Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
You imply that efforts to understand radical Islamsist and killing radical Islamists are mutually exclusive activities. Wrong. You need to understand the enemy to overcome him.

OK. With you on that one.

If you think I'm suggesting we bury our heads in the sand and refuse to recognize the part our own poor foreign policy played in making us "the great satan", you've misread me. We need to uderstand why we're being targeted and modify our own behavior.

Armed with that understanding, do we do anything other than kill people?

Unfortunately, that alone will not stop the radicals, so in the interim, with our other free hand, we have to crush their jihad to the best of our abilities. Your soft intellectual solutions are fine fodder for these academic debates, but in reality, you and I both know, you don't fight people like Al Queda by "winning hearts and minds" or through mere political moves. You've got to kill a whole lot of them, and some of the kills must be spectacular, to reinforce the notion that the US cannot be defeated or brushed back. Its a terrible analogy, but think Hiroshima. Some enemeies don't learn until you bring out the huge guns. The other angle we are properly engaging is beefed up intelligence with assassinations of radical leaders, but its still not enough. We should start "disappearing" people in the AQ network. We should put all rivals to radical islamists on the payroll to "hit" the imams who advocate Islamic theocracy and violence against the US.

Is there anyone left in the United States who is opposed to killing leaders of Al Qaeda? Haven't they all left for France by now? That being the case, what you propose sounds like the Bush Plan -- do what everyone else would do, but talk really tough while doing it. Yep, we're going to leave Fallujah a pile of rubble if they don't produce those tairsts who killed them contractors.

And please say more about my "soft intellectual solutions." I'm both intrigued and a tad aroused, although it's a little early for that.

And most of all, we should use the best chemotherapy we have on radical Islam - American culture. We should FLOOD their media with American programming more than we do already and dump more of our products into their markets. Our culture is like crack. You feed these bastards enough decadent western junk and they'll forget Islam.

Hell, I'd go as far as to flood their societies with Western drugs like crack and meth. Get them addicted to something that makes them hurt themselves instead of others. Thats insane, but I guarantee, somewhere, there's a classified document discussing how that might work. Hell, drugs keep the cultural stasis in our country. The sort of minds who gravitate to fundamentalism have about the same education as those on meth and crack. Imagine how screwed we'd be if the meth heads had found fundamentalism instead of drugs. Fuck, we'd be saying Hail Marys before the All Star game and jailing people for adultery.

Kill them while converting them. A little carrot and stick action. Levis, a discman, a membership to BMG music club, a little internet porn, subscriptions to People and US Weekly, a little fantasy football, some electric shavers and chicks on the street dressing like Britney... OR, join the jihad - have the air sucked out of your lungs by a Daisy Cutter.

They'll all forget Allah like the fiction he is... you'd have shit for brains to bargian for 72 afterlife virgins when you had live hotties right in front of you. I've seen some of those Iraqi women in western dress. Some are damn fine... they have a sort of Latina-hottie thing going...

I'm down with all of this, and to prove it to you, I signed Zarqawi up last night for a little visit from the Church of Latter Day Saints. Plus, they'll be sending him a copy of the Book of Mormon. Not exactly the sort of U.S. culture you had in mind, but as American as apple pie. It takes all kinds.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think your rhetoric was a little extreme. Calling any group of people animals and suggested that we bomb them back to the Stone Age is a little extreme. Did you grow up reading Curtis LeMay's Bedtime Stories For Kids or something?

Dude, we are talking about a culture (the Saudis) which beheads people in public squares for small time drug sales and "crimes of blashpemy" and believes that slowly slicing off a person's head with a kitchen knife is a palatable form of political expression (militants). Women cannot vote in their society, let alone drive a car. In certain of their countries, the murder of women by their borthers is allowed as an "honor killing." In one case, religious police refused to allow firefighters to enter an all girls' school to save little kids from a fire (Saudis again). In Afghanistan, they were stoning people for adultery before we brought civilization back to the savages.

Yes, as the pompous old Brits who colonized these people would say, the moderate normal majority of Muslims in that part of the world is held hostage by "savages." You can make the weak academic argument - and you will - that its "a culture difference" and I'm ignorant and unfairly judgmental. Rubbish, professor. Get your head out of your arse. We have loathesome practices such as the death penalty and hypocritical lying politicians in charge, but we're not behaving like we're in the 13th century. Wahhabism is an idiotic, perverse, offensive form of governance. I hate to use the term, but it is, well, evil. Its nothing more than a way for scared men to keep women under foot, and I won't even acknoweldge the stupid argument that its somehow as valid as Western Democracy. I can understand monarchy, I can buy socialism... hell, communism has some worthwhile ideals. But horrific discriminatory religious fanaticism as the rule of law is not a "different culture." Its a lower form of humanity.

Whether bombed to the Stone Ages or slowly killed by political pressure (preferrably the latter, of course), the Wahhabists and the Shariah following imbeciles need to go. I'm a belt and suspenders kind of guy - I say bombs and pressure.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Armed with that understanding, do we do anything other than kill people?

Uh, did you not catch the clear implication that we need to also change our policies? Why else would I suggest examining their shortcomings?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Uh, did you not catch the clear implication that we need to also change our policies? Why else would I suggest examining their shortcomings?

OK. I'm in favor of examining our policies' shortcomings and changing them (the policies, not their shortcomings). I'm opposed to BMG, though.

"You may rest assured that the British government is entirely opposed to sharks."
-- Winston Churchill, 1945

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Dude, we are talking about a culture (the Saudis) which beheads people in public squares for small time drug sales and "crimes of blashpemy" and believes that slowly slicing off a person's head with a kitchen knife is a palatable form of political expression (militants). Women cannot vote in their society, let alone drive a car. In certain of their countries, the murder of women by their borthers is allowed as an "honor killing." In one case, religious police refused to allow firefighters to enter an all girls' school to save little kids from a fire (Saudis again). In Afghanistan, they were stoning people for adultery before we brought civilization back to the savages.

Yes, as the pompous old Brits who colonized these people would say, the moderate normal majority of Muslims in that part of the world is held hostage by "savages." You can make the weak academic argument - and you will - that its "a culture difference" and I'm ignorant and unfairly judgmental. Rubbish, professor. Get your head out of your arse. We have loathesome practices such as the death penalty and hypocritical lying politicians in charge, but we're not behaving like we're in the 13th century. Wahhabism is an idiotic, perverse, offensive form of governance. I hate to use the term, but it is, well, evil. Its nothing more than a way for scared men to keep women under foot, and I won't even acknoweldge the stupid argument that its somehow as valid as Western Democracy. I can understand monarchy, I can buy socialism... hell, communism has some worthwhile ideals. But horrific discriminatory religious fanaticism as the rule of law is not a "different culture." Its a lower form of humanity.

Whether bombed to the Stone Ages or slowly killed by political pressure (preferrably the latter, of course), the Wahhabists and the Shariah following imbeciles need to go. I'm a belt and suspenders kind of guy - I say bombs and pressure.

It wasn't that long ago that people were lynched in America, and we overcame that without being bombed. Why the deep need to deny the humanity of these people? Al Qaeda is a minority movement even in Saudi Arabia. It seems to me that talking about replicating Dresden is playing into their hands, but, hey, I'm up in the ivory tower with my head in my ass -- you clearly have a better idea.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It wasn't that long ago that people were lynched in America, and we overcame that without being bombed. Why the deep need to deny the humanity of these people? Al Qaeda is a minority movement even in Saudi Arabia. It seems to me that talking about replicating Dresden is playing into their hands, but, hey, I'm up in the ivory tower with my head in my ass -- you clearly have a better idea.

I don't think you're arguing that people engaged in lynching blacks were human, because they weren't. They're right up there with the Wahhabist lunatics. No talk with that sort of animal - he just needs to "go."

There's also an imporatnt distinction you're missing - the lynchers did not engage in their lynching under the country's accepted criminal code. The Wahhabists cite good ole' Allah, and their hysterically juvenile legal code derived from the Koran, as the basis for chopping off heads. Even in the most virulently racist bowels of the lynching belt, the lynchers did not lynch anyone with explicit state approval.

I have not advocated Dresdening SA. I have advocated Dresdening the collections of AQ in places like the provinces of Pakistan, where AQ is NOT a minority, but enjoys broad support from the populous.

You only play into their hands when you fight, come up short and walk away. We made some inroads when we laid on the gas and bombed the Afghan border back to the Stone age, but the campagin was about 250 square miles short of what was necessary. We should have crossed the border and blown the provinces into smythereens. And we should have done the same in the lawless provinces of yemen where AQ has the same camps.

[Replaced_Texan]

Official Democratic National Convention Schedule

6:00 pm — Opening flag burning ceremony (lighter courtesy of Al Franken)
6:01 pm — Opening secular prayers by Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton
6:30 pm — Anti-war concert by Barbra Streisand.
6:55 pm — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
7:00 pm — Tribute theme to France.
7:10 pm — Collect offerings for al-Zawahri defense fund.
7:25 pm — Tribute theme to Germany.
7:45 pm — Anti-war rally (Moderated by Michael Moore)
8:25 pm — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
8:30 pm — Terrorist appeasement workshop.
9:00 pm — Gay marriage ceremony, officiated by Rosie O'Donnell

9:30 pm — Intermission

10:00 pm — Posting of the Iraqi colors by Sean Penn and Tim Robbins.
10:10 pm — Re-enactment of Kerry's fake medal toss.
10:20 pm — Susan Sarandon presented with a Life-time Achievement award for anti-American rhetoric (medal presented by a tearful Michael Stipe)
10:30 pm — Abortion demonstration by N.A.R.A.L.
10:40 pm — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.
10:50 pm — Pledge of allegiance to the United Nations
11:00 pm — Group oath to uphold the Bill of Rights (except for the 2nd and 9th Amendments, per the wishes of the ACLU, and portions of the 1st Amendment per the wishes of Tipper Gore)
11:15 pm — Maximizing Welfare workshop
11:30 pm — 'Free Saddam' pep rally
11:59 pm — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast
12:00 am — Nomination of democratic candidate
12:01 am — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast
12:02 am — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast
12:03 am — Ted Kennedy proposes a toast


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Official Republican National Convention Schedule

6:00 pm — Opening Prayer led by the Reverend Jerry Falwell
6:30 pm — Pledge of Allegiance
6:35 pm — Burning of Bill of Rights (excluding 2nd and 9th amendments)
6:45 pm — Salute to the Coalition of the Willing
6:46 pm — Seminar #1: Getting your Kid a Military Deferment (presented by Donald Rumsfeld)
7:30 pm — First Presidential Beer Bong
7:35 pm — Serving of Freedom Fries
7:40 pm — EPA Address #1: "Mercury, it's what's for dinner"
8:00 pm — Vote on which country(s) to invade next
8:10 pm — Call EMTs to revive Rush Limbaugh
8:15 pm — John Ashcroft Lecture: "The Homos are after your children"
8:30 pm — Round table discussion on reproductive rights (MEN only)
8:50 pm — Seminar #2: Corporations—The Government of the Future
9:00 pm — Condi Rice and Collin Powell tap dance the Shim-Sham Shimmy
9:05 pm — Second Presidential Beer Bong
9:10 pm — EPA Address #2: Trees—The Real Cause of Forest Fires

9:30 pm — Break for secret meetings

10:00 pm — Second prayer led by Rev. Billy Graham
10:30 pm — Anne Coulter lecture: How Michael Moore is Perverting the 1st Amendment
10:35 pm — The Bush daughters make public service announcement urging teenagers to "Just Say No".
10:40 pm — Posthumous awarding of Lifetime Achievement Award in Bigotry and Hypocrisy to Strom Thurmond.
10:45 pm — Clarence Thomas reads list of black Republicans
10:45:15 pm — Third Presidential Beer Bong
10:50 pm — Seminar #3: Education—A Drain on our Nation's Economy.
11:10 pm — Hilary Clinton Piñata unveiled
11:20 pm — John Ashcroft vows to replace Bill of Rights with the Ten Commandments
11:30 pm — Call EMTs to revive Rush Limbaugh again
11:35 pm — Blame Bill Clinton (for everything)
11:40 pm — Laura serves milk and cookies
11:50 pm — Closing Prayer led by Jesus Himself
11: 55 pm — Nomination of George W. Bush as Holy Supreme Planetary Overlord

from Urban Grounds

[Atticus Grinch]

The National Enquirer is flogging the Rumor That Won't Die: Cheney Out, Rudy In.

Bush lied!

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
The National Enquirer . . .

Bush lied!

You're basing the second claim on the source? Yellow journalism, indeed.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
The National Enquirer is flogging the Rumor That Won't Die: Cheney Out, Rudy In.

Bush lied!

The only way this happens is if Cheney's heart problems take a turn for the worse, either IRL or as an excuse to dump him. Bush cannot back away from him now, nor do I think he will. If he does and chooses Rudy, his base will go ballistic.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by sgtclub

I didn't catch Gore. Did he lose it? Did he make anybody wish he had won in 2000?

OK, so I caught Gore last night on CSPAN. With the exception of the slightly stiff delivery, I thought he was pretty good, though I couldn't help but think of the SNL spoof.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
OK, so I caught Gore last night on CSPAN. With the exception of the slightly stiff delivery, I thought he was pretty good, though I couldn't help but think of the SNL spoof.

I didn't see the whole thing, but I did see the first few minutes. I was a bit surprised that with the DNC leadership talking about a positive convention, and how Kerry is great, he started off with teh old Reagan question of whether you're better off now than four years ago and "Do you think you got what you voted for four years ago."

Certainly turning the election into a referendum on Bush is understandable, and probably the best strategy, but it doesn't say much for Kerry to start with a prime time speech essentially saying Bush must go for someone else. Nader, perhaps?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I didn't see the whole thing, but I did see the first few minutes. I was a bit surprised that with the DNC leadership talking about a positive convention, and how Kerry is great, he started off with teh old Reagan question of whether you're better off now than four years ago and "Do you think you got what you voted for four years ago."

Certainly turning the election into a referendum on Bush is understandable, and probably the best strategy, but it doesn't say much for Kerry to start with a prime time speech essentially saying Bush must go for someone else. Nader, perhaps?

I thought the point of the speech was to dispell that 2000 notion that there was no differences between the parties (i.e., there is no need to vote for Nader, because the world would have been a vastly different place under the DEMs than what it has become under Bush). The second half of the speech was positive, pro-Kerry.

[SlaveNoMore]

sgtclub
Teresa Heinz Kerry, years before becoming a Democrat ...said she didn't trust Sen. Edward M. Kennedy [related, bio] and angrily called the liberal lion a ``perfect bastard.''

The Kennedy camp responded as saying "it's all water under the bridge"

Which is really, really, really funny...unless your name is Kopechne.

[Gattigap]

It sped past me when I heard it last night, but Slate's William Saletan was on the job:

The real prime-time hour on Monday night opened with a remembrance of Sept. 11 by Haleema Salie, who told the delegates she had lost her daughter and son-in-law on that awful day. Oh, and one more family member—"my unborn grandchild."

Whoa! This is exactly the kind of speaker whose words are gone over with a fine-tooth comb by the presumptive presidential nominee's speech reviewers. Did they suggest changing the "unborn child" language? If they didn't—or if they did, and Salie resisted, and they relented—isn't this an acknowledgment that most people are going to think of the human fetus this way, whether or not leaders of the Democratic Party like it?

Fair point.

Look for 3-hour coverage of this on the next installment of the No-Spin-Zone, after O'Reilly exhausts his supply of invective for John Kerry's wife. My guess on the over/under is, say, Sunday.

Gattigap