Michael Richards and his Biiiiiig Mouth
Michael, Kramer on Seinfeld, not only used the N word at his recent appearance at the Laugh Factory, he repeated it several times so that we would understand him clearly. I would be inclined to accept his apology on David Letterman, except he had to bring Katrina into it.click to show/hide the rest of the post
The thing that is galling is that he said such racist things, and then he goes and blurts another racist thing—implying that the reaction to Katrina was based on race. Unacceptable racism followed by politically correct racism. I can only come to one conclusion now. Michael Richards is a racist to the bone.
click to hide most of this post
Pelosi and Ethics
Nancy Pelosi has gone and wanted to do it again. She wants to appoint Alcee Hastings to the Intelligence committee chair.click to show/hide the rest of the post
This guy was impeached for unethical conduct while he was a judge. So much for Pelosi’s pledge to make this the “most ethical congress in history”—first trying to appoint the unethical John Murtha, and now Hastings.
click to hide most of this post
Moderate Muslims
I have to admit, though I was busy when I heard these, and wasn’t near a recorder or a pen at the times, I’ve begun to notice some moderate Muslims starting to speak out. There are a couple books out there—I’ll bone up on this as soon as I can. Plus, there are some Muslim leaders in the world and in America who are beginning to appear on talk shows. This does my heart good.click to show/hide the rest of the post
On the other hand, they purport to speak for the majority of Muslims and I wonder about this. I hope they are accurate, but you hear so much about radical Islam in Europe, as in England, and even in the U.S., like in Dearborn, Michigan. I hope the new voices prove me wrong, as might Tyk, one of my commenters, from Lebanon, who also believes the majority of Muslims are like he.
I’d feel more comfortable if I saw as much outrage from the Muslim community about suicide bombings, Osama bin Laden, and the shelling of innocents as I’ve seen about statements by the Pope, or Dutch cartoons. Another issue I have is, why wouldn’t Muslims want Iraq to be free of Saddam and running their own country with a democracy? Why are they so against this? Fine, they want Americans out of a Muslim land—then what? Also, why do they view the Americans as invaders rather than liberators? These things I don’t understand. It just all seems to point to the fact that it remains easy for the majority of Muslims to believe that the West, led by the U.S., is evil.
click to hide most of this post
60% of Iraqi’s Think It’s Okay to Kill Americans
This I heard on one of my radio talks shows (Michael Medved). If this is true, then we may have to oblige them. I realize that “cut and run” might lead to an Iran-dominated area there. What is the alternative, though?click to show/hide the rest of the post
Regardless of denials, this situation is starting to sound more and more like Vietnam. In both cases, in my present view, the U.S. waged war for honorable reasons; but in both cases, too, we did not get the rabid support we needed in order to help the locals fend off tyranny. We can’t do it alone. The geo-political situation is always a chess match, and we either have to come up with some new moves or live to fight another day.
click to hide most of this post
Towards a New Style of Fighting Guerilla Warfare
I still believe that we need to come up with a new style of fighting our guerilla wars. Our present way of doing it truly reminds me of the British and Americans in the Revolutionary War, and of the Americans in some of the Civil War. In those wars it was usually considered the “honorable thing” to stand up in full sight and fire your weapons at your enemy, also standing up and firing at you.The first successful guerilla fighters were the Native Americans, who hid behind trees and used camouflage.
click to show/hide the rest of the post
Modern insurgents and guerilla fighters like Al-Queda do not wear uniforms, which is against the Geneva Conventions, and hide among the populace, also forbidden. Whether it is forbidden or not, they do it. The good guys, the U.S. and its allies, abide by all the Geneva Conventions, and are at a disadvantage.
I think that the Geneva Conventions need to be revisited for “asymmetrical warfare” like we have now, fighting people that do not honor the codes. I also think that new tactics and strategies need to be devised so that our soldiers do not keep following our present strategy of winning the conventional part of the war but losing the guerilla part of the it. We can beat anyone in a conventional war, but our model of “standing guard” does not work once we’ve conquered the physical territory.
click to hide most of this post
8 comments:
Good day Rock, First, Pelosi, well, I think we've covered that ground and it's no big surprise, I'm actually surprised, I really thougth they would spend the first year just gloating, but I see she wants to change things fast. All the better for Republicans in 2008. About a year back, I thought the coolest bumper sticker I could come up with would be a W08 just like the W04 President Bush used. Although it can't happen, just the thought of Democrats getting upset and rioting about it would be funny. Secondly, it's hard to pull back and take a look around when we have tunnel vision. What I mean, is I too believe that most Muslims are good, but in so many situations, a herd mentality will rule for the moment. It takes less than a handful of people to start a riot just about anywhere. Look at the LA riots. It was an excuse to act unruly and get away with it, very little had to do with any verdict. The same with those pictures and videos our media loves to promote, You get three people to start shouting things in a public square, start passing out signs, flags and matches and pretty soon you have a mob. Why? because they can do it without being punished. Would I love to go home, yes, do I believe in the job I'm doing here, and the job of the military in Iraq, hell yes! Can I arm chair quarterback this and say there are better ways, yes. But when you add more politics than needed things go south. Continue the fight for truth, continue this blog and continue to get the word out that true humans need to unite to fight evil. oh, and Happy Thanksgiving.
Yeah, happy turkey day, and Sarge Dub, if you're reading this, send my best to all the men and women in fatigues. I may talk a lot of stuff about my disdain for the war, but I wish all you guys the best and I hope they bring you all home SOON! Now on to business.
"Kramer"- Using the WORST word you can call a Black person was completely idiotic considering the host of other words he could have used. Bringing Katrina into it was even MORE idiotic, because he's using it as a way to show that he's not racist but instead empathetic. That makes him even MORE racist in my book because he's assuming Black people would be dumb enough to accept an apology based on his "feelings" about the tragedy in N.O. and forget about the horrific words to come out of his mouth. (sidebar) I STILL continue to believe that the apathetic response was part racial, part economic. You can't tell me that it would have taken 5 days to get assistance in if it had been Beverly Hills that had flooded on the same scale. Sorry, not buying it.
Pelosi- Welcome to American Politics 101! I'm still waiting on your explaination as to what San Francisco values are and why they are anti-American (besides a lack of military support.) Not supporting the military hardly seems anti-American.
Moderate Muslims- You've heard the saying "The squeaky wheel gets the oil" -these wheels happen to have "Down with USA/the pope/Europe/Israel/Pluto/Antarctica" signs and are the darlings of American media outlets who just love sleeze. Moderate voices pleading for peace don't get the attention they deserve. Maybe Fox"news", CNN, and the rest could help this image problem by giving these voices some significant airtime rather than trying to instill fear in their viewers.
Iraq- You're a funny one, Rock (not "ha-ha" funny, funny as in interesting). Liberals (like Ted) have been saying "Iraq IS the new Vietnam" for a couple years! What's funny to me is that if a "liberal" says these things, you'll say "liberals think with feelings, and they listen to the biased liberal media full of lies and falsehoods etc." (ala your response to Charles Lebracque.) Now that conservatives have their doubts about the war and it's lack of direction and planning, you decide to jump on board and side with the libs and Dems (?), even implicitly suggesting that a "cut and run" may not be such a bad idea. Hmmmm. You're right mind you, just two years too late.
Guerrilla warfare- Guerrillas are probably the hardest type of enemy to fight because they're like the nerd who brings a brick to the fist fight after school, they don't fight "fairly". Due to this fact most conflicts with guerrillas in areas all over the globe end at the negotiation table, not on the battlefield. I hate to sound pessimistic, but it seems like the conflict Iraq will have to end the same way. The question is how long will it take....
The reaction to Katrina WAS racist. Bush and his fat white boy club took this as the opportunity to engage in a little serendipitous gentrification.
How do we know?
After denying emergency aid to the poorest and most vulnerable counties, which, as long-predicted, were destroyed, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi urged Bush to fire Brown.
"Why would I do that?" the president replied. "Because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week," she explained. To which he answered, "What didn't go right?"
Hi Mr Rock,
Tell us more about those Geneva Conventions? And how you dont violate them? Maybe you could explain them in regards to Guantanomo Bay??? Also Abu Ghraib??? Yes Yes I know what you are going to say Mr Rock! Your are going to go on and on and on and on about how essential it is to get information out of detainees so as to prevent further attacks on America!!! And a whole lot more and try and bury the fact that my argument is that you have broken Geneva Conventions for at least 5 years.
Torture and detainment without charge or trail both break the geneva convention.
And heres something to make a grey area (I know you are going to hate this because you like things black and white) What about the IRA or the UDA that opperate(ed) in Ireland? not as easy to call them evil because they are not Muslim or Arab? The IRA or UDA have the same background and structure and philosphy (being nationalism/religion, sorry excuse the simplicity its not quite that easy but theres no need to get into too much depth on this topic) as the people you are fighting but you wouldnt call either of them evil would you?
Sgt Dub, you said:
First, Pelosi, well, I think we've covered that ground and it's no big surprise, I'm actually surprised, I really thougth they would spend the first year just gloating, but I see she wants to change things fast. All the better for Republicans in 2008.
You might be right.
About a year back, I thought the coolest bumper sticker I could come up with would be a W08 just like the W04 President Bush used. Although it can't happen, just the thought of Democrats getting upset and rioting about it would be funny.
Funny idea.
it's hard to pull back and take a look around when we have tunnel vision. What I mean, is I too believe that most Muslims are good, but in so many situations, a herd mentality will rule for the moment. It takes less than a handful of people to start a riot just about anywhere. Look at the LA riots. It was an excuse to act unruly and get away with it, very little had to do with any verdict. The same with those pictures and videos our media loves to promote, You get three people to start shouting things in a public square, start passing out signs, flags and matches and pretty soon you have a mob. Why? because they can do it without being punished.
Our herd mentality. You can't change human nature I guess. Plus, you're right. Freedom leads to demonstrations, some you don't like.
Would I love to go home, yes, do I believe in the job I'm doing here, and the job of the military in Iraq, hell yes! Can I arm chair quarterback this and say there are better ways, yes. But when you add more politics than needed things go south.
Again, words of wisdom.
Continue the fight for truth, continue this blog and continue to get the word out that true humans need to unite to fight evil. oh, and Happy Thanksgiving
Thank you so much Sgt Dub for your words from the front. Happy Thanksgiving to you too. God bless.
Rock
paz y amor, good hearing from you. God bless you on this Turkey Day.
I may talk a lot of stuff about my disdain for the war, but I wish all you guys the best and I hope they bring you all home SOON! Now on to business.
paz, how about wishing them luck in completing their mission, which is what they really want?
That makes him even MORE racist in my book because he's assuming Black people would be dumb enough to accept an apology based on his "feelings" about the tragedy in N.O. and forget about the horrific words to come out of his mouth.
Another reason why I see you as reasonable. Thank you.
I STILL continue to believe that the apathetic response was part racial, part economic. You can't tell me that it would have taken 5 days to get assistance in if it had been Beverly Hills that had flooded on the same scale. Sorry, not buying it.
How horrible it must be for you to have these feelings and beliefs. If anything, the government's motivation in these matters would be to go out of there way to help blacks, especially when its on national TV. These are politicians. They are aware of the bum rap they have with the press and liberals, and with blacks, a constituency they want to do better with. The motives you ascribe just don't make sense.
Why did Mississippi do better with Katrina, even though they had the same kinds of damage? Because of the Federal government? No! Their state government performed better. Busses were not left unused. There were plans in place. People got help, black and white, because the local and state officials were doing their job.
The real lesson of Katrina is not racism, rather it just shows the ineffectiveness of government programs and responses. The private sector and local governments always do better than massive federal bureacrocacies. Except, New Orleans was corrupt and ineffective. Why? Not because they are black, again. Because they were always corrupt, and never fixed this.
Moderate Muslims- You've heard the saying "The squeaky wheel gets the oil" -these wheels happen to have "Down with USA/the pope/Europe/Israel/Pluto/Antarctica" signs and are the darlings of American media outlets who just love sleeze. Moderate voices pleading for peace don't get the attention they deserve. Maybe Fox"news", CNN, and the rest could help this image problem by giving these voices some significant airtime rather than trying to instill fear in their viewers.
Here I agree with you paz, to a certain extent. When it comes to fear, however, I see the liberals trying to frighten us much more than conservatives. The conservatives "frighten" us with reality--WMDs and terrorism etc. The liberals frighten us with lies--like the Republicans want to take away your Social Security, or are racists or homophobes, and so on.
Iraq- You're a funny one, Rock (not "ha-ha" funny, funny as in interesting). Liberals (like Ted) have been saying "Iraq IS the new Vietnam" for a couple years! What's funny to me is that if a "liberal" says these things, you'll say "liberals think with feelings, and they listen to the biased liberal media full of lies and falsehoods etc." (ala your response to Charles Lebracque.) Now that conservatives have their doubts about the war and it's lack of direction and planning, you decide to jump on board and side with the libs and Dems (?), even implicitly suggesting that a "cut and run" may not be such a bad idea. Hmmmm. You're right mind you, just two years too late.
You and some of my liberal commenters keep on acting as if I am an apologist for the Republican Party. I hope that you can begin to see that I am an apologist for truth. My truth in Iraq is this: I want us to fight harder, not withdraw. However, because of people with pacifist views, like you paz, we are not allowed to fight harder. So, we have no choice. I believe we ought to fight to win, or get out. I have been very consistent on this.
You're right, I have doubts about the war and planning, but part of my disappointment is that we are fighting a politically correct war, to please the left, to be liked, to show the pacifists we are "good guys." Does this approach work? No. We are demonized and are losing the war. So, fight or get out.
Guerrilla warfare- Guerrillas are probably the hardest type of enemy to fight because they're like the nerd who brings a brick to the fist fight after school, they don't fight "fairly". Due to this fact most conflicts with guerrillas in areas all over the globe end at the negotiation table, not on the battlefield. I hate to sound pessimistic, but it seems like the conflict Iraq will have to end the same way. The question is how long will it take.
On the face of it, you are right. However, I still believe there are more effective ways of fighting guerillas. We don't have to just stand there guarding things and being targets.
If we're going to get out without fighting, then I agree with you, let's get out quick.
Thanks for your comments paz. Happy Thanksgiving.
Rock
phil, nice to hear from you. You said:
Tell us more about those Geneva Conventions? And how you dont violate them? Maybe you could explain them in regards to Guantanomo Bay??? Also Abu Ghraib??? Yes Yes I know what you are going to say Mr Rock! Your are going to go on and on and on and on about how essential it is to get information out of detainees so as to prevent further attacks on America!!! And a whole lot more and try and bury the fact that my argument is that you have broken Geneva Conventions for at least 5 years.
You are so angry at the U.S. I never see any anger from you about innocents being bombed, 9/11, terrorist attacks, and so on. You don't say a word about beheadings, real torture, real rape, kidnappings, etc. Even the worst at Abu Gharaib doesn't come close to what the terrorists are doing. Then, you justify their actions? How does humiliating a Muslim by stripping him naked or even water-boarding, compare to slicing a man's throat?
Abu Gharaib was wrong, and does not happen anymore. Gitmo has changed too. Unfortunately, people like you are so angry at America that you've lost proportion.
And heres something to make a grey area (I know you are going to hate this because you like things black and white) What about the IRA or the UDA that opperate(ed) in Ireland? not as easy to call them evil because they are not Muslim or Arab? The IRA or UDA have the same background and structure and philosphy (being nationalism/religion, sorry excuse the simplicity its not quite that easy but theres no need to get into too much depth on this topic) as the people you are fighting but you wouldnt call either of them evil would you?
You are so wrong in your assessment of U.S., conservative, and my motives when talking about terrorism. Terrorism is terrorism. Anyone, IRA, UDA or radical Muslims, who use it are evil. It is not a tactic I support, and it has nothing to do with color, race, nationality or religion.
Radical Islam is a barbaric group of people. I don't see the IRA chopping off heads and hands, raping little girls, nor shooting people in groups. If they are still bombing innocents, however, then I condemn them as doing evil. I was under the impression that they had given up this tactic. Am I wrong?
You are wrong, though, Phil, for making this a racist thing, or an attack on Islam. I fault Islam for not undertaking a reformation. On the other hand, I know not all Muslims condone terrorism.
I know I will not get from you a similar condemnation of terrorism as I have given, across the board. You seem to understand the shelling of Israeli children. I can't understand how you can live with this. I also don't understand how you can be so concerned with the civil rights of terrorists and unconcerned with the victims.
Thanks for your comments, Phil
Rock
new american patriot, thanks for your comments. You said:
The reaction to Katrina WAS racist. Bush and his fat white boy club took this as the opportunity to engage in a little serendipitous gentrification.
How do we know?
After denying emergency aid to the poorest and most vulnerable counties, which, as long-predicted, were destroyed, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi urged Bush to fire Brown.
"Why would I do that?" the president replied. "Because of all that went wrong, of all that didn't go right last week," she explained. To which he answered, "What didn't go right?"
You are just looking for racism where none exists. What you have shown Bush saying is just another Bushism--there are thousands of them. Bush has another problem too, he is always overly optimistic, about everything. The Iraq war was "going well" until he had to admit there were problems after the election.
New Orleans did not get the help it needed because of its incompetent mayor (a black), the incompetent governor (another Democrat), and the incompetent federal response. Incompetence does not equal racism. It means incompetent. Mississippi did much better with Katrina, with the same federal government--because they had effective mayors and governor, Republicans. The victims in Mississippi and New Orleans were both black--why did the supposedly racist government succeed in Mississippi, with black victims?
Thanks.
Rock
Post a Comment