About Me

Name: Grampus
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Negotiating With Terrorists-The Real World

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 5:44:36 PM
This brief blog entry takes you through a series of negotiations over time between peacemakers and terrorists:

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of a line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker introduces himself. The terrorist kills him.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker asks, "why did you kill my friend?" The terrorist kills him and rapes his wife.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker says, "Stop that!" The terrorist kills him, rapes his daughter and kills his wife.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker says, "I'll pay you $1000 if you stop attacking us." The terrorist agrees to the deal, takes the $1000, and kills him.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker appeals to the United Nations. The United Nations says the peacemaker is at fault. The terrorist kills him.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker now has a gun, and threatens to use it. Other peacemakers start chanting the old 60's whine, "Can't we all just get along?" The peacemaker hesitates. The terrorist kills him.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker tries to convince his peacemaker friends that the terrorists aren't going to respond to negotiations, but they insist that if he kills the terrorist, it'll just make the other terrorists mad. The peacemaker reluctantly agrees to try negotiating again. The terrorist kills him, his entire family and his neighbor's family.

A heated debate now ensues between the peacemakers who want to be nice to the terrorists and the peacemakers who believe that there can never be peace until the terrorists are all dead. While they are debating, the terrorists kill 15 more peacemakers.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker asks himself, "Which is more important: being liked by everyone, or protecting my family?" The terrorist pulls a knife to kill the peacemaker, but the peacemaker pulls a gun and kills the terrorist first. The United Nations condemns the peacemaker's use of unproportional force. Many of his peacemaker friends turn against him.

A peacemaker walks up to the left side of the line. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line. The peacemaker apologizes for what his friend did to the other terrorist. The terrorist kills him, his entire family and his neighbors, and threatens to destroy the city as soon as they develop a bigger weapon.

A peacemaker refuses to meet at the line because every time a peacemaker goes to the line the terrorist kills him. A terrorist walks up to the right side of the line and fires rockets into the peacemaker's town. The United Nations condemns the way the peacemaker provoked the terrorist by refusing to come to the line and meet with him.

Generations pass and not much changes until one day when the son of a peacemaker decides that the old strategy simply won't work. He walks up to the left side of the line a little early. As the terrorist approaches the right side of the line the peacemaker shoots him. Another terrorist approaches to replace the first, and the peacemaker shoots him too. This scene plays out several more times. Then a terrorist approaches carrying a white flag, but he also has weapons. The peacemaker shoots him. A terrorist next approaches with a cease fire resolution from the U.N. The peacemaker shoots him also. A large group of terrorists approach and the peacemaker shoots them all and drops a nuclear bomb on the city they came from. The peacemaker continues killing the terrorists until the terrorists are all dead.

There is finally peace on earth and the United Nations takes the credit.

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

We Found the Problem

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 5:29:00 PM
The ulimate liberal's morality?

"Houston, I think we found the Problem

CLINTON' - NO CONTROLLING MORAL AUTHORITY

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hilary Picking Away

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 4:28:29 PM

hilary picking.png


I won't politicize this...it is just funny!

Grampus

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hilary Gets What She Gives

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 3:09:12 PM
This article sure points out the hypocrasy of Hilary and the main stream media

“I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate,” Falwell said at a breakfast session Friday in Washington. “I hope she’s the candidate, because nothing will energize my (constituency) like Hillary Clinton,” he said. “If Lucifer ran, he wouldn’t.”

This from the Clinton camp was sort of interesting.

Clinton press secretary Philippe Reines said Sunday, “Working for someone who believes in the Golden Rule, we’re not going to engage in such vitriolic discourse — but it seems that a new low has been reached in demonizing political opponents.”

So Hillary finds vitriolic discourse distasteful, eh?  Well that certainly didn’t stop her from fund raising with Harry Belafonte, who once called President Bush the “greatest terrorist in the world” while down in Venezuela supporting Hugo Chavez’s socialist revolution.

I guess vitriol does have a place in politics for Hillary, as long as it is aimed at her political opponents.

Also, funny how this somewhat dumb comment from Falwell gets all sorts of press yet people like Cindy Sheehan and Belafonte telling the world that the President is worse than Osama bin Laden gets scant attention.

Grampus

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Utopian Fantasy

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 2:47:49 PM
The U.S. said they would allow more time for the UN sanctions to be put in effect and allow more time for progress in implementing them.

Thus, Iran is negotiating with the EU appeasement nations about suspension of uranium enrichment and the UN sanctions resolution is being totally ignored. Meanwhile the enrichment of uranium continues. The European nations have a very short memory about the disastrous results of appeasement.

The left wingers (domestic and international) are all agog about Ahmadinejad and Chavez’s multicultural comments and even applauded them for their courage by saying out loud what the whole world is thinking.  Have they so soon forgotten that Ahmadinejad said that Israel would soon be blown from the face of the earth which endeared him to the Islamic world?  

Iran’s leaders are seeking to obtain nuclear weapons and they are fanatical enough to use them. The Left lives in a Utopian fantasy.

Grampus  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Small Sign for Peace in Iraq?

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 12:50:14 PM
One of the largest roadblocks to peace in Iraq is settlement of differences between the various sects and tribes.  There seems to be some progress in overcoming this obstacle to democracy.  It will be interesting to note how much coverage of this is reported in the MSM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Excerpt] But they agreed to break a two-week deadlock after all parties accepted a Sunni demand that the parliamentary committee be set up discuss amending the constitution.

Sunni Arabs hope to win an amendment that would make it more difficult to establish autonomous regions. Although federalism is enshrined in the constitution approved by Iraqis in a referendum a year ago, the right to seek amendments to the charter was a key demand made by Sunni Arabs when they agreed to join Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's national unity government in the spring.

The deal opened the way for Iraq's communities to move ahead politically and solve an impasse that threatened to further sour relations among them. If left unresolved, the deadlock could have further shaken Iraq's fragile democracy and led to more sectarian violence.

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Votes Above Honesty

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 11:10:06 AM
Democrats are livid about the new photo ID requirements bill that passed in the House.  In a country where we are required to show photo ID for beer and cigarettes, pay by check or board a plane…they are against the same proposal for the sanctity of the voter ballot.

Nancy Pelosi reeled off a long list of liberal organizations opposed to the bill.  One of them interestedly, is the National Council of La Raza headed by none other that paragon of liberalism, Tom Daschle.  Pelosi also ranted about it being a poll tax, even though a safeguard in the bill provides the ID to the poor for free, paid for by the federal government and is not in the category of an unfunded mandate.  

For the Democrats, this is all about benefiting from the votes of 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants in the United States.  They place a higher value on increasing their constituency than on the honesty of the electoral system.  As I have said many times before, these people are dangerous.

Grampus

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

NY Times - Again?

Posted by Grampus on Monday, September 25, 2006 8:47:40 AM
The New York Slimes is at it again…unsubstantiated report from a secret document. It sounds like another attempt at discrediting President Bush prior to the elections to me.  

The US and its allies in the war in Iraq have angered the Muslim world, fuelling terrorism, the secret document said. Sections from the paper were leaked to the New York Times which published them in an article yesterday.

Grampus

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Their Head is in the Sand

Posted by Grampus on Sunday, September 24, 2006 10:40:49 AM
Much like the ostrich of myth, Democrats are hiding their heads in the sand.  They are ignoring the real threat that Iran and the Islamic terror groups represent to America’s national security.  They scoff at President Bush when he says “we must defeat them over there” and not let them follow us back home.  They call for immediate phased pullout of our troops.  Daily, Islam’s imams, mullahs, ayatollahs and government leaders call for death to America.  Yet, somehow the Democrats do not take them seriously.

The Democrats do not view them as a real threat but rather something that can be dealt with at the negotiation table.  Time and again, the Islamists have said that they will sign treaties, however, they will only honor the treaties as long as it suits their purpose.  We have witnessed that very thing several times, yet the Democrats continue to believe that something like a Marshall Plan that we implemented in Europe after the war can be accomplished with them without a war.  MoveOn.org even suggests that if we do that, it would give the people of Muslim nations a 'new vision ' and then they would not tolerate the terrorists in their midst.  In my mind, that kind of thinking is very, very dangerous should the Democrats regain power.  

Democrats do not do well in war, usually one of their first actions when they are in power is to seriously  diminish the capability of our military forces. Kennedy’s Bay of Pigs, Johnson and McNamara’s botching of Vietnam, Carter’s disastrous attempt to rescue hostages and Clinton’s ‘let the UN handle it’ approach failed miserably.  God forbid that they would have to deal with the Islamic threat.

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

No Ideas From Democrats

Posted by Grampus on Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:10:40 AM
Recently, the democrats after being challenged by the press to present their policy plans trotted out Pelosi, Dean and Reid.  When questioned about their plans for the Iraq war…their response was “it is not incumbent upon us to present a plan, only specific criticism.” Is that not arrogance?  After repeated delays, they finally presented the same old tired policy statement as follows:

       Agenda for change:

       Real security and immediate phased pullout in Iraq
       Higher minimum wage
       More affordable college
       Energy independence and lower gas prices  
       Affordable health care
       Something called "Retirement Security and Dignity," which calls for shoring up
     private pensions.

Real security…what does that mean?  Pelosi replied “our leadership of the war will be tough and strong.”  I’m sure that has Osama bin Laden and the insurgents quaking in their boots.

The rest of the agenda is the same old line…requiring more government intrusion, higher spending levels and government interference in the economic markets.  All of their ideas would move us closer to socialism.

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Did They Do It?

Posted by Grampus on Saturday, September 23, 2006 8:21:13 AM
If you understand why Senators McCain, Warner and Graham along with Colin Powell raised an issue that caused a disunion in the Republican ranks this close to the elections...would you please enlighten me?  The Dems have been licking their chops hoping this issue would blow out of proportion causing a major rift in Republican ranks.  Now it appears to have become a non-issue with the compromise that basically gives the President what he needed to deal with the captured terrorists.  One exception is a requirement to give the defendants access to information that is used against them. 

One good thing that did come of this from my viewpoint...I think that Senator McCain has diminished his support from the Republican core base. He is a moderate that has a lean to the left.  Have you ever heard of a great moderate?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hate-Democrats Acting Like Muslims

Posted by Grampus on Friday, September 22, 2006 3:50:39 PM
I ran across this on Right Wing News about the people on Democratic Underground.  [Right Wing News]  The hate they display is appalling! The organizations I mentioned in my blog 'Orchestrated Anger' have done their work very well!
-----
Americans aren't particularly fond of way over-the-top attacks on the President in any case and they certainly don't want to hear them from some tin pot thug, Castro-wannabe whom we were gracious enough to allow to enter our country. So, Rangel's comments were good politics and, if you ask me, just common decency.

But, of course, not everyone agrees -- like the folks over at the Democratic Underground, in a thread called Rangel: An attack on (CHIMPY) is an attack on all Americans...

As you read these comments, note the poisonous hatred towards Bush which is so extreme, so out of control, that these people are actually spewing massive amounts of venom at an ultra-left winger like Charles Rangel just because he defended George Bush. Apparently, for these people, being a loyal Democrat means NEVER saying a kind word for the other side, cooperating with them , or defending them for ANY REASON, no matter how justified it may be. Some of these comments are just....wow, you'll see:

Moochy: Oh brother. Nationalism is a poison... Thanks Rangel.
xchrom: then tell your president to stop trying to overthrow legitimately elected governments.
RandiRhodesArchives: that he needs to switch parties! and he can take Zell LIEbushlover with him too!
malaise: Attack? How is calling him the devil an attack. Doesn't Bushco call people terrorists with no evidence. Bush is the fugging anti-christ. Charlie knows a Dem backlash is coming for Chavez speaking at a Baptist Church in Harlem
OneBlueSky: when that president represents an immediate threat to world peace . . .and, indeed, to the survival of humanity and of the planet itself, I'd say that criticism is quite appropriate -- anytime, any place, and by anyone . . .
Generic Other: Evil translates into many languages. F*ck ALL BUsh apologists. I am not offended by the g*ddamn truth.
Rex: Well then he can go and goosestep with his new best friend George Bush. I hear Lieberman was a great progressive at one time and p*ssed his whole career away due to a kiss by the Devil.
michael_1166: Tell you what, Mr. Rangel: I'm just an ordinary German citizen, but I'm not only refraining from visiting your country, I also won't buy any American products unless your mass murdering president is behind bars.
Skidmore: You know, none of us here could possibly hate this country as much as the chickenhawks voted for these imbeciles that head this Mickey Mouse administration (yeah, I'm calling Boosh & Cheney names so sue me) and the Mickey Mouse Club Congress y'all installed with them. By the time they are done, America will be unrecognizable and no longer sovereign. Land of the free and home of the brave, my a*s. Bunch of cowards lined up behind a coward and a bunch of Christian fanatics trying to bring Armageddon on cause they've been told that Mickey and the gang are put there by God. Handed the nation over Bin Laden and the terraists a long time ago. "They wanna kill us all." Inless we go shopping, of course. Shop till you drop, but my guess is y'all won't wear a uniform and actually go fight. Of course, there are those lucrative positions with KBR & Halliburton in which you can always make megabucks in and retire after a year.
LaPera: SO F*CK YOU CHARLIE RANGEL! Yes, Bush with his war mongering, killer of the poor and his imperialism certainly is the "devil"...But, we all knew this! Viva Chavez! Bravo!!
El Zopilote: What is U.S. Congressman Charles Rangél doing? Is he betraying the Democratic Party? He's bashing Hugo Chavez and defending Bush. It is very disturbing and alarming to see a Democrat, especially a monority, to critize an international Hispanic leader and ally by expressing sympathy for Bush and his racist Republicans. Has Mr. Rangél gone loco? Has he turned into a rogue Democrat? Is he a traitor? Hopefully Mr. Rangél has an ulterior motive. But as Democrats we must be careful not to create the slightest impression that our strong united coalition has a crack in it. I consider all minorities (African-Americans, Hispanics of course, Muslims, American Indians and all to be my brothers in the cause of solidarity). We must remain united. Solidarity is the key to victory. We do not need dissent.

Grampus

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Morality & Integrity

Posted by Grampus on Friday, September 22, 2006 2:23:37 PM
One has to question recent actions by General Powell and Richard Armitage.  It was a shock to learn that while serving as Secretary of State and Deputy Secretary of State respectfully, both were singularly lacking in moral courage.  Men who should have been paradigms for integrity betrayed the trust given them by the President.  Their silence and refusal to step forward and admit responsibility or knowledge of the key elements in the Plame/Wilson scandal, Powell and Armitage have been sadly revealed as devoid of moral courage.  It is one thing to disagree on policy different than their own principals…however, there are built-in mechanisms for expressing disagreement.  There are options when confronted with a dilemma  on policy.  Make your point.  If overruled, you can either subjugate your objection and carry out the policy or you can resign.  These choices are morally correct.  Sabotaging the policy undermines the trust that is imparted by those above and below you and the general public is not a valid, honorable action.  Both men schooled in the tradition of honesty, courage and leadership selected that under-handed and sordid option.

Then General Powell recently teamed with McCain, Warner and Graham in creating major obstacles for the President in dealing with captured terrorists,  thus causing a disunion for the Republicans prior to the very important elections in November. 

Now we learn that 60 Minutes in a show that airs Sunday, Pakistan’s President Musharraf said that Richard Armitage (while still Deputy Secretary of State) is the one that told Pakistan’s Intelligence director that the U.S. would “bomb them back to the stone age” if it did not help in the fight against terrorists.

Given the history of television with the creation of false stories to discredit Republicans and Richard Armitage’s  denial of the allegations, ( you have to wonder about his credibility after the Plame/Wilson scandal)…it will very interesting to see how all of this comes out of the wash.

Grampus
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Orchestrated Anger

Posted by Grampus on Thursday, September 21, 2006 11:24:47 PM
"We have to fight back.  We have to fight back."  According to Byron York in his book, "The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy", these were the words of Al Franken in November, 2003 as left wing activists, political and media types gathered to celebrate the opening of a new liberal think tank, The Center for American Progress founded by former Clinton White House Chief of Staff, John Podesta.  The center was to become "pushback" against the Right...launching daily attacks on the Bush Administration and fighting Conservative's sound bites on every occasion from television and radio.

The leaders of the left believed that they had been too "nice" in the fight against what they describe as the Republican attack machine.  In starting an institution devoted to "pushback", they were just part of a far larger movement to drive George W. Bush from the White House. Their effort made history in part because it raised more money than has ever been raised before to defeat a single politician...literally hundreds of millions of dollars. 

The internet activist group MoveOn.org, enormous contributions from the anti-Bush billionaire, George Soros, the massive pro-Democratic voter turnout effort by the new organization America Coming Together, the films of Michael Moore and Al Franken's Air America radio network were all funded by the enormous sums of money raised.

It is very tempting to ascribe the Left's activism entirely to anger.
  • Clinton's Impeachment
  • 2000 Florida Vote Recount
  • War In Iraq
  • Even the look on George Bush's face
Indeed, it is still the motivation for many people.  However, The Left is using its activist organizations, MoveOn.org, Franken, Moore's movies, etc. to foment anger with the American people and attack the President's and Republican Congress' ideas and solutions on all the issues of the day.  Of course, the grass roots liberals don't have a clue and just continue to spew their hate messages at every opportunity.

The main stream media continues to support them at every turn. It is a very scary thought indeed when it appears that this strategy is working its intended purpose on the American people and Democrats could be the majority.

Grampus

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Cut & Run Crowd

Posted by Grampus on Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:49:40 PM

Will Democrats ever understand that Ahmidinejad, Bin Laden and Kim Jong Il are the enemy not Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld?

In the midst of the despicable political maneuvering over national security by the politicians of the left, it would be helpful if someone reminded them that America has real enemies; that those enemies are working very hard to get nuclear and biological weapons; and that those weapons can end up killing millions of Americans.

It would be helpful to have the Boxer-Pelosi-Dean-Lamont party of weakness, appeasement and surrender tell us in a positive way what they will do to defeat our enemies before they spend all their energy attacking fellow Americans.

Grampus


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234567891011121314Next »