DirkaDirka.RedGriffins.org

Turns out there are things that I didn’t learn in the Navy about this subject… I think I might have to screen the comments on this one.

From FOXSexpert: Are We Nip/Tucking the Wrong Places?

It is no wonder that, based on a lack of safety and efficacy data, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) has warned that the following “vaginal rejuvenation” procedures are unproven and potentially risky.

— Labiaplasty: Nip and tuck has taken on a whole new meaning, with many women wanting a "neat and tidy" look. Believing that their inner lips are “too large,” protruding beyond the outer lips, or asymmetrical, these women see their vulva as ugly. So labiaplasty procedures seek to change a woman’s external genital appearance – namely its shape and size. Most “improvement” efforts target the vaginal lips, with excess flesh cut and reshaped using a laser, scalpel or curved scissors.

— Vaginal Liposuction: Fat is liposuctioned from a woman’s upper thigh or lower abdomen and injected into her labia for a plumper, softer look.

— Vulvar Lipoplasty: Fat is removed from the mons pubis or outer labia for a more “aesthetically pleasing” look and contour.

— Clitoral Hood Reduction: Skin tissue around the clitoris is trimmed. One important note: this procedure can make this prime hot spot less sensitive.

— Vaginoplasty: Cosmetic vaginoplasty, or vaginal rejuvenation surgery, involves a variety of surgical procedures — for example, laser vaginal rejuvenation — that alter the vagina. Women seeking such surgeries want a tighter vagina that offers more friction. A surgeon creates this by cutting the vaginal muscles and reattaching them. Is it any wonder that critics consider these surgeries the Western version of female genital mutilation? (The desire for virgin-like tightness is one of the many reasons the African practice of female genital mutilation is performed).

— G-shots: Women seeking a more sensitive G-spot are going for this procedure, which involves a collagen injection to the front wall of the vagina. This G-shot is supposed to make the area more accessible and sensitive for up to four months. Yet there is little scientific evidence to back the claims. There have been no double-blind placebo-controlled studies have been published on this procedure.

Check out FoxNews’ responses for a good grin.

According to the article… S-3 Vikings were originally designed as an anti-submarine warfare aircraft, but are now used mostly for maritime surveillance and as an air refueling plane.

However, some have been modified for electronic warfare and intelligence gathering.

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A US Navy surveillance jet lost its way during a counter-drug mission and strayed into Venezuelan airspace, US officials said Monday following a vehement Venezuelan protest.

Venezuelan Defense Minister Gustavo Rangel called the overflight "a deliberate action" and "another link in a chain of provocations."

Rangel said the Venezuelan air defense system tracked the S-3 Viking over the Venezuelan island of La Orchila on Saturday at 8:40 pm (0010 GMT Sunday).

The island is a military base and a presidential retreat that lies in the Caribbean just north of the Venezuelan mainland.

This is almost funnier than the time one of the Hoovers lost an engine cover over the Hotel Del Coronado….

"A US S-3 aircraft conducting counter-drugs operations lost navigational situational awareness causing it to fly into Venezuelan airspace off the mainland coast," the Joint Interagency Task Force South said in a statement.

The aircraft was assigned to the military-led task force, which directs US counter-drug operations in the Caribbean from its headquarters in Key West, Florida.

Commander Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said the S-3 aircrew was queried by Venezuelan air traffic control at Maiquetia after experiencing "intermittent navigational problems" while on a mission originating in Curacao.

The US Air Force operates a base for US counter-drug operations in Curacao, one of the Netherlands Antilles near Venezuela.

I wonder who was flying that bird. If it was truly a nav error, that’s whatcha get for not having a SENSO onboard!

I don’t think anyone disputes the fact that Hussein wasn’t directly behind the 9/11 attacks. There are some strong indicators that he was still a threat, most of which I covered in a previous thesis / post.

Interesting information as always from Mark Eichenlaub’s Iraq Regime of Terror blog:

A closer reading of the study (see here, here, here, here, here and here) shows that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq cooperated with, financed and supported a number of Islamic terrorist groups, including al Qaeda proxies (at least five according to Thomas Joscelyn) and had a larger capacity for state apparatus terrorism (car bomb training, IED training, jihadist suicide bomber recruitment, etc.) than previously believed by many.

Of the many noteworthy findings in the report is the assertion made in the conclusion that Hussein had retained not only the capacity to launch anti-West terrorist attacks but the will to use those terrorist capabilities, including directly against the United States, which was also a matter of previous debate.

The report’s conclusion, while noting that a perfect grasp of Hussein’s mindset at the exact time of U.S. invasion remained elusive, states that "evidence that was uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces."

Still, there are reasons that I have felt justified our actions.

My opinion on invading Iraq - three years later…