Saturday, December 31, 2005

2005: A Year that (mostly) Sucked 

The year began with a splash. A gigantic tsunami near-annhiliated the coastal populations of South Asia, particularly Indonesia. The United Nations were helpless to aid the victims without American helicopters and the American military, so they begged us to hide the American symbols on our choppers. We refused. The American government gave $50 million in aid (third highest donation, behind the governments of Japan and Australia), plus provided all the logistics to move the worldwide aid to where it was needed. The cost of the logistics have not yet been calculated to my knowledge, but probably range in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions (source: conjured the numbers from my ass). Many on the political Right wondered if the United States should aid such a powerful al Qaeda stronghold as Indonesia. The results show for themselves (beyond the whole argument of human decency, of course).

Alas, Nature is indiscriminate in her victims. The United States itself found itself under attack this summer when Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastated the southern states. Mississippi and and Louisiana were the hardest hit. Mississippi was smashed with the full wrath of Hurricane Katrina, a Category 4 Storm. Louisiana, though only hit by the edges of the storm, suffered a much worse fate.

For years, Louisiana's leadership has been ineffective and corrupt. This culture of corruption came home to roost this year in New Orleans, a city built by the sea wisely built below sea level. There are only two things that prevented New Orleans from becoming a part of the Gulf of Mexico: a series of wetlands (most of which have been destroyed and developped over), and a system of levees. The levees mostly paid for by the Federal Government, and maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers, however the day-to-day maintenence was overseen by the Orleans Levee Board. Their corrupt misuse of levee money led directly to this tragedy.

But, much of this could have been avoided if not for the Trio of Incompetence:
- Governor Kathleen Blanco
- Mayor Ray Nagin
- FEMA Director Michael Brown

Nagin refused to evacuate the city, even allowing entire fleets of school buses to be lost to the floods, rather than use them to evacuate the poor and the elderly. Governor Blanco apparantly refused to request help from the Federal Government until it was too late. Additionally, Governor Blanco's administration expelled trucks full of food and drinking water from the Super Dome, because she did not want to encourage the refugees to stay longer than they had to.

FEMA dirctor Michael Brown, on the other hand, was totally useless during this whole debacle, and just watched the pandemonium grow until the Coast Guard took over the relief efforts.

Our enemies in the Arab world laughed as we floundered in our ineffective bureaucracy. Zarqawi, who leads al Qaeda in Iraq, announced to the world that he, himself, prayed for this to happen, and that Allah was destroying America for him.

Commandment #2: Do not Use The Lord Your God's name in Vain.

Before the world could refocus their attention away from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, a massive Earthquake hit the Kashmire region, ironically right in the area Osama bin Laden is theoretically hiding out. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of others also are in that area.

Unlike the Tsunami and the Hurricanes, no one really seems interested in helping the victims of the Kashmire Quake, despite an estimated death toll as high as 20,000. Perhaps there have been just too many natural disasters for one fiscal year.
Oh, did I fail to mention the terror attacks?

Britain was almost ready to take the War on Terror seriously when the London Underground was attacked by suicide bombers. The urge quickly passed.

Jordan, on the other hand, switched sides in the Terror War, after Zarqawi's ill conceived attack on a wedding in that country. In fact, many people in Muslim countries have changed their view on suicide attacks, thanks to Zarqawi's crude tactics.

France burned, while Chirac played his fiddle.

Iraq, on the other had, had a decrease in violence and elected their first democratic parliament since the Ba'athist takeover. On the plus side, the Sunnis actually participated in this election. On the minus side, the reacted to their loss like a bunch of whiny Al Gore Democrats.

Speaking of Al Gore Democrats, how did they behave this year? Sadly, with treason.

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Piot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners." -Senator Dick Durbin, describing Guantanemo Bay's treatment of al Qaeda prisoners.

"The idea that we can win this war is just not true!" -Howard Dean

"[T]here is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs." -Senaror John Kerry, who then added, "Iraqis should be doing that." (Really!)

Also, Liberals in Congress and the Press have:
- Accused Gitmo guards of flushing Korans
- Released
boatloads of Top Secret information in the War on Terror, including:
- Wiretaps of phone numbers found in al Qaeda laptops and cell phone phonebooks.
- Revealed secret CIA prisons in Europe.
- Revealed FBI/Department of Energy plans to locate hidden nuclear material smuggled into the US.

So, it seems that this year has been a fairly ugly one. Let us lift up our drinking glasses, and hope 2006 is just a little more pleasant.

(0) comments

Friday, December 23, 2005

Warrants? Humbug 


Read this. Done with your mock outrage? Ok then, let us discuss.

You don't need a warrant for this sort of search.

Warrants are meant to protect our reasonable right to privacy. This means, we should be protected from searches that infringe this reasonable right. However, if ways are designed to search us in ways that do not interfere with the reasonable right, then authorities are allowed and encouraged to take advantage.

In my Con-Law classes, we had several examples of how police legally searched without warrants, even directly against the permission of the suspect. For example, in one case, police used a heliocopter to view the land a drug pusher used to grow marijuana. Since the police never actually stepped foot on his land, this was approved by the Supreme Court.

The most known method of an unobtrusive search is the use of drug-sniffing dogs. Airport authorities use dogs to check luggage for contraband. This is considered a legal search because none of the passengers' affects are specifically outed. If some weirdo tried to hide some S&M Bondage outfits in his luggage, for example, the dog would not be able to humiliate him.

Radiation detectors are like the dogs. They cannot check inside the house and tell the FBI that Mohammad is sleeping with the mailman, or that Aisha is smoking the reefer, or anything that could be used against the suspect in the court of law or public opinion. All the detectors tell authorities is "Yes, there is a dangerous amount of radiation here" or "No, there is normal levels of radiation here." Citizens do not have a reasonable right to expect that huge radiation eminations coming from their homes remain private.

Now, perhaps some of you are concerned that they seem to be targetting Muslims. Fair enough, but I think perhaps this speaks more to Muslims needing to examine why they, of all ethno-religious groups, seem to warrant this attention. It can't be for discriminatory reasons, because one does not discriminate and then not let their victims know they are being discriminated against. It defeats the whole purpose.

Muslims aren't bad. But a whopping majority of terrorists are Muslims, or claim to be. And if we cannot see this at this point, it is time to tear our heads out of our asses.

....Merry Christmas!

(1) comments

Tuesday, December 13, 2005


I've noticed a disturbing trend in the movies. They are shamelessly ripping off ideas from cartoons.

First, there was the 40-Year-Old Virgin. I heard it was hilarious, although it looked borderline retarded to me. Either way, the entire premise of this movie was based on a throwaway joke in an old episode of The Simpsons, where Superintendant Chalmers exonerated Principal Skinner for screwing Ms. Crabapple in front of the children when he confessed he was a virgin. The joke was that no 40 year old would ever falsely claim to be a virgin. We all shared a good laugh. But, someone ended up making a billion dollars turning that premise into a movie.

Now, consider Exhibit B. "Brokeback" is a movie expected to sweep the Golden Globes, and likely the Oscars. It is an independent movie about gay cowboys. This idea had to be stolen from this second-season episode of South Park. Honestly, this idea is too f-ing retarded for a serious filmmaker to think of it on their own.

Speaking of F-ing retarded, Johnny Knoxville is getting in on the act. In "The Ringer," he directly plagiarizes the actual plot of an episode of South Park last year!

I don't really know if I had a point, but if the damn movie companies wonder why no one wants to shell out $10, pre-snacks to watch their crappy movies, this may be one of many hints.

(1) comments

Sunday, December 11, 2005

Tookie Must Die! (Not a Robin Williams Movie) 

Liberals love murderers, Hollywood Liberals especially.

Does this accusation sound a little too Ann-Coulteran? Well, for your approval, take one Stanley "Tookie" Williams, one of the founders of the infamous Crips street gang. Do you want to know why he is going to be put to death?

Only click if you really want to know. I warn you, this link is both gruesome and repugnant. And it was all Tookie's handiwork.

But, Hollywood wants Williams (I refuse to continue to call him Tookie) to live. Since going to prison, Williams has apparantly "turned his life around," as all death row inmates seem to do when they are in a cell with absolutely no temptation or opportunity to continue their evil. All they have left to do is make piece with Christ or Allah (for some reason, these two are always the most popular. I suppose Buddah and Ginesh have better things to do than deal with these scum). They decide they have reformed, and they wish for society to forgive them, or at the very least, spare them their undeservedly humane execution.

This link can explain everything much better than I can. It is the California Supreme Court explaining why they won't stop the execution. Don't worry, it isn't as gruesome as the last one. It is a PDF file, so consider yourself warned.

Williams' defenders credit Williams with writing children's literature in prison about the evils of gangs. Why, he works to keep people out of gangs now!

That might mean something, if he didn't help create one of the most vicious gangs in the United States.

The fact is, if Williams was born in Saudi Arabia, he could very well have been bin Laden. If he was born in Jordan, he could have been Zarqawi. They all have that strain of evil that not only allows themselves to murder innocents, but encourages others to do so as well.

But, Hollywood loves this murderer, and wants him saved. Snoop Dog comes to his defense (although expecting him to support this execution would be like expecting Baghdad Bob to be impartial to the Saddam Hussein trial). We also have the usual windbags: Mike Ferrell (get a job! MASH ended 20 years ago!), Jesse Jackson, Margaret Cho, and others. They are all begging the Governator to grant clemency.

I would hope that Schwarzenegger will be smart enough to let the process go through until the end.

Stanley Williams, in cold calculating blood, murdered at least four innocent people, blowing them away at close range with a shotgun. This does not include all the lives he ruined luring the poor and desperate into his vile gang. We shouldn't care how many books he wrote about gang violence. We shouldn't care if he is the next Charles Dickens or William Shakespeare. He deserves to die. He deserves to die horribly, but as a civil society, I think we can agree to let him drift away piecefully from a lethal injection. May God have mercy on his soul.

(0) comments

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

A Day That Lives on in Infamy 

No one really saw it coming, but it was undeniable when those planes appeared in the bright blue skies. America was under attack. We knew the dark ambitions of the enemy, but due to our isolationist fantasies, we didn't think they would dare attack us. But the ocean did not protect us from our foes, motivated by fanaticism and dreams of world conquest. On 7 December 1941 the United States was attacked by the Empire of Japan, in a cowardly sneak attack on our Pacific Fleet stationed in Pearl Harbor.

Two days later, the United States was at war with... The Germanic Third Reich?

Now, don't get me wrong, I truly believe that destroying the Nazi regime is probably among the greatest achievements of the United States. But, by today's logic, such an action would be considered inexcusable to the likes of Ted Kennedy, John Murtha, and Dick Durbin. After all, Germany had NO connection to the Pearl Harbor attack.

"But Jon," you say. "Japan and Germany were allies!" Well, Iraq provided financing for al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations both before and after 9/11. When al-Zarqawi was injured in Afghanistan fighting the Allied forces, he was treated by Saddam's hospitals and treated as a guest of the state.

"Germany declared war on us first," you may point out. This is true. Saddam declared war on us, however, by refusing to live up to the cease-fire agreement of the original Iraq War.

The fact is, in 1941, we accepted the fact that we were under attack, and we had the courage to fight back. We understood then that Hir0-Hito was not the only man who worked for the destruction of American ideals, but that Hitler and Mussolini were equally hostile.

In 2001, we were attacked by a two-bit thug, Osama bin Laden, who was probably acting as the bitch of half a dozen Middle-Eastern dictators. We smacked down the Taliban, which did not have the money or resources necessary to even begin to fund the al Qaeda network, because they were the poor schmoes who the other dictators chose to house their boy. This allowed them to act shocked and appalled when the fanatic they financed followed their instructions, and attacked us. Again, I'm not saying that we shouldn't have freed Afganistan. I'm just saying that the Taliban had about as much to do with 9/11 as Iraq did, perhaps less.

After World War II, we thought we'd never have to face another sneak attack on our soil. After all, we bravely fought the enemy back, culminating in the detonation of the most fearsome weapon humanity has ever seen.

Our reaction to 9/11 has been petty political infighting. Our enemies this time will be encouraged, not detered, by the shameful American reaction to an uprovoked attack, and the war that followed.

(0) comments

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?