Disappointment With America

You know, for all the American flag-waving and the gung-ho patriotism I often display in these blogs, sometimes I can’t help but be disappointed by many of the people who live here in my beloved U.S. of A.  I’m sure that could be said of any nation around the world.  Every place has its share of jerks and morons.  Some have more than others.  I often used to ponder the population of the United States of America and take comfort in the notion that this nation had the least number of jerks and morons “per capita”, particularly when compared to most other places around the globe.  Let’s face it:  this is one of the greatest places on earth to live.

The more I read the news and see our citizens’ responses to the headlines each day, the more I realize that I am not in fact surrounded only by the wonderful flag-waving Americans that I thought I was, but rather I am equally surrounded by a lot of jerks and morons.  I suppose this is to be expected, as we are the world’s melting pot.  We have all kinds here, and that’s generally a good thing.  But such openness also leaves opportunities for the shallow end of the gene pool to thrive and multiply as well.  I guess we have to take the good with the bad.

As I think of themes to write about in this blog, I try to keep a cohesive theme for each one so as not to ramble on in too scatterbrained a fashion.  I know I’m not the world’s greatest writer – this stuff is new to me.  But when I peruse the news each day while eating my lunch, I’m beginning to find that it’s becoming more and more difficult to settle on just one theme.  They way I write, I could probably spew out gobs and gobs of stuff on each news story that piques my interest.  I simply don’t have the time to do all that writing, so I try to be selective where I can.

The jerks and morons that I was referring to above seem to have a knack for intruding upon my daily news review.  As I see stories on CNN.com, and also commentaries by various CNN-affiliated scholars, columnists, and political pundits, I often see the “Sound Off” section that follows each article that I read.  This is the zone where readers can submit their off-the-cuff comments and from-the-hip criticisms of the preceding article.  These comment sections often degenerate into a tit-for-tat combat zone for people to engage in online flaming of each others’ posts.  I confess that I’ve now succumbed to the fracas and often stop eating my lunch for a bit to compose brilliant little gems of “shut the hell up” to those with whom I disagree.  What I’m finding, in retrospect, is that I seem to be alone in my principles out there in the online wilderness.  Once in awhile I see a kindred spirit who spouts off the same things that I was just thinking, but more often than not I’m seeing comments from people that really get under my skin and make me lose faith in this country’s citizenry.

In other words, I think the jerks and morons are outbreeding the rest of us.  This is not a good trend.

And I don’t just see it online, either.  I look out the back window of my house to a playground that is within reasonably close view, and I see jerks and morons “in the making” out there every day.  The future generations of jerks and morons are plentiful, and they’re in my backyard.  What makes them jerks and morons?  Well let me tell you about it…

The playground equipment out there is relatively new – only a few years old now.  Within the 2nd year, there was a group of young boys out there with bricks and boulders (left behind by the morons who built the playground), and these youngsters spent the better part of an afternoon trying to break and destroy the partially plastic playcenter with the huge rocks.  Thankfully, they really didn’t succeed in accomplishing much other than making a shitload of noise, and leaving some battle scars on the surfaces.  Eventually, I had enough and found a way to secretly and anonymously “dissuade” them from continuing.  They hopped on their bikes and scrambled for home.

Another summer, I woke up one morning to find spray-painted graffiti all over the plastic slides where children go daily to play.  The graffiti, much to my surprise, was in English (instead of illegible street-ganglish), but was full of obscenities.  Again, this is a place where parents bring their children to play.  By some miracle (presumably at the hands of the park department), the graffiti was gone within a few days.  Not sure what they used to remove it, but it was gone.  A few days later, there was fresh graffiti right back where it had been.  Some of it consisted of more English obscenities, the rest was illegible street-ganglish that no one can read or understand.  Again, the graffiti got removed after a period of time, and that issue has thankfully NOT resurfaced.

Recently, I’ve noticed a trend where the adolescents in the neighborhood are beginning to use the playground as a place to hide out from prying eyes or from their parents, and have been hiding out within (or underneath) the playcenter to smoke.  At first, they seemed to just be smoking cigarettes – okay, it’s not good, but it’s not the end of the world.  All of us probably knew a fellow 12-year old who smoked when we were that age.  But one morning I woke up to get ready for work, I looked out the window, and there were four young teens near the playcenter, sitting on a picnic table that they had conveniently “relocated” to put themselves more out of sight from the street.  I observed one of them pull out a joint and light up.  Mind you, these kids were YOUNG – ages 14-16.  I got extremely pissed that at 7:45am on a summer weekday, these punks had the audacity to bring drugs to a public playground in broad daylight and light up like they owned the place.  So what did I do?  I put on some clothes and sunglasses and took a walk around the long way to get to the park.  I succeeded in sneaking up on them from their blind side and surprised them.  Sadly, I didn’t catch ‘em in the act of smoking the joint – they must have finished it or tossed it before I rounded the corner.  Nevertheless, I proceeded to scream, cuss, and belittle them for a good 5 minutes straight.  They were young enough that I clearly instilled some fear in them, because every one of them had a look of shear terror on their faces, and they were addressing me with a polite “yes, sir” or “no, sir” to each rhetorical question I hurled at them.  If I hadn’t been so pissed off at them, I probably would have been laughing my ass off at how pathetically scared they all looked.  My parting phrase to all of them as I stormed off was, “You little fuckers make me fucking sick.”

That phrase pretty much sums up how I’m beginning to feel in general when I see the youth of America.  So many of them are gangster-punk wannabes, tattooed and pierced to the gills, pants down around their knees in honor of their prison-bound “homies”, and sporting ball caps turned around their empty skulls at such weird angles that it doesn’t seem humanly possible to keep the things on their heads without duct tape or glue.  And that’s just the teens I see around the neighborhood.

I spend a ridiculous amount of time in bars for some reason, presumably because I like being social and getting out of the house.  Or maybe I’m developing a latent drinking problem.  But now that I’m a bit older, I’m quickly realizing that I’m too old to fit in with the bar crowd, even in places where the crowd is a mix of ages.  The younger, just-turned-twenty-something crowd that I see more and more exhibits the same fashion sense (or lack of it) and the same general gangster-punk attitude as their younger counterparts around the ‘hood.  I realize that it’s unrealistic to expect to see civilized, intelligent people in bars on a regular basis.  If that’s what I want, I need to make more money and become a yuppie so I can hang out in yacht clubs or country clubs.  But I’ve always prided myself in being able to mingle and get along with just about anyone, especially if they’re willing to mingle and get along with me.  You know, the mutual respect thing.  I dig that.  But as I’ve observed the bar scene over the course of many years, I’ve watched a general decline in civility and camaraderie amongst bar patrons.

Once upon a time, a bar was a place where one could go to unwind, have some pleasant conversation, meet interesting people, nurse a cocktail or beer, and just be social.  Anymore, it seems like everyone goes to bars to get tanked, sit around and judge everyone else, and make snide comments under their breath to their “friends”.  Eventually, as the alcohol kicks in, someone somewhere loses control of their faculties and starts a shoving match with someone else.  The friends jump in to either encourage the fight, or perhaps to break it up, but it seldom ever ends well.  I’ve seen this scene repeated countless times, and I’m developing a knack for NOT being where the scuffle is.  I’ve learned how to dodge the fisticuffs.  And I can usually spot the asshole who’s going to start it as soon as I sit down on my barstool.  I can read a room like you wouldn’t believe.

Okay, so I’ve whined about the locals long enough.  I don’t live in a gated community with a country club, so I guess I shouldn’t expect a civilized crowd when I go to the local watering holes.  But what I do get to see is an overall cross-section of middle America going about their business.  If this is what makes up middle America, be worried.  Be VERY worried.  And I don’t even see the real low-income, poverty-stricken side of America.  I can’t imagine how scary that must be.

Between what I see on the street every day, and what I read on the Internet news comments every day, I can’t even fathom how this nation is going to survive in the future.  And I’m not just talking the distant future when I’m wheelchair-bound and drooling.  I’m talking about our future in 2 to 5 years.

The youth in this nation blindly put Obama in office without any thought as to what they were voting for.  They just wanted to see a “brotha” get in there, ‘cuz it would be so cool.  It fit in with their gangster mentality – put a liberal brotha in office, and we can all legalize pot and get high.  We can stop worrying about our jobs ‘cuz we can get more welfare to live on.  We can get free healthcare, paid for by “the man”, whoever that is.  We can get huge discounts on new cars, too!  With Obamessiah as the prez, we can gets all kinds o’ free shit ‘cuz he cool like dat!

The jerks and morons that support this president’s policies and programs have no idea what the repercussions are going to be in the future.  It’s laughable to sit back and remember how all the Obamatons flagrantly LAMBASTED the Bush administration for wrecking the economy.  Apparently, Bush spent too much, according to them.  But I think it’s plain to see now that Obama has spent, and is going to spend, this nation’s economy right into the ground.  When it’s all said and done, Obama’s spending will make George W. Bush look like a fiscally responsible genius.  The only way to pay for all this bullshit is a major tax hike in all sectors.  Sure, the rich will get hit harder with taxes, but so will the rest of us who aren’t rich.

Listen up, all you pot-smoking gangster-wannabes who can almost read this (sorry, this is in English – I don’t speak street-ganglish):  quit getting high and pondering your next fucking tattoo.  Quit expanding your earlobes with hoops so big I could shoot basketballs through them.  Quit worrying about how you can steal someone else’s shit so that you can pay for the parts to pimp out your fucking Ford Focus.  Turn down the thumping kicker boxes, because that sorry excuse for music you’re playing SUCKS.  Please quit blazing down the expressway on your crotch rockets with one wheel in the air and one foot on the seat – stupidity doesn’t impress me.  Quit pretending to be bikers when you’re not – that realm belongs to the Hell’s Angels, the Invaders, and all the other REAL biker gangs that have been around for years.  They’re laughing at you.  And so am I.

And far be it from me to tell someone else to NOT be judgmental, but for the love of God please stop sitting around the bars acting like your shit doesn’t stink, because your shit stinks worse than you can possibly imagine.  So does mine, but I’m not going around in public looking down my nose at everyone who walks into the room, looking to pick them apart.  That is, unless it’s one of you gangster-punk wannabes – you nimrods deserve to be picked apart, if not picked off altogether.  And to the youth of America:  please wise up, stay off drugs, and get an education (if you can).  Learn about this foreign concept called RESPECT.  Aretha Franklin can teach you more about that, if you’ll turn off your crappy Lil’ Wayne CD long enough to give real music a chance.  And a little self-respect should be included in that learning process, in the form of how you present yourself.  Freakish tattoos and sagging earlobes that rest on your shoulders do NOT make good impressions when it comes time to get a real job.  Unless, of course, you consider a real job to be working at a tattoo parlor.  Then it works fine.

I weep for the future of America, and all the nimrods who thought Barack Obama was going to save it.  If I may quote Jack Nicholson’s Joker character in the 1989 “Batman” film:  “This town needs an enema…”  So does this nation.

All The Talking In The World

Back around July 10th, I came across an article that indicated the Taliban would be willing to talk to the U.S., according to Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI.  The ISI still has communication channels to various warlords and leadership figures in the Taliban, including Mullah Omar himself.  These communication channels have apparently existed since the 1980s when the ISI (with help from the U.S.) was supporting the mujahideen in their struggle against the Soviets.

I find it interesting that our supposed “ally” in the war on terror, Pakistan, has had these communication channels at their disposal all along since we first became embroiled in the war on terror in 2001, and only NOW have they revealed that these communication channels exist.  We’ve been looking for Mullah Omar since day one.  If Pakistan had been so interested in helping out the U.S. (which clearly they have not been), then they should have helped us to exploit those channels in such a way that we could have tracked them and led us straight to the head of the snake.  Rather than do that, they’ve kept this trump card in their back pockets and sucked the U.S. for every dollar of money they could get.  We’ve pumped an inordinate amount of money into Pakistan’s government and economy, all in the interest of gaining their favor to help our efforts in the war on terror.  And what do we have to show for it?  Okay, so they’ve let the U.S. military’s supply lines pass through their territories.  They’ve done that much.  They’ve allowed us to pass through their airspace.  I hardly call that a great deal of “support”.

Instead, they’ve connived and conspired to suck us dry, while allowing the Taliban to run rampant in their ungovernable territories.  When the Taliban got too cocky and started suicide bombing Pakistani civilian targets (as well as government targets), the government negotiated peace talks with the Taliban.  That resulted in granting the Taliban the right to impose sharia law in “their” turf in and around the Swat Valley.  The Taliban was given an inch, so they took a mile.  They took a LOT of miles, actually – to the point where they were within 60 miles of the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.  That woke up the Paks, and they decided to push the Taliban back out.  That battle is still raging on, although from what I’ve read it’s somewhat stalemated at the moment.

Regardless, the point I’m trying to make is this:  Pakistan foolishly decided to engage in “peace talks” with the Taliban.  They actually believed that the Taliban was willing to embrace a peaceful solution to the conflict.  The problem is that the Taliban always attempts to use the “peace talks” tactic when they’re on the ropes and they need time to retreat and regroup.  If any overtures are being made by Mullah Omar to engage in “peace talks” with the U.S., you can rest assured that such overtures are NOT legitimate.  They are simply a stalling tactic to allow the Taliban insurgents time to regroup and re-strategize.  I’m unsure why the ISI is even floating the idea of such talks when they themselves fell victim to the folly of “negotiating” with the Taliban.  They attempted it, and they got burned.

Folks, the Taliban does not negotiate.  They do not honor agreements.  They don’t MAKE legitimate agreements.  They lie, cheat, and connive in order to further their sadistic cause.  Obama has already indicated that he’s willing to talk to anyone that will engage him.  If he’s truly that trusting with the Taliban and Mullah Omar, then he’s going to get burned.  And when I say “he”, I mean “us”.  Our troops will be the ones to pay for such a foolish endeavor.  I can already envision some sort of “cease fire” being negotiated, immediately followed by a blatant disregard for it by the Taliban.  Either innocent civilians will pay the price, or our troops on the front lines will.  Or both.  No matter how you shake it, attempting to negotiate peace with people who know nothing of peace is a waste of time.  I just hope our blissfully ignorant president realizes that.

Another interesting article I read on Time.com covered the new strategy that our military is taking in Afghanistan.  Apparently, since the Afghans have become so enraged about civilian casualties suffered from U.S. airstrikes on buildings containing Taliban insurgents, it has been decided by our president that a new tack must be taken in order to win back the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked for the resignation of General David McKiernan, who was the commander in charge of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan.  Historically, our forces under General McKiernan have generally used the strategy of calling in airstrikes on target buildings known to contain Taliban insurgents.  This is safer for our troops, as they do not have to storm booby-trapped compounds bristling with bad guys in every corner.  Using such airstrikes, the bad guys die, and our boys get to go back to base.  It’s a win-win for our troops this way.  Sadly, Taliban insurgents often hole up with civilians, using them as human shields and putting them in harm’s way.  This plays into their hands, because they can use the innocent deaths as propaganda when slamming the West in the media.  Our military has always done a good job of trying to avoid collateral damage and loss of innocent life, but the way the Taliban chooses to “fight” (and I use that term loosely – they fight like cowards, not like men), it often puts us in a bad position.

But there’s a new marshal in town where the ISAF is concerned:  General Stanley McChrystal has been installed as the new commander of ISAF.  And he’s taking his commander-in-chief’s lead in changing the way our forces conduct business on the ground in Afghanistan.  Airstrikes are to be nearly eliminated as a means of disposing of Taliban hold-outs.  The reason, obviously, is to reduce or eliminate the potential for innocent civilian casualties.  This is a noble endeavor to be sure, but here’s the “gotcha” that I see in this strategy.  This is going to force ISAF troops to eliminate hidden insurgents the old-fashioned and dangerous way:  face-to-face, gun-to-gun, hand-to-hand.  If you think you’ve seen a lot of good soldiers die from IEDs, you haven’t seen anything yet when the time comes for our troops to clear buildings and compounds room by room.  Sure, these guys train for this stuff, and can do the job effectively.  But it’s considerably more dangerous than dropping a few smart bombs on a known Taliban target.

Some may say that calling in airstrikes is no more honorable a way to conduct warfare than when the Taliban hides out among civilians.  But my retort for that notion is that we wouldn’t HAVE to airstrike targets in the first place if the Taliban insurgents would come out and fight like men.  Our soldiers would love nothing more than an open gunbattle with identifiable combatants that fight like soldiers.  We could completely wipe the floor with any group of Taliban fighters if they would actually FIGHT.  But they snipe and ambush and plant IEDs, conducting themselves in something even less than guerilla-style.  Their methods are just plain pathetic.  They strike and then run away like pansies, hiding out amongst women and children.  The Taliban are cowards of the lowest sort.  They talk a big game, but when push comes to shove, they run and hide rather than stand and fight.  This leaves us no choice but to choose an equally low method of elimination:  airstrikes.

Frankly, I’m all in favor of bombing the living bejesus out of them whenever possible.  If they nestle in like ticks, then roast ‘em.  Sure, we’ll probably take out some “innocent” civilians along the way, but when it comes down to it, those “innocent” civilians are often poppy farmers, cultivating their cash crop to make a quick buck.  Their money often ends up in the hands of the Taliban, and their product ends up on our streets, in the bloodstreams of countless drug-abusing ASSHOLES here in America.  Incidentally, allow me to take this opportunity to openly insult drug users here in the States:  every time one of you assholes uses a narcotic, you’re potentially supporting the Taliban and Al Qaeda.  Nicely done, you fucking losers.  Do us all a favor and overdose sooner rather than later, okay?  But I digress…

I don’t like the U.S. to be part and parcel to the deaths of innocent women and children – please don’t misunderstand me.  Every time we inadvertently kill innocent people, we create new enemies in those that survive.  I fully understand this.  My take on the matter is that most of these people are our enemies anyway, and I don’t really believe that we are ever going to succeed in winning over their hearts and minds.  Our government, to its credit, is attempting to do more to provide money and opportunities to the average, uneducated Afghan, which in theory should help turn them away from violence and help them become more civilized.  But you mustn’t forget one important fact here:  they’re all Muslims.

Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the West.  I’ve written on this topic many times.  If moderate Islam is the dominant force in the world, then why aren’t the moderates doing more to isolate and eliminate their extremist brethren?  Where is their sacred notion of “jihad”, or “struggle”, for their faith?  Why won’t they claim their “tolerant” faith back from the extremists?  Rather than castigate fundamental extremists and eliminate them, the moderates often side with them, even if they aren’t willing to strap on a suicide vest or to plant the next IED.  In principle, moderates will always side with a fellow Muslim long before siding with an infidel who tries to win them over with money and job opportunities.

I truly wish it were so simple to win over the hearts and minds of Afghans by building them schools and roads and hospitals.  But I’m willing to bet that in that war-torn pile of rubble we call Afghanistan, those projects don’t stand a chance of succeeding.  Who’s going to teach in Afghanistan?  Who’s going to work in an Afghani hospital?  Who’s going to drive on the nice new roads?  Most folks over there don’t have their own vehicles.  Most folks over there aren’t going to be schooled to become doctors.  Most folks over there are certainly not going to worry about teaching a version of Islam to their children that can tolerate Western points of view in any new school we build.

Islam is a lost cause.  All the talking in the world isn’t going to change that fact, and all the painstaking care our troops take to spare innocent civilian lives isn’t going to change the Afghans’ opinions of Americans.  The only outcome of our being more careful regarding Afghani civilians is that we’re going to fill a lot more body bags with American soldiers.  In the end, Afghans will still hate the West because Afghans are Muslims.  That being the case, why not bomb them?

I don’t recall seeing much Afghan sorrow for the loss of 3000 innocent American lives on 9/11.  Rest assured, they’re feeling some sorrow now.  Let them hurt.  Pain is all they understand.  Kindness sure as hell is not something they understand or embrace.

My Thoughts On Obama’s “A New Beginning” Speech (June 4, 2009)

I forgot to set my DVR to record Obama’s speech to the Muslim world this morning.  I wish I had remembered to do so, because I prefer to see such speeches live to observe not only the actual delivery, but also to observe the audience’s reaction.

Thankfully, CNN.com posted a transcript of the speech shortly thereafter, which I promptly downloaded and read.  My first observation is this:  if this were a college speech course and Obama were a student in class, he would probably flunk the speech course for plagiarism.  It’s truly uncanny how much material his speech writers lifted from George Bush’s speech writers.  If I bothered to track down all the detailed records of such things, I could probably match a number of phrases verbatim with phrases snagged from speeches that Bush has given over the years.

What really sickens me is that Obama is going to be glorified for making the same comments that Bush was vilified for making.  I don’t understand it, but that’s how it will undoubtedly play out.  Maybe if George Bush had a Chia Pet designed after him, or a collectible plate made to honor him, his speeches would have somehow carried as much weight as Obama’s “groundbreaking” speech this morning.  I guess if you’ve got slick images and slick catch-phrases on your campaign posters, your words somehow carry more weight than the other guy’s, even if your words ARE the other guy’s.

That aside, as a whole, the speech itself was well done.  The messages contained within are mostly on the money.  Of course, there are a few statements about which I would like to make some comments.  I’ve selected the excerpts that stood out as “gotchas” in my mind, and will follow each with my comments:

“And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

I guess this means that Obama’s gonna scold me for my scathing viewpoints on Islam contained within these blogs.  If Mr. Liberal sends his goons out to censor this blog, folks, then rest assured that Obama is a far greater threat to our civil liberties than George Bush ever was.

“Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion.”

The problem I see with that statement is that it ignores the fact that Islam by its very nature does not really allow for freedom of religion.  With Islam, it IS the religion, and will tolerate no other.  Well, let me amend that.  If Muslims follow the Koran’s rules for “tolerating” peoples of other faiths, then you’ll find that people of other faiths must pay a fee called the jizya, which then entitles them “protection” by the Islamic state.  In our culture, we call that extortion.  Organized crime has used that tactic quite regularly here, offering “protection” to its subjects.  In Islam, this is expected.  This is the “holy” way to accept people of different religious beliefs.  When an outsider pays the jizya, he/she is known as a dhimmi.  A dhimmi would typically have fewer legal and social rights than a Muslim.  So much for convincing Muslims that freedom of religion is a must.  That notion is contrary to Islam.  And if you’re an agnostic, well, then you’re just considered an infidel or worse.  That likely will lead to more severe forms of punishment, up to and possibly including death.  Oh, who I am I kidding?  It would definitely mean death.  They’re good at the killing part.  OFF with your heads, non-believers!

“So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America.”

In my mind, Islam represents everything that America is NOT.  Islam is not part of America unless Islam learns to lighten the fuck up.

“Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.”

Well this is conveniently and blatantly ignorant of the facts.  I seem to recall that the United Nations tried for nearly 12 years to get Saddam to cooperate with his post Gulf War agreements and obligations, using diplomacy to do so all that time.  Saddam thumbed his nose at the world every step of the way.  It’s amazing how many Americans, including our own president, have forgotten that fact.  Obama implies here (and did so all through his election campaign) that no diplomacy was ever attempted prior to our 2003 invasion of Iraq.  That’s complete bullshit.  Saddam Hussein had plenty of chances to respond to diplomatic overtures up until March of 2003.  He essentially flipped us off repeatedly.  This is why we WENT to war against Iraq: because Saddam refused or rejected all attempts at diplomacy.  Obama is one ignorant ass if he doesn’t know this.  What the fuck is wrong with him?  I thought Obama was the intelligent one with the Harvard degree.  How is it that he doesn’t know this simple obvious fact?  Was he asleep all through the 90’s when Saddam was shooting surface-to-air missiles at our patrol aircraft in the no-fly zones?

“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”

Not toward Jews, they don’t.  Islam is as bad as, if not worse than, the Nazis when it comes to anti-Semitism.  No tolerance there, my friends.  The news archives, hell the historical archives, are full of evidence to the contrary.

“Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s.”

SOME Muslims?  I think that’s grossly understated.  While the extremist crowd may be this supposed “small minority” amongst the greater Muslim world, I think it’s safe to say that the rest who do not participate in jihadist warfare still sympathize with the cause, and often financially support such extremist movements.  More on that next…

“For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.”

Zakat, as I learned today, is one of the pillars of Islam.  It is expected of Muslims to offer up a percentage of their wealth as a form of charity, or welfare, for the poor and deprived in Muslim nations.  On the surface, this sounds all fine and good.  Obama wants to help American Muslims more easily fulfill this obligation.

What Obama omitted is that the reason it’s been “difficult” for American Muslims to fulfill zakat is because we’ve learned the hard way over the years where that money is truly going:  to Hamas and Hezbollah, both terrorist organizations responsible for countless acts of bloodshed in Israel and beyond.  Hamas and Hezbollah both do perform charitable functions for the poor in Lebanon and in the Palestinian territories – I’m not disputing that.  The problem is that both organizations also have military wings that commit all the atrocities that you and I see on the nightly news every day.  Since we cannot control how those umbrella organizations distribute their funds, it’s anybody’s guess how those “charitable” contributions are being utilized.  It’s just smarter on our part to freeze that money.  Sure, it causes the poor to suffer even more than they already do, but does it make sense to allow that money through so that it ends up in the hands of suicide bombers?  Those lines of cash flow were frozen for a reason.  Well, according to Obama’s statement above, he intends to resume the flow of money to those types of organizations.  Let’s hope he’s got a plan to follow that money.  I’m not betting on it…

“I know there are many – Muslim and non-Muslim – who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort – that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country – you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.”

Well there’s a statement I can almost get behind.  I used to be all in favor of moving forward and trying to live in peace with Islam.  Sadly, Islam is not in favor of moving forward and trying to live in peace with me.  Muslims are too anchored by centuries of old animosities and grudges, and after 9/11, they’ve given me a grudge to bear against them, a grudge that’s too big to simply dismiss.  Sure, I know that Al Qaeda supposedly doesn’t speak for all of Islam, but like I said earlier, walk into any number of Muslim homes throughout the Middle East, and you’re bound to see shrines and posters on the walls of their martyrdom heroes, the boys involved in jihad against the West.  The moderate majority may not all be strapping on suicide vests or hijacking aircraft, but most despise Israel and the United States just the same, and all the flowery talk in the world from Obama’s mouth isn’t going to change those opinions.  I hope I’m wrong, but Muslims around the world are very steeped in their traditions and beliefs, and many of them believe we are the devil.  All the kindness and tolerance we can muster is still likely to be insufficient to change the narrow minds of the Muslim world.

I hate to point fingers, but the Muslim world needs to step up and stamp out extremism on its part.  The more that we infidels have to do it, the more resentment we build on their side.  Since deep down I know that the “moderate” Muslim world will never muster the courage to stamp out their own extremism (because they quietly encourage it), it’s apparent to me that we need to stay the course and continue striking terrorist targets militarily.  If the Muslim world won’t address the problem within their own culture, then we will have to.  The risk of NOT doing so is that we will again face another catastrophe like 9/11 someday.  You can call that fearmongering if you want to -- it’s a nifty liberal panty waste catch phrase to throw at me.  Like I recently told a friend:  I call it awareness.  If you’ve become complacent just because we haven’t had a large scale terrorist attack since 9/11, then shame on you.  When the next one happens, it’s the complacent people that will be the first ones up in arms crying, “How could we have let this happen?  How did we not see this coming?”  Those are two sentences I heard repeated a LOT in the days following 9/11.  Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

In our post-9/11 world, there should be no excuse for not doing all we can to eradicate terrorists wherever they are.  If that can be done through Obama’s precious diplomacy, then more power to him.  The realist inside of me knows better, and knows that militarily stamping out terrorists is the better option.  12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did nothing to sort out their insolent behavior.  There comes a point where endless efforts at diplomacy, with no progress made, have to be deemed futile.  It has been said that war is nothing more than a failure of diplomacy.  But folks, sometimes diplomacy simply fails.  Military intervention finally removed Saddam from power, and slowly…EVER so slowly, Iraq is working its way back from the brink.  Unless things take a drastic turn for the worse, I foresee that in the future we will not have to continually butt heads with Iraq at the United Nations like we did all through the 90’s.  And it was military intervention that got us there.

As far as Obama’s speech today, I commend him for trying, but he didn’t say anything today that wasn’t already said by previous administrations, INCLUDING the Bush Administration.  And all of those ideas and suggestions fell on deaf ears in the Muslim world.  I don’t expect it to be any different this time around.

Chumming The Waters

Well, prepare yourself for the media shark frenzy, everyone.  Mark my words, the liberal panty wastes are gonna swoop in on this little development.  No sooner did I spout off about how little I care about the human rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees, when I learn that one of them went and committed suicide.  I suppose he figured he was tired of waiting for his fourteen virgins in paradise, so he stepped up the timetable.  31 year-old Mohammed Ahmad Abdallah Salih (a.k.a. Al Hanashi) was found dead during a routine check by guards.  That’s really too bad – I was really hoping that he and I could have a nice game of chess over tea and crumpets.

On a quick tangent, did you ever notice how all of these terrorists have names as long as one of my blogs?  And even when you’ve gotten to the end of their ACTUAL name, there’s always the “alias” that inevitably follows.  I suppose if I were going to introduce myself to a group of Muslims, in order to “fit in”, I’d introduce myself as Maximilian Bartholemew Rufus Xavier Sasparilla Vanguard, a.k.a. WonderBoy.  And that’s still a lot shorter than most Islamic names I’ve seen in print.  I can’t imagine how in the hell they address each other in the Middle East when having a conversation.  I have a theory on this:  the reason that there’s never any successful or meaningful dialogue amongst warring parties in the Middle East is because they spend all their time introducing themselves to each other.  Here, we say, “Jim, this is Ed.  Ed, this is Jim.  Let’s get down to brass tacks and hash this out.”  In the Middle East, they spend the first fifteen minutes announcing their names, and the rest of the time yipping and yapping “Allah be praised,” “by the word of Allah,” or “by the blessing of Allah.”  By the time they’re ready to begin conversing, they’re all so annoyed and pissed off at each other that they end up wanting to kill one another.  Okay, so it’s a lame theory, but it was worth a shot…

Anyway, so now we have a dead detainee at Gitmo.  I can already hear the crybabies coming down hard on the concept of Gitmo, and how the institution is an atrocity by its very name, as if the words “Guantanamo Bay” themselves somehow motivated Al Hanashi to kill himself.  I could really care less about his motivation(s) for suicide.  We must keep in mind, folks, that most of these guys are suicidal to start with.  There have been dozens of reported suicide attempts at Gitmo since its inception, with around four successes prior to Hanashi’s.  Is that our fault?  Frankly, no.  These guys chose a path in life, and that path is death.  They chose to embrace an ideology that involves murder, oppression, intimidation, and coercion.  Nearly any one of these assholes would murder you or me in an instant.  And they would have done so long before they ever became a guest at Gitmo, so it’s a weak argument to say that their experiences at Gitmo have “created” the monsters that they are.  These monsters were created in the madrassas and terrorist training camps found in the barren wastelands of Afghanistan and Pakistan.  They were monsters long before we ever came upon them.  If they’re suicidal, it’s because they were trained to be so.

So again we come to the argument that Guantanamo Bay “must be closed”.  Why?  For what purpose?  The argument I keep hearing from “legalize my pot” liberals is that we must do so to improve our standing in the court of world opinion.  But here’s the thing:  if we do not intend to free the detainees, but simply relocate them, then what have we truly accomplished?  We’ve simply dispersed the true gripe that the “court of world opinion” has with Guantanamo Bay:  that these men are supposedly innocent and should be set free.  I don’t see what difference it makes whether these prisoners are detained at Gitmo, or whether they’re detained somewhere else.  As long as these men are still detained, we are never going to improve our standing in the court of world opinion.  The nations doing the most complaining are the ones that hate us anyway, and probably always will.  We can’t appease everyone.  We need to do what’s right, here.  And what’s right is to keep these animals from killing anyone else.  It’s already been proven that when we set these bastards free, they end up right back on the same battlefields from which they were captured.  And why were some of these guys set free?  Because the liberal lefties and their ACLU lawyers insisted that they be freed.  Why would they want them freed so badly?  Well, the argument has been that these men were never given fair trials.  Now mind you, most of these guys were plucked right off the smoldering battlefields of Afghanistan, with AK-47s and grenades still in hand, but why should that matter to the ACLU?  Let’s not forget the folks that back the ACLU.  I’m talking about such gentlemen as Mullah Louis Farrakhan and the “good” Reverend Al Sharpton, as well as everyone’s favorite media opportunist, Jesse Jackson.  You see, it’s all about the civil rights of the detainees, so they say.  Apparently it’s more important to worry about the civil rights of people who’d kill us all in a heartbeat than it is to step back and look at the situation in its proper perspective.

You know, I wonder how badly the ACLU would fight for me and my civil rights if I were a vicious mass murderer?  I’ll venture a wild guess and say that as long as I were only killing white people, the ACLU probably could care less.  I doubt I’d have Jesse or Reverend Al calling news conferences and staging protests for me to have my precious civil rights protected.  And I’m sure that the fact that I am white would have “nothing” to do with their blissful ignorance of my plight.  But you see, the dark-skinned fellows in Guantanamo, well, they deserve to have their civil rights protected.  Never mind that they’d behead you or me without hesitation, or strap on a C4-packed suicide belt loaded with nails, glass, and ball bearings, and detonate it on a bus or train or playground.  Never mind that if given access to a nuke, they’d take out millions without even giving it a second thought.  Their rights must be protected, or we look like “bad people.”  Excuse me, but, umm, aren’t the guys with the murderous intent the bad guys here?  By locking them up, we just want to keep them from doing any more harm.  Doesn’t that make us the protectors?  The defenders of freedom?  How is it so terrible to try and protect human life?  If that means locking up some really nasty people to do it, then what the fuck is the problem?  If it makes us unpopular, then LET US BE UNPOPULAR.  This isn’t a popularity contest, this is life and death.  Fuck world opinion.  What has any of these nations ever done for us?  We send billions of dollars in aid to all of these nations, trying to “buy” their respect.  And when we lock up terrorists, we’re demonized for it?  Cut off the money, and let ‘em keep complaining.  If they hate Americans, they hate Americans.  All the money and appeasement in the world is never going to change that.  When we keep reaching out to other nations of the world with money, we end up with one obvious result:  debt.  The other result is that these nations never figure out how to become self-sufficient.  Wanna fix this economy?  Let’s keep some liquid capital here and make it work for us.  It’s not doing much to help Pakistan, is it?

Gitmo should stay open, period.  And I think it should stay open in blatant DEFIANCE of all those people and all those nations who are so quick to accuse the U.S. of being such horrible “captors of the innocent.”  These detainees get three square “culturally sensitive” meals a day, the right to wear their religious garments, the right to a Koran, and a prayer mat to pray on five times a day.  Hell, we’ve even put up signs pointing East so that these arrogant killers can face Mecca when praying for our demise.  I’m sure Gitmo isn’t a beautiful resort, but prison isn’t supposed to be.  That’s why it’s called prison.

A high school acquaintance of mine recently put up the argument that Obama doesn’t intend to release the detainees.  My friend pointed out that, “…we’re just looking for the right place to put them.”  I shot back, “but we’ve already got a good place to put them:  Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.”  Besides, aren’t most of our domestic prisons already full?  Yet another reason to keep Gitmo open.  Do we really trust other nations to keep these guys locked up?

In other related news…

I also read today that a new audio tape of Al Qaeda’s #2 man, Ayman al-Zawahiri (no nickname was given), was released to the press.  Apparently old man Ayman has criticized Obama’s planned visit to Egypt this week, where Obama will attempt to appease, capitulate, and reach out to the Muslim world.

One of the more interesting tidbits from Zawahiri’s tirade was when he sarcastically claimed that Obama’s message came through to Muslims when, “…his administration continued to reject the appliance of the Geneva Conventions regarding Muslim prisoners in the crusade war against Islam that they call the war on terror."  This is obviously a direct reference to Guantanamo Bay, and/or possibly Abu Ghraib in Iraq.  He’s implying that we failed to observe the Geneva Conventions with regard to our detainees.  This is the same argument all of the Gitmo detractors have been using all along, this silly notion that we “can’t be a beacon of hope for freedom, democracy, and human rights” in the world when we don’t observe the Geneva Conventions ourselves.

Okay, that’s a cute argument, but I always love to counter it with another one.  When, in all of our experiences with the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or the insurgents in Iraq, have ANY of THEM ever observed the Geneva Conventions?  And why on God’s green earth would we ever let Al Qaeda attempt to use the Geneva Conventions as an argument against us?  It’s completely ludicrous.  We’re not lopping off heads, chopping off limbs, throwing acid into people’s faces, etc.  We got some water up Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s nose.  Was that a nice thing to do?  Nope.  Was it anything CLOSE to the kinds of torture that Al Qaeda is responsible for?  Nope.  It’s all a matter of perspective, people, and I think those who keep harping on Gitmo’s closure have completely lost all perspective.  Al Qaeda horrifically tortures victims just for fun.  We harshly interrogated detainees to extract valuable intelligence to further our fight against terrorism.  KEEP IT IN PERSPECTIVE, people.  It’s night and day when you step back, take a deep breath, and look at the circumstances.  Learn to ignore the hype and the rhetoric, and look at the facts.

Let’s do some comparisons.  The Taliban takes random hostages, tortures them, uses them as human shields, beheads them, etc.  We take enemy combatants as prisoners, and try to extract information that we can use to save lives.  Al Qaeda suicide bombs public marketplaces or buildings to inflict as many innocent casualties as possible just to make “good press” for their cause.  We strategically precision bomb targets based on the best intelligence we can get so that we can surgically remove vicious killers from the earth a few at a time.  The Taliban and Al Qaeda do not observe the Geneva Conventions when they dress in civilian clothing and hide amongst the civilian population, making them impossible to detect.  Our soldiers proudly and bravely wear the uniform of our nation, often times at their own peril because they become obvious targets.

Why am I going through the exercise of making these obvious comparisons?  Again, it’s all about keeping it in perspective.  For whatever “horror” waterboarding may be, it doesn’t hold a candle to the horrors that our enemies have inflicted upon us.  We are nowhere near sinking to their level, so quit making the pathetic argument that “we’re no better than they are.”  What an insult to our armed forces.  We have rules of engagement, the enemy does not.  We’re fighting this war with one hand tied behind our backs, and the people looking to tie back the other hand are all of the liberal crybabies that have no fucking clue what it takes to defeat our enemies in this war, a war that we never asked for.

I’ve about had it with all of the political bullshit with regard to “torture”, “enhanced interrogation techniques”, and Guantanamo Bay’s impending closure.  Leave Gitmo open, leave the detainees there to rot, and everyone please stop whining about their fucking civil rights.  They don’t even know what civil rights are, and wouldn’t respect them even if they did.  Keep it in perspective. 

The Best Way To Insult An American Soldier

Driving home tonight, I pulled up to a stoplight and noticed that the car next to me had a bumper sticker on it that read, “Support The Troops…End The War”.

Now, I understand that the nimrod driving this car is probably thinking to himself how noble he is by “supporting” what’s supposedly in the best interest of our troops.  He’s probably thinking to himself that the best way to “back” our troops is to bring them home.  But when you sit back and think about that bumper sticker, I can’t think of a more effective way to blatantly insult our troops than to display a message like that.  The underlying message that it sends is this:  “Come back home…you’ve failed miserably.”

To expand on that, that pathetic bumper sticker also implies that everything our troops have worked for means nothing.  It implies that yes, our troops have shed their blood and in many cases have made the ultimate sacrifice in service of their country, but the cause isn’t worth fighting for anymore, so let’s bring them all home so that we can shame them by insulting their cause.  That bumper sticker also goes so far as to insult the families of those lost on September 11th by saying, “Your lost loved ones are not worth the sacrifice they unknowingly made on that fateful day.  It’s not worth it to put our troops in harm’s way to right the wrong done on September 11th.  It’s not worth it to make a stand and fight for what’s right anymore.  It’s not worth it to stop those who have every intention of doing us harm again.”

Am I reading too much into this bumper sticker?  Absolutely not.  The message the sticker sends is everything that is insulting, harmful, and despicable to our valiant troops.  Having said that, there’s no doubt in my mind that many or most of our troops would rather be here at home than out on the front lines getting shot at.  I’m not trying to say that our forces are filled with glee to be in a combat zone.  Nobody wants to be in a war.

The issue is this:  we are IN a war that was not of our choosing, whether you like it or not.  We are IN a war whether you agree with it or not.  We are IN a war whether you acknowledge it or not.  We could sit around here with all of our troops at home and pretend that there are no bad guys out there trying to conquer nations and slaughter the innocent for the sake of furthering their quest for ultimate power.  But that kind of “bury your head in the sand” mentality is perhaps one of the biggest threats to our own safety and security, because it’s a convenient way to ignore reality and it’s a total cop-out.

I would like to make something very clear to those of you who seem to think that bringing our troops home is the best way to show your “support”.  Our armed forces do not wear the uniform to march in hometown parades and look cool.  Our troops have not enlisted in the service because it would look good on a resume.  Our soldiers have not endured countless hours of training and endurance testing solely for the sake of seeing if they could do it and then go home.  Our armed forces signed up to do a very valuable and important thing:  SERVE THEIR COUNTRY.

I would also point out that, to my knowledge, there’s no active draft in our nation at this time.  This means that everyone currently enlisted has done so by CHOICE.  Our forces have volunteered to serve their country.  Many volunteered as a direct response to September 11th.  They know the risks.  They know what they’re likely to face upon enlisting.  This is what they’ve agreed to do for you, and for me.  They’ve agreed to defend our country.  They’ve agreed to lay down their lives for you.  I can’t think of a bigger insult then to simply say with a shitty bumper sticker, “Don’t bother”.

It’s uncanny how the Democratic party has so effectively pulled the wool over so many eyes in this country by portraying the war on terror as some sort of sick, twisted, conjured-up quest of the Bush administration.  Bush did NOT start this war, you ignorant fucking assholes.  Al Qaeda did.  Here’s a simple explanation for you fucking retards who seem to have forgotten the good guys from the bad guys:

• George Bush / Saddam Hussein – Saddam was the bad guy
• Dick Cheney / Osama Bin Laden – Bin Laden is the bad guy
• Condoleeza Rice / Mullah Omar – Omar is the bad guy
• CIA / Guantanamo Detainees – The detainees are the bad guys
• Bush Administration / Taliban – The Taliban are the bad guys
• U.S. Troops / Islamic Extremists – the Islamic Extremists are the bad guys

See how easy that was?  All you needed was a quick little refresher course on the good guys versus the bad guys.  Maybe that’ll help put things back into perspective, and make you realize what side you’re supposed to be on with regard to our troops.  Because if you honestly believe that it’s in the best interest of our nation’s well being to just bring the troops home with no rhyme or reason, then you’ve just spat in the face of every soldier who’s fighting for you, and you’ve just desecrated the graves of all those who have died for you.  Furthermore, if you think our troops need to come home this instant, in light of all that’s happening on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan, then you’ve just patted Al Qaeda on the back and said, “Job well done.”

I, for one, support our troops in their efforts to rid the world of Islamic absolutism.  And that means I support their FIGHT.  I want them all to come home safely, too, but our enemies must be defeated, or it was all for nothing.

How insulting it must be for our troops to see a paradoxical message like “Support The Troops…End The War”.  If you’ve chosen the mindset that we should just blindly and ignorantly end the war with no regard for the risks and with no regard for our troops’ sacrifices, then you are NOT supporting our troops at all.  Go and bury your head in the sand.  Our troops can do without such insults at a time when they need our honest support the most.

Signed, SEALed, And Delivered

So Easter is long over with, but the Easter bunny couldn't have delivered me a better snippet of news than to have informed me that three Somali pirates are dead of fatal head wounds at the hands of Navy SEAL snipers.  I got some yummy treats from the Easter bunny, don't get me wrong, but there's a profound sweetness to the notion that three Somali assholes no longer have heads, and the fourth is sitting in a cell somewhere with his tail between his quivering bony legs.

I have no tolerance for assholes who refuse to make a better life for themselves, and instead embark on cruel criminal enterprises to make a fast illicit buck.  Especially when that criminal enterprise threatens the lives of innocent people.  It's going to be interesting over the coming days and weeks to hear all the whining from human rights organizations the likes of Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the NAACP or ACLU.  I can already hear it:  "What about the rights of those Somalis that were so cruelly executed by the American military?"

In ordinary circumstances, I suppose I would be all in favor of supporting such organizations that purportedly safeguard the “human rights” of the little guy, the underdog, the unfortunate.  But these groups are often politically motivated, and not from any of our own home-grown political interests.  They’re hell-bent on bashing the U.S.A.  And yes, I understand the situation on the ground in Somalia is a dire one.  There are few opportunities for the average Somali to make a better life, or to find legitimate sources of income.  It is this dire situation that has driven young impressionable male Somalis to piracy.

But my gripe is this.  The United States of America made an honest effort to help the Somali people back in the early 1990s.  We sent our troops there to help ensure that humanitarian aid was distributed to those most in need of it.  The country had been racked by years of warlord-on-warlord warfare, and there hadn’t been a working government there for some time back then (and there still isn’t).  The gratitude we received for our humanitarian efforts was that 18 of our soldiers were brutally murdered and their corpses desecrated (a 19th soldier died in a separate combat incident 2 days later).  Perhaps you’ve heard of the “Black Hawk Down” incident.  Books have been written on it, and there was a movie made about it.

It’s important to note that Al Qaeda often speaks of this incident, and often takes credit for it.  This is because some of the earliest ragtag elements that later coalesced to become Al Qaeda were there in Somalia when the “Black Hawk Down” incident happened.  In fact, some experts speculate that the reason Al Qaeda views the U.S. as such a weak nation is directly because of this incident, since shortly after it occurred Clinton pulled us out of Somalia.  The Al Qaeda attack on the USS Cole also made the U.S. appear weak because there was little or no response to that incident either.  Al Qaeda even cites the Marine barracks bombing and the U.S. military’s subsequent departure from that base in Lebanon in the early 80’s as another example of how “weak” we are.  Al Qaeda’s propaganda often centers on the notion that whenever the U.S. is attacked, it runs away and cowers in fear.  When a bully bloodies your nose, and you run away, you will likely be perceived as weak.

Now you and I know that our U.S. military forces are anything but weak or fearful.  They step up to the challenge of defending our nation every day, and they do it exceptionally well.  They would have done more back in Somalia if given the chance, but Clinton pulled the plug on the mission.  Our forces have been fighting hard and winning in Iraq, and they’ve been fighting hard and winning in Afghanistan.  And now, we’ve had a successful anti-piracy mission in the Gulf of Aden.

So what’s my point?  Well, I guess I’m just glad that our lame-ass president actually grew some testicles and authorized the mission against the Somali pirates holding Captain Richard Phillips.  I never would have expected a pandering lefty liberal pansie to even consider such a thing as DOING THE RIGHT THING.  He’s been spending so much time trying to make friends with the likes of Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that I’ve begun to wonder what side he’s on.  But our “president” aside, I’m more excited to know that our Navy SEALs had a chance to strut their stuff and show the Somalis what we’re capable of.  It’s a better message to send than the one sent when Clinton pulled us out of Somalia after the loss of 19 good men.

If a nation is going to commit its resources and its military to conducting a military mission, then it should do exactly that:  commit.  Right or wrong, once we invaded Iraq, it would have been a huge disaster to have pulled our troops out too soon.  We already abandoned the Iraqi people in the first Gulf War by first instigating them to rise up against Saddam, and then pulling the plug.  It’s no wonder they all despise us.  Saddam slaughtered them by the thousands after that.  The same can be said for Pakistan.  We supported the Mujahideen fighters (through Pakistan) to rise up and repel the U.S.S.R. when they invaded Afghanistan.  That mission ended up being successful overall, but shortly after that the U.S. pulled the plug on all support, and the people we wholeheartedly backed during the conflict were left with a pock-marked, land-mined wasteland after it was all over.  It’s no wonder they all despise us and eventually morphed into what we now call the Taliban.

The common thread in these instances is that the U.S. got involved, but failed to commit.  The consequences of failing to commit are costly and disastrous.  Some folks argue we should stop sticking our nose where it doesn’t belong.  I disagree when the stakes are such that we’re attacked by extremists and the result is nearly 3000 dead.  You can’t “not respond” to that.  It sends a bad message to our enemies, and it emboldens them.  That means more attacks here at home.  I believe in peace through superior firepower.  Quit fucking with us, and you won’t end up dead.  That’s a message people understand.

I wish we lived in a world where we could all just get along and we would never have to engage in warfare.  Nobody would love peace like that more than me.  But we don’t live in such a world, and we never will.  I disagree that conflict resolves nothing.  It’s a sad last resort, to be sure, but it can resolve plenty when done right.  Conflict stopped the Nazis in WWII.  Nukes stopped the Japanese empire in WWII.  Was it ugly?  Absolutely.  Was it the right thing to do?  Absolutely.  We started neither of those conflicts, but rest assured, we had a heavy hand in finishing them.  We finished them because we committed ourselves to the task, and we got the job done.

Today we find ourselves at war with Islamic extremism.  A larger internal war is about to bust out in Pakistan soon, if things don’t change quickly.  The Taliban is amped up and ready to conquer the Pakistani government.  In Somalia, the pirates are amped up and are taking hostages almost daily.  Our enemies are stepping up their attacks all the time.

So America, are we going to commit to crushing them, or are we going to cower in fear and motivate them even more?  It’s all very noble of the hippie peacemongers out there to try and preserve life, and to worry about the rights of remorseless killers like terrorists or pirates when we capture them.  It’s very noble, indeed.  But it doesn’t work.

Strength is what our enemies understand, and lately, our government hasn’t shown any.  Especially since Obama took office.  I would hope that as we move forward and face threats, Obama follows the example of his single successful decision to authorize the Navy SEAL snipers to handle the pirate/hostage situation.  When you commit yourself to a military engagement, and our forces are at the helm, the world can be made a better place.  But we have to commit, or all is lost.

As we send more troops to Afghanistan, let’s hope that we commit to getting the job done, and not leaving until the job is done.  We’ll do more damage to ourselves in the long run if we send in troops, get our noses bloodied, and then turn tail and run.  In the future, we’re very likely going to be faced with combat inside Pakistan as well.  If that comes to pass, we have to commit to wiping out our enemies there.  The alternative is to bring all of our troops back home before the job is done and hope that the enemy doesn’t succeed in sneaking a nuclear weapon into the country.  Since we can’t even keep the Mexican drug cartels from smuggling dope across the border, I don’t have a lot of faith that we’d be able to keep Al Qaeda from bringing a Pakistani nuke across the border.  We can prevent this now if we commit.

I hope to see a strong message sent to our enemies, and I want it to be signed, SEALed, and delivered properly.

The Countdown To Pakistan's Collapse Has Begun

Everyone, start your doomsday timers. Today I stumbled upon a gem of an article on CNN.com that really couldn't have done a more effective job of illustrating the very point I've been trying to make about the dangerous threat building in Pakistan. For an eye-opening read, check out the article at the following link, then come back to this blog for my commentary:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/04/21/pakistan.taliban/index.html


Now if that doesn't make you squirm in your seat, I don't know what will. Let me recap, in case that link becomes invalid or in case you've chosen not to go read that article.

A Taliban spokesman in Pakistan by the name of Muslim Khan has essentially said that the government of Pakistan is no longer legitimate, and that it is "un-Islamic". Speaking with a CNN correspondent by phone, Khan said that Islamic Sharia law should immediately be implemented all across Pakistan.

In a recent blog, I ranted on at length about how if Pakistan capitulated to the Taliban one inch, they'd take a mile. Well guess what? It's happening. In order to stem the continued violence coming from Taliban extremists against Pakistani interests, Pakistan recently capitulated to the Taliban's demand to make the Swat Valley fall under Sharia law, and the demand that it be governed by the Taliban. Supposedly, attacks and threats from the Taliban would cease if Pakistan would just meet this one demand to cede control of Swat Valley. Pakistan capitulated, and now all of a sudden it's not enough. The Taliban now demands that all of Pakistan be ruled by Sharia law, and that it be governed by the Taliban and its strict, extremist interpretation of the Koran.

People constantly look at me quizzically when I spout off about how Pakistan is going to be the biggest threat to the world's security in the near future. They seem to have no idea where I'm coming from. Well I'm hear to tell them (and you, the reader) that this CNN article proves my point to a "T". Pakistan was foolish to believe that if they gave up one little province, they could expect the Taliban to cease and desist any further attacks or threats. Now that the Taliban has a comfy base in Swat Valley from which to operate freely (with no Pakistani interference), they can proceed with their goal of overthrowing the government of Pakistan. Once they've done that, they will have a ready-made arsenal of nuclear weapons at their disposal to do with what they wish. I'm guessing those nukes won't stay in their silos for very long, folks. Not if Taliban history is any indicator.

So while all of this country's peacemongers and Obamatons have decided that the war on terror is some sort of foolish mistake, our enemies are gaining ground and gaining strength. While the lefty liberal assholes in this country are all wound up about the human rights of Gitmo detainees and Somali pirates, the extremists in Al Qaeda and the Taliban are inching ever closer to their dream of an Islamic Caliphate. While Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and our ACLU are busy looking to lynch the CIA for getting some water into the sinus cavities of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (the mastermind of 9/11), Al Qaeda and the Taliban are gaining serious ground in dangerous territory.

For all his faults, George Bush at least had his eye on the ball during his presidency regarding the war on terror. While Obama is busy running around the White House lawn with his fucking bitch (oh, and the new puppy too), Al Qaeda is laying the foundation for a nuclear-armed terrorist state. Well done, Obama. Keep shaking hands with Hugo Chavez, and keep making overtures of friendship to Iran (who will never give it). Keep on attending global conferences and meetings and making appearances on 60 Minutes or Leno. Because that's what's truly important: to be a "likeable" character for the American people -- the same people who are going to be a pile of dusty ashen corpses once the nukes start flying. I hope your little doggie will be okay down in the White House bunker all that time while you're waiting for the nuclear fallout to blow away. You know, Obama, you're gonna end up having to EAT that little doggie at some point when the food supplies run out. I hope he's tasty. I suggest a little kung pao sauce to make him go down a little easier.

I know the economy is first and foremost on everyone's mind right now -- it concerns me too. I'm perilously close to unemployment myself if things don't turn around fast, so I understand the urgency to focus on that. I just hope, for all our sakes, that somebody's paying attention to the situation in Pakistan. If the Taliban conquers Pakistan (and they're on their way to doing so), the unemployment rate in this country is going to be the least of our worries.

If you put nukes in the hands of suicidal extremists, how much do you think it's going to matter about bailing out the financial industry, or GM? About sharing the wealth? About whether or not some murderous terrorist in a Gitmo cell was insulted by having to wear a diaper? That same murderous terrorist in diapers will be laughing at your dead corpse once the dust settles. That's what he wants. So why should we care about whether or not he got locked up in a dark cell with a harmless caterpillar? Obamatons, quit worrying about the stupid shit and focus on the important shit.

America, how's that hope and change working out for you?

The Cost Of Capitulation

Sometimes, I just hate it when I'm right.

For those who follow my blogs, you're well aware of how much the country of Pakistan deeply concerns me as a potential flashpoint for a major global war. Some developments this week have really troubled me, and they should trouble everyone the world over. The developments are bound to have global implications.

For those who haven't followed my blogs up to this point, please pay attention.

Pakistan, a nation full of more America-haters than almost any other, is a place where bad things are happening. This week, the tenuous government of Pakistan has agreed to cede control of its northwestern province (the place where Bin Laden is thought to be hiding) to none other than: The Taliban! Yes, in order to capitulate to the Islamic extremists who brought you fun moments in history like 9/11, the USS Cole bombing, and the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, Pakistan has decided that they don't want to be bombed, shot, or beheaded while trying to combat extremism in the northwestern province. So rather than face the threat head-on with their military, Pakistan has instead decided to allow the northwestern province's extremist militants to impose Islamic Sharia law, Taliban-style. What does "Taliban-style" mean? Well, it means bombings, shootings, and beheadings.

Think this through to its logical conclusion, folks. Pakistan's government was tired of the threats, intimidation, and violence coming from the Taliban, so in order to get out of the crosshairs of the bad guys, they've capitulated and said, in essence, "If you quit killing us, we'll let you rule your little province, and we won't intervene." The obvious problem with this silly notion is that the Taliban only knows one way of life: murder. So giving them a province to rule will never appease them. It will never be enough for them. The old adage of "give them an inch and they'll take a mile" applies here. Now that this province has essentially "fallen" to the Taliban, how long do you think it will be until the next one falls? Or the one after that? Before too long, the seat of power in Pakistan will belong to the Taliban and their good friends Al Qaeda.

Now I know that I've blogged in the recent past about the Taliban and Al Qaeda supposedly going separate ways, and that the Taliban under Mullah Omar had expressed a desire to distance themselves from Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. This is what the media reported, whether correct or not. And in my blog, I recall being very skeptical about such a "divorce". I figured it was a ploy. Well, for what it's worth, the Taliban's murderous way of life is alive and well in the northwestern province of Pakistan, if you've been following the news there in the last few weeks, months, or even years. It's worsened quite a bit in recent weeks. Whether the Taliban has split from Al Qaeda or not is really irrelevant to me, because their philosophies and methods are very much the same. Murder and intimidation are what they sow, and frankly, I don't see much of a distinction between the two groups now. The Taliban and Al Qaeda technically used to be separate entities, but for all practical purposes they've melded into one mass of bloodshed now. Whether they're together or not, both groups are Islamic extremists and killers.

I would remind the reader that Pakistan is a nation that possesses nuclear weapons. This isn't an Iraq situation where there might or might not be nuclear weapons. Pakistan HAS them. They've conducted tests with them. We've seen those tests. This is fact. So before all the liberals start dismissing my concerns as "typical Republican fearmongering", you'd best think again. There is no question about the existence of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. It was their arsenal that spawned a nuclear arms race between themselves and India. So for all of you who have wondered why I've been calling Pakistan the biggest threat in the world to our national security, I hope that it's becoming a little more clear as to why I feel this way. If Pakistan falls to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, how long do you think it will take for them to start pressing launch buttons? Do you really want to fool yourself into thinking that nobody would be crazy enough to launch that arsenal at us or our allies? If you feel this way, then it's clear that you voted for Obama and that you may as well go back to worrying about when your next welfare check is due to arrive, complements of John Q. Taxpayer. Go back to playing your Wii and leave the security of the world in the hands of those better qualified to understand it than you.

For those who see eye-to-eye with me on these matters, I'm guessing you share my concerns about what it is that the U.S. is going to have to do to quell the Pakistani situation. I'm mystified as to how Pakistan would just give up a province and let the Taliban have it, thinking this would somehow reduce the violence they've been seeing. It's clear that once again, to save the world from imminent disaster, it's going to be up to the U.S. to step up to the plate. The problem is that we've got a panzy liberal in the White House who probably won't do shit about it. Sure, he's planning to send 17,000 more troops to Afghanistan. That's a necessary start. But I sure hope he's willing to go the extra mile across the border and face the Taliban and Al Qaeda head-on. He said he'd do that in his campaign speeches. I can pretty much guarantee you that this will NOT happen on his watch. It's just another lie he told to get elected.

My wish is to see our elite military roll through the northwestern province in Pakistan and wipe out every bit of resistance in its path. I don't see the point in worrying about world opinion on this matter, because the rest of the world is too stupid to understand the immense threat that exists in Pakistan. They're all figuring that the battles raging inside Pakistan are an internal matter. That's the same stupid logic that liberals have been applying to the sectarian violence in Iraq: that it's an "internal matter" and that we should butt out of it. Yeah, that's a nice dismissive way to look at it, but the fact of the matter is that if you leave middle eastern assholes to their own devices, you end up with a breeding ground for the expansion of terrorism. This is what happened in Afghanistan throughout the 90's, and is what ultimately allowed 9/11 to transpire. If you don't see that, then shame on you. The world turned a blind eye to events in Afghanistan after the Soviets left, and what we were left with was a wonderful void in power that the Taliban gladly filled. Within their dominion, Al Qaeda was allowed to flourish. This is exactly what will happen in Iraq if we leave too quickly, and it's exactly what will happen in Pakistan unless someone steps up to the plate to intervene in the northwestern province.

This is not a matter in which we can afford to "butt out". There's far too much at stake. I understand that everyone is focused right now on economic matters, since the world economy is in such a downward spiral. But I ask you this question: how much do you think the economy will matter to you when you have nuclear weapons raining down on you from above? I'm guessing that you'll be a tad less concerned about how your 401K is doing, and more concerned with saving your own ass. By then, folks, it'll be too late.

Our new President had better start focusing on world events in a hurry, or he's not gonna have a world left to worry about.

Should Have Known Better

Tonight as I write this, I've just finished watching a documentary on the National Geographic Channel called "Inside Saddam's Reign Of Terror". It highlighted the reign of Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party in Iraq from 1979 thru 2003. It included a lot of testimonials from Iraqi citizens who witnessed Saddam's brutality firsthand. It was a disturbing documentary to watch.

I admit that I have no love for the Iraqis, but I think it's a little clearer to me why they're such a brutal and violent people. It's likely they are this way because it's all they've ever known. Fear, mistrust, and extreme cruelty were a way of life for Iraqis under Saddam's rule for nearly an entire generation. I find myself conflicted, wanting to feel sympathy for the Iraqi people, but not quite getting there entirely. One would think that after such a long period of suffering, fear, and misery, that once the coalition lifted the black cloud of Saddam's rule from their shoulders in 2003, the Iraqis would never want to look back to that way of life. One would think that they'd look forward to a new day, a new life, and would embrace a potential world where people could think and speak freely. One would think that they'd desperately seek a world where there was no longer a need for fear. One would think that nearly everyone who managed to survive Saddam's reign would jump at the chance to breathe easy and renew their hopes for a better life.

That being said, it's amazing how quickly in 2003 the population of Iraq devolved into even more cruelty and brutality than that which Saddam left behind when he fell from power. I'm inclined to think that this tendency toward inhuman brutality was a learned behavior, learned firsthand from the Baathist secret police and the military. Their deeds and methods became well known not only in Iraq, but eventually around the world. When insufferable violence is all you ever know, I suppose it's hard for someone to swoop in and impose a world where that no longer exists. It's probably too foreign to even grasp.

I guess I have the luxury of waxing philosophic about these matters because I've never been exposed to that kind of world firsthand. Sure, I read about it, and I see it on TV. But I've never been there, nor do I want to be. I don't pretend to understand a world I've never seen or interacted with. Well, maybe I do purport to have an understanding here in my blogs. I guess the best way to describe it is that I'm trying to gain such an understanding. It's hard for me to get there, since I have a hard time relating. In my world, when some bastard does something cruel or inhumane to another, I expect to see justice and see that bastard pay for the crime. In Iraq, it was the "authority figures" that were responsible for all the cruel or inhumane acts. Who could an Iraqi turn to for justice when the very people that were "responsible" for doling it out were the same ones committing the crimes? If a person dared to speak up and demand anything, that was it for them. That person was as good as dead (if they were lucky).

I once got into a debate with liberal co-worker about the nature of the people in Iraq. I undoubtedly got into one of my rants about my disdain for the Middle East in general, and likely used the examples above as points of argument. I think I had described how most of the civilized world has gotten so far beyond where the Middle East culture is in terms of humanity (I know that's not even remotely true, but I'm trying to believe it). My co-worker's response was, "Well, they have to LEARN. Europeans have fought countless wars over the centuries, and eventually after people have had enough of warfare and suffering, they LEARN to change." I suppose there's a minscule shred of truth in that. Europe, for what it's worth, hasn't had a major armed conflict (that I can think of) for awhile with the exception of the Balkan conflict in the late 90's. Now they've got the growing European Union, which I suppose is a far cry from the way things were only a few decades ago. Things are hardly perfect, but I see such developments as an attempt at progress, if nothing else. But I guess I can't entirely agree that the Iraqi people need more time to "learn" how to embrace a change in their way of life. In my opinion, they've had plenty of time to "learn" what not to do while they lived under Saddam's rule. Obviously, they didn't learn much.

So what's my point in all of these seemingly random meanderings? Well, with the Bush administration gone, and Obama about to yank our troops out of Iraq, many are now wondering if it was worth it to depose Saddam. According to polls, it appears that most Americans do not. Was it worth all the bloodshed? Was it worth sending thousands of American troops to their deaths? Was it worth the deaths of many thousands of Iraqis, both combatant and civilian? Did the U.S. "learn" anything in this whole conflict?

Well, I can honestly say that after watching the documentary about Saddam Hussein tonight, deposing him was definitely a good decision. I don't think most Americans have an appreciation for what a sick fuck that man was. They hear the stories, and see a few quickly flashed photos of dead Iraqi civilians, and they say, "Yeah, he was evil. But he was no threat to the U.S." From what I just saw, he was a threat to anyone and everyone. We can consider ourselves lucky that his oppression didn't make it too far beyond his own borders. It's unlikely that Saddam would have been successful in dominating the entire world, in the way that Adolf Hitler was striving to accomplish back in WWII. Many of Saddam's neighbors had no use for him, and would likely have put down any attempt by him to expand his empire. That's essentially what happened in the first Gulf War. It's important to note that while the U.S. made up a significant portion of the coalition in that war, there were a number of nations that joined our efforts, including some of his neighbors. So was Saddam truly a threat that needed to be dealt with after 9/11? That is the key question on many American minds.

I suppose the answer to that question is best answered with another question: What if we had never invaded Iraq in 2003? Would the world be a better place? Would the U.S. have made any more headway in the war on terror?

If you look at how things developed, I don't believe we'd have been any better off in the war on terror had we left Iraq alone. We obviously still would not have captured or killed Bin Laden by now. Everybody thinks that thousands more troops in Afghanistan would have made some sort of enormous difference, and that Bin Laden would have been taken out if we had more resources there. I feel the war in Iraq has had little bearing on developments inside Afghanistan. Sure we've had fewer troops there, but in the initial months (and even years) after we ousted the Taliban in late 2001, the majority of the surviving elements of the Taliban and Al Qaeda either went underground or fled to Pakistan. Since we were (and are) unable to pursue the enemy into Pakistan, we'd have had countless thousands of American troops in Afghanistan with no obvious enemies to fight. Most of the enemy were either dead, hiding, or sitting across the border in Pakistan flipping us off. Would it have made sense to have kept all those American troops in Afghanistan, when for all practical purposes we'd killed off every bad guy we could reasonably find? We would have probably lost more soldiers from land mine incidents than anything else there at that point. The country is still littered with mines leftover from the days of the USSR's invasion. I suppose our troops could have turned their efforts to clearing all that shit out, but the purpose of the military's presence there was to FIGHT TERRORISM. It's kinda hard to fight it when there's nobody there. You can argue all day about whether Iraq was a necessary fight or not, and whether going forward it will be judged a success or an "abject failure" as a friend of mine once described it. I feel that deposing Saddam needed to happen sooner or later. I don't feel our time in Iraq has adversely affected the outcome in Afghanistan. We may have thinned out our presence there, but we never actually LEFT. As threats have been identified, we've mopped 'em up.

I suppose if we'd have kept more troops in Afghanistan and focused more on rebuilding efforts, we may have made it harder for the Taliban to win the hearts and minds of most Afghans. But let's face it, folks, the Taliban didn't take control of Afghanistan the first time by winning any hearts and minds. If you don't know the history of the Taliban's rise to power, they took control by brutal force and they maintained control through Islamist oppression. While our forces may be thin in Afghanistan today, we've at least done our best to win the hearts and minds of Afghans. Our military has always done that whenever possible. If we made any major mistake in the invasion of Afghanistan, it was failing to blockade the border with Pakistan first with large numbers of our troops. It's a huge border, and sealing such a porous border is easier said than done. But we came in from the south and the north (as I recall it), and we counted on Afghan elements aligned with us to hold the border with Pakistan. THAT, more than anything else, was our fatal mistake. It was those "friendly" Afghan elements that allowed Bin Laden and his cronies to slip across the border into Pakistan. They betrayed us. And why wouldn't they? Bin Laden and friends were fellow Muslims. We Americans were infidels. There's no way that we should have trusted the Afghans to side with us and take out Bin Laden. We should have been at that border to lock it down near Tora Bora. But as I always point out in my blogs, hindsight is 20/20. Now we know better. We didn't have the luxury of knowing the future back then, so there's no point bitching about it, liberals.

If I had my way, we'd have chased those bastards into Pakistan and kept kicking ass eastward until we got to the border with India. Then we could have handed over Kashmir to India and said, "With our compliments." But the consequences of invading Pakistan would have been far more bloody and horrible than Iraq could ever dare to be. We were wise to stay out of Pakistan in many respects, but I feel (and have always felt) that Pakistan is the true source of all our extremist troubles. I suspect we'll be involved in a war with Pakistan sooner or later, especially if the current government falls from power and extremist elements get a foothold. If that happens, the world is in serious trouble. For now, I like our current strategy of remote-controlled missile strikes on high value targets inside Pakistan. I say keep launching missile attacks from drones until we've weakened the Taliban and Al Qaeda leadership to such an extent that they can't effectively organize anymore. I hope our dingbat new president doesn't put a halt to those missions. At least it lets us take out bad guys without putting our troops directly in harm's way. I view these drone attacks as our answer to the enemy's IED attacks. The enemy reaches out and touches us with IED's, and we reach out and touch them back with precision strikes from drones. If the insurgents won't come out and fight us like soldiers, then the hell with it. Let's keep launching missiles at 'em. If they decide to try and engage us in a proper ground war, then we can readily meet that challenge and wipe the floor with the panzies.

As far as Iraq goes, a hasty withdrawal is clearly a bad idea. I hope even you die-hard liberal peace-mongers can see the truth in that. But the good news is that through our military's hard work and sacrifices, we've made a lot of headway in Iraq towards getting a government established. Iraq has a lot of work to do, but maybe the Iraqis will eventually learn to do what my liberal co-worker described. Maybe the Iraqis "have to learn" how to live with each other. If they don't, then shame on them. They will have learned nothing from the Saddam Hussein era, and that's a shame. From what I've seen tonight of Saddam's reign, the Iraqis should definitely know better.

Strike One Against Our New President

Okay, strike one against Obama. It sure didn't take long.

One of his first orders as president was to hold off on the tribunals of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay and have all their cases "reviewed". The thinking, as I understand it, is that many or all of their cases will likely be thrown out because these animals weren't given a "proper trial". One of Obama's ACLU buddies is even demanding that all detainees be freed, regardless of who they are or what their crime. It's important to note that among the distinguished "guests" at Gitmo is none other than Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. For those of you who don't know who that is (and shame on you if you don't), he's the most valued Al Qaeda terrorist we've captured to date. KSM is considered the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks. I've read about his involvement in the attacks while reading the 9/11 Commission Report -- he was among those at the core of the plot. Another fine, upstanding citizen of no country in particular who's detained there is Ramzi Binalshibh, another major catch from Al Qaeda. He was also a major player in 9/11.

I guess I'm not clear on why, after all of this nation's efforts to scour the earth and capture these slippery terrorist assholes, we now have a president who's more than ready to arbitrarily cut them all loose. WHAT THE FUCK???? Am I the only person in this country who sees the madness in this decision? I hope upon hopes that after the "reviews" of these detainees are complete, somebody wiser than our fucked up new president realizes that we should keep these fucks behind bars, and that that wiser person is in a position to put the brakes on their release.

I DARE one of you Obama fans to provide me with an explanation as to how this is a good idea. PLEASE comment here and tell me why we should cut all those Gitmo animals loose? I challenge you to make sense while you explain it, because I bet you can't do it.

It's a mystery to me why everyone thinks all the detainees held at Gitmo are somehow innocent people who have done nothing wrong. Trial or not, you must understand that many of those detainees were caught with GUNS IN HAND in Afghanistan at the start of the conflict, shooting at our troops. The rest have been caught through extensive surveillance and detective work with all kinds of overwhelming evidence of their involvement in terrorism. These are not a bunch of guys that we just grabbed off some foreign street indiscriminately and labelled them "bad guys". These criminals are the real deal. One does not find himself at Gitmo for running a red light, or for shoplifting. The thugs held there are extremely focused, determined, trained terrorists. The U.S. has spent a lot of time, resources, and has shed a lot of blood, to get these animals into detention. And now our new president thinks these fucks deserve to be cut loose because they were not given a trial?

I would like to point out that these animals refuse to acknowledge, accept, or respect our government, its justice system, or its court system, whether civilian or military. They mock the proceedings at every turn when put into a courtroom situation, and they openly admit their deeds in the courtroom even without having to ask them. If they essentially refuse to cooperate and be "fairly tried" in our courts, then why should we bother? THESE ARE MURDERERS. They admit it. I say let 'em rot. At the least, don't let the fuckers loose. It's not like they're gonna go and behave themselves when cut loose.

Obama, I was willing to give you a chance to prove yourself once in office. This is not a good start.

Tidbits From A Miserable Wretch

I was asked recently why I haven't posted any blogs for awhile. I guess I'll conveniently blame it on the holidays. Everyone's busy during the holidays. But above and beyond that, I haven't read too many news headlines that have pissed me off enough to warrant time at the keyboard venting. But just for the hell of it, I'll make a few comments. I do have some stuff to gripe about, which is, well, what I do best.

First of all, the Israel/Gaza conflict. I say GO ISRAEL! Fuck those Palestinian bastards up! Bomb them back to Allah for once and for all. Screw 'em. Israel extended their hand in peace countless times over the past few years to try and work things out, and Hamas wouldn't have it. Fuck 'em. They all deserve to be slaughtered like the worthless fucking animals that they are. I fucking hate Muslims. Let them all burn painfully. Their stupid-ass fucking cause is the reason that the Muslim world hates us in the first place. I have no sympathy for assholes that suicide-bomb innocent people, or that carelessly launch rockets at civilian targets with no remorse, rhyme, or reason. If you want to get to the "core" of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, it has to do with Israel taking over and occupying Palestine a number of years ago. Here's my thing: if the panzy-ass Palestinians wanted that land so fucking bad, they should have fought harder to keep it in the first place. They LOST. Those fuckers need to get over it and take whatever offers of peace (and land) they can get. It's not Israel's fault that their forefathers were worthless panzy combatants. Too fucking bad. YOU LOST, assholes. Accept your fucking fate. GO ISRAEL!

Second of all, I hope all of you people who voted for Obama have gotten your orders in for the commemorative coins and plates with Obama painted all over 'em. Get your orders in quick! They're only available for a limited time! What a pathetic joke. I don't remember seeing such crap sold when any of our previous presidents were elected (no matter which party it was). What makes fucking Obama so special? He hasn't even done anything yet. Oh, and here's an interesting development. I read today that he wants to give everyone a $500 tax credit as part of his "economic stimulus" package. WHAT???? Is he actually thinking that this is an original idea? George Bush gave us all two such tax credits/refunds during his last term as part of his economic stimulus packages. So let me understand this. George Bush is an idiot who did nothing right, according to all of you Bush-bashers. But now Obama does the SAME FUCKING THING as Bush, and he's some kind of fucking hero with his "out of the box" ideas? WhatfuckingEVER! I can't wait to watch Obama fall flat on his fucking face with all of his bullshit "change". While running for office, Obama promised all along to END THE WAR, period. Now he's talking about phasing troops out of Iraq and sending more troops to Afghanistan. Umm, geez, Barack. Bush was already doing BOTH all along. Some promise to END THE WAR. It's too bad that Obama is too fucking ignorant to realize that you CAN'T END THIS WAR. It's gonna be waged against us no matter what we do. We're INFIDELS, people. Muslims hate us all simply based on that premise alone. They don't give a fuck whether you're Democrat or Republican. They WANT YOU DEAD. Sure, any dipshit running for office can promise to "end the war", but it can never end. George Bush said as much at the beginning of all this, just after September 11th. And you know what? He's RIGHT. Imagine that. What's Barack been right about so far?

Okay, so I'm trying to think of other stuff that's pissed me off in the last month or two, but nothing else is coming to mind. The economy sucks, I guess that upsets me. I blame that almost squarely on the assholes on Wall Street that can't figure out how to make the economy work. I thought these people were experts in financial matters. Their investment strategies are all based on unfounded FEARS. Some company hiccups or farts, and the whole market drops like a rock as a result. What the hell is THAT? This whole economic mess started with the housing sector, or more specifically, the mortgage meltdown. Everything else tumbled from there. Now we've got countless people out of work and/or homeless. I may be next, and so could you. The government steps in with gobs of rescue money, and still none of these banks or financial firms seems to be making anything work. I'm under the impression that these Wall Street "experts" don't know any more about the economy than I do. And that's pretty bad, because I'm the first to admit that I don't know squat about economics. I sure hope this mess turns around soon, or we're all going to have a lot more to complain about.

But don't worry, everybody. We've got a new president waiting in the wings to fix EVERYTHING. Because, you know, he's such a fucking expert. After all, he's the Messiah, isn't he?