If It Were All Conceded As Lies
Let's pretend that the President of the United States, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and all their intelligence and military men (as well as those of the partners in the "willing coalition") concocted the whole thing about Saddam having weapons of mass destruction. Just made it up out of whole cloth. A simple-minded pretext, easily and soon to be exposed for what it was. Even if it were all conceded as lies, how can the results of our [warmongering] be considered as anything but positive? We have liberated two massively oppressed peoples in Afghanistan and Iraq and given them at least a chance to participate in normal and peaceful societies. Soon, this example will lead the Iranians to overthrow (or at least reform) their own government. In doing all of this, the flow of money into the coffers of terror groups in and around Israel will begin to slow. The eternally disaffected youth of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Syria will begin to notice the advantages of a free society enjoyed by their Arab brothers and will demand these things of their own government. In the end, a whole swath of South and Western Asia and the Middle East itself may experience a rebirth of freedom and economic opportunity.

The young men and women of the United States armed forces who are dying in those countries are the fathers and mothers of global liberty. They are the makers of America's legacy to human civilization ---and I am proud of each of them. Let no one say they died in vain.

And let no one doubt the wisdom of the political and personal sacrifices men such as Bush and Blair are making. They are laying a foundation for a safer world ---and all they are getting in return is the cynical and paranoiac denunciations of hypocritical isolationists.

Why the BBC Is a Big Front for the Commies
Mood:  sad
I strongly encourage you to read Dennis Boyles' account of listening to the BBC World Service on the day Baghdad fell. It's astonishing to what depths the anti-war crowd will descend in trying to discredit the liberation of Iraq.

It's also a real disappointment for a traveler like me, who once very much enjoyed the comfort and reassurance of listening to the World Service on my little short wave radio in darkened hotel rooms throughout Europe.

When did multiculturalism become anti-white and anti-Christian? You'd think the Anglo-Saxon world hadn't done anything for the betterment of humanity.

Piss on apologizers.

Nervous Laughter
Mood:  surprised
Now Playing: "Oh, Shit!" by The O'Shits
The Policy Analysis Market, which was basically an online futures market for predicting global calamities like revolutions and assassinations, has been exposed and shut down by some very angry U.S. Senators on both sides of the aisle. This was conceived as an alternative source of intelligence for the goings-on in parts of the world where U.S. intelligence may not be fully in the know. But, when such a project is run by an "under-reported" office in the Pentagon called the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and headed up by Admiral John Poindexter (of Iran-Contra fame), it is almost guaranteed to take on more water than intelligence and be sunk in its moorings.

I mean, Jesus Christ! Did Rumsfeld lose a bet with a Berkeley professor and have to draw up the worst possible, most paranoia-inducing, po-mo, super-Machiavellian nightmare of an agency to give the anti-war crowd some fresh meat? Sometimes, you just can't write shit this crazy.

It's almost like a Presidential election decided by the electoral votes in a state where the brother of one of the candidates is the governor!

Ha, ha.

Suckers.

But, DARPA? No, that one's true. Looks great on paper (unless the paper is newsprint).

Editorial Note
If I notice a typo I've made, I will go back and fix it, but leave the word in boldface. No extra emphasis, except to note that I fixed something.

A Friendly Disagreement
I've received an exceptionally thoughtful commentary from a correspondent named Chris which I will respond to in my favorite mode: the newsgroup dialogue. Below is the entirety of his essay, interspersed with my remarks in italics.

If, as former White House counsel John Dean explained a few weeks ago in an interview, there is "no chance" the Republican house would impeach Bush for lying to the American people, the nation has transcended mere blind partisan politics and entered a time of living fiction.

I assume the lies for which you think the President ought to be impeached involve his State of the Union address' reference to British intelligence's belief that Saddam was trying to buy uranium from Niger. How that has come to be characterized as a lie is a mystery to me. It remains the belief of British intelligence. And it is entirely consistent with Saddam's past habits. No lie and no crime. Thus, you have no impeachable offense.

This is the same Republican Party whose members badgered and hounded President Clinton until he was caught in a lie.

The Republicans caused Bill Clinton to lie. That's silly. He lied and encouraged others to lie to cover up his mistakes.

His prosecutors, the legions of right-wing radio listeners, organizations dedicated to unearthing damaging material on Clinton's past, showed a disgust for immorality in the White House.

And his partisan defenders showed none. This is especially true of feminist organizations that looked the other way because of Clinton's liberal bona fides. Talk about cynicism!

But when Clinton's impeachment came, the vast majority of Americans refused to march on Washington demanding his removal from office. In fact a few went so far to march in his support.

That's true. People were too happy being employed and making money in the markets. Otherwise, they would have had the time to be offended.

Americans, both for and against President Clinton, knew in their hearts, if not minds, that the question he was asked should have never been asked because it involved his personal life; not his public life.

On this, you are absolutely wrong. Clinton pursued a sexual relationship with a woman in his employ and did so on the job (i.e., in the workplace). You know very well that had he been a CEO or a college president or a commanding officer who was getting blowjobs from a student or an underling that he would have been accused of any number of crimes or policy violations and been terminated. That is incontrovertible. And that is only a part of what he did to undermine the dignity and to abuse the authority of his office.

Now, the situation has reversed. We have an unelected president who lies to the American people and the world, sacrifices innocent American and Iraqi lives to create a distraction from his disastrous ineptitude at home. This president can't poke his head out in public without an angry crowd forming.

It is disappointing to have to continually correct the Bush-hating Left on the facts of the 2000 election. George W. Bush neither stole nor bought the Presidency. He won the office because he won more electoral votes than Al Gore. It was because of the gross incompetence of officials in Democratically-controlled counties in Florida and an accident of numbers that the election results in that state had to be resolved in the courts.

As for the purpose of fighting this war against Arab fascism, if you think it has been concocted to distract the American people from the President's so-called ineptitude, then you must also believe that he is somehow responsible for the recession. How is that possible?

Still, the Republicans are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The Republicans I know, the little rank and file footsoldiers who spent the late 1990s jeering at President Clinton, can't defend Bush themselves.

Whatever the party label, I defend Bush as a plain-spoken, no-nonsense guy who's doing a great job defending our country.

Something about American commonsense knows a high crime from a misdemeanor.

Yes, but both are explicitly impeachable, right?

No group, except possibly for American soldiers and Iraqi civilians, can feel as betrayed as Bush's reluctant pre-war WMD believers.

That's almost shameful! You believe that our soldiers and the Iraqi people feel betrayed because the treasonous pricks in the liberal media have told you to believe that. The truth is that our fighting men are proud to have done what they have, regardless of their complaints and moments of despair. They are the begetters of a new society for the Iraqi people and their achievement will only continue to grow in the estimation of the world.

They shouted that anyone who stood against the war was a yellow, cowardly Quisling. They said any argument against the war represented pin-headed, politically-correct handwringing.

That may be a little extreme, but I won't disagree.

Now, of course, even if WMD were found it would be hard to prove they were of an imminent threat to US troops. So we continue to ask where are the WMDs?

The circumstantial evidence of their existence is extensive and attested to by people at every place along the ideological spectrum. Even the UN said that there were chemical and biological weapons there, only they were too cowardly and corrupt to stand up to Saddam.

Where is justification for this elective war?
Yet, there is still no call for his impeachment.

This is just absurd. President Bush is laying the foundation for a whole new world. Your anger at him is irrational. You don't appreciate what he must endure to build the Pax Americana.

If nothing else, we need no more proof that the witchhunt to bring down President Clinton had nothing to with moral outrage and everything to do with undermining the legitimacy of an elected president.

Clinton was a corrupt and opportunistic liar. Ultimately, he was impeached because of his many faults of character. I supported every bit of it.

Rightwing radicals who feel so sure about themselves they can seek to bring down an elected US president are an unsettling group.

What does being elected have to do with anything? As much of a fan as I am of Richard Nixon (a legitimately elected President), I believe he would have deserved his impeachment had he stood there to take it. Instead, he had the character to resign and spare the public even more exposure to his corruptions.

They feel like "the consent of the governed" means an expensive PR effort and spin job to deflect criticism.

That's just empty cynicism.

They have a religious conviction in their own arrogance and supremacy.

That's just bigotry. Are Democrats uniformly secular?

They have no ideal other than the consolidation of power.

That's just paranoia.

But what of their political strategy that depends so heavily on lies? What personal friend of yours would forgive such constant lies? What business partner? Most Americans parents don't tolerate lies from their children. Why makes excuses for it from a Bush?

I just can't agree with your characterizations. Obviously, in times of war, the public is not entitled to know every little thing at every point along the way. That's not realistic. You're mistaking secretiveness for lying.

The lies, if tolerated by the American people, or the Republicans in Congress say a lot about our country today. For the people, you could say we live in a fact-free culture of images, of sensation. (Think of the images of Bush's aircraft landing versus the realities it masked).

Absolutely not. This war is being followed by thoughtful people who know their facts and who understand what sacrifices will have to be made to make the peace. You're getting some sort of cartoon stuck in your head and taking that for the reality of the situation. That may be ideologically satisfying, but it isn't the truth.

One where lies, assertions, spin and advertising language go unchallenged. For the Republicans in Congress, it says party loyalty means more than truth, more than justice, more than integrity. In fact, integrity for them is measured by uncritical loyalty.

I, too, would be suspicious of unquestioning and uncritical loyalty. But I don't have to be suspicious because the President is routinely and constructively criticized and challenged by the people closest to him. Do you think Powell and Rumsfeld are in lockstep with each other? Do you think Bush the Elder agrees with the worldview of a man like Paul Wolfowitz? Please! There is active dissent all around the President for him to draw on in making the best possible decisions. No yes-men in sight.

In this way they are more akin to a street gang or crime family than a political party. Of course, in a healthy society both street gangs and crime families are considered a public problem to be rehabilitated or prosecuted.

I thought they were considered excellent material for a whole film genre.

Texas' Democratic State Senators Are Assholes
Mood:  party time!
I hear that a bunch of Democratic state senators have absconded across the Texas-New Mexico state line to prevent a quorum. Why have they done this? So that they can deny the majority of Texans their right to be proportionately represented by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives. These jerk-offs are a lot of cowards who don't want to stand up and take their lumps. And, so, they are forcing the Governor into calling yet another special session and wasting more money the state doesn't have to handle the business that they, as a party, refused to let be handled during the regular legislative session.

Don't forget: the Legislature is the branch of government responsible for drawing up the district boundaries for the state's representatives in Congress ---and not some Federal judge. The Republicans are in the majority now and it is only right that they have the prerogative here. Running off to another state to break a quorum is a bunch of chickenshit, and I very much hope that the voters remember that the next time we go to the polls.

At this point, I guess the only thing we can do is to call the Albuquerque Police Department and warn them to keep an eye on Gonzalo Barrientos. If he gets ahold of some firewater, he's liable to get lit up and go smash his car into a cactus.

Chasing Parked Cars
Liberals and Democrats are opposed to racial profiling and domestic spying conducted by our intelligence and police agencies. Come to think of it, so are a lot of libertarians and militiamen. And so they all jump up and down and scream about how we are losing our rights to the Patriot Acts. But how are we supposed to keep tabs on potential troublemakers in this country if we can't investigate the kinds of people who are most likely to make that trouble? There are a lot of people who want to charge the Bush Administration with malfeasance and all sorts of treachery and who demand to know why our "intelligence" was so poor that we "allowed" the events of 11 September 2001 to happen. But they don't want the government to keep those tabs and to harrass the supposedly innocent. These same people say they don't trust the government and that they don't want any more Nixons or J. Edgar Hoovers keeping any lists. They make it harder and harder for the intelligence community to cultivate the kinds of bonds with the kinds of characters who would know if something bad were about to happen. These agencies have had their human intelligence funding cut and the regulations circumscribing their behavior drawn ever tighter. But, still, the complainers wonder why our intelligence is so lousy.

No need to wonder. Just look in the mirror.

Hysteria
Mood:  on fire
The anti-war and anti-Bush Left have become hysterical sacks of shit and I want to be clear about that. Their congenital condition, which waxes and wanes with irregular, lunatic commotion, has now blasted its way to the fore of their thought, and they have become bloody-minded accusers and stone-throwers. These shrieking, unthinking partisans have become infected by their own biology and are now too sick to be reasoned with.

What has happened? They are so angry at the President for his boldness and moral clarity that they have become enemies of this nation's cause. But, why should that trigger such outrage? Because they, as Leftists, know that they have no such champion on "their" side. "Their" side has sickened itself on hatred for the President and have alienated themselves from the support of this war. This war is this nation's cause right now, but they have no resort except to the extremes of partisanship.

For two weeks or more, the Left have harped on and beat on this so-called lie the President told in his State of the Union address about Saddam seeking out uranium from Africa. What the President did was throw everything (including the kitchen sink) into his list of crimes and weapons that Saddam was engaged with. He sold his case and he oversold it. He didn't have the firmest or most specific knowledge of Saddam buying uranium from Nigerians, but does anyone doubt that Saddam has pursued a nuclear capability in the past? Is there any anti-war Leftist piece of shit who doubts that that is something Saddam would try to achieve? We know that Saddam was working on the nuke in the early 80s when the Israelis came and bombed his sites flat. We know he was trying for them again in the early 90s when we stopped him in the aftermath of the Gulf War. We know that he developed and possessed huge stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons as late as 1998. And, as the President alluded to, the British STILL believe that Saddam was in the market for uranium as recently as the months before we invaded. Now, what kind of hysterical fucking idiot is going to take the President or his Admininstration to task for believing and acting upon the reasonable intelligence assessment that Saddam was a seeker and user of weapons of mass destruction? The Left should be ashamed of themselves for their loud-mouthed and ignorant bullshit. Listen to these idiotic Democratic nominees for President, casting about for some reason to blame the President. They call him a liar and a manipulator when many of them, on their own, supported action against Saddam. And they want to keel-haul Bush for intelligence failures? HEY, GODDAMMIT! Tenet and Freeh were CLINTON'S men! The emasculations of the intelligence community came long before Bush showed up. Get your shit straight and quit blaming our President for EVERYTHING! We are in the middle of a war against terrorism and the worst kind of ideological insanity in ages. You effete sacks of hysterical shit want to see real barbarism? Then let these Mohammedan psychopaths and Islamofascists have their way. Excoriate our Commander-in-Chief for the benefit of the assholes at the BBC and in Chiraq's France and Schroeder's Post-Naziland. They love it. Keep scattering the seeds of doubt and division and keep the Ba'athist dead-enders alive in their resistance. So long as you Leftist assholes keep it up, then YOU'RE the reason why our boys are getting hit with RPGs. Let that be on YOUR heads.

My Bill of Lefts
A friend of mine recently wrote to ask why I hadn't posted his remarks on Private Lynch. I told him that it was some sort of Lycos foul-up since I wouldn't dare censor any post from someone kind enough to read this stuff. I just never received his remarks. If that happens to you, maybe keep a draft of your remarks to either re-send or to send me as an e-mail: I definitely want some feedback to post here.

But, I want to take advantage of the opportunity afforded by a suggestion he made to ask, rhetorically, why I should be labeled a "right-winger." It doesn't really make any sense because:

I don't believe in any supernatural being or practice any ecclesiastical religion.

I strongly support a woman's right to an abortion, with the exception that I believe it's wrong to terminate a third-trimester pregnancy unless the mother's life is endangered or the child is handicapped. In fact, I strongly advocate government subsidies of any and all birth control measures, including paying women to have tubal ligations.

If it existed in America today, I would not support the military draft.

I believe in the minimum wage, the progressive income tax, and, as a general proposition, "regulations on business." That is to say, I am a TR-style trust-buster and believe that unregulated capitalist enterprise is a crime against the lower and middle classes.

I hate censorship and am opposed to it except in the rarest cases.

Marihuana should be fully legalized, and all convictions for its sale, cultivation, and possession should be immediately overturned.

I believe government should pay for the education of its all its citizens from kindergarten to graduate school. It is the single best infrastructural investment the government can make.

Gays and lesbians should have the same individual rights against discrimination as any other citizen has, and enjoy every benefit of marriage that a heterosexual couple does.

Government must apply all of its regulatory authority to fight deforestation, air and water pollution, littering, etc.

Government must preserve the natural habitats of as many species as possible, even in contravention of the uses of the landowner and/or the public.

Oh, yeah: I don't wear cowboy or Western clothing, don't care much for what passes for country music these days, don't vote straight-party, don't believe in "smokers' rights," don't like SUVs, etc.

These are just some of my non-right-wing beliefs and practices. If you ask a hardcore Republican whether a person who believes as I do could possibly be in his party, he would say no. Or, just ask any truly hard-right conservative if these are the beliefs of a person who is on his side of the fence. Of course they're not. But all of this just goes to show how difficult and potentially irrelevant partisan labels are.

Even Fleance Dies
Mood:  celebratory
It has just been confirmed: Uday and Qusay are dead. We are now "exploiting" the site where they got Bonnied and Clyded, which might even yield up information leading to Saddam himself. If that happens, the transition to a new Iraq will go very much more smoothly.

Congratulations to the U.S. Special Forces and the people of Iraq. Our will be done.

Uh, Well, Actually...
Mood:  d'oh
I guess it would have paid to have looked a little more closely into Michael Ramirez's politics and what he actually said about his cartoon before I went and sounded off. But, I'm not going to try to hide my previous entry like the time my aunt's cat went and hid one of her Swedish meatballs in his litterbox at a Christmas party. No, I stand by my suspect offering and will not have it mistaken for anything but what it is.

Apparently, Ramirez meant to show that the President, whom he supports and which fact I did not know, is being threatened by the politicization of the war in Iraq. I mistakenly believed that Ramirez was suggesting, like every Democrat running for President is, that GWB was getting his comeuppance for his craftiness and manipulations in getting us into another quagmire.

You gotta admit, though, that that cartoon's pretty much a masterpiece of ambiguity. Nonetheless, I found it (and still do find it) to be shocking. So, it seems, does the Secret Service, which is investigating it as a threat. Maybe someone should tell them what I didn't know, either.

Oh, by the way: the executioner in the original photograph was the top cop in South Viet Nam. I guess Ashcroft has some way to go before he gets that messy.

A Political Cartoon
Mood:  cool
There was a political cartoon in the Los Angeles Times a few days ago, I believe, reprising the infamous photograph of the ARVN officer shooting the VC prisoner in the head. The little commie rat had just murdered someone the ARVN guy knew (if I'm getting my facts wrong, please write me) and he was being executed for it.

Well, this Mike Ramirez out in L.A. has the ARVN officer labeled as "politics" and the guy about to lose his brains drawn as the President.

The message, I guess, is that the politicization of war is coming back at the President to be avenged in his death. And, of course, the insinuation of Viet Nam as quagmire has its currency.

It's a pretty shocking comment to make in one of the biggest newspapers in the country. Those who hate George W. Bush undoubtedly approve, even though the violence of the message is hardly reconcilable to the ostensible attitudes of the peace-loving Left.

But what we can all take from such an image and message is that the First Amendment is alive and well. Dissent thrives in America. No one is going to kill Mike Ramirez for the anger in his work. He and his employer are not under arrest for treason. No one's going to be disappeared. Remember that the Leftist complaint that civil liberties are being destroyed in this country is a lie.

As is their own claim to actual patriotism.

Private Lynch
Mood:  not sure
Private Lynch is going home today. I hope it's a good homecoming for her and that everyone gives her enough space and everything gets handled with good taste and an appropriate touch. I imagine the whole thing would be pretty overwhelming, but she's small-town and, thus, less likely to get a big head about stuff.

And, then, I hope all of the cameras and reporters and dealmakers go away and let her live out the rest of her life in normalcy.

That is to say, let's not make more of this than is proper. Comprende?

I know, I know. I was just hoping.

Kobe
Mood:  not sure
I don't like the Lakers. They win too much, just like the fucking Yankees. But there's nothing not to at least respect about Kobe Bryant. The guy is obviously the Jordan of his generation and a joy to watch. I am sorry that he is in trouble. It just doesn't seem like his M.O. And when you see the friends of this girl who is accusing him of rape being interviewed on the TV, you really have to wonder whether it's even possible for any of them to be raped. Get my drift? They all strike me as being a bunch of pampered, well-heeled sluts. They're a lot of starfuckers. Just listen to them. They have no idea what's wrong with going up to the private room of a man like Kobe Bryant in the middle of the night. "Like, omigod, who wouldn't?!" I just don't think it's possible for women of this type to be raped: they live these lives of easy sex and social opportunity, always putting out scent and looking for the next slab of hunk to open up and say "aah" for. Anyway, it's a shame that Kobe would cheat on a woman as impossibly beautiful as his wife is. He's a Grade A dumbass for doing it and maybe this is his punishment: big fat lawyers fees, some lost endorsements, and some tarnish. But I'll bet you that this rape allegation is pure crap. He'll get off ---only I hope it's not with the help anymore.

Good God Almighty
Mood:  a-ok
Have you seen that new Beyonce Knowles video? Good God almighty!

What Intelligence Gets Us
Another thing for all you Krugmanites and Kennedys and Heinz-Kerrys: think back on the past century or so of American wars and the "uses" of intelligence in those conflicts. The Spanish-American War was brought on by the presumption that the Maine had been bombed by Spanish saboteurs, yet no one really believes that anymore. And they had shit for intelligence at the time. But the result of believing that "lie"? A relatively quick war that brought us crucial territories in the Pacific and a reputation for liberation here in our own backyard. It also truly united the United States for he first time in 30 years. And what about the First World War? It wasn't the sinking of the Lusitania or any other of the Hun's outright barbarities that drew us in, but the capture and decoding of the Zimmermann Telegram, which alluded to some cockamamie plot by the Germans to get the Mexicans involved in keeping Pershing and the Army tied down at home. Tee hee. It wasn't that the krauts were littering the Atlantic with our torpedoed ships, but that the messkins might come and try to take back Texas! Now that's putting intelligence to some use! It only made us into a world power and a savior of Europe. And how about the long series of rectocranial responses to the warnings that the Japanese were coming at us in December of 1941? That particular "intelligence failure" made us the most powerful nation on Earth. So powerful that when the Last of the New Dealers ---one of the most dishonest men who ever occupied the White House--- cooked up the Gulf of Tonkin incident 20 years after, we were still able to stand in the wake of our own defeat. In every one of these cases, American (and sometimes British) intelligence was used and abused to advance ourselves in a greater cause than the ostensible "cause". But there is a price to be paid: the hysterical and flustered eruptions of essentially ignorant liberal isolationists and [conscientious] objectors. They are all in high dudgeon just now, vowing to get to the bottom of things and demanding before the bathroom mirrors of their audience to know what the President knew and when he knew it. But their shrill shitheadedness is only manufactured for the sake of the appearance of integrity: most of them supported the President in Afghanistan and Iraq because they knew that the American people wanted a piece of those regimes' asses. That's what we got and continue to get. High prices to pay, but we are making it possible for those people to live in peace and liberty. Why such an objective should merit the disdain of supposedly liberal one-worlders is a question worth answering.

Summa @#%$! Laude
Mood:  suave
Now Playing: "Honky Tonk Angels" as covered by my friend Adam Bork
The most interesting thing about Maarten's latest (and, he suggests, last) posting is his claim to have studied "political sciences" (presumably all of them), for which he earned a degree and graduated "summa @#%$! laude." That's [sic], mind you. Now, what I am fascinated by is whether Maarten believes that the Latin preposition cum is a dirty word and did not want to type it or whether he has some sort of weird software filter which automatically replaces "dirty words" with the nonsense of @#%$!. I am inclined to believe it's the latter, for, as you can see, other dirty words are similarly substituted out with the same keystrokes. So, I wonder what sort of world it is that Maarten inhabits where even his right to cuss has been circumscribed. That's not my world. Maarten says that dissent has been crushed and disallowed in this new world of fascists fighting fascists, but everywhere I look, I see people casting aspersions and doubts and even dice on the President's honesty and character. On the TV and radio and in my readables, too. The craphounds and crackpots running for the Democratic nomination for President are constantly suggesting that the President has led us into a war on false pretenses and that we "need to get to the bottom" of such and such. Well, what these dopes desperately need to do is fuck off. Their own judgement (collective or individual) could not be more suspect in my eyes and I wouldn't vote for them for toilet flushers. But, look: they're dissenting, Maarten. Do you think there was much dissenting in Ba'athist Iraq, the land of the 99.9 per cent electoral landslide? Much dissenting among the womenfolk in Taliban-run Afghanistan on whether to wear their burqas? As a matter of fact, Mr. Political Sciences, I don't know of too many places in the Muslim world where dissent is much in fashion, unless you count the Universal First Amendment Right to strap dynamite or plastique to your abdomen and detonate it in a cafe or bus.

Oh, I'm sure there's dozens of great examples of American villainy and treachery you could regale us with, but why don't you remember the other dozens of examples of American greatness and nobility and moral right? I presume you are a European of some kind, maybe Dutch or Belgian. Whether I am correct, let me remind you, Maarten, that you come from a place (literally or "ideally") where you have not had to fight off a Nazi or Commie for more than fifty years because of the presence of the American military on the continent of Europe. Western Europeans of our generation don't know a goddamned thing about real fascism or communism because America has either beaten them down or back. Thus, you have a whole culture of wankers who have not earned their freedom, but feel free to exercise it, nonetheless, when they rip into Uncle Sam about his excesses. Fuck that shit, jackson. I almost look forward to the day when a million skinheaded Robespierres go fighting Algerian psychopaths on the Champs Elysees with breadsticks and mo-ped parts. Maybe Villepin can write a poem about it and stuff it up Jacques Shiraq's garage.

9/11: "A nominal reason"
Mood:  on fire
Be sure to click on the comments links. (Tripod finally switched back to showing whether an entry has been commented on, as they should never have not done that to begin with.) The latest comments by Heather do not encourage a respectful tolerance of the liberal mentality, which, with respect to he present state of world affairs, consists of a lot of self-loathing and anti-Christian caca. Now, ordinarily, I take a backseat to no one in pointing up the failures of Christian belief and practice, but nothing sends me back to the hecklers' perch faster than a doe-eyed white chick trying to stick up for her put-upon brown-skinned turbanheaded Muhammedan heroes. It just seems unnatural.

But listen to what Heather has to say about the terror of 11 September 2001: it was just a "nominal reason" ---a pretext--- for us in the West to act upon our genocidal bigotry for the Muslim. Yes, we were just looking for an excuse. Hmmm. May be. But it almost sounds like she believes (or, with enough cable access or late-night radio in her eyes and ears, be led to believe) that the whole thing was planned. Maybe the Government was in on it. (Certainly the Jews were.)

Anyhow, Heather is wretchedly wrong. Our country (well, mine, anyway) was attacked by Muslim psychopaths. Young men who were willing to die in order to kill thousands of Americans in the furtherance of ---what? What did they mean to accomplish? In the end, all they will have accomplished is the end of the Muslim world as they knew it and the abortion of a Muslim fantasy that they will never know. Their pipe dreams are for snuffing out. We hear that al-Qaeda will strike at us again on our own soil. I fear it's so. But the ratcheting up of our fury will make these petty lawyers' complaints of "wrongfully" detained young men from Yemen or Saudi Arabia look quaint. Do you want to see real profiling in America? If the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam were to come undone by Muslim sabotage, you're going to have people burnt at the stake. You're going to see engineering college dormitories and gas stations and mosques firebombed like a week of 4th of Julys. People aren't going to be debating whether Saddam tried to buy uranium or whether some tape is actually of Osama's voice; you're just going to have extreme, cut-nut, shot-wad, blown-nosed violence. And I say let it be.

Heather (as you can read for yourself) also laments what repressed, Dark-Aged fascists we are under the control of here in America, and how terrible it is that we just had to go and blow something up (e.g., the Taliban in Afghanistan) without even trying diplomacy. Ha, ha. Bless her heart. She just don't know no better.

The Blair House
I was very pleased to see Tony Blair lend a hand (and some much-needed eloquence) to the President yesterday before a joint meeting of Congress. The PM was dead on with just about everything, but I would disagree with him on the issue of whether what we're engaged in is a war between civilizations. I say we are. He says we are not because, basically, every great culture has something good to add to the whole of humanity. Certainly, Islam did a helluva bang-up job preserving the wisdom of the ancient Greco-Roman world while Europe was soiling itself in superstitious degradation, but that's been at least 500 years ago. There can't be any real question of which of the great monotheisms has since gone forth and conquered in every meaningful aspect of civilization. (Oops. Sorry. I'm not supposed to claim anything good in the name of Judeo-Christian culture.) So, what is it, exactly, that Islam has been contributing, lo, this past half-millennium? Slavery? Clitorectomies? Extreme political and civil repression, oppression, and censorship? Even the source of most of the Muslim world's wealth (oil) has only been possible through stealing (nationalizing) the infrastructure by which it is extracted and refined. These are medieval men, far removed from the glory of their ancestors, whose only purpose is to conflict with us and human destiny.

Anyhow, I am a great fan of Tony Blair's and I am pleased that he is such an Americophile. He complements Mr. Bush well, for our President is no orator (at least not by habit). They both know this, of course, so it's not all that much of a problem. The real eloquence is in their deeds and, at that, they are 21st Century Catos, Lincolns, and Churchills. Long live the Anglo-Saxons!

In Favor of Corrupting Our Intelligence Assessments
Mood:  cheeky
My correspondents have also supplied me with a link to New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's latest swipe at the Administration and the intelligence community. Krugman's basic complaint is that the neocons and hawks have deliberately corrupted the process of intelligence assessment so that we could be more easily drawn into war against the Islamofascists and the other Middle Eastern tyrannies. George Tenet gets Bush thinking that Osama and Saddam are conjoined twins. Paul Wolfowitz and Bill Kristol and other trouble-making Jews pound on the war drums until no one can think straight and we just wind up attacking everybody with a towel on his head and a wife on her knees. Well, it's good work if you can get it: keep up the "simple-mindedness," gentlemen.

In case you missed it the first thousand times, let me remind you that September 11th changed everything. That's the day that medieval-minded savages reached into our society and shook us to pieces ---for a few hours. After that, any American with any balls or brains knew what had to come next. We've only just begun crossing the names off of our shit list. We're not even two years removed from the nightmare of that day and, already, we have done great damage to al-Qaeda and the Ba'athists. They say that Afghanistan is already in the grips of another Taliban, but the first one sleeps in the dirt forever, jackson. Maybe these new guys want some, too. Let's find out. But I'm betting on music in the streets and girls with the sun on their skin. Junior's done been to Gay Par-ee.

The thing is that the war is on and it won't end until every Mohammedan psychopath is under glass. Craphounds like Krugman think their reasons and reasoning are enough to turn the world upside down, but, ultimately, no one is going to care. There is a general threat against this culture and its prosperity ---and it comes, too often, from Arab/Muslim men in their 20s and 30s. Saudis, Yemenis, Egyptians ---who cares? The human race cannot survive or tolerate these people blowing themselves and everyone else to bits because of their fucked up fantasies of paradise.

You think American intelligence is mixed up about what goes on? Well, everyone is to blame for the confusion. We pretend, as an oil-buying and car-crazy consumer society, that the monarchy of Saudi Arabia are our friends, but they are the root cause of much of the world's terrorism. They pay the families of young Palestinian suicide bombers in compensation for their sons' murder of innocent Israeli Jews. But, so did Saddam. And even though we bankroll the Egyptians and the Palestinian Authority, they continue to commit atrocities against us and our allies. Why are we at such cross-purposes? Sooner or later, we're going to have to be done with them all. And the world will be a better place for it.