and head out yet again.

After I pick him up, he related the following, with perhaps just a little embellishment or filling in the blanks. But just a little.

He got tired of the tunnel, walked back out and called the police because “he was lost.” When BP arrived soon after, he was already on the phone with the dispatcher. There was a fence between him and the BP lady.

She told him that he needed to get out of there immediately.

“What are you being mean for?”

“You need to get out of there.”

“That’s no reason to be mean…”

He handed her the phone through the fence and let her speak to the police dispatcher.

“Look, you’re in an International area. You can’t be in there. You have to get out.”

“But you don’t have to be mean. I lost my wallet–”

“Sir, I’ll get you the phone number of the train company and you can call them tomorrow.”

“But you don’t have to be mean.”

“I am not being mean. I am following procedures. Now, please…”

He climbs the fence.

“You didn’t have to be mean about it.”

“Stop saying that!”

I gather he would have been arrested but–not shitting you==some guy who “escaped” from the hospital ran up, IV still in arm, bleeding all over the place, demanding an ambulance.

So, how was your evening?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 99 other followers