28 February 2007

My Anger Persists

Recently, I posted a piece about the shabby treatment of returning Iraq and Afghanistan vets, since that post a story broke about just how shabby Bdg 18 is. The Bldg is where vets stay for their out-patient care at Walter Reed. The story is being reported heavily. Gates is upset! Oh please, where was this outrage before the story broke?

And McCain, a vet himself, where is his two cents?

And now the troops housed in the Bldg have a time to rise and get the room ready for inspection. Are you kidding? No, I am NOT! Their room must be perfect in case there are people walking through the Bldg. Let see, You want a vet who lost his legs because of your ignorant war, to rise early and prepare his room for some idiotic inspection? You people are flippin' animals! God forbidden that his room not be perfect. Is this the answer? Hell no! It is just a way to cover some low life's ass.

Oh yeah, the rest of the story--the troops are not allowed to talk to the press in any way. Your pathetic government is attempting to use damage control with the hope that all this will slide from the memory of the people. If history is correct, it will, the American people are more worried about who flies some worthless cloth or which $3 magnet you have on your car or refrig. They are a pathetic bunch of cowards.

And there is more! More? How did we get so lucky?

Congress will be holding hearings on the conditions. I hope the vets are not putting any faith in these, it is just a delaying tactic with nothing being accomplisheed except some PR and photo-ops

I will continue to be angry, because the people voted the smirking Texan into office, not once but twice, and he sent our young to face the horrors of war; so indirectly, the American people are responsible for their plight and yet NO ONE gives a crap. Yeah, I am proud to be an American--In CASE YOU ARE DENSE__THAT IS SARCASM!!!!


27 February 2007

A Patriot Tax?

If the readers have been following the blog, they will know that I got pretty pissed at the treatment of returning Iraqi vets, especially the wounded. I do not like the idea that the government is ignoring the problem as they did with the Viet vets.

I see a wealth of flags and stupid magnets everywhere, somehow these mental midgets think it is patriotic and supports the troops. HA!

I say if the money is damn hard to find to give the deserved assistence to the vets, impose a Patriot Tax. The tax would be levied on all flags bought or flying, the same with the magnets, that "Support Our Troops" or anything that has that terminology on it. And make it a substantial tax--after all the money will be well spent, for a change.

This will do two things 1--Raise needed monies for the care of the injured vets 2--it will show just how patriotic the American publiic really is. I say that patriotism, at least in the forms that will be taxed, will disappear. The "sunshine patriots" will return to under the rocks they have crawl out from. There will be no more objects from them to get so they can soothe a guilty conscience. They will have to pay! That will make a significant difference in the lunacy.

Is this extreme? You bet your ass it is! And it will prove once and for all who really supports the troops.


26 February 2007

A Note

I changed the style of the blog, hopefully it will be a bit better than the last; that one was too busy, I like this style better. Hopefully there will not be too much confusion.


The Green Zone

According to most observers, the central part of Baghdad, the Green zone, where ministries, embassies, govt offices, etc are located, is well guarded and considered by most to be secure. Oh really?

In the recent past insurgents and such have attacked the zone from within and out. Recently, an Iraqi VP was the target of a bomb while he visited one of the miniastries offices, he was wounded and taken to the hospital, others were killed. There have been small arms attacks, rocket attacks and bombs. That does not sound like a secure place to me. You?

Soon the major "surge" will be going on in Baghdad, going from neighborhood to neighborhood, this operation will clear the 'hoods and make them secure. Oh really? Would that be the same security that they have brought to the Green Zone?

All the admin's cheerleaders say this is the only way to bring the violence to a halt, well at least stop some of it. Does anyone here really buy this claim? May I see a show of hands?


This will no more bring safety than any other plan they have had in the past. The insurgents will just fade to the shadows, regroup, rearm and start all over again. The Green Zone, will be no more secure than irt was yesterday, when the Iraqi VP was almost killed

This plan is doing two things for sure: 1--wasting money and 2--wasting lives. The time for a major rethink on Iraq has come and is almost gone. A major shift in strategy is sadly needed. Surely, there is someone on the payroll of the admin that could come up with a new direction, not some rewording of the old "stay the course".


25 February 2007


I like short little words they are so easy to type.

Revolutionary Democracy

What is it? How does it work? Before I answer these and other questions, I need to let the reader know that as an observer, I write like I think, I have no time to be grammatically correct, so if for some reason it offends the readers sensibilities, I would say........Okay.

I am a revolutionary democrat. That does not mean I am a member of the Democratic party, far from, it means that I see a need for drastic changes in our system of government. While I might agree with some of the stances of the DP, I should by no means be confused for a lame half-witted liberal.

Revolutionary Democracy sees the multinational corporations, imperialism and a new form of colonialism as the harbingers of a world crisis. It is time for the people to take control of their lives and their country. The people must demand and get accountability from their representatives, something they have none of today. Time for the people to step up to the plate and learn to play ball; to take the decision making out of the hands of millionaires and put into the hands of the people. A time for participatory democracy, where all lead and all govern.

At the present time in this political epoch, with corruption, scandal and non-caring, the reps you now have are nothing but spokespeople for big business and the wealthy. They only care about the people every 4 years or so, once they have the vote they move on to their real objective--self-interest.

As long as the people continue on their path of subjugation, they will never have a voice in their destiny, just turn it over to those who prefer to lead and will lead to the path of ruin.

Right now, the people have the ways to take back their country and their government, but they must want to change world and must want to end the political slavery they are now in.


24 February 2007

Middle East Factoid

I am going to try and give my readers a piece of fact about the region that is causing so much grief, the Middle East.

This will be my first---

The borders of modern day Iraq, were drawn up by a female, Gertrude Bell. She did this at the end of WWI. She and T.E. Lawrence alone set up the monarchy of King Faisal of Iraq, who was not an Iraqi, but a Saudi by birth.

Iraqi Historical UpDate #1

Historical UpDate

The idea of three states or whatever you would like to call them, in Iraq is something new? Is it the way forward for Iraqis? What do you think? Me? I think it is a ill advised move, that shows little or no actually knowledge of what could happen in the future.

What about a division of Iraq? This idea is not a new one or an original one. Under the auspices of the Ottoman Empire, Iraq was divided into three vilayets or administrative districts. In the North there was Mosul, in the center it was Baghdad and in the south, Basra. Wake up! (snapping fingers) Does any of this sound familiar?

Nothing being done in Iraq is original, not the tactics by the occupiers, not political and not, especially, the idea of a division into three parts. All was tried by either the Ottomans or the Brits or now, the US.

Why would you continue to do the same things over and over and expect a different outcome? Time to eliminate all the "wise guys" in Washington, tgime to find people who know history and who knows the ME on an intimate level.

Just look at a history of Iraq and you too could predict the outcome and make Cayce proud.

The Professor has spoken!


23 February 2007

I Get Cheesed!!!!

Recently I read an article about the cutting of funds for Arlington Cemetery. And then the same day a story about how shabbily returning injured Iraqi vets are treated and then CNN does a piece on the shabby condition of the out-patient barracks at Walter Reed. Dammit! THERE IS NOTHING more important than the rehab of the injured vets--NOTHING!

Well, I was so upset that I posted both events on a discussion forum. Guess what! Not one of the admin's cheerleaders has anything to say about the obscenity. But yeah, they know absolutely everything about the war in Iraq, but yet they have NO opinion about these stories.

As a Vietnam vet, I watched too many good men succumb to the non-caring government. These men were calling out for help and were fucking ignored, and now the ass wads are doing it again. WHY? Because the military will use these men and women up and once they are injured, ther usefulness is gone. Just turn their backs on them and whatever happens happens.

I have had little use for the government since Vietnam and now they are at it again--everyone of them deserves to be shot, multiple times so that is is a slow agaonizing death. Take a good look around, if they do not care wgat happens to these people, what care for you do they have? Easy answer--NONE!!!!!!

Now Gates gets on TV on the sujbect and says it is unacceptable--way to go dick wad. But where were the concerns last year? They got caught and now they pretend it is appalling. They were caught!!! If not then the crap would still be going on.

Odd, Americans seem to think that a piece of flippin' cloth in front of the home and a couple of ribbons makes up for this abuse. If so, they are lazy bastards and more unpatriotic than anyone I have ever met and believe me I have met some real radicals. If this type of abuse is not worthy of a comment, then you are more worthless than Bush. And believe me, that is a bout as worthless as a human can be.


There Goes The Neighborhood

The UK will pull some 1600 troops out of Iraq, but yet Prince Harry will go for active duty. Also getting in on the deal is Lithaunia and Denmark, will be pulling trrops from Iraq.

There are several ways to view these pull-outs. One, the war is going so well that some of the forces are not needed. Or two, these countries are bowing to pressure at home to "cut and run" Or three, it is just a political ploy to gain some type of support from somewhere. There is more to this than just a couple hundred guys going home.

For one the Brits are in the South of Iraq, reports say it is a more secure area and they are not needed. But reports say that they are attacked by mortar and RPG, almost daily. Secure, you say? OK. But the Brits are gonna leave the bulk of their forces in the area. So, with that said, this is just a media event to bolster Bush in his statements that all is going good.

Now let us move on, the plan for the "surge" is to go into a 'hood and take on the insurgents and bring a move secure atmoshere. Once the "bad guys" are thrown out, the miliatry will live within that ;hood to keep the peace. Sorry, guys, but IMO, that is just another occupation and will be really be unpopular and give the insurgents even newer targets. This tactic is a lame one at best and someone really needs to rethink this strategy.

With countries trying to find ways to bail on the war in Iraq, how long will it be before we are alone still fighting the same guys over and over; for once the sweep is over they will be back. Who will be next, to bring the troops home?

none of this will do what the cheerleaders say it will do. The only thing they should promise is that there will be more casualities to deal with in the future.


22 February 2007

He's Da Man!

McCain 4 Prez

There seems to be a lot of jockeying for the frontrunner position within the GOP. Whi is it Guiliani? How ab out that McCain? Which is the man to be king?

Guiliani, probably will not be it! He is pro-choice and anti-gun, two of the positions that could kill him as a frontrunner.

Now we come to the man--McCain. If this is the best the GOP can do-shake hands with the new Democratic pres. He use to garner some respect because he was a VN vet that was in a prison camp in Noth Vietnam. OK, where is that a good place for a pres to come from? He will think hard about sending US troops to war? Yea, right. (sarcasm intended)

He is a supporter of Bush's policies and of the man and being so is attempting to hold the support from the right that Bush still retains. How does he do this? Well, let us see shall we? In the past McCain was a supporter of not repealing Roe, now he says time to zap it. When Runsfeld left, he said he was a good man and deserves respect, now he is saying his policies were wrong and it was mishandled by Rumsfeld. This man is an insult to the American soldier and voter. He follows the political winds to feather his own bed. This is a man who cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be allowed to lead this country. A man that will tailor his views to win political support is not a man to be trusted. He is only trying to win support from Bush's original supports, that helped him into the WH.

McCain is not a vet, he is a politician who happened to be in the military. His switching on issues is far worse than a guy who joined the NG and sat out Vietnam in Alabama; that guy has an excuse for his views. They are he was not there and never witnessed the obscenities of war. McCain was there and witnessed and yet he closes his eyes to the obscenities That, IMO, makes him a worthless lump of ....and not suitable to even eat at the same table as Vets and definately makes him unacceptable as a pres.

Know your candidate or suffer all the lies he/she can sling at you, for the only thing you can bitch about is your ignorance.


21 February 2007

Political Bitch 101

What does anyone outside the ME have to do with the implimentation of a peace accord? US or Germany or UK or whomever, what do they know of the situation, othwer than some dumbass news coverage?

My thought is, if you want to offer a suggestion on a peace for the ME, try living there for a month and then offer your proposal. I can say that may views changed considerablly after living there. No one can understand the complexities of the situation by watching the crap on CNN.

Only first hand knowledge should be acceptable for any proposal without that you have nothing.


Yet Another thought

Blair has announced the pull out of about 1600 Brit troops. Why? Is he bowing to political pressure at home? Or is he bailing, like most everyone else?

Let see our forces go back over and over and these go home. Is there any justice left? Why can they not go to Baghdad and assist? I thought Bush said we were all in this war on terror together.

Could this be a political ploy to make it appear that things are going well in Iraq?

There are a wealth of people with answers to everything from Britney to life on Mars, so please, someone explain this to me--quickly.


Just Another Thought

Sec, Rice is in Berlin to talk about ME peace. Why? Sould not the talking points be at the people involved? She demands Israel be recognized, but what has she said Israel must do? Anybody that can defend this type of :diplomacy" needs to do a little research in conflict management. What are the negotiating points? Pals must recxognize Israel's right to exist, ok, we got one. What must Israel do? Give up settlements? No! Agree not to destroy houses and lives? No! Shoe some restraint on the use of lethal force? No! Just what the hll does Israel have to do?

It is not a compromise if only one side has to agree to give up something. That is know as bullying. And that has been the policy of the US since Johnson. Maybe longer. What is the new approach that the US is offering? The Pals do all the giving and Israel does all the taking? Sounds like the current policy.

There will never be a peaceful solution as a heavy handed approach is used toward the Pals. There will never be a successful solution as long as one side does all the compromising. The thing to look forward to in the near future is a prolonged BS session and the possibility of more violence.


Three States Of Iraq

THe Partitioning Of Iraq?

A question that will be asked over and over until it either occurs or the entire idea is put to bed, for good. When Iraq became a country, it was done arbitarily by the Brits. A map was taken and mostly straight lines were put unto the map and viola we Syria, Jordan, Iraq, et al. No amount of thought was put into the process, other than Kuwait had to be its own country. Why? Well, the al-Sabah family was in bed with the Brits and it was to be their reward for their services to the Crown.

The Kurds were lied to by the world, a homeland was promised and then not so important after the fighting was over. They remain hostile to just about everyone, unless the country happens to be working with them and their concerns.

In Iraq, the Brits screwed up! Within the lines drawn on the map of the region, they incorporated three different factions that had no love for one another. And, believe it or not, they were surprised when independence was met with several years of fighting among these groups.

OK enough history, let us speak of partitionoing of Iraq. After the Bush I war Iraq ws divided into 3 zones, two of which were no fly. Within these zones each faction started consolidating power in the hands of local leaders. Even though Saddam was still in charge, power consolidation was done covertly. The reason these zones were put in was to protect the Kurds to the North and Shi'a in the south.

Then, along came Bush II and his war on terrorism. What a boom! Saddam was taken down and with that came an emboldening of the Kurds and Shi'as. And just take a look at the mess we have going a the presnt time.

There have been those who say that the key to curbing the violence is the formation of three states, each faction will have its space. One major draw back was that the oil reserves werein Kurd and Shi'a territory and that the Sunni would not allow the partitioning to go on. The concern would be that the Sunni would have no bargaining power within the loose federation. So the whole idea has been on the back burner.

WOW! Guess what? A oil reserve has been located in al-Anbar provence near the Syrian border. This now gives the Sunni some clout, something they lacked for awhile. But will this lead to the break up of Iraq? Not right now, but the option will be considered. As the violence continues to grow and the deaths amount up and up and as the refugees continue to stream over all existing borders; something unconventional will have to be considered.

And that consideration will be--partitioning Iraq into three separate entities.

Will this curb the ever grow violence? Not at all, it will however, be a talking point to try and obtain a peaceful Iraq. Once that breaks down, the violence will return and only God knows the outcome.

So the predictions are: Iraq will be partitioned. Peace will be short lived. Violence and civil war will return and more deadly than before.


20 February 2007


Every Little Stan

Stan? what the hell are you talking about? Well, you know, Stan--Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, yada, yada......Why are we discussing these Central Asia countries? Before we do that let us look around the world, shall we?

Nigeria--the country is about as stable as a house of cards. Venezuela--depends on what Chavez decides to do this week. Iraq--enough said! Each one of these countries have the Us as a common denominator--oil reserves. If for some reason we lost Nigerian oil and Venezuelan oil and the ME was an even hotter bed of conflict--what would the US do for oil? Our opil imports would be sharply cutailed and we would scramble around looking for other reserves. What about Russia? NO! They seem to be working on an exspanionists agenda, they will need their oil to counter the US, if it becomes necessary.

What to do? What to do?

But wait there is another way! The Stans! Almost each one of these emerging countries has some oil and gas reserves and the US has found their problem solver.

Most of these countries are lead by a hard fisted dictator-type keader. Will that matter? Not really, we, the US, has a long hoistory of looking the other way from the strong dictators as long as they serve a purpose. Civil liberties are not a major obstacle.

These countries are now allowing the Us to build bases of operations on their soil. This will bring in lots of cash and preferential treatment in the future. These bases will be used to support ops in Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly Iran, among the most popular right now. Did you know? The Us has about 700+ bases on foreign soil and about 2.5 million servicemen. That sounds like "empire building" to me.

We will watch and see just how this plays out and just how the US handles the leaders that only care about a self-serving agenda. When they are eventually overthrown, a new conflict will be in the making.

How do we do it?


18 February 2007

Britney Baby--What Are You Thinking?

Yesterday mI watched the Spears thing on
the boob tube.

What is she thinking? Does not look as if she is doing much of that. She is shooting herself in the foot, with drawless photos, partying and now new tats and shaved head. I mean she is doing everything she can to give her kids to K-Fed. Why? Is she that f**ked up?

I mean, personally, I think bald is HOT! I mean I have all kinds od visions about dating a bald chick. But put that aside she is doing all of ex's leg work for his attorney. I mean come on girl, you are out with the biggest HO in the US, Paris. That in it self is not gonna help you in court.

Unfortunately, between Spears and Smith, there is no room for news--fluff rules the air waves.

All I can say is "Thank God for a pc"!


Alternative Fuels

Well, it seems that the US is trying to do its part and help eliminate some of the demand for oil. The pres decided to inclide this "new" avenue into his Stae of the Union speech. And he went on and on about American's addiction to oil and what did he offer? The guy said that we needed more research on Hybrid tech and hydrocell and additives and so on and on and on.....

The budget is out and let's say that the budget for the Us is $100, if so then the money set aside for alt energy research and developement is less than 1 penny. That ought to get the ideaS flowing, huh?

Bush seems to want to push renewable energy programs, you know, kinda like methanol? Why? There is the fact that it would help farmers, which would be some assistance to the growers, but I suspect there is another more reliable reason.

What would that be? Methanol is a gas additive and more likely than not will be the most money spent on its developement. IT IS AN ADDITIVE! What am I saying? This type of alt energy uses oil as a basis, that means oil companies will still be making billions, while appearing to be helping the ozone thing.

So I guess oil companies will have little to worry about, at least for now and the admin looks like it really cares about the quality of the air. It is a win win program for the pres and his admin. It will not substantially end our addiction to oil.

This whole song and dance is just politics as usual and profits as usual for the oil companies. So where does this end?


16 February 2007

A Thought for 16/02/07

Recently, the Palestinians have come to an agreement to form a unity government. It is a shaky peace, at best. The US and Israel are not too keen on the agreement. Why? It benefits Israel for the conflict to continue and it was a helluva coincidence that the work on the al-Aqsa mosque stirred up confrontation while the sides were meeting in Saudi Arabia. I do not believe in coincidences in politics, especially in the ME. Of course western media is all over the clashes and made it appear that the Palestinians were the "bad guys". Do not believe it! All would have been quiet and safe if the work had not begun and why is the al-Aqsa so important to repair at this time? Let us look, the Pals were getting good world press for their attempts to solve their problems within themselves. Not good for Israel.

Now Rice is sent to the area to try and jump start the peace process, at least that is the story. What a crock! She has made multiple trips saying the same thing and things have NEVER gotten better because of her visits. actually, things usually get worst after her appearance. It is nothing more than a photo op to make it appear that the Bush Admin is working for a lasting peace--THEY ARE NOT!

Ask yourself, why would she show up before a unity government is formed and the peace process is on old until the govt. is formed? No meetings, progress or anything else will be accomplished until that government is in place. So what benefit would her visit have? Only one! Show support for Israel and do a bit of antagonising of the Palestinian factions.

I say ----US keep your broads at home until they work out their government thing and then only show up if invited by the government. Israel can wait and if they truly want peace then they will go for a unity government that will negotiate in earnst.

IMO, Israel does not want peace--it would cost them a bunch from their cash cow--The US.


Does History Repeat?

Does History Repeat?

Does history repeat itself?..............Does history..............?

Alrighty then--let us check into our way-back machine, set the dial for Iraq 1920. The San Remo conference has given us the Iraq Mandate. Which gave the UK control over the area. The area being some indiscrimate lines drawn in the desert sand and called the country of Iraq. Before the ink even dried on the paper the attacks on the British began. Why? Well the Brits in their wisdom, used foreigners to be the admin of the newly formed country. Needless to say the locals were not thrilled with this decision. And the resistance grew and grew with lots of local deaths to add to the chaos. You see the UK failes to include local elites in the decision making and the admin of the country. By any stretch of the imagination, would piss you off also.

Arab nationalists were a big problem for the Brits. In 1941, the nationalists were causing a prob in Basra; the Brits sent in foreign troops and the upraisning was quelled in a bout 4 weeks. That sounds familiar for siome reason (sarcasm intended). After this the Brits still used elites to rule, they still did not have the approval of the locals. The Brits continued to throw their weight behind those leaders who were never part of the average way of life. The Iraqi leadership, at the time, had a very weak grip on power. Another very familiar sounding occurrance.

Now grab your butt and set the machine dial to 2003--Now we see we are in Iraq, Saddam has been diposed and the US has set up an interim govt. We have an American in charge of the interim govt and the list of players in the govt are ex-patriates, all wealthy and all living outside of Iraq for years. These peopl were chosen for their pro-US position, just as the original admin were chosen for their pro-Brit position. If you look closely at Iraq, the people do not have too much confidence in these "foreigners" and their attempt to run the country. De Ja Vu All Over Again!

So you see that the same mistakes are being made yet again. Nothing was learned originally and nothing was learned on the second trip to the table. Unfortunately, the second trip is costing Iraqi lives by the hundreds. There are forces at work within Iraq that give the "average" Iraqi more power in the decisions of their country. However, they are very unpopular with the US and its guys in Iraq. As you see the Brits did not ask for the Iraqis input into their government and neither did the US.

Each time, the interests of the occupying country were the main concern not that of the average Iraqi citizen. THe democracy thing was intersting, it was more a government that would have the interests of the occupyiers not the Iraqis.

I say let the Iraqis, the ones that stayed and faced Saddam, run their country they know exactly what is needed to bring themselves security.

I believe it was Einstein who said, Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. Maybe someone should read a little more and the same occurrances would not be happening.

Does history repeat itself? You bet your butt, it does.


15 February 2007

An Institution


First, let us begin with a few definitions--institution--a tradition or custom, now conflict--a clash of ideas or intersts. Now we can continue with the thoughts.

It is 1920 and most likely a lively day and a British mandate over what is known as Palestine. Jewish settlers start trickling into the country and almost immediately the conflicts between Jew and Palestinian begins. Most of them were small clashes here and there and occassionally the Brits were involved. These differences in opinion continued as well as the settlers entry into the country. And then in the year 1936, an Arab revolt began against Zionists and the Brits. THe revolt continue for some three years of bloody confrontations. Nothing was really settled by the revolt and nothing really changed. Clashes between the two anatagonists, Jew and Arab continued with more bloody conflicts. After WWII, Jews had an exodus to Palestine and the clashes became bigger and bloodier. Then Israel declared itself a country and nation in 1948 and then the real crap hits the fan. It becomes a moral imperative to crush one another. Shortly after the statehood declaration the 1st Arab-Israeli war began. It was not a pretty thing. The conflict ended but the hatred simmered. And simmered. Conflicts, attacks and brutalities continued on b oth sides of the issue. Then 1967, a really big show, the 6 Day War; Arab arnies and the Israelis clashed and death was everywhere. At the brokered end of the war Israel annexed the West Bank and Gaza, but the end of the war did not cease the hatred or the violence. This is a simple history lesson that deserves more depth, but for the purposes of this piece it will be sufficient.

Let's be honest, there were other minor wars like Yom Kippur and the like. Do not musunderstand me, any and all these conflicts and confrontations were bad for both sides, many bad and unfortunate incidents occurred from both antaonists. That in itself is just ducky, but I would like to concentrate on the concept of conflict now.

Since the beginning of the Jewish migration there has been anger, hatred and conflict. These conflicts have caused lasting divisions and lasting hatreds. Father passed on stories about the other side's autrocities to sons and sons to sons and sons to.............on and on. Both Palestinian and Jew is guilty of this. Stories of stolen land, killed loved ones. destroyed house and farms, and the list continues. Because of this word of mouth story telling the hatreds just build and continue for decade after decade. As the stories are past down the hatreds are past down and thus clashes between antagonist continue from year to year.

Both sides know their families stories and then firearms enter the picture and now the clashes become deadly. With each clash a new chapter is written in the hatreds. The more one acts the more the other reacts and it just keeps escalating; the death tolls escalate and sorrows escalates.

Because of the continuing escalation decade after decade, generation to generation, the conflict becomes a tradition, a custom, which after 60 yrs of escalation will be extremely difficult to break. It has become an institution, something that has a mind of its own and left unchecked will ruin both sides of the conflict. Because of the escalation over several generations the conflict has become institutionalized.

The only way this institution can be broken is with the work of both antagonist trying to end the hatred; both have got to desire peace at all costs, without a mutual desire for peace the institution of conflict will destroy both. Only the people can break the tradition, the custom of conflict. Some wealthy second or third partner cannot bring the institution to an end by throwing money at it or threats tossed around. These techniques only strenghten the institution. The people have got to want to live in peace and security. Without that desire all that is accomplished is a minor ceasefire that awaits the next act to ignite the fires of conflict once again.


12 February 2007

Who Lied?


The story is out! What story, fool? The Inspector General has issued a report on the intel that was used to go to Iraq and start some crap. The report says, basically, that the intel was tailored to fit the scenario. Much has been said about the intel. There was no WMD, there was no connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda, this is just a bunch of falsohoods all generated to garner the support for the invasion of Iraq. The best thing out of these investigations, at least in my opinion was the findings of the IG. They said that the false intel was inappropriate, not illegal.

Inappropriate? Can I use that the next time I am caught lying to the cops or possibly in court? Of course, I cannot! Then why is the government's lies inappropriate? The US invade a country without approval of the UN Security Council--that is an illegal act. The US has in the past condemned countries for similar acts. THe US cannot lead by example anymore.

Lies, Lies guess who dies. US troops are dying regularly and because of lies--someone needs to be held accountabl. But who?


11 February 2007

Palestinian Peace

Well, the Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah, have come to an agreement to form a unity government. The US and Israel have not been too ethusiastic about the peace between the two. Why? Well, it could mean that more international pressure would be exerted onto Isreal to come to terms with their neighbors. This cannot be let to happen, is their attitude.

The Palestinians are taking the first small steps to a peaceful government. Once the plan is implimented and begins to show signs of success, Israel will be in the crosshairs on the international stage. They do not want this, they like it better when the Pals are fueding and firing rockets at Israel. Why? These things gives Israel all the justification they need to invade and kill and gives the International community the chance to look the other way. That has become a bit more difficult and if the Pals succeed then the international commnity will have to deal with Isrsael, something they are not prepared to do at this time.

I suggest the first thing the Pals need to do is present a working government without bullshit, then once that gets to cooking then deal with the factions firing missiles. If they accomplish this the world will be on their side and will demand Israel come to terms.

I would almost bet that Israel ready has a plan in the can for such an outcome. They will try to provoke the Pals into making a mistake so they can act and say "I told you so". They cannot let the international community swing support to the Pals and they will do everything possible to prevent this from happening.

The Pals should be comended for their efforts and I wish them well and much luck on their travels to s state of their own.


10 February 2007

Is Government For Sale?

Recently it has been reported that the upcoming election could cost $1 billion, thus making it the most expensive campaign ever. Candidates are manuevering their support so that they do not accept federal funds for their campaigns. This is a scary thing, for them will go to private donations and fundraising to get the money for their campaigns.

This, IMO, will put the government of the United States up for sale. What cabinet positions will be bought? How many governmental jobs will be bought? How many policies will be bought? These are just a few of the questions that the voters need to ask. If the people allow this then the US will be getting the best government money can buy.

I say screw them! Give them all the same amount in federal funds and the same amount of air time and let the people decide. Elections have become big business and that will be the ruination of the nation.

Sit on your ass, and let this occur then you have nothing to bitch about, with the exception of how stupid you are.


Water Water Everywhere?

I have been watching and commenting on the situation in the Middle East for years. Usually I get called a bunch of unflattering names because of it, but I go on.

I have looked a the ME map over and over trying to decide what and why this just keeps getting worse and worse. The situation goes from bad to worse, almost daily and why? Do the people in this region enjoy killing each other, enjoy suffering, enjoy grief; just what the hell is it?

I was staring at a map today of the Me and I had an ephiphany(?). Water! Israelis so concerned about having water that it must keep the situation volitile, so they retain control of the West Bank. Why you ask? The jordan River, which divides the West Bank occupied territory from Jordan. The tributaries flow into the West Bank and to keep the water flowing into Israel they must retain control of the area.

One of their fears is that if the West Bank becomes the new Palestine, then they, the Israelis, would be at the mercy of the Palestinians and they cannot be put into that position. At present most of the water allocations go to Israel and not the people of the West Bank. This could be used as a weapon against Israel and that is what they are afraid of in the future.

Because of this fear, Israel will do all in their power to retain control of the water supplies in the occupied teritories. No peace will be had as long as the watwer issue can be used against Israel.

It is a lot simplier when you think outside the box.


09 February 2007

My Comspiracy Theory

Yesterday I bitched about the coverage the Astro-nut was getting. I bitched about all the media reporting on everything from her hair color to who made the diaper. I bitched and bitched. But I did not expect the story to be upstaged by a death. Ana Nicole Smith, that is.

My theory--Money is the answer. She married a multi-millionaire who left her all his money when he crapped out. Of course, the family was pissed and sued. I think after all the crap she wound up with about $80 million, not bad.

Now think about it--if something happened to her, the son would get the cash, he died, she was devastated, she gave birth to a daughter and now she's dead. After her sons death she tried to drowned herself, boyfriend found and called for help--bodyguard got her out of water and did CPR and revived her. She had been ill for a couple of months, off and on.

Now think about the cash--who is her heir? The baby, but since it is a minor, who will control the money? Who of all the players would benefit from her death? Who controls the cash?

Answer these questions and you have a helluva ploy emerging. A good TV movie and a good best-seller.

I will be watching the autosy reports carefully--me thinks there be something rotten in Hollywood.


08 February 2007

Another Thought

Just how long must we be subjected to the Astro-nut story or the diaper thing or yada, yada? I mean come on people! How much more do you need to hear about this situation? Is it something you cannot live without? If the answer is yes, the you are pathetic!

Another story, NYC is considering a law that would make it illegal to cross a street while listening to IPod, or cel, it will cost you $100 if you are ticketed. NYc is just sucking all the fun out of life. You cannot listen to IPod, talk on a cel, eat trans fats, smoke, or scratch--what is left? They will know how to make life a real joy!

I recall when you could see hookers in Times Square, now it is Mickey; personally, I like looking at hookers more than some capitalistic mouse. Would someone remind me why I would want to go to NYC for a visit.

What is next, some insane clergy carrying signs and calling me a "chilkd of Satan" because I listen to tunes?

Sorry, NYC--I will pass.







The above links are to articles written by Arab journalists and they are well written. But keep in mind that it is a Saudi paper, asharq alaswat, and will have a lean to a pro-western position.


07 February 2007

A Bomber In Government

A Bomber By Any Other Name.....

Let us take a trip in the way-back machine--it is 1983 in Kuwait, the US and French embassies have just been bombed. The Kuwaitis arrest a young man named Jamal Jaafari Mohammed, but he went on the lame before his trial. This guy was involved with a airline hijacking in 1984. Any way this guy was tried and convicted of being a terrorist in absentia.

He was reported to be a member of an Iranian backed para-military group that even attempted an assassination of a Kuwaiti prince. All this is just a histroy lesson right? Not really!

Let us set the controls for our temporal machine for the present to see what our Jamal Jaafari Mohammed is doing today.

One, Jamal Jaafari Mohammed is a member of the Iraqi parliment. He is a convicted terroist and he has diplomatic immunity. Not bad! This man was nominated by the DAWA, the coalition that supports al-Maliki. He also had the support of most of the Shi'a organizations. OH, by the way, Maliki's party Dawa took responsiblity for the bombings in '83 and was exiled to Iran under Saddam.

Now once this guy was nominated for the Coucil of Representatives under the US led government; he was elected and became a MP for Babil region. Plus there seems to be a bunch of info leaking out that Mohammed may be a conduit to Iran, which according to the US, is meddling in Iraq's business. Still no concrete proof of that accusation.

I realize the US was in a major rush for the elections to go forward, so they could hold up Iraq as a beacon of Democracy. Apparently, so quickly that no one bother to check out the candidates to see who they might be , in reality. I mean take a look mat one the US's boys, Chalabi, he is a felon on the run from justice in Jordan for hois part in a bank fraud, but now he has immunity--convienent, eh? Recently, a 9 month old baby was detained at an airport because his name was on the "terrorist" list of the US, but yet a convicted terrorist somehow slipped through the net. Just how much money are we flushing down the toilet?

It would seem that the more we try the more embarrassing moments we seem to create. This guy will probably become a victim of some violence, since he has immunity, any solution to this problem will be a behind the scenes solution. And once this story quietens he will slip into obsurity.


06 February 2007

Today, I read a story about this whacko that was shocking his 18 month old with a stun gun and for 3 months. Is this a sicko or what? Awhile back, in my area some kids put a cat's feet into hot grease. Heard on the news about some kids beat a miniture pinscher to death with sticks and these types are stories are everywhere. What a fuckin' degenerate society we have become.

What is needed is to overhaul the justice system so that the punishment fits the crime. For instance, the guy with the stun gun gets zapped everyday for 90 days with 100,000 volts. The kids with the hot grease, one og their hands is put into the same grease and those wonderful kids with the sticks, get beat with bamboo for 25 lashes.

What about capital crimes, you may ask? The same punishment fits the crime. For instance, they guy that was dragged to death behind a pick-up--he dies the same! The guy who was sodomized with a pipe because he was Mexican--the perps get sodomized repeatedly for 5 days.

I know this will not be popular, but something has to be done to right the crap that our society is nuturing.

Or how about, every tenth person arrested is shot to death by firing squad. Yes, I know these are a bit extreme, but something needs to be done and the sooner these deviant personalities are handled the better.


05 February 2007

A Ranting

Mr. Bush and his budget will be all the news of the day. It will be analyzed from every angle; I, myself, might put my 2 cents in, only time will tell. It seems he will be asking for a buttload of money for the war in Iraq and probably some for DHS, to help the war on terror. I mean these are no brainers, of course, he will.

I am such a major political geek that I watch the History Channel or as I call it the "Hitler" channel. Anyway I digress, today is a lot of shows on Saddam and his crap and I was wondering, could these stories be on today, of all days, because of the budget calling for ore money for the war? A coincidence? I think not! I seem to recall during the Lebanon conflict this past summer, I watched, on the same channel, a buttload of shows about the Germany and its policies toward the Jews. Coincidence? I think not!

Could the History Channel be used to garner support for different policies in the news? Who. BTW, owns the Histroy Channel?

Just a thought.


The New Refugees

The New Refugees

The Middle East in the last 50+ years has seen a wealth of refugees. The most extensive was the Palestinians fleeing their homeland. They went into Jordan, Lebanon, Syria as well as others. After decades of conflict, these refugees have become entrenched in the countries, sometimes not as welcomed guests. Jordan moved against them for fear that they would move against the ruling family. And of course, Palestinians were part of the problem in the civil war in Lebanon. These refugees have been blamed for all sorts of problems, which were not necessarily of their own making. To this day, animosities toward them continues, as well as their dislike for Israel. In other words, these refugees have inadvertently assisted in the continuation of the Israel-Palestine conflict. Sometime they were at fault, others not.

Since the US has invaded and occupied Iraq violence has grown almost daily. As this violence and lack of security grows, the people leave their country to become refugees. All in the search for a little peace and security. THe UN has estinmated the number of refugees so far as 2 million and about a 1000 day leave the country to go to their neighbors, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc.

The recieving countries, which are not the richest countries in the region, are having to deal with the influx of refugees, sometimes they are not welcomed. IN the beginning the wealthier Iraqis were leaving, doctors, lawyers, etc. Now average Iraqis are taking their life savings and fleeing the country.

The transportation of these refugees has become a boom industry in Iraq, probably the only industry that is doing well. Taxis, trucks, the like are all being used to take these displaced people to neighboring countries.

These refugee camps, will soon become the recruitment centers for insurgents, just as they were for the Palestinians. The longer the US is in Iraq and the longer the violence persists to more recruits will be available.

What are we looking at? Another conflict along the lines of the Israel-Palestine one. The longer the war in Iraq drags on, the more the disenfranchised look for ways to "get even", for lack of a better term.

Since the conflict with Israel has turned into an institution, there is no way to break the cycle short of a miracle. We are looking at the same occurance for the Iraqis. If the refugees are out of Iraq for 10 years or more, then we will be looking at it becoming an institution and a problem that will be more difficult to control.

The President was given every possible slant to the war in Iraq, except this one. Some of his advisers should be smart enougth to see this problem mushrooming into a major problem for the US and its allies. But as usual for the US leadership, the whole picture is seldom looked at, just the small part that is in front of them at the time. In My opinion, the US is in for another rude awakening.


04 February 2007


The peice I wrote yesterday about the Iran situation, got me to thinking and wandering. So I went back to the notes I have been taking for a long time on news stories of the hour. At least in my notes the whole Iran "bad guy" thing started getting hotter and more verbal about the time that Israel entered Lebanon. Israel's battle with Hezbollah seemed to present a uniques opportunity for the US to up the ante on the Iranians, since they were helping Hezbollah, it provided a uniques opportunity to link al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and the militias in Iraq to the world-wide terror netrwork.

I would say that was fortunate, was it not?

My notes could be incomplete; I will say this is not a certainity. but according to my notes it appears a bit suspicious.


03 February 2007

It's A Propaganda War

All the saber rattling going on in Washington and Baghdad about the involvement of Iranian "agents" in the situation in Iraq, is nothing more than a propaganda war right now. Why? there has been liitle evidence offered other than the hear say of some officials here and there. Has the media been allowed to verify any of the crap pass out? NO! Recently the US forces captured a cache of arms and immediately they were supplied by Iran. The truth is they found ONE Iranian machine gun among all the hundreds of arms captured. That does not mean that they all came from Iran, nor does it mean they did not come from Iran. I am just pointing out the fact that it was used for propaganda purposes.

It is certain that there are Iranians operating in Iraq, just as there are "agents" working in Jordan or Egypt.

Basically, what I am saying is I will reserve my condemnation of Iranian "agents" until I have concrete proof, not the lame evidence that is being offered now. I think that type of evidence will not be as easily produced as the lame accusations.

Let's look at propaganda--if one falsifies a fact, then a confrontation can be the answer when it is proven erroneous. But when an interpretation is offered then it becomes more difficult to prove it wrong. All media is used to get the message across to the public. An interpretation of a fact is just that what one person defines it as and is not necessarily accurate.

So, now are we seeing the propaganda war against Iran? All indications I have is that we are, but then again that is my interpretation and it may be propaganda--you decide!

I appears that the subjagation of Iran to Washington's desires is a necessity for the long term plans for the region. The US seems to be manuvering for domination of the Middle East and Central Asia, whether it is oil or whatever, they must be made to become subject to Washington's will.


A Thought For 03/02/07

I spend a lot of time reading various world edition newspapers and finding info that would normally not be seen in the US. I have found that some people are very short-sighted. On different forums I try to post article, stories, opeds, whatever that would generate a response, a thoughtful response, but as usual, in some cases, I get pure bullshit. The one that comes to mind most recently is an article I posted about the makeup of a terrorist org, and the first reply was basically calling me an Islamic apologist, I guess because I posted on something they have a bug up there butt about. Anyway, I apologize for NO ONE and I DO NOT accept any argument that labels any religion as "muderous".

Let see Muslims parked planes into bldgs and that makes the religion murderous. Ok with that same logic, the asshole who blew up an abortion clinic killing people was a Christian, so using the same logic, Christianity is a murdereous religion also.

I really get to laughing at the mentality of these so-called "civilized people", for it is easier to call names than to look for the cause. People like these are part of the problem we are having across the globe.


02 February 2007

How Would Syria Benefit?


The question is why would Syria order the assassination of Gemayel? Unlike the rest of his family he was a junior player, famous only for his surname. His grandfather founded the Phalangist, what could hve appeared to be a knock-off of the Brownshirts. This group has lost a lot of its standing because it collaborated first with Israel and then with Syria.

Gemayel assassination bears no earmark of a Syrian attempt. Remote controlled bombs were the norm. His assassins stop his car and shot him many times, while allowing his driver to escape. Why would Syria risk such an outcome?

Now, the gunmen escaped, if they had not the contract originator would be known. How does one commit this act on a busy street? My opinion, his attackers knew him by sight, in other words he was known to them.

Now we come to the political stuff. The assassination by Syria makes little sense since Assad's value to the region and his possible influence could be jeopardized. Plus the possibility of Assad being an ally to the US
in the worsening conditions in Iraq is becoming more and more likely.

Even world papers are questioning the Syria connection to the assassination. The International Herald Tribune, stated, Syria is on a semi-roll now in the political arena, so why would they want to kill this opportunity?

The Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz says, "pure political and diplomatic logic makes it difficult to see Damascus behind the assassination."

Syria has no benefits from the assassination of Gemayel. They are close to getting the semi-official stamp from Washington as the one of the only countries that can help calm things down in Iraq.


About Me

My photo
The truth is never as obvious as it seems