BUSH WANTS WW3, CLEARLY

US 'President' George W. Bush has now stated that he wishes to remove threats to America and freedom throughout the world.

"We are going to respond in a determined, focused, effective way by defending freedom no matter what the cost, and that includes understanding we cannot let the world's worst leaders blackmail the United States or our friends and allies with the world's worst weapons,"

What is the proof of this 'blackmail?' Who has publicly threatened the use of 'the world's worst weapons' against America and her friends? I challenge anyone to quote one leader who has publicly said 'America? She's a bitch and we're gonna put her down.'

Okay, so they don't need to have used those exact words, but even Sadam hasn't said 'We plan to nuke the USA.'

Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector in Iraq says there is absolutely no evidence of Iraq having any weapons of mass destruction. Who would better know about this than he? Ritter is an ex-Marine and a Republican who voted for George in the last 'election.' So, it's pretty clear he can be trusted. In my opinion, you can usually trust a man who has turned against his leaders for reasons of logic and morals.

Many are saying that George will attack Iraq because of this 'threat.' Even if you ignore that this would effectively be two 'wars' the US military would be fighting, the next logical question is, what's next? China doesn't like us that much and there's a list of countries behind China that also don't like us. Will there be (imagined?) threats of those countries using the 'world's worst weapons' on us then? Or will George be satisfied that freedom is protected with Iraq out of the picture?

I think every American everywhere should speak up and make their opinion known on this. Proof needs to be presented to the American people of these threats. War is no longer a logical rational for man to wage in the twenty-first century. It is against International Law to conquest for land and our borders are not being threatened by Iraq or any terrorists.

War is acceptable if a country is attacked by another. But so far, there has been no proof of even a threat of this against America. And after all that has gone on between the 2000 'election' and the recent economic scandals (some surrounding the US 'president' and his 'vice-president', it doesn't seem to be wise to trust them at their word when they claim there has been a threat issued.

America needed Pearl Harbor to get involved in World War II. America needed 9-11 to get involved in the 'war on terrorism.' But now, George is out there inviting World War III.

And too many people are silent on this front. Who was it that said:

'Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.'

I guess I just did� huh, neat�

Cool Space Stuff

COOL!

TheKey and Some Other Junk

Nothing too exciting to report. TheKey is starting to pick up steam a little bit. I've also just parked a new domain that I hope to doing more work on soon - it's for one of my favorite characters that I created myself... more on that when I've got something at the site to talk about... yesterday the extreme heat in LA made me ill - isn't that COOL? I hate this town... Aside from that zippo is going on... (well, aside from the same old crap, anyway...)

My Rump Hurts!

Ahhh life - what a pain in the ass! So much to do and I got way too much sleep last night. This of course means I have to DO this stuff. Great... thanks sleep... damn flakey alarm!!

I'LL KILL YA, DAMN IT!

DIE FOR MY FREEDOM? YOU'RE JOKING!

On July 17, 2002, the Government Reform Committee Chairman and Republican, Dan Burton said this on the Donahue show:

BURTON: We're in a war. It's going to take place and is taking place in our country right now. And so the PATRIOT Act, which you referred last night, is something that does eliminate some of our civil liberties and rights. But when you're in a fight for your survival, then you have to take some steps. And so I think this is a little bit different.

I thought our rights were more important than survival. I thought that hundreds, thousands, maybe even millions of men and women serving in our armed forces gave their lives so that we could have these rights. Saying that we as American citizens should willingly relinquish these rights to ensure our survival seems to defame the memory of those brave men and women's lives.

Did they die only to have us willingly give up the rights they gave they gave their lives for? Apparently so.

I'm not in the military. But I understand why many people went into it. I understand that many people chose to risk and lose their lives so that America and other countries can breathe the air of freedom, because it is the only air worth breathing.

Here we have an American Congressman telling us that it's okay to have some of our civil liberties and rights eliminated. I hope there isn't a heaven because if there is, there are thousands of very upset souls up there, looking down wondering just why the hell they bothered.

Laughter is a VIRUS!

What is it with laughter that makes it so contagious?

K-19: THE WIDOWMAKER (2002)

Entertaining? Yes, vaguely. The acting was fine as was the story.
Technically any good? Too much music telling us how to feel. Not enough movie making us feel things. Script seemed too accurate to actual events to allow for a really good movie.
How did I feel as the credits rolled? Note to self: Don't let National Geographic co-produce your movie. This thing really should have been an hour long and on TV.
Final Rating? SIYL (Don't expect anything exciting or action packed.)

'ALTERNATIVE' WILL ALWAYS STAY THAT WAY

You ever notice how in a single hour of American TV there are about thirty TV commercials for cars? If people stopped buying cars, not only would the car industry lose jobs and money, so would the oil industry. After all, the main reason for the oil companies to exist is to create fuel for cars. And if the oil companies lose, that means that there's a LOT less money floating around the US economy because the oil companies are HUGE. Less money in the US economy means weaker US economy which means weaker world economy.

The safety net here is that if the oil companies lose money, politicians get less money in payoffs-- I mean -- bribes -- I MEAN -- donations. The result of that would be a more free and less corrupt government. Of course, because the world economy has weakened so much, who knows what that less corrupt government would really be like or how long it would last. Weaker economy in theory could mean more chaos in the world.

So, this drive by environmentalists and people just more interested in saving the environment (and the human part of it) to ditch oil-based cars in favor of hybrid or electric cars is going to be about as successful as a career upswing for Pauly Shore.

Of course, a balanced approach to this problem would work fine, but the white men in power right now (even if they're black, they're still white) are about as balanced as the OJ Jury. The reality of the situation is that it's best for the environment if only vehicles that demand the power only an Internal Combustion Engine can give them get ICEs. If every four door sedan or two door were to have fuel cells or be a hybrid car (gas and electric) the environmental problems facing major cities all around the world would be cut in half. (Because, lets face it - in the US, half the cars ARE SUVs!)

But of course even asking for a balanced approach from the white men in charge is like asking a nun for oral sex. As a result we're getting screwed, anyway. Too bad it's the bad kind of 'screwed.' In the end it means that 'alternative' fuels, 'alternative' vehicles and just about anything else 'alternative' will stay that way.

DAMN STRAIGHT, THIS SLOPE IS SLIPPERY!

Imagine yourself, for a moment, living in pre-World War II Germany. If you read the papers regularly, you may have heard of a guy called "Adolf" who was running this up and coming political parties. Perhaps you'd know the name of the party, perhaps you wouldn't. Most likely, you'd be too busy with your job, or raising your family, or just taking care of your own life to notice.

But then, many days later (perhaps many weeks later) that you hadn't seen a good number of your friends lately. You decide that they're probably just busy with their jobs, raising their family, or just taking care of their own lives to stop by for a visit or go for coffee or anything like that. No big deal.

Weeks later (perhaps months later), you're at the market, or perhaps at a friends house for a small get together when you hear a rumor. Something about certain locals getting rounded up in particular areas of cities in your country. Nothing big, just mentions by vague acquaintances of how someone like you wouldn't want to go into those 'types of places' anyway. After all, you're not Jewish are you?

"Uh, no - of course, not." is you instant, gut response. You don't think about what it means because you're too busy thinking about being social. Get-togethers like this are for relaxation and friendly companionship, not discussions of moral issues.

Months after that (or was it longer?), you go to the movies for a relaxing night out with friends, or perhaps your loved ones. Perhaps "Das Gestohlene Herz" or "Ein Mann will nach Deutschland" or was it "Triumph des Willens"? That was it. And what a problem those Jews are. You had never really thought about it before. But it was difficult to not think about those Jews in a bad light - there's such an anti-Jew movement in the country right now - just think about those crowds from the movie. They were all together because they wanted to fight back the influence of the Jews.

But still, you're not Jewish and you don't know many Jews, so you think it's just best to go back to your life and concentrate on your job, your family, general things like that. This is precisely what you do. Too much to worry about in your own life to think about these Jews. They were in their own areas of the city, so it really wasn't a big concern of yours. Especially since after poor President Hindenburg died, Adolf Hitler was now in charge. He was the most outspoken of the people calling the country's attention to the Jew-problem. If anyone could take care of it, he could.

Months after that, you hear something in the newspapers about Jews losing rights or something, but you don't give it much thought. They were, after all, a problem according to the leaders of the country. This was just a necessary step. It's not like they were being physically harmed, or anything.

More months pass (or was it years?) and one morning on your way to work, you look around to discover a section of town you pass by every morning was a mess. It was as though the place had been torn to bits by a riot. You read in the paper later that it was some sort of retribution for a Jew who killed a Nazi. Well, that makes sense. If you can't keep your own people in line, how can you blame others for not trusting you?

The newspaper, radio and Television reports that Germany is expanding - good news, certainly! Of course, you're just trying to concentrate on personal and professional issues. You've got a family to take care of.

Then the newspaper informs you that German forces have moved into France. This is exciting for you because you've always wanted to visit Paris and think it might be easier to visit now that it's part of Germany.

At another get-together with friends, you hear more vague talk about what happened to the Jews. Your friend tells you that it's no big deal but that all of the ghettos are being emptied of the Jews. The Jewish problem is over.

A few days later you find yourself with business near an area that has come to be called a 'ghetto'. You happen to find an opening in one of the walls that separates the ghetto from the rest of the city. You watch as people, you assume they're Jews, are forced at gun point to climb into the back of a large truck. One refuses and struggles to get free. He is summarily shot and killed on the spot.

Good. Damn Jew.

How does it come to this? Did the non-Jewish Germans just wake up one day and find themselves hating the Jews? Of course not. Then how did this happen?

Slowly� very slowly� but surely.

This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while.
-- George W. Bush

Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.
-- George W. Bush

[T]o give law enforcement the additional tools it needs to track down terror here at home.
-- George W. Bush

The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them.
-- George W. Bush

We're fighting people that hates our values. They can't stand what America stands for.
-- George W. Bush

We're now interested in finding those who may attack America and arrest them before they do. We've had over nearly a thousand people have been detained in America and questioned about their motives and their intentions.
-- George W. Bush

If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
-- George W. Bush

That last quote is obviously just a joke, but if little hints like the above quotes are repeated slightly differently enough times, you'll buy into them and come to agree with anything their speaker suggests. Think about how many car commercials you see in a single hour of TV. You think they'd be pounding us with those ads if they didn't work?

I'm not saying Bush = Hitler, but the propaganda techniques are similar, you have to admit� So, listen to what he says and make sure you don't take him too seriously. What's right and wrong is really up to you anyway, right?

Ghost Town on July 4 - What's This Iraq Stuff?

Well, the fourth was fun. We visited a ghost town up near Palmdale. It was pretty neat. Not terribly exciting - not like the ghost towns you see on TV shows or anything, but it was neat being among these broken down and nearly non-existent buildings. We took pics and video, I'll try to post them soon. Hey, I'm curious - what do you think the President is up to? If anything? All this talk about invading Iraq - what's the deal? We've never 'invaded' a country before - at least not like this. And why now? Shouldn't we be paying attention to the terrorists? What's going on here? Hm... I think I feel a Bitch coming on...

Fluoride Fun (???)

HOLY FRIGGIN' CRAP!

(to get to the REALLY crazy stuff, scroll down to the brain and read how studies in China suggest Fluoridated water actually lowers IQ!...)

MEN IN BLACK 2 (2002)

Entertaining? Not really. Sort of in a Saturday afternoon cable tv there's nothing else on kind of way.
Technically any good? The FX are somewhat neat, but the one that kept sucking was Johnny Knoxville's TERRIBLE second head. Oh yeah and the script SUCKED. It stole ALL of it's gags from the last one and brought NOTHING new to the screen. NOTHING.
How did I feel as the credits rolled? Saddened. I like Will Smith. I like Tommy Lee Jones. Why did EITHER of them agree to be in this movie?
Final Rating? DNS (How many more bad movies will Will be in?)

TheKey...Half Way!

Busy... what else is new? Approaching the EXACT midway point on TheKey!! Check it out now!! It's a good time to start reading since I just started a whole new section of the story. So if you haven't been reading CLICK HERE! Oh and the PDF for June is up, too...