I'm off on a business trip, and if the past is any guide, I know ANYTHING can happen.

Sometimes, such a hiatus from the routine yields unexpected free time, long uninterrupted periods for reading and thinking, a strange sense of liberation, and the opportunity to step outside one's life and get a new bearing on all of the busy busy busy work that grinds from morning 'till night - and maybe, just maybe, get an entirely new perspective on how we spend our time on this Earth.

Other times, I work all day in some godforsaken town and then just go back to the hotel and drink.

This time, I'll be in Biloxi, Mississippi, 'home of catfish, classic cars, soft taffy and big-haired women.'

Actually, I don't know if Biloxi has any of those things, because no one knows what's in Biloxi. Least of all, me. For all I know, Biloxi is the 'home of chicken fried steak.'

I will have a digital camera, and may be able to post some pictures. But if Biloxi turns out to be the 'home of smashed electronics,' then I'll probably spend my free time under the desk with a legal pad.

Regardless of all that, I can say with some assurance that Biloxi is the 'home of meeting planners who forgot to check out Charleston and New Orleans.' So there we are, and there I go. Catch you on the flip side, Jack.

UPDATE: Well coat me in flour and call me 'Nostradamus" - I done called this one partially right! They take their chicken fried steak pretty seriously in Biloxi. In fact, at our hotel they served 'KOBE beef' chicken fried steak for $15.95 - and that was the only kobe steak they served.

The waitress nodded knowingly after our incredulous question: How on earth can you sell kobe beef this cheap, and why is it 'chicken fried'?! On Iron Chef a slab of kobe beef costs more than my truck.

'Honey,' she said, 'that's exactly what EVERYONE asks, and the answer is, that's just the way it is. And we only serve it chicken fried, or in hamburger. But unfortunately we're out of it tonight.'

So I have one reason to go back to Biloxi, if the opportunity should ever arise.

Posted by John Climacus at 04:21 | Permalink

In case you were wondering on what basis the previous post said the US Muslim leaders' 'fatwa' was bogus, this WND story spells it out:

Terrorism researcher and analyst Steven Emerson argues that along with the terror-related background of signatories, the decree is missing key elements.

"Nowhere does it condemn the Islamic extremism ideology that has spawned Islamic terrorism," Emerson said in a dispatch posted on Counterterrorism Blog.

"It does not renounce nor even acknowledge the existence of an Islamic jihadist culture that has permeated mosques and young Muslims around the world. It does not renounce jihad let alone admit that it has been used to justify Islamic terrorist acts. It does not condemn by name any Islamic group or leader."

Emerson called it a "fake fatwa designed merely to deceive the American public into believing that these groups are moderate."

He pointed out officials of both organizations have been directly linked to Islamic terrorist groups and Islamic extremist organizations.

CAIR is not your friend.

UPDATE: More about this fools-fatwa here.

Posted by John Climacus at 03:11 | Permalink

This is not an incendiary comment, but merely a statement of fact: Michael Graham was right about Islam, as confirmed from within the Muslim world.

You heard it here first at the Alpaca Burger Forum.

What a coincidence it is. On the same day Michael Graham is bounced off the air by the CAIR-fearing suits at WMAL radio for saying 'Islam is a terrorist organization,' MEMRI reports that a group of prominent Arab reformists say essentially the same thing.

As we summarized for you, a series of proposals said that Islam, as currently practiced and understood, needs major changes, even to the point of reevaluating the Koran and diminishing the authority of certain portions. This is important, Wittenburg Door stuff folks, so please go read it if you haven't already.

Far less oriented toward solving the problem are certain American Muslims: We still have in our midst prominent Imams who say the call for reform is 'alien' (and who are Jeddah-bound, we hope). Of course, CAIR issues its typical doublespeak, 'Hey, we've issued an unspecific, non-binding fatwa, what more do you want? We're NOT going to sell out our Hamas or al Qaeda brethren.'

Pay no attention to these bozos. They are only interested in preserving the freedoms of non-Muslims until such time as the Imams run the show.

I am no expert, but I've always felt the statement in the 2nd Sura that 'persecution is graver than slaughter' is a loophole wide enough to drive a car bomb through. If you're going to have a religion, allowing for murder when practitioners feel they are 'persecuted' seems like a pretty good formula for an absolutely horrific religion.

Yes, the Christian Bible contains passages justifying slaughter - in the part of the book we call the 'OLD' Testament, which was written long before and was based on a law explicitly denounced by the Founder of the 'NEW' Testament; which is, by the way, the entirety of 'Christianity.'

As a matter of fact, you could look at the current situation and say, 'Islam needs a New Testament.' Because their Old one has the same problems as the Christian one did. But - here's a novel idea - there already IS a New Testament, with absolutely NO slaughter prescribed, and maybe the Muslims could just adopt IT. That would pretty much solve the problem.

UPDATE: If you didn't happen to get referred here by Nikita, please refer to his post on this topic for much additional information and links.

Posted by John Climacus at 01:38 | Permalink

Just noticed this lovely bit of news on LGF.

Generally speaking, we at the Alpaca Burger Forum REALLY don't like CAIR. We view CAIR, as an organization, as highly deportable, in fact.

Why? Count the reasons.

So when these terrorist-supporting folks manage to get one of the good guys suspended, you want to take a pretty hard look at who's doing the suspending.

And who that is, would be the asshats who run 630 WMAL, news radio in the nation's capital.

There's lots of other radio stations, boys. Until Michael Graham is back on the air, we won't be visiting yours. Adios.

UPDATE: Here is Michael Graham's Web site. Pay him a visit and send him a note of support. He should be nationally syndicated anyway and maybe this major boneheaded move by WMAL will provide the impetus for that to happen eventually.

Posted by John Climacus at 12:29 | Permalink

I've been too busy to post anything lately but this collection of proposals by Arab reformists has the seeds of something very important. More needs to be done to circulate these ideas; for now here is a sample:

• "The battle we face is against the ideology, as opposed to against the terrorists themselves. The terrorist groups make the most of freedom of speech and movement, as reward [their benefactors] by spreading propaganda among neutral individuals and by frightening their opponents..."

• "The time has come for British authorities to be realistic and resolute regarding extremism, before complete chaos is unleashed onto British society. In the past, we told you: 'Stop them!' Today, we tell you: 'Expel them.'"

• "the most important medium in corrupting young Muslims's thinking throughout the world is the Internet – not the schools – because young people use the Internet intensively and by means of it learn about incitement, recruitment, and terrorist education."

• "The time has come for us to declare resolutely that the claim heard whenever Muslims stage a terror attack – 'George Bush made me do it' – is a stupid one…"

• "The terrorist discourse is first and foremost cheap television [programming]… The sizeable increase in the number of Arab satellite channels, and their keen aspiration to fill airtime, are the main reason for the growth of the fundamentalist stream..."

• "...it is time to strip the title of 'mosque' from a place where firebombs are made...moderate Muslims can boycott such mosques, because they do not have the courage necessary to wrest them from the extremists. When a mosque becomes a place where firebombs are made, it ceases to be a mosque, and should be treated as the scene of a crime..."

• "Many condemn bin Laden, but unfortunately many others have not condemned him in any way. Most of [the latter] live in Europe and the U.S. They are not sleeper cells, as the naïve in the West call them; they are cells that are wide awake, ready to strike at any moment..."

• "Of course, it is not helpful when a 'good' man like London Mayor Ken Livingstone invites Yousef Al-Qaradhawi [to London], just as it is not helpful when Tony Blair and George Bush invite people who are likely in the future to become terrorists to meetings in the British government and the White House. It is regrettable that Western media channels, particularly CNN and the BBC, host Islamist activists who support terrorism and treat them as experts and analysts...

• "Only two things can stop terrorism:...issuing fatwa s removing bin Laden and his supporters from the fold of Islam, and the West ceasing to be naïve about 'moderate Islamists.' There is no such thing as 'moderate Islamists.' There are ordinary Muslims who lead ordinary lives, and there are terrorists and people who are likely to become terrorists in the future."

• "The religious institutions, and the official and unofficial religious authorities, must take real, not formal, measures – in order to salvage what can be salvaged. If they will not do so, it won't be long until the world stands in a single rank against Islam and the Muslims."

• "There is a need to form a new religious culture that will lay out the borders of the Shari'a laws in the Koran, will set out what is characteristic of the life of the Prophet, and will clarify when and how the law is absolute for every time and place… Then, there is a need to discuss intensively the issue of abolishing chapters in the Koran [naskh] and [a need to examine] whether it is true that the verse of the sword [Koran 9:5] abolished all mercy, leniency, and forgiveness in the Koran…" (emphasis added)

• "the war on terror … requires intensive and ongoing intellectual, political, and educational activities, in order to fight the extremist and terrorist Islamic Salafi thought and the Salafi da'wa that calls to establish a fundamentalist Islamic regime …"

Read it all. It is the beginning of a road map for constructive effort to solve our biggest worldwide problem.

Posted by John Climacus at 04:15 | Permalink

The Brits may be coming around:

People who 'spit hate' at the British way of life should be deported, Tory former Prime Minister John Major said.

Mr Major spoke of the 'uncomfortable reality' that many terrorists were born or lived in the UK but had been taught to hate its culture.

Since we also noted the uncomfortable reality the other day, we've done a little research and, surprisingly, it may not have to be so uncomfortable as all that.

It just might be, as the drumbeat for deportation grows louder, that more and more Muslims in the West will begin to investigate the options for themselves, to nip the problem in the bud so to speak. There are signs this process has already begun, in fact.

As they explore their options in the Islamic world, our guess is many of them will look at the Kingdom itself, and they're going to LIKE what they find out. A lot.

Many Muslims in the West may not realize there are ample accommodations available in Jeddah, less than 50 miles from the Holy City. Imagine performing the Hajj every year if you so wish!

Arabian Homes offers these beautiful choices:

...four Arabian Homes Villages in Jeddah - Sierra, Andalus, Marbella and Medina Road. All are conveniently situated for the principal shopping and business districts and within easy reach of both the international airport and the recreational facilities of Obhur Creek.

Each of these villages offers 'an atmosphere of coolness and calm':

Quiet pathways shaded by mature trees, beautifully landscaped and carefully tended gardens, a profusion of tropical flowers and the glitter of sunlight from one of our numerous swimming pools around every corner - a true oasis of peace and tranquility. Nowhere could be more conducive to unwinding after a hard day's work. Secluded pool areas with spacious sundecks and comfortable poolside furniture are each shared by a relatively small number of residents, enhancing a feeling of privacy and exclusiveness.

Restaurants offer 'renowned quality' and you'll find numerous choices for recreation just a short stroll away.

Whether you choose a townhouse...

...or a villa,

...you can bet you'll be in better style than anything London (or Detroit, for that matter) has to offer. To get the ball rolling, contact Arabian homes today!

Other outstanding choices in Jeddah include Mura Bustan, Sharbatly Village, and for those who are thinking big, contact Red Sea Housing for assistance in relocating your entire mosque or neighborhood in one fell swoop!

Imagine setting up all of your friends and family on the banks of the Red Sea:

If 'try before buy' is your style, Alpaca Burger Forum strongly recommends getting your bearings while at the magnificent Kaki Hotel. Four stars, starting at $77 US per night, and located just a short drive from the airport, business centers and all midtown attractions (and ladies, you don't even have to worry about this part because you'll be chauffered everywhere!)

Travel to Jeddah need not cost an arm and a leg, although if you try to fly directly into the city it may feel like it costs a lot more than that. Probably your simplest, most economical option is to book first into Riyadh, then catch the 1 hour Saudi Air flight to Jeddah.

Besides the toasty climate and slow-paced lifestyle, the thing about Saudi Arabia that most appeals to Muslims from the West is...it's purity. From your first waking breath until you fall asleep each night, you will live a life nestled in the will of Allah, surrounded in every aspect by the teachings of the Prophet (PBUH).

As noted, women are treated like royalty in the Kingdom, and can expect their lives to become much, much simpler. For the men, guarding your family and its honor against the predations of decadent Western civilization is a piece of cake - because Western civilization will only get as close to your family as YOU allow. Turn off the satellite and keep them locked inside, and your work is done.

Best of all, you can let your guard down. No more need to rage inwardly about the Jews, infidels, polytheists and apostates, because you'll hardly ever see one here.

So come home, come to Saudi Arabia, come to Jeddah - where you ARE wanted!

Posted by John Climacus at 09:13 | Permalink

I just completed a vigorous e-mail exchange on a topic I'm a little behind on.

The proposition was: 'How US foreign policy has been hijacked by individuals who possess dual loyalties."

Supporting documentation given to me:

By Pat Buchanan: Whose War? 'A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest.'

Business Week: An Issue Too Hot for Fahrenheit? '...The film goes on about filial revenge and oil, but it never ventures onto really touchy turf -- namely the role of fiercely pro-Israel neocon hawks in convincing Bush to go to war.'

Paul Craig Roberts: Propaganda's Forward March. 'In pursuit of their agenda, neoconservatives have shown no respect for facts or persons.'

And for the mother of all neocon conspiracy links collections: The genesis of the war on Iraq - Or - How the neocons hijacked the 'war on terror'.

The context for the discussion was this: Someone circulated an e-mail titled 'Pictures From Iraq That Are Too Shocking and Graphic for The Mainstream Media', with a slew of photos of U.S. troops doing good things on the ground in Iraq, and being warmly received by the locals.

Someone who got the e-mail fired back with a succession of e-mails containing numerous links like the above, propagating the idea that the entire war was a mistake, it is going terribly, and a group of neoconservatives foisted it on the U.S. in order to help Israel. There's actually a lot more to it than that, but there's the gist of it.

My initial reply to him was this:

This post was initiated by a woman who sent some nice images of US troops doing good things and being well received in Iraq. You responded with two posts containing/linking a slew of very derogatory - though, for the Left, well-worn - arguments that pretty much everything is going wrong in Iraq and everything was initiated because of utterly base motives. I normally ignore this type of nonsense, which can be found in heaps all around the Web and of course in the progressive press, as the rantings of an increasingly powerless political segment.

But because part of the 'information' you offered up was of the half-truth variety a la 'expert' Juan Cole (hey, he speaks Arabic, therefore he is right about everything!), and I had nothing else to do during lunch, I took the bait and fired off a response. I find it annoying when these ankle-biting type of complaints are heralded as major news: So Iraq is not going to have a pure Jeffersonian democracy? How could this be! Their Constitution may be tainted with artifacts of Sharia law? Who'd a thunk it! Restrictions on 'un-Islamic' behavior? Outrage! Next thing you know they'll have women wearing the hijab!

I hate to see this type of misrepresentation, but in retrospect, I should have let it die because this was never going to turn into any type of 'discussion' of any issue. On top of that, I did not address the specific things wrong with your two e-mails but instead just responded with arguments about the Left in general couched in a series of satirical statements, in the truly lame 'my links versus your links' form which has got to be one of the Internet's greatest contributions to modern intellectual decline. Not exactly a constructive foundation...and an almost exclusively emotional response. And now it has evoked two, three - how many? - further similar e-mails from you to the entire group. Nobody on this recipient list signed up for this argument, and one person who I removed from the address group of this e-mail already has gotten pretty angry about it...

He then replied courteously to me with this:

...The Iraq war as you can see has divided this country to the point that if you do not agree with the administration's foreign policy of pre-emptive war you are labeled 'un patriotic'. We should all take heed of TR's quote 'Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official...'

What was so derogatory about the following links that I e-mailed?...

...Along with these links I included the following statement with links about the neocons.

'And as we look at these photos and admire the spirit and pray for our troops in Iraq let us not forget the neocons who sent our servicemen and women into harms way!'

Was Pat Buchanan's article 'Whose War?' that appeared in 'The American Conservative' derogatory or Leftist in it's content?

I wonder how many of those I replied to know who the neocons are and what role they have played in taking our country to war?

The last question raised of the last sentence of Justin Raimondo's somewhat 'controversial' op ed 'Iraq: What Are We Fighting For?' pretty much sums it all up - 'Soon, they will be asking: Who lost Iraq? As well they might. Yet I fear another question far more: Who lost America? We all live in dread of the answer'...

I did not mean to offend anyone's feelings. (My older son is serving in the Navy overseas) My intent was to inform but evidently both sides have closed minds on the issue of how US foreign policy has been hijacked by individuals who possess dual loyalties.

Perhaps 25 or 50 years from now our children and grandchildren will know the truth.

And here is my final reply:

Obviously I did not mean each specific link used in the context of making the larger point was derogatory, it was the larger point I was referring to. And I know exactly what that larger point is. The fact that Pat Buchanan has contributed to the argument does not really mitigate my contention that it's a 'Leftist' argument - though I agree with Pat on many things I realize labeling he and, say, Bill Kristol as 'conservatives' in the same sentence requires 'conservative' to be put in quotes. But I will grant you it would be more accurate to leave the ideological label out and just refer to the 'neocon conspiracy argument' or whatever those who believe in it would call it.

All that being said, the idea that US foreign policy has been hijacked by a cabal of individuals possessing dual loyalties is, I believe, 'derogatory' in the sense that I don't happen to believe it is true and therefore I think propagandizing in its favor does an injustice to the legitimate reasons our country went to war with Iraq. Those of us with family and friends currently serving, who believe those people are serving in a worthwhile cause, may find it offensive to hear that cause being run down based on the types of 'evidence' you've propounded.

If you do believe in the conspiracy theory, then of course you view it as simply telling the truth, which should not be considered derogatory. Based on our differing assumptions, therefore, we will be on different sides of that particular question. But I think you can see why those on my side would consider the things you circulated to be, on the whole, 'derogatory.'

I am conversant with several people - a couple folks who are firmly liberal, one a libertarian conservative, and one a 'paleo-conservative - who respectively make some of the same arguments reflected in the information you point to with your links, so I've heard it all. What I think is off-base about it is this: If one accepts the notion that the Iraq regime was associating with international terrorist organizations, then taking steps to remove that regime from power was a good idea REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT EVERYTHING MAY NOT HAVE BEEN DONE PERFECTLY OR WITH PERFECT FORESIGHT.

The fact that the Bush administration and the coalition provisional authority are responsible for some screw-ups and obviously did not have a perfect crystal ball about what the aftermath would bring, does not mean it was not a good idea nor that anyone else would have been able to do it any better.

Sure, there were voices warning about precisely the type of situation that has come to pass, and other voices that argued differently. Listening to the second group was a big mistake. However - and please take good note of this point - some people don't think it is possible to conduct the perfect war, and do think that big mistakes have been made in every war. This is why Bush was re-elected, and why, in my view, the Left (please excuse the generalization) is having so much trouble getting a sympathetic hearing from many Americans.

Regarding the question of support for this administration: It's not about saying support of Bush in all things is required to be 'patriotic.' It's just saying we believe they are conducting the war in good faith, even if imperfectly.

If you recall, the only choice we had last November was between Bush, with all his flaws, and a guy who, when he could say anything at all with certainty, said what he would have done differently is to 'bring in the French and the Germans.' You don't have to be a blind supporter of George W. Bush to think that was a pretty silly assertion.

Again, maybe you believe the French and Germans do have the answers for our problems in Iraq; I personally think they were on Saddam's payroll, first of all, and secondly that they don't necessarily agree the U.S. should be able to take whatever steps necessary to ensure our security. I know people in Europe and here who honestly believe we deserved what we got on Sept 11, and also believe the U.S. could stand to be taken down a few MORE notches. (I'm assuming you are not one of these, right?) So pardon my narrow-mindedness, but I am skeptical about what certain European countries could bring to the table in terms of advising us on Iraq and the war on terror in general.

So at the risk of overgeneralizing, here is another reason many Americans support the Bush administration. It's not because the 'neocons' have been able to secretly hijack our foreign policy and the news media. It's because we honestly agree with the Bush administration's basic contentions. No WMDs found? Though that was surprising it made not one whit of difference in our support for the operation in Iraq. We believe Saddam had pernicious intentions. You can ridicule that idea, or mock it by asking whether we are going to go to war against every country whose intentions we mistrust, or ask why we didn't go to war with North Korea instead. We've heard all that a million times and, to us, it is a silly line of questioning. Saddam should have been taken out, period.

You can argue about this until you are blue in the face, and you won't convince us otherwise, because the basis of your arguments does not ring true. We don't think the 'neocons' have hijacked anything: We just tend to agree with them. The sooner the Left accepts this fact and "moves on" to other lines of argument, the sooner they may be able to see increased support.

However, in my view they won't do this. Instead they will continue to attack Bush's motives, spread the conspiracy theories, argue that Saddam was a benign dictator and the war has been a waste of American lives. Instead of dealing with what is to us the obvious fact that Iraq is a critical front in the war on terror because of Saddam's documented history of support for terrorist organizations and hostility to the US, they think the way to winning the argument is downplaying the menace Saddam was.

We think - and again please forgive the generalization but I am honestly trying to give you a window into this point of view - there are many facts supporting the idea that Saddam was a threat, and only a few supporting the idea he wasn't. In order to take the latter viewpoint one has to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt.

One would have to say, 'Technically, he may not have a been a danger, and should be considered innocent until he has been proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt.' We think this is just nuts. And one of the key methods of framing the debate by the Left seems to be as a duel between rival coteries of experts - 'If you think YOUR experts are right, then have a listen to what MY experts have to say.' All I can say is, good luck with that.

As I said, I have friends/acquaintances who make the same arguments you are making, so I do understand how reasonable people can come to such conclusions. I just think you've been misled. You are aware the conspiracy theory positing an internal minority with 'dual allegiences' has a rich tradition in American history, right? Masons, Catholics, and Jews have all had their turn to come under suspicion. I know I am not a skilled enough rhetorician to change anyone's mind - heaven knows I've tried to do so with my friends and have failed miserably - but I will say: Be skeptical about conspiracy theories, be very skeptical.

Thank you for the civil reply and the opportunity for vigorous debate. I agree that 20 or 30 years from now, most of these questions will have been settled.

I was going to add 'assuming the neocons haven't completely taken over the world' but figured that would just be mean-spirited.

The paranoid style of the modern progressive, to paraphrase Richard Hofstadter, deserves further examination, because otherwise reasonable people have succumbed to it in droves.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:34 | Permalink

Speaking of deportation, here's reason number 229 for pulling the plug on this gaggle of corrupt thugs: Listen to Donald Trump tell Congress about the incredible incompetence and corruption of the United Nations in renovating their building in New York.

Posted by John Climacus at 12:44 | Permalink

One in four Muslims sympathises with motives of terrorists

If you can't change their minds, you have to think about changing their accommodations. Seriously. Yemen is supposed to be just lovely this time of year.

Posted by John Climacus at 12:28 | Permalink

This is the story, friends, so for now it stays at the top. (For more recent Alpaca Burger Forum posts, please scroll down below this one.)

Lance Armstrong, in every sense of the word, is the man.

UPDATE: 1:11:46, stage win. Yes! What a way to go out. More here.

Ullrich, +0.23, for third place overall. Good to see!

FINAL UPDATE: How cool. The podium of Armstrong, Basso and Ullrich was one of those seminal images of sports history, and the final kilometer by Vinokourov was spectacular. It was one of those very rare spectator experiences that goes a level beyond all the other stuff we sit and watch; a passive experience that enriches you. It will be a long time before we have another one of these.

And for the rest of the story, Bob Roll is the pronunciation-man.

Actually, for the full Bob Roll picture, you really want to go to Bob in the Buff. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll grab another brewski.

Thank you to everyone at Outdoor Life Network. The 2005 Tour de France was one of the epic television sports programs. It was a huge media logistics project, and you all nailed it. Bravo!

Posted by John Climacus at 12:43 | Permalink

(CUE: drumroll please...)

(CUE: trumpet fanfare...)

(CUE: sound of woman screaming...)

Well, hello, how in the world are ya' anyway? I'm Andy Willoughby and I've got the three-step plan to help you and your family achieve your financial dreams, and you can do it all from the comfort of your own home; (more on the three step plan here)...

[oops, sorry, wrong script....]

Hi there, while we're trying to get the hang of this whole podcast concept we'll be periodically testing new ideas, and depending on the response we may emerge with an entirely different set of characters, mysteries, and challenging word games. Or we may just keep dishing up photographs taken around the house.

But no matter how it all shakes out, you can rest assured your intellectual and musical needs will be filled, your perceptions will be altered, and your emotions will be rubbed raw, here on the Alpaca Burger Extended Family Radio Hour, every evening from 8 pm until the coyotes begin to howl.

(CUE: Japanese gong....)

For our first and only order of business today, following our non-vacation-related absence, we wish to thank Ed, of MonkeyWatch who unbelievably immediately picked up on the Soupy Sales image in an otherwise tortuously conceived post which we assumed would not only not create any reader interest itself, but actually might quash the last, dying flickers of interest in this site which could still exist around the Internet.

Alas, thanks to Ed and, of course, Bob Roll (or 'Rolleux', as the French say), the Alpaca Burger Forum is alive and kicking again this week, with the courage to go on for another day.

My repetoire of Sixties pop culture references is probably not what it should be, thanks to things that happened in the Seventies, but for what there is I am deeply gratified when they don't go unnoticed. Congrats, Ed: You are a wise, wise man.

(CUE: Pachelbel, Canon in D Major...)

(Switch to mellow, "classical music radio station announcer guy" voice...)

By the way, if you're a primate like I know I am, you're probably looking for a way to learn more about, keep an EYE out, and ENJOY the many wonderful species of monkeys with whom we share this globe. Hi, I'm Johannas Climacus, the voice of SMOOTH classics 105, and in my book there's no better place to watch the monkeys, than MonkeyWatch. Whether you love them, or WANT to love them, or even if they just plain scare you half to death, you should join me and head on over to MonkeyWatch, every single day.

(Switch to deep, fast-talking "legal fine print disclaimer guy" voice)

Not recommended for inmates, ingrates or anyone professing an irrational fear of the outdoors. Women who are pregnant or nursing should not read MonkeyWatch without first discussing it with their husband or physician. MonkeyWatch is not responsible for damaged computer screens caused by rapidly expelled coffee or for shattered, falsely optimistic conceptions of reality. MonkeyWatch takes no responibility for the treachery of monkeys, which has been universally recognized since the beginning of time.

(CUE: sound of locomotive approaching)

(Switch back to regular voice...)

In other news...

(CUE: mad scientist hysterical laughter...)

...some call it a 'religion of peace', many of course call it the 'religion of beheadings', but what really IS 'Islam'? Talk radio host Michael Graham says: It's a problem!

FRIDAY, JULY 22, 2005

"WE ARE AT WAR WITH FUNDAMENTALISM, NOT ISLAM." Oh, really? Then show me the fundamentalist Christian Church teaching its members to murder people because of their religion. Or the Hindu or Buddhist sect that says suicidal attacks against civilians are God's will? Show me any other religion that has a sect of any size practicing murder to advance their theology. You can't, because they don't exist.

The undeniable fact of the war of terror launched against the West 40 years ago is that the source of the violence is Islam. If every terrorist converted to any other religion tomorrow but kept all the same political and economic complaints they have today, terrorism would end immediately. There are people of all faiths around the world who hate America, don't support our policies regarding Israel, think George W. Bush is a dictator, etc. But the only group of people willing to blow up buses because of it: Muslims.

Islam does seem to be, on the whole, a mess. News like this has evoked the thought: Hey, a simple solution might be to call it the 'Religion of Deportees.'

But that would be too extreme. For now. Some Muslims are trying to clean up the mess and unless things get worse here in the U.S., they should be given that chance. For now.

The more problems caused by foreign Muslims create new problems for American non-Muslims, the shorter that grace period will be.

And that's the memo.

(CUE: theme from Jaws...)

Posted by John Climacus at 01:27 | Permalink

Imagine my surprise upon checking up on the Forum from my friend's wife's computer, and what should come up on the screen but a very bold profane word! Spelled right out there in the title of the message, no less! I appreciate Bob Rolle as much as the next guy, but I assume this will be cleaned up pronto. I also see a general tendency to employ more colorful language than we have usually featured here in the past. While I realize there is some effect to be gained by speaking in the authentic vernacular, let's keep it clean, ok? As someone said here recently, it is a slippery slope.

On a related note, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take the news that my Costco barbecue unit has become the object of a spiritual struggle. Am I also going to find flower petals, incense and food offerings around my lawn mower? Because take a look, it's a pretty dandy mower. I appreciate Mr. Climacus fulfilling the house-watching duties with religious zeal, truly I do, but I just ask one thing: Stay away from the Dyson! Leave it in the closet; marvel not at its sleek design; be ye not tempted by its otherworldly powers. Please use the Dust-Buster if you need to vacuum.

I don't want to be hiring an exorcist when I get home.

Also, I've seen some mention of the herb garden; I assume you are drying and bagging them? Keeping the buds trimmed off before they get a chance to flower? I put a lot of work into that experiment and do hope to have a nice stockpile of basil at least.

My Internet access will likely continue to be limited, so I won't be able to keep a very close eye on things. Thanks for watching my place. I am trusting you with all this, John old boy. Please try and keep it together.

Posted by drturner at 12:36 | Permalink

(aka 'Bob Roll'....not sure where I got 'Rolle' from but there it is, another mistake for time immemorial, whatever that means...)

[Please see Editor's notes at bottom of post].

I've been watching the Tour de France for the past 10 years or so and I must say the coverage has gotten better every year. This time, we are talking the best TV in history. It is that darn-tootin' good. Bob 'Rolle' Roll is a big part of it.

[If you're not watching the next week of the Tour de France you are missing one of the great episodes in sports history. The Lance Armstrong story is legendary stuff; I mean, we're talking Jim Thorpe, Muhammad Ali, Bobby Jones. If you have kids, make them watch this.]

If you're a cycling purist you are already watching the live morning coverage. If you are a dabbler, I highly recommend you watch the prime time 'expanded coverage' with Bob. It is television at its finest.

Bob 'Roll' Rolle's thing is he knows cycling really well, and he is NOT politically correct. He consistently mispronounces the name of the race in a way that sort of pokes a stick in the eye of French-language purists.

The proper way to pronounce Tour de France is 'tour duh fronz' (rhymes with 'you're a fonz').

Bob Roll pronounces it 'tour day frants' (rhymes with 'your gay pants').

Last night, the evening of July 14, 2005, Bob was confronted regarding his odd pronunciation of the name of the race. Bob's explanation was essentially to tell a story about the rude-zilla treatment he had experienced over the years from French service workers: 'We finished a long day yesterday by retiring to a lovely cafe, and took a streetside table in this beautiful bucolic setting, and waited an hour and a half for the waiter to acknowledge us..."

Then he went off on a hysterical riff. The bottom line was, as long as these language-pronunciation Nazis treat us like crap, I'm going to say it like I say it.

I can't do Bob's narrative justice so that's all I'm going to relate. It was a wonderful monologue. I was laughing too hard to think to record it and have not been able to find a transcript online yet. Let's just say, Bob Rolle has got the French figured out, and he knows how to needle them hundreds of times a day during the Tour coverage.

UPDATE: I'm starting to find some links to reconstruct Bob's bit on pronunciation. Here is part of it:

Mini-revenge for his years on the Tour when French waiters wouldn't serve water unless the American riders pronounced 'l'eau' in perfect French.

Here is some more:

when he first rode the Tour with 7-11, he noticed how snotty the Europeans in general, and the cheese-eaters in particular, were toward the American team (the only member of the team to get good press was their beautiful blond team masseuse, whose name escapes me). Everything bad was blamed on the Americans.

Crash in the rear, when 7-11 was up front? Americain!

Dropped your water bottle? Americain!

Your great aunt has gout? Americain!

You get the idea, non?

Bob said if you didn't pronounce everything just right, the Surrender Monkeys would pretend they didn't understand you. No water for you!

Mispronouncing the name of the race in interviews became their way of getting back at the the unbathed grape-stomping masses.

F--- yeah.

Do yourself a favor: Watch Outdoor Life Network, especially at prime time (DirecTV #608) for the rest of the Tour. We only have so much time on this world.

[Editor's note on profanity usage in this post: As Alpaca Burger Forum readers know, we tend to tone down our expletives so as not to offend. We do so based on the following rules. If the expletive in question is meant to be a 'bad' word expressed in a spirit of condemnation, we will soften it. For example, we hate the limp d-cked, girl-abusing, f-cking Islamic -sshole mutants gosh darn rascals who want to do unpleasant things. On the other hand when the terms are expressed in a spirit of joy, we do not hesitate to use the adjectives to full effect. 'Profanity' in the cause of celebration is not obscene. For example: 'The Nats win the pennant - frigging-A, frigging-A, frigging-A!!!' These are sentiments you could share with your grandson.]

[Additional editor's additional note: Ok, I changed this post to tone down the obscenity level. I rarely go back and change posts here, regardless of how bad they are or how 'influenced' the author may appear to have been, simply because I believe a man's mistakes should remain in full public view until the end of time. I'm just that kind of guy. But in this case we received an e-mail from someone whose opinion I respect, suggesting really bad words posted so prominently could offend people needlessly. Dr. 'Puritan' Turner got wind of it and decided to get all Amish on my a-- and clean it up for me if I did not clean it up myself. So this is not the original way it was written.]

[Editor's further additional note: For the record - the cloistered, out-of-touch record, that is - that phrase 'f--- yeah!' is from the film Team America and actually signifies a very patriotic, anti-idiotarian sentiment. As everybody who gets out of the house more than twice a month knows. It was not thrown in here 'gratuitously.' But I've toned it down anyway. Whoops, got to run: The Waltons is coming on.]

Posted by John Climacus at 11:59 | Permalink

A some point, I contend, we will have to say once and for all: 'Science has gone too far.'

Perhaps we have reached that very point.

The insertion of human stem cells into monkey brains runs a "real risk" of altering the animals' abilities in ways that might make them more like us, scientists said today...

"Our group struggled with many fundamental questions," said Ruth Faden, director of the Phoebe R. Berman Bioethics Institute at Johns Hopkins University. "Are there cognitive or emotional capacities that are unique to humans in ways that make us worthy of higher moral status? What sets one primate, including us, apart from another primate, cognitively speaking?"

What hath they wrought, but the introduction of a lying, conniving, thieving rascal of a species into the midst of human society under the alias of fellow men? Nature is laughing at us; nay, the Universe is laughing at us: Heaven, have mercy on our souls.

UPDATE: All kidding aside, read this exchange between Cliff May and David Corn. Here is May's recent important article on the Wilson affair.

Also, here.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:14 | Permalink

Up 'till very recently I did not follow this story, assuming anything that had the freaked out DUers and terminally election-losing frustrated Kossites so incredibly focused had to be nonsense. (Hey, in 2006 I want Markos raising money for Bob Byrd if Byrd makes one more run for the WV Senate seat...and I want him raising money for Tim Kaine for VA governor...and I want him raising money for whoever might be opposing Tom Delay. That's all I want).

But I just heard some stuff that makes me think this is not merely a tempest in a teapot. This is a bona fide, steaming load of horse manure. Lots of people knew what Joe Wilson's wife did for a living. The entire 'scandal' is concocted out of thin air.

I urge you to go back and read the note from Nikita from the other day.

If not for the fact that the Bush administration has set themselves up to look like fools by originally denying Karl Rove said things which he apparently had actually said, I'd say Rove would be having a chuckle about this. But he's probably not, since they ARE going to look like fools. Ah well, it goes with the territory. They are not gods, they are just Republicans.

UPDATE: This post is actually the note of Nikita's you should check out. (Maybe if I stopped blathering long enough I'd be able to locate the original text in the first place...)

UPDATE II: Well, well. This seems like it could be the end of the story:

Democrat leaders and editorialists accusing Karl Rove of treason for referring to CIA agent Valerie Plame in an off-the-record interview are ignorant of the law, according to the Washington attorney who spearheaded the legislation at the center of the controversy...

The federal code says the agent must have operated outside the United States within the previous five years. But Plame gave up her role as a covert agent nine years before the Rove interview, according to New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof.

Kristof said the CIA brought Plame back to Washington in 1994 because the agency suspected her undercover security had been compromised by turncoat spy Aldrich Ames.

Moreover, asserts Toensing, for the law to be violated, Rove would have had to intentionally reveal Plame's identity with the knowledge that he was disclosing a covert agent.

Toensing believes Rove's waiver allowing reporters testifying before the grand jury to reveal him as a source – signed more than 18 months ago – shows the Bush strategist did not believe he was violating the law.

A nice cold shower in July is just what my hometown needs. Now with the silly season over, I'm assuming we will all go back to focusing on the important things occurring here in DC.

Posted by John Climacus at 11:06 | Permalink

The problem, as indicated the other day, shall be formulated thusly:

How does one go about using and appreciating an OUTSTANDING grill without slipping into WORSHIP of said grill? (First in a series)

Background information: While Dr. Winston Turner is out of town, I have been charged with 'keeping an eye' on his place. This means plants watered, herbs harvested, mail brought in and ...well, what have we here: An absolute beast of a barbecue which certainly needs to be fired up once in a while, if nothing else to keep the spiders from establishing a toehold.

To that end, over the past five days I have prepared approximately eight meals on this wonderful, exceptional, practically flawless piece of outdoor living equipment, and I must say my initial feelings of admiration have evolved into something a tad...deeper:

Before we attempt to solve the problem, here are a few observations about this hot little number:

-Dr. Turner purchased the Sonoma at Costco for only $499. Comparable stainless units at Barbecues Galore cost at least twice as much. (How is this possible? Hint: May you live in interesting times.

-It's heavy as a tank and solid as a Mercedes. Everything but the gas hose, tires and electrical wires are 304 food-service-quality stainless steel. With a little 3M Stainless Steel Cleaner it buffs to a magnificent shine (mmmm, buffing�.)

-With all three internal burners fired up it reaches 700 degrees in about 12 minutes. Sear away!

-A double layer of heat-dispersing plates keeps flare-ups to a minimum.

-The electric starter ignites the burners in three seconds or less every time.

-Separate rear-mounted infrared rotisserie burner reaches full heat in a minute.

-Only weak points I've observed: More rivets than welds, and the rotisserie bracket was 1/4 inch too wide and needed to be bent in a bit to keep the bar from popping out of the motor.

Last night's offering... hmm, maybe a bad choice of words there ... was a 5 lb leg of lamb, marinated for 12 hours in a mixture of lemon juice, lemon zest, garlic, mint, basil, apple cider vinegar and black pepper. On the rotisserie at high heat for 1.5 hours. Remove from bar and let stand for 10 minutes. Result:

I think we may actually have a double-commandment infraction developing, because there's some covetousness creeping in as well. It is a slippery, slippery slope...

Posted by John Climacus at 05:16 | Permalink

It's up at File It Under.

Heh.

Posted by John Climacus at 11:36 | Permalink

After much reflection on the events of the day, I think we have bigger problems than abortion on demand in this country.

A journalism professor at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania, who previously described the United States as the "Great Deceiver," is criticizing the "attempt to involve U.S. Muslims in London guilt..."

...Siddique has authored a booklet that referred to America as the "Dajjâl," a term that is variously translated by Muslims as either the "Antichrist" or "Great Deceiver." Siddique has argued that previous Muslim efforts to link Israel to the anti-Christ were wrong, that the United States had to be the anti-Christ since it was providing Israel with so much financial assistance.

He has also labeled the U.S. the "Evil Empire" of our age. "Muslims must engage in jihad to defeat Dajjâl," he wrote, adding: "The ideas of guerilla warfare, denial of easy occupation to the enemy, and ability to use small weapons should be made available to every Muslim."

I think the priorities for considering the next Supreme Court justice should be finding someone who will vote to keep Motel Gitmo open for business in case of any attempts to shut it down through the courts; and also, if the opportunity presents itself, vote to lower the standard for admission so assclowns like the fellow quoted above will have less civil liberties than those of us who do NOT preach support for jihad.

Sure, abortion as a form of birth control is a terrible thing, but the pro-life movement would do better to expand the focus on educating everyone why that is so - because otherwise even if there does arrive a majority on the Court in favor of overturning Roe v Wade, there will still be an uphill battle to fight in most of the states. But if you convince folks not to choose abortion in the first place, then the 'progressive' interest groups can march and howl and raise all the money they want and abortions will still become rarer.

Maybe it's possible to nominate a justice who will make everyone on the conservative side happy. If not, the Bush administration should be sure to err on the side of law enforcement and security. A libertarian inclined to protect the liberties of those who support the Islamofascists would, in my book, be more dangerous than someone who is soft on parental notification for 14 year olds.

Posted by John Climacus at 11:27 | Permalink

The HUFU: Human Flesh Alternative guy I spoke of earlier is now in the blogging business with Cannibal Diaries.

He's an equal opportunity offender. More so than anybody I know of, and I tend to read a lot of different points of view.

If you don't know what that means, then go read his blog. Unfortunately he's got some proprietary software written and they forgot to make permalinks possible, but these two paragraphs are from the entries for June 29 and July 8, respectively:

...You object to the stoning to death of some random woman in northern Nigeria, because she has been convicted of adultery? Well, maybe it's none of your beeswax. The same people who sneer at the British for "cultural imperialism" can say with a straight face that they have the right to lecture Nigeria in matters of law and tradition. I think more importantly, maybe there is a different set of balances and considerations at work here that differ from, say, tony suburbs of New York. Maybe, just maybe, adultery is considered a very serious transgression because it can lead to inter- and intra-tribal conflict, leaving scores of people dead.

...So, Justice Ginsberg writes high-minded opinions about the rights of little girls to play soldiers just like the boys, and maybe fifty or so such girls in fact get to actually play soldiers, and meanwhile hubby Marty is making sure the rich and privileged escape taxation at the expense of the rest of society. And we applaud the Ginsburgs for their Devotion To The Cause Of Justice blahblahblah. Well, I think creating symbolic but largely empty rights for a class of people, while taking their hard-earned money out of their pockets, has been a pretty good deal for the Ginsburgs. And what I certainly must admire them for is that they are lauded for this scam. Bravo.

Yep, you read that right: Pro-stoning of Muslim women, and anti-Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

He's the guy at the party who doesn't seem to consider it a successful evening until he's managed to piss off every single person there. Well that's a slight exaggeration: In practice he's actually quite the gentleman regarding the fairer sex, despite the passage above, and generally seems intent only on pissing off every MALE in the room.

And it's not just a matter of conceit: Hufu Man does have political principles, which if I had to describe would be something like 'so far to the left you might think he's on the right.' As you've probably deduced already, supporting the right of Nigerians to stone their women and condemning Justice Ginsburg for hypocrisy are not mutually exclusive but rather reflect an extreme multiculturalist/leftist viewpoint which is honest enough to follow principles to their logical conclusion without regard for political concerns.

He sort of reminds me of what Michael Kinsley once did on his periodic good days, but without Kinsley's utterly predictable anti-GOP slant on every issue.

So I'm blogrolling Cannibal Diaries, and I recommend you check him out at least once in a while. He can be relied on for a non-traditional perspective on just about any issue. He can be counted on to say what progressive leaders would be saying if they were intellectually honest.

Posted by John Climacus at 12:00 | Permalink

...for what that's worth.

From Lambro:

Migration from liberal bastions in the Northeast and Midwest to the Sun Belt states will boost Republican electoral strength in the coming decade, making it tougher than ever for Democrats to win the presidency without carrying states in the South or Southwest.

The Census Bureau's latest projection of population shifts, the first in eight years, shows a dramatic movement from the North to Southern and Western states over the next 30 years. The study points to a political movement as well.

Posted by John Climacus at 04:38 | Permalink

In response to a recent post here, the disciplined nikita demosthenes - whose frequent discursions on this and discursions on that tend to reflect more research and analysis than we muster in a typical month; and who I definitely would want on MY side in a knife fight debate - has graced us with his observations on the Valerie Plame controversy joke fiasco BS.

We should remember where the whole Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame story started: Valerie Plame should be 'frog-marched' out of Washington

... Joe Wilson's wife is not a foreign spy - she's a desk jockey at Langley (with a cushy place in Georgetown) who's responsible for ... wait for it ... tracking down WMD for our country!

Why on earth did someone with that very important responsbility pre-judge the Niger-Iraq-yellowcake story as "this crazy story"? I mean, its only our national security and stuff - no biggie. Someone let Val Plame know: the Niger-Iraq-yellowcake "crazy story" turned out to be true.

How many other WMD leads has Ms. Plame given short shrift? Do you know about any more "crazy" WMD leads, Val? Maybe you should go look at those files again. Does her high security clearance prevent her from getting fired for not giving a whit about national security risks for which she's the responsbile agent?

Not only did Ms. Plame dismiss one of the key pieces of intelligence regarding Iraq potentially creating the Arab bomb - she successfuly recommended her gadfly husband to be the sole investigator to go check out the lead! How many millions of dollars go to the CIA for intelligence gathering each year? And yet the only person we have to send to Niger to see if Saddam is building a nuke is ... the house husband of an agent at Langley?

What's next? Will Valerie Plame send the family golden retriever to look for missle silos in North Korea?

This is the real story that the mainstream press won't touch with a ten foot pole. What heads should roll at Langley for entrusting our national security to the whims of the Wilson-Plame family travelogue?

Unbelievable. Shameful. Putting nepotism above national security. Fire Valerie Plame now. She's a very real risk to our national security. -nikita demosthenes

UPDATE: (Sorry, Nat: here's the original link; thanks for posting).

Posted by John Climacus at 03:45 | Permalink

Following the Live 8 concerts, which we all now know was the greatest feel-good event since the seventh day when the Creator of the universe rested, Joe Carter has been inspired to kick it up even one notch further: a blog link fest celebrating raised consciousness about pretty much everything ever imagined since before the beginning of time.

No exaggeration.

I am pleased to announce that I will be raising my personal consciousness about: outdoor grilling WITHOUT turning one's grill into an idol.

There is far too much home-and-garden idolatry about, and barbecue idolatry probably tops the list of sins. Lawn worship comes a close second, yes, but the quickest road to hell is paved with 304 stainless steel and you can take that to the bank. I'm going to help mankind navigate through that particular minefield, after I figure it out for myself.

Posted by John Climacus at 06:03 | Permalink

I have to say, this is one of the most amusing things I have seen in quite some time, and it is humorous on a number of levels. Although I encourage you to go over and savor it from beginning to end, here is a snippet:

How Is AirAmerica Doing?

...I realized I needed a baseline to compare AAR's growth to. I chose Rush Limbaugh...

For the selected cities, the overall listenership of Limbaugh/baseline is about 3.8 million this quarter as opposed to about 1 million for AAR. And don't think to yourself that AAR has 1/4 the listenership of Limbaugh, because Limbaugh is on in many more cities where I didn't even collect data because AAR has no presence there. That said, Limbaugh's 3.8 million is down from 4.4 million at the Fall peak whereas AAR's 1 million is up from 800,000 in the Fall...

(If you want something you can quote, here's some percentages: The mainstream talk radio market, represented by Limbaugh, is down 1% since the Winter 04 ratings while AirAmerica Radio is up 32%.)

It comes with graphics and some good links, and the poor fellow obviously put some solid work into the project, but that little caveat 'don't think to yourself that AAR has 1/4 the listenership of Limbaugh, because Limbaugh is on in many more cities where I didn't even collect data because AAR has no presence there' sure does cast a skyscraper-sized shadow over this flea turd of good statistical news about Air America radio. But he plows ahead - one of the graphs is quite creative in its optimism - and to be honest he inspires me.

Therefore, I decided to do an analysis of my own, because frankly I am in need of a little good news, too.

What I wanted to learn was how the Alpaca Burger Forum is really doing in terms of traffic since the beginning of this year, so I pulled up the data from our Sitemeter tracker.

Then, I needed a benchmark, so I decided to go with a pretty solid, well established site that to some extent reflects the political bent and range of issues you find covered here: Glenn Reynolds' InstaPundit.

Now, in terms of real numbers the results initially were not encouraging. As close as I can figure, InstaPundit got about 4,780,000 visits in January 2005, whereas the Alpaca Burger Forum struggled to break the 450 mark.

But when you look at the trend through the last full month of this year, June, things start to get interesting for us. VERY interesting.

Apparently things haven't been going so great for Glenny-poo, because by June his little InstaPundit baby was wheezing along with barely more than 3,840,000 visits - a traffic decline of more than 19% in the first half of this year alone.

The Alpaca Burger Forum, on the other hand, is sitting fat and sassy, comfortably over 600 visits for the month - a traffic INCREASE of nearly 34%. Here is a graph of our respective trends for the year:

It seems pretty obvious that these are two Web sites moving in opposite directions, and truthfully, it's kind of nice to be riding the rising wave.

Glenn buddy, I'll never forget the influence you had on me way back when, during MY lean years, and now that the table has turned I'll do anything I can to help you out: So here's a little something for you, and no quid pro quo is required.

UPDATE: Jeez louise: 'Mock lightly'??

Methinks my point did not get across, as the intention of this post was to mock the desperate individual attempting to compare the number of Air America listeners with that of Rush Limbaugh's radio show. No one's 'mocking' Glenn Reynolds here except in the context of making a point.

Get it? Air America Radio is to Rush Limbaugh as the Alpaca Burger Forum is to Instapundit. I guess we'll have to add an overdeveloped sense of subtlety to our list of shortcomings.

Posted by John Climacus at 07:04 | Permalink

There tends to be so much going on at the Corner these days that it's easy to overlook any particular post. So in case you missed it, this one from Derb says well what I think a whole bunch of people are thinking (assuming, as I always do, there are a whole bunch of people whose views mirror my own: I'm optimistic about humanity that way).

Wars should be fought with the utmost ferocity, to the complete destruction and humiliation of the enemy, and without any regard to casualties among noncombatants in his territories. To fight a war in any other kind of way is to sow dragon's teeth, as the second half of the 20th century illustrates. Yet such a war is impossible under present Western sensibilities. America has now been fighting the War on Terror for longer than we fought WW2 -- yet we have not even captured Osama bin Laden!

I do believe that people know these things instinctively and will not for long whole-heartedly support a half-hearted war -- not in Britain, not in America. These kinder'n'gentler wars of the present age will never have strong public support, and so will always be tied, or lost.

Most likely the terrorists will get nukes and destroy a couple of our cities, with casualties in the 6- or 7-digit range. We shall then revert to tribal-warfare mode and do to our enemies what our fathers did to the Japanese, or perhaps even what our great-grandfathers did to the Plains Indians. It would be better to do those things before we lose the cities, but of course we can't.

I could not even count all the times I've watched the news and thought: If our country is really at 'war', then WTF are we doing playing patty cake with these a-holes and hanging our troops out to dry like traffic cops in Armageddon? And what about that whole 'either you're with us or you're with the terrorists' deal? Obviously we don't have a military large enough to take on every loser regime in the world, but why haven't we at least dropped many kilotons of ordinance on the eastern half of Syria?

On the other side of Iraq, in addition to sending millions of dollars in cash and weapons to the Iranian opposition groups - which one has to hope we are already doing - why not also some periodic target bombing of mullahs? It could be like: hey mullahs, we understand your sovereignty and all, but sometimes we're going to need to assassinate the f-ck out of 20 or 30 of you, until you quit screwing around with us in Iraq. So if the Shi'ites in Iraq want to start having joint military operations with the Iranians, they'll just have to schedule their exercises around the activities of the U.S. Air Force. If we're bombing mullahs on Monday, then wait and have your war games on Wednesday or so. This seems reasonable and fair.

UPDATE: Confirming my optimism about humanity - read Straight White Guy's take: 'this is a war for the survival of our way of life...'

Presumably more folks will be coming around to this way of thinking, and less and less will give ear to the siren song of the Professional Election-Losing Theorists: 'There is no terrorist threat.'

Posted by John Climacus at 11:46 | Permalink

Ok, I just realized the reference in the previous post doesn't really do justice to why I, your humble narrator but a man of clearly above-average cultural tastes, would count Nino Greasemanelli, aka 'The Greaseman', among the personalities in my favorite-celebrity repertoire.

This thread from a Gene Weingarten chat session does a pretty good job highlighting both the zenith and nadir of Grease's talents (you have to read through a lot of other stuff to get the full effect but it's worth it; to cut to the chase go to the very bottom).

More here.

Summary: He was the most brilliant and talented radio act since Firesign Theatre (the OLD Firesign Theatre) - totally creating a 'theater of the mind' experience - at the highest peak of fame, money, reputation and national syndication, when he made a VERY insensitive remark in 1999 for which he was busted down to the total obscurity of piddling-powered AM and the hills of West Virginia. Where he still lingers, even to this very day.

Posted by John Climacus at 07:44 | Permalink

...is the main reason for the lack of posting here. Some fatigue involved, some family obligations, and a bit of the day-job-runneth-over-into-night syndrome. (I have 400 hours of annual leave accumulated - and would have a lot more than that if not for claiming vacation time for days I actually ended up working - and NOT because I get European-style vacation benefits).

When you're living that kind of life, it doesn't matter if your job is in Maui or Schenectady. As a funny guy (albeit a fallen one) once said, "and they ask me why I drink!"

But things are ever so slowly turning around, you mark my words.

Posted by John Climacus at 07:04 | Permalink