Iran, in a ridiculous new twist on hypocrisy, has banned Zack Snyder's film "300". How this relates to the war in Iraq is that this pathetic display of internal control is just another way President Ahmadinejad has promoted his own version of reality and discarded the authentic one. While we work on ending an already unpopular war in Iraq, Ahmadinejad continues trying to rally support against America to fuel his ideologies involving Iraq and how it should be run. But more importantly, he is very similar to the Middle Eastern version of George W. Bush.
Both are finding increasing opposition within their own government and both have rallied support for their radical views blurring the line between religion and politics creating controlling autonomous administrations. Also, both presidents are immersed in the outcome of the Iraqi struggle. Bush is interested in preserving a shred of dignity in a war that proved to be a costly lie to the American people and Ahmadinejad is interested in influencing a weakened neighboring country to ally itself with Iran. Either way, Iran has inspired me to make one hell of a post on my blog.
Iran has accused this film of humiliating its ancestors who were the Persians. The film has been deemed a "fabrication of history" as reported on msn.com. A fabrication of history? This is coming from a government that initiated a two-day Holocaust denial conference on Dec. 11, 2006. And then, they even say that it is a form of "psychological warfare". Not that the strategies implemented by the terrorists in Iraq that are finding many of their weaponry on the Iranian boarder. I am not saying that Tehran is responsible for funding the insurgents in Iraq but I find it damning that they aren't controlling their boarders as well as they insist (hmmm). "Psychological warfare" is a term I would expect being used about a government publicizing in its country's newspapers, "Hollywood Declares War On Iran". Oh wait, that would be Ahmadinejad's government.
If we are ever going to end this war and focus on peace, we need to stop listening to the skewed bullshit that comes out of our politicians' mouths and start thinking for ourselves. Or who knows...maybe Grauman's Chinese Theater may be the next terrorist target.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
War Has Become A Load Of Holy Crap
War is such an ugly thing. Who really holds the authority to declare it on another people? Even when the majority of a nation declare that a war is wrong, those few elected have the power to combine devastating action with their beliefs. To deem it right to killing others whom you may have never met and pose no danger to is insane. War itself should be considered illegal but when written on fancy paper by people with over-inflated views of themselves declare it, laws and morals take a backseat to politics. This war in Iraq has been illegal since the first mention of it by George W. Bush. And little did he know (or still) that this war would not be like the ones he saw on TV with John Wayne. This would become a holy war to some.
The belief by the insurgents and terrorists that this is a holy war is the one factor that changes everything. The Bush Administration thought that they could oust Saddam, replace the government and everything would be great. But despite the advice of others, George invaded and created this "holy" war. He himself has even brought his religious beliefs into politics further outraging Muslim extremists. Now, even after a new government has been installed, the Iraqis are fighting over who claims power. And in the background are those insurgents who still believe that they will be rewarded in Heaven for killing the infidels. That's us by the way, George. They won't sign a treaty. They can't all be arrested or killed. They have taken this fight to a different level--a spiritual one. And despite my view that a holy war is ridiculous, my opinion doesn't matter because they believe it and that propels them to fight and kill.
Not only has Bush thrown the world into a war that should have never been started but he has given the most violent killers seventy-something virgins to look forward to when they die. George's religion needs to get out of international politics and our troops need to get out of Iraq! In my opinion, when we all die (with the exception of Dick Cheney who is Satan incarnate) we all get seventy-something worms. If the extremists want to kill infidels, don't make it so easy for them by sending our troops to Iraq in a waste-of-time war.
The belief by the insurgents and terrorists that this is a holy war is the one factor that changes everything. The Bush Administration thought that they could oust Saddam, replace the government and everything would be great. But despite the advice of others, George invaded and created this "holy" war. He himself has even brought his religious beliefs into politics further outraging Muslim extremists. Now, even after a new government has been installed, the Iraqis are fighting over who claims power. And in the background are those insurgents who still believe that they will be rewarded in Heaven for killing the infidels. That's us by the way, George. They won't sign a treaty. They can't all be arrested or killed. They have taken this fight to a different level--a spiritual one. And despite my view that a holy war is ridiculous, my opinion doesn't matter because they believe it and that propels them to fight and kill.
Not only has Bush thrown the world into a war that should have never been started but he has given the most violent killers seventy-something virgins to look forward to when they die. George's religion needs to get out of international politics and our troops need to get out of Iraq! In my opinion, when we all die (with the exception of Dick Cheney who is Satan incarnate) we all get seventy-something worms. If the extremists want to kill infidels, don't make it so easy for them by sending our troops to Iraq in a waste-of-time war.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
What Works For Them
My blood ran cold this morning as I read through the newspaper to find that there were absolutely no articles on Iraq. Could this really be the end? Did the violence truly stop? Well...no. Actually this morning a suicide bomber killed at least ten people in a crowded marketplace. And while the violence in Baghdad is slowing down, it only seems to grow elsewhere. American troops, it's sad to say, appear to be only relocating the insurgents. And continually I hear debate over the issue of Iraq being caught in the midst of a civil war.
Let's be honest, this war is anything but civil, but yes--the sectarian violence has reached a point where the country is divided and fighting over power. I turned to msn.com for some news because apparently none happened in my local newspaper. And I read an article about Sadr City--the stronghold of the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr--I found out that the people there have been living in filth since the war broke out. Sewage backup pours into the streets. People throw their waste and excrement in piles in front of their homes. Torn power lines may give the people there enough electricity for only four hours.Hundreds of thousands out of the 2.5 million people who live there are without jobs as an effect of Saddam Hussein's reign. And as much as I support our troops over there, I cringed when I read this quote from Marine Captain Seth Crawford, "This is their lifestyle. This is how they've been doing it for hundreds of years. And they're not going to change overnight...That's what works for them right now." I really hope that this quote was taken out of context before I read it.
I shudder at the thought that our troops who are in Sadr City and are supposed to be working to build a better Iraq can simply say, "That's what works for them right now." How the hell can that "work" for anyone? Do you really think that they have chosen to live like that and are content with the current state of things? I for one think that we are doing a lousy job over there when you consider that the Mahdi Army not only protected these people but also provided some health care as well as other amenities.
If anything, I think the lessons we have learned from Sadr City are that the country is ready to heal itself if we would only stop wounding it. If we left, at least we know that one faction seeking power is willing to help its people. Before we kicked down doors and pointed guns in the faces of ordinary people, things were better. A civil war is fought by the people, not a foreign army. The only thing we are doing over there is slowing progress.
Our alternative motives, personal agendas and corporate interests have taken a noble concept and tainted it with corruption. Our ambassadors of freedom and democracy have only led to mistrust and violence. In a place where we don't belong we should leave. The American government can and should monitor the Iraqi's progress and assist them but we cannot involve ourselves simply to install a government of our choosing. That will never work! We should diplomatically (not militarily) endorse a government that can work internally in Iraq as well as internationally but that is as far as we should go. Give them a chance, George. I know you'll feel that empty nest syndrome but you have to let this war go!
Let's be honest, this war is anything but civil, but yes--the sectarian violence has reached a point where the country is divided and fighting over power. I turned to msn.com for some news because apparently none happened in my local newspaper. And I read an article about Sadr City--the stronghold of the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr--I found out that the people there have been living in filth since the war broke out. Sewage backup pours into the streets. People throw their waste and excrement in piles in front of their homes. Torn power lines may give the people there enough electricity for only four hours.Hundreds of thousands out of the 2.5 million people who live there are without jobs as an effect of Saddam Hussein's reign. And as much as I support our troops over there, I cringed when I read this quote from Marine Captain Seth Crawford, "This is their lifestyle. This is how they've been doing it for hundreds of years. And they're not going to change overnight...That's what works for them right now." I really hope that this quote was taken out of context before I read it.
I shudder at the thought that our troops who are in Sadr City and are supposed to be working to build a better Iraq can simply say, "That's what works for them right now." How the hell can that "work" for anyone? Do you really think that they have chosen to live like that and are content with the current state of things? I for one think that we are doing a lousy job over there when you consider that the Mahdi Army not only protected these people but also provided some health care as well as other amenities.
If anything, I think the lessons we have learned from Sadr City are that the country is ready to heal itself if we would only stop wounding it. If we left, at least we know that one faction seeking power is willing to help its people. Before we kicked down doors and pointed guns in the faces of ordinary people, things were better. A civil war is fought by the people, not a foreign army. The only thing we are doing over there is slowing progress.
Our alternative motives, personal agendas and corporate interests have taken a noble concept and tainted it with corruption. Our ambassadors of freedom and democracy have only led to mistrust and violence. In a place where we don't belong we should leave. The American government can and should monitor the Iraqi's progress and assist them but we cannot involve ourselves simply to install a government of our choosing. That will never work! We should diplomatically (not militarily) endorse a government that can work internally in Iraq as well as internationally but that is as far as we should go. Give them a chance, George. I know you'll feel that empty nest syndrome but you have to let this war go!
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Party Like It's 1984
In today's paper, Dick Cheney (arguably the most scary person in the world), once again focused his attention on undermining all those who do not support his administration's views. He said, "When members speak not of victory but of time limits, deadlines and other arbitrary measures, they are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock and wait us out." First of all, how the hell can we talk about victory when we are losing? As I recall, the President already declared, "mission accomplished" so let's get the hell out of Iraq. If we stay any longer, the Army might as well start opening time-shares. Also, to use the word "arbitrary" was a smooth move, Dick. I understand that in your crooked world, death tolls can be seen as arbitrary but give me a break! The Iraqis want us out. Americans want us out. What more do you need? The vice-president probably wouldn't know what was best for Iraq if it hit him in the face like an accidental shotgun blast on a hunting trip.
The other quote that really set me off was, "When members of Congress pursue an anti-war strategy that's been called 'slow bleed,' they are not supporting the troops, they are undermining them." That is unbelievable! I especially like the "slow bleed" touch--very moving, Dick. How is it that bringing our troops home to safety and out of harm's way in a country that doesn't want us there nor can truly benefit from our "occupation" be considered "not supporting the troops"? I wish the Democrats would stop twiddling their thumbs and jump on these accusations already and stand up for themselves. So far, the Republicans have been running all over them with their "cut-and-run" and "slow bleed" crap. Why is supporting our troops limited to putting them in danger? Why don't we support this administration and send them to Iraq seeing as we are doing so well over there?
Another thing I have heard from people is that if the Democrats "cut the funding" for the war, our troops will be stranded in Iraq without a plane ticket home much less a gun. That is the largest heap of crap I have heard in a long time. Cutting funding for the war includes bringing our soldiers home! It isn't like a father cutting his son's allowance but still making him mow the lawn. Wars are waged with money and without the funding, the war will end--thus bringing our troops home. Are we clear?
In another Dick interview, he claimed that terrorists chose Iraq and that is why we are there. The truth is that no link to al-Qaida was ever made to Iraq until we invaded. We chose Iraq and of course the terrorists followed. The promise of easy oil must have been just too much for George W. to ignore. Now, he has run Iraq into the ground just like all of his pre-presidential oil endeavors. Could anyone have seen this coming?
Either way, the Bush Administration has, is and always will be spinning intelligence to meet their agendas. Also, they continue to use fear and patriotic guilt trips to pressure Americans into following them off the cliff. Americans need to do their own research, look at the facts, think for themselves and then get the politicians in Washington who work for us to do what is best for us! Dick Cheney and his "1984"-style terror is not as scary, though, as our willingness to allow him to treat us this way. I for one am not a political sadist and refuse to be coerced into believing that this war is right! Fear is an ugly four-letter word that I won't let run my life...will you?
The other quote that really set me off was, "When members of Congress pursue an anti-war strategy that's been called 'slow bleed,' they are not supporting the troops, they are undermining them." That is unbelievable! I especially like the "slow bleed" touch--very moving, Dick. How is it that bringing our troops home to safety and out of harm's way in a country that doesn't want us there nor can truly benefit from our "occupation" be considered "not supporting the troops"? I wish the Democrats would stop twiddling their thumbs and jump on these accusations already and stand up for themselves. So far, the Republicans have been running all over them with their "cut-and-run" and "slow bleed" crap. Why is supporting our troops limited to putting them in danger? Why don't we support this administration and send them to Iraq seeing as we are doing so well over there?
Another thing I have heard from people is that if the Democrats "cut the funding" for the war, our troops will be stranded in Iraq without a plane ticket home much less a gun. That is the largest heap of crap I have heard in a long time. Cutting funding for the war includes bringing our soldiers home! It isn't like a father cutting his son's allowance but still making him mow the lawn. Wars are waged with money and without the funding, the war will end--thus bringing our troops home. Are we clear?
In another Dick interview, he claimed that terrorists chose Iraq and that is why we are there. The truth is that no link to al-Qaida was ever made to Iraq until we invaded. We chose Iraq and of course the terrorists followed. The promise of easy oil must have been just too much for George W. to ignore. Now, he has run Iraq into the ground just like all of his pre-presidential oil endeavors. Could anyone have seen this coming?
Either way, the Bush Administration has, is and always will be spinning intelligence to meet their agendas. Also, they continue to use fear and patriotic guilt trips to pressure Americans into following them off the cliff. Americans need to do their own research, look at the facts, think for themselves and then get the politicians in Washington who work for us to do what is best for us! Dick Cheney and his "1984"-style terror is not as scary, though, as our willingness to allow him to treat us this way. I for one am not a political sadist and refuse to be coerced into believing that this war is right! Fear is an ugly four-letter word that I won't let run my life...will you?
Monday, March 12, 2007
Hope Mine Doesn't Smell Bad So Far...
Wow! In today’s paper, March 12, 2007, I read that Bush wants to send an additional 4,700 troops on top of the ones already proposed to Iraq. He claims that these additional troops will be support roles only and not combat. But let’s be real about this for a minute. A soldier is a soldier and one is just as mortal as the next. An additional 4,700 troops are just more body bags that will be sent back home for medals and tears. Bush also wants Congress to authorize this funding “without any strings attached.” No strings attached on Congress’ end at least. When it comes to the Bush Administration’s previous proposals and legislations (Patriot Act comes to mind), they have always been devised with alternative motives and strings attached. These strings are usually held by the government on one end and attached to the limbs of the American people on the other. Perhaps we should start calling President Bush the Godfather from now on?
My grandfather always said, “Opinions are like assholes…everyone’s got one.” I know if you’re reading this up to here you probably know how it smells by now. I read today in the same newspaper an opinion that I thought was ridiculous and without merit. I have no problem with people who tell others their opinions, but please for the sake of everyone, be able to back it up. I hate it when opinions literally come from people’s asses. This will probably be one of very few opinions that I comment on because otherwise I would be here all day responding to assholes.
The opinion’s title was, “Nation should unite behind president”. I know from having my own opinion published in the same paper that the writer does not choose the title but you can get the main idea of the article. The writer, who shall remain nameless, claims that democrats who propose to withdraw troops do “not consider the threats such a move would place on this country.” I don’t know of any Iraqis who were on those planes that flew into the World Trade Center and I certainly know that this country has never been attacked by Iraq unless WE went to war with THEM. I won’t go into the Gulf War but the point I’m making is that our country has never been, is not and very well may never be threatened by the nation of Iraq.
Then this prick…I’m sorry—asshole…quotes the Gettysburg Address to rally Americans to “come together and fight the common enemy.” I can tell you that the common enemy we have are the suits and ties in the White House who are wiping themselves with the Constitution. But as for the Gettysburg Address…please. Regardless that this came from a president who declared martial law and dissembled the free press, the Gettysburg Address can hardly be used in this context. In the Civil War, the nation was really divided and tens of thousands of Americans were killing each other with every passing battle. To compare the Civil War to the war in Iraq is a joke and this person should pull his head out of his opinion.
My grandfather always said, “Opinions are like assholes…everyone’s got one.” I know if you’re reading this up to here you probably know how it smells by now. I read today in the same newspaper an opinion that I thought was ridiculous and without merit. I have no problem with people who tell others their opinions, but please for the sake of everyone, be able to back it up. I hate it when opinions literally come from people’s asses. This will probably be one of very few opinions that I comment on because otherwise I would be here all day responding to assholes.
The opinion’s title was, “Nation should unite behind president”. I know from having my own opinion published in the same paper that the writer does not choose the title but you can get the main idea of the article. The writer, who shall remain nameless, claims that democrats who propose to withdraw troops do “not consider the threats such a move would place on this country.” I don’t know of any Iraqis who were on those planes that flew into the World Trade Center and I certainly know that this country has never been attacked by Iraq unless WE went to war with THEM. I won’t go into the Gulf War but the point I’m making is that our country has never been, is not and very well may never be threatened by the nation of Iraq.
Then this prick…I’m sorry—asshole…quotes the Gettysburg Address to rally Americans to “come together and fight the common enemy.” I can tell you that the common enemy we have are the suits and ties in the White House who are wiping themselves with the Constitution. But as for the Gettysburg Address…please. Regardless that this came from a president who declared martial law and dissembled the free press, the Gettysburg Address can hardly be used in this context. In the Civil War, the nation was really divided and tens of thousands of Americans were killing each other with every passing battle. To compare the Civil War to the war in Iraq is a joke and this person should pull his head out of his opinion.
The Reveal
By now I am sure you are wondering who is Pasquino Rockefeller. Pasquino is the name of a roman statue unearthed in 1501 that was the focus of a ceremony held on St. Mark’s Day, created by Cardinal Oliviero Carafa. The ceremony took on a more democratic than religious tone when those wishing to criticize the Catholic Church or the pope would attach satirical letters to the statue. Thus the term pasquinade came about to define a satirical attack written in roman dialect. As for Rockefeller, well that is derived from none other than John D. who founded Standard Oil in 1870 which made him the world’s first billionaire and tycoon of a substance that would later throw the United States into a war with Iraq. So you can see by now that the name Pasquino Rockefeller is a pseudo name designed in its satirical nature to embody the attitudes of the authentic author of this journal. Why do I choose to go by a pseudo name? I suppose it is the adult politically disgruntled version of dress-up. Regardless, I want all who read this to know that the crime I have committed in lying to you is no different than and should go as unpunished as those told by the Bush Administration that got us into this war.
—P.R.
—P.R.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)