09.18.06
Posted in View points at 7:44 pm by daMan
let me state it plainly: i do not give a fuck about George W. Bush.
i do not know the man, other than his public statements and behavior… i don’t know Cheney, Rumsfeld, "Condi", or any of the other lunatics running the asylum…
i do know this: i will no longer allow them, mouthing Karl Rove’s rhetoric, to frame the discussion
i start with the fundamental premise of their argument: i cannot pretend that ameriKKKa currently posesses, or has ever had any "moral authority", either in the "homeland" or abroad.
the greatest genocide the western world has ever known is what ameriKKKan history books casually refer to as "settling the frontier"… the slaughter of innocents is reflex action for ameriKKKans…
every argument and justification for its current cultural war in the middle east is colored by this truth… ameriKKKa is very familiar with how to dehumanize (red skins|sand niggers), demonize (savages|insurgents) and marginalize (battle the heathen tribes|combat enemy insurgents) whatever population they suddenly deem disposable…
this nation was formed on slavery, and fought its bloodiest war because half its enfranchised number demanded the right to trade in human flesh… despite this war, it STILL required three constitutional ammendments and several acts of congress to force ameriKKKa’s white citizens to end their blatant racist behavior…
this nation claims to support its troops? ameriKKKa? a nation where black world war II veterans were lynched for the crime of wearing their uniforms in public???
LYNCHED! brave men who, despite the unrelenting abuse they had suffered at this nation’s own hand, risked their lives to defend the very men who would ultimately murder them… this nation has the audacity to imagine itself even vaguely familiar with morality?
politicians constantly decry the "terrorist threat", almost always meaning young arab men: yet they continually and completely ignore white supremacists, who number in the thousands, are heavily armed, openly preach hatred and violence, and have infiltrated every aspect of ameriKKKan society… they are the single greatest extremist threat currently facing this nation: must another Klebold, Harris, Kaczynski or McVeigh act to prove this point?
in light of this clear misrepresentation of the real threats to this nation, i can no longer pretend that the drumbeat of fear coming from Tweedle-D.C. is anything other than distraction and propaganda…
Guantanamo and Abu Ghirab are Arab concentration camps. "Aggressive Interrogation" is a euphemism for torture, and torture is illegal, immoral; let’s stop the bullshit word games, already.
Vengeance is not Justice. No matter how many times the events of September 11th, 2001 are invoked, this fact remains unchanged. No argument which begins with, or depends on, the phrase "After 9/11" will be given any serious consideration. We fought the Nazis, defeated them, and put the worst of them on trial. We waged the "cold war", and won, without nuclear exchanges or world war III…
if this nation will lead at all, it shall lead by example, not by decree… when men make well-phrased arguments asking me to allow them to torture others, i will call them out as madmen…
i do not petition washington for permission to speak, to act, to think: washington seeks my constant approval for its continued existence. I AM AMERICA, and those motherfuckers in Tweedle-D.C. are little more than my hired hands… the day they get tired of representing my will, they can resign, and seek employment elsewhere…
this is not their country – they are only a few hundred men. stop being so cowed by fear and confusion that you pretend you don’t know that…
the battle is ON, people — you are either citizens or sheep: PICK one…
Permalink
09.16.06
Posted in View points, Stop the f--king madness! at 6:56 am by daMan
it’s not about 9/11.
it’s not about left wing/right wing, liberal/conservative or partisan propaganda…
it’s not about how smart Dubya is, or what he knew when. it isn’t about theories, conspiracy or otherwise…
we are at war. our troops are dying every day, and innocent Iraqis are being killed. Every day. EVERY day.
yet Osama Bin Laden is still at large… and Afghanistan is unraveling… most of the people incarcerated in both Abu Ghirab and Guantanamo have not even been charged with ANYTHING…
THESE are the reasons we were told we had to wage war with Iraq
- [Condoleeza] Rice acknowledged that "there will always be some uncertainty" in
determining how close Iraq may be to obtaining a nuclear weapon but
said, "We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." - Sept. 8th, 2002, on CNN’s "Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer."
-
Citing Bush administration officials, The New York Times reported
Sunday that Iraq tried to buy thousands of high-strength aluminum
tubes. The tubes, Rice said, "are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs."
- Bush declared in an October 7,
2002 speech: "In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi
regime, the head of Iraq’s military industries defected. It was then
that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than
30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The
inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to
four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological
weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing
millions."
In a CIA report which was apparently "leaked" to Newsweek, a group of CIA analysts predicted that there was
"a 59 percent probability that an attack on
the U.S. homeland involving WMD would occur before 31 March 2003"… It
all seems so precise and frightening: a better than 90 percent chance
that Saddam will succeed in hitting America with a weapon spewing
radiation, germs or poison. But it is important to remember that the
odds are determined by averaging a bunch of guesses, informed perhaps,
but from experts whose careers can only be ruined by underestimating
the threat." - Newsweek, 24 February 2003
"It’s Weapons of Mass Destruction, stoopid"… they don’t get to change the fuckin’ story after the fact; why are we allowing this???…
they didn’t hint that there were weapons of mass destruction… they didn’t imply that Iraq was an imminent threat: they told us they KNEW. you do not wage war on a hunch, people… you don’t invade a nation because you think so…
they were told by their own generals that they weren’t deploying enough troops: this was not an oversight…
protecting the homeland? deposing a threat to world peace? what utter nonsense! This is a direct quote, from Dubya’s speech the day of the Iraq invasion:
And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people.
not "don’t shoot our soldiers"… not "welcome the american troops as your liberators and allies"… his first words to the Iraqi people is to express concern about their "source of wealth" — and you want to tell me it’s not about blood for oil??!!!
we were not attacked, neither at home nor abroad, by Iraq… we, the most powerful nation on earth, chose to invade their nation, for reasons of our own design which, in the end, even those who offered us these reasons admit publicly were not so…
the issues are life and death, y’all, not party line and rhetoric… as for me and this blog here, i can no longer waste time ranting on about the obvious, splitting hairs and parsing words — the fradulent nature of this war must be exposed, not debated…
my nation is in a war that should not be… lives are lost for no good, no defensible reason… the fear created by this mad war is being used as an excuse to deny me my civil liberties, under the pretext that i will be made safe by less freedom and more war?!?!
these are lies, straight up, and i will not accept them just because madmen will call me unpatriotic for simpy recognizing the truth… i may not have armies or embassies, but i have the Internet at my fingertips, and an unquenchable thirst for truth and justice…
my nation is being led to ruin, and i can’t just sit by and whine, watching the bodycount climb higher: i will see this madness end…
all well and good, but SFW: what can i, one private citizen with an unread blog, do toward that end?
well; we are about to find out…
Permalink
09.10.06
Posted in View points, Stop the f--king madness! at 5:10 pm by daMan
i was watching "Rush Hour" on my local television station the other night; an amusing "East meets West" buddy film, it exploits motor mouth comedy and rubber-limbed acrobatics in equal measure.
in a comic faux pas designed to show off the bloodless martial arts prowess of Jackie Chan, while waiting for Chris Tucker to conduct what ends up being a mock interrogation, Jackie attempts to mimic Tucker’s casual greeting, extending his fist in the modern equivalent of hand slap and utters… "what’s up my negro?"
what the fuck? a raucous confrontation ensues, with Jackie scarcely avoiding a severe beat down by all the black guys in the pool hall… because he addressed one of them as negro? C’MON! Twelve-year-old midwestern white kids know that what he said was the typical urban-youth greeting "what’s up my nigger"…
who did the assholes in standards and practices imagine they were protecting from being offeinded: black folk like me?? Truth be told, I found the PC-euphemized censorship to be triply offensive:
- it imagines that i am so sensitive that — what? i’ll start a riot because, for the umpty-jillionth time in my life, i’ll hear a black man referred to as a nigger?
- it ruins the comedy of the fuckin’ scene!!! the whole joke is a typical comedy of manners, a play on the fact that an outsider can’t be as casual with such a phrase as "one of us"…
- most offensively, it makes the black guys in the scene out to be complete and total idiots. they destroyed the pool hall attempting to kick some chinese guy’s ass because he called one of them…. negro??
this wasn’t the first time the revisionist timidity of broadcast TV ruined a pivotal scene in a well-known movie… in the mindlessly re-edited version of "Die Hard III", Bruce Willis’ John McClane character is compelled by a mad bomber to strip naked and walk through the streets of Harlem, wearing nothing but a sandwich board that says… "I Hate… Everybody"????
yeahright!!! that’s why when the Harlem youths see him, one throws a switchblade into the the sign across his chest, another bounces a basketball against his face, a third smashes a bottle against the side his head, and Samuel L. Jackson’s black militant character risks his life and pulls McClane’s gun on his own neighbors… to rescue this man from being killed… because he’s a misanthrope???
are we supposed to be fuckin’ stupid? the sign said "I Hate NIGGERS", dammit!!! the whole point of the scene was that the mad bomber wanted McClane to commit public suicide.
if you walk around Harlem with a sign saying you hate everybody, you’ll hardly raise an eyebrow, and laughter will be the most energetic reaction you’ll arouse….however, if you are a naked white guy with a sign that says i hate niggers, those niggers will kick your fuckin’ ass…
when did ameriKKKa become so chickenshit about what was once its favorite word? i remember as a youth watching what was then the most watched, most controversial television event in American history: Roots. Never before, and never again until the heyday of Yo! MTv Raps was the word nigger heard with such frequency…
it was an attempt to accurately portray slavery, to get beyond the bullshit white-boy fantasies of Birth of a Nation and Gone with the Wind, where the darkies cozied up to masssah’s side, wanting nothing but to shuck, jive, sing spirituals and nurse the white babies that would grow up to score their backs with bullwhips.
Black Americans should stand by others seeking freedom
today, she went on, and shun the "condescending" argument that some
races or nations were not interested in or ready for Western freedoms.
"We’ve
heard that argument before. And we, more than any, as a people, should
be ready to reject it," she said. "That view was wrong in 1963 in
Birmingham and it is wrong in 2003 in Baghdad and in the rest of the
Middle East."
- Condoleeza RIce, addressing the National Association of Black Journalists in Dallas.
nowadays, you’d think that the word has always ended with an "a", and was never anything other than a urban-youth term of endearment… as long as it’s used in this "see, they use it themselves!" manner, TV seems to have no problem with it…
you almost forget that it is a word created to dehumanize a people, justify trading in their flesh, mudering them for sport — all the while allowing the words creators to sleep peacefully, imagining themselves decent christian men…
the offense of editing those scenes is that it denies the power the word still has when coming from the mouth of the oppresor: that the sight John McClane’s sandwich board would still be enough to incite young black men to riot.
the offense of censoring those scenes is that it excuses white ameriKKKa for its sins, pretends that racism no longer exists, ignores the "us" and "them" mentality that still prevails in all corners of this country…
it trivializes the effect of race in ameriKKKa… and allow a blackface shill like Condoleeza Rice to use it as just another metaphor to setup the same old Republicrap justifications for this insane ameriJihad.
"Condi", suddenly embracing her roots, in order to lecture a group of Black Journalists that "We… as a people" must reject criticisms of Dubya’s mad war?
nigger, please…
Permalink
07.04.06
Posted in View points, Stop the f--king madness! at 10:41 pm by daMan
…fireworks explode outside my bedroom window, on the sidewalk below… the report and rhythm of these heavy duty "block busters" sound not like the tinny "pop-pop-pop" of celebration, but more like… being shelled…
…this nation was born of war, and measures its chronology as much by its conflicts as by any other benchmark… still, its recent wars no doubt color my interpretation of the revelry in the streets below… i can’t help but think that. halfway ’round the world, our brothers and sisters in arms celebrate this day under skies thick with the smoke of actual mortar rounds and gunfire…
…how would each of us feel, I wonder, if instead of fake rocket blasts from illegal fireworks, our streets were overrun with the random violence deemed necessary to "democratize" Iraq?
Permalink
04.30.06
Posted in ...ism schisms, View points at 1:23 am by daMan
America seems to have a selective memory…
We make a big deal of how we "won the Cold War" — the political war between the concepts of Communism and Democracy. We claim that this victory entitles us to the self-appointed position of "leaders of the free world", whichever world that may actually be.
The "Cold War", so-called because it was mostly a battle of ideas, was supposedly waged to oppose the Soviet Union in its tendency to, among many things:
- violate the sovereignity of nations, via invasions, occupations and violent atrocities
- suppress personal freedoms of its citizens and those of its subject nations
- restrict the press, and the fair and accurate reporting of the truth
- imprison people without cause in their prisons, known as "Gulags"
- persecuting political and, especially, religious minorities in actions known as "pogroms"
The Soviet Union was an "invading force" — but the United States is a "liberator". Suppression of civil liberties was a crime in the U.S.S.R., but somehow is protection under the U.S.A. PATRIOT act?
During the Reagan era, we proudly boasted that chief among the positive differences between America and Russia was that Americans were free — free to speak and, more importantly, to speak out against their government should they choose. Now, citizens are accused of treason for exercising the very virtues we claim our brave sons and daughters are dying for every day in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places.
The gravest atrocity of the soviet era in the minds of many was the imprisonment of thousands, if not millions, without trial or charge. But we now defend the very same behavior — despite the evidence of atrocities at Guantanamo and Abu Ghirab — in the name of "national security"…
What was the point of winning the "Cold War", if all we accomplished was to become the very enemy we struggled to defeat?
Permalink
04.10.06
Posted in Poli-tricks, View points at 12:18 pm by daMan
so…. we mock them as "surrender monkeys" because of our self-congratulatory mis-telling of World War II events…
then, dig up this image to ridicule them for not supporting our Iraqi invasion…
but when it comes to actually standing up to one’s own government, and fighting for one’s rights, it would seem that the French just took our asses to school, as massive student protests overthrow a law that would have allowed companies to hire anyone under 26 for up to two years, and fire them without cause or explanation… the students, and unions, saw this as bullshit, called it such… and took it out like the trash…
we have also been schooled on standing up against election fraud by the Ukranians, who not only fought against the Russian’s rigging of their 2004 Presidential election, but just spanked the candidate they did elect in their recent parliamentary election for not making good on his campaign promises….
Liberia reveals itself to be centuries ahead of U.S. in terms of gender politics. This nation, formed by freed ameriKKKan slaves in 1820 during the "get the hell back to Africa" movement, boasts the first elected female head of state of any African nation… any bets on how many decades until we move past our own national machismo, and can claim the same?
yet somehow, we persist in representing ourselves as "leaders of the free world"… somebody out there, please write in and explain what that means anymore…
Permalink
03.12.06
Posted in Poli-tricks, View points at 3:51 pm by daMan
last night, accused genocidal mastermind Slobodan "Butcher of the Balkans" Milosevic was found dead in his cell, awaiting trial for crimes against humanity.
there is speculation that he may have been poisoned, or committed suicide a la Heinrich Himmler in Nuremburg… the initial reaction is that he has "escaped justice". that last part confuses me — escaped justice? how? because he’s now dancing in hell of his own accord, as opposed to being tried, found guilty and then rendered dead?
OR… is it because he didn’t stick around to be murdered by his vengeful accusers? DO NOT misunderstand me — this is not an expression of "sympathy for the devil" — i’m sure Milosevic was every bit the scumbag he was accused of being…. but at that, he was hardly a rare commodity, as the world is still full of tyrants, despots and madmen that are ignored, tolerated or embraced to whatever degree the West deems them valued resources…
but… this bullshit about "justice denied" is really about somebody wanting Milosevic’ blood on their hands, or being able to gloat over the thought of his rotting in jail - being better fed and cared for than the poor of Bosnia, no doubt…
"justice" here is a euphemism for vengeance… if it wasn’t, then all involved would simply be glad that the mother fucker is rotting in hell, where he belongs… or, did his accusers imagine that the fires of hell would be stoked higher for ol’ Slobby, if he were dispatched at the hands of those "seeking justice"…?
Permalink
03.05.06
Posted in View points at 11:50 pm by daMan
"It’s Hard out here for a Pimp" just won Best Original Song at the 78th annual Academy Awards…
…I’m not really sure how I feel about that — but, y’can’t say it wasn’t a surprise…
Permalink
02.12.06
Posted in Poli-tricks, View points at 4:29 pm by daMan
…the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons in the European press was a planned action by the U.S. whose aim is “to provoke a row between Europe and the Islamic worldâ€?. “It will all end with European countries thanking the United States and paying, and giving soldiers,â€? said Vladimir Zhirinovsky.
Zhirinovsky is a senior Russian parliamentary official and leader of the Liberal Democratic party. He claims that "a U.S. attack on Iran is inevitable… The date for the strike is already known — it is the election day in
Israel (March 28 ). It is also known how much that war will cost�
His words, not mine… but if we’ve got troops in Iran come April, I just wanna be on the record…
Permalink
02.06.06
Posted in ...ism schisms, View points at 7:05 am by daMan
damn — if i were a Muslim, i’d start to feel like a conspiracy theorist:
there are riots in Denmark… outraged Muslims have taken to the streets, reacting to "a cartoon of the prophet mohammed" — this is how the Western press is portraying it: in lockstep, karlrovian, terms of disinformation…
notice that no description of the cartoons in question is mentioned — as if to imply "those crazy f—in’ muslims: there they go again"… even if we ignore the fact that this full page of cartoons portray the single most important (human) person in the Islamic faith in a variety of, well… extremely disparaging ways
unless you’re completely ignorant of the tenets of the Islamic faith, you would realize that the basis for this outrage is the blasphemous nature of any graphic representation of "The Prophet"… you yourself may eat pork and shellfish, but if you invited an Orthodox Jew over for dinner, would you offer these dishes as sign of your hospitality?
this "cartoon controversy" is being portrayed as an issue of freedom of speech vs. fanatical intolerance — with Hamas elected in Palestine, the Muslim Brotherhood outlawed yet still emerging as the dominant opposition party in Egypt, Iran being set up to dance the Iraq two-step, and cries for the U.S. to leave Pakistan — is this really the time for the West to fan the flames, and pretend not to see the fire spreading?
Israel talks of withholding the… taxes they withhold "on behalf of " the Palestinian people unless… wait a damned minute: unless what, dammit?
like Hamas or don’t… hold fast to the belief that "once a terrorist, always a terrorist"… whatever you feel, the moneys in question belong to the Palestinian people… is this really the way to convince a group sworn to destroy Israel to change its mind? and to damn the entire Palestinian people… even due to an understandable fear of Hamas’ potential… is to stereotype them all as terrorists….
are all whites racist? are all jews rich? are all blacks criminals? everyone would admit that these statements are the grossest of stereotypes… but somehow… its okay to not only portray all Muslims as terrorist – but to therefore regard them as deserving of our violent, "pre-emptive" responses — and to feel free to disrespect their religion, and blaspheme their prophet….
which part of this doesn’t look like a crusade?
Permalink
« Previous entries ·
