Life Is Grand for The Iranian Hostages

Okay, you’re right. I’m kidding. Let’s be realistic here.

Iran wants Israel and all her allies wiped off the face of the earth. Iran wants to take control of Iraq. The Brits, while not largely responsible for this, are part of what stands in the way of both of those goals. So Iran takes hostages. And then the fun begins.

Taking hostages is one of the oldest tricks in the world for a smaller, less powerful bad guy to try and get a good guy to do what he wants. Of course, sometimes the good guys do it, too. (This brings to mind the instance in the Patriot when Benjamin Martin creates British soldiers in order to get his own back. Both involve faking things.) Now, what I don’t get is the paradox. The Iranians kidnap the Brits, treat the Brits like kings, and expect the entire country of Great Britain to tuck tails and run.

First of all, if they really are being treated like kings, why would the Brits run? Maybe more people will be captured and get treated like kings.

Secondly, why the Brits? There are a vastly superior number of American soldiers running around out there. Question easily answered. As tough as Blair may be on terror, no big-time terrorist wants to toy with Bush in that manner. They’re too afraid they’ll end up like Bin Laden (running for his life at all times) or Hussein (wishing he had somewhere to run to get away from the flames).

Third, why the phony confessions and all that? Trying to win in the court of public opinion? Well, if we had thinkers in the world today, it might not work. But the sad part is, that the Iranians, at least for the time, will at least compete in the court of public opinion. There will be some ignorant few who will say that they don’t understand what everybody has a problem with. After all, the Americans are doing it to Iranians, right? Wrong. The comparison is not even possible for a couple of reasons. First, Iran has not been attacked. Iran’s troops have not been attacked. The U.S. has had both happen, and the terrorists they arrest are engaged in acts of war against the United States. Lest you say “defense of homeland,” most of these terrorists aren’t Iraqis, and whether the U.S.’s war was justified or not, the terrorists are still perpetrating war against them, so therefore fall under enemy combatants according to the much overvaunted “international rules of warfare.” Also, the British troops were not engaged in warfare against Iran, they were patrolling for smugglers. And don’t give me the stuff about in Iranian waters. No troops are going to venture into enemy waters carelessly with today’s technology. The very idea is asinine.

Let’s not kid ourselves. We all know what terrorists usually do the people they capture. Criminal regimes do not treat their hostages “royally.” The letters are fake. I watched the video. It’s obviously not spontaneous on the part of the serviceman. I’ve done a bit of movie-making and he is clearly either reading something or following someone’s cue. He is prompted several times by questions and he appears uncomfortable. In short, he looks like a really bad amateur actor.

If anyone reads this, and has gotten this far and sympathizes with Iran, I’d be interested to here your rationale. It should prove a bit difficult to defend.

Other Guys: Brit Speaks on UK Hostages

Here’s why the Brit thinks the letters ostensibly from the female sailor are fake.

Ever Get Frustrated in an Elevator?

First of all… DO NOT PULL A GUN WHILE A COP IS ON THE ELEVATOR!!! BAD IDEA!

Secondly, take a big breath and wait a bit longer.

Third, do make sure there isn’t a camera in the elevator and you won’t get seen by the whole entire world.

Fourth, try forgetting to put on deodorant in the morning. They won’t come so much if you do that.

Fifth, look like somebody who’s going to pull a gun, not a suave businessman.

Any other suggestions?

Support the Troops?

Not here. I’m not even getting into the Constitutionality of this… but I think we can all agree that this is repulsive.

Would someone care to explain to me how you can say that this…

represents peace?

It’s hatred, folks. Hatred for the country. Hatred for the people protecting those person’s freedoms. Hatred for anything that doesn’t buy into what they say. And it’s wrong.

Peace my eye.

Views Now Over 5,000

I didn’t think I’d get there so quickly. But I’m there. What does it really mean? It’s nothing more than a number, right?

But somehow, I still feel a sense of satisfaction. Here’s hoping that there will be many more thousands of Wisdom-seekers.

Uh-Oh… ERA Coming Back?

Please somebody tell me this isn’t happening. The so-called “equal-rights amendment” is in the works again. From Cybercast News Service, Sens. Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer, along with Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler will be making a Tuesday afternoon announcement about this. Bad, bad news. The ERA states this:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Sounds innocent enough, doesn’t it? Don’t be fooled for a second. Folks, if this amendment even comes to a vote, let alone is ratified by the states, we are in for trouble. This means that the femifascists or feminazis (I prefer the latter) will come crashing down on anyone who does not follow their stringent guidelines of “non-discrimination.”

First problem is that this amendment is unnecessary. I mean, there is far more racism in this country than sexism, and I don’t think there is all that much racism anyhow. The fact is, discrimination against women simply doesn’t happen all that often. Today, women can get any job they want, even jobs that are traditionally considered men’s jobs. Women can be construction workers, utility workers, and can even go into combat. (I definitely do not think they should be doing the latter, but this is not about that.) Women can be executives or politicians, and they seem to have no trouble these days getting into the highest reaches of the media (Oprah Winfrey, Katie Couric, Ann Coulter, Laura whatever-her-last-name-is the talk show host, and on and on and on.) To imply that women are somehow kept from doing what they want in this day and age is silly. We even have a woman who, while she is vastly unqualified and many will never know this because she will never face a tough question from the people who worship at her feet, is running for the highest office in the land. She is such a prominent candidate in large part because she is a woman. There is no danger of women being discriminated against in today’s society. For more on this, you can read the excellent book, Tyranny of Tolerance by sitting judge Robert H. Dierker.

Second problem is the vagueness and where it will lead us. If activist judges, mostly liberal, who are intent upon revising the Constitution and can somehow twist the First Amendment into discrimination against religion, more accurately Christianity, and can take the Second Amendment and turn it into somehow talking solely about a militia, then what would they do with this? I guarantee you that our country would suffer because of this. The government would be sued over the military to the point where they would be forced to accept any woman who came along to fight, regardless of whether she had the physical wherewithal to handle the rigors of the military. Countless jobs, perhaps insignificant by themselves, but forming the economy as a whole when put together, would be stolen by the feminazis in the name of “equal rights,” regardless of who was most competent. Companies and the people that hire for them would have to hire the less competent candidate who has a lawyer and is a she at the risk of being bankrupted by lawsuits and legal fees. Yet they would fail eventually anyways, because of the removal of a competitive work structure and environment. (Please note: I am not saying that all women are incompetent, just that, regardless of who was more competent, hiring would immediately come down to which was a man and which a woman. We see this already demonstrated with affirmative action in terms of race.) And in the political spectrum, every criticism made of female politicians would somehow be misconstrued as unconstitutional. It, I think, is conceivable that were such an amendment as this to pass, campaigning against women would somehow be eventually portrayed as wrong.

I am white, I am male, and I think this is nuts. I am NOT a male chauvinist, racist pig. But this disgusts me. Tremble in fear if this becomes even a viable possibility of law.

Oh MAMA… You Gotta Love It!

I am currently guffawing at a site I’ve found for a research paper I’m working on. I know, I know, I’m supposed to be more congenial, but I can’t pass this up.

Ummm….. caste system in capitalism? Capitalism is a religion? I’m not sure he/she (equal opportunity insult) is aware of the distinction between capitalism and Hinduism. Those who don’t need to work are capitalists? Ha!

You must read it. It’s funny. I might talk about it more later.

Iron Sharpening Iron? Or Just Angering It?

Last night, a friend of mine really got after me for an issue she thinks I have. It kind of left me without a lot to say. I wasn’t sure whether to thank her for bringing it up, or to get ticked off at her and blow her off. I didn’t really do either, because I knew there was some truth in what she was saying, even though I didn’t agree with it all.

As I lay in bed thinking about it, and praying, last night, the verse from Proverbs came to mind.

Pro 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

I was thinking about it, wondering whether it still applied if I decided I didn’t think she was right. It still does, oddly enough. What the verse seems to imply is that a true friend will aid the other in becoming a better person. I added in the blank that it works even if the other won’t seemingly cooperate with the first person.

With that in mind, I came to the conclusion that the way to tell a true friend from an acquaintance friend is how much sharpening they do. What they say to you when they think, or know, you won’t like it. Or, more likely, what they say to you that may be an unpopular viewpoint. Not to say they are always right, yet hearing the perspective of someone who sees through you is a sometimes terrifying, but usually helpful, experience.

Infamous, Idiotic, or Ignorant Person of the Week: Charlie Sheen

a>Author’s note: This once a week post is dedicated to people who really say stupid things and is the one time in the week I will not talk pretty. I pledge to be cruel, mean, and call the award-winner stupid in every post. )

Oh, have I got a good one for you today. In the second weekly installment of Infamous, Idiotic or Ignorant Person of the Week, we have (a man who belongs to a category that will probably be repeat offendors) Charlie Sheen. Son of Martin Sheen. Who rants and raves political speeches at Oscar awards… but I digress. Here’s a couple snippets of what Charlie said:

…it just feels like 19 amateurs with boxcutters taking over airlines… and hitting 75% of their targets, that sounds like a conspiracy.

I saw the south tower hit live…that famous live shot where it went behind the building, and then we see the tremendous fireball… it just didn’t look… umm… it didn’t look like any commercial jetliner that I’ve flown on any time in my life.”

Wow. Ummmmmm…. I’m almost speechless. Almost. Here’s the video of radio interview he did with somebody named Alex Jones.

Charlie, let’s review a couple things here. First of all, let’s just clear up any misunderstanding. I don’t really like you. No confusion about this, okay. I can’t stand you. It’s nothing personal, I just can’t. You are a very, very dumb person. No doubt, a good actor (never seen any of his stuff, and don’t intend to after this), but acting is all a big lie anyhow. So, let’s consider the fact that your specialty… is lying. You make millions of dollars to lie. To take us all to a world that is not real for two hours or half an hour, and carry us off into, no doubt, a better ending. Not that there is anything wrong with that particular kind of lie, but you still lie for a living. So give me one good reason that I should listen to a MAN WHO LIES SO HE CAN GET A NEW MANSION OR A NEW LAMBORGHINI?

Didn’t think you had one.

Secondly, let’s review a picture. Since you obviously have the intellect and rational ability of something less than a one-year old, you probably like picture books, but do not understand them. I will attempt to explain.

Here is the plane flying into the south tower. Now, how many of you have ever flown on an airplane that doesn’t look even remotely like this one?

(

This is stupid… I’m not posting more pictures.

Pop Quiz: Who was the first President of the United States? Sorry, Franklin Roosevelt is the wrong answer.

Did you know that we have audio recordings of what went on in those flights? Yeah, that’s what lets you hear exactly what you said later on when you are watching your worthless films. No, that doesn’t just work on movie sets.

Did you furthermore know that each of the people who committed those attacks don’t exist anymore? Did you know that we have pictures of each of them when they did exist? Didn’t think so.

You are stupid. Go back to where you came from, and don’t bother us again.

Music: A Whole New Language

I know most of my readers are not musicians and could care less about what I think about music, but bear with me for a moment…

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the language of music. Some of you know, some of you don’t, that I am a somewhat accomplished musician. I’m not saying this to brag, it’s just the way it is. But I am a far different musician from what you find in most circles. I like to think of myself as more of a classical musician, particularly when playing the piano. I find that today’s music is often low quality, easily performed (or screamed) by anyone. Sure, there is good music to be found in popular culture, and talent no doubt abounds. But I can’t stand most of it.

Music is a language. Like any other, it is an expression of emotion. I will use classical music to illustrate, because, other than sacred music, I don’t listen to anything else. I also find that classical music requires thought, unlike much of the music today. But I digress, this is not supposed to be a post where I bash popular music.

I say again, music is a language. And, as much as I have played (for over ten years now), as the more versitile I get, the more I am amazed at what music can do. Not only at what it can do, but at how ignorant people are of what it can do. Not so much music with words, but music itself. That is why a lot of people give classical music a bad rap. (no pun intended.) It often has no words. Yet these do not use their brain. If you have not attended a concert by your city’s symphony orchestra recently, I suggest you do. Pick something by Beethoven or Tchaikovsky. The emotion is easily found in their music.

At first you will be caught in rapt attention. In St. Louis, we are privileged with an orchestra that has been rated in the past among the world’s top ten. Not only that, but their home, Powell Symphony Hall, is one of the most acoustically perfect buildings that you will ever see. (or hear) Whenever I go, I am amazed at the sound. It takes me, someone who frequently listens to and plays classical music, a good fifteen minutes before I can actually think about the music. But once you are past your awe (if you go to good concert by a good symphony), close your eyes, and imagine what the instruments as voices, and the music coming forth, as words. What are they saying?

It might be a storm. Much of Beethoven’s music reminds me, and everyone else for that matter, of a storm. In fact, one of his symphonies is actually literally meant to describe a storm. However, Beethoven’s storms do not simply give you the thunder and lightning, as a lesser composer’s would. Beethoven’s storms bring to mind everything about it. From the calm before, to the first drops of rain, to the onslaught and downpour, to the following silence. And, at the end, there is inevitably the thunder getting the last word. How is a storm an emotion? Beethoven’s life was a storm. His music reflects this. But the storm of Beethoven’s is, as a one saying put’s it “God’s thunder.” Only Beethoven could have described a wonder of God’s Creation so profoundly.

It might be a song of joy. Haydn and Mozart, earlier classical composers, have it. With them, life is free and happy. Not a care in the world. While this wasn’t true of their lives, they certainly had more to rejoice about than did Beethoven.

It might be sorrow. I link one particular piece to sorrow. It is Ralph (pronounced Rafe) Vaughan Williams’s Fantasia on a Theme By Thomas Tallis. It is a little known piece. If you have ever seen the movie Master and Commander, it is the piece played when they are chopping the rigging away and losing a sailor in the process to save the ship. But, oddly enough, that is not why I associate it with sorrow. Some friends and I have been working on a film for the last couple years. In it, one of the two main character’s brother, also his closest friend, passes away. I am playing the character who lost his brother. I am only an okay actor, and do not have a ton of experience, so you can imagine that this particular scene was quite difficult. I gave the best emotion I had, and it actually turned out pretty good. But then we went to put music to it. We looked at this piece, to see if it would fit. Suffice to say, that if the movie ever gets finished, and this piece ends up being in that scene, you have no heart if you do not cry. The scene by itself is average; the scene with the piece will rip your heart out.

Music might be a love song. Almost every composer has written these, though Chopin, my favorite composer to play, comes to mind especially. His songs are some of the most beautiful works of art ever produced. I played a nocturne of his once when at my aunt’s house, and she told me that was the kind of song I should play for my wife someday. I agree.

Music has words, even when there is none spoken. You have to listen for them. A piece played or sung badly will lose its charm, whether it has words you can understand or not. Many people like to make fun of how the classical pianists and performers seem to be lost in their own world, and over-exaggerate their emotion. When you see one doing that, he sometimes is just showing off, but more often, is feeling something more than that piece. He can understand what the music is saying. It may be different for him than for the listener. But it is a language. It speaks of just about anything you want it to speak of. You just have to listen… listen, and think.