Thursday, November 30, 2006


Fox News carries this report.

Moroccan police have arrested a Muslim prayer leader who is suspected of recruiting young men to be suicide bombers in the insurgency in Iraq, a newspaper reported Wednesday.

Mmm. How suprising. What's the evidence?

Abdelilah preached at a mosque in Mezouak, a vast slum on the city's outskirts, exhorting Moroccans to "fight the American-Zionist occupation in Iraq," the newspaper quoted police as saying.
Two young men who attended the mosque carried out suicide bombings in
Baquba, Iraq, last month, and a further five Moroccans linked to the mosque are believed to have joined the Iraq insurgency, the daily said.

Sounds to me like ther'e nothing "alleged" or "suspected". Lock, stock, the freaking lot. Send him to Cuba so we can shake him down, and find out if he was acting alone.

As for everyone crying that the Guantanamo detainees deserve trial, I couldn't agree more. Pump them for information, try them, and when we find them guilty, execute them so we can hurry up and piss on their graves.

As if to accentuate my thoughts, the television over my shoulder just aired a video of a terrorist who was bring interviewed. The subject? His admitted practice of beheading those he considered infidels. He remarked that he despised cowards, especially those who appear too nervous as they kneel waiting for the sword to take off their head.

What is that if not genocide?



MNF-Iraq brings us joyous news.

Coalition Forces killed eight al-Qaida terrorists today in an early-morning raid near Baqubah. Acting upon numerous intelligence sources, Coalition Forces launched an operation to detain individuals running a known terrorist cell. At the objective, Coalition Forces received enemy rifle and machine gun fire. Due to the heavy volume of enemy fire, Coalition Forces also engaged the terrorists with aircraft. Coalition aircraft fired rounds neutralizing the enemy threat.

The only good terrorist is a dead one. That is how you fight a war. Your enemy hides in a building, you blow it to hell with air assets. Blammo, wrath of God, shock and awe and all that glory. They cannot stand against our technology and air superiority, SO USE IT.

Upon a search of the objective area, they found two female local nationals who were killed during the firefight.

A shame to be sure. Their blood is on the hands of al-Qaeda, we have only just begun to avenge them. God rest their souls.


Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Mucking it up already

Originally from CNN:
Fresh from a defeat in her bid to appoint a controversial congressman as House majority leader, incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday she will not appoint Rep. Alcee Hastings to head the House intelligence committee.
My my my. Dare I suggest that already Pelosi is spending valuable political capital just to keep her side of the aisle on her side? I've often laughed, knowing the immense strain she'll have trying to simultaneously retain the monetary support of the psychotic leftist interest groups and maintain the facade of moderation before a greater American public. I honestly have to say though, I didn't expect her to trip this early in her congressional appointments. Not that I mind.
It also came fewer than two weeks after Pelosi's colleagues tapped her as the first female House speaker, then quickly snubbed her in her bid to propel longtime ally Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania to the majority leader post.
Murtha, also the subject of a federal bribery investigation in the 1980s (he was never charged), lost to Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland for the post in a vote by the party caucus.
Promising to clean up corruption and then appointing Murtha is like promising marital fidelity and frequenting the Red Light District. So, since her decision makes no political sense, can we infer her choice of Murtha, and later Hastings, are the result of some unseen political force? Perhaps some unscrupulous arm-twisting, back-scratching and jockeying for power? It's a safe bet.
"Sorry, haters, God is not finished with me yet," his [Hastings] statement said.
He later added, "Now where are my playahs up in this bitch?"


I couldn't stop laughing

I'll have you know, that's how terrorists actually talk.

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Not suprisingly

Misha over at Anti-Idiotarian does a fine job bringing this latest piece of filth to us from the mouth of Charlie Rangel.

I'd comment on Rangel's idiocy, but Misha does an adequete job, as always.


Some notes on 2008

Sorry for the lack of posts yesterday. This from CNN.

Democratic Sen. John Kerry, considering a second bid for the U.S. presidency, finished dead last in a poll on the likability of 20 top American political figures.

Really? To quote Fight Club, "I am Jack's complete lack of suprise."

The survey asked respondents to rate 20 political figures on a "feeling thermometer." The warmer or more favorable they felt toward a person the higher score they gave them on a scale of zero to 100. Respondents were given the option of saying they did not know enough about the figure to offer a rating.
In the current poll, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, a Republican, ranked first with a mean score of 64.2, followed by Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, 58.8, and McCain, 57.7. All three are potential presidential candidates.

And of the three, only Giuliani passes muster as a defense candidate. What the hell has Obama done anyway, to have gotten so popular? He's a junior senator! Look at his voting record, he's done almost nothing.
Though there's nothing new here. We pretty much knew that these wold be the big ones for 2008. As things look now, no candidate is particularly great, but Giuliani's crim-fighting spirit could prove useful in our war
on terror.


Sunday, November 26, 2006

Stupid news item of the week

According to MSNBC, Michael Richards is even falling on his knees before Jesse Jackson now. Excuse me, the Reverend Jesse Jackson.

Richards appeared on the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s nationally syndicated radio program, “Keep Hope Alive,” as a part of a series of apologies for the incident. He said he knew his comments hurt the black community, and hoped to meet with the two men.

It won't do any good. Your career is still ruined (what was left of it), the two "victims" are going to sue your ass off and we're all still laughing at you.

He told Jackson that he had not used the language before.

Bullshit, please continue.

Richards’ publicist, Howard Rubenstein, said Saturday that Richards has begun psychiatric counseling in Los Angeles to learn how to manage his anger.
“He acknowledged that his statements were harmful and opened a terrible racial wound in our nation,” Rubenstein said. “He pledges never ever to say anything like that again. He’s quite remorseful.”

Ugh, this is what I'm talking about. One man, one washed up comedian, opens up a "terrible racial wound in our nation"? I'm sure it does so much more damage than affirmative action does when a poor white student can't get into a college because a less qualified black student is needed to fill a quota.

Michael Richards is a has-been, and he's been relegated to doing standup. If his comments (which I don't condone by the way) can cause so much damage, than maybe the black community should check the behavior of Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock or others who frequently use racial humor. I personally don't mind it but apparently its damaging me more than I know.

Weak. We're becoming weak.


Saturday, November 25, 2006

The horror...the sheer horror

Reuters almost made my eyes fall out, as I was rolling them so hard.

Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski told Spain's El Pais newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation.

Who...the hell...cares?

"The methods consisted of making prisoners stand for long periods, sleep deprivation ... playing music at full volume, having to sit in uncomfortably ... Rumsfeld authorized these specific techniques."

There may even be unconfirmed reports of tickle torture exacted with a feather-duster. God Almighty, what a glorious waste of time this all is.

The Geneva Convention says prisoners of war should suffer "no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion" to secure information.

Please read the actual document, you morons. Nowhere does said document protect members of a resistance who do not adhere to the rules of war, among them displaying a fixed sign of allegiance visible at a distance. Hence, no protections. None. In the words of Willie Wonka, "You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good DAY sir!"

Why are we still crucifying Rumsfeld anyway? The man is stepping down, and we can all sleep better at night knowing there will be no more "having to sit uncomfortably" for those who want to kill us.

Jesus Christ. Find your brains for GOD'S SAKE people.



CNN's dealth cult brings us this one.

Sunni gunmen stormed two Shiite homes in Diyala province overnight and slaughtered 21 men in front of their families, Diyala authorities said Saturday. Since the Sadr City attack, enraged Shiites have retaliated by burning people to death and torching Sunni mosques, witnesses told CNN.

I don't care what someone's greivance is. This method of warfare is completely lacking in any sort of honor. I don't want to hear about other cultures. Human beings do not execute fathers in front of their children or burn people alive. There is something fundamentally wrong with these people, and it stems from a lack of humanity.

A simply disgusting display.


Friday, November 24, 2006

Reverse Racism

If a white man had said the same of blacks, he'd have been arrested for inciting racial violence. A black man spews his hatred, and he recieves applause in the capitol building. Sort of makes you feel like you're the only person with a brain.

See, its not racism unless it comes from the majority. Don't get me wrong, racism is the product of ignorance and blatantly wrong thinking. But no matter who the racism comes from, its ugly and disgusting, and frankly makes the person spouting the hate speech look extremely stupid.

Further, as you can probably see from the captions in the video, the overall subject was Hurricane Katrina Relief for African Americans. Seems to me that Hurricane Katrina was a disaster for Americans in general, not just the blacks. The media (and a certain Ray Nagin) is responsible for making this into a racial issue and further dividing the nation, rather than providing the solidarity we need to deal with such disasters.

The guy in this video, all the counter-racism racist civil rights lawyers, the KKK and the skinheads of the nation are pollutants and stains on the flag.


Thursday, November 23, 2006

A fair criticism

I've recently discovered the blog Southern Appeal, and I'm liking what I see. Today they presented a post discussing the discrepancy between classic conservatism (the only way to go in my book) and the mess it has turned into these days. You can find a brief analysis, and a link to a larger editorial, here.

True conservatism, at its heart, has its premise grounded on learning the lessons of the past, and not deviating from the status quo without careful consideration of the consequences. That doesn't seem to be what's been happening lately. Draw your own conclusions.


Should I be worried?

According to Fox News, we're about to have a sitdown with the insurgents in Iraq. Well, Prime Minister Maliki is, anyway.

Nouri al-Maliki’s government has asked insurgent leaders to send intermediaries to a national reconciliation conference, marking a new domestic drive to bring peace to Iraq.

I have to admit, when I first read this I was already getting fired up. We're negotiating with the enemy now? Then I read the following:

The summit will not include outside terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. It will address the question of Shia militias, but controversial groups such as Al-Mahdi Army will not be included — because the Shia-led government believes that it can deal with them within its own communities.

That's at least one point of relief. At least we're talking about the sectarian violence and not the goat-molesting 12th century barbarians that are streaming across the border. I'm still worried that certain concessions will be made that won't bode well for the sovereignty of the new nation, as I can't imagine mere words will stop the fighting, or even abate it.

Mr. al-Hakim, an agricultural engineer who belongs to perhaps the most influential Shia party in the government — the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq — said he wants to intensify the dialogue with the Baathists.

Whoops. There goes my cautious optimism, flushed right down the toilet. Read over the name of that guy's party. Alright, now what other nation do you know of that experienced "Islamic revolution"? I'll give you a hint: it's lead by a genocidal madman with a penchant for brown coats and nuclear weapons.

I don't think I'd be hugely out of line by saying that this looks bad indeed.


Happy Thanksgiving

Here's your cliche' festive, holiday post. Happy Thanksgiving to all those who regularly read this blog, or to those who just stop in from time to time. I for one am thankful to my right to free speech, that allows me to run this blog at all.

Go eat some turkey, you bastards.


Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Well said

Misha over at Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler posted this. It doesn't get any more "blood and guts" than that. Well said.


Seems we still have Marxists to worry about

As you might have guess by the graphic on the left, this bad boy comes from the Associated Press, who seem to be up to their necks in this story.

Police arrested 29 leftist activists who broke into The Associated Press office in the capital Monday to protest alleged mistreatment of prisoners in Turkey, authorities said. There were no injuries.

Leftists in this context refers to Marxists, as is pointed out later in the article. Pay close attention to how hard the AP comes down on the socialist bastards who took their own workers hostage. (That was sarcasm)

Shortly before police swarmed into the office, protesters coughed and leaned out of the windows to escape the effects of the gas. They had unfurled banners from the windows but were unable to secure a live interview on Turkish television as demanded as part of their efforts to publicize their cause.
The group often stages demonstrations against alleged torture and other mistreatment of prisoners in Turkey. It says it was formed after a military coup in 1980 as a voice for prisoners' rights, and claims that more than 100 prisoners have died in riots or hunger strikes in high-security prisons in the past decade.TAYAD has campaigned on behalf of families of jailed members of the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front, or DHKP-C, a banned Marxist group. The DHKP-C, which is leading the strike, has claimed responsibility for a number of assassinations and bombings since the 1970s.

So since they found themselves unable to publicize their cause by forcing a broadcast from the AP building, the AP decided to do it for them in text form following the incident. Notice the above reporting slants sympathetically towards the hostage takers? It just goes to show that even in the face of coersion that the mass media still favors Marxist causes ever since their little darlings in the Soviet Union went under.

Now to be fair, a spokesman for the AP stated:

"We strongly protest this incident and we believe that journalists should be allowed to do their work without interference."

Translation: "All you guys had to do was ask us politely and we would have given you all the airtime you desired. We're on YOUR side!"


Tuesday, November 21, 2006

To be interpreted as "bang bang, love Iran"

A Lebanese cabinet Minister was assassinated today, according to Reuters.

Gunmen on Tuesday assassinated Lebanese Christian cabinet minister Pierre Gemayel, an outspoken critic of Syria, plunging Lebanon deeper into a crisis over ties with its dominant neighbor.
At least three gunmen rammed their car into Gemayel's vehicle near Beirut, then leapt out and riddled it with bullets, firing at Gemayel with silencer-equipped automatic weapons at point-blank range in a Christian neighborhood, witnesses said.

Let's see what those animals in Hezbollah have to say about the attack.

"Syria strongly condemns the killing," the official Syrian news agency SANA said. The Shi'ite group Hezbollah also condemned the "low criminal act" and urged an investigation.

As low as, say, using civilians residences as firebases for their missile strikes against Israel? No, certainly not THAT low, but pretty damned dishonorable nonetheless. I also remind everyone that Hezbollah is a strong supporter of Syria, so draw your own conclusions.

Gemayel, 34, was rushed to hospital where he later died of his wounds. Hundreds of angry and weeping family members and supporters gathered at the hospital.

Wow, do you see that? They gathered and wept and mourned and...nothing else. They didn't flip over cars, throw stones or light flags on fire. In a world where nothing negative can be said about Islam without rioting on a global scale, this is encouraging. A peaceful show of resistance to a regime that is perpetually suckling the tit of Iran. I imagine their hands aren't entirely clean either.


Monday, November 20, 2006

War is NOT an X-box game

*May be disturbing*
It's cruel, and brutal and dark. Listen as the marine prays for deliverance and he and his budies and holded up. I can only guess as to what that horrible crumping noise is outside the building.

That is what our guys are facing over there. It's no movie, and its no game. Out there, you can feel the devil bite your ass. So, if you see your congressman or senator voting to defund the war, remember that they're taking protection and equipment away from these soldiers, and be sure to vote their asses out so quickly their head spins.


Sunday, November 19, 2006

Stupid news item of the week

Well well, stupid shit coming out of Charley Rangel's mouth. Is anyone suprised? Fox News picks it up:

A senior House Democrat said Sunday he will introduce legislation to reinstate the military draft, asserting that current troop levels are insufficient to sustain possible challenges against Iran, North Korea and Iraq. At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," he said.

Let's see. Isn't it plausible that Rangel is just proposing the draft to foment further anti-war feeling? His last quote is especially telling, almost tongue in cheek.

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

No shit. It's nice to know that Rangel is wasting our time over in the House though.


You have to admire this guy

CNN brings around this story.

It was not a laid-back Turkish holiday. The citizens of the proud, predominantly Muslim nation had no love of Popes. To the East, the Iranian government was galvanizing anti-Western feeling.
The news reported that an escaped killer was on the loose, threatening to assassinate the pontiff when he arrived. Yet the Holy Father was undaunted.
"Love is stronger than danger," he said. "I am in the hands of God."

I could end the article right here with applause and leave it at that. Brave words from an admirable man. This, however, refers to John Paul II back in the 70's. What does Time Magazine think about the Holy See these days? Why, they do nothing but foment trouble!

Instead, Benedict, 79, will arrive carrying a much different reputation: that of a hard-knuckle intellect with a taste for blunt talk and interreligious confrontation. Just 19 months into his tenure, the pope has become as much a lightning rod as a moral leader; suddenly, when he speaks, the whole world listens.

He spoke out against religious violence, for God's sake. The response? Violence. Violence on the part of barbaric neanderthals who, when challenged to clean up the image of their own religion, respond by murdering Catholic clergy worldwide.

The topic is extraordinarily fraught: there are, after all, a billion or so nonviolent Muslims on the globe; the Roman Catholic church's own record in the religious-mayhem department is hardly pristine; and even the most naive of observers understands that the Vicar of Christ might harbor an institutional prejudice against one of Christianity's main global competitors.

Give me a break. The medieval injustices done by the Church were left in the MEDIEVAL AGES, where they belonged. The ash-heap of history! As for these billions of nonviolent Muslims, the pope wasn't even speaking in regards to them. (By the way, where are their voices of protests when the extremist take it upon themselves to butcher innocents?) The final line reveals the greatest misunderstanding that these secular liberal pricks can't seem to get out of their skull: THIS IS NOT A CRUSADE.

Look, I'm not saying Islam is inherently a bad religion that promotes violence, and neither does Benedict. Instead, what he is saying is that Muslim leaders MUST rise to the occasion to condemn violence, just as it would fall to the pope to do the same if it were Christians blowing themselves up around the world. Muslims will not find acceptance until they can clean up the disease that's eating away at their faith.

Benedict won't back down, and he shouldn't because he's 100% correct.


Saturday, November 18, 2006

Torture/Coercive Techniques

A friend of mind recently asked me to enumerate what acts in Guantanamo I considered torture. The answer is simple: so far none of them.

Waterboarding? That's the worst people can bring up. It's essentially simulated drowning for the participant in a controlled environment. The question is, who are we using it on? US citizens? Nope. Foreign nationals? Negative. The upper brass of our detainess who we believe are holding critical information and are refusing to play ball? Check. I frankly couldn't give a damn if some uncooperative little shit gets the life scared out of him if the information breaks up cells and saves lives. So far, every person waterboarded has yielded such information.

Sleep deprivation/sonic assault/temperature manipulation/forced standing et al: don' make me laugh.

What DO I consider torture?

-Savage beating
-Sexual assault
-Mutilation of any kind
-Humiliating treatment that you would not subject your dog to.
-Bone breaking
-Anything that looks like it belongs in a Clive Barker film

This isn't an exhaustive list, but you can see how I'm categorizing things. Fill in the blanks.


Friday, November 17, 2006

A little humor

Whether Democrat or Republican, I think you'll get a kick out of this! A little boy goes to his dad and asks, "What is Politics?" Dad says, "Well son, let me try to explain it this way: I am the head of the family, so call me The President. Your mother is the administrator of the money, so we call her the Government. We are here to take care of your needs, so we will call you the People. The nanny, we will consider her the Working Class. And your baby brother, we will call him the Future. Now think about that and see if it makes sense." So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what Dad has said Later that night,! he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper. So the littleboy goes to his parent's room and finds his mother asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny. He gives up and goes back to bed The next morning, the little boy say's to his father, "Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now. " The father says, "Good, son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about." The little boy replies, "The President is screwing the Working Class while the Government is sound asleep. The People are being ignored and the Future is in deep shit


Thursday, November 16, 2006

Not for him, not unless you have to

Sorry for the inactivity as late. I'm back with this from CNN.

The 2008 race for the White House intensified Thursday as one of the big name Republican players, Sen. John McCain, threw himself into the fray.

Forgive me for not leaping for joy, but I like the fact that coercive interrogation saves lives and thwarts attacks. None of which, when closely examined, has any meaning when compared to his Vietnam POW stint, before you bring that up.

Registered Republicans surveyed in an October CNN poll about their 2008 presidential preferences put Giuliani and McCain at the top of the heap, well ahead of other possible contenders.

That's because nobody else has any name recognition, not because they are the more moderate/socially liberal candidates, as CNN would have you believe.

He angered conservative opponents of immigration by co-authoring a bill with Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts that would allow illegal immigrants to become guest workers. The idea is for illegal immigrants to work their way toward citizenship.

You sign anything with Ted Kennedy, and you are on my shitlist. Here's hoping we have a slate of conservative candidates that have bigger balls than McCain and further to the right than Giuliani. I oppose McCain's candidacy, and it remains to be seen if Rudy can court my vote.


Sunday, November 12, 2006

More demagoguery from the left

CNN carries the following story.

Joe Klein of Time Magazine says about the elections:

This was a big deal. Certainly, it was the end of George W. Bush's radical experiment in partisan governance. It might have been even bigger than that: the end of the conservative pendulum swing that began with Ronald Reagan's revolution.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. There was no liberal victory here. None. Here there was only punishment of Republicans for not adhering to Reaganite conservatism. Period.

In fact, if there was a common strand in last week's Democratic victories and Republican defeats, it was the ascendancy of realists. The architects of the Democratic victory, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, had calculated with cold-eyed efficiency which candidates the party would support, regardless of the extent of their orthodoxy.

Neither of those pigs should ever be associated with anything approaching realism. They pray for more bloodshed in Iraq to use it as a tool to further their own power.

But the administration's stubbornness on Iraq, neatly symbolized by Rumsfeld's detachment from reality, certainly didn't help the GOP cause. Of course, it is assumed by most people in Washington that bipartisan efforts on even the smallest matters, much less the war in Iraq, will be near impossible.

The only stubborness they can be accused of is of not taking aggressive action to route out the murdering bastards over there. That's not the type of stubborness I feel the Times is alluding to. Sounds to me like the want retreat. Yes, we are stubborn in the face of opposition because we have the world's biggest sledgehammer, and none can stand against it when it falls. We just need to USE IT.

The question now is whether "winning" means blocking the president or demonstrating the ability to govern. It probably means a little of both, but I suspect the Democrats will be better served by proving they have the maturity to do the latter.

Don't hold your breath. The Dems won't be able to resist impeachment proceedings and generalized dick-headedness once the ball gets rolling. They'll show their true colors before long, and hopefully this will revitalize the conservative element in Congress.


Saturday, November 11, 2006

World's Finest

There's no reason why we can't win over there.


Friday, November 10, 2006

The Democrats have fans

This is telling, and it comes to us from WorldNetDaily. A series of quotes from various friendly neighborhood jihadists

-"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND.

-Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin, said the Democrats' talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes him feel "proud."
"As Arabs and Muslims we feel proud of this talk," he told WND. "Very proud from the great successes of the Iraqi resistance. This success that brought the big superpower of the world to discuss a possible withdrawal."

-Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.
"[The mujahedeen fighters] brought the Americans to speak for the first time seriously and sincerely that Iraq is becoming a new Vietnam and that they should fix a schedule for their withdrawal from Iraq," boasted Abu Ayman.

So surely the terrorists have misjudged the Democrats, right? Surely they're not weak-kneed, naiive little children with no grasp on how to wage war. Pelosi illuminates us:

In a recent interview with CBS's "60 Minutes," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, stated, "The jihadists (are) in Iraq. But that doesn't mean we stay there. They'll stay there as long as we're there."

Idiot bitch alert. Maybe she's right. Let's ask one of our camel-humping friends what he thinks.

Islamic Jihad's Saadi, laughing, stated, "There is no chance that the resistance will stop."
He said an American withdrawal from Iraq would "prove the resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works. The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States."
Jihad Jaara said an American withdrawal would "mark the beginning of the collapse of this tyrant empire (America)."
"Therefore, a victory in Iraq would be a greater defeat for America than in Vietnam."

That's the whole point. You fight fire with fire, and meet strength with strength. If you fail, you die. That is the nature of war. It is also worth noting that an al-Qaeda leader recently remarked in an audio tape that the jihad would not stop until the White House was destroyed. Stick that in your bong and smoke it, you hippies.


Why we fight

This from Fox News:

British authorities are tracking almost 30 terrorist plots involving 1,600 individuals, the head of Britain's MI5 spy agency said, adding that many of the suspects are homegrown British terrorists plotting homicide attacks.

And I'm sure the Brits have no qualms about invading the "privacy" of these militant loonies in order to stop their carnage.

"It is the youth who are being actively targeted, groomed, radicalized and set on a path that frighteningly quickly could end in their involvement in mass murder of their fellow U.K. citizens," Manningham-Buller said. "Young teenagers are being groomed to be suicide bombers.
"Today we see the use of homemade improvised explosive devices, but I suggest tomorrow's threat will include the use of chemicals, bacteriological agents, radioactive materials and even nuclear technology," she added.

So given this information, what, can we surmise, is the extent of the terrorist threat in the United States? After all, we have a gaping hole in our border that our government doesn't seem to give a shit about. With everyone crocking about "alarmism" in our nation, this news story should serve as a firm, open-palmed slap in the face.

The Visigoths are here, and they want to burn Rome to the ground.


Thursday, November 09, 2006

New Defense Secretary

Let's hope this guy has more balls than Rumsfeld.

I don't know what to make of him. The Christian Science Monitor says the following about him:

And in this case, a change in style might result in a change in substance. Skilled at building consensus, a realist who adapts to conditions as he finds them, Mr. Gates might find it easier to urge a change in course in Iraq than did Donald Rumsfeld - who was a chief architect of the administration's Iraq policies, after all.


Next year Democrats are likely to push legislation calling for a yet-unspecified troop withdrawal from Iraq. They may add bills calling for more money for veterans and special forces, and for the repair of military equipment damaged in Iraq fighting.

Why is it that the Democrats always seem to try and shore up their hawk resume by working for veteran's benefits? They support the troops so long as we never have to use them to bloody the nose of our enemies.

Look all's I'm saying is that the Dems seem to like this guy, and that worries me. Let's face it, the modern Democratic party is NOT centrist. It is led by and largely made up of the far left. Leftists are known to be squeamish about using any sort of military action (see Vietnam, Mogadishu) and this adorable sort of naiivete is dangerous.

Listen not to what they say, but watch what they do.


Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Sweet Jesus

Save us all.

Nancy Pelosi has taken leadership of the House. Hold your children closer to your chests and lock your doors.

But seriously, I found it illuminating that when asked LAST NIGHT by Wolf Blitzer what the Democrat plan for Iraq was, Dean said it was "too soon to be thinking about that."


His party is about to own the House, and has extended their influence in the Senate, and he says its too soon to think about that? I say its about freaking time you started thinking about that Howie! Moreover the Democrats have two years now to convince the Americans that they can win this thing in Iraq, and that they're not the gutless cowards they've shown themselves to be. We do need change, but not like the liberal Democrats have been saying. We hit HARDER in Iraq, not withdrawl.

If any good came from last night, its that hopefully Republicans will take this as a chastising of their vote whoring to the illegal Mexican population and their compromising with those who wring their hands over the "torture" of our enemies. This, I hope, will lead to a resurgence of conservative voting, better spending and a harder line of military matters by the Republicans. That would render their defeat into a lesson to be learned from, hopefully resulting in the victory of an '08 presidential candidate with a set of Reaganesque balls.


Tuesday, November 07, 2006

A few positive words

No, the election didn't largely go my way ideologically. Trust me, I'm going to cut into this election with a chainsaw tommorrow.

Tonight however, I'd like to remind everyone, conservative or liberal, that once again the United States has had another peaceful transition in power. We live in a nation free of military coups and dictatorial control of the polls. We should count ourselves fortunate to be blessed with such a great nation.


Calling fans of 24

If you like to watch terrorists get shot to pieces on 24 as much as I do, you'll want to check out Blogs4Bauer. Also be sure to support the show by buying seasons 1-4 on dvd.


Recommended candidates

Below is my slate of recommended, pro-defense candidates. My list is free of partisan bias. Vote by the issues.

If you haven't voted yet, get off your ass.

-Randy Graf (R) 8th District Arizona House (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Doug Lamborn (R) 5th District Colorado House (Democratic opponent is pro-defense, but more watered down)

-Jon L. Kyl (R) Arizona Senate (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Rick O'Donnell (R) 7th District Colorado (I especially like this guy)

-Joe Lieberman (I) Connecticut Sentae (Lukewarm on interrogations, but his opponent is clearly a coward)

-Jim Marshall (D) 8th Georgia District (Both candidates viable, but Marshall gets the endorsement for supporting benefits for disabled vets)

-Jim Talent (R) Missouri Senate (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Rick Santorum (R) Pennsylvania Senate (Mainly because Democratic opponent is a partisan sycophant)

-Bob Corker (R) Tennessee Senate (Both candidates seem to be partisan hacks, but his Democratic opponent has a bad defense track record)

-Thelma Drake (R) 2nd Virginia District (Both candidates lukewarm, but Drake at least supports defense in rhetoric, while her opponent is silent)

-George Allen (R) Virginia Senate (Very strong candidate. Highly endorsed.)

If any of these men or women are in your area, put your vote down for them so we can butcher the murderous barbarians that camp at our gates.

**And yes, I primarily endorse Republican candidates this go around. Democrats seem to have no balls these days. Show me Democrats like JFK and you'll see my support for them rise.


Monday, November 06, 2006

Useful ego

Alright everyone, this is my lecture to all of you, and my effort to get you to get out and vote.

I know you're tired of Washington. I know sometimes you feel as though your vote means nothing. Maybe it doesn't, but your vote attached to mine and mine attached to a hundred others DOES mean something. Changes at the aggregate level begin with the individual, and change is sorely needed.

You may tell me that electing new politicians will only bring more of the same, and I can't really promise that this is untrue. What I can tell you is that politicians are motivated by self-interest and ego, and this ego can be sharpened and used by us as a weapon. You want to affect change? You hit the politicians where it hurts. Go to the polls, if not to support a candidate, then do it to punish one. Tell him you disapprove of his tactics by stripping away his power, and send a message to the fellow that beats him that he's next. The alternative is you sit idly by and give silent consent to that with which you disagee.

This is most important of all: no matter what your views on welfare, abortion, gay marriage or what have you, you NEED to vote for defense candidates. No other issue matters if you're dead. This is not a Republican scare tactic. If a Democrat is a better defense candidate, vote for him. Make no mistake, our enemy wants us dead, and IS capable of killing you and your entire family.

I'll say that again. He is willing and able to kill you and your entire family.

The only thing standing between you and the jungle is the world's finest military. Unfortunately, its hands are tied by the politicians. Thus, fill the chambers of the legislature of men who will wield our military like the finely-honed weapon it is. Men who will bring pain and death to our enemies before they bring it to us.


Stupid news item of the week

Reuters graces us with this glorious waste of time.

Did a clairvoyant help U.S. commandos ferret Saddam Hussein out of his hiding place in Iraq three years ago?

I'm having a hard time stifling my laughter.

Israeli-born celebrity psychic Uri Geller, best known for his spoon-bending antics, says the power of the paranormal led U.S. troops to the fugitive Iraqi ex-dictator.

Spooky huh? What's more, evidence is beginning to surface that Jesus actually piloted the UFO that shot down flight 93 on 9/11.

You remember when they found Saddam Hussein in Iraq? A soldier walked over to a rock, lifted it and then found a trap-door and found him in there," Geller told Reuters.
Geller, who says he worked for the Central Intelligence Agency during the Cold War, said his information came from a high-level source involved in U.S. paranormal programs.

This source was later confirmed to be none other than Sasquatch, who is covertly working alongside the United States as an outside consultant on all things paranormal. The woodland beast has since been dismissed for his lack of discretion.


Sunday, November 05, 2006

"Peace through strength"

The Christian Science Monitor carries this one.

In a new thread to the North Korean bomb saga, arguments over Japan's nuclear ambitions are becoming the focus as prominent politicians from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) continue to raise the issue.

Any objections yet? I thought not. On we go.

Security experts say that nukes would be of little or no benefit to Tokyo - neither politically nor in military terms - and that the recent statements are mostly bluster. Yet the continuing, very public discussions underscore how regional security threats are deepening the anxiety among Japan's conservative political set.
"Alarmist views have been continually wrong in the past and they are wrong again now," says Shunji Taoka, a defense writer and former professor at Tsukuba University.

Why is it that the fruitcakes in academia seem to label every threat "alarmist"? The threat posed by terrorists and wide-opened borders? Alarmism. They haven't the stomach nor the substance to prepare for war, and it is this preparation that is the surest road to peace. You keep the other dogs from biting you by ensuring you have the sharpest teeth.

"Nuclear deterrence will not work against an irrational or desperate opponent" and would be unlikely to prevent the desperate last acts of a North Korea on the brink of collapse, says Taoka.

Neither will screaming and running to the UN for shelter. And I'm not entirely convinced that painting a giant red target on Kim Jong-Il's palaces wouldn't grab his attention. If anything, he's self-interested.

Some victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki still bear physical scars, and the moral implications of the US decision to use nuclear weapons haunt a generation.

Then I'm sure they will agree, it would have been to their advantage to have nukes of their own at the time. Too harsh? *shrugs*

While we're at it, let's remove the restrictions on Japan's military. With China rising in power, Russia hiding their cards up their sleeves and North Korea's leader showing his ass, Japan seems to be our best friend over there.


He got off easy

CNN carries this article proclaiming the coming demise of Saddam Hussein.

This particular death sentance comes as a result of our friend's heavy-handedness with some folks who tried to kill him many years ago. So now the butcher gets his appeals process, and afterwards we get to lynch the bastard right?

Not quite.

Hussein is also in the middle of another trial involving the 1988 Anfal campaign, the government offensive in the country's Kurdish region. Hussein is charged in that case with genocide.

Which means we have to try him again to get another death sentance so we can hang him twice. Just you watch, my prediction is that he'll die in prison before the bureacracy gets around to stringing him up, much like Milosevic.

Oooh, maybe we can make the execution a live pay-per-view event, and use the proceeds to buy humvees with better armor so our guys don't get their legs blown off by IEDs? It would be ironic yeah?


Saturday, November 04, 2006

No, this is not real.

But by God, its funny.

Iraq's Atomic Weapons Program?

Before you start lambasting me as a Bush lackey, read this New York Times piece. I encourage you to read it in its context so you're sure not to miss anything.

At first the article reads like a chastising of Congressional Republicans for forcing these documents to be publicized. Fair enough, draw your own conclusions. What interests me is paragraph fourteen, which reads as follows.

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

Now if I'm reading this correctly, AFTER Desert Storm (meanings, as seen above, 2002) documents were written up that indicated Saddam had an a-bomb program, one that we narrowly prevented from reaching fruition? Look, if you're a Republican stop cheering and wagging your finger, and if you're Democrat quit your pouting. Looking at this information objectively seems to raise some serious questions.

Chief among them is why the Times buried this story in the fourteenth frigging paragraph, and ONLY in the fourteenth! Everything else is an attack at placing nuclear blueprints on the internet, with paragraph fourteen consisting of two lines. If we rule out incompetence, it might be suggested that the Times has an agenda.

Once more: Iraq was close to developing an atomic bomb in 2002, a little a year away, which would have put them in control of one circa 2003. We invaded in 2003. I'll let you connect the dots.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Please Refer to Article 4

I've noticed alot of people seem to be misinformed about Geneva Convention rights, asserting time and again that those held in Guantanamo are entitled to them. The actual official document as it relates to prisoners of war can be found here.

As the title suggests, Article 4 is the crux of the issue. It states captured prisoners consisting of a defeated standing militray force, as well as organized resistance members are entitled to these rights. HOWEVER, resistance fighters must meet the following requirements.

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

(Emphasis added) Feel free to read more of the document to get this in context.

Our enemies seem to fail both of the bold-faced criteria, if ot one of the other criteria as well. Thus they truly are entitled to even less than we're giving them.

I know this will create alot of feedback, and I welcome it. This is an important issue.


How true. The other element holding our boys (and the Iraqis) back is the death cultists in the media. Credit for this cartoon goes to Larry Wright.

Ready The Salvos

You know, I was recently accused of attacking Democrats to the detriment of my non-partisan crusade against the politicians.
It just so happens that I stumbled across this Reuters article this morning, and it provides the perfect opportunity to parry such claims. *gives the nod to that poster*

One look at the title should make you do one of three things: laugh, weep, or just puke. We have the Commander-in-Chief challenging his opponents for a plan. I'll say that again and take care not to have an aneurysm. Our President is defending the conduct of the Iraq War by pointing out that his opponents can do no better?

"Truth is the Democrats can't answer that question," he said. "Harsh criticism is not a plan for victory." says Bush.

No, it isn't. And neither is the half-assed containment policy we're enacting over there. So we have the two major powers in this country, and each when asked for their plan screams bloody murder "I don't know, but it beats the other guy's plan". In the midst of all that, our boys die daily. No, I don't want to leave Iraq. The job isn't done. Regardless of anyone's personal views on how we got there, most will agree that the job needs to be finished, and finished effectively. Our handling of the war stinks of tip-toeing around the media and taking care not to lose too many votes.

Bush said Democratic claims that the tax cuts would hurt the economy were wrong.
"Well, if their election forecasts are as good as their economic forecasts, we're going to have a great day on November 7," he said to cheers.

Maybe you will. Maybe the Republicans will hold their ground and it will be a day of celebrating for the GOP. Maybe, on the other hand, the Democrats will sweep both chambers, and it will be a great day for them. What about us? What about our soldiers? What about America? When is her great day coming? If you see that great day coming, please tell me, because I sadly do not.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

We Just Don't Get The Joke

That is, according to Keith Olbermann. Thanks to a friend of mine for bringing the link to my attention.

"The context was unmistakable: Texas; the state of denial; stuck in Iraq. No interpretation required.
And Mr. Bush and his minions responded by appearing to be too stupid to realize that they had been called stupid."

Yes Olbermann. Bush felt that way, members of Kerry's own party felt that way (including Hillary), millions of Americans felt that way. We all must have been too stupid to interpret such a clever joke in its correct context. Would that we could drink from the same font of knowledge that you and Kerry do.
Olbermann continues:

"This president must apologize to the troops for having suggested, six weeks ago, that the chaos in Iraq, the death and the carnage, the slaughtered Iraqi civilians and the dead American service personnel, will, to history, 'look like just a comma.'"

Yes, by God, because we cannot abide optimism. Dammit we won't STAND for it. Bush has time and again validated their deaths by speaking of the legacies they are helping to build.

"This president must apologize to the troops because the intelligence he claims led us into Iraq proved to be undeniably and irredeemably wrong."

And so must all of the senators and representatives (the democratic ones among them) who voted for the resolution. While we're at it, let's have the CIA apologize too.

The fact is that as you read Olbermann's article, he uses the same devisive language that he blames Bush for. Republicans are Bush minions. They make fun of "cripples". Blah blah blah. I have little if any respect for Olbermann, and not because he is a dissenting voice. It is because he's an ignorant jackass that IS the partisan hack he claims to rail against. Hypocrisy is disgusting whether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

Mortal Threat

There is no reason not to vote. Not ever.

This video was originally found at The Political Pitbull

**EDIT- I endorse this video only insofar as it shows the nature of our foe. I do not endorse the partisan leanings contained herein*

Soldier Still Missing

Ahmed al-Taie, a 41-year-old linguist and U.S. soldier, is still missing after being kidnapped by gunmen while attempting to visit his family ten days ago. There's been absolutely no dialogue between his kidnappers and the U.S. military.

Does the Iraqi government (whom we've liberated, founded and propped up) care about our plight? Not enough to allow us to conduct roadblocks to try and locate our soldier. Why was this move made?

Take a look at this Reuters article.

It seems the city in which these roadblocks took place is under the influence of al-Sadr's lot. For the uninitiated, al-Sadr is the Shi'ite pile of dog feces that's operating (it's suspected) as a proxy of Iran and is leading one of the three major factions opposing the Coalition. What does that have to do with Maliki's call for the dismantling of the roadblocks?

Power. The cleric controls a faction that holds political sway in the new government, and Maliki wants an ally. His justification?

Asked about U.S. policy toward Sadr, whose supporters rose up against U.S. forces on two occasions in 2004, Caldwell said: "He's a part of this political process. From the comments he's made recently he wants to see violence reduced. He wants to see greater peace and security for Iraqis."

Screw his recent remarks. You are defined by your actions. al-Sadr is a man who compells his followers to acts of cruelty and barbarism, and is a barbarian himself. I say we go door to door in Sadr City, asking for leads on our soldier, always with the polite reminder that if we don't find him in another week, we're going to level that festering sore with carpet bombs.

You take one of ours, we kill one hundred of yours. That has to be our policy. KEEP POLITICIANS OUT OF WARS.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

The Least He could Do

The Associated Press has run a story that seems to suggest that, in spite of showing his ass at the press conference yesterday, Kerry is finally issuing something approaching an apology. All of us were calling for it, and we've at least now recieved a baseline show of regret to our troops.

That's not to say I'm letting Kerry off that easily. Read between the lines. Had this not been an election year, there never would have been an apology. It's clear that behind the scenes, Kerry's softy buddies were wrenching his arm for making them look bad (as though making them look worse were possible) and in the process made him come to the table for the good of the Party of Opportunists.

So what's the lesson to be learned here? Nothing matters unless its election currency. An apology to the troops? Only warranted for purposes of Democrat damage control. Voting for the Iraq War Resolution? Only if they think they can bag a few votes. Turn around and start calling for redeployment and phased withdrawls? Again, wait until the political weather is right before making a move.

So Kerry. Thanks for the apology. Now piss off.

Interesting Tidbit

This was recently brought to my attention in an email.

"The company is owned by PDV America, Inc., an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela."

So as I understand it, Citgo is indirectly under the control of the Venezuelan government. That is to say, a government head up by a man who called our president Satan in front of the U.N..

Take that into consideration next time you dump the contents of your wallet into your gas tank.

The Biggest Reason to Vote

This was posted over at Wide Awakes Radio. In a nutshell, this is why we have to go to the polls.

Unless you look forward to Miss Speaker of the House Pelosi?

Biting the Hand that Feeds

This from the Christian Science Monitor:

"Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Tuesday ordered the dismantling of US and Iraqi checkpoints surrounding the area."

And why might that be?

"The checkpoints - manned by US and Iraqi troops for a week in an effort to find a kidnapped US military translator of Iraqi descent as well as snare an alleged death-squad leader - had snarled traffic and bred growing anger in the slum."

We're concerned about traffic delays and pissed-off motorists when the country is infested with guerilla fighters and murdering jihadists? This smells more of a power play to me.

"The Americans agreed with Maliki's decision to leave Sadr City because of the US elections," says a driver with the nickname Abu Haidar. "If they let [the unrest] continue, it will spread. Moqtada [al-Sadr] and Maliki played it very well."

And there is the crux of it all, boys and girls. We acquiesed to the demands of Maliki because it was a good decision tactically right? Because we want our translator back? Not so much. Turns out our withdrawl was politically calculated, just like this whole damned war.

Bottom line, politicians cannot win wars. Generals, soldiers and specialists do. Politicians are spineless slaves to opinion polls, and its nauseating. The last time politicians got too involved with a war, we had Vietnam. Get the message?

Bush Goes for the Throat

You know, often George and I don't see eye to eye. This case is an exception. Finally Bush sounds sutibly forceful. Not as forceful as I would have liked, but still high calibur. Notice how he didn't stoop to calling anyone stupid? Instead, he just showed Kerry for the snake-in-the-grass, villainous turd sandwich he is by quoting his own words.

It sounds distateful even still, and I still fail to see the humor or "botched joke" behind the senator's comments. Thank God that man never became president. He would have been commander in chief to a bunch of brave men and women that its clear he has no respect for. Say what you will about Bush, and the way the war is being executed. President Bush at least has a human compassion and genuine respect for our soldiers.

The most important part of Bush's comments are contained in the end of his speech. Regardless of party affiliation, we should all have a baseline of respect for our soldiers. Period, end of story. It takes alot of guts to be a soldier, and their choice to serve had nothing to do with test scores.