fr_defenestrato: (bush)
1. I have a really tough time even wrapping my head around the idea that a member of my species could kill their child and nickname it "gloopity-glop."

2. It is more and more clear that federal taxes in the United States are principally if not entirely a wealth redistribution scheme that flows from poor to rich. What's worse, they've figured out how to get a significant minority of the folks with the most to lose (in terms of percent of their wealth) to agree heartily with said taxation in order to fund "whatever globally crucial wars we're touting at the moment." To squawk about the obscene amounts of funding the feds are pouring into Iraq and elsewhere—directly, that is, into the coffers of a precious few already obscenely wealthy men who provide the products and services and accoutrements of war—is to be unpatriotic and for the terrorists to have already won.

Watch: what we have been seeing for 6 months will continue indefinitely: some Congresspeoples will holler and froth publicly about curtailing the war, reports from various quarters will take various stances, but the end message will always be the same: what we're doing now is kinda sorta working but it'll take months or years to really figure it all out. Just give us more time. That's because we're not looking for progress. What we're doing has precious little to do with international politics or ideology or national security or Middle Eastern stability, and it CERTAINLY has nothing whatsoever do to with the threat of Islamic terrorism to the Amurrkin way of life. It has everything to do with ensuring that the people who run the military-industrial complex can keep their fireplaces burning all winter with fresh cash, or perhaps the donated gloopity-glop of their lowest-paid workers.

Like Louis XIV, a slew of third-world despots, and a few choice Roman emperors, by far the most successful war being waged by the Organized Crime Racket of the American Presidency (OCRAP) is the war on the peasantry.

3. Shoes.

fr_defenestrato: (armaments)
All kidding and all politics aside, the most compelling argument for the removal of U.S. military troops from Iraq—indeed, for the permanent disbanding of the U.S. military as a whole—and frankly they can all stay in fucking Iraq for all I care—is the staggering, in-your-face, nine-inch-nails-on-a-chalkboard stupidity that prevails there. Sure the front lines end up populated mostly by kids most unfit for any sort of formal education (typically performing badly in class from grade school up); but what is less commonly known is that at every level of military command and administration the important once are chosen not for their smarts but for the facility with which they can make shit up on the fly to pretend they're smart. That's why the knee-deep bullshit jargon. That's why "to include:" is used even in past tense. That's why every document in the "List of Applicable Documents" in the Request for Information I'm reading right now has the annotation "(current version or later)" next to it.

Support our troops! They need our support! They're too stupid to get out of the way of a suicide bomber!

(The author of this blog would like to point out to anyone who should happen across this entry who has a relative or friend fighting in Iraq, that he really doesn't wish them ill. After all, they are only following the Fourth Reich's orders and fighting for my right to marry, have joint power of attorney with my partner, visit him in hospital, successfully bequeath my property to him, etc.; to not get beaten up, fired, kicked out of my housing, or kept from joining whatever association for being queer; also for my right to be religion-free; for my overall right to privacy without illegal molestation from the feral gubmt; and to ensure all the country's kids are taught according to indisputable scientific facts and principles.)














































(Oh. Wait.)
fr_defenestrato: (j'accuse)
From the perfectly named Dick Cheney's remarks to U.S. Troops at Contingency Operating Base Speicher, Iraq:

"We are here, above all, because the terrorists who have declared war on America and other free nations have made Iraq the central front in that war."

Oh, they HAVE, have they? That's funny, I coulda sweared WE had decided to take our war on terror to one of the few friggin' places in the Middle East that WASN'T overrun with jihadists.

"[Osama et al.] see this country as the center of a new caliphate, from which they can stir extremism and violence throughout the region..."
spleen cont. )

Dear Iraq:

May. 10th, 2007 12:53 pm
fr_defenestrato: (j'accuse)

We keep sending him.  You keep missing him.
What up with that?
fr_defenestrato: (j'accuse)
"Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." —George W. Bush*

"I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn." —George W. Bush**

And this lovely exchange from 20070111:
CONDI: ...we're not going to stay married to a plan that isn't working because Iraqis aren't living up to their end of the bargain.

SEN OBAMA: Madam Secretary...Are you telling me that, if in six months or whatever timeframe you are suggesting that in fact the Maliki government has not performed these benchmarks... that at that point you are going to suggest to the Maliki government that we are going to start phasing down our troop levels in Iraq?

CONDI: Senator, I want to be not explicit abvout what we might do, because I don't want to speculate. But I will tell you this: the benchmarks that I'm looking at—the oil law's important, the political process is extraordinarily important—but the most important thing that the Iraqi government has to do right now is to reestablish the confidence of its population that it's going to be evenhanded in defending it. That's what we need to see over the next two or three months, or this plan is not going to work.

SEN OBAMA: The question is not whether the plan is going to work; the question is what the consequences to the Iraqi government... Are there any circumstances that the President or you are willing to share in which we would say to the Iraqis, 'We are no longer maintaining ... American combat troops in Iraq'? Are there any circumstances that you can articulate in which we would say to the Maliki government that enough is enough and we are no longer committing our troops?

CONDI: I'm not going to speculate... but the President made very clear that of course there are circumstances. That's what it means when he says 'Our patience is not limited.'

GOURD: Freudian slip?

----
*, **criticizing President Clinton on *19990409 **19990605 for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo.
fr_defenestrato: (j'accuse)
(so I got a form mail from Don Cheadle and John Prendergast at darfur@mail.democracyinaction.org asking me to sign a petition to Prez. Bush urging him toward action on Darfur... on the site to which I was redirected I was asked to edit the text of the form letter before sending it off to the White House. I did:)

Dear Mr. President,

Sudanese President al-Bashir continues to ignore diplomatic efforts to pressure him to end the genocide in Darfur. More than 400,000 Darfurians have already lost their lives and over 2.5 million have been displaced.

In case you were asleep, drunk, coked out, or have received contraindicative reports directly from "reliable British sources" or maybe God, that's on par with what we helped Saddam Hussein do to the Kurds of Iraq (and perhaps also on par with what we did and continue to do to the Iraqi people).
More bile )
fr_defenestrato: (Default)
the evil fucker. i mean, pure, unadulterated, no two ways about it EVIL MOTHERFUCKER.

i dunno where the fuck Dana Perino came from, but i truly madly deeply wish there was something to the christian cosmology, because i really wish to believe that someday she and every single evil motherfucking boss of hers will be holding a coffee clatch in hell. if that's not possible i suggest we give them a one-way ticket to the sun, departing Earth 1300 hrs EST 20 January 2009.

this evil motherfucking president (TEMP) vetoes and will continue to veto any bill that includes ANY kind of structure to facilitate the end of the U.S. military occupation of Iraq. TEMP even steadfastly refuses to put any due dates on "benchmarks" for the "democratic," "independent" government of Iraq. why? Perino tells us that "[TEMP] is determined to win in Iraq." what does winning look like to TEMP? he won't tell us. maybe we can use common sense and surmise that winning is when all the Shiites and John Sununus stop killing each other. wait wait wait: our ultimate goal is a cessation to violence, but we won't put a timeframe on cessation of violence?

but if TEMP is using that criterion, which he appears to be doing, he is committing us to an indefinite stay there (until he's no longer TEMP and somebody else is T(hopefully slightly less)EMP and won't veto a bill with a troop withdrawal timetable.

but whoa, two steps back. why is ANYBODY giving credence to the absurd notion that TEMP refuses to even entertain the notion of ending this U.S. occupation because he wants to win? please. he is keeping us engaged, at the cost of a few American lives and a few hundred Iraqi lives per week because and ONLY because it benefits his cronies in the big business of waging war and thereby lines his pockets, makes his retirement (the pre-hell phase, anyway) more cushy, and gets more and more evil corporate motherfuckers to love him even more. how motherfucking sick depraved eat the asshole out of a dead wolf EVIL can he get?

Profile

fr_defenestrato: (Default)
fr_defenestrato

February 2015

S M T W T F S
123 4567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 07:48 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios