Why Being Stuck in an Airport is a Little Bit Like Being a Soldier in Iraq

This week hundreds of people were stuck in airports all over the country, anxiously waiting and hoping to finally reach that land of oppurtunity, beauty, and liberty: the Northeastern United States. This not only affected those who wished to come to the Northeast, but those longing to leave as well; many people were flat out stuck in JFK or Laguardia airpot. But if you're going to be stuck somewhere, there are worse places than an airport; there's plenty of literature to read, TV is on everywhere, and there's food. But even though there are all those things, it still sucks. You're somewhere you don't want to be, and what makes it even worse: you really, really, want to be somewhere else.



This is where I make the comparison to Iraq.



Whether or not you think troop morale is high or low, you know that no one really wants to be in Iraq. But is Iraq like an airport? Not really. There is food, there is entertainment, (heck Iraq troops got to test out Halo 3. There are some kids who would sign up just for that oppurtunity.) and as we saw on Bill O'Reilly's visit to Iraq, the troops have quite a few amneties. However, they are risking their lives every day just by being there. And Iraq is obviously a much more hostile situation than an airport terminal. But soldiers are still there, forced to stay there, even though they desperately want to be somewhere else. Nowadays, even though the troop surge isn't 100% official, many reserve and former Army officials are being called to Iraq, including retired officers. My cousin just happens to be one of those officers. Lord knows he'd rather stay here at home, but he'll be stuck in Iraq for a year and a half, which is a hell of a lot longer than anyone has spent in an airport. He'll be in Iraq, probably playing Halo 3, probably enjoying some of the other amneties they have there, but also hating the gruelling task of simply being there, and the whole time he'll be longing for the weather to clear up so he can catch his flight home.

Russia + Iran + U.S. = Bedfellows (Maybe)

Can Russia and the U.S. be BFFs?

This week Russia scolded Iran for not coming up with the $$$$ to build a Russian nuclear plant in Iran. Even though Russian-American relations haven't necessarily been bad, this sure did come as a surprise. This is a pretty huge relief, because it shows two things:

1. That Russian interest in Iran has little to do with building alliance against America (which is what we were all worried about) and more to do with simple finances. While it does suck that Russia was going to help Iran build the plant, the Russians are still skeptical of Iran's intentions, and like the rest of the world, they want to make sure that those crazy Persians aren't building a nuclear bomb to start the Holocaust Part II.

2. Russia communicates with Iran the way no other "Western" industrialized nation does. None of us really know why that is, and it kind of creeps out the U.S. I think a lot of U.S. politicians want to like Russia, but the thought of President Putin and Mahmoud "Everyone spell-checks my name" Ahmadinejad cozing up and playing golf together is a little unnerving.

The most important one to note is point 2. We'll get to that later.

"In Soviet Russia the Vodka Drinks YOU."

Though your average American still views Russia as the Soviet Union, most U.S. politicians and diplomats view Russia as a friend. But in international politics there are differences between a nation that is a "friend," and a nation that is an "ally." An ally to the U.S. would be Great Britain. Russia is a friend mainly because we have friendly relations with them. Putin and Bush get along pretty well, and the U.S. and Russia remain in strong agreement when it comes to the War on Terror (save Iraq, which Russia, along with the rest of the world, did not view as part of the War on Terror). In fact, Russia and the U.S. have every reason to be friends: Russia has oil, natural gas, and they're a democracy. Of course, there are those in the hard-core conservative camp, like Glenn Beck, who say in this video that Russia is "always the enemy." Not only is this stupid in and of itself, but George Washington, a person who Glenn Beck probably emulates, would disagree. In his farewell address Washington warned against "permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations," and also said that if we permanently label any nation as an enemy (or friend) we ultimately become "a slave to that nation." So let's try to get over any lingering Cold War hatred towards Russia and see if we can use our friendship with them for good things. This brings us back to point 2.

Ahmadinejad is crazy.

But not crazy in the sense that you're thinking. Even though Ahmadinejad has said some really shady things about Israel, let's take an objective look at the democratically elected leader of Iran.

1. He was democratically elected.

Though Iran may not be a true democracy in the American sense, it is still a democracy albeit one with a Persian/Muslim/Middle-Eastern twist.

2. He is pretty damn progressive.

Ahmadinejad has taken heat from Muslim clerics and from the Ayatollah Khumeni (still in power as the "supreme leader" of Iran) for his lax views on women's public dress codes. He also changed the laws for female attendence at men's sports matches, stating that not only should women be allowed to attend, but "should be given the best seats in the stadium." This is pretty standard in the U.S. but for Iran, this is progressive.

So why should we not take advantage of this progressiveness? Imagine a Middle East with an American-Russian-Iranian alliance. I'm not talking about throwing out relations with Israel; Russia has been able to remain friends with Israel and with Iran, so why can't we? Using Russia to as a bridge to friendly relations with Iran could also mean Israel using us as a bridge to friendly relations with Iran. I know that the whole "peace in the Middle East" thing is kind of a lost cause, but a little stubborn optimism never helps. I understand that most of America thinks Ahmadinejad is batshit crazy and that Iran probably wants to kill everbody and prove to everyboy that 300 was just a movie. But immediatley writing Russia off as an ally simply because they were our enemies at one time is stupid, and the same goes for Iran. At the very least we should hope that we will be able calm everybody down, because these days it seems like everybody is ready to start World War III and I am in no mood for a draft.

What Really Happened on 9/11

9/11 Conspiracy - Not What You Think

Many of you may have heard of movies like Loose Change or 9/11 Mysteries. I have watched these movies numerous times, and even though I am tempted to believe 3 college kids, a ton of drama professors, and a 42 year-old man who lives in his parents' basements as opposed to countless experts and scientists, I feel there are a few missing elements to their [3 college kids, a ton of drama professors, and a 42-year-old man who lives in his parents' basement] theories. Right now I shall put forth my own, and once you see this evidence, you will find it hard to disagree with me. (If you do, I will simply write you off as closed-minded and naive.)

Theory: Setup

There have been many questions about 9/11 since the horrible event occurred. Dylan Avery and his posse have created a video called "Loose Change" which blames the George W. Bush Administration for organizing the attack using remote control planes and planted explosives in the buildings. I have no problem with the explosives being planted, but there is no way those planes could have been remote controlled. Have you ever tried to fly a remote controlled plane? They are a pain in the ass. I submit this video as evidence:



See? RC planes suck. Someone had to have been flying those planes. But was it the alleged hijackers? The Loose Change kids say that some of the hijackers are still alive! Frankly, it doesn't matter as to whether or not the hijackers are alive or not, because the person who really flew the planes is neither dead nor alive, he is UNDEAD.



Yes, Dracula.

I know what you're thinking:

"Dracula? How could he have possibly done this? What is his agenda?" I know there are many questions, and I will address them all.

1. What is his agenda?

Firstly, only a fool who has never watched a Dracula movie would ask this question. Humans are food for Dracula, and he hates the human race. Why would he not want to take out 3,000 humans in one foul swoop?

2. He was there?

To those who doubt Dracula's involvement, answer me these questions: Why was Dracula nowhere to be found on September 11th, 2001? Why is there a lack of BLOOD at the World Trade Center following the events? Look at these photos for evidence:

What is important to note is the cross in the upper right hand corner of the above photo. Was it merely coincidence that this cross was constructed, as if the rebuilders were giving mad props to Baby Jesus or was it to keep away a much more threatening figure? Maybe Dracula perhaps. I know, the evidence is overwhelming, but there is much more.

3. Dracula hates Jihad and is not a Muslim.

Dracula does not need to sacrifice himself in a Jihad so he can get 72 12 year-old virgins, he has all the female vampire sex slaves he'll ever need. So Dracula did fly the planes, but morphed into a bat (as we all know he can do) and flew away at the last second. Look at these photos:

What do you suppose that spec is flying away? Looks as if it is a bat, if you ask me. Further evidence proves this:

This car was found just outside the World Trade Center the day after September 11th. While it is true that many birds fled downtown New York and unloaded on several cars because they were literally scared shitless, upon closer examination this poop is highly questionable. Note the traces of red in this "bird" poop:

What kind of a bird poops red? Perhaps this isn't the shit of a bird, but the shit of a bat instead? A bat who had recently consumed a healthy amount of HUMAN BLOOD? THE TRUTH IS IN THE BATSHIT.

4. Dracula's Crazy Letter

Of course the big-business/corporate controlled/right-wing fascist/liberal media didn't cover this, but I will: Dracula has written his own threatening letter to the United States:

And there you have it folks. I hope this clears up any of the arguments the naysayers may have.

I made this post using the same logic actual conspiracy theorists use. I think most conspiracy theories, while sometimes fun/funny, are stupid and full of logical fallacies. I usually judge people who believe in conspiracy theories, but I am glad they exhist, because it at least lets me know that I am smarter than some people.