Thursday, November 20, 2003

By the way, I've finally joined Friendster, the online community. If you are a member, go ahead and link up to me using my email address. So far, I am connected to 225,145 people, but I wouldn't mind a couple more.

We all know Morrissey is a whiny English singer, but did you also know he was a prophet? According to this website, he not only saw Princess Diana's death years before the actual event, but he also predicted the movie release of Contact, starring Jodie Foster. Some people are way too into Morrissey for their own good. I won't ruin the experience by explaining all the subtle nuances of this theory, just read it and be AMAZED!

While all this attention has been pointed at Michael Jackson turning himself in to the authorities here in California, something decidedly more insidious is possibly going on at Neverland. Three teenagers from Oslo, Norway have "disappeared" while visiting Jacko at the ranch. Two youths were invited along to California by Jackson's Norwegian-Pakistani friend Omer Bhatti, 19. The ages and the names of these youths have not been released, but while the visit was only supposed to be for one week, the parents of these teens have not heard from them in four weeks now.

There is no mention of the police finding them during their raid of the Neverland Ranch earlier this week, but one would assume that if the youths were found there, they would have said something. The parents state that they are not concerned overtly about their children being sodomized by the bizarre pop star, but would like to at least talk to them. Yeah, right. By this time, I would have thought that Jacko had sucked their blood, amongst other things, and now has sequestered their corpses for some later ritual. But I tend to overreact.

Keep your eye on this site for further developments concerning this story. It could be juicy.

Monday, November 17, 2003

Arnold Schwarzenegger has now been officially sworn in as California's new governor. The citizens of this great state can now relax with the knowledge that the world will end, having fulfilled the prophecies for the End Times. When asked what were the first things he wanted to accomplish while in office, he said he want to "crush his enemies, see them driven before him, and hear the lamentations of the women." Sounds better than Grey Davis, at least.

Tuesday, November 11, 2003

Rummy Splits Hairs Over Wording On Iraq

United States Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has decided that the best thing to do in order to distance himself from his own statements concerning Iraq is to berate reporters over the specific wording he may have used in the early days of the invasion. Donny has quite a bit of egg on his face concerning his rather declarative statements concerning the disposition of Iraqi civilians to the virtual destruction of their country and supposed WMDs. But when confronted by these statements, he has decided to launch Operation Semantics.

For example, on Feb. 20, a month before the invasion, Rumsfeld fielded a question about whether Americans would be greeted as liberators if they invaded Iraq.
"Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?" Jim Lehrer asked the defense secretary on PBS' "The News Hour."
"There is no question but that they would be welcomed," Rumsfeld replied, referring to American forces. "Go back to Afghanistan, the people were in the streets playing music, cheering, flying kites, and doing all the things that the Taliban and the al-Qaeda would not let them do." The Americans-as-liberators theme was repeated by other senior administration officials in the weeks preceding the war, including Rumsfeld's No. 2 - Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz - and Vice President Cheney.

But on Sept. 25, - a particularly bloody day in which one U.S. soldier was killed in an ambush, eight Iraqi civilians died in a mortar strike and a member of the U.S-appointed governing council died after an assassination attempt five days earlier - Rumsfeld was asked about the surging resistance.
"Before the war in Iraq, you stated the case very eloquently and you said . . . they would welcome us with open arms," Sinclair Broadcasting anchor Morris Jones said to Rumsfeld as the prelude to a question. The defense chief quickly cut him off.
"Never said that," he said. "Never did. You may remember it well, but you're thinking of somebody else. You can't find, anywhere, me saying anything like either of those two things you just said I said."

He's a slippery one, alright. Let's see what he may or may not have said about weapons of mass destruction. When testifying about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction before the House Armed Services Committee Sept. 18, 2002, Rumsfeld said Saddam "has amassed large clandestine stocks of biological weapons." including anthrax and botulism toxin and possibly smallpox. His regime has amassed large clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons, including VX and sarin and mustard gas."
Saddam "has at this moment stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons," he later added, repeating the charges the next day before the Senate Armed Services Committee. He repeated that theme in the weeks preceding the war. Last month, after U.S. weapons hunters reported to the administration and Congress that they have yet to find a single weapon of mass destruction in Iraq, Rumsfeld was asked about his earlier statements.
A reporter at a Pentagon news conference asked: "In retrospect, were you a little too far-leaning in your statement that Iraq categorically had caches of weapons, of chemical and biological weapons, given what's been found to date? You painted a picture of extensive stocks" of Iraqi mass-killing weapons.
"Wait," Rumsfeld interjected. "You go back and give me something that talks about extensive stocks. The U.N. reported extensive stocks. That is where that came from. I said what I believed to be the case, and I don't - I'd be surprised if you found the word 'extensive."'
And he's right. He never specifically used the word "extensive". At least he has good recall over what he said. But, of course, he will start to deny that too when elections come back up. I have a funny feeling he won't be getting his old position back.

A special thanks goes out to Eric Rosenberg of the Hearst Newspapers and the fine people of the Ocala Star Banner, because I ripped about 85% of this article from their site. See, it's not plagiarism if you give credit where credit is due.

Monday, November 10, 2003

America has begun to come to the conclusion that they cannot control Afghanistan anymore. Our first choice for an Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, was hand-picked be the U.S. government because of his decidedly pro-American stance. Unfortunately, the Afghan people did not agree with our choice, and he has yet to establish his writ in the capital city of Kabul, much less the rest of the impoverished country. His failure as a statesman and talking head for the U.S. had led to a progressive decay in the government of Afghanistan, and has led us to pursue less desirable candidates in the interest of getting the hell out of this wasteland deep in the heart of Asia so we can concentrate on putting Iraq together again.

We have now gone to Pakistan for help in finding a new government structure for Afghanistan. This includes so-called "moderate" Taliban leaders, whom the U.S. found to be repugnant at first, but will clearly have more favorable support of the people of Afghanistan. This will hopefully ease anti-U.S. feelings in the southern provinces, but puts a lot of the people back in power who we ousted just a couple of years ago. This is where Pakistan fits in. They claim that they can "tame" the Taliban rulers into adopting a more mellow religious stance while in power. This sounds like one hell of a plan. Lots of luck, guys.

Pakistan claims that they are already making great steps in "converting" the legendary mujahideen Maulana Jalaluddin Haqqani. "Soon after September 11, 2001, Pakistan authorities invited Haqqani to Islamabad, where he was offered inducements by US authorities to change sides. He refused, and gave up his high position in the Taliban regime to take up arms as a guerrilla against the US-led invading army. He currently commands a large force in the Paktia, Paktika and Khost regions where the resistance is at its fiercest. Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, according to Asia Times Online sources, has assured the US that sooner or later Haqqani will be on their side. Close aides of Haqqani, though, dismiss out of hand such talk." Yep, sounds like we're getting off to a great start!

America has watched as events slowly but surely have turned this smoking crater of a country against us. The former royal party, which has support in Kandahar at least, has suffered from a growing Taliban influence in their area. This was the spiritual home of the Taliban anyway, and it should not be a surprise that they would want to take this city again. But this does not dismay the occupying forces in Afghanistan. Their reason? "Now, al-Qaeda's network in Afghanistan has effectively been broken, and it poses no threat to the US in that country. Thus, a growing argument runs, since there is no threat, should the US really care who rules the wasteland that is Afghanistan, be it the Taliban or the Northern Alliance or a combination thereof? Better that the US pull out its troops and leave the Afghanis to themselves." So, basically, we're kicking the dust of Afghanistan off our combat boots because the place is about as fucked up as when we got there and we can't fix it after all.

But at least we got Osama bin Laden. Oh, wait. SHIT!