Winning The War On Terra

Rejecting a prosecution request for a severe sentence, a panel of military officers sentenced the convicted former driver for Osama bin Laden to five and a half years in prison on Thursday. The sentence means that the first detainee convicted after a war crimes trial here could complete his punishment by the end of this year.

Who the fuck is Osama Bin Laden? That name sounds vaguely familar but I'm having a hard time placing it...was he the driver for Saddam Hussien? Come to think of it, who the hell was Saddam Hussien? If memory serves me, Saddam was the guy who died and made the world a safer place, but the details of just how his death made the world safer elude me in much the same fashion that Osama eludes our crackerjack anti-terra war machine.

Nearly seven years after the start of our War on Terra we finally see some results- we have convicted Osama's driver of being Osama's driver, something that he freely confessed to , stating that he felt he had two choices:

-Drive Osama and face punishment should he be caught by anti-Terra authorities...

-Stop driving Osama and take a bullet in the back of the head.

For that, he was detained at Gitmo for over 61 months- without charges- while BushCo fabricated a travesty of a military tribunal system; one that allowed hearsay and evidence produced under torture to be introduced into the trial and disallowed rights guaranteed by the Geneva Convention. BTW, what the hell is the Geneva Convention?

With a rigged system, a secretive prosecution and almost six years to build it's case, the BushCo Justice Squad barely managed to convict Hamdan of what he had admitted to already...in fact, it took them so long to do so that Mr. Hamdan has already served the majority of his sentence and is eligible to be released in a matter of months -unless BushCo exercises the right it has granted itself, allowing our Freedom Spreaders to keep anyone in jail for any (or no) reason for any amount of time, all at the whim of our Glorious Leader and his string-pullers.

Given the time frame of this first tribunal and that there are approximately eighty other Terra suspects awaiting "trial" at Gitmo, we can expect justice to be served to all the Gitmo defendants sometime in the next five hundred and sixty-odd years.

Freedom Spreaders like to claim that Terra-ists don't deserve fair trials- after all, they are Terra-ists- but how do we know that they are Terra-ists if we don't present evidence, allow for defense and have hearings ( aka trials) to establish guilt?

The easiest way, it once seemed, would be to torture the guilt into our prisoners but the world is full of squeamish liberal pussies who blanch at the idea of using medieval interrogation techniques to wrest confessions out of captives- don't these hand-wringing closet Socialists remember Tomas Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition of the late 1400's? That dude kicked ass- almost everyone he tortured was found guilty. Post-humously.

At the behest of the Roman Catholic Church, Torquemada was amazingly succesful at using "advanced interrogation" to bleed confessions out of Jews and heretics- like BushCo, Torky had rigorous Church-imposed guidlines to ensure he didn't Spread Godliness on the innocent:

If you see that your neighbors are wearing clean and fancy clothes
on Saturdays, they are Jews.
If they clean their houses on Fridays and light candles earlier than
usual on that night, they are Jews.
If they eat unleavened bread and begin their meal with celery and
lettuce during Holy Week, they are Jews.
If they say prayers facing a wall, bowing back and forth,
they are Jews.

I mean, if you don't want a Vatican Death Squad to confiscate your property and burn you at the stake, then simply don't wear clean clothes on Saturday. How hard is that?

Of course, no one hates or persecutes Jews or any other ethnic minority anymore, so the code pasted above needs to be updated in order to persecute liberals, liberals being the direst threat facing Freedom at this moment in time:

If you see that your neighbors are not wearing flag pins on their lapels, they are Liberals.
If they place recyclables outside on Fridays and use compact flourescent bulbs,
they are Liberals.
If they eat unbleached bread and begin their meals with celery and
arugula , they are Liberals.
If they don't drag God into every discussion regardless of topic, setting or context ,
they are Liberals.

Freedom Spreaders take note: Your neighbors may be Liberals...your spouse and/or children may be falling under the nefarious sway of Troop-Hating Recycling Cultists and Anti-American Vegetarians at this very moment!

Has your daughter taken to riding a bicycle lately, muttering about the so-called "high price of gas?" If so, buy a Hummer and use it to drive her to a convent! If we don't keep using gasoline, we won't have any reason to build oil rigs on the Florida coast and the Terra-Lovin' Liberals will have won.

Don't let that happen. Let Freedom Spread!

News at Five

December 7, 1946, the fifth anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor:
A bedraggled President Harry S. Truman addresses a frustrated, angry American public; attempting to mollify the citizens, Truman points out that the number of Japanese attacks on Hawaii have dropped in recent months and that at some point in the next one hundred years Hawaii will become a safe, hospitable vacation destination.
As he delivers this speech, a Japanese torpedo bomber sinks a small American tourist vessel, killing seven; including a movie star and a millionaire and his wife.

Three days later, amid a roar of public outrage, Truman resigns in disgrace.



Obviously, I made that up. But one needn't make stuff up if one wants to experience the falsification of history- one needs only listen to BushCo as it describes our "victory" in Iraq.
Once again, the mission is accomplished, whatever it was.

He said recent troop reinforcements had brought about "a major strategic victory in the broader war on terror".The speech comes amid criticism in the US of the war, with some opponents pointing to its high cost. In his speech, Mr Bush dismissed what he called "exaggerated estimates".

He said: "The costs are necessary when we consider the cost of a strategic victory for our enemies in Iraq."

I am not sure what he means by that last statement. Since most of our enemies in Iraq are Iraqis, Bush seems to be arguing that our multi-trillion dollar expenditure is justifiable because it's costing the Iraqis a bundle too. Think about that.


Bush points to our progress:

Mr Bush argued that fighting Islamic militants in Iraq helped to prevent attacks on targets in the US.

"The terrorists who murder the innocent in the streets of Baghdad want to murder the innocent in the streets of American cities," he said.

Meanwhile, as Bush was speaking of "terrorists who murder the innocent in the street":

..near the northern city of Kirkuk, US troops shot dead three Iraqi policemen by mistake, an incident officials described as "a tragic accident, which was sincerely regretted".


Oops. Sorry about that.

On Monday, Dick Cheney went to Iraq to discuss the progress we are making towards "freedom and security" , but his visit was overshadowed by a series of bombings and mortar attacks that left at least 78 Iraqis dead.

The UN reports that the number of Iraqis applying for asylum doubled from 2006 to 2007:

Iraqis were the largest group among asylum seekers to the world's industrialised countries for the second year running, according to a UN report.

More than 45,000 Iraqis applied for asylum in 2007, up from 22,900 in 2006, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) said. But they make up only 1% of some 4.5 million Iraqis uprooted by war.

Math Time:

4.5 million Iraqis displaced by the war = 4.5 million Iraqis who have lost their homes due to the actions of the United States= 4.5 million Iraqis with a legitimate grudge against the USA.

When those 4.5 million refugees speak to their children of America, what sort of tone do you think that they will use?

What will they say?

"God Bless America?"

The Luck of the Irish

What could be luckier than having your death sentence commuted?
Back in ye olde days, if an Irishman on Death Row was lucky, he could avoid the gallows by taking advantage of the Crown's travel program known as 'transportation'; a practice which provided poor persons and criminals with wealthy landowners that they could work for in exotic locales such as Van Diemen's Land; Sydney; Georgia or Boston.

Irish women were also 'transported' . Lucky them.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back in 1960, political pundits were asking this question: " Is America ready to elect an Irish Catholic to the office of President?"
We were, and John F. Kennedy moved into the White House.

Things didn't work out so well for JFK personally, but one thing is certain:
We are really lucky that George Bush wasn't President during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

There's a striking parallel between the question asked in 1960 and a certain question being raised during the current election season.
If we are lucky, the answer will be 'yes' and the parallels will end there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I played a great many songs on the radio this weekend. If you were lucky, you heard:

The New Breakfast Snob, 16 March, 2008

Snakefinger- 36-22-36
Alvin Lee- Education
Sharon Shannon-Blackbird
Jethro Tull- Cold Wind To Valhalla
Loreena McKinnett- Gates of Istanbul
Soft Boys- When I was a Boy
Alan Parsons- Hyper-Gamma Space
Jeff Beck-Freeway Jam
Moving Hearts- The Storm
Television- Prove It
Pretty Things- Pure Cold Stone
Iron Butterfly- Shady Lady
Claanad- Together We
XTC- Dear God
Steeleye Span- Lowlands of Holland
Fairport Convention- Tam Lin
Pogues-Sunny Side/Sayanora
Pentangle- Hunting Song
Claanad- Poison Glen
Maire Brennan- Against The Wind
Damien Dempsey- The Jar Song
One of my fellow DJs has started playing Dempsey! A convert! Take that, St. Pat!

The 12 Fl. Oz. Show, Monday 17 March

I play quite a bit of Irish and Celtic music on my own weekly show so I found it ironic that I was acting as guest DJ for an Americana show on St. Patrick's Day.
As a DJ, I tend to look at St. Patrick's Day the same way that an alcoholic looks at New Year's Eve- it's the one day that the rest of the world follows my lead...anyway, the playlist:

Les Paul and Chet Atkins- Somewhere Over The Rainbow
Little Feat- Oh Atlanta!
Tornados...OZ...Atlanta...nevermind.

Ken Nordine- Green
Papa John Creach- Enjoy
Mem Shannon- S.U.V
Johnny Cash- Personal Jesus
Marcy -The Gospel Express
Roy Clark- Steel Guitar Rag
Sandy Nelson -The Boss Beat
John Prine - Sweet Revenge
Sam Bush- Howlin' at the Moon
This song mentions Heaven and moon-howling...Christianity and Animism!
Holy 'Dual'ing Banjoes, Batman!

Steve Earle- Hillbilly Highway
Big Brother & Holding Co. - I'll Change Your Flat Tire, Merle
Granpa Jones & Friends- Pft, You Were Gone
This is from Hee Haw.
Bill Anderson- The Reverend Mr. Black
Ken Nordine- Yellow
Steve Earle & Del McCloury- Dixieland

Mitch H. Price- Shopping Mall Moan
Flaming Groovies- Jailbait
R. Crumb- Confessions of R.Crumb
Ten Years After-Baby Won't Let Me Rock and Roll ya?

X- Come Back To Me
Ken Nordine- Flesh
Les Paul & Chet Atkins- Lazy River
Mitch H. Price- Save me a Slice of That
Clarence 'Gatemouth' Brown & Roy Clark- Tobacco Road
Hot Tuna- Ode to Billy Dean
Steve Earle-Galway Girl
Factoid: Ireland and Scotland are two different places.

Mitch H. Price - Voodoo
Steve Earle & the Pogues -Token Drinking Song
Leo Kottke- Morning is a Long Way Home
Tony Trishka & Bela Fleck- John Hardy
Lucinda Williams- Concrete & Barbed Wire
Billy Pilgrim- Dominique
Roy Clark- Under the Double Eagle
Honest to Baal, Roy Clark is one awesome MFing guitarist. Clark's rendition of this John Phillip Sousa classic is nothing short of amazing.
Buck Owens and Roy Clark- Turkey in the Straw



Good Night and Good Luck.

Chicken Little Was An Optimist

Whoops. I was wrong. I thought that the catalytic event that shifted an idling WWIII into full gear would be the assassination of Pakistani dictator 'Pervy' Musharef- I hadn't anticipated the return and subsequent murder of former Prime Swindler Benazir Bhutto.
Bhutto- who was a politician, not a saint- was Pakistan's best hope for 'moderate' rule- a chance to build a corrupt democracy instead of a corrupt military dictatorship.



A good example of a corrupt democracy would be America.
A corrupt military dictatorship might resemble North Korea. Or Pakistan.

In politics, corruption is inevitable- the price of doing business as they say- we will always be given the choice of lesser evils; the choice of lesser evil must be made with the greater good in mind- money will get stolen, lies will be told, favors will be granted- of greater concern are issues such as: do the people have food?
And: Are we still fighting?

General Musharef has been playing 'double agent' for years...taking billions of US dollars to 'fight terra' while simultaneously allowing the Taliban and al-Queda to become resurgent in the remote Pakistan/Afghan border regions- and Osama bin Laden* is, of course, still a free man.

Pundits and politicos have started asking questions regarding what exactly we are getting in return for our generous material support of Pervy's regime. Ostensibly, he's fighting terrorism, but his nation's most popular leader was just killed on a crowded street in a military neighborhood- overlooked in the uproar was the sniper who killed at least four people at another political rally earlier the same day. The news of the suicide bomber who killed nine on 23, Dec. didn't seem to reach the American media , but it did happen.
Such incidents are increasingly common in Pakistan.

In short, it doesn't look like Pervy is very good at fighting terrorism. He may, according to recently released emails from Bhutto, be committing terrorism... I imagine we will learn the truth about Bhutto's murder at the same time we find out who killed JFK.

Anyway, why are we giving Pakistan so much money? Hmmm...

Pakistan, you probably know, has a nuclear arsenal. Bombs with upper-case B's.

I haven't heard anyone ask the obvious question regarding our 10 billion dollar aid package to Musharef: What if the payments are nothing more than a shakedown? Protection. I mean:
Give us tanks, guns and money and we will make sure Osama doesn't 'accidentally' get his hands on one of our shiny nuclear weapons, you see what I'm saying?

There was a time not long ago when overwhelming American military superiority could deter tinpots like Pervy and North Korea's Lil' Kim from ever becoming serious threats- but that time is past. Unfortunately, at the moment our military is busy elsewhere and would be hard-pressed to fight an actual 'war of necessity', should one occur. I hope it does not.
Iraq, Afghanistan (and potentially Iran) are not wars of necessity- no matter how many times you say "9-11" and point to Afghanistan, it doesn't change the fact that the large majority of the 9-11 murderers were Saudi Arabian- as is Osama. It also doesn't change the likelihood that Osama is comfortably holed up in Pakistan. Nor does it change the fact that the Taliban have regrouped and are more influential than they have been since 2002.

In any case, it's long been a simple matter of time before a suicide bomber gets strapped to a nuke- this inevitability has been hastened by recent events...when? Where?

Another possibility is the establishment of an openly anti-American theocracy in Pakistan. (See notes on nukes, above). Our troops in Afghanistan would suddenly face an overwhelming number of hostile fighters on their border. Historically, this sort of scenario tends to end poorly.

There's a possible upside: These events may lead to our military being pulled out of Iraq.

The downside: They will be pulled out and re-deployed to combat duty in an all-out war on the Afghan/Paki border.

--------------------------------------
An Unrelated Note of Appreciation

I'd like to say thank you to everyone who has sent kind wishes for my grandmother; at the moment there is nothing new to report. These ER trips are serious, but not uncommon for her- some are more severe than others. She is stable and resting at the moment, tomorrow I will drive back home and learn more. Assuming that we haven't been nuked, that is.

------------------------------------
*who?

Advanced Technique

The painting below is on display at Cambodia's Tuol Sleng Prison, which is currently serving as a Torture Museum, a reminder of the horrors perpetrated by Pol Pot's despotic regime. The artist is Vann Nath, a former inmate.


According to John Dean, there are at least ten preliminary investigations regarding the CIA's destruction of ' advanced interrogation' videotapes, tapes on which waterboarding and other 'advanced' techniques are demonstrated.

There are more than a few things wrong with the 'official story', whatever that is at the moment. Like the reasons behind the Iraqi occupation, the rationale for torture and the subsequent obstruction of justice seems to change over time.

- The initial BushCo defense, that the tapes were destroyed to protect the ID of CIA agents, is laughable. First, Cheney didn't hesitate to out Valerie Plame, who was an honest-to-Godzilla anti-terrorist secret agent; second, doesn't the CIA have the ability to pixelate images?
If pixelation is too high-tech for our CIA, couldn't they simply take a cue from the terrorists they are supposed to be monitoring and wear ski masks?

- In the course of the waterboarding discussion, defenders of 'advanced techniques' like to claim that valuable anti-terrorist information was obtained using 'advanced' methods...that assertion reeks of bullshit. If we obtained such invaluable data during these 'advanced' sessions, why were all the tapes destroyed? Shouldn't that valuable data be preserved?

-In typical BushSpeak, what are called "advanced techniques" aren't advanced at all. Water torture has been used for thousands of years- it's about as basic as you can get. See that painting, above? That is waterboarding. All you need is water, a blindfold and a victim. Gravity does the work for you.

- Here's a scary thought : Some of the 'advanced' sessions were held with terrorists involved in the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps, under torture, they gave up information that connected certain 9/11 dots, dots that BushCo would rather not have connected. These are not hard dots to connect.

In other Bad News:

- I am listening to George Bush on live TV and I find, to my horror, that I agree with him on something:
The Democratic Congress sucks at their collective job.
My reasons for believing this are different than his, however. Bush is upset that Congress waited until the last minute to collapse into jelly...I am pissed off that they caved in at all.
Not surprised, but pissed nonetheless...

- Bush just used the term 'shooters' to refer to soldiers from allied nations who are stationed in Afghanistan...'shooters' is the term used by Blackwater and other mercenary corporations to describe their combat employees. Calling a real soldier a 'shooter' is a show of disrespect.
To be precise, Bush said he was "grateful for the shooters"...perhaps he meant the Jello shooters that Pelosi and Reid were serving last night.

- He just called what we did to Iraq "bestowing the blessing of liberty".
I have to admit that the Second Amendment seems pretty healthy in Iraq...perhaps that is what he means.

-What was Dick Cheney's staff burning?

We Already Know That

After seven years of George W. Bush, it should be clear that any white man, regardless of intellectual capacity, can be selected as President of the United States.

So why is Mitt Romney making such a big deal out of being a Moron? We already have a Moron in the White House. Not for the first time, either.
I'm not sure if we, as Americans, are ready to elect a black man or a woman (of any color) to the Presidency, but I'm absolutely certain that we are willing to vote for a Moron.

Perhaps Romney wanted to point out that not only is he a Moron, he's also unfamiliar with American history and civics in general or that he specifically doesn't know Jack* about the Constitution of the United States.

Ask anything? OK, here goes:

1 ) What legally binding document contains the following stipulation?:
"...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Hint: It's the United States Constitution.

2) How many times is God mentioned in the United States Constitution? Be specific.

3) What does the first line of the First Amendment to the Constitution say?

4)Why do you think the founders felt it necessary to include this language?
Hint: The answer is in your mirror.

Take your time with these stumpers. It's easy to become distracted when one reads the documents on which this nation was founded...I was searching for God and facts kept drawing me away on tangents...have you ever read the Declaration of Independence, for instance?
It's pretty short reading; it's not an outline for democracy; what it is, is a petition of grievances against a power-mad lunatic named George.
It mentions a 'Creator', but not 'God'. According to correspondence between James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, this was meant to include: "Jew and Gentile, [ Native Americans] heathens and infidels."
It's meant to be inclusive, not exclusionary.

From the Declaration of Independence:

"'When in the Course of human events..." is what it says.

NOT: " During the mysterious movements of God..."

OR: "...due to the capricious whim of the Almighty..."

BUT: "...human events..."

The case for the "new religion of secularism" was made on July 4, 1776.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of the DoI grievances against Mad George seem disturbingly current.

Does any of this sound familiar?:

-He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good

- He has obstructed the Administration of Justice

- He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people and eat out their substance.

- For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury

- For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

- He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

-He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and [he is] totally unworthy [as] the Head of a civilized nation.

Dudes! I couldn't have put it better myself.

Anyway, we eventually got rid of George, which gave us the freedom to design our own three- branched government; a system of checks and balances was used to insure that no one branch gained control over any other. Certain rights were given to specific Branches.

Congress, for example, was given the sole power to wage war. (Art. 1, Sec. 8)
Congress chose to give this power back to Mad George. The current anarchy in Iraq is the direct result of this dismantling of the American system of checks and balances.
Patrick Henry, it seems, died in vain.

Hey, check this out. It's in the Constitution too:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

When the founders wrote ..."or Invasion...", they meant foreign invasion of American soil, not American invasion of foreign soil, but BushCo suspended Habeas Corpus anyway.


The United States Constitution also contains this wording regarding the Executive Oath of Office:
"Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

That parenthetical "(or affirm)" was placed there for a specific reason. It directly relates to the first question, above. It allows for the possibility that the person taking the Oath may not have the same -if any- theological beliefs as the persons who wrote the Oath.

But I am digressing.

Mitt, it's time for a hard question.

You said: " You cannot have freedom without religion".
This is in direct contradiction to the First Amendment.

Can you explain what you meant by that remark -or are there some things that your faith doesn't allow you to discuss?

Spreading Freedom

I'm not the slightest bit surprised to learn that Iran suspended it's nuclear weapons program in 2003, nor did I raise a brow when I read that the U.S. has known this for years. Despite this knowledge, BushCo has been busily trying to lie us into attacking Iran under the pretense that they might be building bombs.

Bombs that aren't there.
Does that sound familiar?

After invading Iraq, we learned what was already obvious to anyone who paid attention to reality: Iraq presented absolutely no military threat to America. None.

BushCo should have been impeached, disbanded and jailed for starting that war, but instead there was a general consensus that well, maybe there weren't any WMD, but "the world is a better place without Saddam."

How? In what real, human terms has the removal of Saddam improved the world?

More importantly, BushCo has yet to provide a satisfactory reason for our invasion of Iraq.

Our mission is to spread freedom/democracy? Give me a fucking break. A 3rd grade history student could knock down that spurious claim:

The region now known as Iraq is home of one of the earliest civilizations in human history. The people who live there have had roughly 5,000 years to 'invent' democracy. They have had over 2,000 years to adopt Christianity and Western ideals. That they haven't done so speaks volumes as to what they want in their homeland.

Our hypothetical 3rd grader would point out that the Christian West has a long history of trying to spread freedom on the Muslim East and that it has always ended badly. Always.
Our imaginary student could use their cursory knowledge of world history to give true, supportable and specific examples; something that our real President seems incapable of. Our real President is painfully, dangerously ignorant of history.

He also seems oblivious to basic human psychology and motives. He apparently doesn't understand the direct cause-and-effect relationship between war orphans and suicide bombers.

I would wager that the odds of one of these kids growing up to be a suicide bomber increased dramatically the moment they started seeing body parts strewn about the streets of their neighborhood.


One of the many sad, overlooked facts in this whole debacle is that before the American invasion, it's quite likely that these kids liked America.
They wanted their MTV.
They wanted to play WoW.
Now they'd be lucky if they have two living parents, indoor plumbing and a roof.


You don't need to be a spy to understand why Iran doesn't have a nuclear enrichment program- they don't have one because they don't need one. If Iran really wanted a nuke, they could get one on the black market- if they haven't already done so...North Korea and Pakistan both have the bomb and the collapse of the USSR has led to some serious security concerns regarding nuclear warheads...the demand will inevitably create a supply. It will. The weapons already exist- it's merely matter of time and espionage until one falls into the wrong hands.

In the real world, it is extremely unlikely that Iran would ever launch a nuclear first strike against anyone- Israel included. The inflammatory rhetoric coming from Iran re:Israel is mere rhetorical demagoguery- American politicians do not have a monopoly on political bloviation and lies. The Iranian Mullahs are fully aware that to launch a nuke would spell the utter destruction of them and their nation. They would lose everything. Being in charge, they stand to lose a lot.

War orphans, on the other hand, have nothing left to lose. When Kris Kristofferson wrote, "freedom ain't nothing but another word for 'nothing left to lose'", he wasn't referring to the kind of freedom that we are spreading on Iraq, but he was right.

Unlike despotic heads-of-state, war orphans understand the liberating freedom of nihilism, even if they don't know the word. They understand that they have lost all hope and that just maybe if they wear this special jacket and press this magic button, they will have some part of what they have lost restored to them.
The technology has changed but the psychology has not. If you kill someone's family and destroy their home, the survivors will want revenge. That should be obvious. Violence begets violence.

Believe it or not, the #1 reason for Iran wanting the Bomb is to deter an American invasion- the Mullahs are very aware that we haven't invaded North Korea- a nation that sorely needs freedom if there ever was one...we haven't invaded because of Lil Kim's atomic deterrence and Iran knows that. The entire world, with the possible exception of 250 million Americans, knows this.

The next time a nuclear device explodes in a civilian area, it will probably be the work of individuals, not of nations. It's not unreasonable to speculate that the perps will be war orphans with the new freedom to have nothing left to lose.
Freedom that was spread on them by America.

If Bush actually wanted peace, he'd have greeted the belated 2003 security report with relief.
"Thank God", he would say," there is now one less threat to worry about. Now we can start concentrating on fixing our real problems without this additional distraction."
That is what a real leader would say.

This is what Bush said:

"“I think it is very important for the international community to recognize the fact that if Iran were to develop the knowledge that they could transfer to a clandestine program, it would create a danger for the world,” he said."

What he means is: We should start a war now because it's possible that at some future time Iraq may acquire a nuclear bomb. Or something. And that would be bad.
In any case, he's still hell-bent on beating the war drums...he's created a trillion-dollar for-profit war machine and peace would ruin all the hard work his cabal has done over the last seven years. For example,100,000 Blackwater mercenaries would be out-of-work. Those people are trained killers - I don't look forward to standing in the unemployment lines with them.

With any luck, this development will derail BushCo's war plans. The American people are growing visibly tired of endless, pointless war and it's unlikely that the average Iranian citizen has much interest in fighting yet another war-they know they will lose, and badly- given time, luck and a bit of clarity, both nations will eventually replace their leadership -from within.
We can do it here in 2008.

It may take a bit longer for the Iranians to make a wholesale change in their civics- if ever- but that is up to them, not to us. Normalizing relations with Iraq would be a possible first step. I am convinced that we could win more hearts and minds with Shrek DVDs, MySpaces and music videos than we could with depleted uranium shells, land mines and laser-guided smart bombs.

It would be cheaper too.

Kurds And Why

It's time to start imposing mandatory drug and alcohol screening on all three branches of Government. Let's start with Nancy Pelosi. I would like to know exactly what combination of chemicals makes this seem necessary or timely:

House speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday said she planned to put the bill before the full House of Representatives. The House foreign affairs committee last week branded the Ottoman Empire's World War I massacre of Armenians a genocide, angering Ankara.

Armenians say at least 1.5 million of their people were killed from 1915 to 1917 under what they describe as an campaign of deportation and murder by the Ottoman Empire. Turkey bitterly disputes the number of dead and the characterization of the killings as a genocide.

Well, duh. This genocide is a matter of international historical record. The Democrats finally take control of Congress and they use their new clout to catch up to Woodrow Wilson?
After WW1 and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, President Wilson cited the Turkish massacres of the Armenians when he recognized the need for an independent Armenian state in a 1920 message to Congress:

May 24, 1920. — Read; referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and ordered to be printed.

Gentlemen of the Congress:

On the fourteenth of May an official communication was received at the Executive Office from the Secretary of the Senate of the United States conveying the following preambles and resolutions:

Whereas the testimony adduced at the hearings conducted by the subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations have clearly established the truth of the reported massacres and other atrocities from which the Armenian people have suffered; and

Whereas the people of the United States are deeply impressed by the deplorable conditions of insecurity, starvation, and misery now prevalent in Armenia; and

Whereas the independence of the Republic of Armenia has been duly recognized by the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference and by the Government of the United States of America: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the sincere congratulations of the Senate of the United States are hereby extended to the people of Armenia on the recognition of the independence of the Republic of Armenia, without prejudice respecting the territorial boundaries involved...

He also invoked Christianity as part of his declaration. We need to protect Christians, said Wilson:

...I make the suggestion in the confidence that I am speaking in the spirit and in accordance with the wishes of the greatest of the Christian peoples. The sympathy for Armenia among our people has sprung from untainted consciences, pure Christian faith, and an earnest desire to see Christian people everywhere succored in their time of suffering, and lifted from their abject subjection and distress and enabled to stand upon their feet and take their place among the free nations of the world.

Two years later Armenia was swallowed up by the godless Soviet state and subjected to the tender mercies of Joe Stalin. Wilson could have sent US troops into Armenia and started the Cold War thirty years early- with the US and the USSR waging a proxy war on Armenian soil- but he didn't.

What he did do was publicly acknowledge the genocide committed by the Turks. Doesn't Pelosi know this? If not, why doesn't she? The term 'genocide' was not in use at the time, but the size and scope of the massacres and atrocities were well-known when Wilson condemned them. It was not a secret in many countries not named Turkey.

Why is Pelosi introducing this bill now? It does nothing but modernize the language of Wilson's lip service- and piss off Turkey, our ostensible ally. We have considerable strategic resources at risk and seemingly little to gain. Among the people who do stand to gain from this action are the oil companies, who can jack prices and increase profits again as soon as this stupid debacle starts fucking up the world's oil markets- which happened about an hour ago as of this writing. It would also make the rich Armenians in Pelosi's district happy- at the consternation of everyone who isn't a wealthy member of the Armenian Diaspora movement.

Here are some facts about Armenia, courtesy of the CIA:

-Armenia is an aggressor nation. Armenia has been militarily occupying 1/8th of neighboring Azerbaijan for over ten years. This has displaced nearly a million people, perhaps more.

-Armenia was the first nation to declare itself insane, circa 300 A.D.

-Armenia is a Christian nation in a Muslim neighborhood.

-Armenia has no oil.

-Construction of a natural gas pipeline between Iran and Armenia has been completed and it is scheduled to be commissioned by April 2007. Economic ties with Russia remain close, especially in the energy sector.

-Nuclear power plants built at Metsamor eliminated the chronic energy shortages Armenia suffered in the early and mid-1990s, but those plants are under international pressure to close.

--------------------------


Why are we sticking it to the Turks now?

Could it have anything to do with Turkey's decision to attack Kurds in Iraq, Kurds who are also ostensibly on our side? This development seems to have gotten almost zero press coverage despite the fact that it threatens to make Iraq even more unstable than it already is.

It gets more interesting. Muslim-dominated Azerbaijan- the same Azerbaijan that has been at war with Armenia since, well, forever- does have oil. Lots of oil. But it's been hard to develop because of geographical difficulty and political instability- getting the oil to the West is a real problem. Currently, the oil is being pumped via a pipeline that crosses Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey, who share in the revenue. Not surprisingly, corruption is rampant in all three nations.

Now take a look at the map below. Imagine that tensions between Turkey and the US lead Ankara to shut down that pipeline. Georgia isn't a very stable nation either, so events there could disrupt flow as well. Do you see any alternative routes to the West?

Which country would you have to invade?

Hint: It starts with an I.





Hopefully, that won't happen.

According to breaking news, we have just won the Iraqi war!

It's been said that our reason for staying in Iraq is to fight an organization imaginatively called 'Al-Queda in Iraq'- an organization that didn't even exist until after we invaded.
Apparently, AQ in I are close to becoming non-existent again, which means we can bring all of our troops home right away.

We won! That's about the worst news BushCo could hear. It means they no longer have an excuse to snowball their for-profit war machine. I expect Bush will make a speech tomorrow announcing our victory and promising that our troops will be home by Christmas. Right?

I'm kidding. He won't do that.

The funny thing is, if he did do that, his approval ratings would soar and and the GOP's 2008 chances would rise with them- but it would shut down the Blood Money Machine.

If Bush's loyalties are to America and it's troops, he will use this face-saving 'out' and start a military withdrawal even if it means that a lot of corporations will lose money in the short term.
'Turn your swords into plowshares', Bush could advise the disgruntled war profiteers.
It's not a bad concept.

If his loyalties lie anywhere but with the American people, he will keep us in Iraq indefinitely.

What's your guess?

That Many?

I tend to believe exactly the opposite of what BushCo says. To me, this article seems to say that Osama bin Laden has sent the White House a detailed, hand-written, signed and notarized itinerary of his follower's latest 'travel plans'.

WASHINGTON, July 11 (Reuters) - The Bush administration said on Wednesday
there was no specific, credible terrorism threat against the United States
and denied that an emergency meeting had been called.

"There continues to be no credible, specific intelligence to suggest that there is an imminent threat to the homeland,"White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

There's some real irony here. With a slight modification and a five -year trip into the past, Fratto's statement becomes truth:

"There continues to be no credible, specific intelligence to suggest that there is an imminent threat to the homeland from Iraqi military or WMD"
- Informed American Citizen, circa 2002

It was obvious at the time that Iraq wasn't a threat, yet most of the nation was uncritically buying into the Bushit Machine's saber-rattling , logic-defying claptrap. During the run-up to the Iraqi invasion, I was much more frightened of my fellow Americans than I was of Saddam Hussien.

Saddam never sent me threatening emails, screaming in ALL CAPS: "IF GORE WAS PRESIDENT YOU WOULD BE SPEAKING IRAQI (sic) NOW! DIE LIBERAL, DIE!"

I used to have the occasional political post on the now-defunct Daily Dirt site, and my anti-war screeds sometimes provoked 'patriotic' readers to tell me just how wrong I was about Bush, Iraq, the Saudis and the Project for a New American Century. I wish that I had been wrong.

Americans used to tell me: " You know, you should consider putting a flag decal on your car. People are slashing tires on cars that don't have flags."

I had more than a few Americans make the preceding suggestion, none of whom understood that targeting individuals for violence on the basis of their political beliefs is terrorism.

Look, I would say, if you slash my tires because I don't share your political views, then you are a terrorist, you are not a patriot.

Then I would brace for impact, because criticizing stupidity was a dangerous thing to do in 2002.

Today, according to Gallup, 29% of American adults who are at home during the day and have both time and inclination to answer telephone surveys approve of BushCo's job performance.

Has Gallup ever called you? I have never been polled by Gallup. Who gets these calls? The survey claims to have called 1,014 households, which is far from being enough to draw any sort of objective conclusion from. A more accurate headline would read:

Twenty-Nine Percent of American Poll Respondents are Morons

Of the 29% , I'd wager that over half of them responded favorably because they are apathetic towards politics. They find the news to be grim, depressing and confusing, therefore they don't pay attention. "Yeah, sure , Bush is OK, I guess...", might be a typical response from such disinterested parties. When you read the poll, question number two asks if there is sufficient cause to begin impeachment hearings against BushCo, only 36% of those polled said yes.

In other words, only 36% of those polled have a basic understanding of the U.S. Constitution:

Article III, Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

Immediately after 9/11, dozens of Saudi royals and members of the bin Laden
family fled the U.S. in a secret airlift authorized by the Bush White House. One
passenger was an alleged al-Qaida go-between, who may have known about the
terror attacks in advance.

Of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers, fifteen were Saudi Arabians. 15 of 19.

Osama bin Laden is a Saudi.

So why is BushCo holding hands with Saudi Prince Abdullah? Abdullah's countrymen attacked us. Is a hand-held guided tour of the Rose Garden giving 'aid and comfort' to the enemy? Bin Laden attacked us and BushCo rounded up Osama's family and covertly escorted them safely home- was that 'aid and comfort'?

There is a precedent for our president:

In October of 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government halted operations at New York's Union Banking Corporation.
A bank official was charged with "Running Nazi front groups in the United States."
His name: Prescott Bush. (Dubya's granpa-ed.)

The apple seldom lands far from the tree.

Respect My Disbelief

I didn't know it at the time, but in the months preceding my forced hospitalization I did make a few half-hearted and ultimately doomed attempts to "get help" for my drinking.

Jenny was one of those attempts. Jenny was a girl that I worked with during my on-again/off-again temp assignments at Bank of Generica. She was slender and bookish, keeping her long auburn hair in an unfashionable bun and wearing unflattering, baggy clothing with minimal cosmetics.

She looked like the kind of girl who would play Dungeons and Dragons with you- the sort of chick who would allocate more points for her character's Intelligence than for Strength or Charisma.

She wore librarian glasses and sensible shoes.

To me, she was hot. She was real, and it made her the most attractive woman in our department, so I was delighted when she approached me as we were leaving a meeting.

"Do I know you from somewhere? You look very familiar- have we met?", she asked.

For a drunk, this is a tough question to answer. Drunks have bad memories and worse behavior. If she 'knew me from somewhere', it was probably from me being drunk and hitting on her in some stinky-ass rock club.
Perhaps I had sold cocaine to her?
Hmmm...I like this woman. Did I know her?
I wanted to.

"I don't know...are you into the local music scene?"

Maybe she had seen me at a radio-sponsored event. Perhaps she'd even seen me play guitar or bass on-stage!
That would be cool...but the look she gave me indicated that she wasn't aware that there was such a thing as a 'music scene'.

"No...that wouldn't be it. Have I seen you at church?"

"Uh...no, I don't think so."

Church? When was the last time I went to church? I have never attended church in my adult life. I'm sure she hadn't seen me in church.

"Well, it's from somewhere...I feel like I know you..."

She likes me, I thought, but work intervened before I could follow up.

A few days later, we were working together and she picked up our truncated conversation.

"I think I did see you at church."

She named a church. Sure enough, I used to attend AA meetings there when I was on probation, but I didn't want to tell her that.

"Oh, yeah...I have, uh, been there before. It's been a long time, though."

Jenny smiled and said she was glad she figured that out- she'd been thinking about me for several days, it seems. That turned me on. She likes me, tra la la...

We worked together quite well, Jenny was smart and funny and our tedious tasks were not so bad when we did them together- over the course of our talks, I learned that she was into Jazz Dance and liked to write fiction. Cool.

She rarely drank and she didn't do drugs.

I did both daily, but I didn't tell her that.

I didn't want to keep doing those things, I just didn't have a reason to stop. I didn't even know that I wanted to quit- all I knew is that my head was full of really bad ideas and I was desperate for something...but what?

One of my really bad ideas involved Jenny.

I thought that if I could get Jenny to date me, I would find the strength to quit. I would get my courage from her, not from a bottle.
For a woman like Jenny, I believed, I could do anything- including quitting booze.
I hadn't had a significant relationship for years, and the women I did know were at least as drunk and fucked-up as me. Eightballs and benders...I didn't 'date', I binged.

One time, my girlfriend stole all my dope and then tried to sic her half-wolf/half-Shepherd hybrid on me when I demanded the return of my drugs, which she had already sold and shot.
I was the one who usually fed the poor dog-beast, it liked me a lot so it just sat and whined while we fought, but the whole scene was fairly indicative of my success in relationships.

Hey man, can I crash on your couch for awhile?

Why?

My girlfriend threw me out. She tried to attack me with a wolf.

What would happen if I dated a a girl who didn't have a coke dealer on speed dial or a wolf in the backyard?
Maybe if I dated a 'straight' woman, I'd get clean- that was my hope. At least in hindsight, I think that was part of what I was looking for- Jenny was much too bright to date a fuck-up, so I thought maybe she could magically "fix" me just by sleeping with me on a fairly regular interval and doing whatever else it is that people do when they aren't fucking or getting wasted.

That was a false and wholly unfair hope if there ever was one, not to mention a completely ass-backward approach...definitely not a moment of clarity or reason for me. I had completely bottomed-out and didn't even know it.

But the bad idea seemed like a good one at the time.

Of course, first I had to get her to go out with me.

This was really easy to do. A friend of mine was playing at a local Jazz club and I had free admission. When I asked Jenny if she'd like to go, she readily accepted.
She'd been waiting for me to ask. So we went.

We had dinner in the club's quiet dining room- when the waitress cleared our plates, I noticed that I had three empty beer bottles and two shot glasses on my side of the table.

Jenny had consumed about one-third of a glass of wine.
Jenny was aware of this disparity.

"Look, I need to ask you something and you might not like hearing it", she leaned towards me.

"OK."

"How can you be a Seeker if you drink so much? How can you find anything in that condition?"

A Seeker? What is that?

"Um...what's a 'Seeker'?"

"A Seeker of Christ. Of the Truth. I thought that's what you were."

"Uh...well...honestly, I'm not religious..."

Oh no. I can't have this talk right now, I thought. I have too much liquor in me to be tactful and I'm not drunk enough to tell lies. Why is it assumed that I am a Christian? We've never even discussed religion before.

I raised my arm- another beer and a shot over here, please.
I am not ready for this.

"You do believe in God, though. Right? Don't you?"

Make that shot a double!

"Ah...no. I don't."

"What? How can you not believe in God?"

"I just don't...I'm an atheist...or maybe an agnostic. I dunno. I haven't really thought about it much."

This was true and it still is- except for the thinking part. After that night, it occurred to me that I might stand to benefit from giving religion some thought. I figured I 'd better learn enough about it so that the next time a woman asked me if I was a 'Seeker', I'd be able to give the answer that got me laid.

That's how I saw religion. As a tool to be used to coerce others into doing something that they might not otherwise do. A means to power.
Sure, I'll pretend to be a Christian if it means getting laid. Or a raise. Or elected.
Or at least I used to think that way.

After sober reflection, I have no faith that any 'God' exists, but I do believe that using religion as a tool for manipulating people is inherently wrong. It's how wars get started and it's a pretty shoddy foundation for a healthy relationship.

The truth is, I don't really care if there is or isn't a 'God'. It doesn't much matter to me.
I can change myself , but I can't change God. Can I ? Would I even want to?

The beliefs of other's shouldn't be cause for killing.

Does this exchange make sense?:

"Why do we hate them?"

"They worship in an improper fashion."

"How do we know that?"

"Our Book About God tells us that."

"And that is worth killing for?"

"Yes."

"But our God tells us not to kill."

"Die, infidel, die."

It doesn't make sense to me, but it happens every day.

When I was dying, coughing up my shredded guts onto the cold white ER floor, I didn't pray.
I didn't think about God at all. I wanted to live. I was afraid of dying, but not of judgement.
I was bleeding to death and I needed surgery.
God wasn't a part of the decision to go to hospital instead of letting the darkness fall.
Pain was. Fear was. God was not.

Who will feed my cats? I remember thinking about that, but I don't recall saying any prayers .
I remember wanting an ice cube really, really, badly and suddenly feeling quite cold.
No praying.
Whomever said: "there are no atheists in foxholes " was wrong.
I've been in a foxhole of sorts and I didn't convert.

But that was to be in the future.

In the past, I am still talking to Jenny.

All I needed to do was to lie to her and say I believed- and I would have been in her bed, making her cry "Sweet Jesus and Amen, Hally -Yoo-Ha!" all-night long...all I had to do was lie...but I didn't. Looking back, I'm glad I didn't.

"How", she asked, "is it possible to not believe in God? How can you even live like that?"

"Jenny, I really just don't know. I guess I just muddle along. I never really give it much thought."

Jenny was a bit stunned by my revelation.

"You haven't thought about it much? That's not possible."

Maybe I should have lied. She didn't believe the truth. Maybe I should have asked what particular faith she was...not that I much cared. She wasn't a puritan or a tee-totaler, I knew that much.

"Uh...it just doesn't come up much."

This was true, but it wasn't well received by Jenny, who was Seeking Truth.

Jenny took a long sip of her wine and stared at me. She looked stricken. She glanced down at her wine. I thought she was going to gulp the rest of it but she set it down, pushed it aside.

I thought, she's ready to leave and the band hasn't even started yet.
I'm not getting any tonight.

"I respect your beliefs."

That's what she said.

"I respect your beliefs."

It was a concluding statement but I was too drunk to let it go. Mistakes were made.

"You can't respect my beliefs. I don't have any beliefs.
I know things or I don't.
Things are or they aren't.
Whether I believe or not doesn't change reality, so I choose not to believe in anything."

Of course, I was too much of an asshole to keep that belief to myself.

"Are you sober enough to drive me home or do I need to call a cab?"

"I believe that I can drive."

"Liar."

" Success is not no violence."

UPDATE: This is just a piece of political 'filler' I did because Dubya's incoherence, wrong-headedness and incompetence fills me with great pain. This blog really isn't about politics anymore, but thanks for visiting anyway.
___________________

I guess my willpower isn't as strong as I thought.

Somehow I fooled myself into believing that I could just walk away and never look back- but it's never that easy, is it?

So here I am. Alone with the cable news and Godzilla help me I'm gonna do it because I can't stop it.
Lou Dobbs is my enabler.
I'm writing about politics again. Just a quick one, then I'll quit again. Promise.
Oh hey, sorry about the last time.

No one can see me if I don't hit publish, I think, and my battle is lost. Another tab opens, another set of headlines are scanned...and I wait for the rush.

And wait.

It's a rush alright. A torrent of sewage loosed from the cancerous bowels of Hell.

I can't believe I used to enjoy this. But it begins again:

The 222-203 vote to override Bush's veto fell far short of the two-thirds needed, effectively killing the $124 billion supplemental appropriations bill.

George Bush is still President? How is that possible?

He just said this when asked about the ongoing collapse of Iraqi society- I quote:

" Success is not no violence."

My shame and despair deepens to an almost unknowable depth.

I feel the need to hurt myself.

" Success is not no violence."
" Success is not no violence."
" Success is not no violence."
" Success is not no violence."


I guess it's only fitting that he describes his goals using a double negative.

"" Success is not no violence." =" Success is violence."

Mission Accomplished.

He continues:

There are parts of our own country that have got a certain level of violence to it.But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives. And that’s what we’re trying to achieve. And that’s what we’re trying to achieve.

What level of "comfortable" violence is acceptable to you? Your family? I'm hoping none.
Were the Va. Tech shootings "comfortable?"
Worse things happen in Baghdad every single day-
why is it acceptable there but shocking here?

WWHD?

After hearing Bush telling 70% of America to: 'fuck off, I'm the decidinator and I'm gonna invade Iran too!' it's become clear that BushCo never intended their conquest to end at Iraq, that indeed it was just the first step in a regional campaign encompassing the greater Middle East; and that the entire PNAC plot collapsed when Iraq didn't turn out to be the 'cakewalk' that the neo-cons claimed it would.
Well, duh, we all know this now...so:

Let's go back a bit to Sept 1, 1939. That's the day Germany invaded Poland, which caused much of the world to declare war on Germany.

They declared war on Germany because it is wrong for one nation to invade and occupy another nation merely because it wants to do so.

That's the reason we, as an international community, went to war with Iraq in the first Gulf War- they invaded Kuwait.

Anyway, back to 1939- by the time the nascent Allies got it together, it was too late for Poland, which, ironically, would have to wait a long, long time to be 'liberated' , as it went directly from Nazi to Soviet domination.

But imagine if the USSR hadn't attacked Poland from the east and that Germany was unable to
roll over the Poles and instead of easily taking control of Poland and going on to wage WW2 for the next 5 1/2 years, the bulk of the German Army had become bogged down in Warsaw, waging an endless defensive war against a fractious civilian resistance .

Let's say that after about four years of escalating German casualties and no tangible results in the Poland war, the German people start to wonder if their leader knows what the hell he is doing. Perhaps the German public becomes informed that one of the major reasons for the invasion was actually staged by the Government in order to justify the war they wanted so badly? Perhaps they would start removing the 'H' bumperstickers from their Volkswagens and start declaring their dissatisfaction by taking to the streets in angry demonstrations of what is now the majority opinion?

How would the German leader react?

First, he'd remind the civilians that he was The Boss.

Then his minions would insinuate that pointing out the Emperor's Clothes was tantamount to treason .

Then he'd declare war on Russia.

Me One , Pat Robertson Zero -or- I told You So # 896

Just Monday I predicted this and here it is.

I almost never say : " I hate to say this, but I told ya so", mostly because I rarely hate to say that. Saying that would take the fun out of gloating.

But sometimes gloating sucks, sometimes there's no room for good natured ribbing -saying "I told ya to shoot for the corner pocket, not the side" is unlikely to cause much heartache to anyone, but saying : "I told you that BushCo would ruin America. I told you that before you elected him ", well, that breaks my heart.

I'm wrong a lot- I was hoping that I'd be wrong about the Iraq war- does anyone remember when saying "this war is wrong" was enough to get your ass fired, shunned and/or beaten?
It was.

In Novemeber, 2001- before the war, but during the post 9/11 chaos- one of my staff asked me why I didn't have any Flag Decals on my car.

I don't need one, I said, I already know I love my country.

Wasn't I afraid that someone would slash my tires?

Slash my tires because I don't have a Flag Decal? I need to be afraid of that?

Yes, she said, people are doing it. Spray painting cars too...they sprayed my neighbor's car. Then she pointed out the banner-sized flag hanging from the rear of her SUV .

Well, I said, then the terrorists have already won because they are us.

I wish I was wrong about that too.

Reporting From:

Mainstream journalism has given up the slightest pretense of doing it's purported job- reporting the news-
and has handed the keys over to bloggers- here's a BBC article about blogs that are covering a conflict that the U.S. press won't seem to touch...one of many such unpleasant trifles.

This blogger's conclusions largely match my own, and he's not sanguine about the outcome, although he does offer some optimism. It's no small deal, this war, despite being ignored in typical U.S. media fashion.

Q: Where's Darfur?
A: Right after da three, duh.

Sadly, the above isn't a joke, it's a national mindset.

From the Head Heeb blog:

So on balance, I'd still rate the most likely outcome as a sham Ethiopian withdrawal followed by an extended counterinsurgent conflict, with the TFG remaining ineffectual and internally divided while the Islamist militias wage a guerrilla struggle with substantial public support. This, in turn, will ensure that Eritrea continues to support local proxies against the Ethiopians, and that fighters from the greater Middle East will continue to be attracted by the widely reported (albeit erroneous) portrayal of the conflict as one pitting Somali Muslims against Ethiopian Christians. And needless to say, a prolonged counterinsurgency is the type of conflict that nobody wins, with major impact on regional food security as well as widespread death and displacement. Somalia deserves better, but there are too many forces converging toward the opposite to provide much room for optimism.

Change a few words and I got this:

So on balance, I'd still rate the most likely outcome as a sham American withdrawal followed by an extended counterinsurgent conflict, with the ITG remaining ineffectual and internally divided while the Islamist militias wage a guerrilla struggle with substantial public support. This, in turn, will ensure that Iran continues to support local proxies against the Sunnis, and that fighters from the greater Middle East will continue to be attracted by the widely reported (albeit erroneous) portrayal of the conflict as one pitting Al -Queda against America. And needless to say, a prolonged counterinsurgency is the type of conflict that nobody wins, with major impact on regional food security as well as widespread death and displacement. Iraq deserves better, but there are too many forces converging toward the opposite to provide much room for optimism.

See? I cut and pasted someone else's words, changed a few nouns...took about twenty minutes, start to finish- and suddenly it's a more in-depth look at world events than you can find on our Network/Cable news...pitiful.

Endeavor to Persevere

Here it is, 2007 , and the Cable News has a developing story, a banner across the bottom of the screen proclaims : THE HUNT FOR OBAMA and in the background there's a grainy video of Osama bin Forgottin.
There are a great many other words on the screen but they move too rapidly for me to even attempt to decipher them- but I do see THE HUNT FOR OBAMA quite clearly...

Hmm...

Don't they mean THE HUNT FOR OSAMA?

cut to commercials...this ad...it's a woman touching herself, she's seemingly naked on a field of white and her soft voice rises as she orgasmically hawks some product or service-I don't know what she's selling...what a jarring interlude, this odd sensuality trapped between the snippets of carnage and portents of doom that...it's sad that this weirdly beautiful 30 second spot exists solely to help sell detergent. Or insurance. Or toasters.
Like I said, I have no idea what she was selling...

The news comes back, this time the "Developing Story" is corrected:THE HUNT FOR BIN LADEN.
Geez...bin Laden? That's so 2001, the news should have more pressing concerns- our President certainly doesn't seem to give a shit about finding bin Laden, so why should we?- let's see, Gerald Ford, James Brown and Saddam Hussein are still dead- how can the news be running low on material?

At one point it was almost impossible for me to watch the James Brown tributes because they kept getting interrupted by pictures of a hearse, presumably carrying a Presidential cadaver, which in turn was interrupted to bring me updates on Saddam's Deathwatch...beneath it all , there was this constant stream of fast words, quick , elusive text, subtitles within subtitles; is this how we are trained to think?
No wonder tranquilizers are so popular.

So what's the Osama Scoop?

Get this: No one knows where he is. He might be in Pakistan or maybe not.

This is a Developing Story? I could have told you that in 2005. Or 2006.
---------------

Happy New Year to Slovenia! You have until 2016 to exchange your tolars for euros.
I understand that the paper notes will be honored indefinitely.

(oops, I was misinformed- better hurry!)
---------------

Did you know Gerald Ford is dead? True.
Did you know Richard Nixon's favorite food was cottage cheese and catsup? True.
Did you know Ford's first Presidential Order was :" Stop serving cottage cheese and catsup!"? All true.
----------------

Oh yeah- we have a whole new war to ignore. Ethiopia has kicked the shit out of the Somali Islamists- Ethiopia is not a nation known for it's wealth, but it has somehow managed to acquire devastating and expensive military technology- I wonder where they got those attack helicopters?
eBay?
The displaced Islamists will disappear into the shadows and become tomorrow's terrorists/insurgents and life in Mogadishu will continue to be hellish, brutal and violent- quite a bit like Baghdad except without headlines to remind us it's there.

I guess you could say it's more like Afghanistan than Iraq.

I just saw a one-minute "news" report about how you can upload pictures of your dog straight from a cell phone to the Interweb.
Yowzah. Who knew?

Not one word about Afghanistan or Ethiopia.
--------------------

Iraq is back in the news- did you know that Saddam is dead?
So are at least 3,000 American Troops.
Fair trade? You decide.

Our President says he's going to make a decision about Iraq eventually, maybe sorta...
I have full confidence that whatever decision he makes will be the absolutely worst, ill-considered move possible- probably leading to an unwinnable war against Iran.
He's not very smart, our Glorious Leader, but he is consistent.