Thursday, August 27, 2009

Libya Uber All-o-Us

Two Swiss businessmen detained in Libya for over a year ago will be allowed to leave. - swissinfo
In July, 2008, Swiss police detained Hannibal Gaddafi (the son of Libyan Dictator Moammar Gaddafi) and his wife for having beaten two servants while the Gadaffi's were in Switzerland.

Two days later, the Gaddafi's were released on bail after having been charged with "inflicting physical injuries against the servants"; they immediately left the country. The two accusing servants dropped all charges after they were "compensated" (financially, presumably by persons acting in the interests of Gaddafi's son ... one wonders who that would be).

Later in July, 2008, two Swiss businessmen in Libia were arrested in Libya, where they were working, for "Visa violations". They were later released from jail, but their exit visas were canceled.

Later in 2008 Swiss airline flights are no longer allowed to land in Libya; Libya airlines reduce their flights to Switzerland.

In June, 2009 Libya withdrew most of its assets from Swiss banks.

On August 20, 2009, Swiss President President Hans-Rudolf Merz apologizes to Tripoli for the arrest. Within the week Libya "gives assurances" that the two Swiss Businessmen will be allowed to leave Libya. As of this date (August 27, 2009) they are still in Libya.

Golly, that must be embarrassing for the Swiss.


Also in August, 2009, Libyan Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi -- the only man ever convicted and imprisoned for the 1988 Lockerbie airplane bombing applied for his release from the Scottish prison where he had been housed since 2001, on compassionate grounds. He is dying of cancer and is said to have only three months to live. "The 57-year-old was jailed in 2001 for the atrocity which claimed 270 lives in 1988. "

The United States protested strongly objected and demanded of Great Britain and Scotland that al-Megrahi not be released, due to the enormity of his crime.

On August 20, 2009, "Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill explained his decision to release Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi.

He said the Libyan, who has terminal prostate cancer, would be allowed to return to his homeland ..." ... on "compassionate grounds".

President Obama personally and through a States Department spokesman stated that al-Megrahi "should not be given a hero's welcome." "Mr. Megrahi is a terrorist, not a hero. If Libya chooses to lionize him it will affect our future relationship."

That must have scared the shit out of the Libyans, because upon his arrival in Tripli al-Megrahi was given a hero's welcome in a "festive greeting by thousands" including Seif al-Islam el- Gadhafi, son of Libyan leader Libyan leader Moammar Gadhaf.

The latest word is that the prognosis of al-Megrahi's prostrate cancer may not be exactly that he has "only three months to live", which is one of the conditions for early release.

And suggestions that the doctor who gave the prognosis may have been employed by the Libyan government emerged in the report's notes. It said that a professor from Libya had been involved in Megrahi's care and the medical officer who wrote the report had been "working with clinicians from Libya over the past ten months".
Rumors abound that Great Britain encouraged the release as a step toward finalizing a favorable concession for Lybyan oil.
(See here for PJTV video)

Golly, that must have been embarrassing for the Americans.

Imagine, two of the greatest and strongest, and one of the richest, countries in the world being humiliated within days in two separate political coups by the same self-proclaimed dictator of a third-world country.

Leadership can do wonders, can't it?

Whatever happened to "No Blood for Oil"?

Sure wish we had a competent leader. I wouldn't even mind if he was a madman.

Oh, wait: he's just not competent.

Never mind.
UPDATE: August 29, 2009
It's just a bit of a Technical thingie, actually. I removed the "color=transparent" HTM code from the bottom quarter of the article, after I noticed that the finished product didn't show any black letters after the final block-quote. It actually comes to a somewhat smoother when it doesn't look like this:

No Blood for Oil


Wednesday, August 26, 2009

SWMBO Report: Organizing Boston Mass First Trip

It has been three weeks since I last reported on SWMBO's battle with Lung Cancer, and today we see that she has been battling the Bureaucracy more than the Cancer.

I regret that report may have mislead readers to assume that her Oncologist was inept. To the contrary, he is diligent, professional, concerned, highly qualified and doing the best he can to find a cure for her health.

Unfortunately, this is a complex situation. He has gone as far as he can in offering ameliorative treatment for her condition, and now he is working hard (7 days a week, and on-call ) to provide her and all of his many patients with the best health care available. In a small town, (pop: 50,000) and without many Oncologists, his options are limited.

Fortunately, SWMBO (I've given up referring to her as "Sandie", which is her true name, because she has reverted to full Range Officer Mode) is not too shy to pick up the administrative baton and run with it.

The most recent occurrences incLude that (Boston) Massachussets General Hospital [MASS GENERAL]has determined, from the tissue samples sent to the, do not indicate that she is a candidate for the ALX type of lung cancer which has been successfully treated with drugs which are normally used in the treatment of another kind of cancer. (Skin Cancer?)

I had taken her to Saturday Lunch a couple of weeks ago when she received this news via a cell-phone call from her Oncologist, but while we were both very disappointed we managed to enjoy our lunch anyway.

During the past two weeks, SWMBO has been talking to her Oncologist, the Genotyping facility and UC Irvine (Ca) and the MASS GENERAL administrative staff.

SWMBO eventually got word that she is "enrolled" in the Cancer Genotyping Experimental program there. She needs to get a lot of information (a CD of the scans, more test results, personal medical records, etc.) moved from the local Oncologist to MASS GENERAL.

During the past week and weekend, SWMBO has spent much time and effort attempting to gather the medical history information required to (a) complete qualification for the experimental program, and (b) provide as much medical information as necessary for MASS GENERAL to completely understand the technical nature of her affliction, as well as the pharmaceutical history of her treatment.

(The rest is going to be long and boring, but if you wish to read ... do please feel free to skip to to the bottom of the article.)

I know I'm going to get some of this wrong, but here's the background.

She doesn't know yet (well, not until today) whether MASS GENERAL has received all the information needed ... which should have been sent from her Oncologist last week.

This morning she tried to phone her Oncologist's office to determine whether all records had been sent. She couldn't get through, so at 8am she drove from her home to the Oncologist's office.

When she walked in the door, the Office Manager said something like "Oh Oh".

During the ensuing discussion SWMBO discovered that not all of the required information (including the CDs of the various electronic scans) had not been sent to MASS GENERAL.
She responded to the office manager thus:

"I'm tierd of hearing excuses an it should have been done by now. So I would appreciate you doing it now while I'm here."
This is Full-Power SWMBO, taking charge and getting things done. Which is why I have stopped referring to here as "Sandie". It's not as much a take-charge name as "She ... Who Must Be Obeyed".

By the end of the day, SWMBO had heard from the Oncologist's office to the effect that all required information has been sent to MASS GENERAL .

We don't know how long it will be before MASS GENERAL replies with a definite 'first meeting' date. What we do know is that the first appointment will probably be just gathering patient history, assessing the patient. SWMBO has expressed to me the thought that she will probably spend one day traveling (by airplane, from the West Coast to the East Coast), a second day with the east-coast doctors being interviewed, and a third day traveling back to the West Coast, and to Home.

Usually, it's no great problem to fly from Coast to Coast, even in these post-2011 days. But her local Oncologist requires that she travel with an "Oxygen Generator", even at the 30,000 feet altitude thes large passenger planes go.

The airlines aren't comfortable with that.

For each airline she boards with her Oxygen Generator, she must produce a letter from her doctor that the air generator are mandatory, she must have it within reach, and before and after her flight as long as she has no general access to supplemental oxygen.

That comes in the form of an "Oxygen Generator", as I have said before. It is available from the local supplier ... but they need 3 week s in advance notice to reserve it. They're not cheap.

And SWMBO didn't now when she needed to travel s she reserved it today.

Her appointment is for September 15 ... which she only just learned today, and only by dint of pushing the system.

So she'll leave on the 14th, stay overnight again at Boston with her sister (who is giving up her September 15 birthday celebration to accompany SWMBO to Massachussetts), make her appointment of the 15th, stay overnight again at Boston, and come back to Oregn on the 15th.

Hopefully, MASS GENERAL willl have completed all necessary test and interviews on the single day and she won't have to go back until MASS GENERAL has completed all testing and has found a cure for her disease.

We don't know if that will ever happen. We just wish and hope for it.

And if nothing can be found to stop the course of the cancer in her lungs ... well, it's better to know. Y'know? Not much we can do about it if the Doctors can find a cure, so we find ourselves clinging to the not-so-faint hope that they can find a cure.

IPSC Haiku: Archive It

I just wrote an article which linked to "IPSC HAIKU", presented on Jeff Maass' webpage.

Ordinarily I would not steal material from another webpage, but since Jeff has decided to go out of the "IPSC LOADS" publication venture and other IPSC and shooting-related stuff (I don't see a link more recent than 2006), I decided to duplicate the material here, rather than to lose it. I don't feel too uncomfortable "stealing" this, because I contributed a significant amount of the material. Besides, it includes material from individuals who have been shooting IPSC and/or USPSA competition for a ong time, and you may recognize some of them.

If you have a new IPSC Haiku, I hope you will send it to me (see email addy at the bottom of the page) so I can continue to grow this innovative, interesting ... inane ... compilation.

I have a new host for my archival files, but until I learn how to use it I'll just post it here where I can always find it.

This is, as Jeff has stated, taken from a 2001 thread on the Unofficial IPSC List.

By Vince Pinto

Darth Alexakos
From the Dark Side of the Force
Has a great vision.


Offer more options
To all the competitors
To broaden our sport.


But keeping the old
Such as targets and scoring
Everybody smile.


Long live the great Darth
And his faithful servant Vince
Woof, Woof, Woof, Click, Wheeze.


By Tom Frenkel

Things are quiet here;
no one writes me anything;
I will take a nap.


By Jim Boemler

The Geek do haiku
Better than you and me do
Nails the creepers too


Powder saved for naught
Bullet is but a feather
One seventy four


Nick and Vinny plot
Rob and Mikey do see red
We wait and wonder


Scoring and targets
Conspiracy theories
Tempests in teacup


Lots of lead downrange
More, reload, more, reload, more
Steel stands proud and tall


Earthworm tumbles down
Bullets choke in the barrel
Pizza saves the day


This haiku addicts us
Each phrase ridiculous
Two alpha it's gone


Open-gun fire storm
Bullets whizzing everywhere
Targets unafraid


Errant syllable
Embarrassment surrounds us
Time to hit the sack


Targets with no heads
Scores different from before
Hell in handbasket


By "Jerry The Geek"

Brown cardboard target
Needs two holes. I see just one.
A perfect double!


Gravity Turner,
What did I do to you, eh?
That you fall so fast?


Wind blows the steel down.
Range Equipment Malfunction!
I get a reshoot.


The Safety Area ...
you can't handle ammo there.
Okay to dry-fire.


Your SV Fails you.
Should have bought an STI.
Dave Skinner says so.


Area One is
Having a tournament soon.
A Space Oddity!


The 2001
RO Examination
Has a trick question.


Rain drops, mud puddles,
Soggy cardboard bends its head.
Put on plastic bags.


Exciting IP_SiC
Adrenaline flows like wine.
You are drunk with speed.


Just one bullet hole?
Cry: "It's a Double, Dammit!"
RO will believe you.


Eight shots through Port "A",
Make mandatory reload;
Else, procedural.


Sunshine and gunsmoke
And the company of friends.
What more could you ask?


You're getting tired of
Taping holes with masking tape?
Go buy a tape gun.


Issues are a distraction:
We just want to shoot!


Classifier is
Ten Percent over your class.
Too bad. Throw it out.


Run fast, Grasshopper!
Double-tap all ten targets
In under twelve seconds.


By Millard Ellingsworth

Quality unknown
Better relative to what?
More poems for you.


Ten rounds only, frown.
Equipment race is over.
Must now learn to shoot!


Level playing field:
I Don't Practice Anymore
What have you done, Bill?


High Cap STI:
It's Kalifornia Dreaming!
Boring guns pass test.


Fuzzy outline seen.
Sights wobble, pull trigger now!
Speed is what matters.


Complaining endless.
Where to gather for big match.
Weather keeps them in.


Les Baer poster boy,
Wise one says: move fast, shoot slow.
Scores continue climb.


No window constrains.
Three iron bars bisect it.
A-zone has two holes!


Optics for sissies
Or old men with failing eyes.
Limited best way.


Focus shift too slow.
C-More so that I see more
Red dot shows the spot.


By Robert J. Woolley

Eight-shot revolver
Outlawed by the new rulebook
Better luck next time


But does it matter?
Can't reload fast anyway.
Will make do with six.


By Gene Bray

shooting faster As
shooter saunters to new box
fast shots, ringing steel


By Scot Johnson

standing reload, damn
curse it, curse it, little plate
dodges lead tsunami


Hitler Banned at Brian Enos forums.

From Youtube, courtesy of USPSAnonymous:
"Hitler's persistent picking at the IDPA, Revolver, and Airsoft crowd has forced the banhammer on his head at the Enos forums. He is not taking it very well..."

Many cleaver Geeks have picked up on this all-german-language movie scene and have provided their own running sub-titles, but this is the first I've seen which is centered on IDPA/IPSC/USPSA/Revolver/Glock subjects. And a fine job it is, as well.

This is the only video post to date on YouTube from USPSAnonymous, but I do sincerely hope he/she finds reason and opportunity to continue with this delightful start.

I can't list all my favorite lines here ... there are too many. But it's a fine start. (Kind of reminds me of "IPSC Haiku", only the 21'st century version and from a single source.)

I got here from a YouTube email telling me that "
YouTube user theknightoflight2000 has just subscribed to your videos! YouTube Subscriptions allows a user to be notified when another user adds new videos." I went to the webpage and found that the subscriber content seemed to have little to do with IPSC/USPSA/Competition Shooting (etc.), and that he had only one video (Japanese martial cartoons, I can't even remember the correct terminology) and two subscribers. The second was USPSAnonymous. As soon as I get done writing about this, I'll go check out the other subscriber.

You might try that too. Its good to try new things. Even if you decide it doesn't suit your personal taste you will know something you didn't know before.

As as one of JerryTheGeek's Aphorisms go:
"It's Better to Know, than Not To Know"

Blogger Memes

Bloggers who are on each other's Links List (eg: "Sidebar") are often so referenced because they share common cultures, values, attitudes or priorities.

As I went through my "Bloggers I Read Every Day" list tonite, I was struck by the number of quality posts and observations which I read more than once. It is as if one person found a seminal/original thought, and one or more people who like to read him/her was impressed by the profundity found there ... BING! There's another post on the same subject, often with comparable or exact quoted content.

Since I don't know how many of my small coterie of readers bookmark my favorite bloggers, I'll provide links for you and if you like what you see, you may be encouraged to also become regular readers of these Blogs.

(My only concern is that you will recognize that these people are much better than I at writing about "interesting things", and will tend to read them instead of me when time is short during an evening of reading. On the other hand, if you think it is a net advantage to you ... why not?)

Heavyweight vs Bantamweight

The first meme I noted was originally penned by Munchkin Wrangler.
This is not a blog I regularly read. Who am I kidding? This is the first time I have ever read the man's work. But it won't be the last. He goes on the Sidebar tonite.

"Marko" (?) wrote "A vote for gun control is a vote for Thunderdome", a reductio ad absurdum editorial piece exploring just why restrictions on the ability of lawful citizens to legally own a firearm moves us just one step closer to barbarism ... a la Mad Max.

This was not only cited on Michael Bane's Blog, (who also linked to the delightful ZootShooters Gazette, which I fully intend to explore more fully when I'm done here) but was also prominently featured on August 25, 2009, on the GeekWithA45 (no relation) "Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves".

The Marine and The Politician: Town Hall Rocks
The second meme was posted on August 23 by The Smallest Minority, under the title "Quote Of The Week" (a regular feature by TSM) and was also posted on that same date by The Lawdog Files under the title "For that which you are about to receive, may you be truly grateful". Lawdog actually adds more commentary to the YouTube Video, but it does stand on it's own. I am sorely tempted to provide the link and embed the original video, because it's a bombshell. However, I think you deserve to reward the 'original' bloggers for their efforts if providing you with quality information, so you'll just have to click on one of the titled links. The authors deserve your recognition, measured by your visit as part of their statistics.

(Besides, it's almost as much fun to read the comments from their readers as it is to view the video.)

Both of these subjects are doubtless featured elsewhere on the Blogsphere, but I'll only refer to them in passing ... however much I highly recommend them.

BTW, while you're reading The Smallest Majority (if you do so choose), I also highly recommend two of his recent posts: "I Will Not Register" explores the proposals of firearms registration and firearms licensing; and "Abandonment Or Ass-Covering?", in which a CBS Opinion Piece admits that "There Will Be No Cost-Saving" in Obama's ObamaCare bill. Kevin's comment: "Holy $hit! Honesty in the MSM!"

Or ... you can just do what I do. Put these bloggers on your "Read Every Day" bookmark, and don't miss another stanza of their beautifully Purple Prose, a phrase which has come to have a whole new meaning given the increasing popularity of the Internet, and the formatting of links which is regrettably, often rendered in The Color Purple.

Monday, August 24, 2009

'Truth' vs. 'facts' from America's media --

'Truth' vs. 'facts' from America's media --

The LA Times is a handmaiden to the NY Times, and this opinion article proves it.

It reads like a spoof article from The Onion, but one cannot help but assume that it was constructed by a man who firmly believes everything he writes. And so do the editors and the Publisher of the L.A. Times. God Help Them ... and Us.

Here's the crux of the opinion piece:
... As we head toward next month's congressional face-off on a national healthcare bill, the news media are infatuated with town hall meetings. Over and over, we see angry citizens screaming about a Big Government takeover of the healthcare system, shouting that they will lose their insurance or be forced to give up their doctors and denouncing "death panels" that will euthanize old people.

Of course, none of this is even remotely true. [emphasis added here and elsewhere] These are all canards peddled by insurance companies terrified of losing their power and profits, by right-wing militants terrified of a victory for the president they hate and by the Republican Party, which has been commandeered by the insurance industry and the militants. But the lies have obviously had their effect. Recent polls show that support for healthcare reform -- reform that would insure more Americans, would force insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions and prevent them from capriciously terminating coverage, and would provide competition to drive down costs -- is rapidly eroding.

Maybe Americans should know better. Maybe they shouldn't fall for the latest imbecilic propaganda and scare tactics. Maybe. But a citizenry is only as well-informed as the quality of information it receives. One can't expect Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin or the Republican Party or even the Democrats to provide serious, truthful assessments of a complex health plan. Truth has to come from somewhere else -- from a reliable, objective, trustworthy source.

That source should be the media, and there has been, in fact, some excellent coverage of healthcare, especially by our better newspapers and especially lately when the untruths have become a torrent, rousing reporters to provide a corrective. But overall, the coverage has not been exactly edifying.
The Author (Neal Gabler) is entirely unconcerned about his facile diminishment of a National protest against what the protesters obviously consider a Federal Take-over of fiscal responsibility.

Look at the emphasized and hi-lited phrases. These are the rhetorically loaded phrases by which attack-liberals commonly use to denigrate the outrage of private citizens. Liberals can't stand the light of righteous indignation, so they ignore the issues and attack the individuals, or groups in an "Ad Hominem" manner.

Extreme ShepHerding


This is the best time-waster video I've seen this year, especially considering the it only runs for less than 3 minutes

Selling Firearms Seized by Police - Yay or Nay?

IPSC List member Stan P. notes that Colorado Springs Police May Sell Seized Firearms.
Apparently, some police are seeing budgetary crunch as a rationale for
selling confiscated guns rather than destroying them. Guns would be sold/auctioned to licensed firearm dealers, which means their re-entry to the public would occur through normal channels.
These guns were not used in crimes, AFAIK, as those weapons would be retained as evidence in the criminal proceedings.
Here's a bit of what the article offered:
The Colorado Springs City Council is expected in coming weeks to approve the final details of a program that would allow the Police Department to sell confiscated firearms to federally licensed gun dealers. Police have already stopped melting down the hundreds of guns they collect from crime scenes, drug houses or civilians who don't need them anymore.

The sales are projected to bring in about $10,000 a year, only a slight dent for a city that faced a deficit of one-quarter its $200-million annual budget this year. But it still helps, said Vice Mayor Larry Small, who proposed the gun sales.

Colorado -- especially the Denver/Boulder area -- are notoriously Liberal in their politics. And Colorado Springs tucks in nicely south of the Denver/Boulder area, both Politically and Geographically.

Still, the article points out that:
... Scott Knight, who helped formulate the association's [International Assn. of Chiefs of Police] policy on gun sales, said, "We understand, particularly in this economy, that some departments need to recoup budget losses.
Knight's police department, in Chaska, Minn., about 20 miles southwest of Minneapolis, is one such agency. The department upgraded its rifles recently and the only way to pay for the guns was to sell the old ones to licensed firearms dealers."
Among the reasons for citizens, Municipal Leaders and Police Departments to deplore this decision are:
  • it may return guns to the hands of criminals;
  • "... the small amount of money they could bring in is outweighed by the risk that a gun sold by the city could one day be used for a crime."
  • "There's all kinds of ancillary issues, one of which is the politics of being in the gun-selling business ... The other is not introducing another weapon into the community." (Colorado Springs PD Lieutenant)
  • the small amount of money the (city) could bring in is outweighed by the risk that a gun sold by the city could one day be used for a crime. (Colorado Springs dissenting City Council Member.)
Still other American Cities have been reselling confiscated firearms for some time, with little or no down-side in terms of "Gun Violence".

Whether or not this decision to resale confiscate firearms may lead to an increase in "Gun Violence", one thing is sure:

The department upgraded its rifles recently and the only way to pay for the guns was to sell the old ones to licensed firearms dealers.
There is a balance between budget, assets, resources and politics. In this city (375,000 citizens), the decision might help criminals to re-arm themselves, although the guns will only be sold to licensed dealers who are required to use the NCIS system to vet customers.

But it will definitely help the Colorado Springs Police Department to replace it's ageing weapons inventory with newer, better, more reliable weapons to support the CSPD in their imperative "To Protect And To Serve".

H/T: Stan P.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Travel Icon Says He'll Avoid Arizona Because of Gun Laws

Travel Icon Says He'll Avoid Arizona Because of Gun Laws

Well-known travel icon Arthur Frommer said he'll avoid visiting Arizona because state laws permit "thugs" and "extremists" to openly tote guns. [emphasis in the original quote]

On his blog, Frommer says:
I am not yet certain whether I would advocate a travel boycott by others of the state of Arizona; I want to learn more about Arizona's gun laws and how they compare with those of other states. But I am shocked beyond measure by reports that earlier this week, nearly a dozen persons, including one with an assault rifle strapped about his shoulders and others with pistols in their hands [emphasis added] or holsters, were openly congregating outside a hall at which President Obama was speaking to the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
If people were carrying firearms "in their hands" at a political rally, I have no better understanding than does Mr. Frommer whether that is a legal manner in which firearms may be carried in public. Arizona firearms laws are probably similar to that of other states, which are generally not friendly to folks who wander about with a gun in their hand. However, there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case in Arizona, so I feel comfortable in assuming that this "in their hands" business was just a bit of hyperbole in which the author indulged.

Mr. Frommer goes on to say, in an ingratiating manner:
For myself, without yet suggesting that others follow me in an open boycott, I will not personally travel in a state where civilians carry loaded weapons onto the sidewalks and as a means of political protest. I not only believe such practices are a threat to the future of our democracy, but I am firmly convinced that they would also endanger my own personal safety there. And therefore I will cancel any plans to vacation or otherwise visit in Arizona until I learn more. And I will begin thinking about whether tourists should safeguard themselves by avoiding stays in Arizona.
If the author is uncomfortable, of course he should abjure states which recognize the Second Amendment rights of its citizens to the point (which Frommer seems to consider extreme) of allowing "... civilians [to] carry loaded weapons onto the sidewalks and as a means of political protest."

Frommer continues:
According to the Phoenix, Arizona, police, people with guns including assault rifles do not need permits in Arizona, but can simply carry such weapons with them, openly and brazenly[emphasis added] , when they gather to protest a speaker at a public event. The police also acknowledge that about a dozen people carrying guns, including one with an AR-15 assault rifle, milled about outside the event at which President Obama spoke.

I would feel as I do regardless of the political identity of the speaker whom these thugs [emphasis added] attempted to intimidate. The continued tolerance of extremists [emphasis added] carrying guns is a frightening development which strikes at the heart of the political process and endangers the ability to carry out a reasoned debate. Is there any responsible citizen of the United States who believes that people should carry guns to a public debate or speech? If Ronald Reagan were delivering a political talk in Phoenix, Arizona, would they have felt it was proper for protestors [sic] with guns to mill about outside the hall from which he would leave?

Let's re-visit Frommer's closing statements:
I would feel as I do regardless of the political identity of the speaker whom these thugs attempted to intimidate. The continued tolerance of extremists carrying guns is a frightening development which strikes at the heart of the political process and endangers the ability to carry out a reasoned debate.
Looking at that pair of sentences from another viewpoint, isn't it possible that the armed "protestors" [sic] are not thugs? Perhaps they are merely concerned citizens who have chosen this method to call attention to their message. The method of protest which these "extremists" is certainly dramatic, yet they abide by the letter of the law and are careful to position themselves outside of the main arena (not in sight of the "speaker") ... and thus do they not "intimidate" the speaker directly.

They have no intention toward political assassination, which is the thinly disguised charge which Frommer is to careful to avoid ... but which he obviously accuses.

The only viable conclusion to Frommer's objection, considering who he is and how he makes a living ... is that he is a man easily frightened, and he is willing to use the prominence engendered by his public persona to influence a similarly "uncommitted" audience to listen to their fears, rather than to acquaint themselves with the facts.

This (admittedly judgmental) conclusion is supported by his statement that " I want to learn more about Arizona's gun laws and how they compare with those of other states. "
There is no evidence that he has made an effort to do so, which suggests that while he accepts that this would be the responsible thing to do ... he has not yet made the effort. He would rather judge the actions of Arizonans based on his personal bias, and in doing so infer that the people he is talking about are "extremists" and otherwise acting outside the law, than to determine whether the people he calls "extremists" are, in fact, acting in a law-abiding manner.

Arizona Gun Laws

Ultimately, Frommer has fallen into the Neo-Liberal mode of frightening the casual reader, rather than t0 assure his readers that the "Extremists" have acted in a manner which is not only legal locally, but encouraged by the Constitution of the United States.

That last document is an embarrassment to the Liberals, because they don't want to accept that certain rights are not subject to abridgment to their personal bias. In fact, although they don't want to acknowledged that they are biased against Personal Rights they will use any argument (as we see here) to undermine our Constitutional Rights.