Saturday, October 29, 2005

Just in time for Halloween

I love stories like this in general, but this time of year they hold a special significance to me. The headline says it all, really:
State hospital escapee has machete, police say
Gotta love that. This story, which is completely true, takes place in Hawaii. This escapee, who's name is (I'm not joking) Adonis Oandasan, apparently believes that the FBI and police are after him (they are NOW) and hospital officials say that he was taken off his medication two weeks ago. Ah but the machete! How did he get his crazy, crazy fingers on the machete, you ask? Well, he was apparently given the machete by the hospital for doing yard work. The icing on the cake is the fact that Oandasan is the NINTH person to escape from the Hawaii State Hospital THIS YEAR!

*Sniff* The cockles of my horror movie loving heart are warmed. Here we have all the makings of a classic horror/slasher film:

1) Mental patient with a crazy has-to-be-made-up name--check
2) Mental patient's paranoid delusions coming true (the police chasing him)--check

Incompetent hospital staff who inadvertently provide the mental patient a means to escape and a weapon--check
Island from which there is no escape for the potential victims--check (ok, so it's a Hawaiian island, but "Island from which there is no escape" just sounds better.)
5) A Machete--check

All we need to add to the mix of elements already provided by the news article are some teenagers having sex in the woods, and we'll have one great, though somewhat cliched, movie!

Unavailible for comment:

Monday, October 24, 2005

Guilty of Being White

Apparently, this guy thinks I should die because of my skin color. How progressive:
We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem ... So we just have to just set up our own system and stop playing and get very serious and not be diverted from coming up with a solution to the problem, and the problem on the planet is white people.
Wow. Just wow. Here's the story. And see Michelle Malkin for some background and for NC State's distancing of itself from this idiot.

(If you "get" the post title reference, you get a cookie.)

Geeking Out

Last time, it was Battlestar. This time its Doom. Doom is/was a game. The game, if you will, that started the whole gaming era. Now it's a movie. And, yes, before you ask, it is not anything more than a video game movie. But here's the thing: it's Doom. Plus, it has the Rock in it. So, yeah, I went, I saw, and I was mildly entertained. My impression was that someone, somewhere said, "Gee, we need to make a Doom movie and the Rock needs another action movie and, well, we could probably slap something in a week." So, Doom is off the mark: the story, the dialogue, the set, even the twist ending. The twist, to spoil it all, is that the Rock isn't the hero. The Rock ain't going to win an Oscar, but he scores points with me for doing a passable job on going from tough big brother to mad man. Some of the lines are just wrong. Some of the plot devices are just stale. But sometimes a poor movie can show how good something could be. Doom could have been a better movie, but the Rock could be really good. I just hope he gets the chance to do it. Because I think that unlike Doom he could be more that just a video game character.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Questioning the BBC

The BBC is taking emailed reader questions that they'll pass on to Venezuelan Pres. Hugo Chavez. I'll save my opinion of Chavez for another time; this entry is meant to serve another purpose. Ostensibly, the BBC (in this particular article, at least) takes no stance on either side of the debate regarding whether or not Chavez is doing good things for his country and Latin America or if he's an autocrat masquerading from behind a veil of socialism. The question from the article:

Is President Chavez the voice of the poor? Or is he an autocrat? Is he a hero or a villain? What do you think of his attitude to the USA?

Hmm. . . a balanced series of questions that seem perfectly reasonable. But is the BBC truly unbiased toward Hugo Chavez? Out of the 16 questions that readers have submitted and the BBC has seen fit to post on their website, only one, in my opinion, does not engage in the shameless stroking of Chavez's ego:

What is the main goal of the government for the year 2006?

Gotta love those questions that aren't open-ended, eh? The rest of the questions to Pres. Chavez read more like these:

Honourable Mr Chavez, I salute you for your admirable stand with the people of the third world. Your courage in drawing a line between Venezuela and the powerful arrogant superpower is encouraging to others! God bless. Would we see a unified front from the third and developing countries on the international issues?
President Chavez: I think you are a bright light amongst an otherwise dim group of world leaders - a Bobby Kennedy for Latin America. [...] What actions are necessary to establish or maintain a healthy middle class as the predominant political power of a country?
As a socialist, I constantly bemoan what seems to be the inability of progressive governments to enact long-term institutions that will create permanent change. I worry that after your time in office is over, Venezuela will cease to be a guiding force of progressivism in Latin America. What will you do to ensure that your legacy remains beyond your tenure?

This is my favorite one, though:

President Chavez I like your policy in south America, you are about bring a great change in Latin America, they need a men like you to transform south America into a new world of equality. I hope others look into your leadership and learn from it. [sic]

For Pete's sake, that's not even a question! One would think that such an institution as the British Broadcasting Corporation, when requesting questions, would post actual questions rather than shameless pandering. Bah! Back to my point.

Taking questions from their readership to put to such a personage as Hugo Chavez is certainly a good thing for the BBC to do, but is seemingly every reader who put forth a question either a socialist or otherwise a fan of Hugo Chavez? The BBC says that the "comments reflect the balance of opinion [they] have received so far." Is it really possible that a news and media organization with such a large reader base doesn't have one reader who submitted one question that puts Chavez and his policies in a negative light? Or if they're looking for a balance of opinion, then does that mean that an overwhelming majority of submitted questions are unquestionably "pro-Chavez?" I seriously doubt it. To believe that there weren't enough questions that were "anti-Chavez" for the BBC to post at least one of takes some serious twisting of logical thought. I know that at least
one blogger, who is, unlike those who have their questions posted on the BBC website, actually from Venezuela, has submitted a series of questions for Chavez:

What about separation of power as the basis for democracy?
Why is it that in Venezuela 99% of public officials in the courts and elswhere, but more notably in the courts, swear allegiance to you?

Why has it been years since you have not given a real press conference to ALL of the Venezuelan media to account for your actions? I mean a real press conference where you MUST answer the questions, not one with only sycophantic journalists to interview you.

Why is it that your administration is blocking REAL investigation to a whole list of political murders, including to people that were following your leadership such as Danilo Anderson?
Why is it that we cannot have a real auditable tax return from any of your ministers?

Why have you not launched a serious investigation on this modern apartheid/fascism that is the Tascon list who segregates 3 million of Venezuelans to a second class citizen status just because they disagree with you?

Last but not least, how long do you think you will be able to keep fooling the people that support you overseas without knowing what is really going on inside Venezuela? In other words, what are you going to do to hide the mess you are creating in Venezuela once Bush and Iraq are not around anymore to serve as convenient whipping boys?

Heh. Do you think the BBC would notice if I just cut and pasted some of those into the BBC's question box? So is the BBC unbiased toward Chavez and his socialist policies? Or are they merely paying lip-service to the ideal of an unbiased and apolitical media?

(ok, so maybe my opinion of Hugo Chavez is somewhat apparent)

UPDATE: For more on the BBC's bias check out this article at the National Review Online and especially check out USS Neverdock for a comprehensive list of the BBC's sins.

Sunday, October 16, 2005

Now Who's the Racist?

You know the biggest story in the world is the success of the Iraqi constitution. But if one went by the BBC one might not get that. Check out the picture. The one story above the fold about Iraq is one that has a Muslim holding a gun. The headline: "Shia militants gaining strength in Basra." And BBC goes to the source of democratic thinking in the 21st century by quoting a Saudi official:

The constitution will give Iranians or pro-Iranian Iraqis an open hand in seven provinces in the south, to bring them together into an autonomy which will create a Shia republic.
Risks? Yes! Dangers? Hell, yes! But when Arab Muslims have a free and fair election that's the news, not the danger or the risk. On a side note, it strikes me that Iraq is the only place where Islamic democracy could grow and at the same time the best place. Why? Exactly for every reason they give that it won't work. Iraq is the intersection of the Kurds, the Shia, and the Sunnis. If democracy takes hold it will it could be like a shot in the heart of Islam. But hey I could be wrong! Let's debate it? No? You just want to run negative headlines and ignore the other side? Well, that sounds like good journalism to me! The august BBC concludes:
The coalition can do little more than wait and watch a democratic process which could deliver it from Iraq, or which could only deepen the morass.
I just love how Arabs are inferiors that can't handle democracy or if they embrace it they will only corrupt it--thank goodness the BBC is here to explain this stuff to me!

Unperturbable Anchorettes

This article discusses the avoidance of the word "Islamic" in news reports and specifically address's Islamic terror/militantism in Russia. But moreover it knocks one of my favorite people to knock:

"Ah, 'Islamic militants.' So that's what the rebels were insurging over. In the geopolitical Hogwart's, Islamic "militants" are the new Voldemort, the enemy whose name it's best never to utter. ... And NPR's "All Things Considered" had one of those bland interviews between one of its unperturbable anchorettes and some Russian geopolitical academic type in which they chitchatted through every conceivable aspect of the situation and finally got around to kinda sorta revealing the identity of the perpetrators in the very last word of the geopolitical expert's very last sentence.

... And then, right at the end, having conducted a perfect interview that managed to go into great depth about everything except who these guys were and what they were fighting over, the Russian academic dude had to go and spoil it all by saying somethin' stupid like "republics which are mostly . . . Muslim." He mumbled the last word, but nevertheless the NPR gal leapt in to thank him and move smoothly on to some poll showing that the Dems are going to sweep the 2006 midterms because Bush has the worst numbers since numbers were invented."

That's pretty much what I hate about NPR. I'll watch "Real Time" and listen to "Democracy NOW!" and get mad, but they are more of a "wow, they are from Mars!" kind of effect. NPR has this smooth, calm, mother-knows-best voice that just leave enough facts to twist the truth. My recent favorite is when they in a soft, cooing voice after being ushered in by Chinese lute strums, claimed once that not giving out the draft constitution meant most Iraqis won't know what they were voting on---then when delaying the finalization allowed for and 11th hour compromise NPR argued the charter had tabled the real problems for later. Wow. You know maybe if libs didn't shoot holes in every thing conservatives did we'd listen to them more. And maybe they might just have one idea that will agree on--without having to resort to the snooty, trickery displayed above.

Friday, October 14, 2005

Sex And Terrorism?

I'm not the first, and I will not be the last, to suggest a connection between terror and sex--or more specifically perversion and rape. In fact, I noted that some feminists had already touched on the subject, but, as the linked article criticizes, when has anything not been linked to sex or rape by feminists? The main contribution to the question, and I am merely posing the question, is that sexual dominance and warfare have an arguable connection.

Jamie Glazov is the main author of articles I found on the subject over at Frontpage, but I will admit he's is a little strange. Before we get to him, let's talk a little basics. First, I'm questioning a connection between Islamic-terror and sex. Under the heading of sex I'm filing: misogyny, rape, and sexual slavery. Second, let's just establish a few facts about Islamic sexual mores. In Islam homosexuality is forbidden, sodomy is forbidden, premarital sex is forbidden, and the punishments are often very harsh.


Men may have up to 4 wives, but there may be some tradition of "temporary wives." Basically, one might be able to argue that there is a culture of misogyny in the Islamic/Arab world, and Galzov rushes to do just that. He points out, "Women are the incarnation of shahwa [desire]." Glazov tells us that in Islamic tradition hell is mostly full of women. Even the 72 virgins or Houri are a symbol of the culture's misogyny:

As Fatna Sabbah notes, she [the houri] "has no spiritual dimension; she is a thing because she has neither will nor any possibility of development. . . . [she] has no intellect; she does not think. She is a thing that awaits consumption." The houri is a manifestation of the ultimate misogyny.

Glazov goes on to criticize the treatment and sometimes infanticide of female babies in Islam. He gets a little out there, but the point is that women are oppressed in Islam. Not shocking news. In fact, if you don't know what FGM is I suggest you sit down before reading this article. Now, I want to take a second and admit that the interpretation of traditions and such can be twisted that's exactly why towards the end I'm going to point to news reports of events, although Glazov does mention many a report. However, there is a creeping shadow of "exceptions" that keeps being cited, like this horror story of a woman imprisoned, set up by a guard for the death penalty and then "married" by the guard before her death.


Rape is forbidden but as we'll see there's twist. The Quranic rule applies: "If one is forced, without willful disobedience nor transgressing due limits, then he is guiltless, For God is Oft-Forgiving Most-Merciful'. (2:173) Notice that the first question is the guilt of the victim. According to Glazov, rape victims are routinely treated as criminals, and he suggests a culture of rape in the Islamic or Arab world. It is not unheard of. In Pakistan recently--suggesting a comfort-level with the idea of rape that is hard to fathom--there was a tribal council ordered gang-rape as punishment. Listen to this insanity:

A village council allegedly ordered the rape because [the rape victim's] younger brother was seen with a woman from the more influential Mastoi clan. Ms Mai and her brother say the allegations were made to cover up a sexual assault on the boy by a group of Mastoi men.

Which is an excellent lead into Glazov's most controversial piece. Where he claims that the sexually repressed Arab culture has a epidemic of rape, including victimizing young boys--boys that grow to be angry, violent men. While this seems to contradict the idea of super-manly misogynists, the comparison is made in this slightly creepy article to prison rape. Recent reports suggest at least some truth to the accusation of child abuse in Muslim countries.


Slavery is forbidden by Islam--among Muslims. But slavery has a long history in Islam, so does the practice of sexual slavery, and the slave trade continues to this day. In fact, there are accounts of boys being taken and, when freed, reporting abuse, including sexual abuse. In Iran there are reports of a thriving sex slave trade. Sudan is, of course, the most famous:

Women and children abducted in slave raids are roped by the neck or strapped to animals and then marched north. Along the way, many women and girls are repeatedly gang-raped. ...In the north, slaves are either kept by individual militia soldiers or sold in markets. ... "Some who try to escape have their Achilles tendons cut to hamper their ability to run. Masters typically use women and girls as domestics and concubines, cleaning by day and serving the master sexually by night." ... Thus says one leading slavery abolitionist group. A former slave writes of "the rape of girls and boys alike, the forced circumcision of boys and girls, often with them fully conscious and screaming and having to be held down by many people. Sodomy and sadistic torture are common. Living hell."

For those of you wondering what all these loosely connected subjects have to do with Islamo-fascist terrorism, the answer is nothing. Or more precisely, maybe nothing. Because I mean to answer nothing, just ask the question in good-faith: what, if any, connection do these issues have. Let's look at three important and purely evil subjects that may suggest an answer to our question. 1) UBL, 2) Saddam's Iraq, and 3) Darfur and Belsan.


Kola Boof. Never heard of her? Well, she claims to have been held as a concubine by Osama Bin Laden for a short time. Judging by the lack of interest in the West in her story I'm sure their's some kind of problem--like the whole thing might be a pack of lies. Regardless, I'm not the Washington Post, I don't have to do anything more than Google a story a couple of ways before I write about it. Supposedly, she's a hated woman in the Muslim world, and maybe even has a fatwa on her head. Here's some of the story, (WARNING: this account is extremely graphic!) :

"I met Osama Bin Laden in Marrakech in 1996. ... Osama Bin Laden has 25 kids (I always count the 2 Black ones)...he loves whores. He loves infidels as long as they're pretty women from the Western world. He likes to beat them, bite them and hurt them with his "member". He has no respect for women whatsoever--you can either be his whore or his maid, or both (in the case of his wives), take your pick. We met at a restaurant, I was there with some Senegalese soccer player I was dating... Osama came in with his gang. I had no idea who he was....friends later told me that he was..."to be obeyed"..."a prophet"..."a lion"..."the son of a rich Saudi Arabian". ... He ordered his men to intrude on me and my date...and to bring me to his table. I went to his table trembling. ... He raped me that first night...with a bag over my head--this is not a joke. He raped me with a bag over my head. He came back two more nights that week (always with his men)--without warning. It was no longer rape. I was trapped in Morocco and I had no money. When he first beat me up (with a snake stick), the police only arrived to ask him to "do it more quietly". ... Osama Bin Laden moved me to an extremely expensive and important place in Morocco--the famous La Maison Arabe. He paid for my room for 6 months. For 4 of those 6 months...I was his concubine. There is no other way to describe it. When Osama was out of town...his men watched everything I did. I was forced to dress completely covered up, head to toe, as a Muslim woman--outdoors. Indoors, I was to dress in silky negligee's, my hair (which is long) styled in a White woman's hairdo. The fact that my vagina is "infibulated" and marked tribally was Osama's main physical attraction to me--he is very well endowed and enjoyed causing me pain during intercourse, because I was much too small for him. In fact, he seeks out women who are infibulated with openings too small for grown men--other than the husbands, who of course would be more gentle and patient. I was only allowed to go out shopping...and then his men always followed me. Luckily, in about 4 months Osama became tired of me. He paid for me to live at the hotel another 2 months. He became interested in some blond French woman from Crete. There was another one, too, a Jewish stripper in Casablanca. Thanks to those women and their interest in Bin Laden's money, I was able to sell some of the gifts he gave me and escape to Spain."

Yeah, crazy, crazy stuff. I do not know what to make of that, but, if in fact UBL is this kind of deviant, maybe that tells us something.


Again there's a problem with the truth in Iraq--knowing what really happened under Saddam's rule is hard, but it seems clear there were "rape rooms" and at least one person claiming to know Uday Hussien well backs up the reports of unspeakable horrors.

Every day Uday Hussein and his bodyguards drove around the university and the girls’ schools until the president’s son saw a girl he fancied. He would stop her and ask her to spend the night with him. If she refused, his bodyguards would grab her and bring her back to the palace. There Uday would rape the girl. If she resisted, after he was done, he would give her to the whole team of bodyguards. Uday learned rape and murder from his father. Reveals Latif: “Saddam’s family, the Tikriti clan, were a bunch of criminals. When Saddam came to power it was like the mafia taking control of a country.”…“Hundreds of thousands had no way to feed their families. But Uday didn’t care. He continued to party openly, without shame.” Uday threw a multi-million dollar extravaganza on his birthday. A thousand people dined on lobster and delicacies. Hundreds of beautiful girls were invited. At one point Uday shouted, “Rip the whores’ clothes off!” His friends shredded the women’s clothing and the party turned into a massive orgy.

And there's more evil:

After three days the girl was returned to her home, with a new dress, a new watch and a large sum of cash. Her parents had her tested for rape; the result was positive. According to Shabaan's account, Uday heard she had been tested and sent aides to the clinic, where they warned doctors not to report a rape. Furious, the father demanded to see Saddam himself. Rebuffed, he kept complaining publicly about what Uday had done. After three months, the President's son had had enough. He sent two guards to the man to insist that he drop the matter. Uday had another demand: that the ex-governor bring his daughter and her 12-year-old sister to his next party. "Your daughters will be my girlfriends, or I'll wipe you off the face of the earth." The man complied, surrendering both girls

There's a guy that needed killing.


An excellent point is made by this article that rape is oddly connected to jihad.

“Each of us was raped by between three and six men….One woman refused to have sex with them, so they split her head into pieces with an axe in front of us.” This happened in Darfur, from which Sudanese military personnel actually airlifted women to Khartoum to serve as sex slaves. Meanwhile, Indira Dzetskelova, the mother of one of the child hostages in Beslan, Russia, reports that “several 15-year-old girls were raped by terrorists.” Her daughter “heard their terrible cries and screams when those monsters took them away.” This indicates that there are two things the massacre in Beslan have in common with the ongoing massacres in Darfur: both, no less than the 9/11 attacks, are examples of Islamic jihad terrorism, and both are characterized by rape.

--and sex. Because while these examples maybe not representative of true Islam, they are representative of jihadists and fundamentalists. The culture that many terrorist spring from is one of hyper-manly misogyny in which the reward for martyrdom is 72 sex-bots (or raisins according to Manji), and a culture of rape and sex slaves. Interesting to me is the "loop-holes" where one is allowed to rape the infidels that are captured and enslaved them and murder them. Do these kind of ideas and practices grow monsters that lash out at what they perceive as a threatening and vulnerable Western world? Or do the monsters create this culture? Maybe there's no connection. Maybe it's all racist lies designed to dehumanize Muslims.

One thing seems clear. If the Islamo-fascists are intent on setting up a Caliphate, as Bush says, I'm doubting that's a world any of us are going to want to live in.

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Michael Yon

Michael Yon's latest dispatch is up, and well worth reading. He's back in Iraq, and before he tells us about his experience with a new unit, he's taken the time to tell how "normal" reporters ("normal" meaning not a CNN/Fox/etc. huge-budget newsy) live and work in Iraq. As always, it's some good stuff:

Apparently the terrorists like it better when fewer reporters are around to peel back the layers of their insurgent press machine and reveal its rotten core. The Americans may think they get bad press, but apparently the terrorists think they get worse. Everybody, it seems, is a victim of bad press, including (ironically) the professionals who print it, because they get shot by everybody, with words and bullets.

Read the whole thing. Yon's dispatches are always worth the time spent reading them.

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Ah PETA. . .

Just when I thought I'd see nothing today on TV or the 'Net that could make me laugh, you crazy kids came through for me, what with your drinking from toilets while wearing fur.

Two questions:
1) Are you trying to put South Park out of business when you say things like, "If people want to pretend to be animals by dressing in their skins, we think they really should go for the whole look, including drinking out of the toilet?"
2) Ummmmmm. . . your activist was wearing fur. Was it fake fur, or did that little detail slip through the cracks. Either way, you made me laugh.

Thanks PETA!

Previously on this here blog:
PETA Post. . . Ugh, I said PETA
More PETA killings
The other white meat

Why Miers is the Right Choice

I enjoy the on the right's vast conspiracy of radio and TV pundits. But they are wrong about this issue. Not about Miers, I don't know her from Eve, but the issue. The goal is not to create a political reality where Bork could get confirmed, nor is it to unleash a war of ideologies ending in something called a "nuclear option." Roberts is right. Judges should not answer anything. Miers is a stealth canidate with a very small paper trail. The goal should be to move the process back towards calm, humble hearings with careful, modest candidates.
But then we won't know if they're true blue conservatives!
That's lib talk, comrade. I don't judge lawyers as qualified and unqualified based on their party loyalty! That's the left's bag, with its crazed jurisprudence and addiction to activitism. Miers isn't going to overturn Roe, oh no! We don't need someone to overturn Roe, we need someone to overturn the ideas that gave us Roe. The left has sold these fine conservatives on the idea that the Court needs to break new ground and fix what's wrong with America. We need to unpoliticize the process. We need to get the Court to be seen as a open-minded and restrained.

And in the end, we don't know any more about how Miers would do on the Court than we do about what Bork would do. The real reason conservatives are savaging Bush on the pick is that they wanted the final showdown, the big one, because for years they've dreamed of this day. But that's minority-think. We're the majority, and to stay that way we have to think about the big picture. After a second hearing full of a lot of nothing the ideological interrogation of nominees will become pointless. When that happens maybe we can start moving the judical branch back to just judging.

Tuesday, October 11, 2005


The power of the Internet (as if we needed more proof). Actually this is a fairly interesting study on how information disseminates on the web; in this case, information in the form of pictures. The above link takes you to the results of one man's continuing quest to take back what's his; or at least to get some credit for it. What does this stalwart do for a living? Here's a hint:

(Above photo taken by Mike Hollingshead. That's MIKE HOLLINGSHEAD. He's the guy that took the picture. Browse his site for others. . . beautiful things he's captured.)

Monday, October 10, 2005

A+ B Movies

One thing you can trust: word on the street. One other thing is that Christopher Walken is gold. Solid gold. Every role he touches is a delight to me. Here's a lesser known movie he brings his freaky manner to bear on. Suicide Kings is a dark comedy about a group of upper-class young men that kidnap a gangster and tape him to a chair. It says alot about Walken that he can manage to be menacing while taped to a chair for an hour and a half. Dennis Leary is also in the movie, plays a hit man, and does a decent job--especially during the toaster scene. The plot is kind of confusing, but you can follow it enough to enjoy what's mostly Walken delivering a two-fisted performance. A lot of people know about this movie and enjoy its craziness, but it generally slipped through the cracks for most people. The DVD, luckily, isn't barebones: decent commentary, which is mostly Narrator and Backslapper but still good, and there are 2 extra alternate endings. Its full of violence and foul language, but the dark edge is what will both turn away some and bring in the rest.

Saturday, October 08, 2005

Neo-Con Girls Are Easy

From a Drudge Flash:

LAWEEKLY entertainment columnist Nikki Finke: ABC/TOUCHSTONE's COMMANDER IN CHIEF series creator Rod Lurie replaced as showrunner by Steve Bochco today because of what sources say was Lurie's wanting to show a 'rough sex' scene between the President's daughter and a Secret Service agent in the back of a limo... Developing...

Yes, because the guy that thinks enlisted women will sell their bodies for forgery so they can go AWOL from Iraq is going to have more restraint. Garm already savaged Bochco's Over There over here.

I actually saw the first 19 broadcast minutes of Commander In Chief. Its amazing how the independent, multi-PhD, apolitical first Vice President woman is pretty much a raving lib with raving libs working for her. When her speech writer refers to the right-wing speaker of the house, played by the stealth-conservative Donald Sutherland, is accused of being a book burner. Click went the remote--they just broke the filter. But there's more--the daughter in the series was introduced making out with a boy at school and guess what? She's a Republican that supported the now dead republican President; a conservative, that according to this was planned to go from frenching some random boy to fornication with an agent in a limo, and it's going to be "rough" because regular pre-marital, unprofessional, likely-major-age-difference, political and security threatening sex isn't enough to slate the urges of the repressed, prissy, young conservative girl. We all know that whole republican thing is just another way of being a tease, right?! Geez, why not just go back to the suggestion '60s protest of "rape-ins" against the wives and daughters of enemies of the New Left?

Okay, maybe I'm taking the indignation a wee bit too far, but, come on, Hollywood trying to write conservatives is just as lame as FDR's legs.... What? Too soon?

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

A spy in The White House!?! (UPDATED)

That's what ABC News is reporting on their website (via Drudge). I haven't seen this ANYWHERE else yet, and I don't think genie junkie has either, since he just sent me the same link, (AP story here) but apparently a Marine working in Dick Cheney's and Al Gore's office has been using his position to spy for factions in the Philippines.

Federal investigators say Aragoncillo, a naturalized citizen from the Philippines, used his top secret clearance to steal classified intelligence documents from White House computers.
Officials say the classified material, which Aragoncillo stole from the vice president's office, included damaging dossiers on the president of the Philippines. He then passed those on to opposition politicians planning a coup in the Pacific nation.
Both the FBI and CIA are calling it the first case of espionage in the White House in modern history.
Last year, after leaving the Marines, Aragoncillo was caught by the FBI while he worked for the Bureau at an intelligence center at Fort Monmouth, N.J. According to a criminal complaint, Aragoncillo was arrested last month and accused of downloading more than 100 classified documents from FBI computers.

Some crazy stuff. I'm not sure as to the specifics of the vetting process, or even what his specific role within Cheney's office was, although I would imagine it was on the NSC/Pentagon intelligence briefing side of the house. That's just speculation though. Hopefully some more/better information comes out about this. At this time, not even the blogosphere has much additional information; just repeats of the same ABC article. . . kinda like this entry.

We'll have more later, hopefully.

UPDATE: Check out PunditGuy for some background on Aragoncillo. That's also where I found a link to the PDF version of the criminal complaint against him. Heads-up work by Bill, and I'm going to use it:

Background – Leandro Aragoncillo, 46

Home: Woodbury, NJ
Birthplace: Philippines, came to US in 1984
Citizenship: US, in 1991
Family: Wife and two children
Occupation: FBI Intelligence Analyst
Hired July 2004, suspended 12 Sept 2005

  • Retired US Marine with 21 years service, 1983-2004. Gunnery Sergeant. Stationed in Japan, Guantanamo Bay, Quantico, VA, Assignment to the White House between 1999 and 2002 as "administration chief" of the security detail assigned to Vice President Cheney.
  • Six Good Conduct Medals and a Humanitarian Service Medal

Arrested: Saturday, 10 September 2005


  • Knowingly communicating classified information by a government employee to an agent or representative of a foreign country (i.e. receiving classified information).
  • Acting as an agent of a foreign official without notification of the Attorney General in violation of Title 18 of the US Code, Section 951
  • Unauthorized use of a government computer to obtain and transmit classified information
  • Conspiracy to commit all of the above offenses in violation of Title 18 of the US Code Section 371.

Dates of Spying: January 2005 to August 2005

Possible Motivations: $500,000 in debts, mostly mortgages on rental properties

US Dept. of Justice News Release (09/12/05)

Again, we'll update when new information comes to our attention.

Free South Africa?

One time I was on a plane--a plane headed to Africa. See, most people hear: apartheid, racism, Mandela, and all that. But anyone, not brainwashed, who has been to Africa knows better. Corruption abounds, racial hatred makes America look like a utopia, and the politics are bloody. "One man, one vote" turns into "one settler, one bullet" in the street graffiti. On the plane ride I picked up a complimentary in-flight "Sawubona" magazine. "People, planet, and prosperity" was the lead article. Notice that "freedom" or "justice" isn't present. Here's a little rundown of the Marxist dribble being printed for the tourists (imagine what the hardcore stuff is like) : 20% of the world pop. is dying of starvation while 20% is rich, controlling most of the world's resources and dying because they are fat and indulgent. The middle 60% is, apparently, living a sustainable life of bicycling, eating grains and veggies, and modest energy consumption just like God intended. Basically, the article goes on to say that the America and the West have too much power, that global warming is going to destroy us all, and rich people are evil. So, the solution is a worldwide tax on GDP.

Yeah... no. Note to commies: try creating wealth instead of redistributing it.

So who cares about some African politics? Well, because, as we just learned with Katrina, class warfare is more fun when race in involved. And I do mean warfare. You see in Zimbabwe there has been a campaign of forcefully taking white farmers' land and giving it to political cronies. Oh sure, it's just evil white people, right? Well, the dictator of Zimbabwe didn't stop there: fixed elections, rapes and murders, starvation, and a plan to renounce private land ownership. Not to mention that when you give farms to non-farmers it guts your food production. And now the same BS is occurring in South Africa. We ignore this stuff and pretend everything is fine over in South Africa. Maybe throw little money their way and blame companies for not doing enough to stop AIDS, and we act like there's not people being raped and killed. Someone once told me that what was happening in Zimbabwe was just like the Native Americans taking their land back. Tell that to the family I met in Zimbabwe that was thrown out of their home so the government could give it to supporters. Or to the democratic MDC party members that were being searched for on the highways by soldiers with AK-47's. It's not okay. Just because people are oppressed in tiny, unknown places like Sudan and Zimbabwe or because they're a certain race or a certain class does not make it okay.

Sunday, October 02, 2005

Kill Bill vol. 2

Yes, this is the mandatory Bill Bennett post. For the cave dwellers that don't know, Bill responded to the idea that if abortion was illegal social security would be fine right now (because statistically there would be more workers). He countered, in an attempt to show the dangerous, even evil results of governing with pure math, that if every black baby was aborted there would be a fall in the crime rate (because there is a higher crime rate among African-Americans). So, recriminations and disapproval all around, and Bill is denounced as a racist.

Some smart people can't wrap their collective brains around this fact: Bill was showing that the logic of statistics is flawed. So, he's right, the crime rate might drop but only because the flawed logic of the argument. If abortion had been banned would social security be fine? Only if we assume that the birth-rate would have been the same, and that generation would become workers, and that the entire political dynamic wouldn't be different, and more. It's a stupid statement, but it works on paper (which, btw, is the first sign that something is probably bad).

That being said, Bill is a total flippin' moron. Heck, Rush was run out of sport casting for suggesting that a quarterback was over-hyped because he was black (which not many quarterbacks are), that's not even racist, that's just a statement about race. Playing around with black babies and abortion and crime--idiot! But this is a guy that back in 2003 lost 8 mil. gambling and couldn't understand how the libs were going try to destroy him with that little factoid. I'm always trying to push the envelope and "go there" and even I know that one treads lightly on connecting race and crime and connecting that to extreme, crazy ideas. For example, I could suggest that the simple solution to the insurgency in Iraq would be to level any city in revolt and put heads on pikes from Baghdad to Basara. I could be making the point that as effective as that might sound on paper it really is beyond insane to even consider, but I would still be open for attacks that I'm a warmonger, a racist, and a fascist. But-hey-watch this-are you watching? Nobody cares! I'm just some lowly blogger barely a Slimy Mollusc over at TTLB. Bill has a national radio show--jeez, learn some common sense race-relations.

Oh, but the other side is even worse! Juan Williams, mind reader extraordinare, was on Fox News Sunday saying something very, very wrong. Williams is scared, scared that even the suggestion of an extreme thought-experiment defaming the very idea of linking race and crime speaks to a secret sub-conscience murderous racism stirring beneath the surface in white America--and specifically the Republican party. Wow. I'm a genocidal racist and I didn't even know it! Sorry Williams, but Homey don't play that! You get to say that someone that suggests something in a hypo is a racist and that Republicans by implication all secretly hope for the day we can kill black babies? Isn't it funny that those who are opposed to slavery reparations or affirmative action or anything you think is important just happen to part of the nation-wide, sub-conscience, black-hating, white conspiracy to do...something ...something...bad--racist! We know it will be very racist. Well, guess what? I think that if Williams even suggests that Republicans are all secretly racist it speaks to a sub-conscience murderous racism stirring beneath the surface in black America--and specifically the Democrat party--no, wait, I don't think that--it was just a thought-experiment to defame the very notion, which, according to Williams, means I really do think that deep down in the cockles of my evil heart.

Luckily, it doesn't matter because I'm not a moron with a national radio show.

Saturday, October 01, 2005

ITM: Poetry Beats Terror

Iraq the Model has a great post about the poetry club of Baghdad. So often your hippy-types think that they alone have some kind of corner on art and creativity. Truth be told, everyone is touched by art. And art is twisted when tyranny enforces a totalitarian system. Iraqis apparently know this well, and ITM knows that it's an important story when people have the freedom to make art. Here's a taste: "Her words kept ringing in my head while I was on my way out of the club; the sound of bullets was loud out there but I didn't care just like that brave women didn't care..."