Of cowards and cretins
Thursday, 14 July 2005 | 87 readers so far
BAGHDAD, Iraq — A car bomber sped up to American soldiers distributing candy to children and detonated his explosives Wednesday, killing up to 27 other people, U.S. and Iraqi officials said. One U.S. soldier and about a dozen children were among the dead.”
My enemy is pathetic, and my enemy saddens me. For my enemy is craven. I can understand being angry enough, or sick enough, or depressed enough to take one’s own life. Since a human being, in my belief system, owns his or her own life, I have no issue with you if you wish to commit suicide.
When you blow up children along with yourself you are a cretin. If Allah smiles on such human offal, then Allah is unworthy of worship. I’m starting to wonder if the Middle East is host to the world’s largest population of adult retards.
This is why I rejoined the armed forces of the United States. To wipe out these baby killing, self-loathing, hate worshipping morons and stop their pointless quest to deprive others of life.
Anyone who has read my blog more than once should have a clear idea that I have quite a number of points on which I am disatisfied with Western civilization and with the current system of American government. I do not feel represented by the current crop of elected leaders in Washington, D.C. The American political process is obviously dangerously close to be broken. I could march into a random crowd and blow myself up, sure. But I long ago learned that kicking oneself in the ass as hard as possible is counterproductive.
If you are considering becoming a human murder bomb, it would serve you well to remember that all you are doing is hardening the hearts of all those who witness your imbecilic act of meaninglessness.
Allow an infidel to quote the Quran to you. “Respect and honor all human beings irrespective of their religion, color, race, sex, language, status, property, birth, profession/job and so on [17/70]”
May Allah reject all those who spit upon the life He created and cast you into darkness.
Other opinions:
Mike’s America
Angel Dressed in Black
Jujutsi Generis
Mudville Gazette
1 July 14th, 2005 at 4:36 pm
superman says:
Maybe if America hadn’t killed over 100,000 people in a stupid-assed fake war, your “enemies” wouldn’t want to blow up soldiers handing out candy to children in a feeble attempt to indoctrinate them. YOU are pathetic.
2 July 14th, 2005 at 6:28 pm
Trevor says:
So if your country was invaded you would blow up the children of your countrymen in retaliation. Perhaps it is you who are pathetic? Or just brain damaged.
Please go back to daydreaming about “the shocker.” I’m sure that women are just lined up to be serviced by your skilled hands. I’ll bet they like you even more when they hear your awesome music on the “Ultimate Blog.”
Please, take a logic class.
3 July 14th, 2005 at 8:18 pm
OTTMANN says:
Good post and right on. The Bible tells us all we need to know about what’s going to happen with Babylon. It’s coming at an ever more rapid pace.
4 July 14th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
GunnNutt says:
Thank you, thank you, thank you Trevor!! For re-enlisting and going where I cannot. You’re now on my permanent reading list and I’ll be checking you often.
5 July 14th, 2005 at 9:38 pm
Trevor says:
The actual pre-departure training will begin in September, GunnNutt. The first two months of posting may be somewhat sporadic and then things should settle down. Stay tuned, and thanks for your support.
6 July 15th, 2005 at 2:07 am
superman says:
Ha ha - made you get angry! Way to take the high road. Glad you liked the song I wrote.
It was pretty easy, actually - took about an hour to record the whole thing. I had one before that was a dance tune that was about having “relations” with my blog, but I got bored with it after a month.
Also, I wonder what’s more morally reprehensible 1. indiscriminant suicide bombings by desperate people fighting an evil foreign invader or 2. indiscriminant warfare against a poor, defeated nation (remember the first war that killed countless children if you include the sanctions and aftermath). Enlighten me.
7 July 15th, 2005 at 3:36 am
GunnNutt says:
1. We are not an “evil foreign invader”. If you think we are, then you think like a retared terrorist.
2. Iraq was not a “defeated nation”. Saddam’s plan to annex Kuwait was defeated, but not his country.
3. By “sanctions and aftermath” do you mean the Oil-for-Palaces program? That was working out quite well for our “allies”, wasn’t it?
8 July 15th, 2005 at 3:39 am
GunnNutt says:
Make that “retarded” terrorist.
9 July 15th, 2005 at 4:00 am
Jake says:
Calling brave soldiers baby killers accomplishes nothing. Are some of the soldiers the United States have evil? Yes, but most of them are good people who want to help others. I don’t know how many people remember the baby’s in Kuwait that were murdered not by U.S. soldiers but by Saddam Hussein. I have said before I am neither for nor against the war but I will continue to say the Iraq war was justified on the basis that Saddam Hussein was an evil murderer. Trevor, thanks for serving and protecting myself and all the other Americans even if they don’t respect you for it.
10 July 15th, 2005 at 5:35 am
Trevor says:
Superman,
You have many more choices than the citizens of most countries in the world. I know because I’ve lived in four countries other than the United States and I’ve visited many, many more.
While I don’t get a warm fuzzy thinking of waging war to solve problems, sometimes, it is the only way to solve them. War is not an equation. Noncombatant casualties can only be minimized, they can’t be completely eliminated.
The difference between myself, the average citizen soldier representing the United States and other countries that at least pay homage to freedom, even if they haven’t achieved it, or are slowly slipping away from it, is that I have zero desire to control people, except in cases where those people wish to kill me. In fact, I want to foster societies that offer individuals the maximum choices about how they live their lives. My efforts in fostering such societies are often flawed. I make painful mistakes. My government makes painful mistakes. But, in general my leaders and I place a high value on two important things - a) human life b) individual choice in how we carry out our own lives and how those around us carry out theirs
The average terrorist leader on the other hand, has no interest in a) preserving and protecting the lives of others or b) promoting freedom of choice. These people are only concerned with their own ability to make choices and control other people. They will use any means, including killing little children, to achieve their ends. By choosing their path, they have made me their enemies.
I could ignore them until they come to my house. If enough people like me - people who would prefer to be left alone to live free - chose to ignore the philosophy of power by death, then one day there would be a knock on my door. I would be told to submit or die. I’d fight and die.
I hope there are enough people like me around who are willing to band together so that we can defeat this mentality and the people who espouse it. If the American government pursued a policy of purposely blowing up children to achieve political goals, I would resolutely take up arms against it too.
I may die in Iraq, or come back mentally scarred, or physically unwhole, or have an epiphany and decide that the American government has evil intentions for Iraqis. Hopefully, none of these things will happen. Hopefully, I will be contributing to an overall increase in freedom, economic prosperity and human rights in Iraq while decreasing the likelihood of the spread of this fundamentalist extremist cancer elsewhere in the world.
The key difference between the United States and the people that we are currently fighting in Iraq is the value system of both sides when taken as a whole. You openly disparage George W. Bush on your blog, or whatever you call it. If you had done the same to Saddam Hussein while he was in power, you would have ceased to exist. Think about it when you’re criticizing and then if you still need to criticize, I’ll respect you even if your presentation and purpose are slightly askew.
Jake & GunnNutt, thanks for your support. I promise to uphold the ideals the three of us share in Iraq and try to spread the message of libertarian thought despite my flaws and failures as a human being.
11 July 15th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
superman says:
Actually, that was a pretty good post. I apologize for my drunken crassness last night. I do disagree with the notion, however, that American soldiers can be placed on a moral plane above terrorists. They are indoctrinated in the exact same way as suicide bombers except that they are committing acts of evil in the name of their government instead of in the name of Allah. (And don’t try to claim that the US government is somehow tied to the Christian God by default). In addition, they believe that they are going to live- suicide bombers obviously don’t. I hate terror as much as you. I hate terrorists because they kill. I also think that American soldiers are committing “great” acts in the name of horrible evil. If you think that the US government is really a moral government, review A.The entire history of the United States and B.the last fifty years of military and interventionist activity. If you want details, just ask and I’ll do a power point presentation. In the grand scheme of things, a nation built on blood and slavery and horror is no better than a single, frightened, suicide bomber who believes his salvation from this world will come with the push of a button.
12 July 15th, 2005 at 3:50 pm
Trevor says:
Superman,
The problem with your assessment is that while the U.S. has a litany of government mistakes under its belt, it’s also the government that has come the closest to giving the most people in history freedom.
I’m not a fan of the interventionism and polticial meddling we do, and I preach against our bad policies all the time. And no one in the government of the U.S. has physically tried to silence me using force.
It’s not a perfect world, and you won’t be seeing anything close in your lifetime, nor will I. You might as well accept that and decide what sort of framework you want to live inside, because we all have boundaries. Pick your battles wisely.
I know the history of this country better than most people who were born here, and it’s filled with mistakes and injustice. Now go look at the history of any other country that’s 250 or more years old and find a better one. Then we’ll continue this conversation.
13 July 15th, 2005 at 4:58 pm
superman says:
How about Canada? I’ll retort futher tomorrow - it’s late.
14 July 15th, 2005 at 6:53 pm
Trevor says:
I emigrated from Canada. It’s socialist. Take a look at the wealthiest and most successful Canadians - unless they are involved in natural resource harvesting, they live, work and play in the United States.
15 July 16th, 2005 at 6:19 pm
superman says:
Socialist? Nonsense. Canada has incorporated certain aspects of socialism into their government policies - the ones that help people achieve better standards of living such as health care and education. In the grand scheme, however, Canada has pursued only vague portions of socialism. I hardly think emigrating from a country makes you an expert.
As far a sell-outs “playing” in the US - so what? They’ve just been indoctrinated by the market system more than real people. For me, wealth has nothing to do with money - it has to do with accomplishment and intellect. But whatever…
Of course the US has come close at times to having a great, free society. There are very dire dangers, however, involved in the pursuit of total Laissez-faire economics - dangers that WILL lead the US to fascism if it is not careful. Watch the media.
If the US had gone to war on a real premise, I would have had no problem. Imaginary WMDs, Saddam, links to terror - Gimme a break.
16 July 16th, 2005 at 8:55 pm
Trevor says:
Superman,
So if you leave one place for a better opportunity elsewhere you’re a sellout? You’re right, emigrating from a country doesn’t make me an expert. But I do know the best job I could find the last time I lived in Canada was at McDonald’s. I also know it took six weeks to get seen by a doctor when I was sick up there. I had to walk around with a lump under my arm the size of a baseball. My arm hung uselessly due to the pain. Here, I have private insurance and can be seen by any doctor anytime I want.
For me, wealth has everything to do with money, because money allows me to enjoy my intellect. It opens up new horizons. It oils the machinery of life and keeps it from squeaking.
I don’t want fascism or socialism and I do watch the media. If you browse backwards through this blog a little bit you’ll realize that.
Saddam was a supporter of terror anyway you slice the cheese. He also had a tendency to go to war with his neighbors unprovoked and he definitely was working on WMDs. I still think that some of those may have ended up in Syria.
The invasion was flawed, and if I had been President, I probably would have approached things from a different angle. I don’t have all the information though, and sometimes, I have to make decisions about whether I want to work from inside the existing power structure or from outside. I’ve made my choice for now, despite having lots of problems with the system we live under.
17 July 17th, 2005 at 3:27 am
superman says:
The only job you could get was at McDonalds…Wow.
Anyway, I don’t know where you went in Canada (last time). You do not have to wait to see a doctor - you might have to wait to see a specialist - and if they upped the health care funding from its horribly low levels after a decade of stupid cuts that wouldn’t be an issue. And yes - if you have money in the US (enabling the purchase of insurance) you can get treatment. The problem is - WHAT IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD IT? But I’ll skip that debate for now.
And yes - I do call people who leave Canada “sellouts” because the only thing that they care about is money. If an American left the states I’d feel the same. Sometimes things like national pride, tradition, honour, and community come ahead of the amount of money you make (and let’s be clear that I am referring to people who make decent livings in Canada and leave to make more - NOT the poor who leave - that doesn’t happen as much anyway). For example - Canadians love Wayne Gretzky. He is considered one of the greatest Canadians. He lives in the US. Why? Because the LA kings offered him more money (when he was already making the largest salary in hockey history). Although Gretzky has done great services to Canadian hockey, he evidently had no interest in comradery with his fellow Canadians. He lives and plays in the United States because he could make more money - he’s therefore a sellout.
Is that it, then? We should not care about anything but money? That justifications can be made for any act so long as the money is better? I don’t think money should rule all things.
As far as WMDs…WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Been watching FOX too much? Seriously - there are no WMDs; any WMDs that existed rusted a decade ago; no US inspectors found evidence of WMDs - and even in occupied Iraq…the are no uncovered WMDs. Iraqi citizens know nothing of WMDs - neither do captured Saddam supporters. Show me where you’re finding this (amazing) evidence of WMDs. I’m sure the US army would be interested (as well as the entire international community).
Saddam as a supporter of terror? Perhaps - if you use the US definition of terror which is “anything that we don’t like”. Let me expand: the term terrorism is defined as - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence against people or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives. Hmmm…sounds kind of like…ohhhh - hey! That’s what the US is doing right now.
Seriously - Saddam’s regime was not a nice one (with kittens and such). My objection is obvious - the US curtailed the ability of the international community to deal with issues. We’re supposedly in this new age of “wonderful” globalization in which the world is coming together to function as one. Does that mean that the West can walk all over nations whose policies they don’t like? No.
18 July 17th, 2005 at 6:23 am
Trevor says:
Technology is providing more access to information for more people than ever before. This is having two major effects - 1) the quality of the information goes does and people have to spend more time filtering it 2) People have an increasing range of choices about who they want to be and what groups they want to join.
Globalization may be bringing us closer physically, but it’s seperating many of us mentally. We’re polarizing.
Yes, if I call President George W. a terrorist, I’m sure the secret police will come and rape my wife while they make me watch. After that, they will hang me upside down from the ceiling and beat me for months until I die. Maybe they’ll dip me in a vat of acid for fun to break the monotony of beating me.
Your attitude about this is silly. I’d leave the U.S. in a heartbeat if there was a resoundingly better place to go. I’m loyal to whatever is best for me and mine.
If you can’t afford healthcare in the U.S. all you have to do is walk into an emergency room and get treated free. You might not get the best treatment possible, but you don’t get the best treatment possible in Canada either, which is why rich Canadians come to the U.S. for many specialized types of healthcare.
Nope, but I know who Dr. Rihab Taha is, and I know that she is in U.S. custody, and I’m happy about that.
Superman, it is obvious you are intelligent. If you can add critical thinking and serious investigatory research to your resume, you might actually find yourself in high demand when it comes to offering opinions. Keep working on it. You’ll probably find Bush-bashing is less fun. He has one of the shittiest jobs in the world.
19 July 18th, 2005 at 6:50 am
superman says:
Well - I’m not going to go through and retaliate to your retaliations in an excessive manner. But Here:
I am anti-globalization - that is why “wonderful” was in quotation marks.
Yes, according to the US driven news media, Dr. Rihab Taha is the most dangerous woman in the world. I’ve still yet to see evidence of WMDs.
Saddam Hussein committed great atrocities. Sure. Was he active in terrorism against the United States? No. Unless you can provide me with some evidence…
As far as my rationale regarding Canadian sell-outs - who says the US is a better place to go? Recent studies show that more Canadians are proud of their country than Americans. More Canadians are happy. More Canadians feel that their country is great. I don’t know what criteria you use to determine that the US is better - the amount of money you can make? Well - therein lies the problem - we subscribe to completely different ideologies. Not to say that the US isn’t great - just that the attitude of its citizenry doesn’t reflect as much.
I love it when I get in a debate and the person with whom I am arguing questions my logic, critical thinking skills, and so forth. Seems to me that it is a silly way to attempt to marginalize my views. Good try, however.
20 July 18th, 2005 at 7:26 am
Trevor says:
I’m not trying to marginalize your views. I’m not a big fan of the negative aspects of globalization. Global government is dangerous.
Are you Canadian? It’s the only reason I can think of for your arguments being so pro-Canada. I’m Canadian, I left. I’m happier here.
I won’t bother continuing to attempt to have a discussion with you of whether Saddam was supporting terrorism against U.S. interests. The preponderence of evidence is clear. It’s also clear that he a) did have WMDs and b) used them against the Kurds and Iranians more than once, which indicates a willingness to use them elsewhere.
I’m questioning the logic because if the evidence is there and you argue against it, then you’re being illogical. Even in the highly unlikely case that all of Saddam’s chemical arsenal was destroyed prior to the most recent U.S. invasion, he did have them at one time, he agreed to get rid of them, and then he reneged on the agreement he had with the U.N. to allow inspections. That alone is enough to justify a threat to other nations, especially his immediate neighbors, whom he had a history of initiating wars with.
I’m not trying to convince you of anything, you’ve already made up your mind. I’m just glad that I’ll never have to share a foxhole with you.
Take care, Superman.
21 July 18th, 2005 at 9:00 am
superman says:
Please share the evidence of the WMDs. If they existed 10 years ago…fine. But that doesn’t mean that they still exist in a functional form. No WMDs were ever found. Ever. Unless you can tell me where to find them - or provide evidence that they are there…what are we talking about?
The US government went to war on the premise that Saddam Hussein was a danger to his neighbours and to the US. That’s fine - great. But when the US couldn’t prove that he was a danger (note the word “proof” - if it had existed I wouldn’t be arguing) the attack was launched anyway. Is this going to be a recurring theme in the future - America proclaiming a nation a danger based on nothing but suppositions?
It seems, too, that I am not the only one who’s made up his mind. That’s what arguing is all about. That said - I’ll ignore the foxhole quip - I doubt we’d be on the same side of the field, anyway.
22 July 18th, 2005 at 10:21 am
Mike on Hilton Head Island says:
Is Superman for real or has he been overexposed to Kryponite?
I’m just going to tackle one of his banalities: 100,000 people killed in this war.
Even for a lefty, that’s a stretch. But for people who make up facts whenever it is convenient, I guess it’s easy.
I would point out however, that most human rights groups count the number of dead by Saddam’s regime running from a low of 300,000 to well over a million. Since we’ve accounted for nearly 300,000 in mass graves alone, I feel the figure is probably closer to the million.
Every day of Saddam’s regime saw more bloodshed than a bad day in Baghdad since it’s liberation.
The blood of all those innocents stains the hands of those like Superman who openly disdain the efforts of our brave troops and insightful leadership that brought this horror to an end.
Wiser persons might join in making this world a more peaceful place accompanied by true justice.
23 July 18th, 2005 at 11:11 am
superman says:
zmag.orgMike - I will hold my tongue. Saddam’s regime was horrible. So are 50 other regimes across the world. Is the US going to invade all of them? Who made the US (with its wonderful track record) in charge of morality and “justice” throughout the world? As far as the 100,000 people killed - there are many estimates, but the most commonly used one is the one based on a study by the Lancet.
That article is a reaction to The Lancet. Granted, that estimate may be a bit high, but not by much. I don’t disdain the brave troops. That sounds like you’ve been listening to inane media drivel. I do disagree with their activities, however.
Anyway, I hope America can force its opinions down the throats of all other countries with military force. Who’s next?
24 July 18th, 2005 at 6:07 pm
Trevor says:
Superman,
America chooses conflicts based on self-interest. There is nothing wrong with that. We can’t solve every world conflict and we shouldn’t try. If you want to privately donate fund to stop genocide in Darfur, for instance, you should. If you want to go over there and offer your services as a mercenary or just protect and help people using resources you’ve gathered, feel free.
American taxpayer funds are not limitless and should be used to protect Americans. I realize that you disagree that’s what we’re doing in Iraq, but hopefully you understand the point I’m trying to make. The military should be used to fight, and it ends up doing way too many humanitarian missions.
There is nothing wrong with being human and wanting to help other humans, but I don’t like the fact that our government is constantly trying to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nations. We should be more selective.