#1
Too bad it's fiction. There is still time though.
I actually remember some old geezer on TV in about 1970 saying that hippies would be objects of mirth, the subject of endless mockery and ridicule, in the 21st century. I wish I could remember who that was or what the program was.
#3
Actually, after the "Summer of Love" (1967) the movement degenerated into anti-war, communist or drug dealing elements. Other than a handful who lived on communes, most "hippies" - they called themselves "freaks" - were extremely violent.
#6
I grew up in southern CA. Most hippies were just dorks who discovered that they could hide that fact by putting on a pirate shirt and some pukas. By the late 1970's the true hippies had mostly died off from drug overdoses, joined The Grateful Dead - or they had moved on in life. Lot's of single mom's left hung out to dry from the summer's of love.
#7
Haight & Ashbury in San Francisco has a sign-up office. Upon paying the requisite tag fee, you will be issued a permit and tag for 1 kill and 1 kill only, preferably female so as to cut down on the breeding population. Permitted weapons are clue-bats, 2x4's, reliable information (ie truth though this does have a tendency to enrage them), the American flag (it's best to wrap them in it), SUV's (just the sight of one can send a hippie into apoplectic shock), and associated items of genuine American culture (a hamburger, coke, and fries, for example, is completely ineffective as a lure, but does act nicely as a contact poison). It has been reliably recorded that a photograph of President Ronald Reagan will stop them in their tracks and send many into such a total state of apoplexy that they can be easily snuck up on and clubbed clueless with a simple #2 clue-bat (the #4, #6, or trusty #10 is far too much weapon to use in this instance and may get you in trouble with the local Game Warden). It has been noted that a single "reefer" (a chemical attractant made from a local and native weed) will attract hippies fom a range of at least 5 miles (although you might also attract the dreaded "toker" in the same process). Wine has also been shown to work as an attractant, but the much-maligned "patuli oil" has been shown to have about the same attraction to hippies as the ripe scent of deer females has for bucks in the forest (though both smell pretty much like skunk pi$$) and is the most recommended such attractant agent.
Unfortunately, handguns are completely illegal in hippie-hunting as breeding populations have significantly reduced themselves in size by migration from hippiedom to the business world during the last 40-50 years.
#8
preferably female so as to cut down on the breeding population
Oh goodness! I thought they were way beyond the breeding age. Also - if you want to attract large numbers of them, put out a microphone, and a TV camera and a phtograph of a murdering despotic tyrant. They love them.
Websurdity Link: This article was inspired by the fine users at the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) Forum, to whom I am indebted for the use of much of this material.
Weve all heard the official conspiracy theory of the Death Star attack. We all know about Luke Skywalker and his ragtag bunch of rebels, how they mounted a foolhardy attack on the most powerful, well-defended battle station ever built. And weve all seen the video over, and over, and over, of the one-in-a-million shot that resulted in a massive chain reaction that not just damaged, but completely obliterated that massive technological wonder.
Like many Americans, I was fed this story when I was growing up. But as I watched the video, I began to realize that all was not as it seemed. And the more I questioned the official story, the deeper into the rabbit hole I went.
Presented here are some of the results of my soul-searching regarding this painful event. Like many citizens, I have many questions that I would like answered: was the mighty Imperial government really too incompetent to prevent a handful of untrained nerf-herders from destroying one of their most prized assets? Or are they hiding something from us? Who was really behind the attack? Why did they want the Death Star destroyed? No matter what the answers, we have a problem.
Below is a summary of my book, Uncomfortable Questions: An Analysis of the Death Star Attack, which presents compelling evidence that we all may be the victims of a fraud of immense proportions.
Uncomfortable Questions about the Death Star Attack
1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?
2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the stations large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?
3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?
4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?
5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didnt?
6) How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to bullseye womprats on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be impossible, even for a computer. Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been investigated, let alone explained?
7) Why has their been no investigation into evidence that the droids who provided the rebels with the Death Star plans were once owned by none other than Lord Vader himself, and were found, conveniently, by the pilot who destroyed the Death Star, and who is also believed to be Lord Vaders son? Evidence also shows that the droids were brought to one Ben Kenobi, who, records indicate, was Darth Vaders teacher many years earlier! Are all these personal connections between the conspirators and a key figure in the Imperial government supposed to be coincidences?
8) How could a single missile destroy a battle station the size of a moon? No records, anywhere, show that any battle station or capital ship has ever been destroyed by a single missile. Furthermore, analysis of the tape of the last moments of the Death Star show numerous small explosions along its surface, prior to it exploding completely! Why does all evidence indicate that strategically placed explosives, not a single missile, is what destroyed the Death Star?
After the recent spate of "truther" bullshit, I saw this and felt compelled to give the 'Burg a bit more of comic relief.
#6
It was clearly an inside job, maybe a conspiracy between the Empire and the Republican jihadis themselves - yeah! That's the ticket...
It's all about OIL!!! Oh, wait, we don;t use oil anymore...okay, it's all about, uh, those evil JEDI's! Yeah, that's the ticket! Why should they be allowed powers and abilities that are so far beyond those of normals? BAN ALL JEDIS!!!
Twenty-seven years ago, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a student in Tehran and is said (by a former Iranian president, for one) to be among those in the U.S. embassy who seized and held American citizens hostage for more than a year.
Today, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is president of Iran and bears less ambiguous responsibility for Western hostages. This time round, they're British subjects: 15 sailors and Royal Marines. There are a few differences between this kidnapping and the last: Back in 1979, the Iranians seized their hostages by invading a diplomatic mission -- the sovereign territory of the United States. In 2007, they seized them in international waters. In 1979, two weeks after the embassy crisis began, 13 American hostages who happened to be black were released; the remainder were held for another 14 months. In 2007, the one woman among the hostages is being offered by the regime for early release, invitingly dangled in front of the TV cameras, though with her Royal Navy uniform replaced by Islamic dress; it remains to be seen what will become of the others. On Thursday, a new generation of "student demonstrators" called for the "British aggressors" to be executed.
On this 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, Tony Blair is looking less like Margaret Thatcher and alarmingly like Jimmy Carter, the embodiment of the soi-disant "superpower" as a smiling eunuch.
Rest at link. It gets more caustic.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/01/2007 12:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
On Sept. 11, a New York skyscraper was brought down by the Egyptian leader of a German cell of an Afghan terror group led by a Saudi. Islamism is only the first of many globalized ideological viruses that will seep undetected across national frontiers in the years ahead. Meanwhile, we put our faith in meetings of foreign ministers.
"It is better to be making the news than taking it," wrote Winston Churchill in 1898. But his successors have gotten used to taking it, and the men who make the news well understand that.
#3
How is it that someone as humorous, concise, informed and well-reasoned as this cannot get traction in the national media. He speaks for the vast majority of America (I forgive him being Canadian and actually would like him to change teams) and has a common sense approach to dealing with the looming insanity. Yet, like Victor Davis Hanson, somehow isn't heard by those who need to hear him. Tragic that he isn't quoated nightly by the MSM, not just on Hugh Hewitt, good though that is for some of us.
#4
Simple: the media are not on the side of those who want us to fight and win this war. They are on the side of those who want the war to end quickly so they can get get back to their "important" issues, back to the only politics they know: the politics of pimping for parasites.
To them, the war is an unwanted and unnecessary distraction. See today's Obama article for an example.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/01/2007 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Patrolling the Shatt al-Arab at a time of war, the Royal Navy operates under rules of engagement designed by distant fainthearts with an eye to the polite fictions of "international law": If you're in a "warship," you can't wage war. If you're in a "destroyer," don't destroy anything. If you're in a "frigate," you're frigging done for.
quick way to disassemble a volunteer army...
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/01/2007 21:23 Comments ||
Top||
If I were to tell you that within twenty years Europe could find itself engaged in a civil war so bloody it made WWII look like a bun fight, you might logically consider me a candidate for the men in white coats. You would be wrong, however. Based on the demographic evidence collated for this article, such a scenario looks not merely possible, but inevitable. In 2005 European males aged 20-40 outnumbered Muslim males of a similar age by 18:1. By 2025 this ratio could drop to a mere 2:1.
#5
Glenmore, some will, some won't. Here's how I see the trends:
After some years from the start of the war, Western Europe would look like a swiss cheese. The holes would be pocket of resistance, concentrated in areas that would be not easily accessible, mostly highlands. They would maintain some modicum of independence and culture within the several European Emirates. Iron Curtain would be established again, roughly following the one from the middle of the last century--this time, the freedom would be represented by the lands east of it.
In 25-30 years, the parasites would suck most of the conquered land dry and begin their decline, reverting to their third-world shitholism and their population would be substantially trimmed by severe epidemias. That would be the time when reconquista would start with the help of countries east of the Iron Curtain.
#6
no mo uro, I believe a bun fight is something English boys do when they're away at boarding school: a food fight with muffin kinds of things. Lots of fun, no one gets hurt, with crumbs and butter everywhere for the staff to clean up a after.
#7
Actually, it's called "BUMFIGHTS"; a phenom where rich punks take it (their moral depravity), a step further.
Satanists from good neighborhoods hit the local slums in search of drunken and/or mentally hoboes to torment. They then give them (poor souls) a few bucks apiece to cockfight to the death. They vid and upload to YouTube for our enjoyment.
Posted by: Asymmetrical T ||
04/01/2007 22:50 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
