Pajiba

Bitch, bitch, bitch. It's been said before NMN, it's been said before.

I glad I'm not the only one fed up with a system that doesn't work and yet isn't questioned. A system that doesn't work but is continued to be used is only acting as a facade of security. Support the troops, not the policy.

If you put the chocolate pudding in a Gerber Peas and Carrots "baby food" container, does that count? Is it all in the label?

Yet it still needs to be said. Complacency is the death rattle of Free Will.

I have to say, I do feel a lot safer knowing that my cucumber melon shower gel won't be taken away from me since it'll be stored in a Ziplock bag. Plus the bag has an extra feature--if the bottle pops open and spills, the Ziplock bag keeps it from leaking out!

Why is this guy given a column every week?

"Yet it still needs to be said. Complacency is the death rattle of Free Will."

I agree, John. I just wish NMN's work was a little less clumsy, a little more precise. It would be a lot more effective if it were, IMO.

RACIAL PROFILING!!! OMG!!! That's awful!

Had you considered, NMN, the whole time you were holding up the line that there might have been snacks for your niglets (am I allowed to use that word?) supplied by the airline? Perhaps even applesauce and pudding? Oh, that's right, it probably wasn't the sugar-free organic variety. Well, then, this has all been worth it!

What the heck is a death rattle? Like a baby rattle? Cause that's not scary. Now a rattlesnake rattle that's scary, but why would Free Will have a rattlesnake rattle? Or a baby rattle, for that matter? And you keep using that word. Are you sure you know what it means? I do not think it means what you think it means. Perhaps "Freedom" is more appropriate?

I agree. The anecdote about the pudding was amusing, (if more than a little worrisome), but otherwise this article had no focus. It just seemed like he was running down a checklist, making sure he covers all the in-vogue liberal talking points. At least it wasn't another rant about percieved racism...

i, for one, feel much safer knowing my grandma has to take off her shoes now and play 20 questions when she flies out here every christmas. you never know what she could be planning.

what the!!!?!?!?!?!!!!

that was hilarious. thanks, NMN. i thought the 'zip it' catchphrase, the apparent jibe at Bob Woodward and then the personal anecdote gave your point all the focus it needed (it's a web column, not an academic paper). anyway, i appreciated the laugh/eye roll.

This dude blows.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Yeah, yeah, Bush sucks, the Iraq war is the New Vietnam, the TSA rules were written by Joseph Heller - I get it. Don't tell me it sucks that you can't bring baby food on the airlines - tell me you would prefer racial/ethnic/religious profiling so that Mahmoud gets searched but Momma with babies in tow doesn't. Don't tell me that the war in Iraq is pissing off a bunch of ignorant Arabs - suggest how we combat (or come to terms with) a massive fundamentalist religious-political movement whose repeatedly stated aim is to "convert or destroy." Dissent is a necessary part of a healthy democracy, but this isn't dissension, just bitching.

Jen,
A death rattle is the last breath of a dying person. If you've ever been around a person in the process of dying, you will notice the difficulty they have breathing, with a ragged rasping in the back of their throat. Think especially of people dying of lung ailments such as tuberculosis. Thus a death rattle is the last dying gasp. Does it make more sense now? That imagery is much scarier than a baby rattle, and makes more sense in context.

>

Because, Spiff, if that is indeed your real name, it is his constitutionally protected right, however much the current administration would like to erode that right. What, does NMN's rhetoric not fit with your neo-con fairy-tale of a world view?

All right, all right: I am engaging in hyperbole and assuming a hell of a lot about your politics from a simple question. Me, I'm glad for voices like NMN's. Someone-anyone-needs to speak up for the dire turns we are taking in this country in the name of security.

And what is the value of security if it costs us our liberty?

>>

A "massive fundamentalist religious-political movement whose repeatedly stated aim is to 'covert or destroy'." Now, do you mean Al Qaeda or the religious right?

I honestly can't believe the anti-NMN comments I just read. Are you people seriously upset by what he said? Do you really think that the new security guidelines work? And did you really miss the point that badly? He's not complaining about the security guidelines, or the fact that his kids couldn't have apple sauce/pudding on the plane. He was talking about the arbitrary nature of the guidelines, and indeed every "anti-terrorism" measure instituted since September 11. The measures enacted don't really serve to make us any safer (as illustrated by the Ziploc story or the x-ray missing the apple sauce in the bag), but simply give us the ILLUSION of safety. And when we try to point that out, well...as he said, the overwhelming response is "Zip it! If you question us, you're with the terrorists!"

And I'm sorry, but if you think racism in America is only "perceived" and doesn't actually exist, well...wake up, is all I have to say. Read Mike's comment to see what I'm talking about. And if you don't like what he has to say? Don't read it. It's pretty easy.

Oh, and Mike? Oscar Wilde is the one who said "Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit," but he was a highly gifted satirist. Do you think maybe he was being, I don't know, sarcastic? And all that talk about "religious extremism"? I'd like you to examine the extreme right's position on things, and tell me if that attitude doesn't come from "religious extremism".

NMN may not be everyone's cup of tea. I don't like every single thing he writes. But I enjoy the way he writes, and I like that he takes the time to share his opinions. Being able to share your thoughts and opinons is what's so great about living in the U.S., and even more so when you're told on a daily basis that questioning the administration is anti-American.

Ahaaha, 'niglets.' That's only the 2nd time I've ever heard that phrase and I laughed my ass off both times...whew, the racism is killin' me inside! But not really...anyways, lessee, I've read better columns.

Sure it's been said before and maybe it's bitching but just agreeing that our situation is problematic and then shutting up is no way to get anything done.

You know who just bows their head and complacently shuffles through the line (wouldn't want to cause a stir or hold anyone up) unquestioning of the logic or method of those in charge? Sheep.

But you know, all of this has been said, so lets just forget about it.

Jen:

A growing number of airlines no longer provide free snacks. And if you've ever been around little kids, you might know that they can be mighty finicky about what they eat. I'm all for airline security, but I hope I'm not being incredibly naive when I say that I highly doubt many terrorists will be posing as a family with very young children bringing aboard sealed snacks such as applesauce and chocolate pudding.

Wow, talk about taking way too much from one sentence.

For the record, my comment had more to do with the subject-matter of the statement vis a vis the purpose of website than the particular content of the piece.

And Bill, people get it, they just think it is bad writing.

Armando - I meant the Taliban, governments of Sudan, Somalia, Iran, insurgents in Iraq, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and any other government and organization led by religious fundamentalists determined to install theocracies worldwide based on a literal reading of the Koran. Do you seriously equate the religious right's desire to end abortion and place the Ten Commandments in school to Al-Qaeda and their ilk's stated over-and-over aim of killing every Jew and infidel? Ok, George Bush may be the worst president we've ever had, the Republicans may be thrashing our civil liberties (emphasis on "may" for both points), but untill the folks who run Jesus Camp sit in the Oval Office, suspend elections, and start stoning homosexuals as a matter of state policy, comparing the religious right in the US to Al-Qaeda is like comparing Margaret Thatcher to Stalin.

And Bill - the only thing I said that could be misconstrued as being racist is "Ignorant Arabs." Politically incorrect? Definitely. But I don't think it's factually incorrect to call the majority of Arabs living in the Middle East ignorant, based on their average education and mullah-skewed knowledge of the outside world. And thanks for pointing out that I plagiarized Oscar Wilde, I'd hate for anyone to be burdend with the misconception that I had coined that phrase.

I actually agree with much of what NMN was trying to say - the TSA is a joke, the Patriot Act is a threat to our freedom, and that security at the cost of liberty will ensure neither (who'd I nick that paraphrase from, Bill?). But don't just sit there and say that the way we are going about this is terribly terribly wrong, tell me the right way to fight (or co-exist with) an ideological movement that will not stop untill every single person left alive on the earth is facing Mecca and kneeling five times a day.

Operation freedom shield baggies in effect.

Oh, my darling man. Sheer brilliance. That is all I have to say about this and about you, at this moment.

I will, however, volunteer the fact that I was one of the many women traveling this past August who lost her motherfucking lip gloss to this latest abomination of a step toward complete corporate and political fascism in this godforsaken country.

That's right -- an eight dollar lip gloss, confiscated in the name of ostensible security, a double-dare to an American citizen: gonna speak up? Is it worth a full body search? A complete ransacking of all your luggage? A terrifying delay for your 6 year old, a probable missed flight? Hmm? Better keep your mouth shut, lady -- ew're in the process of building a covertly fascist state, here -- and your lip gloss is just a microscopic example of everything you're giving up along the way.

Thanks for playing. Watch your mouth, keep your head down, don't even THINK about giving us a nasty look -- and we might just let you get all the way through to your destination without removing your shoes more than a couple times.

And Mary nails everything I'm feeling, except I don't pay that much for lip gloss.

Thank you.

Um, I appreciate the intent, and the message. But I'd like to point out that only Stephen Colbert can pull off this type of reverse sarcasm.

Thank you NMN for moving political correctness on and going for Obama's non-victim framing of racial slurs.

Ah, movie reviews? Anyone?

Spiff: Do they? 'Cause I see repeated comments stating that all he's doing is bitching, or meandering, or maybe even wailing about racial profiling. Leads me to believe maybe they don't. But I've been wrong before.

Mike: I wasn't trying to point out that you "plagarized" Wilde. You used that quote against NMN like it negated his use of sarcasm or something. I was simply trying to point out that maybe, just maybe, the quote itself was sarcastic. And I'm not positive, but I think your new quote is Jefferson.

Your idea that having little education and being "mullah-skewed" makes the Arab nations ignorant is...well, ignorant. They might not know as much as we do about certain things, but they know MUCH more than we do about other things (how to survive in a desert environment, for example). Ignorance is a matter of perspective. Are the extremists bad for Islam? Yes, of course they are. But they don't represent ALL Islamists, just as the right wing crazies don't represent all Christians.

I don't have a better solution. You got me. So that means I can't complain about how jacked up the current one is?

"Because, Spiff, if that is indeed your real name, it is his constitutionally protected right, however much the current administration would like to erode that right."

It's his Constitutional right to get a spot writing for Pajiba? Where the hell is my column then? DISCRIMINATION!!! Then again, maybe this is a right I don't want to exercise, as according to you the current administration is looking to erode the rights of bloggers.

Ummm.
http://www.pajiba.com/the-department-of-homeland-security-has-shut-us-down.htm

"but they know MUCH more than we do about other things (how to survive in a desert environment, for example)."

.....oh man. Dear I say it? Ah, what the hell: STEREOTYPER! heh, I couldn't resist. But I seriosuly doubt the average Arab (outside of the Bedouin population) knows any more about surviving in the desert than you do. I think what the guy meant is they were ignorant of a larger global context outside of what their mullah or imam tells them. Which is true. Okay, now that I've obnoxiously capitalized for two posts in a row I think I'll give it a rest.

The only reason the new measures are in place (despite the fact that they are being relaxed as we speak, and in a month or two will probably not be in effect) is because the dems. don't want racial profiling on airplanes.

If we took that one step-extra security for those of arab or middle eastern descent, it would save the lines, save the bags, and be just as effecting if not more effective than either of the prescribed measures being taken now.

When 70 year olds, or white anglo guys or African Americans start blowing up the airplanes, you can chage your tune, but until then, let people do thei rjob the right way. You don't go to the police station to report a theft , give a description, then expect the cops to search everyone on the street just to be fair to those who match the description, do you? Arab radicals hijack and blow up airplanes . There's your description, theres your sketch, no go and get 'em.

"suggest how we combat (or come to terms with) a massive fundamentalist religious-political movement whose repeatedly stated aim is to 'convert or destroy.'"

Well Mike, it sure as shit isn't putting a separation of church and state clause in a nation's constitution.

My main point about his sarcasm is this:

"[Sarcasm is ] crude. It's about as clever as pointing and laughing. Compared to the incisive brilliance of Oscar Wilde or Dorothy Parker, simply saying the opposite of what you mean does not impress anyone with your razor-sharp repartee."

source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4384734.stm

Punch me if I'm wrong, but his entire piece is pretty much a sarcastic diatribe echoing what many people have been saying for quite some time. Politics aside, sarcasm, especially used to the extent it is used in NMN's piece, is a poor tool for making your point.

And 'twas Benjamin Franklin who said:
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

The question we should all be asking ourselves is, "What do we consider Essential Liberty?" I don't think what is or isn't allowed in our carry-on luggage constitues an Essential Liberty. Being able to speak freely is. But I require that if you dissent, dissent with purpose. Dissent with reason. Dissent with a plan, goddamnit. Snipping at an overworked, undertrained TSA screener who is trying to enforce regulations that change daily does not constitute Free Speech. It constitutes bitching. You wont get thrown in jail for bitching, but the Man may take away your Snack Packs and Max Factor - which after all are just really thick liquids, and as anyone who has turned on their computer or TV in the last six weeks knows, are no longer allowed on as carry-ons.

Like it or not, there is a significant, powerful force out there that desires our destruction - and they will try to destroy us whether there is a Dumbo or an Ass in the White House, and whether or not we would have gone into Afghanistan and Iraq. Jumping up and down and screaming "I hate the Republicans! I hate the oil companies!" will not change that.

Let's put it this way, if being safe in this post 9-11 world means that I have to live in a totalitarian "security" state I would rather DIE A THOUSAND TIMES. People have fought for centuries to have the freedoms we are losing now. Any state that is allowed to take power from its citizens WILL ABUSE IT, time and time again. We are gonna pay for all we are allowing, we will live to regret this shit.

NMN, I thought your dumbass was banished from this establishemnt. I'm sorry to see that I was wrong.

I have always enjoyed NMN posts. He is insightful, even if it may appear crude. Sarcasm, when overused, can draw attention away from the point, but tell me, when did this website become a place to discuss a person's style of writing? He was given the column and if you don't like it...leave. No one requires you to click on his column. No agency is making you do it. So stop your bitching and leave. As many have said, bitching does nothing so ZIP IT! We will carry on without you. And remember, silence can, and usually is, construed as tacit approval.

Sorry barbado,
but you thinking that things are somehow going to get much worse to the extent that we are going to regret all that is happening now is as far fetched a statement as when right wingers claiming that islam will convert the world in the next 50 years if we don't kill them all before they kill us.

Sorry, but unless you for some reason can't go about your day the same as you always have for the last umpteen years, then all of those civil rights and liberties that have been "eroded" haven't really been eroded.

You can still say what you want, do what you want, act how you want, and go where you want in this country. You can vote, you can buy alcohol, you can purchase firearms, you can talk on the phone to your friends about anything without fear of dissapearing, you can even make claims and movies that you would like to kill the president nowadays and get away with that scott free, while making a few bucks in the process.

Just because someone calls you un-patriotic doesn't mean that you are, and it doesn't threaten your life, liberty and the persuit of your happiness. It's their opinion of you, and they have just as much of a right to label you as un-patriotic as you do to label them war-mongerers, or Nazi's, or anything else you can come up with.

If not being allowed to carry lip gloss or a bottle of water on an airplane are the most you have to bitch about, then by all means, bitch away, but don't expect anyone to care or to listen.

Now, when you tell me that a group of guys showed up at your nice, normal house one day and took your dad away ala poor Mr. Buttle/Tuttle in Brazil, with a bag over his or her head, never to be heard from again, then you can start to worry. But right now your claims, or anyones claims for that matter, that your civil liberties are being washed away because someone MIGHT (again, strong emphasis on MIGHT) be listening in on your conversation to see if you are a terrorist or not is unfounded, unjustified, and weak. THis is not Nazi germany, this is not Salinist Russia, hell, this isn't even the WW2 era Roosevelt-ian Unites States of 60 years ago.

You have nothing to worry about, and if you did, then you might want to keep your phone based terrorist activities and Islamic-fundamentalist bank account funding to a minimum, cause then and only then is there the Slightest possibility of them coming to question you.

boogedy, boogedy!

Dude, you are right, I don't know what came over me our freedoms are in good hands and they have our best interests in mind, I apologize...

Your sarcasm is noted.

Please then, tell me how you personally have had to change you lifestyle to conform to all of these eroded liberties you speak of.

I am all ears. If you can persuade me otherwise, then I will gladly change my tune. However, I don't think you really can provide proof that your liberties have been trampled on. Have they been listening in on your conversations for some reason? Last time I heard, it was something like .01 percent of the popoulation whose phones had been tapped. Are you in that group?

HAve you done anything to merit being there? Have you done anything to merit them listening in on your phone? Cause I havent, and Im not worried that ther're listening in on my phone conversations, either. Cause the overwhelming odds are they they aren't, thats a simple fact.

Am I the only who thought that picture was of Phil Hartman at first?

Why the Hell do I find myself compelled to respond to pissy comments from Mike and Some Guy instead of musing happily along with NMN? Who's blog is this, anyway?

Is this Sarcasm? Cynicism? Priapism? NMN just seems to bring out the best in all of us, doesn't he.

Those who can, write.
Those who can't, critique.
Those who don't get it, comment.

Personally, I enjoy NMN's musings and I think they're quite well-written, but that's just my opinion. Am I still entitled to have one?

Constructive suggestions to end the war on terror?
End the war against the Iraqis and Afghans who have no country to call home anymore? End the sham of security by meaningless gesture? Or did we just want to herd all the A-rabs into concentration camps so they won't hate us anymore?

Here's an idea. Think before you speak. Listen. Learn. Treat those who would do you harm as human beings.

Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them? - Abraham Lincoln

It is easy enough to be friendly to one's friends. But to befriend the one who regards himself as your enemy is the quintessence of true religion. The other is mere business. - Mohandas Gandhi

If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies. - Moshe Dayan

They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. - Isaiah 2:4

The Plan? Okay, first you invite the "insurgents" to sit down and air their grievances against the occupying forces from the world's biggest superpower. Then, you negotiate a cease-fire while you plan the withdrawal of American military forces and their replacement with an international peace-keeping force. Finally, using the examples of Japan and Germany, you convince the Iraqis (Sunni, Shia, and Kurd alike) that losing a war to the USA can be more profitable than getting in bed with Al Qaeda. Have we learned nothing from post World War II Germany? Vietnam? Bosnia? Northern Ireland? South Africa? the Cold War?

Or are we the nation built on the backs and blood of slaves and Natives? Why do we still celebrate Columbus Day? What was the Boston Tea Party if not an act of terrorism? Manifest destiny led us to slaughter countless black, brown, red, and yellow strangers in the name of democracy. We hosted the bloodiest Civil War known to man (both sides). We saved the "free" world from Hitler through conventional warfare, yet we became the first and only nation in history to use nuclear weapons to defeat the Japanese (racial profiling, anyone?). And despite Bush Sr's admonition, as cited by NMN, we thought we could "liberate" Iraq by force of Shock and Awe (not "terror," mind you, just everyday "shock" and "awe." Trust the TSA or pity the fool?

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or, in other words:

Christianity All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
Matthew 7:1
Confucianism Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state.
Analects 12:2
Buddhism Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
Udana-Varga 5,1
Hinduism This is the sum of duty; do naught onto others what you would not have them do unto you.
Mahabharata 5,1517
Islam No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.
Sunnah
Judaism What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.
Talmud, Shabbat 3id
Taoism Regard your neighbor's gain as your gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss.
Tai Shang Kan Yin P'ien
Zoroastrianism That nature alone is good which refrains from doing another whatsoever is not good for itself.
Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5
(Thanks to teachingvalues.com/goldenrule.html)

Get it? Talk, stop fighting, rebuild. Then we will have nothing to fear but fear itself. If we don't talk, we won't stop fighting.

Oh, I'm sorry, it's all been said before.

Never mind.

Right, cause all of those cease-fires and peaceful negotiations worked so well with the Isrealies and the palestinians, they are bound to work well with the likes of Al Queda.

Second, we got Germany and Japan to convert from their ways and adapt a US economic position BY BOMBING THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF THEM. Period. We didn't have peaceful negotations with either country until WE LEVELED THEIR CITIES AND KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSAND OF THEIR CITIZENS. Period. Do you assume we just walked into Japan and Germany, said "hey guys, lets talk this one out, okay? Enough with the killing, now I have a great business model to show you all, which would work great for your country."

Yeah fucking right. We destroyed their morale, destroyed their infrastructers, destroyed their history and parts of their culture, destroyed the government that foster the negative ideas. Only then did we get the chance to sit down at a table and negotiate peace with them. When they had no where else to go.

Do you really have the gall to think we leveled Dresden and Tokyo through "conventional warfare"? Are phosphorus bombs and carpet bombings "conventional warfare" to you? What is your opinion of conventional warfar, cause last time I checked, everytime a war is fought, the side who abandons what is conventional at the time first, usually wins.

How many times must Nevil Chamberlain be brought up in these conversations? Cause I am doing it again. He "talked to his enemies" he "negotiated peace" through peaceful means, and you know where that got his ass? It got his country overrun, and millions of people killed. How many times must history tell us that apeasment doesn't work unless you are dealing with a rational, sane individual?

Next and finally, lets assume we do sit down with alqueda and the insurgents and ask them their list of demands.

What do we do when their list includes "convert to islam, the lot of you, and restore our territories from Isreal to Spain."

Cause The leaders of AlQueda are on record as saying that is their goal. To restore the islamic nations in Europe and to convert those who do not believe.

What if they reject our Western business ideals and morality and don't want the western way of life, or the money that comes with it?

When will you learn that negotiating peace only occurs when you are dealing with people who WANT peace. The Arab world hasn't been at peace with itself for 1000 years, much less the rest of the modern/western world. The only thing they know is violence. It is their way of life, and has been for centuries. Perhaps it is ours too, but I for one believe that Korea and Vietnam and the first Gulf War and the cold war were wars fought with a noble reason. Since when is it unnoble to want to save your fellow man from the murderous hand of communists? You know what happened after we pulled out of Vietnam? Millions of Vietnamese were slaughtered by the North. They would have done so with or without the war, but some of us feel that by being a superpower, we have the moral obligation to help out the little guy.

We either change them through force, or we continue to believe erroneously that talking to people who do not want to change will bring change.

You know what I could go for......a discussion about MOVIES! Silly me, I thought that's what this site was about.

I feel you, but Pajiba staff likes his stuff, so they put it on. There's nothing wrong with some healthy debate, but I for one would like to see them put someone on to counter the NMN. He can be called the CRACKER FROM LAST CENTURY, or CRC for short. and with the NMN and the CRC together they will provide us with sort of a Jane Curtain, Dan Aykroid debating on SNL moment.

You know, "Jane, you ignorant slut."

A healthy debate, like that, where we call eachother names to the point that we get bored, then go back to writing about how movies just seem to suck these days. Then, when they put a new NMN article on, we resort to debating and name calling once again. It's the circle of life.

some guy...

See, that's the beauty of being your own editorial board: you don't have to put up "opposing views" -- it's YOUR space and you can post what YOU wish to post.

And others are free to do the same. No one HAS to come here and ENDURE the "one-sided" debate at Pajiba, and complain that his own view is notbeing touted enough by the editors; he can simply leave and begin his OWN blog.

Ah, the egalitarian nature of the internets. So many tubes for so many people...

As for the complaints that this is a site about "movies" -- if that's the extent of your understanding of Pajiba and its contributors, I suggest you start reading the archives -- and check out the blog roll. You can tell a lot about a site by the other sites it chooses to highlight and publicise.

Life is politics. There's no such thing as an apolitical person -- there are only varying degrees of informed from the fully apprised of history and current events to the utterly ignorant.

And if anyone out there wishes to play the "thousand paper cuts" game with me, feel free to come over to MLW and engage. If the phrase "slippery slope" didn't already make you vomit instantaneously, by the time you've waded through half my own posts about creeping fascism alone, it will.

Ridiculous -- where do you draw the line at having your personal freedom infringed upon before you cry "This far and no farther," anyway? When they erase the 2nd Amendment, will that be too far? Habeas corpus is already gone, iat least in the eyes of THIS Congress. We'll see what the Republican-stacked courts have to say about it over the next couple of generations.

I only read about half of the comments in this one, just wanted to point a couple of things out.

---Bush sucks, and these regulations do as well.

---NMN is not a great writer. That's the main reason i don't like him, race this/race that aside. He's just not that clever, he's not that entertaining. Tell me he stands up to any other writer at this site and i laugh in your face.

---Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert pull off this act really well, but this article was just uninteresting.

---MOVIE REVIEWS > CRAPPY POLITICAL OP-EDS

Wait, are you saying that because this is a liberal movie review sight, despite the fact that nowhere does it say so, I shouldn`t be on here wasting my time complaining about what is being said, instead just letting it go without thought or mention?

Cause your argument that "No one HAS to come here and ENDURE the "one-sided" debate at Pajiba, and complain that his own view is notbeing touted enough by the editors; he can simply leave and begin his OWN blog."

sounds a lot like the popular conservative mantra that:

"no one HAS to live here and ENDURE the "one-sided" rule in the US, and complain that his (or her) own view isn't being touted enough by those in charge; he (or she) can simply leave and go live in ANOTHER country."

It's a bit of a stretch, i know, but upon reading what you wrote that was the first thing that came to my mind.

ANd the Cracker from another Century idea was a joke. As long as there is a comment section, you can GUARANTEE that people like me will show up to try and level the playing field, even if we aren't given our own microphone. Cause last time I checked, that was the American way.

Sorry, but you come off as one of the people on the IMDB who complain about people posting negative reviews and comments for the movies that they like, assuming that there is no reason for you to be there, trashing my views, when you don't even like what you are seeing to begin with.

I still don't get the complaining about having NMN on this site. If you just want movie reviews--THEN STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THE NMN'S ARTICLES!

It's not so much the complaint that he's on here, it's what he is saying while he is on here. Which in my opinion isn't much.

"Those who can, write.
Those who can't, critique.
Those who don't get it, comment."

So....you're saying you don't get it?

" still don't get the complaining about having NMN on this site. If you just want movie reviews--THEN STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THE NMN'S ARTICLES!"

I thought liberals were all about dissenting opinions? Stop making progressives look like hyporcites. Thank you.

The truth is, Some Guy, that if NMN wasn't on Pajiba, you'd have no outlet for your backwards, fucked-up diatribes. You are the guy up above who actually suggested that racial profiling is a solution to our airport security problems? And do you realize that, in your seven comments, you've probably got a higher word count than NMN's entire article? So, in a way, Pajiba has given you your own column, only no one wants to read the damn thing. Seriously, you and Matt should combine your efforts and create your own blog, where the two of you can bitch about the meaning of sarcasm and chat amongst each other about the fantastic state of America. And proofread your comments! I swear you must be the kind of guy that spends three hours watching fetish porn and then sends a letter riddled with typos to the actors, complaining that they're ruining the minds of our children. Douche.

No, Matt, honestly I don't give a shit about making progressive look like hypocrites. All I'm saying is that I don't understand the "outrage" or whatever you want to call it for a blog like Pajiba posting the NMN's articles, when it clearly, CLEARLY displays ads for a site like QuizLaw on its main page. I'm all about dissenting opinions--you can think whatever you want to think and say whatever you want to say on here--but honestly? I don't see the surprise factor. I don't know why it's surprising that the NMN would be on this site, and frankly, I don't think that people who only write one line like "I thought the NMN was banned from this publication" or whatever even get what's going on at all.

Some Guy - 'How many times must Nevil Chamberlain be brought up in these conversations? Cause I am doing it again. He "talked to his enemies" he "negotiated peace" through peaceful means, and you know where that got his ass? It got his country overrun' -- are we reading the same history books, because I'm afraid I can't find this in mine?

Pajiba:

Please, for the love of God and all that is holy, stick with entertainment news - from your own staffers. That's why we come here. I've never been able to get through a NMN piece (and he's seriously made me question the standards of Yale). If I want political commentary, I'll find it elsewhere.

Other than NMN, keep up the good work.

Why can't we compare Margaret Thatcher to Stalin? That's my whole life's work you've just maligned.

Questioning the standards of Yale based on the NMN, eh? Well I can say that as an alum of an Ivy League school (and this is in no way a knock to the NMN, at all)--most "good" schools don't have standards that high (and no I'm not putting myself down)...or, rather, they do, but hey, if you're lucky enough to have Mommy and Daddy sponsor the purchase of a brand new gymnasium, despite the fact that you can't get past high school algebra and spend more nights passed out drunk than at the library (or, just, you know, coherent), then, well, you can sleep through classes and still graduate with a nice-looking diploma.

My opinion on the matter is that some of you type too fucking much. The comments shouldn't be as long as the damn article.

And really, if you people disagree with the article, THEN DON"T READ THE THING. I don't beleive that Bush is to blame for the sorry state of our airports (I blame the liberal policies that don't allow for sensible racial profiling or increased regulation of who can fly, but that's just my humble opinion. Oh, and all of the 9-11 highjackers were nonecitizens by the way, so maybe that should be taken into account) But it doesn't mean it makes sense to complain about an article I don't like when I could just skip it.

Not that stealing pudding or putting it in ziplock bags would do anything about anything.

Matt 2.0 -

Are you suggesting that comments be limited to

"Best. Review. Ever."

?

And THIS is why nothing gets accomplished in this country. People are so in love with their opinions!

Dear NMN,
They stole your babies' pudding! That's fucked up.
period.

good article. I don'r read blogs that the ignorant conservatives write and I am happier for it. Cranky commenters should consider adopting my philosophy. Us lefties are way cuter, happier and more fun to be around.

Sorry SMith, Chamberlainds policy of "peace in our time" didn't get his country overrun, it got another country or two overrun and his country bombed fo the next 4 years.

First of all, how will I know if I disagree with the article or not unless I read it first?

Second, the comment section is designed so people like me, and you all, can have an outlet to speak our opinions. On whatever they choose to post on their site. I come for the reviews, but I stay for the political ping-pong matches that somehow ensure from most movies.

But the same has to apply for political diatribe like the NMN. You have the ability to speak your mind and say "great job NMN, I'm glad someone out there speaks to me," and I have the ability to speak my mind. Now why is that so difficult to comprehend? The Pajiba staff don't give me my own column, but they do provide me with the ability to write comments. And I thank them for it, because then you get to hear both opinions, instead of being left with just one to chew on.

Third, and most importantly of all, if you don't like what I have to say in my comments, then don't read them. Simple enough, isn't it?

Again, I have no problem with the NMN mouthing off on a movie review site on a semi-regular basis, though that doesn't mean I have to agree with what he is saying. And that doesn't mean I will sit back and let you all give yourself high-fives for a job well done, either.

I repeat: People who complain about me, or anyone for that matter, writing comments to an article that is purposely more divisive and partisan than most, sound just like those on the IMDB who get pissed when someone comes to THEIR message board, and writes BAD things about THEIR favorite movie.

...Only the people on the IMDB sound slightly less pathetic.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!!

Having been excessively searched, glared at and generally given the 'evil eye' because of my skin tone and religious belief I happen to disagree with the idea of using 'racial profiling'
as means to try and combat terrorism. Why? Simply put not all Muslims are of an ethnic background - remember Richard Reed? Not all who have beards and are 'kneeling five times a day' and 'facing Mecca' (Mike - it's a blast - trust me!) are going to blow themselves up. Not all who hate America's fucking inane and clearly pathetic policies are going to wreck havoc upon said country (omg - somebody doesn't like US policies - shock!horror! right?) Basically it won't work because not everyone who is a terrorist is a Muslim and every Muslim isn't a terrorist.

Oh and another thing - 'The Arab world hasn't been at peace with itself for 1000 years, much less the rest of the modern/western world. The only thing they know is violence. It is their way of life, and has been for centuries' -Some guy. If this is a testament to American schooling and what you learn in history, God help us all.

I liked this article - it wasn't brilliant nor was it god awful, it was good and it got the point across.

The problem I have is with some of the comments made, and before I start throwing a hissy fit, please excuse my pitiful use of the english language and disgraceful understanding of some of the more amazing comments (especially those of 'some guy') because I'm just an ignorant, plebeian fool (more commonly known as a Muslim.)

Having been excessively searched, glared at and generally given the 'evil eye' because of my skin tone and religious belief I happen to disagree with the idea of using 'racial profiling'
as means to try and combat terrorism. Why? Simply put not all Muslims are of an ethnic background - remember Richard Reed? Not all who have beards and are 'kneeling five times a day' and 'facing Mecca' (Mike - it's a blast - trust me!) are going to blow themselves up. Not all who hate America's fucking inane and clearly pathetic policies are going to wreck havoc upon said country (omg - somebody doesn't like US policies - shock!horror! right?) Basically it won't work because not everyone who is a terrorist is a Muslim and every Muslim isn't a terrorist.

Oh and another thing - 'The Arab world hasn't been at peace with itself for 1000 years, much less the rest of the modern/western world. The only thing they know is violence. It is their way of life, and has been for centuries' -Some guy. If this is a testament to American schooling and what you learn in history, God help us all.

"You can still say what you want, do what you want, act how you want, and go where you want in this country. You can vote, you can buy alcohol, you can purchase firearms, you can talk on the phone to your friends about anything without fear of dissapearing, you can even make claims and movies that you would like to kill the president nowadays and get away with that scott free, while making a few bucks in the process."

Damn.... I want to keep my online gambling..

I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist pointing out the (unintentional?) pun in JC's post:

"Not all who have beards and are 'kneeling five times a day' and 'facing Mecca' (Mike - it's a blast - trust me!) are going to blow themselves up."

And just to clarify, I do not believe all Muslims desire Western destruction, merely a significant percentage. I will not cite passages from the Koran "proving" it is a violent religion. I believe Islam (even in my limited knowledge of it) is, like every other major religion, a religion that promotes peace.

Now, a few questions for JC (and/or any other Muslim):

Does Israel have a right to exist?

Which prominent Muslims outside of the US have publically denounced the WTC attacks, use of suicide bombers, or Hezbollah's post cease-fire attacks on Israel?

What is an appropriate response to insults to your faith, such as the cartoon contorversy of a few months back?

Finally, while it is unfortunate that one's appearance may lead to additional and unwarranted scrutiny at security checkpoints, profiling is a necessary tool to help deter and prevent attacks similar to those that have been attempted and perpetrated. However, when someone is excessively detained, denied rights, arrested or otherwise persecuted simply because of their appearance or faith, I fully support their God-given American right to raise holy hell and sue the pants off everyone in sight.

Some guy - when invoking the name of Neville Chamberlain to make a point, it might help to spell his name correctly and not as "nevil chamberlaind." This was only one of many errors in your writing, but if I tried to correct them all I'd be here for days. Proper names of extremely well-known historical figures are good to get right, though. You might seem a little more on top of things, a little less FUCKING RETARDED.

And yes, I'm being nitpicky and not engaging in real debate. But God knows that the stupider people are, the more they feel compelled to write. I'm not going to beat my head against a wall to confirm that you are in fact an idiot.

Haha, absolutely not, Mike. Thank you for pointing that out.

Pajiba:
Continue to write, post, say whatever the fuck you feel like. It's your site, and it's free for everyone else to read.

Commenters:
Continue to post whatever the fuck you want, as well. The differing opinions and 'discussion' is what makes this intresting. I'm entertained, so thanks!

Sanity Clause, I really enjoyed the quote:

Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them? - Abraham Lincoln

PS Dubya is *not* from Texas!!

Wow. A lot of people are getting pretty riled up over a rather silly article. It seems somewhat odd to me that people have taken this article about absurd safety regulations to discussing history and civil rights, not to mention literary criticism and the strengths of sarcasm.

Speaking of that; sarcasm is next to godliness. And just because Madamn Colbert may do it better, doesn't mean NMN shouldn't even try.

I just woke up so I shouldn't say anything really, but also: Comparing "If you don't like the article, then don't read it" to "Don't like mt country, move to Russia" is kinda... well, silly. It may be a similar argument, but it's a matter of scale. It's quite a bit easier to not read an article than it is to abandon the country you've lived in. Also one is abandoning the duty of dissent, and the other is abandoning the duty of reading something you may not enjoy.

Guess which one is which.

So you people like sarcasm, eh? Ok, here goes. You're right, no one should ever discriminate against Arabs in airports. They've never done anything to deserve extra notice, especially in recent history. The liberals all have super ideas to fix this country and promote peace. The whole "let's sit down and hug it out with Osama and the gang" would solve this mess in a jiff! Not being able to have lip gloss in your carry on is a travesty! I feel like we're living in 1984 (the book) except Hitler is in charge and Stalin is everyone's local chief of police! I feel that complaining about Bush and Cheney while not contributing any different ideas, plans or solutions is a tremendous way to show I am political and smart. People from the North are so much more smart than those assholes in the Midwest, what with the working long days for little money and worshipping some outdated religion. I love the jews, yet sympathize with the Palestinians! What to do, what to do?

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

Does Israel have a right to exist?

-Yes, I believe it does. However I think that it ought to be held accountable for some of its actions and if it wants to be thought of as a democratic country then it must comply with the rules and regulations that apply to others.

Which prominent Muslims outside of the US have publicly denounced the WTC attacks, use of suicide bombers, or Hezbollah's post cease-fire attacks on Israel?

-As I see it, the vast majority of Americans are decent, hard-working people. Though many of these people - through no real fault of their own - are also unaware of the outside world and far too insular. Believe it or not, there where many people who condemned the attacks Mike, and I'm afraid if I were to begin listing names, there would be countless hundreds I would unfairly miss out. Though not many Americans seem to know that. Over here (in Britain) apart from a few 'deranged' idiots everyone was outspoken against the terrible atrocities committed five years ago, and by everyone, I also mean the Muslim community. Our Islamic schools, television stations, radio stations and (reputable) mosques will NOT teach that violence is the answer. I'm sorry if that doesn't answer your question but please believe me lots of well-known Muslims did speak out, many just not well-known enough to warranty coverage over in the states.

The Hezbollah thing I believe is a tad different than the other incidents because it's more than just religious ideology. What happened in Lebanon/Israel was horrible and both sides did things that were wrong but Hezbollah's post-ceasefire stance was also political - for them (from my understanding) it was a case of enemy tanks on their soil and I do believe they did say that they wouldn't stop until every Israel army member had left. Though (and I don't know if American news even mentioned this) you have to agree it was somewhat less 'dirty' than leaving thousands of cluster bombs around residential areas on the last day of warfare, which are being discovered mostly by children now, long after the bombs from both sides have stopped.

What is an appropriate response to insults to your faith, such as the cartoon controversy of a few months back?

-Islam has certain rules, which are cannot be bent or translated to mean anything else. One of these rules is making images of any prophet or of God. Combine that rule with the fact that Muslims don't even make light-hearted jokes about God or the prophets (including biblical)- we believe they are to be treated with the up most respect and admiration. The cartoons were unnecessary, at a time when things were calm, and purposefully struck the emotional (and less rational) side of Muslims. I do though think that the response (by some) went overboard and didn't improve the situation at all. I also think that the cartoons happened to be the straw that broke the camel's back, though that doesn't mean that I'm in any way condoning such violent behaviour.

The correct response would be protesting in a manner that is legal, either in peaceful rallies, in letters of complaint, etc. There were many who took this route, not that it worked of course.

Personally, I think that Muslims shouldn't be afraid of insults and criticism thrown at Islam because I'm of the view that Islam speaks for itself - it doesn't need angry mobs burning down restaurants or people marching through the streets, it shows in its ethics and etiquettes
that such criticisms have no real substance against an enlightening religion.

I'm not an Islamic scholar, and I have no pretensions of thinking of myself as one, but I hope I've clarified a number of things for you, and if I haven't, then I sincerely apologise.

Thank you for responding JC. Certainly there is much that goes underreported here in the States, and those who bark loudest will receive more coverage than the rational, peaceful, law-abiding majority of Muslims. I hope we will hear your words from the mouths of Middle-Eastern leaders someday. Unfortunately, politicians of all stripes find it easier to rally the masses with hate and fear than rationality and goodwill. Salaam.

JDS,
U no whut else makes sumeone sound FUKIN RETARDED? Atacking tha speakr fur his spellin insted of the point he makes. Franc-ly I dont give a shat if I did spel his name rong, the point stands. Apesement just doesnt wurk.

butt than yu alredy new that, didnt yu?

Chew on those spellin erors fur a whyle, wuld ya?

You can now commence your banging.

and JC, I read your comments to Mike about the cartoons, and, well, it is my assumption that muslims used the cartoons to spark protests amongst their own people. Let us not forget that the cartoons were printed some five months before the riots started, and they were done so because a wealthy dutch-muslim took them around and showed them to high ranking clerics all over the mid-east, with the intentions of inciting violence. As someone mentioned before, he even took the time to include cartoons and pictures that weren't even part of the original set of drawings or had anything to do with Islam at all. There is a reason for that, and it wasn't to spark an intelligent debate and criticism of them.

Also, Muslims have frequently used Moses and other important Jewish figures in cartoons attacking the Jewish faith. Not only that, but denying the existence of the holocaust is in and of itself a slap to the face of the people involved and that is frequently asserted by them. They have no problems with insulting anything and everything having to do with the Jewish faith, and on a regular basis. Jews weren't even involved in the cartoon fiasco, yet were blamed for it nonetheless.

@Some Guy:

I think you are the most stupid American I have ever seen. Didn't you have any history lessons in school?

So bombing "the Germans" brought democracy to their country? It was a democracy before! Before that idiot from Austria (Hitler) came and made a dictator out of himself. Bombing and occupying the country just delayed the progress! The terror of Hitler ended with his suicide. Germany would have been free, if there woulnd't have been stupid Americans oppressing and occupying them.

Zip it, Some Guy!

Yetused,
I learned plenty in my history classes about WW2, I think the problem is that you never learned to read...If you look closely, i never said anything about setting up a democracy in germany. To help you out, here's the quote from above:

"Second, we got Germany and Japan to convert from their ways and adapt a US economic position..."

In fact, the word "democracy" doesn't appear once in that entire comment about our actions in WW2 towards the Japanese and the Germans.

Perhaps you should start reading things through completely before you criticize me and make an ass out of yourself. Or did you not learn to do that in school?

My one reoccuring thought during this past August was how the La Leche League could take advantage of this latest terrorist scare to promote breast-feeding.Imagine the ad campaign! ;)

Oh, and it also occured to me how *pissed off* I would be if security confiscated my $70.00 bottle of Estee Lauder "Beautiful" perfume!

I feel your pain, "NMN", having been detained at the border with my family and questioned by airport security on more than one occasion.

@Some Guy:

You talked about American ideologies and models that were forced upon Germany and Japan by "BOMBING THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF THEM" and "we destroyed their morale, destroyed their infrastructers, destroyed their history and parts of their culture". These models include the American idea of democracy.

So don't pick the raisins out of your idiotic text from above.

And by the way: Bombing and destroying these countries brought no progress at all. Freeing them from the dictators yes, the rest was just unnecessary. But America doesn't seem to have learned from that. It is still the nation that is involved in all the big wars. Nothing to be proud of.

You're welcome to infer whatever you wish from what I write, that is entirely up to you, but I had no intentions of referring to the instillation of an american form of democracy in either country, so please don't quote me out of context and then assail me for your opinion of what I wrote. The point was as you and I said: we bombed the shit out of them to "free them from the dictators," which is what many, myself included, feel we must do to the likes of Al Queda.

But I will hand it to you, today we might like to install an american democracy AND economic ideals in those countries if need be, but that doesn't mean I was comparing every aspect of our intentions today to our actions 60 years ago. The situations are different, but the one common thread between both would be the use of force to "persuade" those who would otherwise be unpersuadable. Which was my point all along.

Now again, if you believe that installing a "US economic postion," in Germany, as I wrote, is akin to installing "an American form of Democracy," as you wrote, so be it. But the fact is I didn't say anything about installing an american democracy in either Germany or Japan. You did, and i have the quotes to prove it.

Hell, I'll even go so far as to give you the quote from Sarah which provoked my comments about bombing germany and Japan in the first place. She wrote, "Finally, using the examples of Japan and Germany, you convince the Iraqis...that losing a war to the USA can be more PROFITABLE than getting in bed with Al Qaeda. Have we learned nothing from post World War II Germany?"

(Nope, no mention of an installation of american democracy there, either. But it does mention something about economic positions...hint hint...)

However, you are right in assuming that today, in order to do so, one must install some sort of Gov't that is receptive to western business practices, which in all likely hood requires installing a pro-capatalist democracy of some sort. Unless of course there were already one installed in the first place, only hijacked by a dictator.

(And with the Japanese AND German economies in the top ten largest in the world, you can certainly say that what we did was "unnecessary," but you can't say it was ineffective.)

Now perhaps you would like to tell me how YOU would have removed Hitler from power? I don't support what we did to cities like berlin and dresden and tokyo, but we did it anyway and it worked. Fortunately today we can be far more precise and reserved in our actions.

You're welcome to infer whatever you wish from what I write, that is entirely up to you, but I had no intentions of referring to the instillation of an american form of democracy in either country, so please don't quote me out of context and then assail me for your opinion of what I wrote. The point was as you and I said: we bombed the shit out of them to "free them from the dictators," which is what many, myself included, feel we must do to the likes of Al Queda.

But I will hand it to you, today we might like to install an american democracy AND economic ideals in those countries if need be, but that doesn't mean I was comparing every aspect of our intentions today to our actions 60 years ago. The situations are different, but the one common thread between both would be the use of force to "persuade" those who would otherwise be unpersuadable. Which was my point all along.

Now again, if you believe that installing a "US economic postion," in Germany, as I wrote, is akin to installing "an American form of Democracy," as you wrote, so be it. But the fact is I didn't say anything about installing an american democracy in either Germany or Japan. You did, and i have the quotes to prove it.

Hell, I'll even go so far as to give you the quote from Sarah which provoked my comments about bombing germany and Japan in the first place. She wrote, "Finally, using the examples of Japan and Germany, you convince the Iraqis...that losing a war to the USA can be more PROFITABLE than getting in bed with Al Qaeda. Have we learned nothing from post World War II Germany?"

(Nope, no mention of an installation of american democracy there, either. But it does mention something about economic positions...hint hint...)

However, you are right in assuming that today, in order to do so, one must install some sort of Gov't that is receptive to western business practices, which in all likely hood requires installing a pro-capatalist democracy of some sort. Unless of course there were already one installed in the first place, only hijacked by a dictator.

(And with the Japanese AND German economies in the top ten largest in the world, you can certainly say that what we did was "unnecessary," but you can't say it was ineffective.)

And i do think American intervention is something to be proud of. I would rather be hated for doing the right thing than be liked for being a coward and doing nothing.

Yetused,

you might have been right except for one thing- the Soviet Union would have made another satellite state out of Germany if the U.S hadn't occupied it. Hell, that's what they DID to the eastern half of the country.

I must start off by saying that I fucking love this site; for the vehement enactments of that most important stipulation guaranteed by the first amendment, found on the pages of Pajiba and in the comments above, bring a patriotic smile to my face. I view these comments as an entertaining (at times surprisingly insightful) exemplification of our right to say whatever the fuck we want, however the fuck we want, and in any fucking manner we desire, and in so enacting a self-indulgent musing of my own - at the sincerest attempt at brevity, of course - I now will deign to bear my insight into the effectiveness of our troops dying for a good cause, and selflessly spilling their lifeblood into the dusty streets of Iraq to guarantee our fragile freedoms.



I was driven to write this response due to the opinions posed by some guys here, that it is the right thing to do, at this tumultuous stage in our countries history, to send our young men to fight for a noble cause. For chauvinism is nothing new, nor is our quickness to bear arms for what we believe to be right, as the pages of our history never shy to bear. Our very freedoms were established in the wake of a bloody revolution; our very way of life possible due to the bearing of arms. Our civil war, in its aftermath, removed the plight of slavery from our lands. The Second World War, the most incredible conflict our race has known, ended the scourge of fascism. I believe that conflict, with bloody violence its vanguard, may result in positive change. But why, when I look at the wars that followed our feel-good conflict (thanks for that one Pajiba) in Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq (again), do I feel sickened?



I am sickened because I believe that our soldiers - our brothers, our friends, our countrymen - are dying in vein, as they died in those cold wars. I believe this administration to be not only incompetent in their "War on Terror", but to be the quintessential personification of opportunism - the zeitgeist that haunts our very liberty with every waking day.



Since WWII (an acronym concise enough for a bumper sticker), our military has grown ever stronger, and yet the visage of our enemy more vague; what we fought during the cold war was more ambiguous. We fought our communist enemies via our proxies abroad during these conflicts, and so our reasoning also changed. We had gone from fighting a sworn enemy who attacked us without declaring war, to fighting a battle of ideologies: communism vs. capitalism, oppression vs. freedom. These battles were fought in foreign home fronts, far from the serene landscape of America, while the hysteria over the spread of communism terrified a nation from within - could anything be more Orwellian, more prophetic?



My grandfather was in the navy during the Korean War. He is a man whom I hold in the highest regard. At one time I was on the fence regarding the War in Iraq, being prior a proponent of invasion under the guise of finding weapons of mass destruction and defeating terrorism, but as the war continued I became doubtful of its merits. Myself seeing similarities with this war and Vietnam, the latter being a conflict I saw as useless, and wanting to understand the mentality behind defending the perpetuation of such a War, I asked my grandfather what his mentality was during this time. He said to me, in so many words, "During those years, we thought that communism would spread via the Orient. Basically creating a back door to the U.S." So basically, bringing the fight to them, so as not to fight them on our own shores. His spoken fears of times past echo into present day............



Where did we go astray in this "War"? How did we get deterred from Afghanistan and guided into invading Iraq? Is it for monetary gain by a few wicked men? Or is it simply misguided chauvinism? Is this administration looking out for us, its people? Are we safer now that we are in Iraq, than we were before? What is fucking going on?



Ultimately, the fragmentation of our society shelters me, as it does you, and as others fall to dust, we can only empathize from afar with nothing but our thoughts and words as verification that we are some how part of this fucking mess. We bicker on these pages as if it has any bearing whatsoever towards change, but still our brethren die. When I look in the eyes of my friends whom - thank God - have returned physically unscathed from that foreign place, only barely imagined in my minds eye, and when I hear the regret in their words, words at one time proud at what had been done there and now remorseful in their sorrow, I know whom pays the price. What rhetoric can validate the death of an American youth, whose future at one time so infinitely stretched over our continent?



So, as the New Millennium Niggga so perfectly put, I conclude: "still it doesn't make any sense".

JAK -

1. No one besides me is reading this anymore.

2. You are trying to sound smarter than you are, which never works.

3. This sentence is absolutley awful:

"I view these comments as an entertaining (at times surprisingly insightful) exemplification of our right to say whatever the fuck we want, however the fuck we want, and in any fucking manner we desire, and in so enacting a self-indulgent musing of my own - at the sincerest attempt at brevity, of course - I now will deign to bear my insight into the effectiveness of our troops dying for a good cause, and selflessly spilling their lifeblood into the dusty streets of Iraq to guarantee our fragile freedoms."

Good night now.