At first, I felt compassion for Cindy Sheehan. I can't imagine anything more difficult than losing a child - even an adult child of 24. And thousands of Gold Star Moms know her pain personally.

But then I realized Cindy Sheehan is merely a publicity seeking nutjob, who will use anything - even the death of her son - to spout her racist hate and anti-American sentiment.

According to Sheehan, "This country is not worth dying for."

Apparently Casey thought it was. Not only did he enlist in the armed forces, but he RE-enlisted. HE believed in what he was doing. He stood tall and proud, and he gave all in defense of not only his countrymen, but in the hope that the people of Iraq could live free, without being under the thumb of a brutal, murderous dictator or under the rule of the extremist terrorists.

Casey was a hero.

Cindy Sheehan has no respect for her son, his choices or what he stood for and what he died for.

When the families of other fallen soldiers asked her to take down the crosses in the field at Crawford that bore the names of their sons and daughters, she disrespected them by not honoring their request.

Casey's family totally stands behind him and his choices, even after his death. It is only his nutjob mother who has disrespected him in death, and as a result of her lunatic behavior, her husband is divorcing her.

She has spouted enough racist retoric during her August venture into Crawford to do David Duke proud. In fact, David Duke, Grand Shithead of the Klan, was seen being physically embraced by Cindy (birds of a feather and all that rot). They dig each other because they both hate Jews (hate is such a bonding force).

This is not about Casey. It's about Cindy Sheehan's desire to be famous, to have the cameras on her while she perpetuates the lies and racism.

Another young man who graduated high school with Casey Sheehan also joined the military (Marines). David Colip does not support Cindy Sheehan's self-centered grandstanding and begged his mother, Toni, to support his decision, even if he ends up injured or killed.

"He said, 'Don't dishonor me, don't walk on my grave,'" Toni Colip said.

It's too bad Cindy Sheehan feels no compulsion to respect her son. Instead, she walks on his grave daily.

From http://huffingtonstoast.com/393/jayson-blair-romance-novelist/ 

Cindy Sheehan, who has worked tirelessly for fame by discounting her son's service to his country, apparently received a book deal! But it's not the non-fiction melodrama we'd all been expecting. Instead, she's going to be the star of romance novels!

Let's take a peek:

    Cindy Sheehan probes the meaning of forbidden love.

    Darling of the Mainstream Media, she courts disaster with the duke of anti-Israel love, David Duke. Two-timing with the Pogrom Prince of Crown Heights, Reverend Al Sharpton, Cindy’s bed becomes a randy Rainbow Coalition.

    Torn between two worlds and two men, and a her family who oppose both, Cindy eagerly succumbs to the penetrating force of multicultural antisemitism.

    White sheets and crosses illuminate the nights of Cindy’s unquenchable burning desires.

    A poignant story rich in character, lush in detail, ample in antisemitic imagery and emotionally riveting.

   

The second book in the series:

I've been doing a lot of reading this last week, especially in the blogosphere, and I've noticed a disproportionately large number of articles containing dumber than usual comments by liberals. So I thought I'd share.

---

... Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is blaming Haley Barbour, the Republican governor of Mississippi, and the GOP for the devastation caused by the hurricane. 

 "Now we are all learning what it's like to reap the whirlwind of fossil fuel dependence which Barbour and his cronies have encouraged," read Kennedy's post on Ariana Huffington's anti-Bush website. The eco-evangelist went on to suggest to his disciples that God may have been offended by a memorandum Barbour -- former Chairman of the Republican Party -- had written to President Bush about flaws in the United Nations Kyoto Protocol on global warming. "Perhaps," Kennedy wrote, "it was Barbour's memo that caused Katrina, at the last moment, to spare New Orleans and save its worst flailings (sic) for the Mississippi coast."

He kind of sounds like those nutjob jihadists who think the hurricane was part of their jihad. Maybe Bob and Osama can get together and duke it out over which of them has the greatest right to lie about God for personal gain when it comes to this American tragedy.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ollienorth/on20050902.shtml

---

... Monica Jackson, ever the race card playing liberal racist, finally took a moment to quit bitching about race to bitch about everyone who points a finger of fault at the New Orleans and Louisana governments.

"What I’m seeing on conservative media and blogs is frenzied shifting of blame. They are trying to deflect blame away from FEMA and the President and focus on the mayor and the governer for not evacuating.

"It’s ridiculous. Where would they have taken this hundred thousand or so people they were supposed to take the initiative to load on school buses and get out of New Orleans? Where would they have gotten the millions, no billions, of dollars for the means to facilitate this? When do they evacuate 100K people every time? How? Where? With what money? There is no way a mayor could marshall the resources to evacucate 100K poor people ahead of a natural disaster."

Heh. Monica, read New Orleans' own emergency plan. It spells it out pretty plainly. I'll translate it for you, rather than making you take the time to read the 45 page document online.

The MAYOR of New Orleans is directed to use all buses owned by the city - including school buses - to transport those without transportation, as well as the sick and elderly, the hell out of the city. He's even allowed to use privately owned buses. He had at least 2 days after they knew it was going to be at least a category 4 hurricane and before the storm landed.

Check out these buses, Monica. Look at the 200 plus buses the mayor of New Orleans had at his disposal, and REFUSED to even attempt to use. Had he made but 1 trip 60 miles outside the city, with each bus loaded, that would have been 14,000 poor people in New Orleans saved by the mayor. 2 trips (surely doable in 2 days) 60 minutes west of the city, that would have been 28,000 poor people saved. 3 trips would have been 42,000 people. And so on. And the buses wouldn't have been sitting in water like they are now, and that would have saved the city a shitload more than the cost of gassing up those buses to transport the valuable human lives he simply directed to the domes for a few days of hell. 

If you can't see the picture above, go to http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050901/480/flpc21109012015

What about the governor of Louisiana, Monica? Bush had to CALL her and BEG HER to declare a state of emergency (she admitted this). Bush slow to respond? What sort of governor needs to be told to declare a state of emergency when a hurricane of this magnitude is approaching?

Learn your law, Monica. The state has to first declare the state of emergency and request help from the federal government (because it is the state's responsibility first and foremost to handle emergencies, which makes sense). It works that way for EVERY state. Other states seem to be able to handle this simple plan when disaster strikes. Why couldn't Louisiana's governor manage a simple declaration of emergency and a phone call to Washington to ask for help?

And why couldn't she dispatch the Louisiana National Guard to New Orleans BEFORE the hurricane hit so they could help evacuate people?

Come on, Monica, admit it. You'll say anything if you think you can bash white people or Republicans or President Bush. What's sad is that you will continually mislead your readers to serve your own racist and liberal agenda, even to the point of outright lying.

Hey, I'll admit, FEMA needs some work. But FEMA's role is as support to states in crisis. Not as the sole management of the crisis. Yet Louisiana's corrupt politicians have done little more for their state and city than stand around and bad mouth the feds for not doing the Louisiana government's job, while taking every possible photo op and chance to be on television.

Yeah, these are your people, Monica (and before you get your racist panties in a racist bunch, that wasn't a racial comment - I'm not talking about blacks here, I'm talking about liberals who are full of it).

http://monicajackson.com/blog/2005/09/05/blame/

---

 A stellar quote from Randall Robinson on Ariana Huffington's site (we can always count on her to deliver the most bizarre bullshit):

"It is reported that black hurricane victims in New Orleans have begun eating corpses to survive."

An outright fucking lie. He made it up. All on his own. No one but Robinson claimed this - not the hurrican survivors, not the military, not the relief workers, not even the supposedly racist whites who might have actually had something to gain by such a grotesque lie. Of course, once the outcry of "LIAR!" could be heard clear into Robinson's livingroom, he retracted the lie.

This is a man who brags about all he does for blacks, yet this one quote shows his goal is not to uplift blacks and make them self-sufficient. It is to keep them separate in all ways from whites, because it suits HIS purposes. Note that it was only blacks supposedly canabilising, according to Robinson.

If you were silly enough to buy what he was selling, then you could only assume white victims were simply going hungry, rather than eating the sewage soaked decayed flesh of the dead that floated in the toxic waters of New Orleans.

Robinson's the guy who expects reparations for blacks because of slavery.

Yep, Robinson wants MY money - even though my ancestors never owned a slave. In fact, my ancestors, the IRISH, were treated worse than the black slaves in America. Plantation owners valued their slaves that they paid cold hard cash for. Not so with the Irish. The Irish were hired to do the labor too dangerous for the black slaves to do - labor that was so dangerous that it was more likely the laborer would die than collect a check. So bring in the lowly Irish, because the dumb shits were willing to do the unthinkable to earn a living and feed their families, while the plantation owners got tons of free labor because so many of the Irish died while working for them that they didn't have to cut a paycheck.

Yep, Robinson wants MY money - even though I've never owned a slave.

Robinson wants MY money for the 100 years after slavery ended that blacks were still treated like second class citizens - even though I was born well after the civil rights movement.

Robinson can kiss my white ass.

Reparations will never happen in this country the way he'd like to see it. Not only because there are too many whites who'd vote against it, but because there are too many self- respecting blacks who'd vote against such a dumb policy. And reparations have already happened, in that laws were enacted to give modern day blacks a helping hand that their ancestors didn't get then and whites don't get now. It's called affirmative action, it's called scholarship awards based on race, it's called all the minority programs that have benefited the black community, and it's called being able to say stupid, racist shit without any backlash just because you're black and you get a free pass for it because your ancestors were slaves and therefore, apparently, you're entitlted to say stupid, racist shit.

Robinson is a racist. THAT is his only real legacy.

Robinson is so extremely racist, he almost makes Monica Jackson look like a moderate racist.

A note to Robinson and Jackson: get a clue - you're doing more to perpetuate racism with your racist comments than you are doing to allieviate it. You don't win over hearts and minds by biting the people whose hearts and minds you want to win.

No link here, because I won't link to the Huff-meister's website on principle.

---

Amanda Marcotte from Pandagon (Monica Jackson's prime source for racist and inane bullshit) wrote an editorial on September 3rd that she entitled: "Dear racist fucks who complained about looting:"

Sorta like the racist fuckpot calling the rest of society racist, isn't it?

The editorial surrounds the situation with Jabbor who commandeered a bus and took 100 people safely out of New Orleans - something the fine mayor of New Orleans couldn't manage.

Every conservative blog that I've seen mention this young man PRAISED him. It was your liberal media that suggested he was looting. It is the liberal and corrupt government of New Orleans who would be in charge of arresting and prosecuting him.

---

My own blog, for example, from my post on September 6th had this to say:

The media - who Monica Jackson insists on referring to as "conservative", when in fact the media is decidedly liberal and always has been - called a young black man (a boy, really) a LOOTER because he got on a bus ignored by the mayor of New Orleans and drove more than 100 people to safety.

LOOTER? A looter is a THIEF. Someone who, during a crisis, steals for their own personal gain (like the assholes stealing Nike tennisshoes or jewelry or guns while New Orleans drown). This young man - Jabbor Gibson - is a HERO.

He didn't get on the bus and drive himself out. He got it loaded beyond capacity and drove more than 100 people to safety.

It's a shame the mayor of New Orleans couldn't have done as much to save the people of the city.

I found this info thanks to Holly Lisle in one of her blog postings http://hollylisle.com/writingdiary2/index.php/2005/09/03/english-for-reporters-101/

---

And really, was it racist? Just because Jabbar is black doesn't mean that that's why the media referred to his taking the bus as looting. This is merely a case of a nearly illiterate Liberal media not knowing how to define "looting", and since it was the catch term of the day, they used the word without bothering to look it up.

That makes the media STUPID. Not racist.

Maybe YOU have difficulty understanding the difference between taking food and water to survive (or even a school bus) and stealing a flat screen TV or 6 pairs of Nikes and taking them back to your hovel.

Jabbor is a hero. That kid rocks.

Looters who stole luxury or entertainment items or guns are simply thieves. No excuses for them. Being black and poor is not a pass to be a criminal, even in a crisis.

Jabbor was right to do what he did, and if there's any attempt to punish him for his act of heroism, you can bet white conservatives are going to be paying for his attorney and raising a stink (they've already started thinking of ways to reward this young man). The thugs that turned New Orleans into a criminal playland were wrong and should be prosecuted.

Here's Amanda's profound quote in her editorial, written with so much love for her fellow man (because, you know, she expects that of everyone er, Republicans and whites, but Liberals and blacks in her book get a pass on kindness as long as their hate is targeted at whites and Conservatives).

"And as for the racist fucks behind this foot-dragging and lying and all those that support them, I hope that when you get to hell, after you've been greeted nicely by Satan and checked in by Ronald Reagan, your punishment is to be drowned over and over and over again until you fucking realize that suffering is suffering, no matter what race or class or ethnicity the people suffering are."

Can you feel the LOOOVE?

She continues: "This entire situation isn't "raising questions" about race in America. It's answering them."

Yes, Amanda, dear, it is. In the last week, I've learned that while whites and Republicans are pitching in and doing everything in their power and working alongside blacks and sane Democrats to help people, any question I may have had about racism towards whites by a certain segment of the black community has been answered loud and clear, as has any question I may have harbored in regard to the lengths certain Democrats will go to politicize, even at the expense of those who have endured such a tragedy.

You can read more dumb comments at  http://www.pandagon.com

You can read the Ace of Spades' reply to Amanda at http://ace.mu.nu/archives/115817.php

---

As always, Jesse Jackson can be counted on for a dumb quote:

"It is racist to call American citizens refugees," the Rev. Jesse Jackson said, visiting the Houston Astrodome on Monday. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have expressed similar sentiments.

You guys are nuckin' futz. A refugee is someone who flees their home for refuge elsewhere. Who in their right mind can dispute that the hurricane victims left their homes and sought refuge to keep them safe? And then sought refuge to sustain them until they could find a way to get their lives back together?

And how in holy hell is it RACIST to use the term refugees, when it has been applied to EVERYONE, regardless of color.

Even if the term did not apply (which I think it does), at worst, it's just another example of the media not using their dictionary. Crying racist in this case makes it look like Jackson has run out of creative ways to get his face in the media.

Bugger off, Jesse. Your blatantly racist retoric is way beyond getting old, and makes you sound like little more than an irritating sound bite.

There's other dumb things that have been said recently by Liberals - these were just some of the dumbest.

Notice how most of the assinine things being said revolve around race? So sad that racists will use trumped up charges of racism to perpetuate their hate.

 

Yes, I ragged a bit on the mayor of New Orleans and I won't apologize for that, because I really do believe he shares a good portion of the blame.

And yes, I believe there were a lot of mistakes made on every level in the first days following the hurricane.

However, this post is to say that regardless of where the blame should be levied, we have time enough to investigate all aspects of government later.

Right now, we need to focus on the PEOPLE in AL, MS and LA and that means getting them help. NOW.

We can play politics later.

I admit, I loathed Clinton as a president every bit as much as the harshest Bush detractor loathes George W. Bush. Yes, I thought he was a piss poor public face to put on America, I hated that he had acted like such a cad in office. But I NEVER wished for Clinton's failure on any national issue, because the bottom line was that Clinton's failure would have meant our country's failure.

So I rooted for Clinton to succeed, and simply bided my time until I had a chance to vote again.

Today's ultra liberals literally foam at the mouth, praying not for our country to thrive, but instead praying that Bush makes a mistake big enough to assure them a win in 2008. Yes, they love it when President Bush does something wrong - even at the peril of their countrymen, so they can get on their high horses and point it out.

In the wake of hurricane Katrina, the number of liberals who sit idly at their computers and bitch and moan about the problems with the federal response (which they blame on Bush, even though to do so is misleading when it comes to where the responsibility for response truly was those first days) is astounding! Many of the most vocal against Bush haven't donated money to the relief effort, haven't raided their closets and sent boxes of clothes to the Salvation Army, haven't done anything, except complain. For these liberals, it's everyone else's responsibility (it's that entitlement mentality run wild).

And then there are those liberals who do donate clothes or money, but who still want to point fingers for political gain.

Maybe it's because all these liberals playing the blame game or, worse, playing the race cards, simply don't know shit about how the government really works (or worse, maybe they know how it works, but are intentionally misleading those who don't).

So me, being the kind-hearted conservative that I am, will give all the clueless liberals a lesson in how the government works when it comes to disasters.

First, it is ALWAYS the local government's primary responsibility to handle disasters. Starting with the city and county governments, and then the state government. It's been that way for the states along the east coast and in Florida in the past, and it was that way in New York on 9-11.

And it worked that way for Alabama and Mississippi who were hit by Katrina.

Why is it Mississippi, who got hit WORSE than Louisiana, is managing the disaster better? Could be because the state took the responsibility they were supposed to take.

Do these liberals know that New Orleans had an emergency plan in the event a huge hurricane hit? Yep, they did. It's called the "City of New Orleans Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan."

Do these liberals also know that Ray Nagin (mayor) and the Louisiana governor somehow forgot to follow the plan in the days before the hurricane hit (when it was known it would be a category 4 or 5 hurricane) and when the moment of disaster arrived?

Here's a few excerpts, thanks to Christopher Ruddy at Newsmax http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/9/4/151327.shtml

"As established by the City of New Orleans Charter, the government has jurisdiction and responsibility in disaster response. City government shall coordinate its efforts through the Office of Emergency Preparedness."

The above is New Orleans' own claim of jurisdiction and responsibility for disasters.

More...

-------

"The City of New Orleans will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas. Those evacuated will be directed to temporary sheltering and feeding facilities as needed. When specific routes of progress are required, evacuees will be directed to those routes. Special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves or who require specific life saving assistance. Additional personnel will be recruited to assist in evacuation procedures as needed. ...

"Evacuation procedures for small scale and localized evacuations are conducted per the SOPs of the New Orleans Fire Department and the New Orleans Police Department. However, due to the sheer size and number of persons to be evacuated, should a major tropical weather system or other catastrophic event threaten or impact the area, specifically directed long range planning and coordination of resources and responsibilities efforts must be undertaken."

-------

Not only does this document demand that the mayor of New Orleans do what needs done to protect his people, it outlines HOW he should protect his people. This document SPECIFICALLY gives officials of New Orleans (namely, the mayor) the right to use city owned buses and school buses for evacuation purposes.

Do these liberals know that parishes outside of New Orleans somehow managed to evacuate their residents with city owned buses and school buses?

Do these liberals even care that the mayor dropped the ball and left all those city owned buses and school buses in New Orleans to sit empty while his people were left to fend for themselves? And that not only were the school buses and city owned buses in New Orleans ultimately covered in water, but so were the poor people without transportation that he should have gotten on those buses and evacuated.

Liberals like to give Ray Nagin a pass by asking retarded questions like, "Where was he supposed to get the money for all these buses?" Duh. In a crisis, the mayor doesn't have to pay for the buses. First, the city OWNS the buses - he wouldn't have to pay for them. Second, he could have commandeered privately owned buses in a state of emergency and worried about paying the bus owners and the gas stations later.

Do these liberals comprehend that the governor of Louisiana had complete control over the Louisiana National Guard? The president does NOT control the Louisiana National Guard (or the National Guard of any other state for that matter). They answer directly to the Louisiana governor.

Why weren't the Louisiana National Guard dispatched by the governor sooner? Surely they could have helped evacuate BEFORE the hurricane hit.

So, liberals and race card players, in light of the fact that the mayor not only had the right to use all those buses (unsued, and now sitting under water) to save his people and simply did not do it, can you at least acknowledge that the mayor made a major mistake?

Can you at least acknowledge that the governor probably fumbled the ball a little, too (though not nearly as bad as the mayor)?

No doubt the mayor is pointing his finger at the president and the federal government to shift the spotlight off all he and his administration did wrong.

You can read the rest of the document at http://www.cityofno.com/portal.aspx?portal=46&tabid=26

The media - who Monica Jackson insists on referring to as "conservative", when in fact the media is decidedly liberal and always has been - called a young black man (a boy, really) a LOOTER because he got on a bus ignored by the mayor of New Orleans and drove more than 100 people to safety.

LOOTER? A looter is a THIEF. Someone who, during a crisis, steals for their own personal gain (like the assholes stealing Nike tennisshoes or jewelry or guns while New Orleans drown). This young man - Jabbor Gibson - is a HERO.

He didn't get on the bus and drive himself out. He got it loaded beyond capacity and drove more than 100 people to safety.

It's a shame the mayor of New Orleans couldn't have done as much to save the people of the city.

I found this info thanks to Holly Lisle in one of her blog postings http://hollylisle.com/writingdiary2/index.php/2005/09/03/english-for-reporters-101/

In summary, the federal government (including the president and FEMA) are ONLY supposed to ASSIST state and local governments in disaster relief. They have never been supposed to lead the relief effort.

This makes sense. The federal government resides in Washington, D.C. The state and local governments reside in the heart of the disaster, and they SHOULD be much better able to handle at least the preliminary evacuations, especially when they had something like 48 hours warning that they were about to get hit by a catastrophic hurricane, to get their shit together and get those people on buses headed out of New Orleans.

FEMA hasn't had its brightest moment in the wake of the hurricane, but the sad reality is, had Ray Nagin and the Louisiana governor simply followed their OWN emergency plan, New Orleans would have been a disaster, but not such an overwhelming tragedy.

Imagine, had those now ruined and empty buses just been used during those 48 hours to transport the people 30 minutes to an hour west of New Orleans, how many lives would have been saved, how many fewer people would have suffered.

Imagine...

 

A New York Times article today quotes a lot of people who want to complain about the government's response to hurricane Katrina.

For those who have built themselves a stylish cross for the occasion of the disaster, I challenge you to get off your cross and do something besides bitch about how bad things are. Get off your ass and actually DO something.

The situation in New Orleans wasn't just the result of this administration. FACT is, the situation in New Orleans has been underfunded for almost 20 years - through both Republican AND Democrat congresses and presidencies. Bush has only been in office 4 1/2 years. And it's congress that sets the amount of aid given -- not once did President Bush veto funds for New Orleans' levees.

America was not built on the notion that the government is our mother and therefore takes care of us all the time. Our history is founded in the belief that AMERICANS - the people - take care of their own. Americans are, after all, the government.

We have become exceedingly lazy as a result of our properity, and apparently, many in this nation are under the belief that we are entitled to kick back and tell everyone else what they are doing wrong, rather than rolling up our sleeves and volunteering to do whatever needs done ourselves.

I say, "Bullshit!"

Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana are the responsibility of EVERY AMERICAN. Not just the president (who is doing a hell of a lot more than his detractors who sit at their computers and run him down). Not just congress. Not just the rich.

According the the New York Times:

Priscilla Turner, 55, of Hastings-on-Hudson, N.Y., is a registered Democrat, but she said President Bush was being saddled with some unfair blame. "There is an instinct to be so negative," Ms. Turner said, "to wish for the worst, to anticipate the worse, to glory and wallow in the worst." If Mr. Bush had sent troops to New Orleans too quickly, she said, his detractors would have portrayed him as "going in with guns blazing."

Right on, Priscilla! The whiners are going to whine and bitch and moan no matter what President Bush does.

You know, it's easy to get pissed off at other people who the pissed perceive as not doing all that can be done, or not doing it fast enough, or not spending enough money on it or whatever.

It takes courage and commitment to take responsibility yourself and get in there and get your hands dirty, go without a couple trips to McDonalds or a movie so you can donate a few bucks to the relief effort.

I know to some blacks, Condoleeza Rice isn't "black enough" (that's called racism in its truest, ugliest form), but this is what Ms. Rice is quoted as saying in the New York Times article:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in an unusual foray into domestic affairs, sharply disputed any suggestion that storm victims had somehow been overlooked because of their race. "We're all going to need to be in this together," she said in announcing offers of foreign aid. "I think everybody's very emotional. It's hard to watch pictures of any American going through this. And yes, the African-American community has obviously been very heavily affected."

But noting her own roots in Alabama, and her father's in Louisiana, Dr. Rice announced plans to visit the region this weekend and said, "That Americans would somehow in a color-affected way decide who to help and who not to help - I just don't believe it."

Hey, she's right. I'm white, and I donated money and sent off clothes, knowing damn well it would probably benefit anyone who needs help - be they white or black. And that's how I want it.

Can the complainers say the same?

 Complaining on your blog about how everyone else is doing it wrong doesn't accomplish anything.

One more time, I challenge y'all to get the hell off your crosses and do something that actually makes a difference in the lives of others.

Or should it be "Racism My Ass"? Whatever. Those reading this get the point, regardless of my uncertainty about the punctuation.

What I am?

I'm white. I'm conservative. I'm a Christian.

What I'm not?

Racist.

I can honestly say  that I do not judge a person by the color of their skin. Instead, I judge them by word and deed. And yes, SOME black people are not exactly on my list of people I'd like to hang out with - not because they are black, but because they are petty, whiny and rather than get involved and make things better, the main thrust of their effort is to bitch about white people.

I've been following the Katrina news pretty closely, and I've read a few quotes by idiots who claim the less than stellar relief response is because the victims are mostly black. Before I even went to her racist blog, I knew Monica Jackson would be using the opportunity to play the race card, but I peeked anyway, and, as always when it comes to race, she didn't disappoint.

All I have to say to Monica (and those who get off playing the race card) is "RACISM, MY ASS!"

At least 2/3 of New Orleans proper is black. So it only stands to reason that the majority of the victims in New Orleans are black. Has nothing to do with race. It's the simple demographics of the city.

It's not like the government and Red Cross and Salvation Army or the American people have ignored New Orleans. It's not that relief efforts weren't started immediately. It's not like the entire white nation turned their back on the victims because they are primarily black. It's merely that everyone - for a variety of reasons - was sadly unprepared for the level of devestation New Orleans experienced, and therefore, steps that might have been taken that MIGHT have prevented some of loss of life and suffering of the survivors were not taken.

Those steps should have been taken FIRST at the local level. Ray Nagin, the mayor of New Orleans who wants to bitch about the federal inadequacies, should have gotten every school bus and mass transit bus and commandeered them to take those poor black (and white) people who didn't have cars the hell out of the city before the storm descended (it's not like they didn't know in advance that it was going to be a killer storm).

I'm sure this same whiny mayor knew the problems with the levees - one more reason he should have offered every man, woman and child without transportation a ride out of Dodge.

Seems to me HIS response was every bit as inadequate as the fed's, if not more so, since he was in charge before the storm hit. And if he'd have been on his toes, and prepared, it wouldn't have mattered what the federal response was. He'd have saved his people.

Not all blacks are racist. In fact, I know many blacks who are friends with whites, whites who are friends with blacks, and neither of them let the whole race thing become an issue.

Then you have those opportunistic black racists who use any tragedy possible in order to play the race card.

According to them, when black people are seen with stolen property, they are looting, when white people are seen with stolen property, they are searching for food.

More bullshit.

The pictures were very telling. You had white and blacks who'd gone into drugstores and grocery stores, and they were carrying out food, medicine, and other basic supplies to get them through - and feeling bad about taking it without paying. Then you had the street thug assholes who, instead of helping their black families and neighbors, were looting shoe stores and snagging 6 pairs each of those $150.00 Nikes or robbing the gun stores - and then you had the white criminal element looting jewelry stores and the gun department at Walmart.

The media never said "whites search for food" and "blacks loot". They simply showed pictures of blacks and whites, both races looking for food and necessities, and both races looting. To twist it into racist propoganda is complete bullshit.

No one faults a hungry man for stealing a loaf of bread, but whether they are black or white, most do think the kids stealing the expensive sneakers, the thugs firing shots at the helicopters trying to bring food and relief to the masses, the pigs who are taking the opportunity to rape women in the Superdome bathrooms, and the heartless cowards who have stolen guns and now use them to rob tourists and residents of New Orleans and kill anyone who gets in their path deserve to be taken out as enemies of the state.

Frankly, I'm disappointed that there's so many blacks from New Orleans who have chosen to forsake their families and neighbors and who choose, instead, to use it as an opportunity to commit crimes. But you don't hear the black racists who are blogging and talking to the media lay any of the blame for the lawlessness at the feet of those who are actually committing the crimes. Instead, they try to give the criminals a pass because they are poor and black and what else are they expected to do when they are desperate?

As a white person, I hope the white criminals are nailed. And you know what? I hope the black ones are nailed, too, because I don't make excuses for any crime based on skin color (yes, I believe in equality!)

And the president who Ray Nagin, Monica Jackson and the idiot rapper want to complain about? HE has said the response was inadequate, HE has sent more troops to New Orleans. HE went down there and surveyed the damage and talked to victims and did his best to comfort victims. HE sent a bill to congress and pleaded with them to approve almost $11 BILLION in disaster aid (and the Republican congress passed it without debate).

After reading Monica Jackson's racist hurricane rants about how her black brothas and sistas in New Orleans are suffering at the hands of evil white, rightwing, Christians who aren't doing enough, my question for Ms. Jackson is simply this: HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE YOU GIVEN? AND WHY ISN'T YOUR ASS IN YOUR CAR HEADED SOUTH SO YOU CAN LEND A HAND TO THE VICTIMS OF THIS TRAGEDY? AND WHY AREN'T WE HEARING HOW YOU'VE OPENED YOUR HOME TO HOUSE SOME OF THE VICTIMS?

Cause here's the deal, Monica. Your bitching and moaning about the plight of the black victims in New Orleans and trying to put a self-serving racist spin on it is bad form, and proves that if ANYONE is racist, baby, it's you.

The blacks stuck in New Orleans weren't stuck because they were forced to work weekends, because as you've pointed out, the rich whities were leaving New Orleans for higher ground, so their businesses were closing. And what kind of dumb #$%^ would remain in a city about to be blasted by a level 5 hurricane JUST to work? It's not like the boss could fire them for not showing up, because the boss wasn't going to have a business in a matter of days anyway, and chances are good those who "worked" that weekend would never get paid for their time.

The poor whites in New Orleans are not getting aid any faster than the poor blacks. And there are some not-so-poor whites also stuck in New Orleans.

It's not a race issue at all. It's merely a sad and tragic fact for everyone who was stuck in New Orleans without money or transportation, or who felt they had to stay with elderly or sick relatives, are now living in what can only be termed as HELL.

In the meantime, while the black mayor plays the race card in every media opportunity possible, this white chick thinks he ought to be rolling up his sleeves and taking some of those black victims out of harms way - maybe open up his home and take a few of them in even.

And in the romance and womens fiction books neighborhood, while Monica Jackson, multipublished national best selling author complains about white, conservative Christians keeping the black man (or black writer) down, this white chick thinks she should put her money and her effort where her mouth is - like so many of her white counterparts have done.

White authors have adopted black authors from New Orleans who lost everything and are getting them food, clothing, shelter and whatever they need until they can return home. White authors have adopted a white author from Mississippi and are helping get her family what they need until they can return home.

White authors and readers are giving donations of money and gift cards to send to hurricane victims. White authors and readers are getting in their cars and traveling hundreds of miles to help the victims of the hurricane. All this without regard to skin color.

Me? I've already sent my donation to the American Red Cross, as well as a donation to a romance site that's raising money for victims that put a call for donations out to their lists. I'm going through my clothes and my kids clothes to send a bunch of clothes to the Salvation Army down there.

Sounds to me like the only racism out there is coming from people like New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, author Monica Jackson and that idiot rapper (who, btw, would surely never dream of getting his hands dirty in the relief effort like all these white folks are).

Again, I say "Racism, my ass." So put that in your racist pipe and smoke it.

Links:

http://monicajackson.com/blog/

I've been waiting almost a week for world reaction to hurricane Katrina - after all, the world expects immediate response from the United States of America (backed by billions of dollars and huge manpower) for every crisis they experience.

Africa has an AIDs epidemic, and the world expects the USA to foot half the bill. Iran has a tragic earthquake, and even though politically the USA views Iran as an enemy of the state, within hours, our aid to Iran is gathered, and we send food, water, medical help, manpower and many other forms of assistance to the Persian country. The tsunami strikes, 22,000 are feared dead in the first day, and America immediate pledges 15 million in aid and starts humanitarian efforts and sending troops and supplies, before the extent of the destruction is even actually known, and the whole world bitches that America isn't doing enough (particularly the UN) - as the death toll increased, so did America's pledge of aid, and now it's at least 1 billion, and individual Americans' donations have more than likely doubled that.

I realize America has deep pockets, but when one considers the number of hands reaching into said pockets, it doesn't take a mathematician to figure out that there might actually be fewer coins in those deep pockets than, say, in the pockets of other nations.

Usually, Americans give - as a government and as individuals - no matter who is in need. We are often criticized for not giving more, and yes, I admit, that bothers me, in light of the fact that overall, we give more than any other country, and often more than many countries put together. But through insults and offenses, Americans generally turn the other cheeck, dig beneath the sofa cushions, and hand over *more*.

Very often, when disaster strikes in America, we get polite condolences, but many seem to think that because America is so wealthy, there's no need for them to return the proverbial favor of humanitarian and financial aid. Without bothering to consider that perhaps our aid to others has left us with limited resources.

(Note that I'm not including big disasters like 9-11 in my assessment, as the good people of the world do tend to lend a hand if it's a huge disaster like 9-11)

In the wake of hurricane Katrina - undeniably one of our worst natural disasters in modern times - I wasn't hearing a whole hell of a lot in regard to help from around the world, even though we have a minor tsunami aftermath-like environment - massive flooding, dead bodies floating, no clean water, people going without food, families trapped on rooftops, inside collapsed buildings, entire cities wiped out, and the danger of disease from the sort of filth that collects in situations like this.

Finally today there's a USA Today article that outlines some of the world's reaction to the devestation in Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.

I found the reactions in many cases both stunning and the sort of reaction that leaves me with that warm and fuzzy feeling toward countries or leaders of said countries that I can't ever recall feeling "warm and fuzzy" toward.

And then there were reactions from others across the globe that I can only categorize as assholes.

Let's start with the international GLOBAL GOOD GUY team:

Iraq's National Assembly Speaker, Hajim Al-Hasani, sent condolences.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, offered to help and are sending contributions to the American Red Cross.

Islamic Relief USA appealed to their members for donations.

College kids in Jamaica set up a disaster relief fund.

A television station in Bosnia is collecting donations.

France is sending in relief teams from the Caribbean.

Italy is sending pumps, generators, tents, disaster experts, and supplies.

Queen Elizabeth sent a note expressing her sadness and shock (I didn't see anything about relief aid from Britain, but that was probably an oversight on USA Today's part)

China assured the world that America would overcome and rebuild (yeah, yeah, we always do, eventually, but some rice to feed the masses of starving people, and maybe some of free t-shirts to clothe the homeless might be nice, in light of the fact that we buy a lot of stuff from China, including American flags and we've made the Chinese t-shirt industry boom, and bought tons of those $29.00 Chinese Apex DVD players).

Residents of Indonesia's Aceh provice are praying for the victims of Katrina - prayers are certainly welcome, and since 178,000 were killed in this province by the tsunami, I appreciate that they understand what our people here are going through.

Biggest Global Good Guy, Warm and Fuzzy surprises?

Iran expressed their condolences.

In Cuba, Castro and his parliament held a moment of silence for us. *wow*  - unexpected and... welcome.

And of course, like always, the individual Canadian people have been great in regard to making donations and offering help, and the Canadian government has at least put their military on standby, with an offer to send relief troops. Ontario has offered emergency medical teams, and the Canadian Red Cross is gathering volunteers to go to Louisiana and Mississippi.

A couple that didn't quite make me feel warm and fuzzy, but appreciative nonetheless?

Chancellor Schroeder of Germany offered assistance (I don't know if that means they offered and left it at that, or they offered and help is on the way).

Venezuela's CITGO PETROLEUM is donating $1 million in hurricane aid.

Who gets the ASSHOLE AWARDS?

Let's start with the idiot Environment Minister of Germany, Jurgen Trittin, an opportunist asshole who took our national tragedy to try to make some asshole point about the environment. No "Gee, this really sucks. What can I do to help since you guys risked your lives to save my family and friends from the nutjob Nazis a few decades back, and the Russians during the cold war?" Instead, we get that President Bush closed his eyes to the dangers of pollution and climate change, and therefore Americans got what they deserved. How do you spell Asshole in German? J-U-R-G-E-N-T-R-I-T-T-I-N.

Some Environment expert he is. Even if Bush had agreed to do everything Trittin suggested in regard to the environment (not that it takes an act of congress or anything, right?), Katrina STILL would have happened. Just as freaking natural disasters happened centeries ago, long before the US was even a country, let alone causing pollution. Now is NOT the time to try to cement your  political future, Jurgen, with asshole accusations and insensitive comments like we only have ourselves to blame for a hurricane.

Like rubbing salt into a gaping wound!

I mean, how would it sound if Germany experienced a natural disaster or a terrorist attack and some American official commented that the Germans got what they deserved because they didn't listen to Americans in regard to selling arms and other supplies to Iraq and other terrorist sponsors, or because various members of their society took bribes in the Oil for Food Program?

But Americans wouldn't do that. Even if they thought it, they'd not be stupid enough to say it and use it as an opportunity to humiliate the German politicians they had disagreements with.

And shame on Schroeder for not bitch slapping Trittin, because I'd have certainly bitch slapped any American who was as hateful and cold as that toward Germany in a time of crisis.

Next Asshole Award goes to the turd in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, who took our American tragedy as an opportunity to call President Bush the "king of vacations". Dude, way off topic there (and is that the best insult you could throw at us when we're down? Sad. Really sad.) According to Chavez - the supreme example of compassion, you know - the US "had no evacuation plan. It's incredible - the first power in the world that is so involved in Iraq (gotta get that anti-war zinger in there, right?)... left its own population adrift."

All right. Let's send Katrina over to Venezuela, just for kicks, and see how well old Hugo Chavez has planned for evacuation (I'm kidding here. I wouldn't wish that kind of devestation on anyone, and especially not the innocent Venezuelan people, or even Chavez for that matter)

How do they spell Dick Head in Venezuela? H-U-G-O-C-H-A-V-E-Z.

I'm not usually one to look a gift horse in the mouth and all that. But let's call a spade a spade (and no, that's so NOT a racist comment - it's a mere figure of speech) - CITGO needs our good will, because they want to charge us $5.00 a gallon for gas. CITGO is a Venezuelan state-owned company, so they pay a good portion of Hugo's salary. Americans are the chief purchasers of Hugo's gasoline.$1 million is nothing compared to the profits we've given Hugo over the years. And how many American gas companies have donated as much if not more?

And then there's that little issue of Hugo desperately wanting the ex Venezuelan who he and Castro have accused of doing some bombing down there many years ago, and who has applied for assylum in the US because of fears of being tortured in Venezuela and not getting a fair trial (he has since dropped his assylum plea but still hopes to be granted US citizenship because of the years he worked with the CIA).

Then, of course, we have to award an Asshole trophy to the Muslim Extremists who claim Katrina is part of their Jihad.

Self-absorbed much?

I have one thing to say to these twisted fuckwits: bullshit. You nuts aren't powerful enough to bring about a natural disaster, and if Katrina had been part of God's plan against us, he could have done a lot better than destroying a few cities with water. In fact, if GOD was on YOUR side of this whole Jihad thing you're waging, God would have given you the plans to build a big ass ark, given you warning so you could get your families aboard, had you capture 2 of every animal and bring them aboard, too, and then flooded the whole damned earth.

Attention extremists: God doesn't need you to wage a holy war. He's quite powerful enough on His own. And frankly, as shitty as your plan has been going lately, I'd say God isn't lending you squat for help. (perhaps you might want to think about that - could be becuase He thinks you're as nutty as the rest of the world does)

The final - and grand - Global Asshole Award goes to the Prime Minister of Canada, Paul Martin.

All right, Paul, so you don't agree with America's choice to take Saddam out. And we don't agree with a lot of Canadian choices that we feel go against our beliefs. And yeah, you're probably still pissed that your cows are not selling in record numbers over here because there were too many outbreaks of Mad Cow associated with cows we bought from Canada. On the other hand, perhaps we should be pissed that you didn't require more caution with your cows so you didn't sell us cattle infected with the disease. And maybe you and the US have different theories on missile defense (but you sure do benefit from the US's defense systems, so call it a wash).

The bottom line is, Canadians are our closest neighbor as far as relations. Yeah, you are bit more liberal as a whole than Americans as a whole. But we still consider you our sister.

So when Paul Martin can't be bothered to pick up a freaking telephone and call to give his condolences until Thursday, and all he could muster was a routine sympathy message (no doubt since others were coming in and he didn't want to look like a total asshole)... well, it says a LOT. And it says it loud and clear. And not only did Americans hear it, but so did Canadians.

Stockwell Day, a member of Parliament, said Martin displayed "a shocking  lack of personal support for the United States."

John Ibbitson, of The Globe and Mail (Toronto daily), in response to Martin's lack of a response, wrote, "When a close friend and ally is suffering through something this traumatic, moral support matters as much as offers of aid - especially when, in this case, Canada stands to benefit from America's misery" (as a result of high energy prices).

All I can say is shame on you, Paul Martin. Your country has never wanted for anything or been without US support and aid. Even if you hate our guts, out of respect for our mutual history and the ties of our people, you should have sucked it up and made the call right away.

Again, to the Canadian people and government, from the bottom of my heart, I thank you, on behalf of all those Americans who have been hurt by this disaster.

To all other people across the globe - English, Irish, French, Scottish, German, Japanese, Italian, and everyone else who has expressed their sorrow, and for those who have sent aid, whether monetary or material or manpower - thank you, thank you, thank you.

God bless you, and if you ever need a hand, you can be sure I'll be there for you, as you were for my people.

 

UPDATE: Seems I'm not the only one who was disheartened that the world seemed silent in the first days. Read Holly's blog: http://hollylisle.com/writingdiary2/index.php/2005/08/31/wheres-the-international-community/

Since I wrote this blog, many countries have offered to help, and many are sending supplies, manpower, and machinery.

 

 

 

The bombings in London on July 7th brought back all the sorrow and anger I felt on 9-11. I couldn't write about it, I couldn't even talk about it. THEN.

But after almost 2 weeks of reading the news articles and quotes by nutjob extremists (the media loves to quote nutjobs, you know) and their nutty supporters, I've realized I don't need to talk about my sadness, but I need to address BOTH the nutjob extremists and the moderate Muslim, and make a few points from an America-Christian perspective.

POINT 1:

To both the extremists and the average Muslim: I DON'T GIVE A FLYING FIG WHAT YOUR RELIGION IS

As an American, I grew up believing everyone had a right to worship the way they chose - even if they chose not to worship at all. Granted, I may not totally understand how various religions believe what they believe (or don't believe), but I've always respected the individual right of a person to choose their faith.

God gave every man a choice in how they believed - or whether they believed at all. Who am I to question God and tell anyone how to believe?

Most everyone in America feels this way. So if you're a Jew who doesn't believe Jesus was the Messiah, or a Muslim who doesn't believe Jesus was the Messiah and thus the ultimate prophet as the Son of God, no, I don't understand how you can not believe, but I totally believe you have a right not to believe (notice how Jews and Muslims are pretty much united on believing Jesus was a good guy and a prophet but not the SOG?? You folks have a lot more in common than you think

I live in an area of the country where there is a majority of Christians, but also a good sized population of Jews and Muslims. Guess when the last time we had a squabble (or bloodshed) over religious differences? ANSWER: NEVER. Never, ever. Not before 9-11. Not after 9-11.

You know why? Because the Christians, Jews and Muslims here are all free to worship as they choose, and all acknowledge the rights of different religions to exist. Hell, we're even friends with each other (I had a Jewish attorney and a Muslim was one of my bridesmaids!)

This is not unusual in America. Pre 9-11, that was the norm. Post 9-11, most communities are still this way (though some communities where extremists have been found are a bit antsy, and understandably so since the extremists what to anihilate Americans of every faith just because we're Americans).

And yes, we've had a few American nutjobs who want to retaliate against all Muslims because of what the extremists did - but they are VERY FEW, and WE (Americans of all faiths) prosecute them, because the one thing we are not tolerant of is religious intolerance.

So for any extremist or average Muslim - Don't you think we'd have nailed the Muslims in America if our goal was to get rid of Islam? Hell, all we'd have to do is enact legislation outlawing Islam (like so many Muslim nations have laws that outlaw Christianity or Judaism) and close our borders. We didn't have to go to the Middle East.

But, you see, Americans don't outlaw any religion. Or even the lack of religion. Even though we are a country founded primarily on Christian (Old Testament and New Testament) ideals.

POINT 2:

For extremists and the average Muslim: FOR US, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION, AND NO MATTER WHAT THE EXTREMISTS TELL YOU, THIS IS NOT A HOLY WAR.

First, the extremists will kill anyone who disagrees with them. They don't care whether you're Christian, Jew or Muslim. In fact, they kill a lot more Muslims than they do Jews or Christians.

Second, Jihad (holy war), according to Mohammed, is not a matter of Muslims kicking the shit out of Jews and Christians and murdering as many non-Muslims as possible just because they aren't Muslims, or murdering as many Muslims as possible because they are easier targets. And this is all the so-called Jihadists are accomplishing.

Third, as I pointed out above, we don't care what your religion is. You attack us, you threaten us or our families, and we don't care whether you're Christian, Jew or Muslim, we're going to fight back.

Anyone who claims this is a holy war is lying to you. Not only is this NOT the way MOHAMMED instructed Muslims to act (in regard to other Muslims, Christians or Jews), our attacking Afghanistan and Iraq had NOTHING to do with religion or Muslims. The bad guys just happened to be Muslims. And we've fought many a battle in the past where the bad guys also happened to claim to be Christian.

American has NEVER fought a war based on religion. For us, it's all about FREEDOM. Freedom not only for us to live without the threat of terror, but also freedom for Muslims in the Middle East so they can worship how they want and not live under the constant threat of being murdered or raped or beaten by the thugs who use Islam as a cover for their evil.

And no matter how much Osama twists and intentionally misinterprets the Koran, the bottom line, he's not fighting for Islam or for Mohammed or for God. He's power hungry and determined to rule all of the Middle East.

Do Muslims across the world really want to see the home of their ancestors and the place where Islam was born controled by a man who lies about the scripture and blatantly defies the very word of God and Mohammed so that he can get one step closer to his goal of dominating Muslims?

POINT 3:

For every Muslim: WE DID NOT ATTACK IRAQ IN 1991 BECAUSE THEY WERE MUSLIM. WE ATTACKED BECAUSE SADDAM WAS BULLYING ANOTHER MUSLIM COUNTRY (Kuwait) FOR THEIR OIL.

America often helps countries who are being bullied by another country. We don't care about what religion the attacker is or the attacked.

The first Gulf War was AMERICA DEFENDING MUSLIMS (Kuwait)

POINT 4:

For extremists and the average Muslim: WE DID NOT ATTACK AFGHANISTAN IN 2001 OR IRAQ IN 2003 BECAUSE THEY ARE MUSLIM COUNTRIES

We attacked Afghanistan because the Taliban was running the country and the Taliban was a group of power hungry, bad people. Not only were they harboring that bastard Osama who ATTACKED US FIRST. But they were cruel to the average Muslim living there.

We didn't care if Osama and the Taliban were Muslim (or Christian or Hindu or Buddist or Jew) - they are evil, and regardless of religion (or lack thereof), they needed taken out.

From an American perspective, BOTH the fact that they were cruel to the people of Afghanistan AND that they supported the man who'd plotted to kill as many innocent Americans as possible on 9-11, that's more than enough reason to attack back. It had NOTHING to do with their religion. They just happened to be Muslim (but if they'd have been Jews or Christians, we'd have nailed them, just the same)

We attacked Iraq for more reasons than I can count on my available fingers.

All right, we now know that SOME of the intelligence was incorrect. But admit it - even Muslims in the Middle East were pretty sure Saddam had WMDs.

And we also have to admit Saddam bragged pretty openly about his weapons programs (probably thinking that would keep us from attacking after the first Gulf War).

He broke every treaty he made after the 1st Gulf War. He kicked weapons inspectors out. In general, he was a raging lunatic, who literally slaughtered Muslims by the thousands. And let's not forget that this man also tried to have our president assassinated (George, the elder) and by American standards, this alone is enough reason to take him out (though we took the high road and only arrested him). And Saddam was an open supporter of suicide bombings that served no purpose but to kill innocents, and he had his own little terrorist training camps.

And EVERYONE knows that IF he didn't have WMDs before the war in Iraq (that he certainly could have ditched in the 6 months we hem-hawed around about going into Iraq), he would have obtained them at the first opportunity he thought he could (what do you think all those bribes with the UN Oil for Food program were about? Getting the eyes of the world off him so he could go back to terrorizing more than just the citizens of Iraq, including other Muslim nations).

And speaking of the Oil for Food program, doesn't it bother Muslims that Saddam was keeping the food and medicine and money from that program that were supposed to be used for all the common Iraqis? He was keeping it for himself and his buddies. The common Iraqi got squat. This is a great man to Muslims?

Yes. We wanted him out of there. He was not only a threat to the Shites and Kurds living in Iraq (and some of the Sunnis), but he was a threat to the countries neighboring him (just ask the people of Kuwait and Iran), and in general, the guy was a... thinking of the sort of curse Saddam himself would use here... DOG. No, he was worse than a dog. Lower than a dog. He wasn't as good as the ground a dog walked upon.

Some Arabs thought Saddam was cool because he "stood up to America". In reality? He stood only as tall as he dared - but no taller than the height he thought that the US (and the rest of the world) would not actually notice him.

He was not brave. Killing weaponless citizens of Iraq is not brave. Attacking Kuwait for their oil was not brave. Raping women in front of their husbands because you're pissed off is not brave. Killing children because you're pissed off at their father is not brave. Killing men just because they disagree with you is not brave.

And fleeing Baghdad and hiding in a hole on some farm while your countrymen lose their lives in your name is NOT brave.

Saddam was a coward. Period. He did nothing brave. Ever. He and his thugs terrorized the people of Iraq, and frankly, if the US hadn't been keeping tabs on the madman, he'd have terrorized much more of the Middle East.

I have to wonder why all these Muslims who are upset about us attacking Saddam aren't upset about all the evil Saddam did to... MUSLIMS? He killed Muslims. He freaking enjoyed killing Muslims. Hell, he liked killing Muslims more than Jews! (compare the number of Jews he killed to the number of Muslims he killed).

Isn't killing innocent God-fearing Muslims wrong, folks? Or is it Okay if it's done by another Muslim? Explain it to me, because I just don't understand how anyone could have thought this guy was a hero when he killed so many Muslims - many for no reason at all beyond his thirst for killing Muslims.

He was cool because he hated America? Who are we kidding? He LOVED America - our movies, our clothes, our way of life. He just didn't like the fact that America prevented him from taking over other countries.

How many Americans did he kill in his hatred of America? How many hundreds of thousands of Muslims did he kill in his love for Islam? THINK ABOUT IT.

POINT 5:

To all Muslims: SUNNI, SHITE, KURD - IT'S ALL ISLAM

Saddam murdering Shites and Kurds (just because they were Shites and Kurds) or Osama and the Taliban killing Muslims who didn't wear long beards or a scarf over their face (just because they were Muslims who didn't worship in the extreme, strict, often misinterpretted way Osama and the Taliban wanted people to worship, even though they didn't worship this way themselves) would be like me killing Baptists and Catholics (just because they Baptists and Catholics).

But you see, in America, I may be a Christian who doesn't worship quite the same way as a Baptist and Catholic, but in America, we consider them all Christians, and therefore part of the same religion. So no, we don't understand all the in-fighting amongst the different sects of Islam (actually, we don't understand fighting and killing anyone just because they are a different faith)

And no, we don't think it was okay for Saddam to kill Muslims.

Holy @#$%, folks, you're all Muslims when all is said and done. Why do SOME Muslims approve the killing of other Muslims just because they worship a bit differently?

Did God - the authority higher than the Jews' prophets, the Christians' Jesus and the Muslims' Mohammed - EVER say to kill innocent people? Did Mohammed ever direct Muslims to kill other Muslims just because they didn't like the skin tone or nationality of the other Muslims? Or just because other Muslims may have a few different rituals or special days?

I'll answer you. The answer is NO. NEVER. Neither God nor Mohammed thought it was cool to kill innocent Muslims.

In fact, neither God nor Mohammed thought it was cool to kill innocent Jews or Christians or Hindus or Buddists, either.

POINT 6:

To the extremists (because the average Muslim already understands this): EXTREMISTS WHO SUICIDE BOMB JEWS, CHRISTIANS AND MUSTLIMS ARE GOING TO HELL

Yep, you read that correctly. They are going to HELL.

Just because some drugged up dude straps explosives to his body and detonates himself while crying "Allah Akbar" doesn't mean he has a place in Heaven. God (the supreme authority) never condoned murder and the slaughter of innocents. In fact, even when Moses and his people were being abused by the Pharoh, God did not tell Moses to kill their abusers - GOD took care of all that Himself.

In the Muslim Koran, the Jewish Torah and the Christian Bible, the penalty for killing innocent people is separation from God (we Christians call that HELL). So suicide bombers are NOT going to sit at God's feet no matter how loudly they claim they do it in the name of God. They will be cast out of Heaven and into the fiery pits of HELL.

Good riddance.

POINT 7:

To the extremists: YOU ARE NOT GETTING VIRGINS WHEN YOU DIE

Here's a fact. God NEVER promised SEX to anyone for good deeds. Never. In fact, God disapproved of sex except between a married couple.

And God NEVER said anything about sex in Heaven (sex is for procreation and mortal enjoyment between married people - spirits don't have penises, and therefore could not have sex if they wanted to).

It seems odd that a religion so conservative about sexual relations between unmarried people would allow some nutjob to convince their youth that they get shitloads of fornication in Heaven - when it's ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE!

Focus and try to think clearly for just one moment here.

Would God ever approve of a man leaving his wife and children for the opportunity to have sex with other women?

If you've read your Bible (or Koran and Torah), the answer is NO. God commanded ALL men to cherish and care for their family and raise them up in the way of the Lord God, not abandon them forever and leave them unprotected for a chance to fornicate.

IF you answered "yes", then you have not read your scripture, and have instead allowed someone else to tell you what it says - and they have LIED to you.

Take responsibility for your own soul.

Read the Torah (it is the first set of books God commissioned), then read the Bible (New Testament) as it is at the very least by Mohammed's acknowledgement the books about the great prophet Jesus, and then read your Koran (just like any trilogy, they are best read in the order they were written).

Anyone who tells you you get physical pleasure for murdering yourself and others is full of shit. When you're dead, you're a soul. You have no physical presence. You canNOT have sex! Even if you got virgins in Heaven, you couldn't have sex with them!

So what's the bloody point of committing the sin of murder? First, there are no virgins in Heaven (just other souls without bodies), you couldn't have sex with them anyway, and besides, you're going to hell for the sin of murder.

All right, whatever. You want to be extreme in your religion, fine. But at least use a little common sense, and quit thinking with your mortal penis, because your mortal penis is lost to you when you die.

 

POINT 8:

To the extremists: LANGUAGES CHANGE OVER TIME, THEY EVOLVE, AND NO, MOHAMMED DID NOT SAY YOU GET VIRGINS IN HEAVEN

Go back to the definition/meaning of the words Mohammed used at the time he wrote them - because that is the ONLY way to translate (obviously, the man used the words and the meanings of the words for HIS time, not yours).

In the passage Osama and his thugs are pointing to in order to convince you that you're getting a bunch of eager virgins in Heaven? The word he's telling you means virgin actually meant GRAPES at the time it was written.

But hey, back in Mohammed's day, grapes were quite valuable. You could, after all, make wine. Even Jesus loved grapes. And I'm sure Abraham, Isaac and Jacob dug grapes, too. Even I, a lowly Christian, love that fruit of the vine.

So it's not so far fetched that Mohammed would promise grapes to believers. In that day and time, grapes were a pretty good reward for anybody (and when I was a kid, I'd have done almost anything for grape juice or grape jam or grape Bubble Yum - I LOVED anything that tasted like GRAPES!).

But if Osama and all the other terrorist nutjobs promised these young men GRAPES, chances are good most would refuse to blow themselves up. So he (Osama) had to come up with something a bit more enticing.

What does a young, hormone filled, Muslim man whose been denied even a glimpse of female calf want more than anything? SEX. (and this doesn't just apply to young Muslim men - it also applies to any male in the world between the ages of about 12 and 35, because they all have an abudundance of testosterone)

Osama is lying. IF you went to Heaven for the sin of murder, at best you would receive grapes (which is fine - you couldn't fornicate with a virgin because, as pointed out in POINT 7, you wouldn't have a penis anyway)

But remember, GOD said you shall not murder, and so murder isn't going to get you into Heavan in the first place.

 

POINT 9:

To extremists and regular Muslims: THE KILLING OF INNOCENTS IS FORBIDDEN BY ISLAM

In Afghanistan, innocents were massacred by the Taliban regularly. If your beard wasn't long enough - you were killed. If you were a woman who needed a gallon of milk for your children and there was no male relative to get it for you, so you went to the store yourself - you were killed. If you were a woman and the wind blew your scarf away from your face and some guy saw it - you were killed.

In Iraq, if you were a Shite or a Kurd during Saddam's reign of terror, there was a good chance you'd be killed (or your mother raped in front of you before the two of you were killed)

In Iraq NOW, if you are a Shite or Kurd or Sunni, and if you want a job on the police force or if you have coffee in a coffee shop, or if you're a little child on a school bus going to kindergarten, there's a good chance you'll be killed.

In fact, in Iraq, it doesn't matter what you're doing - you have a good chance of being TARGETED for murder.  

NOT by Americans (or Christians or Jews), but by MUSLIM TERRORISTS (who, btw, we do not consider Muslims - because these people carry out their terror for their own greed and goal of domination - not for God).

Every day, TERRORISTS INTENTIONALLY MURDER and SLAUGHTER innocent Muslims.

Why? Because they want control of Iraq.

POINT 10:

To extremists and regular Muslims: THE US AND ENGLAND DO NOT WANT CONTROL OF IRAQ

Not once has the coalition attempted to outlaw Islam or force Muslims not to worship. In fact, the coalition has not interfered at all in your ability to worship.

Only the Muslim extremists have placed demands on the way and times you worship - and our goal is to allow you to worship however you choose, without interference by anyone, even those who falsely claim to be Muslim.

We don't want Iraq's oil. We've never had an issue paying for the oil we purchase (though prices right now are a bit hideous and I drive a lot less than I used to).

If this war was about oil, trust that we've already spent enough money to PURCHASE the country outright. In fact, we could have BOUGHT IRAQ a couple times over with all the money we've spent getting Saddam and the terrorists out of Iraq (and don't think greedy Saddam wouldn't have sold us every square inch of that country if the price was right).

If our goal was merely to control Iraq, we would have carpet bombed the entire country and taken over. It would have been that easy. And we have enough people in this country who'd love a good job in the oil industry, that we wouldn't have had any problem staffing.

Why would we have spent so much money and American lives, and gone to such lengths to protect the people of Iraq from the terrorists, when we could have literally destroyed all opposition in a matter of 24 hours, for way less money?

The answer? Obviously, since we have gone to great lengths to do as much as possible to keep civilian casualties as low as possible, and since we're training the Iraqi people to fight the terrorists on their own, and since we're piling money into the country in the hope of getting the hell out of the country - well, we must be doing it so the IRAQI PEOPLE have control (rather than the terrorists or even us!).

POINT 11:

To regular Muslims: DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT IF THE US LEAVES IRAQ, THE TERRORISTS WILL STOP KILLING MUSLIMS?

If you think that, you're out of your mind, and here's why.

The terrorists in Iraq want control of Iraq. They do NOT want Iraq to have a government that works for the people. They do not want Iraqis to be free to live and worship how they choose. They want total control. They want to recreate the Taliban society that oppressed Muslims in Afghanistan and killed many Muslims.

If the US left right now, Iraq would become a police state, ruled by power hungry terrorists, who use their skewed translation of the scripture to control the average Iraqi and build a fortune in money and possessions for themselves, while the people suffer.

Osama was a perfect example. Instead of giving his billions of dollars to the poor and needy in Afghanistan, he spent all his money on weapons and bombs and attacks on innocent people.

Just imagine what good he could have done with those billions of dollars if he'd have lived according to God's scripture (and Mohammed's teachings).  How many children he could have fed, how much medical care he could have provided for everyone, how many books he could have purchased for schools so that the children in his country could be educated. Or better yet, he could have opened thriving businesses and provided jobs for the people, so they could afford all this themselves.

A God-fearing, God-loving man with billions of dollars would have used that money to help others, rather than to obtain his own personal goal of domination, while murdering innocents.

If the US leaves now and lets these terrorists get a foothold, the Middle East (and Muslims) are screwed.

 

POINT 12:

For the average Muslim: WE CAN'T LEAVE IRAQ UNTIL THE JOB IS DONE

We want the hell out of Iraq, but we will not (canNOT) leave Iraq in the hands of the extremists. Let's be real - Osama and his henchmen will be as bad as (if not worse than) Saddam. It would be cruel to leave Iraq in their hands.

At what point are all the Muslims of Iraq and the Middle East going to emphatically decry the INTENTIONAL brutal slaughter of innocent Muslims by the Muslim terrorists?

 

POINT 13:

To regular Muslims: WE WANT OUT OF IRAQ! LIKE, YESTERDAY ! BUT WHEN WE LEAVE IS UP TO THE IRAQIS

We want out. And as an American taxpayer who is helping to fund the troops over there, as well as the rebuilding of the country, yesterday wouldn't be soon enough.

But we aren't going to leave until Iraq is stable and being run by the regular, non-violent people of Iraq.

There's really only one solution, and Iraqis (mostly Muslim) hold the key.

See, as long as some Iraqis cower in their houses and allow the terrorists to move their headquarters into your neighborhoods, or carryout their slaughter of your neighbors and duly elected officials, and little kids on the school bus, then the terrorists will thrive, and the coalition will remain - to protect you and prevent the terrorists from making you part of a country that even the Taliban would have been afraid of.

Iraqis must CHOOSE to protect themselves, and that means standing up to the terrorists.

So if you really want the US out, quit shielding the terrorists. Take a stand. Fight as hard for your freedom as we do. Together, we'll destroy terrorism in Iraq, and when that's done, baby, we're out of there.

Until the Muslims in Iraq and the Middle East stand up to terrorism and terrorists and take control of it, we're stuck with each other.

And for Muslims who like to complain and who don't live in the Middle East, like Dr. Waheed, put your money where your mouth is. You want to protect Iraqis? You mourn their deaths? Then for God's sake, instead of inciting young men to hurt innocent non-Muslims, incite them to fight the terrorists who are actually killing the innocent Iraqis so the REAL IRAQI people can leave in peace.

 

POINT 14:

To Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan: IF YOU WANT TO BE FREE, YOU MUST FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOM

And no, I do NOT mean you must fight the US. As I've already stated, we're ready to leave as soon as you are capable of defending yourselves against terrorists.

Because the terrorists have threatened (and attacked) us and our allies (9-11, 3-11, and 7-7, not to mention all the other attacks against us all over the world by Muslim extremists), we have little choice but to take the terrorists out.

As long as you choose not to take any responsibility for your own protection against terrorist forces who would take control of your country (and out of your hands), we'll fight them for you. And we'll fight them for our own protection.

So until you're willing to take responsibility for your own protection, don't complain when we protect you. And don't blame us for protecting ourselves.

Allowing the bad guys to dominate your neighborhoods out of fear is unfathomable to the average American. If there is a bad guy in our neighborhood, we call the police. And if the police won't remove them, we take care of the problem ourselves. But under no circumstances will the average American live in fear in their own home.

I understand that the people of Iraq lived in fear under Saddam (and the people of Afghanistan lived in fear under the Taliban) for so long, they may not be able to comprehend the true meaning of freedom. What is the true meaning of freedom? It means you have fight for it; that you're free to fight for it and that you will fight for it at all costs because it's that important to you.

Lives will be lost in your fight for freedom. It may be you, your spouse or your children. Obtaining freedom ultimately requires great risk, and sometimes, even the ultimate sacrifice. But it's the only way to gain your freedom (ask us, we've been there, done that - and many an American and British mother have given the lives of their children for YOUR freedom).

And as soon as the terrorists are wiped out or apprehended, and as soon as Iraq and Afghanistan aren't under constant threat of takeover by nutjob terrorists (or as soon as the people of these countries are capable of handling the threat and do handle the threat), then we'll gladly leave.

But we care about you and your freedom enough to stay until the people of these countries can protect themselves and remain free.

I assure you that the vast majority of American and British soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq do NOT want to be there. I can also guarantee you that the vast majority of American and British soldiers are willingly fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq because they believe Muslims in these countries deserve to be free from the domination of terrorists.

 

POINT 15:

To average Muslims: NEITHER YOU  NOR THE CHISTIANS OR JEWS SHOULD ALLOW ANY EXTREMIST TO DIVIDE US

In a New York Times article, Dr. Waheed of England, in response to the bombings in Londona said:

"We know that the killing of innocents is forbidden," Dr. Waheed said. "But we don't see two classes of blood; the blood of Iraqis is just as important to us as English blood." He emphasized that they in no way condoned the bombings. "But when you understand things from that perspective, why should we condemn the bombing?"

All right, Dr. Waheed, since you don't seem able to figure this one out on your own, I'll help you:

The INNOCENT Iraqi blood being shed in Iraq today is being shed by OTHER MUSLIMS (or so that's what they call themselves). It is the Muslim extremists who are maiming and slaughtering innocent Iraqis. NOT Americans or the British.

And American and British forces are targeting both Iraqi and NON-IRAQI terrorists. Not civilians.

I totally agree with Dr. Waheed - the killing of innocent Iraqis is wrong. And so is the killing of innocent British, Americans, and anyone else.

So instead of agitating the situation, why don't you take responsibility as a Muslim leader and help teach these impressionable young men that it is wrong to not only spill Muslim blood, but the blood of Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddists?

If people like Dr. Waheed would quit inciting young men to commit the sin of murdering innocents, then perhaps the terrorists who would gladly spill both Muslim and Christian blood, would not divide us.

When we allow the extremists/terrorists to divide us, we are all doomed to more blood and death of innocents.

When Christians and Muslims stand together to rid the world of nutjob terrorists (regardless of the religion of the nutjob terrorist), we can beat them and live as God (and Mohammed) intended - peacefully, together.

We should all - regardless of religion - condemn EVERY attack on innocents, no matter whom the attacker.

And for those who may not be able to comprehend this on their own, there's a huge freaking difference between a war against terrorists (where civilian deaths are caused by terrorists because they hide behind civilians like bloody cowards), which is a righteous war, and a war to get a brutal dictator out of control (which is also a righteous war), and a terrorist bombing a school bus or coffee shop because they thrive on death and control.

 

POINT 16:

For normal Muslims: YES, CHRISTIANS, JEWS AND MUSLIMS ARE DIFFERNT, IN THAT THEY WORSHIP DIFFERENTLY. BUT WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE, WE WORSHIP THE SAME GOD.

No matter your favorite prophet or whether or not you believe the Messiah has come, the foundation of all 3 religions is GOD.

And it's the same God. And we are all - regardless of religion or lack thereof - God's children.

And how we, as individuals, choose to worship (or not to worship) is between the individual and GOD. Not the individual and the Taliban. Not the individual and Osama. Not the individual and the terrorists in Iraq who are killing babies and men walking to work. Not the leaders of Chrisitan cults who would force others to worship their way.

One of the most difficult things God asked us to do is have FAITH. Faith is not tangible. It's not physical. It can sometimes be difficult to maintain.

It's a belief in God and His righteousness, His power to forgive even the greatest of sinners, and His power to overcome evil.

Faith is about letting go of what we want and putting it all in God's hands.

Faith is about worshipping God in your way, and leaving the rest to God.

What faith is NOT?

You have lost your faith when you quit believing God is the ultimate power or allow some mere man to have control of your beliefs and your heart.

You have lost your faith when you quit trusting God to His own judgment.

 

POINT 17:

To all Muslims: THE EXTREMISTS ARE PREVENTING GOD FROM WINNING

Until the day we die, we have an opportunity to come to God, to become a believer, and to live according to God's holy laws.

Many people, throughout all time, have come to God later in life, either because they weren't raised to know him, or because they strayed (as humans tend to do occasionally).

God is not only a vengeful God, but He is a loving and forgiving God, who welcomes ALL his children into His fold (regardless of race or religious brand), and who rejoices whenever a soul finds Him or returns to Him.

When a terrorist-extremist of any religion takes a life prematurely (before God takes them Himself), if that person is not a believer, that person has lost a chance to find God or come back to God. And God has lost a chance to win over Satan (or evil) by claiming that soul for Himself.

We all know God loves all his children, and that nothing makes Him happier than a lost soul finding their way to him - or finding their way back to him.

When we allow terrorists-extremists to take lives in the name of Islam (or Christianity or whatever religion), we are allowing them an opportunity to take a soul away from God - who might have found God or come back to God, had the terrorist-extremist not interferred in God's plan.

When any of us allows terrorist-extremists to win, we allow them to steal from God that which is rightfully His - the right to take the life, and the right to win the soul.

And there's a big difference in a man who kills to defend his family and keep them safe and prevent terrorists from killing innocents, and the terrorist who kills in the name of any religion just because they want to be in control and hurt other people.

In a desperate bid to win $300 MILLION American dollars, quack Russian astrologist Marina Bai has sued Nasa in a Russian court (as if that would actually have any legal authority over the American space program's bank account).

Russian newspaper Izvestia reported that Ms. Bai is upset that NASA launched the probe that smashed into the comet Temple 1, claiming the Deep Impact probe "ruins the natural balance of forces in the universe."

Scientists stressed that the impact did not significantly alter the comet's orbit (around the sun), and the scientific experiment, that scientists hope will help show how the universe was formed, would not pose any risk to Earth.

Bai's lawsuit is for... get this... MORAL SUFFERING! How bloody Brilliant. Now all morally inclined Republicans can sue Democrats for their "Moral Suffering" in regard to legal abortion. And Liberals can sue Republicans on the grounds of "Moral Suffering" for the tax cuts.

I propose that Ms. Bai has proven herself a fraud, and is therefore not entitled to any monetary award, including any sum set aside for her psychological treatment in a professional mental facility, because a real astrologist would know Temple 1 has no bearing on the astrological chart.

If she were a legit astologist (or even had an IQ higher than that of the moon dust that resulted from the probe's collision with the comet) she would also know that, using her theory of "natural balance disruptus", every space rock brought back to earth (by her country's astronauts and mine), would have upset the natural balance of the universe, as would every space shuttle or sattelite sent into orbit, and astrology would have been toast decades ago.

I submit that Ms. Bai is merely an unsuccessful astrologist - and perhaps a bit loony besides -- who is looking for some free advertising to boost her business at the least, or is hoping to get rich off the American taxpayer's back at worst, and therefore her lawsuit should be dismissed as a frivilous waste of the Russian court's time and Russian and American taxpayer money.

I also submit that should NASA be forced to defend itself against Ms. Bai's frivilous claim, that Ms. Bai and the Russian government be held financially responsible for all court costs, attorney fees and travel expenses incurred by the Defendant.

Respectfully submitted,

Elizabeth Butler, US citizen who's mightily weary of her tax dollars being spent every time some nut files a stupidass lawsuit.