Saturday, February 01, 2003


I live in Dallas. I heard a loud boom this morning but rolled over in bed and pulled the covers over my head. I didn't know until a few hours later that Columbia had broken up in the sky over my head and fallen in shattered bits over East Texas.

My condolences to the family and friends of the brave crew members of Columbia:

Michael Anderson
David Brown
Kalpana Chawla
Laurel Clark
Rick Husband
William McCool
Ilan Ramon

Our everlasting gratitude to these brave seven as well as all their fellow pioneers who have pushed the boundaries of space to expand the comprehension of our universe.

May you rest in peace.

Friday, January 31, 2003


Some douchebag named Linda Heard is dissatisfied :

"Well, I've got news for you. Arabs are the good guys here. It is outrageous that just because a group of fanatics ran with their hatred and committed a cruel criminal act last September, some three hundred and fifty million Arabs have come under America's microscope and are being held up for scrutiny.

And if 19 fundamentalist Christian Americans had flown 757's into Mecca and Medina you don't think that 270 million Americans would have been put under the Muslim microscope?

"Firstly, the Arabs have nothing for which to apologise. If anything, it is the West that should be doing the apologising. Britain , France and Italy have jointly and separately raped the Middle East and North Africa , while greedily lusting after the rich mineral deposits of Iran and the Gulf."

OK. The West will apologize if you apologize first for Muhammed's wars against his neighbors that carried Islam as far west as Spain and as far west as Indonesia. Apologize for all of the Christians and Jews who were killed. I'm waiting.

"Today, the US has adopted a new style of imperialism, consisting of the spread of an insidious viral pop culture, threatening traditional mores, along with unconcealed self-interested, geopolitical designs on the oil-rich region. To do this, it isn't even bothering to court the region, preferring to use the more expedient method of "might is right".

Linda, babe, there's this thing called a power switch. You may have noticed it...it TURNS OFF THE FUCKING TELEVISION. BUT NOOO, its easier to raise Arab school children to hate Americans and use them to supply fresh homicide bombers for a mass-murdering cult of Islamo-facists trying to enforce Sharia across the globe than to "just say no" to "Survivor".

If you don't like Big Macs don't eat at McDonalds...if you don't like American movies, don't go see them at the theater. We aren't forcing our culture on the Arabs, they are demanding it (and boy do the mullahs get pissed about that).

And while the US spouts about the lack of human rights in the Arab world, it sees little contradiction in its having imprisoned thousands of Arabs, post 9-11, under the pretext of visa violations.

We aren't detaining illegal aliens under the "pretext" of visa violations - we are, in fact, detaining them FOR THAT REASON. At least we don't imprison foreign women who have been raped when they complain to the police.

Better still, they should travel to the Occupied Territories for a refresher course in just why much of the Arab world is materially lagging behind.

I agree. The Palestinians are perfect examples. A racist tribe of malcontents, universally reviled even by Arabs, who would rather maim and murder women and children than have to co-exist with J-E-W-S. They chose murder as a political tool and now they reap the fruits of their efforts. They richly deserve their suffering.

Its indigenous Berber and Arab peoples were treated little better than slaves, forced to bury their languages along with their religion. They were deprived of education and stripped of their dignity until they decided enough was enough.

Somewhat like dhimmis, no?

Unlike America and Britain, however, France appears to have learned from its murky history that domination and force doesn’t work in the long term. Instead, it is now doing its utmost to courageously avert war on Iraq, while engaging in trade and culture activities with the Arabs.

No, unlike America and Britain, France appears to have learned nothing from it's history of appeasment of dictators and miscreants. The French are whores who will eventually sell one too many nuclear reactors to despots and see a mushroom cloud ascend over Paris.

If the current American administration and Britain’s Blairites have their way the entire world would be saying ‘I am an Anglophile or a wannabe American’.  It wants to impose the American way of life, with all that entails, on the rest of the world. Bearing in mind that the US is a young country of immigrants, isn’t this the epitome of arrogance?

The only part of our culture that we realy care about exporting is democracy and respect for human rights. Apologists like you make excuses for the horrible mistreatment of women and ethnic and religious minorities in the Arab world. Americans don't think it's arrogant to point out a wrong when we see it; we view it as an OBLIGATION to try and correct it.

It would behoove both America and Britain to put their own houses in order first before they preach to the rest of the world. These are societies where the family structure has broken down, divorce is rampant and, in the case of Britain, violent crime and pedophilia is on the increase. In the US some three to five thousand children are abducted each year, while drug and alcohol-related crimes on the up-and-up.

What the fuck does this have to do with anything. The US government doesn't force people to drink, get divorces, rob banks or bugger little children. We punish people who engage in the latter two; the former two we do not.

Are you really suggesting that the government establish and enforce morality? What if we decide women ought never to be seen in public - you OK with that, Lin?

It is strange how Britain and the US demand Swiss-like precision, American-style economies and Danish human rights records in fledgling Eastern states. Have they forgotten that it wasn’t until 1928 that women in Britain were enfranchised and the southern US states boasted a policy of apartheid until the heroic 1960s’ efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King?

So, your point is what exactly? That the Arab should be given a free pass for stoning people to death, cutting off hands for stealing, state endorsed torture, emprisoning women for the "crime" of being raped, gang rape as punishment, mass murdering Jews in discos and grocery stores, pushing cripples off of cruise ships, decapitating journalists, etc. because women have only been able to vote in Britain for three-quarters of a century? Because America had "White Only" drinking fountains forty years ago? I'm sorry, there isn't enough slack in the world to cut the Arabs for what they're doing now.

Where in the US or Britain would friends and neighbours flock to your home when you are sick bearing reassuring words and hot soup? I was the recipient of such kindnesses in Alexandria.

It's a good thing you're not a Jew or they might have dropped off a letter bomb instead..

When your vehicle breaks down on a British motorway, see how many of your fellow motorists come to your aid. None. In the UAE you would quickly be inundated with offers of assistance.

But it wouldn't happen in Saudi Arabia where it is illegal for women to drive.

Human kindness and compassion is surely worth more than material goods and a fistful of dollars. The Arab world has an abundance of the former, commodities fast waning on the streets of Western capitals.

Tell Daniel Pearl's widow about Arab kindness. Tell the homeless Kurdish children, mothers taken from them by Saddam's poison gas attacks, that they should understand the imperfections of Arab governments. Tell Linda Beemer to understand that the Arabs have grievances.

I'll tell you something, you disgusting piece of crap, the world you advocate might not have violent movies and alcoholism - no, when you get sentenced to death for excessive drinking it tends to discourage consumption - but I'd rather put up with all of the amoral, disgusting, self-destructive, weird-ass behavior of people I personally don't like than have a well policed state where women are stoned to death for being seen with the wrong man.

I'm even willing to put up with brain-dead fucktards like you to preserve the freedom of speech. How's that for tolerance?


Memento Mori makes a good point: "When you are in Kindergarten, and someone cheats, you go to the teacher. Well, guess who that is? That's us. That's not France, bartering their support to whoever will turn over the biggest percentage of their lunch money, and it's not Germany, trying to emulate the bad kid so teacher and parents won't notice that he's having trouble learning to read. We are the authority of first and last resort because all those international authorities you want us to abide by get their power from our guns. And this game is a little too serious to call it off and send everybody home without first taking control of the Ba'athist bedroom and making sure that there aren't any toys in there that aren't recommended for their age group.

Very nice Rory Lee.

Thursday, January 30, 2003


As I was driving back to the office this evening, I heard Sean Hannity interviewing a couple of left-fringe nimrods about the pending war.

One was named Jaqueline from the Western Defense Fund or League or something like that (I couldn't get a good match on Google or the Hannity website). This is apparently a nuclear disarmarment group and Jaqueline believes that the US should UNILATERALLY disarm. I am NOT exaggerating. Hannity asked her the hypothetical (recollection of the exchange) - "If you were president and unilaterally disarmed, what would you do if a Hiltler or a Saddam or Osama bin-Laden threatened the US with a nuclear weapon?" She never answered the question (I had to leave the car before the interview was over) but, after at first denying it, she did admit that she favored the unilateral nuclear disarmarment of the United States.

The fact that anyone is insane enough to hold this view frightens me. She actually believes that if we renounce the use of force and dismantle our nuclear weapons that Americans would be MORE SECURE! Oh yes, Jackie, I'm sure the whole world will love us and everyone would agree to live in peace and harmony if only we would disarm. Since America is the only BAD country in the world, all it would take is for us to change our evil ways and disarm and then...UTOPIA.....except for butchers like Saddam who use chemical weapons, torture and rape against their own citizens, enlightened leaders like Milosevic who advocate genocide, and philanthropists like Kim Jong-Il who starve their own people to build nukes. They only do it because WE MAKE THEM. They are driven insane by the hegemon, right?

Pacifism is a free ride. It's easy to be a pacifist in the United States where you are insulated from bloodthirsty tyrants by a robust constitution at home and the most powerful military in the history of the planet abroad. So go right ahead you fuckwits - call Bush a Nazi and claim "Not in My Name" and "No Blood for Oiiiiiiillllll" and recycle your newsprint and bottles and drive your Mini-Cooper and embrace your brothers-in-arms in "the Movement". Yeah, let's Free Mumia! and let's go visit Saddam, let's get down with CNN.com - North Korea!

This makes me sick. Look, if you are a pacifist, if you believe that nothing is worth fighting for, then just put yourself in handcuffs and wait to be lead off to the gulag. To be so fantastically ingnorant of the history of man is inexcusable. Pick up a book and read about what happens to societies that lose the will to fight - they lose period.

I, for one, am not ready just yet to give up on this great experiment America. We have flaws, we make mistakes - without question. We elect fools (e.g., Bill Clinton) - guilty!. But who of us would rather live in France or Germany much less Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or Vietnam?

One thing I like about Bush is that he is proud to be an American and is unafraid to say so. He has a vision for the country that is beyond prescription drug benefits and tax cuts.

Fuck Chomsky and Fisk and Chirac and Schroeder, fuck Le Carre and Sean Penn and Sarandon and Streisand. Fuck the apologists for the murderers; fuck the America haters.

"Let's Roll" brothers and sisters!

Wednesday, January 29, 2003


I've read a few excerpts from the SOTU address along with some of the blogger analysis.

Den Beste and Misha are concerned that we are going back to the UN and will be stalled by the Axis of Weasels. I think they're missing the boat.

Bush is very deliberately tighting the noose around the necks of the weasels. By going back to the UN and "consulting" with the security council, the US will have complied to the letter with the original resolution. The French publicly maintained at the time that 1441 required a second resolution but the US prevented that language from being used.

Since Congress has already authorized Bush to use force against Iraq, the last real obstacles are the weasels (France and Germany) - and they can't stop us from acting. The forum for the case to be made in detail is to the Security Council. Once this briefing occurs, the weasels will have a short window to reverse their previous position claiming that the new evidence changes everything; they can "save face". In that case, the US asks for a new resolution (one they know will pass and will not be vetoed by France) and Bush nails it.

If the weasels continue to oppose us, we will, as Bush declared in the SOTU, act anyway without them. In that scenario NATO is dead and the UN might as well be.

Either scenario will result in Hussein's removal and an American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for as long as is required to establish stable, democratic, pro-Western governments. And, as Lileks wrote in today's Bleat, "Defeating Iraq isn’t the camel’s nose in the tent - it’s the camel’s head in the bed of every other Arab leader."

I think another factor in not making the SOTU a de facto declaration of war was its proximity to the UN Inspector's report. Following only a day afterwards, a more thumping war speech would have made the decision seem more as if it had been predetermined regardless of Iraqi actions.

Bush clearly enunciated that he would not be deterred - "The course of this nation does not depend on the decision of others." He might not have said "regime change" but what could this mean - "I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country – your enemy is ruling your country. And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. - except that he is still committed to removing Saddam from power?

Don't worry. Bush is going to shove the French, Germans and the UN aside if they get in the way. He understands how important this is and what the consequences are for America if he doesn't get it right.

Tuesday, January 28, 2003


Sorry about the recent lack of material (the three or four of you who actually visit regularly). I have been out of town about half the time recently - San Francisco, Tucson and Houston - on business. It is too big of a hassle to take my laptop with me because of all of the security and besides, I am too busy when out of town to post.

At least business is picking up.

Unfortunately I missed the State of the Union tonight because I had a basketball game. It was doubly unfortunate that I sucked and we lost. Oh well, at least I don't make my money shooting hoops.

I am now back at work. Yeeeeeeeow! Need more time in the day.

Monday, January 27, 2003


Another brilliant piece at Eject! Eject! Eject!:

For we are waking up to a simple reality. In a new millennium where a few diseased people can carry a suitcase with the power to kill millions, the lesson we must learn is simply this: the only way we will be safe, prosperous and free is when everyone is safe, prosperous and free....

But there can be an end to this war. It will end when all people are inside the bubble we have built for ourselves and our children: warm, well-fed, free to pursue their dreams and ambitions, their minds and bodies and women liberated, racial and tribal hatreds put aside, and so on.

The quiet idealist deep inside in me, on a speak-when-spoken-to basis, actually believes such things are possible. After all, it works -- pretty well -- for us, and we Americans are children of all the world. We know what such a society looks like, and we have documents of such stunning clarity and hope as to show anyone the way.

The conservative I have become, however, is certain that if it happens, it will happen because of the actions and sacrifice of US Marines and not because of middle-aged naked hippies spelling PEACE on a golf course. It will take decades. It may take centuries....

Can we FORCE freedom and democracy on people? It seems, from the example of Germany and Japan, that indeed we can. These societies once harbored fanatics no less dedicated to our destruction than the ones we face today. Now they are our trading partners, and often our friends and allies. The point at which it becomes necessary to force such a regime change will be determined by how ugly the swamp has become. And can anyone seriously argue that the people left after the defeat of the Nazis, Japanese Imperialists or American Confederates are not far better off today than they would have been if they had WON?...

In this, I am guardedly optimistic due to our recent victory in Afghanistan. Not the military victory, magnificent though it was.

No, I am thinking of things like the reopening of their soccer stadium, the field where I have seen -- thorough the camera obscura of the internet -- women in burqas forced to kneel and then shot through the back of the head for the crime of adultery. Kids play football there again. That?s a win, Noam Chomsky, you lying son of a bitch.

Making the case for the Battle of Iraq AND calling Noam Chomsky a "lying son of a bitch" (absolutely) - what more can you ask?

Weblog Commenting by 
<!--WEBBOT bot=