Senator Joe Lieberman sums up my feelings on the Iraq Study Group:

One thing is certain: There is no alternative to success in Iraq. We are engaged in a global war against Islamic extremists and failure is not an option. In the coming days and weeks, we must work together in a bi-partisan fashion to forge a strategy to prevail in Iraq. The freedom and security of the American people demand no less.”

Further, Lieberman commented on radio today:

“To think that Iran will help us to succed in Iraq, that makes no sense, because they don’t want us to succeed in Iraq.”

Three letters: “duh.”

The newly-approved (95-2, two Republicans against) SecDef, Robert Gates, is making mealy-mouthed appeasionist statements that should be appreciated in the UN and would make Neville Chamberlain proud, having abandoned Czechoslovia and given up the Irish Free State Navy Ports; the ISG recommends that Israel give up the Golan Heights.

Rick Santorum said:

Republicans and Democrats, Leaders in the Congress, why don’t we talk more about Iran? Why would we focus on Iran? The American public has no appetite for increasing this war. So what do we have? We have this report, which is a prescription for surrender. There is no prescription for victory in that report. Who are these Islamic Fascists? This is not just a Shia problem, but is becoming a Shia dominated field. Let us not leave out Saudi Arabia and others to foment fascism around the world. This problem is growing. Every regime is feeling the pressure and not just since 2003. We’ve seen in Arabic countries this rise, and in Indonesia, Malaysia, this rise.

People have been targeted because they were Jews. This is evil.

Likely Israel will kiss the Golan Heights goodbye and a portion of Jerusalem.

Hey; why don’t the Jews just suck it up, purchase millions of Kelty packs and hike right out of their nation?

Except that, I surmise actual advanced societies would merely be supplanted by primeval, backwards, misogynistic societies.

The solution to Iraq exists within Iran. Because Iran, we must realize, is the ultimate Puppet Master.

Rick Santorum for US Ambassador to replace Bolton?

BZ

The Koran and the AK-47.

Earlier this week Michael Medved hosted Victor Mordecai (actually, Avi Lipkin) and a local Seattle apologist for the religion of Islam whose name is unimportant.

Whilst I am sure that Pakistani is, individually, a wonderful human being who does not kick his dog or beat his wife, every word that escaped his lips was nothing more than apologist propaganda for the religion of Islam in all its forms. Michael was very careful to frame his questions in an egalitarian fashion but the Islamic respondent displayed not only his ass but his bias for all to see.

Michael has to, due to his national dissemination, be a bit careful about his framing and his statements.

My readership is comparatively minimal and therefore I can completely state my opinions as I believe them to be.

Let’s examine some basics and move to the conclusion that I make about Islam:

At this point in US history, there is a Triumvirate against us that includes Iran – Iraq – Syria and, moving into the neighborhood, Lebanon. This Triumvirate Axis has decreed: annihilate the Sunni leadership in Lebanon.

Despite there being a 28% Christian presence in Lebanon.

In terms of percentages, Islam is overall 85% Sunni and 15% Shia; that is not the case in the Middle East.

The goal of the Shiites is to create a Shia Califate.

In terms of Saudi Arabia (a nation comprised predominantly of Sunnis), Shiites believe that the Sunnis allow 2 million pagans and infidels to defile Mecca and Medina by their simple presence. That in and of itself is an egregious and unrepairable offense.

The Shiite remedy is to realize that Shiites never truly enjoyed the petroleum benefits, these ran to the Sunnis, so it remains to the Shiites to blow up and eviscerate every oil field within reach in order to weaken the economics of the Infidels. Oil only strengthens the economies of worldwide unbelievers.

Canada is self-sufficient; Europe is completely dependent upon outside oil sourcing; the United States receives 70% of its oil from the western hemisphere, 15% from Nigeria and 15% from Persian sources. The first area to completely suffer would be EUROPE, not the United States.

Let me make so clear statements now and forever:

Israel cannot live in peace alongside any Islamic nation, “Palestine” or otherwise; not because Israel will disallow peace, but because Islam will disallow peace with any Jewish state.

I would postulate this: if one were to take the “Palestinian Issue” and “Israel” out the equation, would anything else change?

I submit it would not.

Therefore the removal of Israel is NOT the “key” as the dimwitted Jimmy Carter would contend; Carter has unwittingly become the lapdog of Islam — not because he is necessarily evil but simply because he is naive and stupid — and, bottom line, an Islamic tool.

Let us review history for a moment:

In 2000 Barak and Arafat met; Israel offered the complete West Bank but, no, that was not enough. Following this refusal Arafat then instigated the Intifada. But Arafat knew inherently that he would have been executed by Hamas cells had he acquiesced to Barak’s offer.

“Allahu Akbar!” shout various Muslims.

This does NOT mean that “Allah is great.” It means that Allah is GREATER. Greater than whom? Answer, as any 7-year-old Muslim can respond: Greater than YOUR God.

And therefore Jerusalem has to be destroyed.

Any good Muslim child knows that monkeys and pigs are Christians and Jews.

In Iraq: 25 to 50 Christians are killed per day.

Christians are therefore hiking to, oddly enough, Syria.

And the Islamization of Europe continues.

Austria is already 30% Muslim.

Christmas was “canceled” in Austria due to pressure.

Osama bin Laden said in his book, Messages To The World, that there were four things to do:

• Get the United States out of the Middle East;
• That the Jihad wave had to extend throughout the Middle East;
• That Jihad had to be used as an unequivocable weapon;
• Destroy Israel.

Boys and girls in Radio Land: it doesn’t get any sharper or clearer than that.

Leaving Iraq early? Acquiescing to OBL Issue Number One.

Except for the al Qaeda Training Manual.

To Michael Medved’s Islamic apologist, I would respond in this fashion:

I couldn’t care less about what you say Islam represents, for this is the Guide:

Islam is what Islam DOES.

BZ

The United Nations is obviously crumbling in terms of its actual importance; John Bolton, a man who knows himself, knows the history of the UN and is unafraid to call nations on the issues, will no longer be our UN Ambassador. And the UN manages to crumble further and become less important.

That Bolton is leaving — is only to the detriment of the United States.

But Bolton, because of his outspoken self and the fact that he was not remotely hesitant to call various nations, issues and representatives on their stupidity, has “resigned.” Or perhaps, more accurately, Bolton is serving out his term before stepping down.

Why? you might ask. Because, under the Democrats, Bolton has little chance of being confirmed for a full appointment by the Senate. Politics demand that the appearance is that Bolton is a successful ambassador derailed by Congress. And that is so true. From CBS News:

The White House quickly took issue with that characterization. “It is not a resignation,” Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino told CBS News. She noted that Bolton would be leaving his post when his recess appointment expired at the end of the 109th Congress. After an email with Perino’s comment was passed around CBS News, the headline on the Bolton story was changed to “U.N. Ambassador John Bolton To Step Down.”

Why might Bolton not be confirmed? Because he is contentious? Because he is not a carpet? Because he has opinions and calls a spade a spade? Because he is not an apologist for the White Race and not a card-carrying member of the “United States Is Evil” club? Because he believes the UN is broken and needs to be repaired?

“Iran‘s Foreign Ministry has called Bolton ‘rude’ and ‘undiplomatic.’ “

Bolton has been a strong critic of the United Nations for much of his career. In a 1994 Global Structures Convocation hosted by the World Federalist Association (now Citizens for Global Solutions), he stated, “There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States.”

Oddly enough, according to the biased Wikipedia:

The New York Times in an editorial The Shame of the United Nations has praised Bolton’s stance on “reforming the disgraceful United Nations Human Rights Commission” [47], saying “John Bolton, is right; Secretary General Kofi Annan is wrong.” The Times also said that the current commission is composed of “some of the world’s most abusive regimes” who use their membership as cover to continue their abusiveness.

Yes; all of those things and more.

President Bush said this:

I am deeply disappointed that a handful of United States Senators prevented Ambassador Bolton from receiving the up or down vote he deserved in the Senate. They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time. This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country, and discourages men and women of talent from serving their Nation.”

I am no apologist or bootlicker for President Bush as anyone who has historically read my blog knows. I am a Conservative before I am a GOP supporter. But Bush has pegged this issue precisely.

Kofi Annan today criticized the Iraq war and said the Iraqis are worse off than before the fall of Saddam Hussein. The average Iraqi believes “yes, we’ll get through the chaos.” But not Kofi; he thinks every Iraqi would rather bleat: “Yes, I long for the good old days of Hussein and the disappearances of my neighbors.” Oil for Food corruption? George Galloway still on the take? Kofi’s son in receipt of more expensive Mercedes-Benzes?

Insanity in the UN.

Untolerated by Bolton; soon to be tolerated by whatever limp-wristed servile sychophant the Democrats choose to appoint.

Because migosh, though the US funds the UN to the tune of $5 billion dollars per year, we certainly shouldn’t make sure we get any return for the money American taxpayers invest, should we?

I mean, shoot, how expectational and judgmental would that be??

BZ

In the comment section of my last post, Sues indicated that if she won the lottery she’d quit her job and leave Fornicalia, which she called Mexifornia. That got me to thinking:

What would you do if you won the lottery?

Let’s say, perhaps, $20 million dollars?

With that figure in mind, I have a few questions:

• Would you stay at your job for a period of time?
• What would you immediately do with your money?
• What would you do with the rest?
• Would you stay in your current home or town?

BZ’s ANSWERS:

Yes, for a period of time I would continue working my job; I would also do my level-headed best to ensure that my winning the lottery was not made public, nor would I mention it to family or friends until I was in a fiscal and mental position to handle the flak, hysteria and complications that would inevitably result.

What would I expect?

First, some amount of media coverage. My inclination, because I was the media years ago, would be to put them on Ignore Mode. However, they would publish and/or portray whatever they wished anyway and one must expect contacts from not only family but the outside world as well.

I would envision family members who’d never given me the proverbial “time of day” to come out of the woodwork, leaving tearful pleas on my home and cell phone. I’d have friends I’d not spoken to in years clogging my voicemail as well. Throw in total strangers with offers of “making more millions” and I’d have a thoroughly confusing conglomerate.

My reaction? I’d ignore everyone except those who are actually meaningful to me. And I’d take care of me and my immediate family first. First long-term move: begin to investigate the appointment of a professional and competent personal financial counselor/attorney, as I am not an Economics or Accounting major. I would do this sub rosa; making my own inquisitions and sending out my own feelers.

Second: I’d put a roof on my fiance’s home, buy her a new vehicle, and make sure her mother was overseen and taken care of. I’d pay off a portion of my own home — but not completely.

I would also spend a few dollars on my own one immediate whimsy purchase: I’d buy a brand new 2007 GMC Yukon Denali SUV with every feature and appointment imagineable. Why, you might ask? Because GMC is domestic, it would be one clearly conspicuous purchase, and I’ve always wanted to be amongst the few who could sit high, display their conspicuous consumption, and afford something of that order with leather, luxury, a huge engine and no worries about size or fuel. My vehicles have historically always, always been small, thrifty, inexpensive, and much less than luxurious. Screw that now. I’d splurge for this one purchase.

And that’s where my immediate purchases would stop until I stood back and got a Global view and prognostication of where my funds would be in three years, five years, ten years, and so on. $20 million dollar sounds unlimited; in today’s world I suspect it is quite not.

In a longer view, I would consider moving to the Pacific Northwest where the area combines three of my favorite venues: lower temperatures, pines and the ocean. I would leave my home town of Sacratomato behind and consider the Jenner, Mendocino, Ft. Bragg, Bandon or Astoria areas.

What would you do?

Answer these questions:

• Would you stay at your job for a period of time?
• What would you immediately do with your money?
• What would you do with the rest?
• Would you stay in your current home or town?

I’m going to leave this post up for a few days because I really want to hear what readers of this blog have to say about sudden and overwhelming fortunes. How would you handle it, and what would be your reaction to this newfound wealth?

BZ

What is more important to you: the week or the weekend?

I can remember from years ago, someone telling me this:

“When I’d finally reached St. Peters’ gate, I wouldn’t say:

Gosh, I wish I’d worked harder at my job.

_____________

Do you live for the Week?

Or do you live for the Weekend?

Quite frankly, I live for my weekend now, and I’ll explain why.

I live in Fornicalia, the most oppressive of states on many levels. It is a beautiful state which became despoiled by immigrants naturalized and otherwise. It is a state rampant with insufficient roads, insufficient funds, insufficient power production, insufficient water production, insufficient sewer projects, insufficient fire and police protection, and an overabundance of suckers from the Public Nipple — legal and illegal.

And into its coffers my bi-weekly paycheck gets circumscised.

And what about you?

Do you live for the Week?

Do you live for the Weekend?

I live for the weekend.

My job rounds me but it does not “complete me.” I am not it and it is not me. My job requires my living down in the valley. On Thursday night I escape the flatlanders and rush into the hinterlands beyond. Sometimes I feel completely oppressed and compressed and nothing but leaving the valley will satisfy my shiverings.

What do you live for?

And why?

BZ