Friday, January 5, 2007

I got yer horn of Africa right here, mister.

ustules dripping with infection. Ralph Peters, on the other hand, has a perspective that is quite unsettling: "The new year is off to a bad start for Muslim extremists and their admirers in the media: After only a few months in power, the Islamist regime in Mogadishu collapsed overnight as Ethiopian troops drove out the fanatics."

But ... but how is such a thing possible? Aren't those islamists unbeatable? Peters assures me otherwise: "Unconvinced by Western myths that military force is useless against terrorists, Addis Ababa's troops intervened to support Somalia's internationally recognized government against the jihadis. The no-nonsense use of force worked."

Nevertheless, I am convinced that war is not the answer. Couldn't we have negotiated something? Now that the islamists have been driven underground, where they will concentrate on terror rather than Sharia, can't we negotiate with them so that they come back into power? Um, the reason this would be good, is, uh, oh! it's good because forced Sharia law is so much better than terrorism. Yeah. Well? Isn't it? Actually, I, and all right-thinking peace-loving liberals -- that is, all intelligent people -- think that we've fallen into a clever al-Qaeda plot. For the islamists are so much better at terror than at running countries. See? ... Y'know, we should help people fulfill their destiny. It's good karma.

Peters, a very unevolved man, disagrees with my impeccable logic: "Now the media line is that it was all a plan, that the Islamists intended all along to fight a guerrilla war. Sure, right. We've heard this one before, folks: The same pundits argued that Saddam never intended to fight a conventional war, but had always planned to hide in a hole in the ground while his sons were killed so he could eventually be dragged out by our troops and hanged by his own people."

Well, first of all, Mr. Peters, I am offended by your snide racist tone. Clearly you are a homophobe, and don't think I don't see the sarcasm, big man, because I do. You can't pull any fast ones on me, mister man. I have audited classes in literary criticism at a major Ivy League University, and I'm trained to identify subtle textual meanings. For example, did you know that Juliet was having a lesbian affair with her nurse? I must confess that this insight is not original to myself, but once it was pointed out, why, it was so very obvious. And Hamlet's problem wasn't with his father -- although all our problems are with fathers, right, girl friend? ... no, his conflict was that he refused to accept his homosexual yearnings for Horatio -- and don't get me started on Horatio! Oh, that Shakespeare -- the world's greatest feminist playwright. Well, not as great as Gertrude Stein or Gloria Steinem (same initials!) but who could live up to that standard, am I right, sugar? So you will see that I'm effeminately qualified to opine on matters of foreign affairs. In fact, foreign affairs are the best kind! I remember one fling I had with a beautiful Thai boy, so sweet and golden, like honey ... but that's another story.

Oh, it is a dark day indeed. The tacit will of the International Community has been flouted! Why, even Peters laments this tragedy: "Somalia's homegrown fanatics and their al Qaeda allies are on the run; the Ethiopian military is hunting down wanted terrorists ... and our enemies have lost a safe haven, a money-laundering capital, a smuggler's paradise and a launching pad for subversion."

At least we can agree on the facts. Western Imperialism and the White Man have again wrought their evil in the world. I'm not quite sure what Peters means by money-laundering. How can capitalism be clean? And "subversion" -- I'm abashed to confess that I've never quite understood the definition of the word. It just sounds like a sort of humming or buzzing in my head. The closest I can come to conceptualizing it, is by remembering the Salem Witch Trials. Did you know that Eugene Debbs was wrongly imprisoned? And Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent, of course. Oh, the Rosenbergs, the poor, poor Rosenbergs, martyrs to the glorious cause. And tens of thousands of oppressed women starved to death in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire. Damn that Bush.

"The ideal of a perfect, eternal victory -- to which the media hold those who battle terrorism -- is an unfair standard. A win that overthrows a terrorist regime, whether in Afghanistan or Somalia, is worth the fight, even if the enemy can't be completely eradicated. Desperate terrorists struggling for survival are always preferable to a terrorist regime in the capital city." That poor deluded fool. He just doesn't get it.

Oh, I'm exhausted. I can't go on. I know, you're devastated, but I am, after all, only human ... "huMAN" -- what a sexist word! But so typical! Huge man. Ugh. Of course all the big macho he-men pretending to be masculine, whatever that means, are all so huge, with their strong horny hands and their hairy bellies making me feel so dizzy with their hammers and hard hats. Well. The strain of focusing my searing intellect simply drains me. Believe me, lover, I don't mind being drained now and then, but I'm more into being filled up if you get my meaning and I'm sure you do. Yes, I know ... I'm so witty. I'm a one-man Algonquin Round Table. Mostly Dorothy, but there's room in me for a couple of men, too. Ah! I'm doing it again! Somebody stop me! Save some for Rosie! I just love The View. Isn't that Donald Trump a cad? Who does his hair, for heavens sake? He looks like a melted Conan O'Brian. Ghastly. Still, I wouldn't kick him out of bed -- not for a million dollars. Oh! I've done it again! A play on words! -- did you see? I'm very clever.

I'll stop, before you die laughing. Until next time, I remain,

Your Humble Author,

Helmut Crisp

PS -- Mark Foley ... not because of that silly thing about the boys. Who doesn't love boys? No, it's being Repugnantan ... yuck!

1 comment:

Jack H said...