The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Rants and Raves from a proud card-carrying, unilateralist and simplistic American member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Oh, and full-time Emperor and Ruler of All the Known Universe and Every Last Organism in it as well.
Ask Mr. Misha
[Email policy: The content of any and all emails sent to the above address will become the property of the owner of this website and eligible for publication, with the exception of personal details. Such details will not be published unless specific permission is given by the sender.]
Saturday, September 21, 2002
More From NorwayI'm sure you'll remember my link to Norwegian Blogger Vegard Valberg a few days ago, in which he questioned the seemingly "starry-eyed idealism" of the American people in these days with regards to what we have to do and our chances of accomplishing it.
Initially this post might have seemed overly skeptical and even slightly defeatist (I myself felt a whiff of the latter in it), but today he elaborates on what it was that he meant, and he does so in a way that is both thoughtful and illuminative, at least to me.
From reading his post (and you should too, it's very well written) I'm left with the feeling that he asks two questions (and I'm paraphrasing here):
"Are we aware of the kind of determination and hard-handedness such a strategy requires?".
I am, but are we, as a people? We're basically talking about reverting (at least for a while) to the values of Victorian England vis-a-vis the colonies with the terrorists and the nations that aid and abet them substituted for Zulus, Thuggees, wily Pathans etc. Can we do that? I don't believe that we have a choice. And:
"Are we willing to stick with it, even if it requires us to hold on this mentality, a mentality that isn't exactly in keeping with our American traditions, for however long it takes?"
This is a very good question, if you ask me. I'm willing to go on if it takes the rest of my life, but are the majority of us? Isn't it true that we have a tendency to rejoice in early victories and then declare the job done and go home? Isn't it true that it would require enormous efforts to keep our determination going for, say, a decade or even longer? Do we indeed have the attention span required or will we fall back on Jerry Springer and admiring Britney's boobs?
If we don't (and I'm using Vegard's analogy here because it's right on the money), we might as well not start, because to leave the job half finished would be like only going through half your prescribed anti-biotics when fighting an infection. It'll delay the outcome, but the disease will be back, only this time it'll have "learned" from its mistakes and be stronger for it.
I think he's right in bringing up this issue, because, whereas I still completely agree on the premises set up by Steven den Beste if we're to achieve a real victory, I sometimes find myself asking myself if we, as a people, really have the "stomach" to do what we inevitably will have to do.
We're not going to be able to "smart bomb" our way out of this one. At some point in the future, we're going to have to take off the kiddie gloves and use an iron fist instead, if we're to be successful in eradicating Islamism.
And eradicate it we must. I'm not a defeatist and neither is Vegard, if I understand him correctly, but we simply cannot afford to enter this conflict without the hard, uncompromising determination to do whatever has to be done, whenever we have to do it. If we do, it'll just mean delaying the inevitable.
We must mobilize the determination of our grandparents and stick to unconditional surrender, no matter what the other options are and no matter how tempting it may be to just finish half way and go back to the illusion of pre-9/11 America with a negotiated peace. For an illusion it will be. We will have delayed the inevitable, but one day we or our children will wake up to another 9/11.
Islamism must not be merely handed a defeat, no matter how decisive, it must be eradicated, wiped from the Earth, and the ground that it got its nourishment from must be plowed with salt.
If we do not keep this in mind and stick with it, no matter what "sticking with it" is going to mean, our losses and sacrifices will have been in vain and we'll eventually have to start over again, only the next time the fight is going to be harder.
I have no doubts that we have the abilities required to do it, but sometimes I wonder if we have the will.
Now go read Vegard's post yourselves and tell me if I got him completely wrong.
This Just In:RAMALLAH, 9/21/02 The "Rottweiler"'s correspondent reports that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat is currently holed up in a lean-to made out of a few plates of corrugated iron, allegedly accompanied by 15,237 Islamic militants, a Shit-zu and a poster of Jane Fonda.
One of his aides just got through communicating to the assembled press corps, by semaphore, that Mr. Arafat has no intentions of giving himself up and that he welcomes this opportunity to become a martyr, a martyr or a martyr. Word has it that the last word signalled resembled the word "please", but this hasn't been confirmed as of yet.
The "Rottweiler" is also proud to be the first to publicize the following prepared statement, intercepted by picking up a piece of used toilet tissue that was floating towards the IDF lines (corrections as they appear in the original):
It is reported that the
UPDATE: Our correspondent in the Middle East informs us that it has been discovered that it wasn't toilet tissue. It was, of course, a dried-up baby wipe.
UPDATE the 2nd: We are now informed that the poster in question was not of Jane Fonda, but of Scott Ritter, the bitch-boy of the Arab world. I suppose our correspondent got confused by the thong. There goes his pay raise.
"This Is Another Fine Mess I've Gotten Myself In"...Arafat is quoted as saying as the IDF did some urban renewal on his compound again today.
Israeli tanks and bulldozers smashed their way through Yasser Arafat's compound in Ramallah last night, destroying half of the last building still under his control, forcing more than 20 of his aides and bodyguards to surrender, and leaving the Palestinian leader trapped in his office.
"One day, my followers, all of this will be yours..."
"Fuck that, old man, we're outta here!"
"The president refuses to leave. He says, 'I shall either be a martyr or a martyr or a martyr, period. I will not surrender'," an aide inside the building said by mobile phone.
Hmm... What does this mean? Wait, don't tell me, I got it!... Shit, time to go buy some more free candy for the kids around here.
Eyewitnesses said Israeli troops were digging a deep trench and running coils of barbed wire around the office.
Don't forget the sign saying "Please Don't Feed the Animals (unless the peanuts are laced with cyanide)".
"I think they may be targeting the president himself", the aide said.
Your "president" wouldn't be alive now if they were, dimwit.
Around a hundred people were still with Mr Arafat, he added.
In half a building? Must be awful waiting for your turn outside the toilet.
They are believed to include 20 hardcore militants whom the Israelis want to arrest on the grounds they have been involved in terrorist activities.
Sounds like reasonable grounds for arrest to me.
Israeli forces smashed a walkway, cutting off a meeting hall from the Palestinian leader's private quarters. "They have destroyed the president's reception area," the official said. "He is surrounded by people with high morale. They will defend him with their lives".
I'm sure they will, if they're given the option, which they won't be.
Earlier, Israeli forces dynamited other parts of the compound. Tanks roamed across what had once been a helipad, their gun turrets trained on Mr Arafat's rooms.
Nothing quite as inspiring as looking down the barrel of a big fucking gun.
The rest of Ramallah was under curfew, with tanks and armoured personnel carriers patrolling the empty streets.
Must've been the lunch break for the vaunted "Arab Street".
The onslaught followed an emergency cabinet meeting called by the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, after a bomb in a bus in Tel Aviv killed six people. The defence minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, said the aim was not to expel Mr Arafat but to "isolate" him.
Cool! I can't wait to go to Israel so I can get an opportunity to throw peanuts at the old fart.
The escalation in violence is bound to complicate the US effort to get support for war on Iraq.
"Complicate"? As in "we might now get less than no support for the war"? I suppose I should be worried by that, but I'm really not.
US officials had been advising Israel to keep the situation quiet so as not to inflame Arab opinion.
Noticably, we're now no longer doing any such thing. Somebody might want to consider if there's a message in there somewhere.
Friday, September 20, 2002
If I Don't Post This Link, the Terrorists Will Have Won...Not that I think that anybody is unaware of it by now, but, just in case, Charles Austin has another Scourge™ up and it's chock-full of sarcastic goodness, as usual.
Idiotarians Manage to Murder Even MORE People:First, it was killing starving Africans to push their Idiotarian and completely unscientific agenda against "dangerous" GM foods, now it seems that they're out to kill off all the AIDS-victims too. They've finally managed to make research in anti-AIDS drugs so unprofitable that the drug companies are steering their R&D in other directions.
You know, it never ceases to amaze me how "bleeding heart", "compassionate" Idiotarian Lefty Loons are perfectly willing to murder off large parts of the population of the planet, just to show all of us "evil" capitalist how much they "feel our pain".
Well, would you murdering, filthy swine on the loony left kindly stop "caring", before you wipe the whole planet out?
Bill Quick, as always, has a few choice words to share on the matter too:
There's no surprise here. The murderous, discredited socialist and communist philosophies that animate the activist left have never been willing to admit that markets and profits are far more effective drivers of innovation than heavy-handed statist attempts to force free men and companies to do what the activists think is desirable.What he said... In triplicate.
Genocidal Gerbil Molesters.
(Link courtesy of the one and only Bill Quick)
Public Service Announcement:Blogging over the next few days is going to be erratic at best and non-existent at worst, due to family visit.
I'll be back to speed come Tuesday, though.
Thursday, September 19, 2002
The "Elite" Republican Guard or "It Sucks To Be Hated"From The al-Guardian:
Elite forces from Iraq's Republican Guard may not be called upon to protect Saddam Hussein in the event of an American attack - for fear that they might turn against him.
It wouldn't be nice for me to laugh hysterically at this point, would it?
This is because President Saddam cannot be sure of the Guard's loyalties, according to a non-Iraqi source with well-placed contacts in Baghdad. "It's touch and go who they fight for," said the source, who asked not to be identified.
My bet is "whoever's got the biggest gun", and it ain't Soddy.
"The officer corps in the Republican Guard are highly trained and motivated, but they hate Saddam Hussein. They also hate the United States.
Kinda leaves them with nothing but the choice of whose bullets they'd rather end up being punctured by, doesn't it?
The United Nations is currently scrambling to devise a means of forcing the Iraqi regime to succumb to renewed arms inspections in a desperate effort to avoid war. Should that fail Iraq has already made clear that its aim is to draw invading US forces into urban warfare, and officials regularly invoke memories of previous city battles in Beirut and Mogadishu.
The result in Iraq, Baghdad strategists calculate, would be to maximise casualties among both the American military and Iraqi civilians, thus increasing the political risks to the US.
"I see, mushrooms rising..."
But the Republican Guard would not be allowed to join street-fighting inside Bagh dad. Its forces would be kept outside the centre, defending three access routes to the capital, where they would be at the mercy of US bombers.
Oh yeah! A replay of the unforgettable scenes of Gulf War I, where the "elite" were scrambling for cover while our Apaches were picking them off one by one.
The Guard, which numbers 50,000-60,000 men, was originally set up as a counterweight to the regular army, and to protect the Iraqi regime, especially the presidential palace in Baghdad. It grew dramatically during the 1980-88 war with Iran, developing a broader role as an elite force.
Although highly privileged and well-equipped in comparison with the regular army, it has become less trusted as a result of several coup plots involving officers from the Guard. One plot, unmasked in 1990, two months before it was due to take place, included a brigadier-general from President Saddam's home town, Tikrit. A member of the Iraqi leader's own tribe was also arrested but later freed.
This led to an expansion of the super-elite Special Republican Guard (SRG),
I just can't wait for the "Super-Elite Invincible Special Republican Guard With Cheese™" to emerge.
In addition, there is the Saddam Fedayyeen, a thug militia run by President Saddam's elder son, Udai, which specialises in internal repression - such as cutting off tongues and beheading prostitutes.
Just about all his retarded son is capable of. And it'll come in handy too, when the nasty Mairkins invade with their Divisions of Prostitutes. "Hah, Infidels! I'll cut your tongues off! If I can catch you!
Members cover their faces and alternate between white uniforms in summer and black in winter.
...and a combination of red and brown when confronted with actual enemies, to conceal the blood and shitstains, respectively.
(Oh, and how's the color, dear readers? Tell me if you liked the cyan better)
There's gonna be a lot of corpses to clean up after this, but I suppose that the Super-Elite Republican Special Man of Steel Guard can handle that. They do know how to operate a shovel, don't they?
I Thought It'd NEVER Happen!...but finally I managed to achieve my goal: I got hatemail!
Poorly spelled, chock full of Idiotarianism and just begging for publicity.
I'm nothing if not a kind, accommodating soul (it's not for nothing that my email link says "Ask Mr. Misha"), so without further ado, let's hear what our "friend" Otto has to say:
Herr Misha:Generally, I'd consider that a compliment but, sensing a "but" coming on and having read the rest of the spew already, I'm afraid I'm going to have to go take a shower once I'm done typing this.
however , as komeradin, I feel I must remind you that Hitler was also a card-carrying, unilateralist and simplistic member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy amoung a plethora of other labels ..He may have been "unilateralist" and "simplistic", I certainly won't argue that, but I think you need to study up on the meaning of the word "socialist". As in: "National Socialist".
While you've got your dictionary handy, you might also, with regard to the words "unilateralist" and "simplistic", want to look up the word "sarcasm".
I would suggest, when using a slav nomen , (Misha)...at least your abilities as a linguist aren't all bad.
it is an obvious sign of poor selfesteem to refer to a lame Reichskunt as a Nazi Sow..I rather prefer to think of it as an obvious sign of low esteem for Nazi Sows employed as ministers of justice, but to each his own.
and when the name Coventry comes to your mind and mine , I will never forget Dresden..I certainly hope not. Unfortunately, as the rest of your drivel shows, the lesson seems to have been lost on you.
Now let me clarify to whatever German readers I might have left: I fully agree that my remark about Dresden was in poor taste. I intended for it to be. I was trying to illustrate just how much I resent having my President compared to the Scourge of Humanity, Adolf Hitler.
And I'm sure that the intelligent among my German readers (and I suspect that that's the vast majority) already realized that and that I, in no way, was advocating an actual repeat of the terror bombing of '45.
But back to Otto, who obviously doesn't belong to that category:
I think the greatest difference between us , after much reading, is that I refuse to be a bitch for a nation of displaced convicts,I really hate to be the one to have to break it to you (no I don't), Otto, but you already are. If it hadn't been for the Marshall Plan, you guys would still be feasting on turnips and begging for scraps. Fortunately, my ancestors (and considering what they had to go through at the hands of your Herr Adolf it's truly amazing) decided that you'd already suffered enough and that the only sensible end to WWII would be to let bygones be bygones and to move on. And I agree with that, just as I do not for a second believe that the Germans of today should be made to suffer for what happened 55 years ago. It's a good thing that us "displaced convicts" don't carry a grudge for very long, isn't it, Otto?
but I certainly would not waste any energy , time or capital on their undoing, or their victory.. or any other of the untermensch cultures of that miserable land..It's a good thing that I know that the vast majority of Germans are nothing like you, or I'd be itching to get my hands on the launch codes, Ottolein.
Ich kann es nur so sagen: Du kannst mir herzlich am Arsch lechen, du verflichster Arschgeier!
Jetzt hau ab, bitte, und gib die Burschen im Horst Wessel Klub ein Tritt im Arsch von mir... Verdammte Nazischwein!
Ausserdem: Es heisst "dobrij djen", oder jetzt lieber "dobrij vjecher".
Jetzt wirst du gefälligst dein Maul halten, oder?
"What Is It With All This Starry-Eyed Idealism?"This is a question I just received from fellow blogger Vegard Valberg from Norway, who is just a little bit annoyed with the seeming optimism of people such as myself and Steven den Beste with regards to the upcoming reform of Middle Eastern culture.
Before you immediately disregard this question as a sign of EUroweenie defeatism, I would like to point out that Vegard is by no means what you'd call a EUroweenie, nor is he in any way an "Idiotarian" and he does, indeed, present some very good questions that I'll try to the best of my ability to answer in the following. I'll only present snippets here, so I do recommend checking out his post in its entirety, it certainly deserves it:
Vegard starts off by stating that it is, ceteris paribus, always preferable to bring about change from within, without outside pressure:
I think that if we can bring about a change without war or reconstruction then that is best, a change that arise from within the nation in question is going to make them better long term neighbours, and more stable in the long run.I will not argue that, because Vegard's absolutely right.
And that used to be the philosophy. We as Americans are extremely reluctant to try and force our values on other people, no matter what Idiotarians (to whom Vegard most certainly does not belong) may say about our "cultural imperialism". The fact is that our much-maligned cultural imperialism doesn't exist. Nobody's forcing anybody to buy our burgers, soft drinks and watch our movies, just to name the Usual Suspects™, we're only selling the stuff because there's a demand. If there wasn't, we'd be producing something else that we could sell, that's the way we're wired.
Another, and more basic, reason for our lack of willingness to force ourselves upon others is that we, to put it bluntly, couldn't care less. We're happy, we're rich, we're successful (all relatively speaking), so why would we want to bother? As long as nobody bothers us, there's no reason for us to bother them. We're always willing to help if asked, but we certainly don't have a need to get involved where we're not wanted, because why should we?
That used to be the philosophy. But with 9/11 (actually before that, but that was the "line in the sand" for most Americans), the rest of the world ceased to be an SEP (Somebody Else's Problem). Suddenly we no longer had the option of "letting other people mind their own business", because they'd made their business our business by attacking us. And, as a result, the "leave them to themselves until they figure out that their ways won't work" had to be scratched out of the playbook, because American lives would be lost while we were waiting, and that's not permissible. We and our leaders have a duty to protect ourselves from harm.
So passive non-interventionism is out of the question now. We could afford that idea (and it worked) with the Soviet Union because, in spite of their rabid ideas, they knew that any aggression against us would lead to their own destruction. They were rational players. Islamists are not. Death for "the cause" is noble to them, death, to the Soviets, was death, no matter what the cause. The Soviets were driven by a desire to turn us into communists by working on it for as long as it would take, the Islamists are driven by a desire to turn us into either Muslims or corpses.
And whereas the Islamist death cults are certainly psychotic, they're by no means stupid, so they know full well that the first option is out of the question, which leaves them with number 2. Furthermore, knowing that their failings and inadequacies are only going to become more pronounced with time, not less, they also realize that the sooner they act, the larger the likelihood that they'll succeed.
So how are we going to get this reform of the Islamist world?
Well, seeing as we can't afford to wait for it to come about by itself, we have to shove it down their throats.
To this, Vegard has this to say:
The stubborn refusal to see plain facts, and the starry eyed idealism of many people is really annoying. Saddam was democratically elected, after all the other candidates were shot, you can say the elections were rigged, but let me ask you where are you going to get a democracy for the Middle-East? Do you have one in your pocket? Or in your backpack perhaps? Or are you going to make it out of clay and water and try to raise it with a strange Cabbalistic-Constitutional ceremony?No, we're not, but it's a good question.
I harbor no illusions that it's going to be easy because, as Vegard correctly points out later in his post, there's precious little to work with in the cesspool of Islamism.
But we have no choice.
We'll have to go in, throw the garbage out, and then try to build something on the ruins.
Will it be easy?
Hell no, it'll be the toughest job we ever had because, as Vegard also correctly points out, with Germany and Japan we at least had something to begin with. With Islamism, we'll have to start from rock bottom. But it can work, as we've seen in Turkey and, to a lesser extent, in Iran.
But most of all, we have no choice.
So why the "starry-eyed" idealism?
Well, I think that the "starry-eyedness" comes from realizing that here's a job that we have to do if we want to continue to exist, so we might as well concentrate on the best outcome.
If we dwell too much (and don't get me wrong, one shouldn't ignore the possibility of negative outcomes on the way, it would be foolish to think that we could fight and win a war without any mishaps on the way) on "worst case scenarios", it'll at the worst discourage us from doing what we have to do and, at best, just hurt our morale.
It won't change the fact that we're caught in a fight that we have to fight, sooner or later, so it might as well be sooner. The choice not to fight has been taken from us, for that way lies destruction. The clash between medievalism and civilized, modern society had to come, it's just our bad luck that it happened to come in our lifetimes.
I'm sure our grandparents felt the same when they were faced with Adolf Hitler, cursing a cruel fate for being born in "interesting times", yet they realized that they couldn't just shirk their responsibilities, so they fought on, and won.
We must do the same or perish. It's that simple.
But I'm only talking for myself, of course, your mileage may vary.
Who Is The Enemy?Be warned. This essay by Steven den Beste is a LONG one, but it's every bit as much worth reading as it is long.
If you can't set aside the time to read it all now, print it out or bookmark it and read it when you can. You'll be happy that you did.
Seems There's Another Country Ripe For Regime Change Too...Well, considering who it's coming from, maybe we should acknowledge the expertise on the matter:
The regional Schwaebisches Tagblatt newspaper quoted German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's justice minister, Herta Daeubler-Gmelin, as saying "Bush wants to divert attention from his domestic problems. It's a classic tactic. It's one that Hitler used."Careful with what you say, you Nazi Sow.
Assuming that what you're saying isn't just idiotic bloviating from a Klueless Kraut (and that's tough, even for argument's sake), you might want to consider other tactics that Hitler used. Does the name "Coventry" mean anything to you?
Hmmm... Maybe those old navigational maps of Northern Europe will come in handy again some day...
[humming: "I love Hamburg in the springtime, I love Dresden in the fall..."]
Oh, and if you're feeling bored and have a thing or two to say to the German representatives here in the US before we wrap them up in body sized plastic bags, pull the zipper and drop them over Krautland without the benefit of parachutes, here's a contact link you might want to look into.
UPDATE: Maybe the Morgenthau Plan wasn't such a bad idea after all...
(Link via Bill Quick)
My ApologiesHaloscan screwed up again, so if you're wondering where your comments went, that's what happened. Hopefully they'll return when they figure out what it was they did wrong this time and correct it.
Come to think of it: Better check if the Haloscan server is in Miami-Dade or Broward.
UPDATE: That was quick! I just barely had time to pop by their message board and whine about my lack of free ice cream (gratitude never was one of my defining traits) when, lo and behold, everything's back in order and the comments have re-appeared.
Lack of Clue All Over AgainIt seems eternal whiner Al Bore is not content whining about his own defeats, he has to whine about others' too.
Doing what Idiotarians are known to do, namely repeating the same action over and over expecting different results, he's now busy blaming the Child Murdering Monster Janet Reno's defeat on, you guessed it, Republicans. At least it wasn't global warming this time.
It's a subject about which he has some expertise,What, lying? growing a beard?.
and not surprisingly Al Gore yesterday blamed the latest problems in Florida's election system on President Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.Nope, not surprising at all. What would be surprising would be if anything, anything at all happened and the al-Bore didn't blame it on the Bush family.
"Honey? When did that dent in the Volvo get there?"
"It was BUSH, dear!!!"
The man is more pitiful than a Greek suicidal chorus with the blues.
During campaign appearances in Jacksonville and Palm Beach County, areas that figured in the 2000 election debacle, the former Democratic presidential candidate called last week's botched primary election "déjà vu all over again."...then proceeded to claim that he'd just come up with that expression. His dear black Mammy back on the
He gives pathological liars and plagiarists a bad name.
"I didn't expect there to be all the problems at the polling booths again," said Gore, who attended a rally and fundraiser for Rep. Corrine Brown.You didn't? You thought your cretinous supporters in Miami-Dade and Broward had been abducted by aliens and replaced by something sentient since 2000? Like, say, turnips?
"The money the Congress tried to allocate was defeated by President Bush and there was a lack of attention and leadership at the state level by Governor Bush."I didn't realize that State level elections were the responsibility of the President of the United States, but you're probably right about his brother. He was probably busy putting up roadblocks, siccing pitbulls on black voters and kicking little old ladies.
The governor's office responded by saying Florida's 67 counties received $32 million to fix their independent elections systems and only two, Miami-Dade and Broward, run by Democrats, had serious problems.Which was one of the biggest non-surprises of the year. As Andrea Harris once very aptly put it: "The Democrats couldn't run a pair of pantyhose".
Imbeciles, the whole sorry lot of them.
"This sounds like a wannabe candidate who's desperate to be heard," Katie Muniz, Jeb Bush's spokeswoman, told the Associated Press.Sounds more like an incredibly sore loser trying to squeeze the last moist almost-drops of sympathy out of a public that don't give a shit about the washed-out old fool anymore.
During the Sept. 10 primary, hundreds of voters in the two largest counties said they were turned away because of equipment failures.The herds of wild dogs and the barbed wire roadblocks will, presumably, be next.
Other tabulating problems and recounts led Janet Reno to wait a week before she conceded Tuesday to Bill McBride in the Democratic gubernatorial primary....other sources have it that The Waco Monster just wasn't quite sure what week it was or whether pouring gasoline over the Governor's Mansion and burning it down was still an option.
"Even though the late-night comics have gotten ahold of it again, it isn't funny," Gore said earlier at a fundraising breakfast in West Palm Beach for Carol RobertsOh yes it is. It's hysterical! But obviously, the most boring man in the world wouldn't realize true humor if it jumped up, kicked him in the face, pulled his ears, poked one of his eyes out and bit his nose of.
While Gore traveled in Florida, the Republican state government was asking for help from the Justice Department in averting a third straight election fiasco in the Nov. 5 general election. Secretary of State Jim Smith called on Attorney General John D. Ashcroft's staff to "take whatever steps necessary" to ensure a fair election.Quite simple, really: Go back to the pencil and paper system, only this time make sure both ends of the pencils are sharpened, or the glueheads in Miami-Dade and Broward won't get to vote at all.
Come to think of it, that might actually be a good idea...
(Link thanks to Charles Austin)
Of Bitches and Lefty LoonsNorm Jenson of "One Good? Move" has finally taken it upon himself to offer a brutal and humorous takedown of yours truly. If only he would at least try. But, as expected, he sputters ineffectively, pats himself on the back and moves on in search of that good move that seems to be forever eluding him:
Pejman was matched at his request with Misha a cute little Rotweiller. Your my bitch now he was heard to say.Oddly enough I have no recollection of that, much less a recollection of Pej spelling "you're" wrong, but I guess it is possible.
But, in the interest of fact checking, I've looked up my referrer logs and it turns out that I am, and have been for quite some time, Glenn's bitch.
Misha listens carefully to the instructions from his mentor. He has already learned several important warblogger commands he understands Sic that dude deserves a fisking but is having trouble understanding the concept of "Fact check his Ass" he does a lot of sniffing around, but to date hasn't had any success.Without even bothering to come up with any examples (I'd hate to injure your fragile ego by upstaging you beyond your limited comprehension), I can safely say that my successes in that area are vastly superior to your successes in the arcane art of "punctuation".
I assume those keys are among the ones on your keyboard that are hopelessly stuck together.
But What If...?Let's assume that, for some reason, Saddam gets his way and we don't invade right now but instead flood Iraq with inspectors? (Yeah, it's a long shot, but it could happen). What then, happens if these inspectors actually find something?
Paul Wright has thought about that and come up with some rather chilling ideas about what might happen, ideas that further reinforce (as if it needed reinforcing) my conclusion that we need to stop waffling and send Soddy off to the long dirt nap, the sooner the better.
Let's get this job over with, for crying out loud! It's not like the weenies are gonna change their mind ever, not even if, Heaven forbid, Soddy and his drooling fanatics manage to stage another terror attack on the US. So let's get it done, get it done thoroughly and get it done quickly, we can always deal with the hand-wringing Idiotarians' impotent whinging later.
I'd one heck of lot rather risk having to deal with a bunch of howling fossilized Idiotarians who haven't gotten over the 60s yet, than risk having to sift through the glowing ruins of New York for survivors.
And a Few Way Overdue Additions:Referrer logs are a good thing, especially for folks like me who have trouble keeping track without the use of several legal pads and badly chewed pencils. Thanks to this wonder of modern web technology (the log, not the pencils, you...), it came to my attention that there were a couple blogs out there that, for inexplicable reasons, had seen fit to link me.
The only reasons I could come up with without having to resort to delusions of adequacy would be that either the blogowners were on the same meds as myself or that they felt they had something in common with me or heck, even liked me (of course, a small hope that it would be some fresh Fisking™ grounds also reared its bloodthirsty head), so I decided to go check them out.
One is Icchan's Spent Casings (Icchan also happens to be a long-time reader of mine, so he's now entitled to slap me repeatedly upside the head with a dead trout), the other is Gregory Hlatky's Dog's Life.
I recommend both sites heartily and, as a consequence of my unreserved approval, they're now doomed to spend a long time on my ever-growing Blogroll of Infamy™, with all of the stigma that a Rottweiler Stamp of Approval™ carries with it.
My apologies for taking so long, gentlemen.
UPDATE: I know, I won't have room on my blogroll for much longer, but I just came by another Oz blog that is well worth a look, especially if you, like I, love the use of unashamed invective and verbal abuse combined with good sense. Ladies and Gents: Paul & Carls Daily Diatribe.
Wednesday, September 18, 2002
A Washed Out Has-Been Refuses To Shut the F*ck Up...It seems that Nelson Mandela is determined to bury whatever might be left of his legacy, which is very sad indeed, but that won't keep the cerebrally challenged clusterfucks of the al-Guardian from taking him all the way, right down to the hilt:
Say what you like about Nelson Mandela,
I wish I could, but this is a family-oriented website.
but he is not a man known to bear a grudge or lose his temper easily.
Sadly, he seems to be losing his mind now.
Having waited 27 years for his freedom, he emerged from jail to preach peace and reconciliation to a nation scarred by racism.
Since then, all that has changed is that the racism has gotten itself a brand new color.
When he finally made the transition from the world's most famous prisoner to the world's most respected statesman, he invited his former jailer to the inauguration.
And then the long slide downhill began...
So when he criticises US foreign policy in terms every bit as harsh as those he used to condemn apartheid, you know something is up.
Yep. And it ain't his IQ.
In the past few weeks, he has issued a "strong condemnation" of the US's attitude towards Iraq, lambasted vice-president Dick Cheney for being a "dinosaur" and accused the US of being "a threat to world peace".
Unconfirmed reports also have it that he's taken to believing that he's Santa Claus and that pigs can really fly...
Coming from other quarters, such criticisms would have been dismissed by both the White House and Downing Street as the words of appeasement, anti-Americanism or leftwing extremism.
Coming from Mandela, however, it's not only the words of appeasement, anti-Americanism or leftwing extremism, it's also a clear and very sad sign that a once truly great man has finally reached dementia.
But Mandela is not just anyone. Towering like a moral colossus over the late 20th century, his voice carries an ethical weight like no other.
Did I hear a feather fall?
He rode to power on a global wave of goodwill, left office when his five years were up and settled down to a life of elder statesmanship. So the belligerent tone he has adopted of late suggests one of two things; either that some thing is very wrong with the world, or that something is very wrong with Mandela.
Pick me! I know it! Pick me! Pick me!
What Mandela believes is wrong with the world is not difficult to fathom. He is annoyed at how the US is exploiting its overwhelming military might. Earlier this month, after President Bush would not take his calls, he spoke to secretary of state Colin Powell and then the president's father, asking the latter to discourage his son from attacking Iraq.
One would've thought that Mr. Mandela would've taken a hint, but oh no... He's a "moral colossus", after all and, as such, not subject to the whims of mere mortals.
"What right has Bush to say that Iraq's offer is not genuine?" he asked on Monday.
Well... One could go by past experience, just to name one.
"We must condemn that very strongly.
The Royal "We", no less. Methinks it's time for Nellie to take his meds.
No country, however strong, is entitled to comment adversely in the way the US has done. They think they're the only power in the world.
That could have to do with the fact that, for all practical purposes, we are the only power in the world. Another reason is that we're the aggrieved party in this conflict and, as such, hold certain privileges.
They're not and they're following a dangerous policy. One country wants to bully the world."
Nope, Nellie. We just don't want to have to ask the world for permission to defend ourselves and no amount of sanctimonious, whining B.S. from you or anybody else is going to change that fact. Get over yourself and let the rest of us remember you as the great statesman that you were.
Having supported the bombing of Afghanistan, he cannot be dismissed as a peacenik. But his assessment of the current phase of Bush's war on terror is as damning as anything coming out of the Arab world. "If you look at these matters, you will come to the conclusion that the attitude of the United States of America is a threat to world peace."
And I've just come to the conclusion that you're certifiable, old man.
And then there is the dreaded "r" word. Accusations of discrimination do not fall often or easily from Mandela's lips, but when they do, the world is forced to sit up and listen. So far, he has fallen short of accusing the west of racism in its dealings with the developing world, but he has implied sympathy with those who do.
Which is, for all that I care, the same thing. And no, we're not "forced" to do a damn thing, least of all listen to an old man who's obviously lost his marbles.
"When there were white secretary generals, you didn't find this question of the US and Britain going out of the UN. But now that you've had black secretary generals, such as Boutros Boutros Ghali and Kofi Annan, they do not respect the UN.
I'm glad you could clear that up for me. Last I checked, Boutros Boutros Ghali wasn't exactly black. Another thing is that, under the "white" Secretary Generals, we didn't have a problem with Islamofascists murderers driving passenger jets into our office buildings.
This is not my view, but that is what is being said by many people."
And if it's not your view, then why are you so Hell-bent on airing it, you transparent fool?
Most surprising in these broadsides has been his determination to point out particular individuals for blame.
...most likely because he's having trouble remembering all the names in his dotage.
As a seasoned [well-seasoned and burnt to a crisp -ed.] political hand, Mandela has previously eschewed personal invective but has clearly made an exception when it comes to Cheney.
Another sign of senility: You tend to remember people from your past better than the realities of your present.
In 1986, Cheney voted against a resolution calling for his release because of his alleged support for "terrorism". Mandela insists that he is not motivated by pique. "Quite clearly we are dealing with an arch-conservative in Dick Cheney... my impression of the president is that this is a man with whom you can do business. But it is the men around him who are dinosaurs, who do not want him to belong to the modern age."
Nope... No pique here... Move along, nothing to see.
In fact, behind the scenes, the White House is attempting to portray Mandela, now 84, as something of a dinosaur himself - the former leader of an African country, embittered by the impotence that comes with retirement and old age.
Send him some free Viagra™ samples, ferchrissakes!
It is a charge they have found difficult to make stick.
Mandela has never been particularly encumbered by delusions of grandeur.
...apart from the occasional Royal "we" and the very modest notion that the future of the entire world rests on his drooping shoulders.
When asked whether he would be prepared to mediate in the current dispute, he replied. "If I am asked by credible organisations to mediate, I will consider that very seriously.
Now that's a forceful "no thank you!" if ever I saw one!
But a situation of this nature does not need an individual, it needs an organisation like the UN to mediate. A man who has lost power and influence can never be a suitable mediator."
Nope, not bitter at all...
But if there is something wrong with Mandela it is chiefly that for the past decade he has been thoroughly and wilfully misunderstood. He has been portrayed as a kindly old gent who only wanted black and white people to get on, rather than a determined political activist who wished to redress the power imbalance between the races under democratic rule. In the years following his release, the west wilfully mistook his push for peace and reconciliation not as the vital first steps to building a consensus that could in turn build a battered nation but as a desire to both forgive and forget.
And, as subsequent developments in South Africa have shown, neither "forgive" nor "forget" are words that he has even the faintest of acquaintances with. He's every bit the vengeful bastard that Bobby Mugabe is.
So it was for Mandela when he came to Britain in 1990, after telling reporters in Dublin that the British government should talk to the IRA, presaging developments that took place a few years later. The then leader of the Labour party, Neil Kinnock, called the remarks "extremely ill-advised"; Tory MP Teddy Taylor said the comments made it "difficult for anyone with sympathy for the ANC and Mandela to take him seriously."
He made similar waves in the US when he refused to condemn Yasser Arafat, Colonel Gadafy and Fidel Castro. Setting great stock by the loyalty shown to both him and his organisation during the dog days of apartheid, he has consistently maintained that he would stick by those who stuck by black South Africa. It was wrong, he told Americans, to suggest that "our enemies are your enemies... We are a liberation movement and they support our struggle to the hilt."
Is it just me, or didn't this al-Guardian spew start out with the words "...he is not a man known to bear a grudge..."? Just checking to make sure that I haven't become as senile as the sad old fossil himself.
You can swallow now, Gary Younge.
While I'm At It, I Mustn't Forget This:Blogrolling like crazy today, it seems.
I just came across a most excellent Fisking™ of the Fisk™, remarkable not only by being extremely well-written, but even more so by not "merely" being the usual Fisking™ of the Idiotarian drivel in one of Bobby's columns, but by being a solid Fisking™ of the man (if indeed he can be called that) himself and his less than illustrious career.
It's by the fabulous Bargarz, a blogger on his well-deserved way to Blogger Stardom, and can be found right here.
Rachel On a Roll...She rolls off posts like they're going out of style and yet the quality never decreases.
How does she do it???
Anyways, I was going to link to her latest about the Brady Idiotarians, then I wanted to link to her excellent public flaying of Sleazy Lawyers Who Oughta Be Publically Hung, then there's the bit about "parents" who somehow managed to murder a child through their inexcusable stupidity...
Oh what the Heck, just go catch up on it all. If you haven't already, you'll be grateful that I told you to.
SPLAT!Juan takes the old Fiskin'™ rod to the hideous hide of Maureen Dowd and leaves pieces of the old Idiotarian Hag sticking everywhere. I love it, and you will too!
UPDATE: And, just when the Dowdie is trying to do a Terminator™ and coalesce back into the cruel caricature of a woman that she is, Paul Wright jumps in the middle of the pool of Dowd-goo and sends tiny globules of Idiotarian flying yet again.
The Beat Goes On...War Now may be gone, but there's a different site up now that just might replace it and it might be worthwhile to go take a look. Just sayin' 's all...
I Have No Idea How This Site Has Managed to Slip Under My Radar......but no longer will my blogroll suffer under the absence of the eminent Prof. Bunyip from Down Under.
If our friends the Ozzies keep producing bloggers of this quality at the current rate, we may have to consider revoking their blog-license...
Don't Read This While Drinking and/or EatingJames Lileks has an interview with Scott Ritter, former NYC health inspector, and if I wasn't laughing so hard, I'd post some excerpts. Instead I urge you to go check it out before your neighbor.
To Whom It May ConcernI don't know who you are, but I would like to extend a HUGE Rottie "Thank You" (have your towels ready ;-) ) to whomever bought my banner. It was a very nice gesture and it is VERY much appreciated.
You guys and gals are GREAT, THANK YOU!
In other news: "Haloscan" seems to be having trouble digesting its traffic for the moment, so, to cut loading times, I've switched the comments off temporarily. They'll be back up as soon (or late, as might be the case with Haloscan) as they've got their
UPDATE: OK, comments back online. Let's see if it lasts more than a few hours this time.
UPDATE the 2nd: Sprize, sprize... It didn't... Comments off again...
Tuesday, September 17, 2002
Wash, Rinse, Repeat...The UN has come up with yet another Utopian scheme to eradicate poverty, hunger and disease in Africa. It's called the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD):
The 190-member U.N. General Assembly formally endorsed Monday a new initiative to rebuild and rejuvenate one of the world's most crisis-stricken and war-ravaged continents: Africa.
Well knock me over with a feather. I thought you were talking about the Middle East again. Of course, that's not a continent, but you never know with you Idiotarians.
''I am delighted to join you for this important meeting dedicated to exploring ways in which the international community can support the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD),'' U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told a special meeting of the General Assembly.
"That's "Annan-speak" for "exploring ways in which I can get you guys to give me money that you've stolen from people who worked for it so I can give it to people who haven't", in case you were wondering, which, of course, you weren't.
''What had hindered Africa's development in the past was the absence of resources to facilitate the realization of its development objectives,'' Mbeki
And here's the rare "Mbeki" dialect, expressing the same thing.
Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika said that NEPAD reflected the continent's determination to launch a new development path whose objectives were designed by Africans.
...and paid for by everybody except Africans.
''Africa was increasingly marginalized within the global economy because of its conflicts, the spread and aggravation of poverty, HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis,'' he said.
...most of which is due to a strange African tendency to put murdering each other, stealing from each other and fucking anything with a pulse without protection above unimportant stuff such as food and jobs.
NEPAD aims to achieve 7.0 percent annual growth, so Africa can meet one of the goals laid down by the 2000 U.N. Millennium Summit: halving poverty on the continent by 2015.
Another goal of the project is to invest a substantial amount of the funds in the pursuit of porcine aviation.
The Assembly also urged ''the U.N. system and the international community, in particular donor nations,...
...no shit, Sherlock.
...to assist with NEPAD's implementation.''
African leaders say that about 64 billion dollars in aid and investments are needed annually to fight poverty and disease, and also rebuild the African continent.
Whoa! That's a lotta dough! I suggest you guys roll up your sleeves, drop the AK-47s and get to work then.
But the G-8 countries - the United States, France, Britain, Canada, Japan, Germany, Italy and Russia - have pledged only about eight billion dollars annually, starting in 2006, to help bolster Africa's economic development.
Oh, I forgot, sorry... We're supposed to pay for all of that. Speaking of money, I have this prime ocean front property in Arizona...
NEPAD has also been described as ''seriously flawed'' because it depends on that aid money, much of it with strings attached.
I knew that they wouldn't just accept our money without bitching.
African nations have been asked to promise a wide range of political and economic reforms, including multi-party democracy, free and fair elections, respect for human rights, the elimination of corruption, transparency and accountability, market access and free market economies.
How DARE we??? That is just... INHUMANE!!! What'll the next thing be? Equal Rights?
Several non-governmental organizations, including Action Aid and Oxfam, have criticized Western donors for offering ''peanuts'' in return for those commitments.
Does the expression "take it or leave it" mean anything to you guys?
''NEPAD has been instrumental in mobilizing discussion about Africa, but beyond that we have serious concerns, including the fact that NEPAD has been developed in a closed way and doesn't reflect the priorities of the African continent,'' said Amboka Wameyo of London-based Action Aid.
"So can you just give us the money and let us get back to stoning, murdering, raping and pillaging already? I mean, we're talking about some of our most important and time-honored traditions here, you culti-fascist Westerners"
Blair has already expressed disappointment over the lack of African support for his campaign against Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, who has been accused of forcibly taking white-owned land, mostly from settlers of British origin, and giving it to landless peasants.
Blair has also accused Mugabe of rigging presidential elections and suspending the rule of law - both of which go against the basic principles of NEPAD.
...all of which is true, but we're playing "Real Journalist™" here, which is a fun game involving intensive use of words such as "accused", "alleged" and "suspected". Unless we're referring to something Jews or Americans have done, of course.
At the recently concluded U.N. Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in South Africa, Mugabe lashed out at Blair accusing Britain of continuing its old colonial policies.
''Blair, you keep your England, and I will keep my Zimbabwe,'' Mugabe said amidst cheers from some African delegates.
Fine, Bobby old chap, keep it. Don't let the door kick you in the ass on the way out, y'hear? And ferchrissakes, stop holding out that hat, it's pathetic. Have a nice day.
''Massive assistance'' was needed to combat the scourges of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases on the African continent, added Obasanjo.
Send us a postcard when you've decided to stop stoning women for adultery, you fascist prick.
UPDATE: Alert reader Henry suggests that you read the name "NEPAD" aloud to yourself.
I hadn't thought of that, so now I've got coffee stains all over my monitor, Henry, thanksamillion... I have to admit, though, that the pronounciation of the acronym makes perfect sense.
UPDATE the 2nd: Seems fellow blogger Kieran Lyons has his own unique take on the "kneepad" angle and it's a very good take too.
Unfortunately for Kieran, his tipping me off on this means that he will no longer be able to escape the shame of being on "The Rottie"'s blogroll. Sooner or later, I will find you all. Resistance is futile... One roll to rule them all, one roll to find them... (Misha!, time for your meds!)
The al-Guardian Is Showing Its True Colors AgainFrom today's (dear) leader:
Surviving SaddamThis is often the case with rabid dogs. The solution, however, is always the same.
Again and again, in his war with Iran, in his refusal to vacate Kuwait, in his vicious domestic purges, in his provocative meddling in Palestine and in his battles with the UN, he has acted irrationally, illogically and in direct opposition to his own and Iraq's best interests. A twisted form of egotistical nationalism, in which the state and his own person are fused, a vague, contemptuous aspiration towards pan-Arab leadership, and a visceral defiance and intolerance, steeped in pathological violence, seem to be the main elements of his warped mind-set.Quite a character, this Sammy. Surely anything that would turn him into worm food would be a good idea, no?
But one characteristic stands out above all others.That he's a murderous, rapacious, psychotic son of a bitch that ought to be put out of our collective miseries, the sooner the better?
Since 1979, when he seized overall power, Saddam has proved himself a survivor.Largely thanks to the whimpering, whining and procrastination of the "international community" who'd much rather have him continue to kill, maim, murder and mutilate that actually do something about it, as long as it's "only" Kurds and Jews that he's murdering.
This basic instinct for self-preservation has remained constant and paramount throughout all his rash gambles and innumerable acts of daily tyranny....which the al-Guardian would much rather see continue indefinitely than to let those eeeevil unwashed Yanks do something about it, as we shall learn shortly.
It is a sad irony that Saddam's very survivalist credo may now represent the best hope of avoiding an all-out US-led war in Iraq.The Hell with the goals or the motives, as long as we avoid the war at any cost.
Neville Chamberlain would've been proud. The rest of us wouldn't line the cage of a gerbil with diarrhea with the al-Guardian and its noxious spew.
And it is a surprising paradox that, for a growing number of European and Arab states, Saddam's survival now presents the lesser of two great evils.No it isn't.
The EUnuchs know full well that a war against Iraq will kick them off to the dark, damp corner of utter irrelevance and the Arabofascists know that their days are numbered once Sammy is out of the picture, as he will be shortly after the shooting war starts.
It's touching that the EUrinalians value their own already dubious relevance higher than the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis perishing while they waffle about with their limp dicks in their hands. Not very surprising, though. It's what one has come to expect.
In the urgings of Saudi Arabia and the Arab League, in statements emanating from Paris, Berlin and Moscow, there is a tacit recognition that agreement by Saddam to allow the return of weapons inspectors, preferably before any binding new UN resolution is passed, would be rewarded by tacit agreement to his remaining in power.Kinda sad, then, that what you limpwristed appeasers think is of absolutely no fuckin' consequence at all, isn't it?
Come on, EUnuchs, say it: Who's your daddy? You know you want to.
Even our own government seems to hint along these lines. "Either Saddam deals with those weapons of mass destruction or his regime will have to end," says Jack Straw. "The choice is his." Put another way, the foreign secretary's words suggest that unrestricted cooperation will put an end to talk of regime change.That's what you'd like to read into it, anyway. Let's see about that...
This is emphatically not the US position, as plainly implied by Mr Bush last week. He wants both.For one thing, he'd be pleasantly surprised if the UN, once and for all, would back up all of its own resolutions regarding Iraq, rather than going right back to sleep as soon as it looks like Saddam might agree to just one of 'em.
It's not like any of us expect to see that out of BS Central on the East River, but it sure would be nice for a change.
But the emerging consensus since Mr Bush's UN speech is that a majority of regional and western leaders would far prefer full and unfettered weapons inspections, as part of a UN-directed, multilateral process,...[jump!..] Oops, sorry must've nodded off there. Did I miss anything? No, doesn't seem so... Translates into "inaction".
to the precedent-setting full and unfettered exercise, anywhere, any time, any place, of overweening US military power.Thank you for stating your idiocy so clearly for everybody to see.
This majority of which you speak so fondly and repeatedly, in other words, would rather see another round of ineffectual negotiating back and forth, leading to absolutely nothing, zip, zilch, nada, while thousands die in vain, than it would allow the US to go in and clean it up once and for all.
I'm more and more happy with every moronic statement of yours that you idiots don't have a say in the matter.
This unlikely conjunction of interest has been occasioned not by any sneaking sympathy for Saddam......but rather an irrational, knee-jerk contrarian attitude towards any decision made by the US, combined with a bad case of inferiority complex.
...but by the imperiousness of a correspondingly irrational US policy.Same thing.
Mr Bush's motives and timing understandably inspire distrust among putative allies....not that the al-Guardian would ever stoop as low as to actually provide any actual examples of what is so "suspicious" about the President's timing and motives, but we didn't expect anything else from this vile waste of pulp, did we?
The possible consequences for Iraq's people, the region, and other regimes the US dislikes inspire alarm.As to the "other regimes that the US dislikes", I couldn't give a shit even if I ate 10lbs of prunes and tried really really hard, as to the people of Iraq and other people in the region, they really ought to worry a whole lot more about what will happen once a certain mustachioed megalomaniacal psychopath gets his hands on a couple of the big firecrackers.
Mr Bush's evidence that Saddam has the capability and intent to threaten or attack the US or its allies, and is party to a wider terrorist conspiracy, remains opaque....only if you have the same visual acuity as a myopic bat and are trying to read the evidence readily at hand to everybody with a computer and an ISP in a dark closet after having translated it into a language you've never heard of.
Of course, this would perfectly describe the average Idiotarian trying to come to terms with facts that he or she doesn't like.
Sudden US concern for the UN's authority and international law looks, in a broader context, hypocritical.Nope. It was a clear case of "you asses keep whining about us acting unilaterally in defiance of the UN. Well, here's your own damned decisions on a silver platter, so fuckin' well ACT on 'em already or shut your drooling pieholes!"
But you just can't win with Idiotarians. Either we act and we're "simplistic unilateralists in defiance of the international community" or we consult with the UN and are "hypocrites".
Thank Heavens we don't have any need to "win" their approval!
Not for the first time does the Bush administration's proposed cure appear more immediately dangerous than the disease.Again, we're not presented with examples of the horrible dangers that we face if we go in and pop a couple FMJs through ol' Soddy's skull.
But of course, we don't need any. The al-Guardian says so, so that oughta be enough, right?
If Saddam's tactical aim is to thwart US pressure, and if his strategic aim is, as ever, to retain power,Gee! Ya think that might be his ultimate goal? How'd you come up with that example of sheer genius?
then such divergences afford him a clear opportunity.Nope.
One thing I find hysterically funny as I read through the various papers from all over the world is how they all seem to think that Soddy's "agreeing to inspectors" for the 117th time came as a complete surprise to the President and his administration.
You really think we didn't expect that? You think we haven't gotten that one covered in the playbook as well?
Of course you do, we're all "simplistic" Americans, after all. What do we know?
Well, buckwheats, you're about to get surprised, methinks. Sit back and take notes...
Thus, in all logic, he will open his doors to the UN and work out the details later. Unsatisfactory though this is for some obvious reasons,Such as the fact that it's been tried before. And it didn't work then either.
and for both sides, it is also the best way of defusing a crisis that, for many, still bears the stamp "Made in America".There you have it: It's all the Americans' fault! It's our fault that Saddam is gassing his own population, it's our fault that he invaded Kuwait, it's our fault that he's building palaces to himself and buying weapons while his population is starving to death, if only we'd just sit down and be good EUnuchs and do absolutely nothing at all... blah, blah, rant, rave, blah...
Well... I think you imbeciles are about to get a message "Made in America" and I'm pretty damn sure that you're not going to like it one little bit.
The only thing that I'm more sure of is that I don't GIVE A FLYING, DANCING, TWIRLING FUCK!!!!
Now piss off, EUroweenies, before you get hurt.
Post-9/11 GreedRachel has an excellent post up about it already, and there's not a whole lot I can add to it.
She argues that she can't see why families of victims of 9/11 should be entitled to billions of our taxpayer dollars and I agree with her in every way.
For sure, I feel for those families, I feel for them in ways that I've rarely felt before, but for them to be "entitled" to funds from anybody (at least in my view) they'd have to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the ones they're suing for the funds were in some way responsible for their loss.
Are we, the taxpayers, responsible for 9/11? Of course not, that's hogwash. Are the airlines? Well you might say that now, but hindsight has a tendency of being 20/20, doesn't it?
So why should either party be forced to pay? The answer is as elementary as it is obvious: They shouldn't.
Now don't get me wrong. I gave, voluntarily, after 9/11, all that I could spare, out of concern for those families. That's what we do in America, we're never slow to help out when other people are in need and I'm proud of it. And one of the things that really really pissed me off is when the bloodsucking leeches in "United Way" and "The American Red Cross" figured out that the longer they could sit on those donations, the more interest they would accrue, but that's still not my fault. I've learned. I'm never going to give a red penny to those organizations ever again. The next time, if there, Heaven forbid, is a next time, I'm gonna send a check directly to the bereaved.
But my concern doesn't give the government the right to dole out the money that they stole from me at gunpoint via taxes. I didn't fly those planes into the WTC, the airlines didn't fly those planes into the WTC, so why should we or they be forced to pay?
If anybody should, I suggest that the funds that we've frozen since 9/11 be paid out to the relatives of the victims.
At least that would be fair.
Delivery In 30 Minutes Or......Well, doesn't matter, you're toast...
This story really made my day!
But now I'm left wondering if a Hellfire can lock on to the heat signature of a double pepperoni with black olives?
(link thanks to LGF)
A Day Late And a Dollar Short...that really ought to be the motto of this site.
Nevertheless, I give you the Indepundit and his Daschle Dawdle Watch.
He's going to keep track of Sen. Dasshole (D-Baghdad) and his antics as he tries to downplay US national security for political gain.
For those of you saying "oh yeah, so what?", I'd like to remind you of the rather appropriate effects that Scott's whistle-blowing on the McKinney family and their sponsors had on their political futures.
It's true that it was the media that nailed her, but the media got the story from somewhere, didn't they?
Now THIS Is Bloody Bad News!!!I just got word via Sasha that Bruce and his magnificent War Now is going out of circulation...
I'd noticed that it looked kinda weird earlier, but I thought that he was just messing around with the template. Apparently the news are worse than that, much worse.
I don't have the faintest clue as to what made him reach that decision, but I have one thing to say: Whoever gets him back to blogging can have all he wants to drink, courtesy "The Rottweiler", 'coz I'm gonna miss him immensely.
He can be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org.
I've Got It! By Jove, I've Got It!..."Eureka" might have been a good choice for a headline too, come to think of it.
I've been wondering ever since I started how to generate some nasty hatemail but so far, I haven't been successful.
Our friend at Whigging Out, however, have gotten it down to a fine art already, which leaves me green with envy. The recipe, it would seem, is to write some nasty truths about liberals and hey presto, they come squirming out of the woodwork like crazy.
So, for all of you who, like me, can't seem to make people hate you enough to put it in an email, here's a textbook example (not to mention a damn good read) from our One and Only Whig. (Start with my link, then read the rest. Trust me, you won't want to miss any of it, it's ALL good!).
Monday, September 16, 2002
To Shoot or Not To Shoot...And here's the old format:
Idiotarian Dave Barger of the Pravda on the Hudson is all up in arms (pun very much intended) about the issue of arming pilots:
In an attempt to make America more safe, Congress has approved legislation that will make flying more dangerous....according to Barger, that is, but he's a columnist and you're not, so you better take that as a fact, right?
Earlier this month the Senate passed a measure that would allow pilots to be armed, and the House approved a similar bill in July. Many details of this bill have yet to be worked out, and the Bush administration has expressed reservations about some aspects of it. As Congress considers this measure, it should include a provision to allow airlines that meet certain other security requirements to opt out of the program.By all means... Just let me know which ones are opting out so I can call my broker...
The arguments against guns in cockpits are overwhelming. James Loy, head of the Transportation Security Administration, has identified several issues that need to be addressed:He's from Norm's Flying Circus? Well that's certainly going to lend a lot of weight to his erm... issues...
the possibility of accidental gun discharges in flight,Yep, those pesky spontaneous discharges. I have several and I'm telling you, it's like the 4th of frickin' July every day around here! They just keep going off for no good reason at all! That is, until I got this bright idea about not having anything in the chamber.
the distraction of pilots from their proper role during an emergency,Their proper role during an emergency (such as a raving lunatic trying to take over the plane so he can drive it into an office building) is to put as many holes in the nut as he can in the shortest possible time. That's why we have co-pilots, not to mention auto-pilots.
the introduction of loaded weapons into the secure areas of airport terminals, the cost of initial and recurrent training, and tracking the chain of custody and maintenance of the weapons.I'm sure you can come up with a couple miles of Imperial Federal Red Tape that can keep a few thousand unemployables in jobs. You always managed to do so in the past.
Other questions have been raised in Congressional hearings. Many pilots commute to work by plane, flying with regular passengers. Would they be armed? Wouldn't this be another security risk?Absolutely! I've talked to many a pilot who, confidentially of course, told me that the first thing on his mind on his way to work had always been "if only I had a gun so I could take over this plane and kill myself and everyone in it". I'm so relieved to see that our incumbents have found that out too.
Or, if the gun is to remain locked in the cockpit, who is responsible for maintaining it and guarding the aircraft overnight?I'm sure you can come up with a Federal Program to employ another few thousand misfits to sit around maintaining the gun overnight, singing lullabys to it.
And if it is locked, will pilots have quick and easy access to the weapon in an emergency?Odd... This question never came up when the debate was on trigger locks?
Congress may or may not be able to answer these questions.I think that's a given.
What's certain is that airlines have been working with the federal government and local airport authorities to improve aviation security since last September.Certainly! No longer will the Nursing Mothers of Jihad™ be able to terrorize flight attendants with their breast milk, no longer will quadriplegic old men in wheelchairs be able to escape scrutiny in any of our airports and the avalanche of incidents involving toddlers taking over aircraft armed with plastic M-16s taken from their GI Joe dolls has been finally put to an end, thanks to the vigilance of the Federally Funded (that means money stolen from me and you) Screeners.
This legislation represents a step in the wrong direction.It certainly does! For one thing, it provides actual security. For another, it only involves arming private sector employees already there, so no vote scams built in either.
Like all businesses and citizens of New York City, JetBlue and its employees mourned the loss of dear friends and colleagues in the aftermath of Sept. 11. We also saw an enormous decrease in passenger traffic. Accordingly, we responded with several improvements to make our customers feel safe.Good! Really!
With security enhancements like these in place, arming pilots is simply unnecessary"With Ship Design like this, life boats are simply unnecessary [White Line, 1912]"
My philosophy is that if the pilots want 'em, give 'em to them. They're already entrusted with my life along with those of hundreds of others, surely I can trust them to use a gun as well, given training, of course?
Democracy, the Islamofascist Way:I'll most likely be accused of plagiarizing Fred Pruitt here, but I really really like this format. Tell me what you think:
A teenage boy was killed and at least two other people were wounded in Indian Kashmir yesterday as Islamist militants tried to disrupt the first day of the state parliamentary elections.
"Quick, Abdul, they're having an election!
OK, lemme see... Pencils, paper, rockets... I'm ready!
The boy, 16, was at a polling station in Seri Khwaja, 118 miles north-west of the winter capital Jammu, when militants fired a rocket into the crowd. In Kupwara two men were hurt in an apparent grenade explosion.
They're still investigating, however. It could've been anything, after all. Things blow up for no good reason all the time around Kashmir.
At least 440 people have died since electioneering began several weeks ago.
At that rate, there won't be much of an electorate left by the time the voting booths are closed.
There is little doubt that the National Conference party, a member of the Indian federal government coalition, will win again.
Well... That certainly explains it. We can't have that, after all, can we Mahmoud?
It has barely been challenged by opposition parties. Moderate separatists are not contesting the election and have urged a boycott.
Many shops were closed in the summer capital Srinagar yesterday, where separatists called a strike.
"Hah! You infidels will NEVER win! And to prove our point, we're choosing to close down our businesses and starve to death! Allah u-Akhbar!
New Delhi has made it clear that it regards the vote as a test of Islamabad's promises to rein in the Islamist militant groups, many of which are based in Pakistan.
Seems to me that the results of the "test" are in now.
For the past decade they have fought a guerrilla war against the Indian army in Kashmir.
Not to mention the fact that they've also fought a much more succesful (by way of casualties) war against the civilians of Kashmir, but the al-Guardian wouldn't want to get into that, now would they?
The turnout seemed to be poor early yesterday morning, perhaps a sign of intimidation by the militant groups.
It could have something to do with the likelihood of being blown to Beef Stroganoff if you go vote, yes, but let's not be too definitive, right?
Told Ya So...I've said it numerous times already, but mainly in the comments sections of various and sundry blogs (including this one), so maybe it's time to devote a post to the subject:
Although it is with no small pleasure that I slap around EUroweenies and Idiotarians of all nationalities, there are certain nations out there that I've never doubted the loyalty of. It seems, from my email and comments, that the actual people out there are every bit as distanced from the opinion of the worthless chattering classes as is the case in this country.
The three on the very top of my list are, of course, the UK, Australia and Canada.
We may have our differences, nothing wrong in that, I'm not even saying that we're always right and they're always wrong when we do, far from it, but when push comes to shove, these guys never fail to back us up. No conditions, no blather, no "ifs" or "buts", just "let's get it over with".
I admire that and I can never appropriately express my gratitude to all the citizens of those great nations that have fought and fallen along with us, but I can say that I'll never forget.
I was reminded of that when I read the results this recent poll from Britain:
Public opinion in Britain has dramatically swung away from opposition to a military attack on Iraq, according to the first findings of a new weekly Guardian/ICM tracker poll.The people of Britain know, as well as we do, that the chips are now down and we all have to decide whose side we are on. And, not surprisingly, they're on ours again.
Thank you, you Limey bastards, I love you guys!
Damn Postal Service...Just received this letter in the mail. I guess I should've smelled a rat when the stamp had a picture of somebody humping a goat on it, but I cheerfully opened it anyways:
Dear Secretary-General,Sheesh, I'm moving up in the world, ain't I?
Honey! I'm a Secretary-General! I guess this means that I get to order all the secretaries at the office around? [SLAP!!!] No honey, that's not what I meant! (damn right hook!)
I have the honour to refer to the series of discussions held between Your Excellency and the Government of the Republic of Iraq on the implementation of relevant Security Council resolutions on the question of Iraq which took place in New York on 7 March and 2 May and in Vienna on 4 July 2002, as well as the talks which were held in your office in New York on 14 and 15 September 2002, with the participation of the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States.Sorry, man, but I have absolutely no recollection of any meetings whatsoever with the Govt. of the Thugocracy of Iraq, neither in New York nor anywhere else, for that matter. You wouldn't have a government now if I'd ever met you.
Maybe it's an Iraqi version of the Nigerian Scam Mail? I can't wait to see how much money they want to give me this time.
I am pleased to inform you of the decision of the Government of the Republic of Iraq to allow the return of the United Nations weapons inspectors to Iraq without conditions.I'm sure you are and that's great news. How does tomorrow after lunch suit you, my turbaned little friend?
The Government of the Republic of Iraq has responded, by this decision, to your appeal, to the ap peal of the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, as well as those of Arab, Islamic and other friendly countries....not to mention the direct order and ultimatum issued by the President of United States, George W Bush...
"Noooooo, infidel, do not say that!!! Our most enlightened leader gets his moustache all knitted up in a wad when he hears it!"
Say what? Bush?
The Government of the Republic of Iraq has based its decision concerning the return of inspectors on its desire to...avoid having its ugly butt whupped into confetti...
complete the implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions and to remove any doubts that Iraq still possesses weapons of mass destruction.Oh? How good of you. It's only taken 11 FRIGGIN' YEARS you filthy goat molesting piece of Shiite!
Funny how your sudden change of heart seems to coincide with the massive build-up of highly motivated, well-trained and magnificently equipped troops with a taste for whuppin' Iraqi asses, isn't it?
This decision is also based on your statement to the General Assembly on 12 September 2002 that the decision by the Government of the Republic of Iraq is the indispensable first step towards an assurance that Iraq no longer possesses weapons of mass destructionYep... First step... Now you'll presumably go on to address the remaining steps as outlined by President Bush ["AAAAAAAAaaarghhhh!!], won't you?
equally importantly, towards a comprehensive solution that includes the lifting of sanctions imposed in IraqErm... You seem to have forgotten all the other conditions, haven't you?
and the timely implementation of other provisions of the relevant Security Coun cil resolutions, including resolution 687(1991).The "timely implementation" of resolutions dating back 11 FRIGGIN' YEARS indeed. Seems to me that you not only missed the train on that one, buster, you also failed to notice that everybody else left the station and that the demolition crews have moved in.
To this end, the Government of the Republic of Iraq is ready to discuss the practical arrangements necessary for the immediate resumption of inspections.Tell you what: You guys can go sit in one of Sammy's 50 palaces and "discuss" all you want while we dismantle your weaponry and make sure that you'll never be able to get any ever again, just don't get your loathsome asses in our way, y'hear? It's not healthy.
In this context, the Government of the Republic of Iraq reiterates the importance of the commitment of all Member States of the Security Council and the United Nations to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Iraq, as stipulated in the relevant Security Council resolutions and article (II) of the Charter of the United Nations. I would be grateful if you would bring this letter to the attention of the Security Council members."Please HELP, we're being oppressed! Come watch the violence inherent in the system!"
Piss off, you pathetic whining little sand crab.
Please accept, Mr Secretary-General, the assurances of my highest consideration.Please accept, Mr. Naji Sabri, my American boot so far up your ass that you'll have the taste of shoe polish ruining the flavor of your falafels for a month!
Well... Guess I better go forward this load of bull to BS Central on the East River, they might find some use for it...
UPDATE: It would seem that our friends in the Casa Blanca have already put together an answer to Mr. Sabri.
Translated, I think it means, roughly: Eat Sh*t And Die...
Monday's Edition of the Pravda on the HudsonSaudis Indicating U.S. Can Use Bases if U.N. Backs War
WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 — The Saudi foreign minister indicated this weekend that his country would let the United States use its military bases in a United Nations-backed attack on Iraq, a sign that Arab nations may be dropping their resistance to an attack on Saddam Hussein.So that's the side you Merkins butter de bread! Why didn't you tell us sooner?
in an interview with the London-based Arabic language newspaper Al Hayat, Prince Saud said, "Since Iraq says it does not possess weapons of mass destruction and has no plans to produce any, why doesn't it agree to the return of inspectors to settle the issue which will go to the Security Council?"Good dog... Finally you're beginning to get it...
Iraq's foreign minister, Naji Sabri al-Hadithi, again insisted that any new inspections be tied to the lifting of decade-old United Nations sanctions. "Iraq's sovereignty must be respected, and the inspections must result in the easing of sanctions against Iraq and the elimination of all weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East, particularly in Israel," he told German television.It hasn't quite sunk in yet that you're in no position to demand anything, has it?
But Ms. Rice, speaking on the ABC News program "This Week," insisted: "The Iraqi regime can have no say in what is required of it. We've been down that road before. It's done nothing but weaken the resolutions that the Security Council had passed."Did I mention that I love Condi?
Science Slow to Ponder Ills That Linger in Anthrax Victims
"I want to saturate my brain to keep it working and help it to recall information," said Ms. Wallace, 57, still on disability leave from her job as a mail processor at the postal center in Hamilton, N.J. "My short-term memory is coming back."Asked when she imagined she'd be back from disability leave, she responded: "As soon as I remember where I work".
Her co-worker Richard Morgano says he does not feel so fortunate. The nightmares and cold sweats that marked the first months of his recovery from a probable case of skin anthrax have eased. But his health is poor, his mood dark and his anger high. He avoids people and work, he says, afraid he might explode. "I get too bent out of shape," he said. "My temper is short. Even when I drive, I get road rage."That's not after-effects of anthrax, that's called "being a postal worker".
But only now is the government beginning to study their progress. While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta has drawn blood from survivors to measure changes in their immune systems, it has not conducted comprehensive follow-ups or physical examinations. The reason, officials say, include a lack of trained personnel, red tape and a surfeit of competing demands.Perchance if they cut back on their programs to get guns banned, they'd have more time to study actual diseases?
F.B.I. Makes Sixth Arrest in Buffalo Inquiry
"We have the key players in western New York," said Peter Ahearn, F.B.I. special agent in charge in Buffalo. "They worked together, they socialized together, they lived within blocks of each other. It's a trained group of individuals that were trained in Afghanistan. It's an Al Qaeda-trained cell."Well... For the "Sorry, No Terrorism Here, Move Along" FBI to say something like this, there has to be something about it, I suppose.
Over and over, people on the streets, while wary of talking too much to the journalists who poured into town today, insisted that the five men charged Saturday were good family men, religious, and fond, above all, of playing soccer...."They even helped handing out free candy to the children last Sept...", one witness added, before being unexpectedly slapped upside the head by one of the other Yemeni present.
What the five, all of whom were born here, had in common, according to the F.B.I. indictment and people in the community who knew them, was that they all went to Pakistan in the spring of 2001 to study Islamic religion and culture under the auspices of a group known in Arabic as Tablighi Jamaat...."The powderstains on their fingers, the long unkempt beards... It was just strange..."