Why we are better than our enemy

A GI was convicted of raping a 14 year old Iraqi girl, and murdering her and her family. He was sentenced to 100 years in prison.

Story

This is a story of depravity. I don't care about the soldier's excuses of fatigue or anything else. He is a disgrace, and he has been thrown out of the Army and into prison were he belongs.

This case proves we are better than our enemy. You are probably wondering how this savage act proves this. It is very simple. We punish our own. In parts of the Muslim world the victim would be seen as the guilty party. Had she not been murdered, she would have been, because of her disgraceful rape. They see it as her fault. Even if it isn't her fault in their eyes, she must die because she is now unclean.

This is but one example of why we are better. We punish the murderers and rapists among us. The enemy celebrates those that blow up women and children as martyrs. We have fair trials, were we are judged by our peers and evidence is presented. They have roving bands of thugs who act as judge, jury, and usually executioner.

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Take Abu Ghraib for example. They were incensed at the 'atrocities' carried out there. Some of soldiers mistreated some prisoners by putting underwear on their head and taking dirty pictures of them. The terrorists on the other hand take innocent civilians and slowly slice their heads off. We punished those of us who committed the acts at Abu Ghraib, just as we have in the aforementioned case. They see their murderers as heroes.

The Wild and Free Pigs of the Okefenokee Swamp

by Steve Washam
based on a telling by George Gordon

Some years ago, about 1900, an old trapper from North Dakota hitched up some horses to his Studebaker wagon, packed a few possessions-- especially his traps--and drove south.

Several weeks later he stopped in a small town just north of the Okefenokee Swamp in Georgia.

It was a Saturday morning--a lazy day--when he walked into the general store. Sitting around the pot-bellied stove were seven or eight of the town’s local citizens.

The traveler spoke, “Gentlemen, could you direct me to the Okefenokee Swamp?”

Some of the oldtimers looked at him like he was crazy.

“You must be a stranger in these parts,” they said.

“I am. I’m from North Dakota,” said the stranger.

“In the Okefenokee Swamp are thousands of wild hogs,” one old man explained. “A man who goes into the swamp by himself asks to die!” He lifted up his leg. “I lost half my leg here, to the pigs of the swamp.”

Another old fellow said, “Look at the cuts on me; look at my arm bit off!”

“Those pigs have been free since the Revolution, eating snakes and rooting out roots and fending for themselves for over a hundred years. They’re wild and they’re dangerous. You can’t trap them. No man dare go into the swamp by himself.”

Every man nodded his head in agreement.

The old trapper said, “Thank you so much for the warning. Now could you direct me to the swamp?”

They said, “Well, yeah, it’s due south--straight down the road.” But they begged the stranger not to go, because they knew he’d meet a terrible fate.

He said, “Sell me ten sacks of corn, and help me load them into the wagon.”

And they did.

Then the old trapper bid them farewell and drove on down the road. The townsfolk thought they’d never see him again.

Two weeks later the man came back. He pulled up to the general store, got down off the wagon, walked in and bought ten more sacks of corn. After loading it up he went back down the road toward the swamp.

Two weeks later he returned and, again, bought ten sacks of corn. This went on for a month. And then two months, and three.

Every week or two the old trapper would come into town on a Saturday morning, load up ten sacks of corn and drive off south into the swamp.

The stranger soon became a legend in the little village and the subject of much speculation. People wondered what kind of devil had possessed this man, that he could go into the Okefenokee by himself and not be consumed by the wild and free hogs.

One morning the man came into town as usual. Everyone thought he wanted more corn.

He got off the wagon and went into the store where the usual group of men were gathered around the stove. He took off his gloves.

“Gentlemen,” he said, “I need to hire about ten or fifteen wagons. I need twenty or thirty men. I have six thousand hogs out in the swamp, penned up, and they’re all hungry. I’ve got to get them to market right away.”

“You’ve WHAT in the swamp?” asked the storekeeper, incredulously.

“I have six thousand hogs penned up. They haven’t eaten for two or three days, and they’ll starve if I don’t get back there to feed and take care of them.”

One of the oldtimers said, “You mean you’ve captured the wild hogs of the Okefenokee?”

“That’s right.”

“How did you do that? What did you do?” the men urged, breathlessly.

One of them exclaimed, “But I lost my arm!”

“I lost my brother!” cried another.

“I lost my leg to those wild boars!” chimed a third.

The trapper said, “Well, the first week I went in there they were wild all right. They hid in the undergrowth and wouldn’t come out. I dared not get off the wagon. So I spread corn along behind the wagon. Every day I’d spread a sack of corn.

“The old pigs would have nothing to do with it. But the younger pigs decided that it was easier to eat free corn than it was to root out roots and catch snakes. So the very young began to eat the corn first.

“I did this every day. Pretty soon, even the old pigs decided that it was easier to eat free corn, after all, they were all free; they were not penned up. They could run off in any direction they wanted at any time.

“The next thing was to get them used to eating in the same place all the time. So, I selected a clearing, and I started putting the corn in the clearing.

“At first they wouldn’t come to the clearing. It was too far. It was too open. It was a nuisance to them.

“But the very young decided that it was easier to take the corn in the clearing than it was to root out roots and catch their own snakes. And not long thereafter, the older pigs also decided that it was easier to come to the clearing every day.

“And so the pigs learned to come to the clearing every day to get their free corn. They could still subsidize their diet with roots and snakes and whatever else they wanted. After all, they were all free. They could run in any direction at any time. There were no bounds upon them.

“The next step was to get them used to fence posts. So I put fence posts all the way around the clearing. I put them in the underbrush so that they wouldn’t get suspicious or upset, after all, they were just sticks sticking up out of the ground, like the trees and the brush. The corn was there every day. It was easy to walk in between the posts, get the corn, and walk back out.

“This went on for a week or two. Shortly they became very used to walking into the clearing, getting the free corn, and walking back out through the fence posts.

“The next step was to put one rail down at the bottom. I also left a few openings, so that the older, fatter pigs could walk through the openings and the younger pigs could easily jump over just one rail, after all, it was no real threat to their freedom or independence--they could always jump over the rail and flee in any direction at any time.

“Now I decided that I wouldn’t feed them every day. I began to feed them every other day. On the days I didn’t feed them, the pigs still gathered in the clearing. They squealed, and they grunted, and they begged and pleaded with me to feed them--but I only fed them every other day. Then I put a second rail around the posts.

“Now the pigs became more and more desperate for food. Because now they were no longer used to going out and digging their own roots and finding their own food, they now needed me. They needed my corn every other day.”

“So I trained them that I would feed them every day if they came in through a gate and I put up a third rail around the fence.

“But it was still no great threat to their freedom, because there were several gates and they could run in and out at will.

“Finally I put up the fourth rail. Then I closed all the gates but one, and I fed them very, very well.”

“Yesterday I closed the last gate and today I need you to help me take these pigs to market.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The price of free corn

The parable of the pigs has a serious moral lesson. This story is about federal money being used to bait, trap and enslave a once free and independent people.

Federal welfare, in its myriad forms, has reduced not only individuals to a state of dependency; state and local governments are also on the fast track to elimination, due to their functions being subverted by the command and control structures of federal “revenue sharing” programs.

Please copy this parable and send it to all of your state and local elected leaders and other concerned citizens. Tell them: “Just say NO to federal corn.”

The bacon you save may be your own.

Copyright 1997, The Idaho Observer. All rights reserved. Permission granted to reproduce for non-commercial purposes in entirety, including this notice.

This is a very good lesson about the dangers of Federal largess, and becoming dependant on the government. Hat tip: Weetabix at the The Other Side of Kim forums.

The wonderful evil black rifle

As most people that pay attention to the goings on in Congress, I noticed that a new AWB was introduced a few weeks back. It is HR 1022 (ironic isn't it). For anyone interested (if you value your God-given rights you better be), check out the text here.

This abomination will outlaw many, many guns that millions of people legally own now. It goes much farther than the Clinton Gun Ban. It apparently would make it illegal to transfer the banned weapons from owner to owner. They of course don't have the balls to try to confiscate existing weapons, so they would be grandfathered in. You would never be able to sell them though.

In the spirit of 'fuck you, you won't trample my rights', the better half and I decided to buy an AR this weekend. Specifically a Bushmaster XM15. This one in particular.



Actually ours is slightly different. It has an A3 detachable carry handle. It came with one 30 rounder(which would also be banned), a sling, manual, and case. We took it out to the range Sunday. It shoots great! I managed to put about 40 rounds in a 4" circle. Pretty good for iron sights and my bad eyes. I was shooting cheap commie ammo, so I am sure I can improve the performance with some more practice and better ammo.

We bought an extra mag for it as well. I plan to buy a few dozen mags for it, and hopefully another rifle or two.

I will do all I can to fight the new AWB(Assault Weapons Ban for the uninitiated), but if it does go through I will be somewhat prepared. I won't be stuck with 10 round bolt actions for my family's self defense.

I also plan to buy quite a few mags for my XD-45. They hold more than 10 rounds so they would be illegal as well.

We will most likely get an AK or two when funds allow as well. These will be cheapo WASR-10s most likely, but they will kill just as well as the $800 Ruskie versions.

I love my black rifle. Eugene Stoner was a genius, and we must do what we can so that future generations will be able to enjoy his wonderful rifle.

The Europeans are intent on insuring their own desctruction

Making fun of stupid, self-destructive, socialist, liberals, will most likely be a recurring theme of this blog. Let's face it. It is just to easy! Anyway, the Guardian is a shining example usually of what is wrong with Europe and leftists in general.

In this example we will explore the blog of Rasoul Movahedian, who apparently is connected with the Iranian embassy in London. The article is entitled 'Iran is a Force for Peace'. Giggle. The real fun is that the Guardian links to it from their home page and hosts his blog. It is right under an unsourced article that says basically 'the US is lying about Iran, just like they did in Iraq'.

This is part of a pathelogical recurrence that for the life of me I can not understand. I mean, granted the left hates America, and the West on a global scale, but I just don't get their fascination with murderous Persian/Arab regimes. Why do they consistantly ignore the atrocities of the grubby little dictators, and blame America/Western Civilization first? This is a question that I have no answer for. Blame freedom first is a recurring theme. Before the Islamofascists it was the Communists in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America. The still love them of course, but those that would slit their throats seem to be the latest target of their unbridled adoration.

But I digress...Let's look at this wonderful article.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2018309,00.html

The latest salvo of rhetoric against Iran betrays a grand design to demonise the country and trigger a new adventurism in the highly sensitivePersian Gulf region. Again and again the "Iranian threat" is invoked as partof a neocon agenda to deepen US military involvement in the area. But its goal - to downgrade Iran's role in the region - is both implausible and illfounded.

Alright here we go. It is all the neocons fault. They just want to have military adventures here and steal our land. Sound familiar? It does to me. It sounds just like the pablum the Left dribbles consistantly. We don't want war with Iran, but I know for a fact that they will not be allowed to create the caliphate they want as long as people like Dubya are running the show here in America.

Iran, by contrast, has demonstrated throughout its history a belief in constructive engagement in international relations, at the same time as holding firm to its right to retain its important regional role. Our civilising contribution to the history of the region and the world is beyond doubt - and we are the region's largest democracy, so of course we hold influence. But that influence has never had any imperial aspiration. Iran's national security doctrine is defensive and does not consider military might to be an instrument of foreign policy.

Pass me some of what you are smoking! Constructive engagement? Like when you turned your country into a theocratic nightmare, and held 400 Americans hostage? Civilising contribution? Again this has got to be a joke. You are a backwards fascistic theocracy, that is ruled over by Islamist psycho-Clerics. Let's not get ahead of ourselves with the democracy stuff. Yes Iran holds elections for that sham legislature, and the President's office.

The problem is the Council of Guardians and the Supreme Leader (read aforementioned pshyco-Clerics), have to abet the candidates first. Even once they are elected they hold no true power. The Supreme Leader is holding all the cards. There has only been two of them since the revolution in 1979. As for imperial aspirationg, again how are you trying to kid. Your own President speaks of bringing about the end of the world, and creating a Islamic calaphate that rules the world. Your military has never been allowed to be used to enforce your anti-semetic hate-filled foreign policy.

Iran has friendly, neighbourly and constructive relations with all countries in the region. Neither Iranians nor Arabs wish to repeat the bitter experience of the 1980s that followed Saddam Hussein's attack. Iran has appealed to Shia and Sunni alike to refrain from acts of violence. It condemns all atrocities in the either's name. It neither interferes in the domestic affairs of Iraq nor supports violence inside Iraq.

You lying bastard. That pretty much sums up that paragraph.

Given that we have been the victims of Saddam's aggression, it's entirely reasonable that we try to establish security across our long common border with Iraq. But it is not Iran that has invaded and occupied Iraq. It is the US and its allies. Iran has supported the elected government of Iraq and will not spare any effort that can contribute to its reconstruction, development and security. After all, a more secure Iraq means a more secure Iran.

This seems perfectly reasonable. To bad it to is a lie. You have sown nothing but discord between Sunni and Shia, and are looking to take over Iraq as soon as America leaves. This is of course the reason we must stay and fight. The Iraqis must be given the power to protect themselves.

As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran retains the right to benefit from a civil nuclear programme. We demonstrated our sincerity to the world by sitting at the negotiating table for more than two years and suspending all our peaceful nuclear activities to show our goodwill; the result was nothing tangible, but a plan to develop Iran's peaceful enrichment technology.

Last year, however, on spurious legal and technical grounds, the case was further politicised by taking it away from the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, where it belongs, and to the UN security council. Resolution 1737, passed in December, was based not on facts but on suspicion, and undermined the credibility of the council. Political mischief should not be played out through the security council, and neither bellicose talk nor military adventurism will bring a halt to Iran's peaceful nuclear enrichment programme - a programme that sits within the bounds of the non-proliferation treaty.

Suspended what? You have been enriching uranium night and day, even though the Security Council told you not to. You have also refused very reasonable offers over and over. You have basically thrown your program in the face of the international community and dared us to do something about it. It is not within the bounds of the treaty. If it were the IAEA would not be up your ass about it.

Any threat on the part of the United States government to initiate another military conflict in the region can only trigger new crises, wildly jeopardising global security and stability. We believe in a solution through negotiation and dialogue, a dialogue that addresses concerns on both sides, and in the meantime guarantees our inalienable right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy activity.

Short-termism must not overshadow the pursuit of long-term cooperation. If the present mindset can be replaced by a mentality of constructive interaction, a mutually acceptable outcome remains a real prospect. Real impetus would come from a recognition of the rights and the role of Iran in the region and the world. We genuinely hope a new phase of unconditional and sincere negotiations will resume in that direction.

You no more believe in dialogue than the moon is made of cheese. Your President constantly claims that you will destroy Israel and/or America. Neither will happen. You will surely be destroyed first. Unconditional negotiations are an interesting thought.

I did not mean to talk about this article completely in depth, so I have not. The point is the Guardian represents the socialistic leftist view in Europe. That the have something like this on their site is a prime example. Looking at the comments makes it worse. Those that disagree with the man do so in an almost apologetic, and weak tone.

France and Britian must realize what is happening to them. They are being taken over, and are being set up to become Islamic third world states if they do not take control of it now.

Hmm...

Well I have no idea exactly what this blog is to be. Most likely gun talk, political rantings, hopefully some good hunting and fishing stories at some point, and whatever else crosses my mind I guess.

This should be an interesting experiment if for no one else but me. I plan to commit to blogging at least once a week, so after a year or so it should be fun to look back at. At any rate, here we go...