Kim Jong Ill

Ok so I was thinking of having the title "Earth Sucks" but I think I'll save that one for another day.



(stole this photo from another blog)



I don't think this photo does justice as to how disgustingly old King Kim has aged since last time he made an appearance. He's reminding me of the movie "Forever Young", which by the way was a really ironic name for a movie about a guy who gets frozen and then ages to become like 80 years old when he's mentally only in his late 20s, or early 30s. How is that "forever"? HE DIDN'T EVEN GET TO BE YOUNG FOR AS LONG AS MOST PEOPLE!


Here's a better one I just stole from the AP off YouTube:




Here's the problem. Kim is not simply a dictator, he's a monarch. There will be nothing to rejoice about when he dies, because you can bet his son won't be any better.


Kim did nothing to ascend into power. That was pops, Kim Il Sung, famous tool of one of the worst humans in the 20th century, Josef Stalin.

Worse yet, like in the book 1984, there doesn't really need to be an actual "big brother" to keep people in line. If Kim dies and his son isn't quite ready, the henchmen that Jong Il has surrounded himself with will do well enough to keep North Korea in its permanent state of ruination until grandson Kim is evil enough to ascend to full power.

Why does this matter? It's just a piece of the overall reason why Earth (particularly humans) suck right now.


Back in the day, there'd be revolution over taxes. There'd be usurpations over arguments. There'd be world wars over one man's death.

That was back when people didn't live and die like pathetic lumps of meat.

What do we have now? Terrorism. THE BIGGEST SCAM IN GLOBAL HISTORY.

Terrorism NEVER ACCOMPLISHES GOVERNMENT COLLAPSE. Terrorism only strengthens governments. It only gives leaders resolve, and carte blanche to become dictators. Maybe that's exactly what they want, for surely they too promote a totalitarian government. Seriously, let's look at some famous incidents of terrorism.

Northern Ireland. Dominated mostly by Limeys due to the British's method of conquest (similar to the American method used in western states) Ulster chose to remain a part of Britain when Ireland became independent. That's right, CHOSE. What the Irish attempted (and still attempt) would be akin to Native Americans trying to terrorize Americans into handing back their land. Wait. That did happen. How did that work out? It didn't. Curiously enough I was just watching a show about it on the History Channel. When Andrew Jackson told the Cherokee to get off their land to make way for more Americans, the Cherokee sued him! And they won! The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that President Jackson had no right to force Cherokee off their land. What was Jackson's response? "Try and stop me." Thus began what became known as the "Trail of Tears". That's right, one of the most violent, heartless evil things the United States has ever done was done by a president directly violating the United States Supreme Court. He should have been fired for that, but I'll get back to this.

Another good example of terrorism is in Israel. Muslims blow themselves up all the time, and what does Israel do? KILL THEIR WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND LOCK THEM UP IN A GIANT PROVINCE SIZED PRISON. Didn't quite work out for you, did it Palestinians?

Or how about the terrorists in Pakistan, there, for once, they are all the same religion, still terrorists were blowing up Pakistani buildings and killing people. What did Pakistan do? ALLOW AMERICA TO COME IN MORE OFTEN AND KILL MORE. Didn't quite work out for them either.


Terrorism is worthless. It could easily be a scheme by big governments to guarantee big governments if it didn't involve such devout brave idiots. Politicians, especially totalitarians are usually the exact opposite, devout to nothing, cowards at the core, but crafty like foxes.

So Earth, we have plenty of terrorism. That's old news, but it's getting worse, so it's still news.

Next up: Rebellion

Used to be, when a people rebelled, it was for a purpose, or if it wasn't, it became one, and they didn't let it slip away, they made something of it, they'd knock down a government, or at least get something to change. America is full of stories of protesters changing the country. We were founded on rebellion. Nations would rise and fall like the tides. Lately it seems no one is allowed to topple countries.

Don't you know the preamble to the US Constitution "in order to form a more perfect union"? Bottom line, lots of nations around the word need to be toppled before humanity finds a better union.

Nations rising and falling was as natural as businesses rising and falling. That's how ethnicities came to be separate from nationalities. The people didn't go anywhere, but the governments did.

Now we have humorous efforts at revolution. Iran is the primo example. All these poor Iranians; marching and protesting like they aren't going to be executed or dragged off in the middle of the night from their homes, never to be seen again.

Many of them were anti-Muslim authority. That blew my mind. But whether they were the against the government whole, or simply the farce election, they didn't do anything worthwhile. They didn't storm the government buildings. They didn't go on strike and halt the system. I don't think they tried anything but yelling in the streets. It can be just as bloody, with absolutely nothing for it.



And finally: Self Determinism

America, especially now, is effectively enemy #1 to any nation trying to do its own thing. One such issue for me, is the right to bear arms. And if people can bear arms, and a nation exists to serve and protect people, then how can you say a nation can't bear arms? How can you say a nation can't have nukes? I hate Iran's government, but we most definitely do not need another war. America, THE ONLY NATION IN HISTORY TO NUKE PEOPLE, has no footing to demand other nations disarm.


South Ossetia is an ancient land. It has its own people. Its own language, and its own culture. It had enjoyed freedom for many centuries until recently, gobbled up by empires and the USSR. When the USSR fell, South Ossetia immediately petitioned for independence, but to no avail. South Ossetia was gobbled up again; this time by the horrible government of Georgia. South Ossetia has spent over a decade peacefully trying to get independence, but every once in a while, Georgia picks a fight. Most recently Georgia invaded South Ossetia. Russia, being the only nation on earth that recognizes South Ossetian independence, went in and protected them. What was Americas response? "Georgia invaded by Russia". America, not having a clue about the politics in Ossetia condemned Russia, and sent in the UN for a fight. Excuse me good sirs, but where were you when talks were taking place? Where were you when Ossetia begged for reason and court? You have no trouble sending Americans, French, English, Brazilian, Japanese, whoever is available, in to fight and die against Russians, but you find it impossible to consider a peaceful option? You'll kill and die to preserve union's hold on a people. For what purpose? If Georgia were a decent nation, I might agree, but Georgia sucks. They are weak, they provide no good to their people. The only reason they are supported by America, is because they don't like Russia. That may be the only reason Russia supports South Ossetia. But wars shouldn't be fought on the premise of preventing wars. It's evil, and it's all America has been doing since Vietnam.

With a few exceptions. The majority of Americans who have died in combat from now back to Vietnam, were dying to prevent a war. It makes no sense. Vietnam was fought to stop the commie spread, why? Because we assumed if we had to fight the commies one day, we wanted more allies than them. The Iraq war was started because Iraq was a "threat", it might have attacked us. That was the only justification. The whole "WMD" issue stemmed from that. If it were Britain with the WMDs, it wouldn't have been an issue.

So we come to Honduras. 2/3rds of the Honduran government determined to fire the president. By their constitution, they have that authority. here is a link to the Honduras Supreme Court's official ruling against their president: http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/NR/rdonlyres/87E2BFFC-AF4D-44EA-BFC5-D93730D8D81C/2413/ExpedienteJudicial1.pdf.

Honduras's Congress also decided against the president, and appointed a new president, who is a member of the SAME POLITICAL PARTY as the fired president.

According to the left wing media, Hugo Chavez, and Obama, this was a Coup D’état. The media refuses to even acknowledge that everyone but the president is still in the government. The definition of a Coup "is the sudden, unconstitutional deposition of a legitimate government, by a small group of the State Establishment — usually the military — to replace the deposed government with another, either civil or military".

Here is what I need you to consider. President Zelaya is not, and never was "THE" government of Honduras. In fact, the people who fired him are also a part of the government. It is fundamentally impossible to define a coup as a majority of government firing a minority.

The media reports over and over that the military took him out of power. This is a lie. The military took him out of the country. Constitutional authority by the government of Honduras took Zelaya out of power. The military just did the foot work. Which makes sense to me.

How can you call it a coup, when the only change is one employee? The firing might be determined "unjust", maybe. It might be determined unlawful. It might even be overturned. But it was not a coup, for the "government" wasn't removed, the employee was, not even his political party! Come on. Seriously. If the U.S. Congress impeached Obama, then the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Obama to be removed from power as well, and Joe Biden was put in his place, WOULD YOU CALL THAT A COUP??????????????????????


And despite what Hugo Chavez, and Obama think about presidential authority, they are not the overlords of humanity, they have no say in the self determinism of the nation of Honduras.

No American should die fighting to preserve this would-be dictator's authority. The fact that Obama and Chavez are blood brothers on this issue scares me.

It's all fun and games until Obama gets up and is like "Ha ha, you knew who I was and you still elected me, you have no chance to survive make your time. I really don't know how to even begin to argue against these policies. The Founding Fathers intentionally, and very specifically tailored the US government to make the president as weak as possible. They were so certain that the president would be weak, and that congress would be the true seat of power, that they tried to put on extra restrictions to congress to prevent imbalance. If you want a good read check out the speeches made by the founding fathers while the constitution was still still being written, they reveal much of the attitudes of the day. The president isn't supposed to be a king. The president isn't supposed to be a god, and in America, the president isn't supposed to be able to do what Obama and Bush and Clinton and Bush (I could go on for awhile) etc. have done.





I'm disappointed. That's pretty much it. People are still dying. People are still being oppressed, ruined, destroyed, enslaved. But humans have taken on this attitude where despite this, the nation must be preserved. The president must be worshipped. And the only people who do topple nations, do it with an insane reasoning to prevent other wars.