Give Peace A Chance..

Give Peace A Chance...

What the fuck? No, I'm not talking about John Lennon. Yeah, so the dude's death had an anniversary two days ago. Besides, we still have his music and it's still being pimped out for the grand sake of capitalism. So what's the problem?

Lots of artist die all the time. That's what people do. With our without a lot of greatest hits or poor choice in girlfriends. Look at Kurt Cobain. Though in his defense, if someone from the future told me that my music was going to be played on Star 98.7FM, I would eat a bullet as well.

What I'm talking about is the Nobel Peace Prize. You see, it was given out the other day and to someone you probably... okay, I'm among American readers so I'm going to say that without certainty, you 100% didn't know who this Chinaman (Dude, that's not the preferred term) was before Norway pulled the name Liu Xiaobo his name out of their hat.

So what did Liu Xiaobo do that was worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize? Well, he's in jail. So I guess that shows that he did something to piss off the Chinese government. Which I guess isn't to hard when you consider how easily they get annoyed.



He got in trouble for signing a petition, one of the things it called for was private property rights. Why wasn't this chuckle head murdered? The People's Republic of China is far too generous with its terrorist. But the prc just gave him 11 years in prison.

I do have to wonder. When it says 11 years in prison, 2 years deprivation of political rights - does that mean he can vote for 9 of the years he's in jail? Because if so, that's pretty funny in comparison to America's policy towards voter rights.

I love how NPR covered this.

"Chinese dissident was chosen for Nobel Peace Prize today. China is reportedly unhappy with the decision."
-NPR

Gee, thanks NPR. You have offered a new insight I have never thought of before... So basically this guy is criticizing China from the position of capitalist liberalism. He's basically a Chinese Freeper.

I have to say, demanding private property is literally asking for the ability to exploit workers. So fuck your liberal bullshit. Screw anti-authoritarians.. or maybe I just like to take the counter point to the mass message. It does seem like they are all neo-liberal stooges in sheep's clothing.

Liu Xiaobo got the peace prize for being persistent in calling for reforms which would damage the supremacy of the state, and thereby damage the corrupt and abusive form of state-abetted capitalism that runs the Chinese economy.

But I have to question the progress that moving from state control neoliberal private control would help your average Chinese worker. If anything, it would just turn the PRC into Somalia. Good job, little guy. Fight for free elections and freedom of the press! You fight for that second identical political party.

We now have at least three peace prize winners who will be directly responsible for increases in global violence. Great job Nobel committee. Oh yeah, and great job at pissing off China, once again. You've just became a troll to the PRC.

China is pretty pissed at Norway for this. Way to piss off the next super power Norway. Now you wont get any rations when they take over the world. The Chinese government always shout at other governments for calling them out. They yelled at Australia for showing a movie once. While it never comes to anything, you know they have a "shit list" that they just keep updating like a sleeping giant.

Though, China freaking out over this will only keep it in the news longer. Good job China. Didn't you learn anything in your younger days? If people call you a name, just ignore it or get stuck with it for life.

CNN was reporting that China was attempting to black all communication regarding Peace prize winner Liu Xiaobo. Even texting is affected: "Text-messaging on mobile phones is not immune from censor, either. A Shanghai-based netizen, @littlely, tweeted his unfortunate experience: "My SIM card just got de-activated, turning my iPhone to an iPod touch after I texted my dad about Liu Xiaobo winning the Nobel Peace Prize."

Should have though about it for a second before spreading those ideas, bro. Generally talk about civil rights and property are typically just trojan horses for outright full-on American style capitalism.

When you think about it, it's two sides of the same coin. The PRC is authoritarian state capitalism, but not a capitalist state. But I sure as hell think that the solution is not more capitalism.. I mean, look at the position America is in right now. Ha!

The sum up is that this guy's platform is boring boilerplate liberalism and if China had ignored him rather than throwing him in jail, Obama would have won it again for "ending" the war in Iraq. And really, who wouldn't want Obama to go for a back to back on the Nobel Peace Prize?

Oh yeah.. and delete LF. :)

American Foreign Conflict Status? It's Complicated OR Obama, I'mma Let You Finish, But Kissinger Had The Best Peace Prize Speech OF ALL TIME

American Foreign Conflict Status? It's Complicated OR Obama, I'mma Let You Finish, But Kissinger Had The Best Peace Prize Speech OF ALL TIME

Ok, that was a long title, but I just merged two topics I have been meaning to talk about into one. The Afghanistan proposed 18 month decision and the recent Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech. You see, for the first one, the United States Department of Defense and The Joint Chies of Staff brought us (via PA Consulting Group / PA Knowledge Limited) the layout for Afghanistan.


Full PDF presentation from PA Consulting

As you can see, it's beyond complicated on how they're going to do this... and do it in 18 months.
Then again, I could make a similar chart trying to decide what cereal to buy at the store. One could even say that this was him being scared. Every time I've tried to map out every nuance of a decision it was because I was too scared to just make a move.

The New York Times - At War From the Front Lines Blog posted:

For anyone wondering why it took President Obama three months to decide on a strategy for Afghanistan, a look at these military schematics uncovered by NBC’s Richard Engel might help explain the weeks of deliberation that went into the plan. The material outlines the military’s counterinsurgency, or COIN, strategy.

The maps, which look like something Cy Twombly might put together on a spirograph, make it plain that whatever the timeline for deployment and withdrawal, there appears to be no straight line to victory in Afghanistan

For those of you who complain that he took 3 months to decide on Afghanistan, you shouldn't be. As you can see, it was pretty complex. Though it does seem that now the plan seems to be Kill Browns. Got it?

In hindsight, it is sort of a waste of time simply because all his careful deliberation still led him down the BURN AFGHANS path. It looks like half of it is cultural/belief tolerance and respect and building some sort of infrastructure. We're still going to lose tho... but maybe if they do A LOT of humanitarian aid it won't be a complete waste of blood shed. Maybe the US will even work to remove every landmine... ahahahahahaha yeah, never mind.



I know it would be a task to try to complete, but it would actually do a lot more good. There's people in Laos that still fear walking in the field do to landmines and other explosives we dropped on them. It wouldn't be that difficult. there's Sprayable "eco-friendly" bacteria that illuminates on contact with organic explosives vis-a-vis landmines. The site is pretty impressive and it includes a photo of an elephant who's hoof was blown off by a landmine.

Back to the graph and let's see what it actually says:

1) despite being there a while, we still don't understand the all-important local situations very well
2) the central government is a complete and utter failure
3) because the government is fucked nobody trusts it enough to support them over the insurgency. if they're on our side it's for reasons which have nothing to do with the government and everything to do with local politics which we still don't really understand.
4) we can't seem to fix their economy, which goes hand in hand with the central government being worthless
5) at least the insurgents are having trouble working together and haven't all allied under the banner of some third party to drive us into the sea

This is why Obama's decision was basically a catch all that let him make no decision while buying himself 18 months of free reign and making pullout of Afghanistan a non-issue for the next election. We've been here before. I'm not even going to say Vietnam. That's not what I'm talking about. During the whole Rambo II style of liberating Afghanistan from Russia by armoring them, it was a mess. The guerrillas didn't work together during the soviet-afgan war. They were fighting36 different groups.

Moving on to the second part of this. The Peace Prize... specifically the speech given. Well, let's get to the prize first. The Dalai Lama, who never says anything bad about anyone ever, had this to say:

As President Barack Obama prepares to accept the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, the Dalai Lama told Sky News he believes the award is "a little early" and cautioned the U.S. president against relying too much on his advisers.

The exiled Tibetan leader won the Nobel prize 20 years ago for his peaceful opposition to Chinese rule in his country.

President Obama is in Norway to collect his award, which he has controversially been awarded in his first year in office. Some commentators have joked that the award was for "not being George Bush".

The Dalai Lama told Sky News: "I think if you are realistic, it may have been a little early but it doesn't matter, I know Obama is a very able person. Sometimes these individual persons rely on different advice from different people so like former President Bush junior, as a human being I really love him, really wonderful person, very honest, very truthful.

"But I think due to his advisers' views, some of his policies have been a disaster."

Obama declined to meet the Dalai Lama during a recent visit to Washington, with observers pointing out it may have been awkward to do so just before the president travelled to China.

This is a guy who praises and prays for the leaders of the CCP who order monks and nuns to be rounded up and tortured for owning pictures of him. He is the DEFINITION of patience. And he thinks it was unwarranted.

In the speech Obama said things like;

"Peace movements wouldn't have stopped Hitler"

I'm sure the two dozen or so remaining members of Al-Qaeada hiding somewhere in Afghanistan are not Nazi Germany...

"I reserve the right to unilaterally defend my country"

Against? Again, the terrorist have moved to Pakistan. So I don't know what we're defending ourselves from. Then he goes on and name drops Ronald Reagan.... That has to be worse than anything else. The whole visit so far felt like a bunch of backwards villagers trying to impress the cool city guy.

"We can have war and still strive for peace"

Summary: we need to kill everything in afghanistan because of peace. Obama, I'mma let you finish, but Kissinger had the best peace price troll OF ALL TIME. The Kissinger Peace prize was pretty awful in retrospect, but at least it was given for a specific reason (the withdrawal of American forces from Vietnam) and was shared between him and whoever the Vietnamese representative was.



You have to be ballsy and evil to accept the Nobel Peace Prize fter committing nmore troops to an unjust war. Oh, and after you just sold out your country to the pharmaceutical and health insurance companies. Ha, now that's the slap to the face.

In other news, Obama accepted the Slimmer of the Year award while wearing curry-stained track pants. His speech was largely inaudible, as he insisted on eating a 12" deep-dish pizza through the ceremony.

My Nobel speech would be something less preachy and with more buzz phrases.

"Bring back Chappelle Show, cancel Gossip Girls." "I hope Avatar bombs."

I guess the real problem here is that it's not even so much that he's a politican and goes back on his word and promises. It's the way he does it. Obama ignited the passions of a generation of youth whose political coming of age was to rally around this HOPE and CHANGE of Bush's policies coming from one of the most traumatic single incidents in the nation since the Peal Harbor attacks and he just seems to follow the same sort of mentality, only he's a lot better at giving the speech to why he's doing it.

It's only now that those who voted for him are actually aware of what his policies were the whole time. it's not that he just lied or he baited an entire demographic who up until then had nobody acknowledge their fears, they lied to themselves. They never really knew his policies and were dazzled by the idea of change. But this speech as well as his recent actions just shit on those voters dreams and idea of what is change. It's not like he actively shit upon the hopes of a generation, he just opened their eyes to what the reality of politics is.

A Much Delayed Conversation About The Nobel Peace Prize

A Much Delayed Conversation About The Nobel Peace Prize

When I first heard about Obama getting the Nobel Peace prize I was in the car listening to NPR. If I had seen it online I'm sure I would have thought it to be a joke. Even though I voted for the guy, it did seem very far fetched for him to win it. Oh, I knew he was going to get it eventually, but perhaps not in his first year. How long did it take? Hell, how long did it take Martin Scorsese to get an Oscar? And he got it for a shitty remake. I was expecting something like that to be the case for Obama and the Nobel.

As it stands, it seems that the Prize has fallen to the level of Time's person of the year. Maybe this will stop him from invading iran.. haha ha ha ha. Yeah, more than likely not. Especially since on the same day of getting the prize, he deployed more troops to Afghanistan. That's got to be comedic timing at its finest.



The whole situation is a little funny since it was only a few weeks ago that the world showed us they didn't like Obama after it decided to personally shit on his head and not give Chicago Olympics. I'm opposed to the wacky sports events, but Obama went there to fight for them. They made such a big deal about it. How they were putting him in his place. That'll show him!

So what was the rational to giving the peace prize to someone who is dropping bombs as we speak? Let's hear their rational:

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the Norwegian committee said as the prize was announced.

"His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population."

So the Nobel prize committee looked into their crystal ball, and shuddered at the terror that McCain/Palin would have caused. Especially telling since when they would have voted for this prize would be roughly two weeks after he first went into office. They literally gave him the prize for not being Bush. Then again, this is the only way that he would ever visit Norway, so maybe the committee just wanted some autographs and a photo op with the man.

If you really want to get morbid, they also gave MLK the award rather early in his career as well. They felt that they missed the boat with Ghandi because he got himself shot and they didn't want to repeat that again and rushed to give Martin Luther King a Nobel prize. One would venture to say that they're afraid that Obama will end up taking a bullet also.



Now we should ask the real important question. What should he do with the 1.4 million dollars? Please don't say "Use it to bail out the banks". Oh what the hell, we know what will happen to that money anyway. With the world watching he'll do nothing but give it to charity. I'm sure he could of injected it into America's debt. But hey, that would be ripped apart by the far right no matter what he did.

So did the Nobel Peace Prize go to the wrong person? Maybe. The Nobel Peace Prize is intended for the person who "during the preceding year shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

But often, much like how the Oscars typically get it wrong, you can't assume that their voice is always correct. So second-guessing Norway for their choice on who exemplifies these traits is something you should do. After all, the Nobel committee has done mistakes in the past, let's take a look at previous faults.


Aung San Suu Kyi, 1991

Gave some nice speeches, won an election, and has otherwise been cooling her heels in jail for the last 20 years. In other words, she's done even less to get the prize than Obama.

Verdict: Undeserved

Dalai Lama, 1989

A proud symbol of the theocratic feudal system that ran Tibet into the ground, yet for some reason he remains popular with Western new-agers.

Verdict: Undeserved

Elie Wiesel, 1986

Wrote some books and "spoke out against violence, repression, and racism." Yeah, great. Him and how many other people?

Verdict: Undeserved / wrong category

Mother Teresa, 1979

An oddly sadistic, but generally unremarkable nun who got swept up in a huge marketing campaign not of her making. Up to that point she hadn't done anything for international fraternity, aside from expanding her incompetently-managed network of deathbeds. Hadn't organized a peace conference or campaigned for arms reduction either. Never tried to correct the mythology that grew up around her. Often used as a PR pawn by rich bastards to pretend that they cared about the poor.

Also there is a common misconception that she provided hospice care in her Houses for the Dying. A report came out in the early nineties that basically said that there was no substantial palliative care going on and that the nuns who worked in the Houses for the Dying encouraged all patients, including those who were curable, to just lay down and die.

Verdict: Undeserved

Martin Luther King, Jr., 1964

The prize pissed off a lot of white supremacists, which shows that it wasn't all bad, but up to that point King really hadn't done much in international affairs. He didn't start talking about the Vietnam war until the following year.

Verdict: Too soon

Henry Kissinger, 1973

Originally made his name by denouncing the feeble puppet regime in South Vietnam. Once he was in the government, he did everything he could to rein in his batshit insane boss who thought that nuking Hanoi was a pretty cool idea. Ended up holding Nixon to a campaign promise of peace that he probably never intended to keep. Struck a fatal blow against Bircher/McCarthyist domination of US policy by opening relations with China. Single handedly stopped mass genocide of Southeast Asians by ceasing his personal Southeast Asian genocide campaign.

Verdict: Absolutely deserved


There you have it. The final word on this matter. Obama.. way too soon. Not unless you can repeat on that award. You can't win it again, can you? Then again, it was a stupid prize started by a man riddled with guilt that he created dynamite, a tool used to kill countless people. So who gives a fuck who they give it to.

Ok, I'll address the detractors who will call me out on this clearly parody blog entry and take it seriously for some unknown reason. But let's get real here and get to your complaints before they're issued.

I dislike Mother Teresa, not because I'm a monster, simply because I'm not ignorant. Her life was a lie. She funneled millions into the church that the donors thought was going to charity. How much of those millions went to defend or relocate pedophile priest? She gave dictators legitimacy and she ruined countless lives. Hey, nobodies perfect (except Jesus)

What have I've done with my life? You ask. Well, I certainly haven't left people die in their bed and encourage otherwise treatable cases to just die. But maybe.. Just maybe I will do something with my life. Maybe I'll bring about some change. Perhaps that potential could get me the Nobel Peace Prize as well. Maybe even sainthood.