Fisking the Sunday Herald's Tom Shields
Did you want more evidence of the mentality of a typical degenerate Euro-coward? Try this, with my responses in italics:

Slightly Upticked Off With Iraq War

Why the murder of four civilians proves the horrific mess that's been made of the war
By Tom Shields

IRAQ is now so free and liberated that a mob in Falluja can, without let or hindrance, burn and rip apart and then hang up on telephone wires the bodies of American mercenaries.

The characterization of those men as mercenaries implies that they were hired to go and hunt down people by extralegal or extramilitary means. This is wrong. They were hired to provide protection for the very people who are in Iraq to help re-establish that country's infrastructure. That is, they were security guards, albeit well-armed and highly-skilled ones. But they were not hired killers or whatever other sick and deceptive labels the Left wants to apply to them.

The images of the horrific end suffered by the four civilians were flashed on our screens almost a year after President Bush announced that the invasion of Iraq was "mission accomplished".

Calling those men civilians in the next sentence after calling them mercenaries may meet the requirements of the "irony" Shields wishes to develop by contrast with the President's words, but it ignores the reality of war. You don't end 30-plus years of Ba'athist rule with a single stroke; you have to work at liberation and make sacrifices. There are insurgencies and counter-insurgencies in every war of liberation. I choose to honor the sacrifices my countrymen are making because I believe in their objective. I don't call the war they fought in a mistake just because I'm some neo-communist wanker who doesn't like the President.

The pictures from Falluja, and the daily reports of the slaughter of American soldiers, will surely make many US citizens ponder on the wisdom of the Iraq adventure.

What would wisdom be to a decadent surrenderist like Shields? To never finally enforce the 17 resolutions against Iraq, thus demonstrating the worthlessness of the United Nations? To stand idly by while corrupt European politicians personally profit from the oil-for-food programs meant to feed Iraqis but, instead, used to keep a murderous Islamofascist regime in power forever? To deny against all evidence that radical Islamism is a perverse and disease-ridden ideology that must be changed, one country at a time? The wages of inaction and indifference is the death of your own liberties, Mr. Shields. You are a loser to take the attitude that you have.

What is even surer is the head-in-the-desert-sand response of the US military.

Stand by for news, you wretched bag of smegma.

After the attack, Brigadier-General Mark Kimmitt said: "Despite an uptick in localised engagements, the overall Iraqi area of operation remains relatively stable, with negligible impact on the coalition's ability to continue progress in governance, economic development, and restoration of essential services."

Is this not so? Of course, neither the surrenderist crowd in Great Britain nor our own seditious pack of liars in America would know anything about the improvements in the lives of the vast majority of Iraqis since they take their news from anti-war partisans who have a point of view to sell that doesn't include any of the important gains we have helped that country to make. No, it's better to hammer away at the Coalition with flashes of Sunni psychopathy to blind the man in the street than to show Iraqis reading uncensored newspapers and driving their new cars for the first time in their lives.

The families of the Falluja four will be comforted to know that the obscene deaths of their loved ones is merely an uptick.

Oh, and you're such a defender of their sensibilities with your chickenshit label of mercenary that you slapped on them at the start, right? Get your shit straight, jackass!

They will be further comforted by the general's promise: "We will respond. It's going to be deliberate, it will be precise and it will be overwhelming."

This will be overwhelming as in shock and awe.

And what reason do you have to doubt this? Do you expect anyone to believe that, had the American military gone in there with guns blazing, you wouldn't now be pissing and moaning about what trigger-happy savages we are? You're a weak-minded commie rat, Shields. The only problem is that there's no telling whether a successful "pacification" of Fallujah would satisfy you or just make you more of a Ba'athist sympathizer than you already are.

The American military may not be too efficient at winning peace but they are brand leaders in jargon.

Right. Like D-Day, H-Hour, and VE Day, you chattering pustule?

They gave us collateral damage which is when enemy bits are blown up by mistake. And friendly fire when your own side are blown to bits by mistake.

Or, like Neville Chamberlain coining the phrase "peace in our time." This game is fun, Tom!

There is also the surgical strike which is when the US air force tries to launch an attack on Osama bin Laden but hits an Afghan wedding party instead, killing sundry teenage bridesmaids and grandparents. This is usually done with a smart bomb.

Oh, what delicious irony. It's no surprise, though, that a pasty Euro-cockbite who doesn't know his history wouldn't know anything about the sad realities of warfare, either.

There is one bit of US military jargon I am looking forward to hearing. Whatever is Pentagon-speak for: "We have a big mistake, let's get out of here".

So, basically, you take pleasure in anticipating the failure of America's armed forces. What kind of a peacenik are you, anyway?

The absurd corollary expostulated by those in favour of the war-mongers is that if you are not with Bush and Bliar [sic], then you are with the terrorists.

How is that absurd? That is, in fact, the truth. If you are not in support of taking the offensive in this war against terrorists, then you are condemned to assuming the posture of waiting for the Great Big Islamic Porno Pole up Your Slopchute. Get a clue, Shields! You may find American jargon amusing in your own condescending way but, as it's used by this President, the point gets made.

They have missed the small point, that the world is less safe since Iraq was occupied.

Well, the Muslim world, at any rate.

All the coalition has succeeded in doing is to turn Iraq into a terrorist theme park for al-Qaeda and chums.

Hmmm. Maybe you're on to something. Don't look at it too hard, though, lest you realize the logic of such "attractions."

The answer to the problem, if there is an answer, does not lie in overwhelming shock and awe attacks on so-called evil nations.

But I thought you were suggesting before that we had our heads in the sand and hadn't done enough. Which side are you on now?

It lies in achieving some sort of deal to end apartheid for Arabs in Israel and Palestine.

Did George Galloway whisper that in your ear before he pulled out? Whatever the case, you are doing exactly what al-Qaeda wishes for all of its European sympathizers to do, which is make some link between Israeli sovereignty and security and the Coalition's presence in Iraq. You play into their hands with that nonsense. And, if you actually believe that Islamofascists would stop terrorizing the world if only we'd withdraw from Iraq, then you don't even qualify as a useful idiot, but a useless one. Down with the dhimmis is what I say.

The answer also involves smarter anti-terror policing. The Spanish police actually stopped the van in which the Madrid bombers were travelling. If they had checked in the back of the vehicle they would have found the explosives and prevented the horror of Atocha.

Hmmm. A liberal who's in favor of greater domestic intelligence activity and a broader law enforcement privilege? Who knew?

But they didn't. Perhaps if Senor Aznar's government had concentrated more on the home front and less on joining the gung-ho attack on Iraq, Spain would have been spared the pain.

Yep. You've been bought and sold. Like the meretricious neo-commie stooge you are.

Leftist Treachery
Mood:  down
The reaction by the anti-war Left to the murder and desecration (is an atheist allowed to say that?) of the bodies of the four Blackwater Security contract guards in Fallujah has been pretty disgusting. A lot of them glory in it, explicitly taking the side of the Iraqi "patriots" "defending" their homeland against the mercenary killers paid by American corporations to go and hunt down innocent Sunnis. Never mind that these men are highly-skilled American military veterans who are contracted to protect civilian aid workers, bureaucrats, and other private employees who are there in Iraq to help bring the place up to speed. What really matters is that these brave men are profiting from their choice. Isn't that always the burr under the saddle of these donkeys and dhimmis ---risk-taking companies and their employees making money? What must it be like to be perpetually victimized by your own idealism (idealism being code for naive commie wonkerosity) and to forever believe that the best things in life are free? Free, that is, of the normal human impulse to profit from one's own efforts.

No, the infrastructural improvements that we are helping the Iraqis make are not, in the end, acts of charity, but of investment. Disgusting, isn't it? First, we invade and occupy their country and, then, to really turn the screws on them, we make it possible for them to have electricity, automobiles, telephones, and clean water. And how will we reap the rewards of such mistreatment? Some day, they will stop threatening their neighbors and killing their enemies at home. And then they'll realize just how good it is to suffer from the diseases we have infected them with: constitutional republicanism, grassroots democracy, freedom of worship and expression, etc. You know: all that subversive stuff asshole Leftists depend upon but never stop to consider the price that had to be paid for them.

Ask the Japanese and the Germans how it went with them. They took to American Imperialism real pretty. But first, though, they had to have the sociopaths among them ground up and flushed out. That is the biggest mistake we've made in Iraq: we didn't kill nearly enough Sunnis when we had the chance. That is, if we were going to "squander" all of our moral authority, anyway, as the Leftists say, we should have gone in all the way and put the fear of God and Uncle Sam into them. But we're not done yet.

Fallujah's still got another thing coming.

Why?
First of all, how did the story of that pathologically-lying, now non-abducted college girl become national news? For what possible reason did every cable news network carry that story from start to finish? It's an embarrassment. The instant they showed security camera footage of her pacing in the lobby of her building before she took her long weekend ("in a marsh," for Christ's sake!), you just had to know that the whole thing was crap. She was off for some jungle love or something, but it was all her doing.

Second, when are the networks going to come out and admit that this was a bullshit story from day one and that they were wrong to have carried it? The closest thing to an ombudsman that any of them have ---and it's really not one--- is Fox's News Watch, a program where a panel of five journalists (which includes about one and a half liberals) analyze the week's media coverage and declare this or that to be right or wrong. Otherwise, I hardly expect any of the networks to cop to the shoddiness of their logic in covering this story.

Is it that they want to repeat the genuinely shocking and bizarre outcome of the Elizabeth Smart thing and gravitate to those kinds of stories? If so, they can surprise me and choose a real abduction story where the victim falls outside the usual demographic orbit. I wasn't really joking when I made that observation before: the cable news networks' obsession with irrelevant and insignificant stories of crimes against theretofore unknown victims is telling only in its focus on attractive white people, preferably females.

There's really no other explanation but that the networks believe (because focus groups tell them to) that such stories are interesting and titillating in a ratings-positive way. And, because the dissemination of news on television is a for-profit enterprise that is entertainment-based, the only way to really get the information you need is to go online or to turn to trusted magazines or papers.

But this Laci-Scotty-Martha-Jacko-Bullshit-all-the-time stuff on the TV has got to go.

Thorough Enjoyment
Mood:  happy
I'm thoroughly enjoying the sandpapered billy club reaming that the Leftist blogger Daily Kos is getting for his comments on the four American security guards murdered at Fallujah. The whole blogosphere is raining down on him and pressuring the Democratic Party candidates who advertise with him to pull their ads. It's a total hoot.

Kos is some commie wanker named Markos Zuniga who is credited with being an early and influential blogger for the Left and the liberals. He also had quite a hand in promoting the Dean candidacy. (Remember all the media coverage of the Deaniacs' "revolutionary" use of the internet to fun-raise and mobilize? Zuniga was a part of that.)

But, now, Zuniga has proved to be a real pussy by breaking one of the cardinal rules of blogging: "Thou shalt not delete thy posts." I knew that rule by intuition. Newspapers and magazines don't get to delete articles once their product has hit the streets; the best that can be done is to follow a mistake with a correction.

Zuniga, though, deleted his offensive remarks and, in their place, put up some lame-assed explanation for them. Wrong approach, dude. By this time tomorrow, you're not going to have a single Democratic Party candidate advertising on your site. Already, two candidates for the U.S. Congress (including Texas' Master of the Gerrymander, Martin Frost) have yanked their ads.

This is fun. And it's a real education to see the blogosphere in action. Political bloggers make the very definition of the political junkie. Active, involved, and, in the case of Zuniga, on fire.

UPDATE: It turns out that Zuniga did not ultimately delete his infamous post, but redirected the link to it to that self-serving non-apology. Same difference. He still tried to hide it. And he still said what he said.

"Fallujah Will Be Pacified"
The Belmont Club has a fine posting on what comes next:

The deliberate, even cold-blooded approach by the Marines makes this incident the anti-Mogadishu. The tactics employed against the Rangers in the Blackhawk Down incident relied on the belief that Americans could be reflexively trapped into defending unfavorable positions in attempts to recover bodies. The Anti-Coalition Forces probably felt sure that taunting Americans over the media would produce the desired impulsiveness. As the minutes lengthened into hours and the Marines responded with icy professionalism, the enemy may have come [to] the unpleasant realization that this was not the former administration and that other still more unwelcome surprises were in store for them.

Incidentally, I misdescribed before the four Americans who were murdered and mutilated there. They were, in fact, contract security guards who were putting their lives on the line for those filthy animals. They were not, as certain assholes have called them, mercenaries. It's inconceivable to me that Leftist bloggers could show contempt for such brave Americans, but they have.

Fuck the anti-war Left.

A Cordon Sanitaire
Mood:  on fire
The brutality we witnessed (or, didn't) in Fallujah this week against four American civilian aid workers is said to have been committed by some unknown group of terrorists who claim it was done in revenge for everything from those awful Zionists' extermination of Yassin to the American mistreatment of Saddam Hussein.

Whatever the truth is, the United States cannot permit this sort of thing. We must set up a cordon sanitaire around Fallujah and extract the tumors from that wretched city with extreme prejudice. Just like we did at Tikrit and elsewhere, we'll allow the innocents (few though they be) to leave and then we'll go in and exterminate whatever insects are left behind. But Fallujah must be made to pay for its crimes.

History tells us that pretty much all conquered or liberated countries go through a period of insurgency and counter-insurgency in the aftermath of their invasion. Every American knows now that we have lost far more men in this time of unrest than we did in first taking control. It saddens me to read the names of our young men and women who have died in Iraq and to know what futures they will never know. But I believe in their mission and I honor their courage and sacrifice.

Let's not forget that one of our greatest errors in liberating Iraq is that we did not hammer the Sunni Triangle nearly hard enough. The fucking losers in Turkey are to be blamed for a lot of that, but we still have to accept that we did not do enough to destroy the worst elements among the Sunni at the start.

It's not too late, though. I very much want to learn that we have sent in some major muscle and that we're going to pull some weeds. Soon, please. Make them pay. Burn them out of their own misery, the wretched fucks.

Had
Man! How many times am I gonna be had today?

Road to Fame: 1) Be White, Female, and Attractive; 2) Get Abducted
Mood:  irritated
I'm really sick of the cable news networks' obsession with reporting on young hot babes getting abducted. There are a million important things happening in the world right now, but the profit motive in covering bullshit like co-eds who spend a long weekend in a marsh with a villain straight out of central casting is apparently too strong to resist. Where's the sexiness of reporting on the scandals in the UN or with General Sharon? There is none. Can't they do a piece or two on George Soros' meddling in Democratic Party financing or how Putin has returned to his old KGBeing? How about some more on why I'm paying $1.63 a gallon for gas or why no one gives a damn about the illegal immigrant problem? Takes too long. And not enough pictures of hot white college chicks to make it worth while.

And, so, possibly out of an idle need to make mischief and to simulate a concern which I don't have, I ask why it is that none of these abduction stories involve poor women of color. Can you think of the last time a cable news network raised a finger to cover the stories of such women or young girls? I don't think it's because black and Latino chicks aren't getting abducted; I think it's because their stories don't appeal to the majority demographic. And I think it's racist. Yep. That's right, jackass: I want to see many more stories on non-collegiate, working-class black women who get abducted. Because their plight interests me.

I mean, can't the networks find a way to introduce some real diversity into their reportage of irrelevant crime victim stories? What, is the one kind of story some sort of redemptive metaphor for these uncertain times and the other is not?

No more cable news abduction story racism! I wanna see a hoax from the hood! Gimme a 21st Century Tawanna Brawley I can sink my teeth into! I wanna see a tearful reunion in the barrio! Come on, CNN! Come on, FOX! Everybody's getting abducted and you act like it's just a white thing. R U 4 realz?

More of Aaron's Genius

Epitome of Cowardice
Mood:  don't ask
Now Playing: "Whip It" by Devo
Every now and then (or, these days, every few minutes), a story will come along thats substance perfectly confirms my deepest prejudices; to wit:

A study released by the EU's racism and xenophobia monitoring centre astounded experts by concluding that the wave of anti-Jewish persecution over the past two years stemmed from neo-Nazi or other racist groups.

"The largest group of the perpetrators of anti-Semitic activities appears to be young, disaffected white Europeans," said a summary released to the European Parliament.

This is a fucking load of horseshit! In fact, the great majority of the incidents causing the spike in anti-Semitic violence in Europe can be attributed to unassimilable Mohammedan vermin who teem in the ghettoes of Europe's once-great cities. Everyone knows that! So why would the EU allow such a complete lie of a report to be published?

Well, is there any doubt that the European Union is a cowardly conglomeration of decadent losers who don't want to antagonize the North African/Muslim menace now eating away at the culture of its member-states? With shit like this, the ouster of Asnar's party in Spain, in favor of Socialist surrenderers, is hardly a surprise.

Is this the EU that John Kerry wants us to take our orders from? Are "allies" like France and Germany worth even taking a shit on when they are so far gone down the pacifist/multiculturalist route that they are condemning themselves to violent dissolution?

The EU are a lot of goddamned cowards who will betray their Jewish populations at the drop of a hat ---just like every other time they've given in to fascist domination.

(Thanks to Roger L. Simon for this story.)

The Funniest Thing in All of Christendom
Mood:  silly
You simply have to check out this photo essay by Allah. It is a classic: Kerry gets pureed and julienned!

Godforsaken Degenerates
Did you get a load of Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) yesterday at the Capitol with the disgusting homosexual pedophile Michael Jackson? She and it were standing around with a bunch of the Black Congressional Caucus [CORRECTION: Congressional Black Caucus], speaking on the subject of fighting AIDS in Africa, when the homosexual pedophile starts in with this stupid pantomime! What the hell was it doing? It even started to laugh when Jackson-Lee (who is the best argument I know of for resegregation) said that it was the best representative for this cause that America could send to Africa. Even it couldn't believe that a U.S. Congresswoman could make such a bullshit claim.

We're at a pathetic moment in our culture when a disgusting homosexual pedophile, currently under indictment for molesting a young boy, is brought into the halls of our nation's Capitol and praised by a U.S. Representative for being a positive example of anything. Not that I did before, but I will never again take Jackson-Lee seriously on any matter. Her judgement is shit and her reputation as a worthless race-baiting liar and opportunist is well-deserved.

Will black Americans stand up and denounce these two moral freaks? I'm not going to hold my breath.

Unbearably Cute

Some Pretty Pictures
Go here for some pretty pictures, including a couple of nice shots of the Austin skyline. And a great shot of a dog in flight.

Useful Idiot, Continued
Byron York of NRO says that CBS is "exploring" their "options" now that MoveOn.org has taken it upon itself to use Richard Clarke's comments in its anti-Bush ads without CBS' permission. Right.

York also says that Clarke himself claims to have not had anything to do with the ads. Could be. But no matter: no one's in any doubt that Clarke is a stooge of the anti-war Left and a peddler of partisan bullshit. And ads like the ones MoveOn.org are airing only confirm that the orchestration of the commie propaganda machine is only getting warmed up.

UPDATE: Clarke now says he doesn't want his name or words used in that MoveOn.org ad. Man! Does this guy ever tell the truth?!

Savages
If we're planning on leaving Iraq to the Iraqis, they and we are going to have to find a way to exterminate the vermin that were responsible for this and for all the other acts of insurgent terrorism.

Every country must fight and sacrifice for its sovereignty. That is inescapable. But the Iraqis must do more to condemn these terrorist acts. They must do more to show the world that they deserve the freedom that we are helping them to achieve. For too many of them, though, the scars that Saddam and the Ba'athists left on them are too numerous and debilitating. The only thing that can be done for them is to put them down like the sick animals they are.

Some Funny Money
Mood:  silly
Here's some really funny California state quarters, courtesy of the Stand-Up Comic.

Thanks to Aaron's Rantblog.

Commie Rat Bastards
Heard (but didn't see) a MoveOn.org ad on CNN yesterday with all the usual negative motifs: funereal soundtrack, gravelly-throated narrator, slogans on the President's supposed lack of honesty and ability, etc. But the featured element was excerpts of Richard Clarke's condemnations of Bush, which makes the former counter-terrorism [expert] a whore ---and fairly used.

So how is it right that a Com-symp outfit like MoveOn.org may extensively use self-serving accounts of 11 September to spread its hatred of the President, but the President can't include two seconds of footage of flag-draped remains being carried away from Ground Zero in one of his own ads? My best assessment is that it's not fair, and that liberals are mostly hypocritical assholes who deserve to be rounded up and gassed---

Oops! Did I say that out loud?

Indicative
Clearly, the Democrats are never going to recover from Al Gore's loss in 2000. It's almost as much of a trauma to them as the atrocities of 11 September. Maybe even more so.

One strong indication of this stress disorder is their constant reference to that election as an illegitimate coup; something that George W. Bush stole with the help of his brother, the Florida State Police, the Supreme Court of the United States, the Freemasons, and the Trilateral Commission. You can't convince a Democrat that the election wasn't rigged or conferred upon Bush by judicial fiat, no matter how many times the truth is demonstrated to them.

The sorriest thing about the election of 2000, though (besides the fact that it exacerbates their hatred of the President), is that they still use it divisively. The Democratic elite still preys upon their base's distorted memory of those events and uses them to fan the flames. Here, for example, are some of Gore's closing remarks at the Democrats' recent "Unity Dinner" (as taken verbatim from the algoredemocrats.com website):

[...] I want to ask all of you to consider, just for a moment, what it was that happened in the election year of 2000. I want you to remember - - briefly - - how you felt after the voting was over with, and all of that long thirty six day period began, leading up to the Supreme Court decision. Do you remember what you were going through during that time?

(Shouts of "Yes!")

Gore could just as easily be speaking to himself ---or to all Americans who were subjected to his and his Party's desperate and destructive legal manuevers.

Do you remember watching on television and talking to your friends and wondering how it was going to come out? Do you remember what you felt when the Supreme Court handed down its decision the case called "Bush versus Gore"?

(Indistinguishable shouts)

I remember.

(Laughter and applause)

And I want you - -

(Indistinguishable shouts)

- - I want you to remember for one simple reason. Every time since then that you have felt that this guy that's down there in the White House now shouldn't be there because the job he's doing is hurting this country - - we heard it from his own Secretary of the Treasury; we just heard it from his own Head of Anti-Terrorism - -

(Applause)

This is irresponsible nonsense. Gore is saying that Bush shouldn't be President, the implication not only being that he was illegitimately "made" President, but that he is "hurting" the country and should be removed. Gore wants the Democratic voter to be an angry, unreflective voter. He wants him to ignore the truth about the election of 2000, ignore the sound function of the Electoral College, and ignore the legitimacy of other voters' choice. And, more, Gore uses Clarke as a weapon against the Bush White House when Clarke is at least as much a failure of the Clinton White House. Only an unfair asshole would deny that.

- - We've heard it from his own people, about how he does. Every time you have felt that he shouldn't be there, every time you have felt that you would like to get him out of the White House, I want you to draw on all that energy, and I want you to channel it in support of John Kerry to elect him the next President of the United States of America.

It's all pretty disgusting. Gore and McAuliffe and the whole sorry lot of them want to exploit people's anger and to undermine our President with seditious lies. They want to use Clarke's words and politicize the war against the terrorists. Doesn't that make them hypocrites? Where are the self-righteous survivor families of 11 September who have taken up with leftist organizations to use their loved ones' deaths to criticize the President for making a brief visual reference to the attacks in his campaign ads?

This is one reason why Al Gore is a traitor to his country. And this is also why a vote for John Kerry is a vote for those who hate America.

Jews Look to the GOP
Here is an interesting story about the Jewish defections from the Democratic Party. Most of the Jews I know are vehemently anti-Bush, but I doubt any of them would question the President's greater level of commitment to Israel than any shown by a Democrat.

I said before that, on a percentage basis, I predict that the demographic shift in the upcoming election will be greater for Jews than for any other group. After all, when faced with the indecisive and two-faced John Kerry, at least those who have an interest in Israel's security know that Bush is on their side.