congratulations cindy sheehan!

yes, you, cindy sheehan, have been liberated from antiwar activism! congratulations! you did an excellent job! but you never could have anticipated that the congressional democrats, of all people, would help the war continue by passing an unrestricted funding bill and sending it to dumbya! of course the bill was a republican bill, since it was written by republicans and almost all republicans voted for it but democrats were divided on it. but the democrats are supposed to be in control of congress, having supposed majorities in both houses of congress, ignoring for a moment the fact that their majority in the senate goes away if joe lieberman switches sides and works with the enemy like he does on the issue of the war in iraq. but who the fuck cares about joe lieberman? he is an irrelevant political dinosaur who only managed to survive by using his jewish guilt trip jedi mind trick on the people of connecticut. cindy sheehan, the voice of the future, speaks out against voices of the past like joe lieberman, or at least she used to, back when she was ahead of her time. but now that the future has come in the form of democrats controlling congress, cindy sheehan no longer speaks for the future, because that was in the past, and now in the present, the past has already happened. i name myself official spokesman of the future. in the future, the war in iraq will end. anyone trying to drag it out any longer is from the past. if you are from the future, you know that the future ought to happen faster, at least the good parts. the bad parts can happen slower. but ending the war is good, right? it has to be. i mean, our troops leave and come home. they stop being killed and dying. so, that’s gotta be good. i mean, those who speak in the orwellian newspeak about war being peace and lies being truth and fiction being fact might confuse you about the past and the future, and might make you think that we might fight the people we are currently fighting in iraq again sometime in the future. but actually the future happened in the past, in the year 1991, which is actually backwards. forwards, it reads 1991. that’s better, even though it looks the same. anyway, the second iraq war happened in 1991, if you look backwards at time. it was the war the united states actually won. but looking at time forwards, we can see that we have clearly lost the second war, which started in 2003 and lasted for at least 4 years, probably longer. but everyone keeps listening to the professional liars who were wrong about everything. how about some common sense? ok, so we are fighting al qaeda in iraq, among other enemies we have there. but think about it this way: because of us fighting in iraq, al qaeda is fighting alongside many allies, in its fight against us. if we left iraq, al qaeda would be left to fight against the other factions and militant and armed groups of the new iraq, the country that is right where the old iraq used to be located. anyway, the longer we are there, the better the enemy does and the worse we do, something that we have found to be true each year we have fought there. but we are not actually doing any of the fighting, unless the pronoun “we” is used for a large collective of people, the american proletariat. but i might not even really be a member of the proletariat, so maybe i am using the queen of england “we” or the “we” of us versus them. oh yeah. i am using the “we” of us versus them, to refer to all of the united states as “we”. but who are we fighting against? all of iraq? or do we have any allies in iraq? that is a serious question, not just rhetorical. we seem to have some allies inside iraq, but maybe they have just been bullied into being our allies or paid to be our allies or otherwise tricked, or perhaps they are actually subgeniuses and are temporarily playing the role of our allies and hiding their subversive evil plans for later. our allies in iraq are pretending to be allies of ours in iraq, when in actuality, they are an evil cult. oh wait, i forgot what i was talking about. no, but now i remember. our fake iraqi allies are just waiting for us to leave so they can unleash hell on the other people in iraq. once we leave, the immediate consequences won’t be terrorists literally following us back home to america (or, should i say, following the military paid for by the money the government steals from us, back home to the military’s home country of the united states of america, which happens to be the same as the country we live in, even though most of us have nothing else in common with military members). all right, even if terrorists do strike again here and it is somehow related to how we end the war in iraq prematurely, it would mean al qaeda will have been able to establish a safe haven in iraq. but what is a “safe haven” anyway? any country that would try to openly harbor al qaeda would be bombed into the stone age by our military, no questions asked. al qaeda is a shadowy organization, having to hide in the shadows and hide everything from our totalitarian new world order organization that we call our government. if we knew were osama bin laden was, we could literally vaporize him from space using a giant laser. probably. or maybe that program got defunded in the 80’s or was cut in the 90’s or never even existed until this millennium when dick cheney personally started it inside his own rectum. well the mooninites will get osama bin laden with their quad laser, or their 4x more powerful quad glacier, which moves at 1/4 the speed. but osama is hiding somewhere protected by layer upon layer of security, all people who are born-again ultra-religious islamic fundamentalist fanatics. and nobody like that would ever be allowed in our government’s national security apparatus in a million years. they don’t want real muslims in the cia. osama bin laden used to be a cia beneficiary, and so did saddam hussein. i think the cia has learned not to trust these people, and by “these people” i mean “all muslims”. anyway, you have probably had to have been in osama bin laden’s inner circle for many years to be involved in his security at all, and anyone without those qualifications would probably never get allowed near the guy, by the al qaeda security protocols. and since our cia never saw any reason to infiltrate his inner circle until after 9/11/2001, they never got the chance until it was too late becase they had the chance for quite some time but they blew it by doing nothing, back when they actually could have done something. so anyway, al quaeda seems like a decentralized organization to our “intelligence” services because of their stupidity, because they have no clue what is really going on inside al qaeda and are only able to observe what is done by the lowest-level operatives and those at the fringes of the organization. how many times have we captured the #3 ranking officer in al qaeda? like 100? seriously. our government lies to us all the time about this shit, or else they are too stupid to know what they are saying is untrue. either way, we are the ones who end up getting screwed, except not screwed in the sense you would like, but screwed in the other sense that nobody likes. anyway, so how on earth could al qaeda establish a safe haven in iraq? let’s see... first iraq would have to have a giant civil war, have the central government collapse, and be divided into a bunch of subnations, each with its own subleaders, but with loosely defined borders between the subnations and constant war and fighting and bloodshed between everyone. in the complete and utter chaos of it all, al qaeda would be free to do as it pleased, and set up operations aboveground somewhere, without having to hide in the shadows like it does everywhere else in the world. but how is this logical? al qaeda would not be safe if the nation of iraq is completely unsafe for everyone. presumably, there would be local warlords in some region of iraq who would ally themselves with al qaeda to get the islamic mujahedin fighting on their side. but warlords on the other side could easily notify us of this development, and we would ship them in whatever guns, tanks, missiles, and bomber planes they wanted. al qaeda would get crushed and so would whoever allies with them. so al qaeda could only get by if they pretended not to be al qaeda, and went by some other name, and allied themselves with some warlords a.k.a. iraqi politicians, as a fighting force. but the whole thing is so ridiculous... there is no way this could go on in a country like iraq without us finding out, when our agents and our supposed allies are everywhere. al qaeda could never develop a safe haven in iraq, at least nothing even close to what they had under the taliban in afghanistan. under the taliban, they were allowed to operate out in the open, and they did, quite brazenly. thus all of the terrorist training camps we so often hear about, which actually did not exist for that long, seeing as the taliban only lasted from 1996 to 2001 as the government of afghanistan. that is quite a short tenure. anyway, terrorism is a tactic, and while we might be able to eliminate al qaeda from the face of this earth someday, we can never defeat the tactic of terrorism unless we simply refuse to allow terrorists to terrorize us into being terrified. now the war in iraq is completely separate from the war on terrorism, which is a fake war just like the war on drugs and the war on poverty. the only real war is the war on peace. all other wars are part of that larger, over-arching conflict against peace. anyway, the war in iraq is an actual war, not a multinational cross-border law-enforcement operation like the so-called war on terror, or s.c.w.o.t. for short. the s.c.w.o.t. was going perfectly fine when we started the war in iraq, and by “we” i am using the nationalist “we”. but now, the war in iraq, which “we” started, has spilled over into an escalation of the s.c.w.o.t., since the terrorists have several times as many willing new recruits as before our invasion of iraq. in other words, those who claimed to protect our security actually did the exact opposite, and continue to do so to this day, and still, nobody dares challenge them. this is what the lady cindy sheehan discovered to be the case, when she uncovered the mystery of the democratic lawmaker doing the exact opposite of what they campaigned and won on last november, that is, ending the fucking war already, dear jesus, please somebody help us, we are all completely screwed. anyway, cindy sheehan had been trying to call the democratic lawmakers on their hypocrisy on the issue of iraq, on how they voted to continue the war after pledging to do all they could to end the war. unfortunately, some of us “democrats” (and i use that term loosely) may have been a little too harsh with her. some democrats may have told her that her real enemies were the republicans. well, cindy sheehan has enemies on both sides of the aisle. peace has enemies on both sides of the aisle. we have 51 votes in the senate if you include an independent neoconservative from connecticut who has no loyalty to anyone. plenty of democrats voted for the war. hillary clinton has had every possible position on this issue, like john kerry except even worse. much worse. she makes john kerry look like he made perfect sense on the issue of iraq all along. and he did, actually... well... sort of... actually, no... but still he kinda did... compared to some people. but even president bush is a flip-flopper. the bush administration was for de-baathification before they were against it. they were against having iraqi leaders have any say in ruling iraq before they changed their mind. they were against holding democratic elections in iraq before they decided it was a splendid idea. and on the issue of iraqi oil, they have changed their minds at least 3 times, probably more. originally we were just going to sell iraqi oil assets to the highest bidder. then that plan was shelved. then we had another privatization plan. it got shelved too, but that took longer. now we have the best privatization plan ever, but first it has to be passed by the iraqi parliament. hey, at least the war bill that the president signed recently calls on the iraqi parliament to pass the oil law that our government currently advocates! what a relief! yes, the issue has been completely clouded and disguised as an issue of fair distribution of oil revenue among shia, sunnis, and kurds. our plan takes care of that, by giving them all the equally fair percentage of zero. hahahahahaha! no but seriously, they do get a percentage, one that is fair, and it actually is above zero. the iraqis would be fools not to pass our expertly crafted legislation that we are recommending that they pass! to say otherwise is nonsense! our multinational oil corporations will only get the vast majority of the profits, not 100%! there is a difference! anyway, gasoline is really expensive now, more expensive than ever. and that is also because of this war in iraq. if we had only let hans blix and muhammad el-baradei do their inspections of iraq for weapons of mass destruction, and left saddam hussein in power, oil would be much cheaper! now all 3 of the big 3 car companies of america are in financial turmoil, and the oil companies are making record profits and not sharing with anyone! what a fine reward for how, all this time, the car manufacturers had been helping out the oil companies by making excessively inefficient vehicles on purpose! but there is no honor among thieves. and so, no honor among large corporations and the bush administration. just witness the fate of poor “kenny boy” lay, who was reduced to faking his own death to avoid having legal liability for his criminal behavior, after the white house failed to bail out his bankrupt company of enron... or perhaps the conspiracy theorists are right and maybe he did actually die of a heart attack? well, nuts! cindy sheehan, your son did not die for nothing. he succeeded in making you miserable. and in the end, isn’t that what everyone wants to do, make someone close to them miserable? thank you for letting me wash your brain, dear reader. let’s do it again sometime, shall we?