Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers (LARK). May 5, 2008
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
I received the following in an email forward, apprently its a bit dated, but still brilliant stuff. We can only hope such a policy is being actively operated.
LARK PROGRAM
A Lady wrote a lot of letters to the White House complaining about the
treatment of captive insurgents (terrorists ) being held in Guantanamo
Bay. She received back the following reply:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington , D.C. 20016
Dear Concerned Citizen,
Thank you for your recent letter roundly criticizing our treatment of
the Taliban and Al Qaida detainees currently being held at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba.
Our administration takes these matters seriously and your opinion was
heard loud and clear here in Washington ..
You’ll be pleased to learn that, thanks to the concerns of citizens
like yourself, we are creating a new division of the Terrorist
Retraining Program, to be called the “Liberals Accept Responsibility
for Killers” program, or LARK for short.
In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided
to place one terrorist under your personal care.
Your personal detainee has been selected and scheduled for
transportation under heavily armed guard to your residence next
Monday.
Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be
cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your
letter of complaint.
It will likely be necessary for you to hire some assistant caretakers.
We will conduct weekly inspections to ensure that your standards of
care for Ahmed are commensurate with those you so strongly recommended
in your letter.
Although Ahmed is a homicidal sociopath and extremely violent, we hope
that your sensitivity to what you described as his “attitudinal
problem” will help him overcome these character flaws.
Perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere cultural
differences We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home
schooling.
Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat
and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or
nail clippers. We advise that you do not ask him to demonstrate these
skills at your next yoga group. He is also expert at making a wide
variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you
may wish to keep those items locked up, unless (in your opinion) this
might offend him.
Ahmed will not wish to interact with you or your daughters (except
sexually), since he views all females as a subhuman form of property.
This is a particularly sensitive subject for him and he has been known
to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the
new dress code that he will recommend as more appropriate attire. I’m
sure you will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the burqa — over
time. Just remember that it is all part of “respecting his culture and
his religious beliefs”. Wasn’t that how you put it?
Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like
you keep us informed of the proper way to do our job. You take good
care of Ahmed – and remember, we’ll be watching.
Good luck!
Cordially, your friend,
George W. Bush
The insipidly impetuous Mr. Thompson. April 30, 2008
Posted by azandi in Editorials, The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
Jack Thompson is the universally ridiculed, self-appointed legal arbiter of morality in the videogaming industry; an attorney with a near uniformally failed track record, an irreverent and irrelevant empty-suit poseur whom seeks to make a profit out of tapping into the inherently fascistic psychological repository observed in liberalism, a philosophical outlook that desires to absolve parents of any concept of personal responsibility and oversight over what kind of media their children consume, in lieu of Orwellian consumer statism, wherein some board somewhere has the sole capacity to sanction what the children of America can and cannot watch. He’s an extremely dangerous and unscrupulous demagogue, but the reason you may never have heard of him testifies to how incredibly little traction, power, or influence this sorry dolt actually wields. He shows up on the news every now and then in coordination with the latest videogame release, slobbering on about how appalling it is to him that such things are sold, but no one really pays him any attention, and for good reason.
Well, he’s back in the news again somewhat, and this time in a particularly ludicrous fashion. Grand Theft Auto IV was released yesterday to tumultuous and undifferentiated acclaim and accolade, its been adorned perfect scores from gaming critic outlets across the board, and its been hailed as one of the most expansive, sophisticated, organic and dynamic video entertainment experiences ever designed. In all honesty, these games have never really been my cup of tea, but I’ve always had my respect for them; yeah yeah, you can solicit hookers and all the rest, but if our culture can revel at the sight of cerebral pornography the likes of the unforgivable ilk on MTV, or watch people being graphically eviscerated limb from limb in every new B horror movie, then pixel-sex is tame, at least for those of us who are equipped with fully developed cortexes.
Enter Mr. Thompson, who, in some sort of act of visceral rage at his complete incapacity to not only ban this game, but any of the previous installments in the GTA franchise altogether, has sent a letter to the mother of Strauss Zeinick, CEO of Take-Two Interactive, the game’s publisher. This is really too much, just Pythonian absurdity: what, is he approaching a corporacte executive’s mom as some sort of threatening gesture? Or is this a replication of what little kids did when they were in grade school (Thompson certainly has the brain of a whiny little racketeering self-righteous 8 year old starving of attention), literally “tattling” one someone’s mother? is this supposed to be an elaborate ploy to embarass Mr. Zeinick? Or, even more farcically, is Thompson trying to “plead” with the woman, impelling her to “reason” with her son?
Well, here’s one comedian’s interpretation. The ever-hilarious libertarian-minded online satirist extraordinaire Peter Coffin has come up with something I think likely accurately portrays Thompson’s underlying motives.
Come on Jack, you’ve already been disbarred, discredited, and forever immortalized as an object of infinite mockery and loathing by the vast majority of people who even recognize your name. You’re a fraud and a joke as a lobbyist, a complete bust as a lawyer and a failure as a human being. You’re a vapid and unscrupulous moron that barely matters and the very essence of your being and the mission you represent is infinitely more offensive and objectionable than the materials you endeavor to eradicate. The parents of America don’t need anyone dictating to them what their children are subjected to, those of us whom still regard the Constitution as the highest law of the land also believe in a little something that may be foreign to a simian lackey like yourself: personal responsibility. If kids get corrupted by violent videogames or sex-saturated movies or what have you, its the bankruptcy of the traditional, morally-accountable and nurturing family that is to blame. And part of the reason parents have become so lax and acquiescent in the raising of their own children is because of liberal fascist bastards like you who profess that they’ll do their job for them, that the cultivation of moral discernment is the responsibility of not families, but some bureaucratic minion of the state.
So not only are you an abject mediocre person in every respect, but you’re also causing the disintegration of the American family structure as a whole. Go ahead and do us all a big favor: censor yourself.
(By the way, the Ayn Rand reference wasn’t explicit or intentional, but it just so happens you share the name of Atlas Shrugged’s antagonist “Mr. Thompson”, whom also happens to be a low-life champion of statism. To think, you’re being regarded in such prolific literary company. Its the biggest honor you could ever hope to receive.)
So, there is where Hollywood logically will lead… April 7, 2008
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
George Ouzounian has finally released his 2008 April Fool’s joke. Bit late, but better late than never has never been so true. Pure genius,, and couldn’t be more spot on.
The saddest part is some Hollywood goon is probably cognitively-destitute enough to think this is actually a worthwhile project to option greenlighting.
What’s even sadder than that is it’d probably be a box-office hit.
Barack the Silly Somali. February 25, 2008
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.2 comments

So this of Barack Obama dressed up in Somalian cultural garb has been making the rounds now, purportedly originally disseminated by the Clinton campaign. Now, the Obama outfit has been complaining about a caption that was attached to the image initially, which read something ot the effect of “if Hillary was see in a picture like this, the media would have been all over it”. Apparently thisdry and meaningless blurb was quite offensive to the touchy sensibilities of the Obama campaign, which is amusing, considering I can think of a far more suitable and damning caption that could have been embedded with this image:
“Barack Obama says he’s too embarassed to wear an American flag lapel pin, and his wife says she’s only been proud of her country since last week. But he’ll gleefully play dress up in Africa for a golden photo-op.”
Has this man no shame and the American public no self-respect? For any politician to pull this sort of flagrantly transparent and opportunistic stunt while people are actually suffering in the wretched depths of Africa is disgraceful. But coming from Barack, this really has to beone of the most vapid and contrived political gestures ever conceived of. He’ll refuse to don a tiny American flag on his shirt, but masquerading in tribal clthing and pretending like he has any real affinity with Somalians, he’ll do that without hesitation.
Pardon the cliche, but a picture really does tell a thousand words. Unfortunately the trademark stupidity of the Clintons prevented them from distributing any of the right ones with this sloppily executed antagonization effort. Hopefully people will be able to figure them out tfor themselves, its a longshot but it’s always worth hoping. Just ask Barack, blind hope is basically what his entire campaign is predicated on.
The fate all of tonight’s Oscar whores deserve…. February 24, 2008
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
This video is so damn true, I fucking hate the “red carpet exclusives” that are broadcasted ad nauseum before the event. I just don’t know who are more pathetic, the shameless, self-gratifying brainless, soulless attention-starving vessels posing for asinine questions and pandering, or the outright prostitutes with microphones conducting the questioning. It just stupefies me that human being can have so little self-respect, and so much self-loathing. But I’ll stop there, I’ve delivered enough viciously anti-Hollywood vitriol to last eons already.
I’m going to go ahead and excuse myself from this absurd spectacle this year, considering 3:10 to Yuma and American Gangster were deprived of their rightfully earned Best Picture nomination, a fantastically gross injustice that I simply refuse to observe. Hopefully all the slobbering wretches will be consumed by the children of the night as punishment.
The Rime of the American Shield: John McCain and the Return of the Classical American Action Hero. February 6, 2008
Posted by azandi in Editorials, The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
Damn it there you go, Stallone and Schwarzenegger. He now has the endorsement of Rambo and Rocky and Terminator and “Dutch” Schaefer. If the raw logistics and facts of the matter weren’t enough to convince you to vote for the only man with the credentials and experience to move this country forward in the transcendent geopolitical struggle of our time, at least let the fact that you’re not a man if you don’t know exactly, without even a particle of equivocation or inhibition who you’re voting for convince you.
In all seriousness, this really is just too perfect, I’ve been a huge Stallone fan all my life, the entire Rocky series collectively represents a touchstone, sheer magnum opus, flawlessly executed piece of filmographic genius. First Blood is point-blank the greatest action film ever made, and the recently released Rambo IV (I refuse to refer to it by its admittedly nonsensical name…First Blood -> Rambo: First Blood II -> Rambo III -> Rambo? What the hell? And Stallone said the latest might not even be the last one, so what the hell is the fifth movie in the franchise going to be called, Rambo II?!) is absolutely brilliant, even at 60 John Rambo is one uncrossable killing machine.
His films have always reverberated with a resounding sense of patriotic love and exaltation of America, contempt and disdain for bureacracy and ungrateful liberals, confident and proud affirmations of this country’s brilliance and the fact that while it has made mistakes in the past, civilization wouldn’t last 5 seconds in this fural and carnivorous planet without it. Its good to know that such a formidable creative force, independent and unmired by the disgusting pseudo-intellectual idioms of the Hollywood left, is on our side. But all this does beg the phrase, “they just don’t make em’ like they used to”.
Back in the ’40s, a new comic book character saw his inception, Captain America. He actually templated the archetypal all-American hero, he defined it, and he was awesome. He kicked Nazi ass without hesitance nor remorse, he was uncompelled by the relativistic banter of anti-war detractors, he distinguished a clear, ideological dichotomy between right and wrong and acted upon it. He was proud to be an American, and brandished his iconic shield with valor and permeated his every action with stunning pride in what he was doing.
Then came the sixties, and with it the New Society regressive-collectivist philosophy, and a newly deformed Captain America. Exit right the sterling knight of liberty defending his country from the forces of evil, and enter left the emotionally-distraught, morally-confused, self-doubt ridden Captain “Not So Proud to Be” America, drifting through inner-city ghettos, ashamed and disgraced of his shield, posing such idiotically-artifical philosophical inquires as “maybe I should have fought less and questioned more?” and other such multiculturalist moral relativism inspired liberal drivel.
This is emblematic of the apparent demise of the objectivist, unapologetically heroic, pro-American synoptical protagonist and the rise of the sinisterly masochistic, flagranlty anti-patriotic fatalistic garbage the vulgar parasitic frauds and charlatans of the Hollywood elite have been regurgitating the bast dccade. Audiences haven’t “cheered for the good guy” ina long time, how can they? When most of the politically-centric films the likes of Lions for Lambs, Rendition, and Redacted portray Islamic fundamentalists as the “courageous, beleagured heroes” and Americans as “evil, corporatist, Christo-fascist villains”, what the hell is the response supposed to be? For good reason all these films have been stupendous box-office blunders, but the fact remains generally the only time anyone actually feels for the heroes and cheers for the victory is while they’re watching sequels to old movies that were framed under this classic formula.
America needs to return to movies portraying the unambiguated struggle between good and evil, championing a self-assertive, steadfast, and headstrong citizenry actually fighting for real justice; Rambo, Rocky, Die Hard, and of course the mighty Death Wish. We’ve seen great sequels to all of these excluding Death Wish, and Stallone is purportedly planning a remake of that. But we need more, we need a full psychological and philosophical re-configuration in the American literati and cinematographic community. Only then are we going to see a serious change in the aperture by which the public perceives the world.
Here’s hoping McCain, whom perfectly embodies everything great about America and its culture, will run up the Philadelphia steps. It’d sure make one hell of a Rocky-esque American triumph story, and god knows with all the trash we’re subjected to now in both movies and the body politic, we need one.
Hillary’s preponderantly effective Christmas (exploitation) ad campaign. December 22, 2007
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
The last week or so has given rise to a mass influx of holiday-themed advertisements by nearly all the candidates; in the tradition of shameless pandering and political prostitution that is the trademark of America’s electoral process, nearly none the miserably unconcealed vote appeals managed to actually succeed in their presumed purpose, to inject some of the contagious cheer and societal fellowship that is emblematic of the season.
With the exceptions of Giuliani and McCain’s efforts, which were cheerfully funny and relatively moving, respectively, the laughable attempts at half-witted political goons to don some semblance of members of humanity was just a ludicrous little spectacle, especially the grotesquely artificial and prfoundly uninspiring and pathetic stunt of a bubble-headed, latent liberal hick like Mike Huckabee to embed the ugly symbol of the corss into the background of his ad.
But one ad really did manage to shine through this muddled political stratosphere of blathering, cronistic hucksterism, permeating the muck with a howlingly illuminating, impecably honest and intellect, as well as integrity, saturated message of hope and inspiration.
I of course speak of everyone’s favorite “Wicked Witch of Washington”, a woman of such sterling character and grace that she can actually claim with accuracy to be one of the few people who can say that they’re both a literal and figurative political whore. Now thats a commendable feat, and certainly a catagory where her competition couldn’t even hope to out-trump her.
And she exumes this demonstrated virtuosity as a political strategist once again with her new heart-warming and beckoning, yet simultaneously bold and assertive Christmas ad.
Awesome wasn’t it? Just puts everyone else to shame, although whenever I hear that cackle I somehow have the intense, inexplicable urge to tear my ears out and dismantle my speakers piece by piece…as if to make fully certain I’ll never have to hear such a hideous and ghastly noise again…
Weird.
Eternally Led. December 11, 2007
Posted by azandi in Editorials, The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
The Beatles often are afforded, in my humble opinion far too much, extravagant bouts of affectionate accolade, exaltation and praise, commonly characterized as the “pioneers of rock”, the “greatest band of all time” and various other mythical formulations. As previously suggested, its been my belief that these grandiose interpretations of a musical outfit that, once objectively analyzed and stripped of all nostalgic framings and circumstantial evidential fluff is essentially quite non-extraordinary and even at times outright mediocre in terms of melodic instrumental orchestration and lyrical prowess, are rather wasted.
Yes, The Beatles were ahead of their time in many regards, they acted as catalystic jump-starts for the nascent advancement of serious studio recording technology, and were the first musical troupe to perform at the traditionally martial arts centric Nippon Budokan in Tokyo, paving the way for legendary “Live at Budokan” concerts by giants such as Ozzy Osbourne or Dream Theater. And of course theres scarcely a human being who fancies themself a music afficianado who doesn’t have a favorite song by the Beatles. These are all reasons that they should be respected and upheld as an important entity in the history of music. However, these assertions do nothing to substantiate the wholly fatuous and hyperbolic contention that the Beatles “are the fathers of rock”.
And thats where Led Zeppelin comes in.
Rock and metal have both branched out into sprawling, far reaching sub-genre trees; beneath the over-arching umbrella of these two catagories is a whole myriad of various and diversified coefficient subsidiary genres, some of which have their own sub genres. And yet its virtually impossible to find a strain of modern rock/metal which hasn’t ultimately found its roots to Zeppelin. They’ve directly impacted the spawning and growth of music from all across the spectrum, everything from classically-styled mellow folk rock the likes of Comus to blasting thrash metal in the form of Godsmack or Pantera, to the immensely intricate harmonics and complex time signatures of progressive metal such as Symphony X or the aforementioned Dream Theater, or even some of the most extreme manifestations of the genre such as death metal giant Opeth. All of these groups have either directly cited at least a portion of their integral style influence from Zeppelin, or have made it flagrantly obvious in their music. It should also be noted that Eddie van Halen regards Jimmy Page as his inspirational muse for the popularization of double-handed fretboard tapping, which has so drastically and astronomically warped the musical landscape.
I’ll openly admit, however blasphemous it may be to suggest, that I’m not the biggest Led Zeppelin fan, this is almost entirely due to Robert Plant’s “lyrical rambling” style, which can become positively annoying at times. But I am certainly a fan, I recognize their unquestionable talent and technical virtuosity, and Kashmir remains as one of my all-time favorite songs, a flawless masterpiece of rock and in my opinion the band’s magnum opus. It is my firm and unwavering conviction that they are the single most influential musical outfit of the last century, without them rock, and consequently heavy metal as we know it simply would not exist; essentially every contemporary rock/metal band in one way or another traces their genealogy back to Zeppelin, an expansive and timeless sphere of influence that may only be seconded by Rush.
So I’m not in the least surprised about the meteoric fervor generated over their O2 gig last night, their first performance in 27 years. The concert was in support of the great late Turkish-American (I’m half-Turkish myself, so naturally I’m just bursting with pride) former founder and president of Atlantic Records, Ahmet Ertegun, an entrepreneurial mastermind and a human monument to the proof and reality that is the American dream success story. From what it looks like in the embedded bootlegged video, it was a fantastic show, they sounded great even after all these years in dormancy, and they even got Foreigner’s Jason Bonham, son of the original drummer and tragically deceased John Bonham to fill up the position, thus symbolically re-creating the original band roster in name. Quite an impressive setlist as well:
- “Good Times Bad Times”
- “Ramble On” (live debut)
- “Black Dog”
- “In My Time of Dying”
- “For Your Life” (live debut)
- “Trampled Under Foot”
- “Nobody’s Fault but Mine”
- “No Quarter”
- “Since I’ve Been Loving You”
- “Dazed and Confused”
- “Stairway to Heaven”
- “The Song Remains the Same”
- “Misty Mountain Hop”
- “Kashmir”
Encore:
- “Whole Lotta Love”
- “Rock and Roll”
Reportedly one attendee spent over $180,000 for a pair of tickets, thats rather insane (is he obscenely rich or a fanatic to a scale that would put Al Qaida to shame?), but nonetheless hopefully it’ll convince Zeppelin to finally go on a reunion tour, which Page recently said may very well transpire.
Whatever happens, the music will never die. Long live Rock, long live Metal, long live Led.
Keep it prog.
Mitt the Misfortunately Misinformed Mormon Misfit. December 7, 2007
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.add a comment
Alliteration is good for the soul.
Anyway, I was going to retalliate myself against the appallingly fabrication-saturated verbal deliverance recited by everyone’s favorite political cultist, but Hitchens beat me to it, and its quite a whammy. Read em’ and weep, Mormons.
(The following is an extracted column from Christopher Hitchens, posted on Slate December 6, 2007)
Almost the only clever thing about Gov. Mitt Romney’s long-denied and long-delayed but obviously long-prepared “response” was its location at the George H. W. Bush Presidential Library, which allowed him to pose (prematurely, I’d say) in front of a presidential seal as well as a thicket of American flags. Composed chiefly of boilerplate, the windy speech raised the vexed question of the candidate’s religious affiliation—and thus broke the taboo on mentioning it—without setting to rest any of the difficulties that make it legitimate to raise the issue in the first place.
Actually, and in fairness, one should say “any but one” of those difficulties. Romney did avow, early on and in round terms, that “no authorities of my church” could ever exert any influence on his decision-making as chief executive. This may get him in trouble with some Mormons, and it does invite the question of why he adheres to a sect whose “prophet” is a supreme commander, but it is the most he could have been asked to say, as well as the least. Actually, the more he goes in one direction, the more he may find it is Mormons who are developing reservations about him. There is already grumbling in the ranks about his statement that the Bible is the revealed word of God, an absurd belief that Mormons do not truly profess, because they feel it is lacking an even more absurd later revelation to Joseph Smith. There are also those who think that Romney’s disowning of past Mormon polygamy is too opportunistic, since the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does still offer the consolation prize of multiple wives in heaven (just like the sick dream of Mohamed Atta).
Trying to raise himself above this swamp of nonsense—the existence of which is his responsibility, not mine—the governor mainly treated us to evasion and a rather shifty attempt to change the subject and rewrite the historical record. It may be true that Romney “saw my father march with Martin Luther King” (though the candidate himself, who was of age to do so at the time, doesn’t claim to have joined in), but that doesn’t answer the question about official Mormon racism, which lasted 10 full years after Dr. King had been murdered, or of what Mitt Romney did or said about this at the time.
placeAd2(‘news/slate’,'midarticleflex’,true)
Romney does not understand the difference between deism and theism, nor does he know the first thing about the founding of the United States. Jefferson’s Declaration may invoke a “Creator,” but, as he went on to show in the battle over the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom, he and most of his peers did not believe in a god who intervened in human affairs or in a god who had sent a son for a human sacrifice. These easily ascertainable facts are reflected in the way that the U.S. Constitution does not make any mention of a superintendent deity and in the way that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention declined an offer (possibly sarcastic), even from Benjamin Franklin, that they resort to prayer to compose their differences. Romney may throw a big chest and say that God should be “on our currency, in our pledge,” and of course on our public land in this magic holiday season, but James Madison did not think that there should be chaplains opening the proceedings of Congress or even appointed as ministers in the U.S. armed forces. Trying to dodge around this, and to support his assertion that the founders were religious in the Christian sense, Romney drones on about a barely relevant moment of emotion in 1774 and comes up with the glib slogan that “freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom.” Any fool can think of an example where freedom exists without religion—and even more easily of an instance where religion exists without (or in negation of) freedom.
This does not mean that freedom of religion is not as important as freedom from it, yet Romney makes himself absurd by saying that Mormons may not be asked about the tenets of their faith, lest this infringe the constitutional ban on a religious test for public office. Here is another failure of understanding on his part. He is not being told: Answer this question in the wrong way, and you become ineligible. He is being told: Your family is prominent in a notorious church that proselytizes its views in a famously aggressive manner. Are you only now deciding to make a secret of your beliefs? And if so, why?that meant) add that the detainees must not be asked what branch of Islam they favor? If an atheist was running against him, would Romney make nothing of the fact? His stupid unease on this point is shown by his demagogic attack on the straw man “religion of secularism,” when, actually, his main and most cynical critic is a moon-faced true believer and anti-Darwin pulpit-puncher from Arkansas who doesn’t seem to know the difference between being born again and born yesterday. Would he expect a Scientologist to be able to avoid questions about L. Ron Hubbard? Does the governor of Massachusetts who publicly tried for mob applause by demanding that we “double Guantanamo” (whatever
According to the admittedly very contradictory scriptures of the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth warned his disciples and followers that they should expect to be ridiculed and mocked for their faith. After all, how likely was it that God had decided to reveal himself to only a few illiterate peasants in a barbarous backwater? Those who elected to believe this stuff were quite rightly told to expect a hard time, and the expression “fool for God” or “fool for Christ” has been with us ever since. That concept has some dignity and nobility. Entirely lacking in dignity or nobility (or average integrity) is the well-heeled son of a gold-plated church who wants to assume the pained look of martyrdom only when he is asked if he actually believes what he says. A long time ago, Romney took the decision to be a fool for Joseph Smith, a convicted fraud and serial practitioner of statutory rape who at times made war on the United States and whose cult has been made to amend itself several times in order to be considered American at all. We do not require pious lectures on the American founding from such a man, and we are still waiting for some straight answers from him.
The Eve of Eco-Fatalism. December 3, 2007
Posted by azandi in The Daily Intrigue.2 comments
And so its come to this, enviro-fascistic nihilism reaches its natural absolute zenith. No one can disregard this as an isolated, fringe incident. This is a harbinger of an utter demographic implosion, a mass suicide, self-engineered species compromisation is a proposition far less dubious than the insanely fabricated charges of a global warming rooted apocalypse pontificated by the environmentalist front. We seriously have to be concerned, self-pitying, pathetic little cretins like this bimbo are a real threat to our societal stability.
The question is, whats going to happen first; people waking up to the lunacy that is global warming alarmism, or an all-out war waged against western civilization by eco-terrorists?
The prospects here are not optimistic, to put it mildly.