one man's conspiracy is another man's business plan
Saturday, October 30, 2004 | I'm not Osama, but I play him on TV: A New Religion is Born
As the civilized world holds its breath, hoping against hope that yesterday's bloodless Unity Tele-op will not be followed with another of a more "robust" nature, in the US a man who is not Agent Osama bin Laden (CIA, sabbatical) but who does play him, rather badly, on TV, has captivated his audience, as simple in their faith as in their zeal for bloodshed.
Within minutes of the mediocre actor's stilted delivery of a script so hastily and thoughtlessly written that to call it "phoned in" would be a kindness, the heartbreakingly small number of Americans who had managed to hold on to their faculties despite the Goebbelathon of the past three years had dropped their 911 timelines, their patient repeated explanations that colonialist wars of aggression are seldom welcomed by the victims, that whether in the schoolyard or on the world stage, he who would keep his sweets or loved ones safe will best achieve that by refraining from mauling, maiming and slaughtering the sweets and loved ones of others, and run into the streets chanting "evildoers who hate freedom" and cheering on to greater slaughter the bestial hordes of torturers and sexual predators that have come to represent the United States in the civilized world.
What had been a loose but closely held collection of beliefs, in the space of a few moments, coalesced into a religion, complete with all the blind faith in contradictory tenets that religions are famous for.
Thus it is perhaps appropriate that even from this, the ragged isolated pockets of heresy who wait, in varying degrees of silence, bound to their stakes, as the faithful pile the kindling, fittingly ironic that these wretches can snatch a small, if pyrrhic victory: the bloodless Unity Op was every bit as effective as a bloody one would have been.
And probably prudent, in a grotesque sort of way. As the public participation phase of the US "election" process roars to a close, it is expected that the courts will not be likely to reach a decision on who will be selected as US policy spokesmillionaire until spring, if then.
Spring is months away, and important months they are, schedule packed with massacres, desecrations, mutilations, and other expressions of how American taxpayers want their money spent.
With such an agenda, there can be no Kerry, no Bush, no polarized populace, only Unity, only KerryBush.
It's the policy, stupid! It will stand, and it will be implemented, and the houses of Raytheon, of Blackwater, Halliburton, shall rejoice at the dollars in their pockets, and the taxpayers shall rejoice at the blood flowing sweet over the civilized world, money well spent, they nod to each other. Bet it's more than a hundred thousand now. Forgive me for suggesting that Kerry would not kill so many. No, forgive me for suggesting that Bush was not killing enough. Let us work harder, every hour of our work can buy the liberation of an Iraqi child from her little feet.
Non-violence can indeed achieve the same aim as violence.
The restless soul of Goebbels has finally passed into Heaven.
Friday, October 29, 2004 | It Wasn't Osama, But the Tape Contained an Important Truth
The security of the American people is indeed in their own hands, as it has always been, not in the hands of one politician or another, but the hands of the voters, the taxpayers, who spend their money on what they want.
What they want happens to be quite a lot of dead Iraqis, Afghans, Palestinians and others, and quite a lot of money for a handful of US companies.
They have weighed the pros and cons, and decided that the reward of all that blood and all that money is worth whatever price they or their children may pay.
Even though most of them get none of the money. posted at
Tuesday, October 26, 2004 | While We Wait For That For Which We Wait, here's a news roundup of recent stories you may have missed:
Thursday, October 21, 2004 | The Prophet Mohammed as Feminist
A great post over at Islamic Feminista, together with some not so great posts in a variety of places on the subject of Zhila Izadi inspired me to post this here.
The notion of women as standalone human beings as opposed to property is a relatively new one, and while most cultures have made some attempt to move in that direction, there is still "work to be done," if you like understatement.
Subjugation of women has been popular for millennia, and still is, largely because it is the most effective method for keeping a population in control known to man.
Literate mothers teach their kids to read. Economically empowered women are more likely to spend their earnings on things that will benefit their children and their community than on things that will benefit the king. A few generations of this and you end up with a populace that is both less dependent and less eager to sacrifice its sons for the glory and enrichment of said king.
To get a feel for what the Prophet was up against, read volumes 1 and 2 of the series. Selling daughters into slavery, people collecting wives like Pokemon cards, infant brides, it's not rape if it happens inside the city limits, widows forced to marry brothers in law - imagine someone who, within the framework of that cultural context, walks in and starts preaching things like women own what they earn, women cannot be married without their consent, no girl can be married before the age of nine, no more than four wives under any circumstances, and no more than one unless you can take care of them and care for them equally (which really puts a crimp in the whole harem scenario).
That was revolutionary. It was outrageous. It was in direct opposition to millennia of cultural tradition. And, as usually happens, when religion and culture clash, culture wins.
That's why the Church has spent 2000 years very deftly syncretinizing local pre-Christian religious and cultural practices with its own, and why Christmas is celebrated in winter even though historians say Jesus was probably born in the spring, and why the Virgen de Guadalupe just happened to appear to Juan Diego and demand a basilica in the exact same spot where the temple to Tonantzin the Corn Goddess had stood before the Spanish destroyed it, and where today stands the Basilica of the Virgen of Guadalupe, and whether that stuff surrounding her traditional image in the Tilma (google it if you don't know) are rays of heavenly light or leaves of corn is a matter of faith.
And that's why today, in many countries with large Muslim populations, one finds very un-Islamic realities in the treatment of women.
Some of the most vocal opponents of cafeteria-style Islam are some of the most avid practitioners of it, and selective literal interpretation of scripture is popular in all religions.
"Eye for an eye" is a perennial favorite of death penalty advocates, who seldom venture an inch & a half a way to expend the same zeal on exhortations to everyone to observe the conditions and rules for selling one's daughter as a slave.
Mohammed was a feminist and a revolutionary, but he had a tough room to play. Just getting people to start thinking of women as equal human beings, just roll the idea around in their heads, was a challenge.
As Bishop Tutu remarked to Kira Phillips (still reeling from having been told seconds before that "God is not a Christian,") "God is not finished with us. We are a work in progress."
Yet how many Christians, who believe that Jesus was not only a Prophet of God, but "of one substance" with him, complain that Mohammed did not ban slavery, did not do this, or do that, when the same Jesus, whom they worship as a deity, did not even go as far as Mohammed did!?
Now 1400 years later, and pre-Islamic customs still rule the day, even in the land of the Prophet himself, and the same westerners who slam him for the spread of Islam blame him because women in Saudi Occupied Arabia can't drive cars.
...verily, in that is a lesson to those endowed with sight.
In the west today, a woman's greatest value is still her sexual attractiveness. In the east, her greatest value is as a producer of sons. Those who enjoy going barefoot should beware of glass shards.
Below are a few links and snippets reflecting different points of view
The revelation of Islam established women's equal status and equal rights. The Prophet treated women as equals and was very responsive to their thoughts and needs. There was a tendency toward "ignorance" in the society where Islam was revealed, and it crept back in after the Prophet's death and brought back some of the negative things that Islam had reformed, including misogyny. Eventually the misogynist attitude left over from "ignorance" gained a foothold in Islamic law and took away some of women's rights and lowered their status. Islamic feminism is just an effort to restore the equal status of women as is their God-given right in Islam from the beginning. You hear a lot of how Islam is great for women in theory. In practice, there have been many systemic abuses against women in Muslim societies. The Taliban were the worst and most extreme example. So there is an urgent need to re-establish women's rights and dismantle the patriarchal rule that has plagued too many Muslim societies. What makes it Islamic is that it's based on the sources of Islam: the Qur’ân and the Prophet's example.
(Prof Margot Badran is a historian and senior fellow at Centre for Christian-Muslim Understanding at Georgetown University (USA)...)
In the post-colonial discourses, one can argue that the discourse on "Islamic feminism" is the result of an Orientalist approach to the so-called problems of women in Muslim societies in comparison with that of western women whereas the two sets of circumstances are entirely different.
It is a brilliant observation. But there is difference between Islamic feminism and Orientalist approach. Islamic feminism goes back to the text. It’s Muslims talking to Muslims. Orientalists are people from the west and they talk back to the west. Islamic feminists are looking into the basic texts of Islam in context of real life situations for concrete ideas. Islamic feminists are using Islamic categories like the notion of ijtihad. The tools can be different like linguistic methodology or historiosizing. But the frame should be within Islam, not foreign. You don’t have to be confused with the term. The project is not alien, it’s Islamic. You’ve to work within the premises of Islam, only the descriptive term seems weird.
Whether the theory and practice of "Islamic feminism", as an ideology, is more close to Islam or feminism?
No, you can’t put it like that. Islamic feminism is speaking for justice to women as Islam stands for. It’s a tool to remind people what Islam is for women. It’s not more Islam or more feminism. The term Islamic feminism is an idea of awareness preaching that men and women have equal rights based on re-reading the Quran, re-examining the religious texts and telling people to practice it. Some people, who do this for the sake of women, don’t call themselves Islamic feminists. They won’t say it Islamic feminism. Some have stereotypical notions about feminism, so they don’t use. Some others believe that we need a term to develop a discourse and fight the cause, so they use. It’s a rethinking process anyway. I agree that there’s difficulty in the term. At one point I also stopped using the term and started to use ‘gender activism’. You don’t have to term it Islamic feminism always, because people get scared. I use it now because Muslims themselves are using and people understand. What’s important is the discourse, not the term. We’ve to tell them, religion is not a problem, but it is the solution....
In the case of Western feminism, the preferred
goals have been those traditionally fulfilled by the male members of
society. The roles of providing financial support, of success in
career, and of decision making have been given overwhelming respect
and concern while those dealing with domestic matters, with child
care, with aesthetic and psychological refreshment, with social
interrelationships, were devalued and even despised. Both men and
women have been forced into a single mold which is perhaps more
restrictive, rigid and coercive than that which formerly assigned men
to one type of role and women to another.
This is a new brand of male chauvenism with which Islamic traditions
cannot conform. Islam instead maintains that both types of roles are
equally deserving of pursuit and respect and that when accompanied by
the equity demanded by the religion, a division of labor along sex
lines is generally beneficial to all members of the society.
This might be regarded by the feminist as opening the door to
discrimination, but as Muslims we regard Islamic traditions as standing
clearly and unequivocally for the support of male-female equity. In
the Quran, no difference whatever is made between the sexes in
relation to God. "For men who submit [to God] and for women who submit
[to God], for believing men and believing women, for devout men and
devout women, for truthful men and truthful women, for steadfast men
and steadfast women, for humble men and humble women, for charitable
men and charitable women, for men who fast and women who fast, for men
who guard their chastity and women who guard, for men who remember God
much and for women who remember - for them God has prepared
forgiveness and a mighty reward" (33:35). "Whoever performs good
deeds, whether male or female and is a believer, We shall surely make
him live a good life and We will certainly reward them for the best of
what they did" (16:97).
It is only in relation to each other and society that a difference is
made - a difference of role or function. The rights and
responsibilities of a woman are equal to those of a man, but they are
not necessarily identical with them. Equality and identity are two
different things, Islamic traditions maintain - the former desirable,
the latter not. Men and women should therefore be complementary to
each other in a multi-function organization rather than competitive
with each other in a uni-function society...
Islamic feminist discourse is a Qur'an-centered one that distances itself from the entangled web of fiqh schools as well as existing socio-cultural realities of Muslim societies and their customs and traditions. The main concern is understanding the pure and essential message of Islam and its spirit. This can also be found in the model of the Prophet (PBUH) himself in his very treatment and compassion to his wives, daughters, and women companions, a treatment than cannot be too emphasized. Attention is being paid to instances in early Muslim history and community when women are reported to be extremely outspoken and to reveal what can be described as a feminist/oppositional consciousness (see Omaima Abou Bakr, "Reflections of a Muslim Woman on Gender," on the Islam 21 Project web site and Mohja Kashef in Windows of Faith).
The dawn of the nineteenth century marked the commencement of an era of worldwide social change that has continued to challenge the religious and social basis of all societies to this day.1 European colonial powers formed the political and economic ideological framework that was to encroach upon the Islamic world. The gradual emergence of the global economy and the political ascendancy of the West dictated a global trend that was not easy for non-Western nations to avoid. These changes have invariably been multidimensional in nature; from the emergence of territorial states in their current format to educational reforms. One of the areas to undergo a radical transformation is relations between the sexes, as women searched for their identity and place in the new world.
While common perceptions view ‘feminism’ and ‘Islam’ as a contradiction in terms, Fatima Mernissi2 argues that throughout the history of Islam, small numbers of women have seized power in both political and military spheres where their western sisters were unable. Throughout the Islamic world, their has been a growing awareness of both feminism as a movement and feminist issues. This essay seeks to understand some of the root causes that lie behind issues currently being raised by Muslim feminist reformers asking whether these issues are essentially ‘religious’, ‘cultural’, or ‘social’ in nature. I will not go into details about the particular concerns. It is that which lies behind the issues that I wish to deal with. The sheer size and cultural diversity within the Islamic world renders it impossible to accurately survey all issues pertaining to feminism. Therefore, much of this essay is limited to the Arab experience.
The Nature of Islam
Before examining the issues raised by feminists, I believe that we need to ask ‘What is the central nature of religion?’ or in this case ‘What is the central nature of Islam?’ A substantive understanding of religion, where belief in either theistic beings or the supernatural is the prime objective3 comes across as inadequate when religion constructs a comprehensive world view ethic. Clifford Geertz understands religions as representations of cultural systems. Religions are influenced by the process of social change, while at the same time, able to influence such changes.4 Talal Asad takes this viewpoint a step further, arguing that religion as known today, is a modern invention tailored for military conquest.5 For Lawrence, religion is reduced to a subset of culture, and will differ between different cultures.6
This type of function view of religion, leads to Durkheim style views of religion, where religion exists to give adherents a symbolic framework that allows a total perspective on their relationships within the society.7 Religion symbolically legitimises the present order by providing a system of self understanding the community and its function in the cosmic order.8 This can be seen in the way ethnic religions, such as Judaism and Hinduism, have their basis in a social structure founded on kinship relationships. Here, religion protects the community against migration and cultural assimilation.9 Young views Islam as a more than an ethnic religion. As society moves from an ethnic to a universal identity, wide ranging cultural reformation takes place, including religious reform. Under a charismatic leader, religious principles are reformed in an attempt to bring society back to its original social and cosmic order...
We uphold the revolutionary spirit of Islam, a religion which uplifted the status of women when it was revealed 1400 years ago. We believe that Islam does not endorse the oppression of women and denial of their basic rights of equality and human dignity. We are deeply saddened that religion has been used to justify cultural practices and values that regard women as inferior and subordinate to men and we believe that this has been made possible because men have had exclusive control over the interpretation of the text of the Qur’an.
We are inspired by the active participation of women in public life during the time of Prophet Muhammad saw. Biographical collections devoted to the Companions (Sahabat) of the Prophet included the biographies of over 1,200 female Companions. Among them were transmitters of hadith, saints and sufis, matyrs, liberators of slaves, and heroic combatants.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004 | Please blog the story of Zhila Izadi
According to Iranian and foreign press, Zhila Izadi, a 13 years old girl from the north-western city of Marivan had been condemned to death by stoning after being found that she had been pregnant from her 15 years-old brother. The independent Iranian online newspaper “Peyke Iran” (www.peykeiran.com) that had first revealed the news last week reported on Saturday 16 October 2004 that the girl has given birth two weeks ago in prison. ..more
For those who may be unaware, this is not "in keeping" with the laws of any religion. The world does not need another Ateqeh Rajabi
Never fear, another rant will be forthcoming, things just a tad busy in the sleeper cell today, Zarq keeps complaining about the new nose, says last time he got really kick-ass painkillers and only lame Tylenol 2 for this one. He's really pissed. Won't even take Rumsfeld's calls. In the meantime, enjoy this news mini-roundup:
Bush loyalists were forced to interrupt high-level discussions over whether or when, to present a chained Arab to the captive audience of western reporters it keeps under hotel arrest in Baghdad, and whether to call the chainee Zarqawi or move up the date of the planned Goldstein upgrade to Mohammed Younis al-Ahmed. (Props to the mildly miffed Arab who calls himself angry for that one).
Most pundits agree that the unexpected Kerry aggression would have been thwarted in the bud had the Cheneys had the foresight to immediately issue a brief, but firm denial, but analysts wisely pointed out that it would be far better to have the voters debate the state of alleged parental affection in the Cheney household than pausing to wonder why the two candidates seem to be in such harmonious agreement that the crusade against other countries' sovereignty must continue apace and that medical treatment in the US must remain a commercial commodity.
Saturday, October 16, 2004 | Yes, America, There Is a Zarqawi
Some say he is a historical figure, now dead, others say he never existed at all, still others insist he is a living breathing human being, like you and me.
All are correct, in a manner of speaking.
There has always been a Zarqawi, though in other times he may have been called a different name. What form he takes, whether it be man or legend, is as irrelevant as is the frequency and intensity with which it is debated.
For a few, Zarqawi is the evil that opposes the will of wealthy men, the ogre that stands between them and more gold, no matter in whose pocket it may currently reside.
For others, Zarqawi is the adrenaline of rage that annihilates my fear. If you harm those I love, my brain unleashes its Zarqawi and I will run screaming at a tank with a rifle, a rusty knife, or a beltful of plastique, already you have taken my life, my death will be an upgrade.
Zarqawi is what you see when you look into the eyes of an eight year old boy, his ragged clothes covered the blood of his little sister, who died from your bomb, your bullet, your fist.
Zarqawi blazes from the blistered eyes of hundreds, thousands, who lie gasping, sobbing, screaming in your dungeons, your "interrogation facilities."
Zarqawi fills and bursts the heart of the father who clasps the ruined, beaten body of what was once his young daughter, she breathes now, but does not speak, she will never be young again, those dreams of graduation, wedding, grandchildren are gone now.
Zarqawi gives strength to the old woman, who stoops to save what she can of what to her is holy, from the rubble of the little home her husband built with his own hands, hands that will never caress her body again, in their place hooks, he is lucky.
It is because of her grandfather's Zarqawi that a little girl born in a refugee camp, like her mother, like her father, can draw for you in the sand a map, and show you exactly where her home is, grandpa's house, the family's house, though no one in the family has been anywhere near it for over half a century.
It is Zarqawi that screams through the throats of millions, billions, NO! You cannot have my home my country my oil my daughtersonsandmosque!
The secret of Resistance is joy, the spirit of Resistance is Zarqawi.
And it is Zarqawi who collects the payment due when you shoot into the screams.
On Tuesday, September 28th, a new federally-funded, FEMA-directed citizen training program began in my town called CERT. CERT stands for "Community Emergency Response Team.” A quick internet search reveals that my town isn't the only one participating. Nearly every town in America has its own CERT program, it would appear.... The CERT training program is intensive. It’s scheduled to last for only a little over a month. In the short span of just 35 days, CERT trainees will learn the following... 1) Disaster preparedness
2) Disaster fire safety
3) Disaster medical operations
4) Light search and rescue
5) CERT Organization
6) Disaster psychology On Tuesday, October 25th, CERT trainees will receive training on "Terrorism and CERT.” Then, exactly one week later, CERT’s training program will conclude with a "Disaster Simulation & Examination". This final day for the CERT training program, the day when CERT will climax with a "disaster simulation," is none other than Election Day!..full story here
Thursday, October 14, 2004 | Final Debate Show Sparks Worldwide Drowsiness Epidemic
Predictably, neither my suggestions regarding chicken suits nor Paris Hilton as moderator were heeded, and the show's entertainment value suffered for it.
At least they did wear matching costumes. That's something.
Both contestants chose grey-black old fart suits with white fart shirts and red dotted ties. In an apparent bid to show that he too can be "nuanced," Bush's dots were a bit more subtle.
Bush wasted no time in blaming the flu vaccine shortage on the irresponsible practice of seeking legal redress on the part of people who have lost loved ones or limbs to shoddy medical practice. Kerry responded by reaffirming his pledge to honor the proud American tradition of medical treatment as a commercial product.
As Bush warmed to his earpiece, or maybe he has upgraded to a toothpiece, after all the todo over BulgeGate, a small bolus of foam appeared at the sporadically drooping corner of his mouth, an apparent portent of an imminent 7th cranial nerve event, and giving a definite aesthetic advantage to Kerry, who appeared fatigued but at peace with what a dollop of Prep H can do, even if it's no miracle.
Perhaps by previously-arranged mutual agreement, both candidates kept steadily to soporific subject matter, a cloud of rhetorical elevator music spread over the room and sensible people went for a sandwich.
Both agreed to agree that equal protection under the law is not right for America, although they differed slightly on the issue of forced reproduction, at least for affluent women. That the bodies of poor women are government property is a core American value, especially as the need for expendable crusaders spirals.
Kerry courageously promised to raise the minimum wage by less than two dollars over a period of years. (According to the government's figures, even rental housing in the US now costs almost 4 times the minimum wage). Bush suggested that more standardized testing in schools could enable the burgeoning number of children who leave the classroom for the street or homeless shelters to earn a few cents more than the minimum wage when they grow up.
By the third quarter of play, well over 80% of viewers had exhausted on-hand sandwich material, and clicked the white noise off, wandering out into the evening in search of anything that might keep them awake until bedtime.
Possibly the most demonized group east of people who consider Palestinians to be human, on its way to being globally criminalized by Israel - yes, that's right.
It has always seemed to me that the existence of people who deny the Holocaust, or any of the subsequent genocide attempts available for viewing in the mammoth list at
http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocidetable.htm is in its own way, a very positive sign. While such ideation is frequently couched in one or another flavor of anti-Other sentiment, it is unarguably a step up from Holocaust (or any other above-mentioned atrocities) Approval, and in this world, with this species, one takes what progress one can get.
All men of good will wish that the Holocaust had not happened, and wish that the table at the url above were empty. Click the link, let it load, scroll and scroll and scroll, and you just might find yourself sympathizing a little bit with the deniers of all of them. Sure would be easier on the psyche.
The Knesset, however, in its wisdom, has decided that denying the Holocaust will now be a crime. A Global Crime. If you do not live in Israel, Israel will come getcha, and presumably gaunt-faced Mosaad agents disguised as art students, or maybe furniture movers, carrying passports of non-ambulatory cerebral palsy patients will drag you off to be tortured in Facility 1391.
This should give some pause to the Rapturists panting in anticipation of One World Government and Red Heifers and hurling recalcitrant Jews into a lake of fire. But I digress.
It would clearly constitute a violation of the Patriot Act, not to mention the inevitable Rapture Act, to question the Knesset's authority to seize citizens of Liechtenstein or Bhutan or Tonga at will for thought crime. The warlord syndicate regimes of both Israel and its Patron, the US, have decreed and announced that they will seize and/or murder anyone they choose, anywhere, any time.
Perhaps it will be permissible instead for me to respectfully suggest to the Knesset that they have, perhaps in a well-intentioned but misguided attempt at political correctness, not gone far enough.
Without underestimating the chilling threat presented by people who insist that events in living memory and documented with all the technology available at the time did not happen, I believe that the Knesset has unintentionally overlooked criminal elements of a similar, even more dangerous nature.
First, the Flat Earth Society. These brutal fiends surpass even the Holocaust Deniers on the Grave Peril scale. The Holocaust, after all, took place in just one part of the planet, while Flat Earth Evilthought extends to the entire earth!
Who can know how many FlatEarthers those Mosaad agents might stroll right by as they make a beeline for the suspected Holocaust Deniers on your street?
And while they may not have a Society as such, you can be sure that somewhere out there are Anti-Microbialists, determined to convince you that smallpox and strep throat are caused by miasmas, and the most cursory investigative work will reveal clear links to die-hard adherents of the Theory of Spontaneous Generation of Rats.
Knesset, your work is clearly cut out for you. Get to it.
Monday, October 11, 2004 | Shaving Bush's Bulge with Occam's Razor
A Kevlar vest, a battery pack in case of power failure, even a handle for Secret Service agents to grab in case he is attacked (according to this theory, the Secret Service would just grab Kerry's hair).
Stop it! Stop it now!
Bush himself explained the device at an appearance before a group of Old Order Amish several weeks ago, when he revealed that God speaks through him.
Now how do you suppose God is going to do that without sound equipment?
We are not living in ancient times, people!
God does not go around speaking to people on mountain tops and flaming shrubbery or outsourcing it to angels any more.
Nevertheless, I wanted the facts, so I went to the Source, who graciously agreed to answer a few questions via e-mail.
Well, I speak TO him, or at least I try to. I think something happened to his ears. Maybe pretzel crumbs. Could you look in there and - oh never mind.
>>What's up with that bulge? People are going nuts here. Theories all over the place.
Good! This is all about Earth, right? That planet needs more theories. Anyway, what? bulge? what bulge? Oh, wait, THAT bulge, sorry, phone. brb.
OK, back. Well, here's the deal. I have tried and tried with this guy, email, forget it, doesn't read em, tried his cell but it had a recording, I'm not going to burn greenspace for this, and there is no way I am sending any angels down there. I tried that a few years ago, and only a handful of people paid any attention to the actual MESSAGE, duh, and this Bush dude, well, he's my creation and I love him, etc etc, but he in no way rates the big guns. So I had Marconi up in here, you know him? Smart guy, I did a good job on that brain. He suggested radio waves. So I had him build a radio, and toss it down, I knew somebody would put it in Bush's jacket, well, OK, I know everything, but I especially knew that. Didn't I create Karen Hughes, too, or what?
So the other night, I just happened to turn on CNN, yeah, it sucks, but I kind of like trying to guess how much of the screen they are planning to fill up with icons and crawlies, ok, anyway, he was on this stage, and of course the first thing I thought was, oh, no, he's going to sing that song from Cats, and according to the Maya calendar, even time isn't supposed to end till 2013. Or 2012. Whatever. I knew this had to be the moment, so I sort of blipped the radio in. Don't ask me to explain how I blip stuff places. It's a God thing, you wouldn't understand.
So I start off trying to talk to him in a normal voice, just telling him to calm down, walk away from the microphone, walk out of the building, and get in the van. Yeah, I had blipped a van. And a driver. Sweet, gentle guy, who was gonna take him to this really nice place. I'm serious, really really nice. Lots of grass, trees, but a structured, safe environment, they can't hurt themselves there, they can't hurt anybody else - did I tell you his father never listened to me either? Is this pretzel crumbs in the ear thing hereditary? Hang on, let me email Greg. He'll know.
Maybe I used the wrong frequency. I usually try to program a back door in somewhere, in case I really absolutely positively have to get in, but I think his may have malfunctioned.
Or it could be that my signal got eaten up by that guy talking to him through the earpiece.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 | Americans Should Not Think On These Things
Colonialism is not new. The US itself was once a colony in a sense, a gaggle of European invaders was considered a colony by England. This period of American history is also notable for the fact that those invaders ostensibly "fled" England in search of religious freedom.
Upon their arrival in the "New" world, they immediately set about concerted and enthusiastic attempt at genocide against the people who lived there while imposing horrific punishments on anyone of their own number who did not share their religious beliefs.
This auspicious harbinger of the glory that wished to cast itself as the new Rome occurred few centuries ago, very few, about 3.
(When discussing earlier empires in relation to the US, it is always necessary to use Rome as an example, never the Ottoman Empire, or your words will be rendered inaccessible to western readers, most of whom have only a foggy notion of what the Ottoman Empire is, and many of whom are surprised, and a little disappointed, to learn that the term does not refer to a discount furniture outlet.)
The west measures its history in centuries. The US is an infant even within that youthful context. The Majority World measures its history in millennia, in the Americas, in tens of millennia.
There is no nation in Africa, in Asia, in Greater Arabia, in America in the true sense: one large continent artificially made two by a slash of Manifest Knife down in Panama, that is a stranger to either the concept or the consequences of greed.
Few, if any nations anywhere have escaped the thread of invasions, occupations, colonizations and various other actions being woven into the tapestry of their history, and at the time of this writing, all but the most recent have been repelled to a greater or lesser extent.
The most recent are works in progress. These would include secondary repulsions of the sticks that colonizers like to use to keep the cash doors from completely closing when they are forced out.
Occupations and colonial projects end when they are no longer profitable, when the cost of continuing them becomes too great compared to the revenues generated by them.
The US believes it has found a workaround: instead of classical colonization a la the British Raj, or even France in its beloved Indochine, just cut the frills and go for the money shot.
Domestically, the US is taking some bold steps backwards to bring back the profitable darkness of feudalism to its own huddled masses, encouraged by the willingness with which the house servants and yeomen gladly sally forth to cheer their lords, prodded only by the incentive of an extra ration of white sponge bread, delighted as a toddler at a Chuck-E-Cheese bash to be allowed the privilege of choosing which adjectives shall describe the glorious rainment of two naked would-be Emperors, and which one shall be accorded the honor of standing on the balcony to announce which tribe in which far off land will be slaughtered today.
Neither warlords nor house servants are great lovers of history, requiring as it does, quite a bit of reading, to establish timelines and a body of facts, and independent analytical thought to interpret and draw conclusions, however obvious.
This is probably just as well, for even the most cursory overview of empires of yesteryear will invariably touch on the fate of warlords and house servants when those empires reached their inevitable conclusion. Talk about harshing a buzz. And so close to the election, too.
Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old Time is still a-flying;
And this same flower that smiles today,
To-morrow will be dying
Saturday, October 09, 2004 | 2nd Episode of Debate Show Lacked Song, Substance
John Kerry looked old and tired, but only appeared nervous when Bush appeared to momentarily lose control and strutted about the stage anxiously, shouting down a portly but avuncular Charlie Gibson, a loyal American who knows when to shut up and let his President look stupider than usual.
In fairness, both did their share of hamming it up, and fans of both will undoubtedly consider the night one of "substance," but it was a rather sad substance, at once friable and viscous, about the best that can be done when two politicians, one very evidently suffering from some sort of neuropathy, attempt to wring a debate out of positions that do not significantly differ in their adherence to both crusade and feudalism.
Kerry has a more extensive vocabulary, and someone had told Bush to pretend he was posing for a picture while Kerry talked, but both promised the same death.
American culture is frequently accused of being superficial and shallow, so perhaps it is fitting, this devil spawn of American Idol and the Miss America Poise Competition, where competing contestants sing songs with the same chord progression as a thousand other songs, and the beauty queens confide in serial breathy whispers that they hope to work with handicapped children and obtain Masters Degrees in Communications.
The hostility between the two multi-millionaires was well-received by the viewers, probably the most entertaining aspect of the spectacle, although I believe the performances of both would have been enhanced if they had not so stubbornly disregarded my repeated requests to make it a musical.
Even the most ardent admirers of each contestant will have to acknowledge that they are united in their steadfast refusal to sing, although Bush may have had some second thoughts, at one point he walked to his mark and did a little half-turn, mike in hand, and I, for one, had hopes of at least something from "Cats," but it was not to be.
For the next debate, maybe sanity will prevail and they will come out in the arms of handlers, dressed in plus size chicken suits, placed on the floor and sent to peck at one another with large plastic beaks.
Thursday, October 07, 2004 | Century of Resistance: US Has Limited Choices - "SuperDraft," or Abandon Objectives
If it is to achieve its military and economic objectives, the US's choices are quite limited. The native overseer/client state module is becoming too costly, at the same time as it is declining in effectiveness.
I realize that the standard American response to this argument is "just nuke it all," however if you put yourself in the position of the American oil company employee who will be living and working in the nuclear wasteland, supervising the Filipino dollar-a-days, or more appropriately, if you put yourself in the position of his survivors, you may begin to have some misgivings about this option.
If you are part of the oil company's legal team, it is unlikely that you will be a proponent of "nuke it all."
While the US could easily legislate a waiver for illness, injury or death that might result from employment in a hazardous area for companies in certain industries, that would put the oil companies in an awkward position recruitment-wise.
There could also be some unforseen impact on the resources themselves. Radioactive oil might not generate the profits its extractors had hoped.
Technology has changed things in many areas of life, from weapons, both type and availability, to mobility, and it would not be wise to underestimate the advances in communication. Today, for the first time in the history of human activity, it is possible for any human being to communicate in real time, with any other human being almost anywhere on earth, as long as both have access to modems and a common language.
This has dramatically impacted smooth implementation of US policy, not so much domestically, where careful media strategies have largely desensitized the US news-watching and voting sectors, who have developed a variety of techniques to variously justify, applaud, or refuse to believe many aspects of how their tax dollars are spent, but among the target populations, it is a different story.
Not everybody in the Majority World has internet access, far from it, but more people than ever before have access to information today, whether an internet cafe, or a cousin who has been to a city with an internet cafe, and the nature of US operations necessarily renders them somewhat transparent in the field: people cannot ignore the fact that it was a US operative who shot their brother in law.
There have also been some social changes. While it is true that the US has managed for decades to control large populations by the simple technique of identifying native overseer candidates from the target nation who are capable and willing to sell their grandmothers for the right price, this method is becoming less effective and exponentially more costly.
Think of this: Less than a half century ago, in the United States, racial apartheid was the law of the land, and it was not difficult to find even African-Americans who would, even when no whites were listening, express their sincere view that this was as it should be. Today, one would be hard pressed to find even an elderly African-American anywhere in the United States who would agree with such a view.
As the blip of pre-eminence of Europe (and spawn) fades from the radar screen, the notion that Sahib knows what is best continues to decline in popularity throughout the Majority World, and while some westerners, especially Americans, are quite sincere in their closely-held belief in Manifest Destiny and the innate superiority of white western culture, the victims of the doctrine who share it grow smaller in number.
The two views are irreconcilable. I remember reading somewhere about a lady expressing her frustration over trying to discuss gender issues with relatives in rural Latin America. "There is," she said, "not much conversation to be had with someone who believes as deeply and unshakably that you are property as you believe they are not."
That illustrates the unbridgeable gap.
The United States simply cannot keep pouring money down the holes of even the most obligingly draconian regimes in the face of the groundswell of conviction among the rank and file populace that the land, the resources, and they themselves are not the property of either the United States nor the native overseer, and the vast armies of secret police, torturers and death squads find themselves, and their own families at increasing risk from both directions - the native overseer insists that they murder their countrymen when directed to do so - this is his job, if he does not do it, he loses the dollars, and possibly his life.
At the same time, the intended targets' tolerance for dollahoism and collaboration dwindles. The death squad leader demands more money from the native overseer, who must pay him or eliminate him, and his replacement will not be on the job long before he too demands more, and that more must come from the American taxpayers.
The taxpayers are more than happy to pay for it, as long as they do not have to see photographs of the wetwork, but the present system has reached the point of diminishing returns.
It was hoped that Taliban-esque faith-based control would do the job, but that too has its limits - and its glitches.
The Democratic nominee himself has remarked on this, criticizing the Republican incumbent for "outsourcing" US wetwork in target nations.
The only chance of securing the resources for the US, even with the implementation of population reduction strategies so intensive as to jeopardize US contractors and resource extraction personnel and all the potential legal vulnerability that presents for the key defense and energy sectors, is a Guantanamo-style lockdown of the very considerable non-liquidated population, and when one considers applying this to a swath of stretching from South Asia to the Mediterrenean, with tributaries encompassing Indonesia, Africa, and Latin America, the limited efficacy of the client state module, for reasons stated above, becomes apparent.
Achieving the goal can only be done with boots on the ground. Lots and lots and lots of boots. The combined population to be subdued is several times that of the entire population of the United States, including infants, the very elderly, and the infirm in the US and taking into account an average of 50% population reduction in the target regions via a variety of methods.
Even the impressment of every ambulatory soul residing in the United States from 7 to 75 years of age will not be sufficient.
But it will be a start. And combined with maximum-benefit use of sustained population reduction, and added to, not replacing, the client state system, it will be possible for the United States to accomplish a good part of its objectives, at least in the short term.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004 | Darrell Hammond Debates John Edwards, World Doesn't Notice
In an innovative workaround to the necessity of maintaining US court-appointed Vice President Dick Cheney in a secure undisclosed location, Washington strategists called upon the talents of popular Saturday Night Live veteran impressionist Darrell Hammond, and as predicted by sources who wished to remain anonymous, the personnel substitution went unnoticed by both media and public alike.
Hammond's performance was flawless, capturing with chilling accuracy the persona of the man who opposed freeing Nelson Mandela, voted against the Clean Water Act, and fought valiantly against making Martin Luther King's birthday a national holiday.
Even Vice Presidential hopeful Edwards, who was careful early on in the campaign to reassure voters that his values are those of a small town in the Deep South during the era of legalized apartheid, appeared not to notice that the man across the table was wearing special effects makeup and a skull wig.
Working from a script, with improvisation as necessary, was no sweat for Hammond, who has been doing it for years, and when the pair found a meeting of the minds in their agreement that Equal Protection Under the Law is a Bad Thing (TM), there was a soft but audible rustle as America reached for tissues.
Edwards, mindful of his responsibilities to the Democratic party, did a very creditable job of arguing that he supports the Likud-Molodet atrocities against the Palestinian people even more than the current Secured Undisclosed Location occupant, one expected him to whip out a wallet photo of Ovadia Yosef and kiss it, any minute.
The youthful senator was also very forceful in his careful inferences that Cheney's company should not be the one to be making the lion's share of profits from the US operation to liberate Iraq of its oil.
Sunday, October 03, 2004 | Anti-Terrorism Safety Checklist: How to Stay Safer
In light of the October Plan, as the situation in the US deteriorates, if you are a member of an at-risk group, either by reason of appearance, faith tradition, national origin, or because you may be considering participating in any activities, especially offline activities, that could be interpreted as opposing policies of the Washington warlord syndicate, it becomes especially important to do what you can to minimize the impact of your decision on others, particularly those who depend on you for support and care, such as children, elderly or infirm, pets, etc. Many of these suggestions have been in use for three years by at-risk families. Maybe they will be helpful to you. You can also check with your local mosque or immigrant social service organization for more tips. Also, CAIR has put together a safety kit, available in Arabic and English.
Have a plan. Who will care for dependents if you are unable to?
Even in the best of times, it is recommended that parents instruct their children not to go with other adults who may come to "pick them up" from school, even if the adult claims there has been an accident or other emergency. For legitimate emergencies, it is suggested that you and your children agree on a "secret code phrase," known to NO ONE else. This is also a good idea to expand to adult members of your immediate family.
It is within your immediate family that you should make contingency arrangements for caring for dependents. Friendship is a wonderful thing, and the old saying that the true friends one makes in a lifetime can be counted on one hand. The safety of your children is not a good way to put friendship to the test. Your friends may have children, too.
Because extended family ties are not a strong trait in American culture, keep it to your immediate family, and choose even those carefully. American families tend to be spread out, and it is not uncommon for cousins, even siblings, to live thousands of miles apart and communicate rarely and superficially, if at all. If necessary, arrange for you or your trusted family member to relocate so that you will be near each other.
The family member you choose should have a specific and detailed plan for how to collect, where to take, and how to care for your dependents when the time comes.
Be sure to include information about special diets, and medications, allergies, names of doctors, etc, if your family is affluent enough to afford medical treatment. If possible, obtain extra refills of regular medications and leave them with the family member who will be acting as surrogate care-giver. Ditto with money, if you are lucky to have any to set aside. This money should go into a bank account on which your name does not appear. Or you can have the surrogate care-giver purchase travellers' checks in his or her name.
If you take medication yourself, obtain an extra refill and keep it on your person at all times. If you are seized, it will surely be taken from you, but you may be able to quickly take one last dose that could buy you some time, depending on the medication, even your life.
You may not be able to notify them that the time has come, so begin a check-in program now, and follow it religiously.
Because of the special challenges presented by younger children and "secret code phrases," it is better for you, or a trusted immediate family member homeschool them. This is actually the best option for all children, in the current climate, since school officials may not notify you if the decision is made to seize your children first.
If you cannot keep your children at home, make arrangements with school personnel that in the event of any assignments involving creative writing or visual art of any kind, your child will receive a non-creative assignment of comparable difficulty.
Encourage your children to do creative work at home, and keep it at home, and do not show it to or discuss it with ANYONE outside the family, even their very best friend. This is probably the most difficult safety measure of all.
Use "disposable" pre-paid cell phones. Every family member should have one. Purchase the smallest amount of minutes, so that you change frequently. Do not put numbers of family members in the memory, just dial.
Take an objective look at yourself in the mirror. Do you have any distinguishing characteristics, such as moles, scars, tattoos? If so, and if you have the resources to do so, have them removed, or conceal them with cosmetics when engaging in high-risk activities.
Ladies have a particular advantage in being able to dramatically change their appearance with relative ease and rapidity. Use it.
I would strongly recommend keeping online and offline activities and personas separate and unconnectible.
Do not use your real name or other identifiable contact info online. Do not give this information to other people. You may trust that other person, but do you trust the unknown third party who may view the data on their computer without their permission?
Would you want that other person that you like and trust so much to have knowledge that could be of interest to hostile entities? Hostile entities who would not hesitate to use "pressure" against that other person, even their family members, in an effort to obtain that information?
Do not put others or yourself at risk. Limit conversation topics with neighbors, acquaintances and friends to gardening, pets, sports, food, weather. There is plenty to talk about in all of that!
In the workplace, keep conversation limited to what is necessary for work only. If you have previously been gregarious and gossipy, you may have to do a little finesse. Replace your words with big smiles when you can, and when you can't - gardening, pets, sports, food, weather!
If you are in a situation where the talk turns to politics or world events, gracefully remove yourself. If pressed to give an opinion, smile, roll your eyes, and say "may you live in interesting times," "mm mm mm" or laugh and say you are much too busy with work (if at work) or gardening, pets, sports, food, weather to keep up with any of that, and if you are skillful enough, segue into a "for example, last week I found out that my Japanese maple had some fungus thing I can't pronounce and ---." They will leave you alone quickly, believe me.
Sit down and talk with older children, help them develop strategies to follow these same social interaction guidelines. Help them even more by not discussing your high-risk activities, and inasmuch as you are able, any opinions you may have that might be interpreted as opposing warlord policies.
Do NOT take minor children to high-risk events, such as marches, meetings, demonstrations, etc. Find other ways to impart your values. You are an adult and can make an informed decision regarding putting yourself at risk. Minor children are dependent on you to protect them from this and other risks until they are of an age to make their own informed choice.
Don't talk to strangers. Yes, that's good advice for kids, and for you, too. Do not wear a watch in public, and you won't be stopped and asked for the time. If you smoke, don't do it on the street, and you won't be stopped and asked for a light or a cigarette. If you are on a train, waiting in line, whatever, and a stranger starts up a conversation, become Princess Diana.
Princess Diana became known as a terrific conversationalist because she was so adept at following the simple rule that used to be taught to young ladies in many cultures: Transparently and inconspicuously reveal nothing simply by getting others to talk about themselves. Whether the "other" is a harmless old actuary waiting for the bus or a regime operative, you can be sure that they are their favorite topic.
Be observant, ask questions, and be a good listener, and you can walk away from almost any encounter knowing more than you ever wanted to know about the other fellow, and all the other fellow knows about you is that you just love climbing roses.
If you speak any language other than English, keep that fact private. Depending on your ethnicity, speak it in public not at all, or only in situations or areas where many other people are speaking it. Under no circumstances should you reveal to an employer, or to anyone on the internet that you speak or read any language other than English.
If your heritage is "ethnic minority," try to do as much of your shopping and necessary business in a neighborhood where there are either many people of your ethnic group, or where almost everybody is from somewhere else.
Whatever your heritage, get into the habit of paying cash wherever feasible. This can be tricky, since carrying cash carries risks of its own, so use common sense.
You can put the new tires or shirts on your credit or debit card, but pay cash for any printed material such as books, magazines, newspapers, or non-entertainment media such as videotapes or CDs. Of course, if you are printing flyers, pamphlets or buying materials for signs, etc, you should not have to be told to pay for that with cash.
Do not answer your door unless you are expecting someone. This is typical advice given to young ladies living alone in big cities, and like the Princess Diana conversation technique, it is good advice for you too now.
If it is necessary for a repairman to enter your home, before the appointed time, make sure that all family photos, any posters of a political or ethnic nature, anything with any writing or script other than English or containing the name and/or address of any other person, any books on subjects other than gardening, pets, food, sports, are secure and out of sight.
If your neighbors have been in your home and have seen such items, move.
You may consider these suggestions to be extreme.
It is my opinion that you will consider the consequences of disregarding them to be even more extreme.
| US Policies the Real Victor in "Presidential Debate"
Almost unanimously, pundits, bloggers and commentators all over the world agree that John Kerry "won" last week's presidential debate. Even supporters of the developmentally impaired son of the former CIA director, who has wisely postponed a physical examination until after the "election," did not make a very good showing in the verbal skills exhibition.
This has been hailed as a great victory and a turning point for fans of the taller candidate, who appear oblivious to the faint praise damnation.
The real winner, however, is the doctrine to which both candidates are pledged. While affluent Americans watched and discussed the performances of their heroes, US gunmen launched a new mass slaughter campaign in Iraq, US-funded missiles rained down on a crowded refugee camp in Palestine.
The handful of diehards who last week swore they would not, could not support a candidate loyal to the warlord regime's crusade were won over to the safer more comfortable position of the supporters of child rape and torture by the simple televised demonstration that a twenty year veteran of a legislative body is more articulate than a stammering buffoon whose own loyalists acknowledge is barely able to complete a sentence.
Was it planned that way? If it was, it was done well. One might have thought that the hours leading up to the debate were not the best time to publicize what large "operations" were being launched, nor how successful they were in meeting their population reduction goals.
A less confident imperialism might have been hesitant to add to the mix the unusual practice of allowing images of bloodied Iraqi children to be broadcast by regime-approved news media. might have told their man in Tel Aviv to wait until after the debate to add his chorus of agonized screams of dead and dying, not to be seen to be "rubbing it in" that no matter which candidate US voters were drawn to, he would be a package deal, with part of the package the privilege of paying for the murders of hundreds, thousands of men, women and children.
What a welcome banquet for those prodigals, those ideological holdouts whose principles would not allow them to be good Germans. Much better this way, really. It will make their next step all the easier, when they are ordered to send their son or daughter to "soften up insurgents" at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, or when the time comes for them to inform the authorities that they suspect a friend, neighbor, or family member of opposing the regime.
As the enemy whose bread they shared or baked is led away, if they should have any twinges of conscience over his fate, they will always have Debate Night.
Friday, October 01, 2004 | Bush, Kerry Debate the Best Way to Kill Iraqis
Bush, the shorter aspirant for Crusader-in-Chief, deprived of his earpiece for the evening, haltingly struggled with the words on his cue cards outlining his familiar if barely coherent argument that America does not need to share any more of its Iraqi oil money than it is already doing, while the taller multimillionaire reiterated his usual position that it would be cheaper to offer generous cuts of the war loot to several other countries in exchange for their loan of expendables to do more of the wetwork.
The only candidates allowed to participate in the infotainment extravaganza were those sanctioned by the two "parties" funded by the corporate oligarchy, and rare the American viewer, and even rarer the voter who is even aware that any other option exists save having the United States defined by a bestial horde of torturers and sexual predators, who roam the globe at the command of their warlords.
Both candidates essentially agree that the earth, its people and its resources are the property of the United States, and anyone anywhere who begs to differ with this view constitutes a grave and imminent danger to important US business interests, and must be murdered posthaste.
On the doctrine that the right of self-defense, and the decision to possess weapons, are privileges which the United States will bestow or deny, and that the United States shall be the sole determiner in this matter, presumably by divine right, the candidates found another area of common ground, although Kerry has not stated that God speaks through him, so that could be another possible point of argument for the pair.
It could be that Kerry just prefers to keep his messages from God a private matter, or he could agree that God speaks through Bush, and believe that God told him to offer incentives to allies, and Bush misunderstood that part. We don't really know, they didn't talk about that.
On the subject of genocide in Sudan, both agree that it would hardly be polite to America's allies to jeopardize their lucrative oil deals there, and that the African Union should have another meeting.
Early anecdotal reports indicate that the flashing lights failed to charm younger viewers as the producers had hoped.
But that was not enough for the crusaders. Scooping up US state approved media talkinghead Jane Arraf, it was on to Samarra, to display a "large scale offensive" designed to delight and enchant the US voting and viewing sector, at the time of this writing, the number of martyrs is still unknown.
Both Republican party masterminds and the Pentagon are keeping mum about how many votes they believe each dead Iraqi translates into, as well as why votes are a concern, since careful planning and the Diebold company have removed that concern.
As domestic CNN peanut-vendors moved through the crowd, with Arraf safely embedded with the Massacre Bounce brigade, the most recent victims of the crusade writhed in pain, incredibly unaware that Washington movers and shakers were considering the installation of a figurehead pledged to bestow upon them the stability of being bombed by Frenchmen.
Miami humidity defied the best efforts of CrusadeNewsNet's most talented hairstylists, and Sharon loyally ordered the slaughter of several dozen Palestinians. They don't bother luring the children with candy in Palestine.
Meanwhile, France attempted to strike a deal to ransom 3 of its hostagescurrently being "held" by militant US gunmen in a concentration camp, and top Washington masterminds have issued a strict warning to pro-Democracy elements in Pakistan that Washington will not hesitate to take steps that would allow India to launch a strategic nuclear strikedestroying the small but populous South Asian nation, whose strategic location is seen as key to the American warlord's objectives regarding the expropriation and transport of natural resources in the region.
Actions like Sep 11 do not happen in a vaccuum.
Long before those hijackers ever stepped foot on the planes the damage
had been done. They were brainwashed with the same type of garbage
propaganda that is spewed from Fatwa's weblog.
Middle Eastern countries are so much more barbaric today and preAmercia than America can ever hope to be...America has only been around 230 years...who did you blame for everything before that Ductape? I am calling a Fatwa on your bullshit!
IMO - terrorist plain and simple. He is an Al queda operative who
should be put in a cage on gitmo Skinner
My favorite..."In Defense of Holocaust Deniers"
I always thought that "The Enemy Within" was just a metaphore for liberalism, that is, until I encountered Ductape Fatwa. He should be in an orange jumpsuit for sure.
peopleforchange.netductape is either a commie, al queda, or a deep cover mole
Tells you something about this asshole doesn't it. He's really serious.
I believe that DF is nothing but a Republican plant...
Ductape is a commie, a terrorist, and he drinks blood too. He drinks
Capitalist blood. He eats unborn babies too
Give me your address and I'll send you $20 and a thank-you note for taking your hatred elsewhere.
A terrorist with a sense of humor!
He ain't nuthin' but shit
inadequate, halfway house bullshit
You are a dumbass. Fuck you and your condescension about us "benighted sheeple." hamletta
Untruthful, damaging bullshit
no better than the neocons and no different than Timothy McVeigh
dailykos.coma turd in the punchbowl...if DF were Joe Hill he probably would have killed himself rather than get put to death.
A compost pile of fecundity
dailykos.comdespicable and literally mentally ill