Jerhad!com

Behind Enemy Lines: A View of the San Francisco "Peace" Rally

I woke up this past Sunday morning and began my mission. I was planning to infiltrate the "peace" rally in San Francisco to see what I might be able to learn about how the enemy operates. I wasn't quite sure what to expect, because I knew that all major media accounts of past protests were written by journalists who preferred to march in the protests rather than write about them.

My first order of business was to try and blend in with the crowd to avoid suspicion. Wearing a J.Crew shirt, Dockers and polished shoes just wasn't going to cut it. I'd stick out like a… well, like a Republican at a commie-peacenik-America-sucks rally.

The first piece of camouflage focused on personal hygiene. I decided not to shower or shave that morning. Without thinking, I accidentally brushed my teeth though. A nice hot cup of capitalist Starbucks coffee later in the morning would help mask the sense of cleanliness, so I wasn't too worried.

Finding appropriate clothing was the toughest part. I had to dig deep into my closet to retrieve a faded t-shirt and worn out jeans. I managed to locate an old plaid shirt to wear over the t-shirt for further cover. I tried on the dirtiest looking baseball cap I could find, but it made me look more like a frat-boy than a liberal. The I-just-woke-up-and-didn't-shower hairstyle would have to do.

I decided to drive my car downtown and park a few blocks from where the rally was taking place. I could have taken the bus, I guess. But judging from the number of SUV's in the parking lots downtown, the whole "no blood for oil" thing doesn't apply to all liberals anyway.

The first thing I wanted to check out was the claim of "diversity" by the local San Francisco Chronicle. They had an article that talked about soccer moms, students, business owners and other people-next-door types who were banding together for peace. They made it seem like all types of liberals, moderates and conservatives attended these rallies, so I was a little concerned that I might run into some fellow Republicans who would blow my cover.

That concern quickly vanished. I would have had a better chance finding Republicans at a Greenpeace fundraiser than at this rally. There was certainly diversity, but it was a diversity of leftists and over-the-cliff left-wing nutjobs. I'm not saying that everyone there looked like a hippie peacenik, but you would have been hard pressed to find a single soul who had voted for Bush in the last election.

I made my way through the crowd to the beginning of Market Street in order to listen to the speakers on stage. It was here that my entire perspective on these rallies changed. While I expected to hear some tactfully formulated arguments against fighting Saddam Hussein, I got something quite different. Aside from the tired old rhetoric of "No blood for oil!", "No new war!", and "Peace, not war!", I didn't hear much of anything about the possible war with Iraq.

Instead, I heard an endless parade of speakers selling their socialist-liberal-communist propaganda like there was no tomorrow. I thought the first few speakers might be atypical, but it just kept going. I learned about homelessness, socialism, support for queer youth (their term, not mine), racism, better access for teenage abortions, freedom for convicted Cuban spies, the demise of labor unions, and the need for free dental dams and condoms.

The most amusing comment came from a speaker who called for an end to the military's don't-ask-don't-tell policy, because it was discriminatory against gays and people of color. People of color? I had no idea that the military had a policy against telling people what race you were. It must not be working very well, because Colin Powell was "outed" a long time ago as a person of color.

So, I was a little puzzled. Did I stumble across the wrong rally?

Then I started to pay closer attention to all of the rally signs around me. While there were certainly many that spoke to the evils of war and of all Republicans, I found that many, if not most, of these signs had nothing to do with war. They dealt with everything from the environment to communism to Palestine to healthy breast milk (don't ask, because I didn't quite get that one either). I saw countless Socialist Party signs, communist flags, and anti-capitalist banners. Curiously, none of that showed up in the mainstream media coverage.

Now I understood why these rallies had grown so large. The war against Saddam is a great excuse for libbies of all flavors to band together and share their hatred for Republicans in general and Bush in particular. Opposition to the war is the loose tie that binds them, but there are dozens of more important agendas that these people have in mind. I didn't hear or see one proposed solution to the Iraq situation, but I heard and saw plenty of proposed solutions to every social issue the left could dream about.

With my mission complete, I headed home to shower, shave and change into some clean clothes. Unlike the evil Saddam Hussein, I learned that this was an enemy that isn't worth fighting. No amount of evidence will convince them that military force is necessary to bring Saddam to heel, because the vast majority of these peaceniks aren't really focused on a solution to this crisis. Dental dams, condoms, communism and tree-hugging are the more important agenda items. Somehow, I don't think those are on the top of the agenda for the oppressed Iraqi people or for Saddam's bomb makers.

The UN Counts to Three. Nothing Happens

When I was a little boy, my mother had a very effective way of disciplining me. All she needed to do was start counting to "three". Whenever I started misbehaving, I would hear a stern voice say "One…TWO…" Out of fear for my life, I would never let her get all the way to "three".

Now the reason this method was so effective, is because I found out early on what the consequences were if I misbehaved long enough to let her get all the way to three. Knowing that I would get a spanking if I let her get to three pretty much prevented her from ever having to count that high again.

And this method wasn't just effective on me. My younger brother could tell from the fear in my eyes that he too should never let my mother get to three. My mother had followed through on her threat of consequences, so we knew to take her seriously.

Well, the United Nations has reached "three" (maybe four or five by now) with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, but there have been no consequences. While the United States, Great Britain, Australia, Spain, Italy and others are ready to give Saddam a spanking he'll never forget, France, Germany and Russia would like to continue counting.

This is why the United States, Australia and others are making reference to the "relevancy" of the United Nations. The Iraqi's are in clear violation of UN Resolution 1441, but the UN has done absolutely nothing about it. What message does this send to the world?

If my mother had counted to three and done nothing, my brother and I never would have taken her discipline seriously. The same will go for Iraq, North Korea and any other misbehaving nations around the world when the UN continues to do nothing about Iraq. No consequences? No need to take them seriously.

It reminds me of those liberal parents who want to have "discussions" with their children instead of punishing them. These children have no respect for authority, and the parents can't understand why they have no control over their children. The poor kids grow up to be obnoxious brats with no sense of personal responsibility and limited intellectual ability. Apparently, most of them end up moving to Hollywood.

There is no doubt that Saddam is misbehaving. The only question that remains is what to do about it. Do we just continue to count by sending more inspectors into Iraq to play hide-and-seek, or do we actually stop counting and follow through with our threat to discipline him?

Saddam is doing everything in his power to deceive inspectors, not cooperate with them. Adding a hundred or even a thousand more inspectors to search an area the size of California is a colossal waste of everyone's time. The UN can't find a better country than Libya to chair the Human Rights Commission. How can we expect them to find weapons of mass destruction? So, in essence, these UN members are proposing that we do nothing about Iraq's violations. The kids are misbehaving, and the parents want to keep on counting with the hope that they'll eventually stop for no reason.

If the UN wants to remain relevant, it will have to stop counting and start disciplining. But not to worry. The disciplinarians in the UN have started counting of a different kind. In a stern voice, the missile launchers are counting "Three,…TWO, …" And if that doesn't frighten them, I'm sending over my mom.

Playing the Hitler Card

There seems to be an interesting new tactic being unleashed by the left recently. If no one is buying your Communist plot to take over the world under the disguise of "world peace", then just start labeling people as "Hitler." It started as an undercurrent on chat boards and lunatic signs displayed during the Communist-sponsored "peace marches" a few weeks ago (yes, the Communist World Workers Party sponsored those lovely peace marches), but it now has apparently started reaching the mainstream.

Most of you have probably forgotten Germany's Justice Minister, Herta Daeubler-Gmelin, making a comment to a German union group that compared Bush's saber rattling to Hitler several months ago. She later denied ever having made those remarks, but she started a trend that the leftist lunatics have adopted as a credo.

And then there was Malik Zulu Shabazz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, who stated last October at a press conference that "George Bush today is like a modern Adolf Hitler." A staff person for the radical then-congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.), was on hand to deliver a statement which thanked Shabazz and his followers for "their constant vigilance against human rights violations both here at home and abroad."

The delusional Nelson Mandela had another recent big splash on the Bush-Hitler front by referring to the "holocaust" that George W. Bush was going to cause. After a State of the Union speech that promised billions of dollars to save millions of African lives, Mandela had the cojones to accuse the President of being racist and on the verge of causing a holocaust. Go figure.

Hollywood is now getting in on the Bush-Hitler action as well. Apparently, David Clennon referred to Bush as being just like Hitler, but not as smart, on the Sean Hannity radio program recently. For those of you who don't recognize David Clennon (I had no idea who he was either), he was the boss on thirtysomething and stars in the "hit" television show The Agency. I guess Hollywood really does have an endless supply of jackasses.

I'm getting the sense that this Bush-Hitler connection is becoming a strong rallying cry for the Left. I won't be surprised if the Ed Asners, Susan Sarandons, Jaques Chiracs and other brain-dead peaceniks of the world continue the party line and claim that Bush is the Hitler of the GOP Third Reich in the near future. Doing a simple online search, you can find countless websites dedicated to making the Hitler-Bush connection. And most of them are quite serious about it.

As someone who had relatives who were put in concentration camps by Hitler during the Holocaust, I should be quite disturbed and insulted by these comparisons. My own father was born in China, because his parents were forced to quickly flee Germany due to the Jewish ancestry on his father's side of the family. Shouldn't I be disturbed by this Hitler-Bush comparison? Doesn't this belittle the horrifying atrocities perpetrated by arguably the most evil human being known to man?

My answer may surprise you, but I don't think we should be at all disturbed by this trend. In fact, I encourage the libbies to continue the Bush-Hitler comparison. Why? Because I think it shows how absolutely out of touch these people are with reality, and it discredits everything they say after making such an outrageous comparison. While they assume that the American public is too stupid to know the difference between Hitler and George Bush, I believe that the American public wonders why these liberals are too stupid to know the difference between Hitler and Saddam Hussein.

Nelson Mandela's recent remarks are a prime example. Mandela is a legendary figure who is respected throughout the world. Had he made a rational case against war with Iraq, it might have had an impact. Instead, he made bizarre comparisons to the holocaust and made racist accusations against Bush and the United States for opposing the UN solely due to its black secretary-general. He's like the boy who cried wolf, and it will be hard for anyone other than the far leftists and the mainstream liberal media to take any of his future comments seriously.

Someone making such outrageous remarks instantly loses credibility, which is why I would encourage the radical lefties out there to continue down this path. And conservatives should also take notice. This tactic can work against them as well. Comparing Hillary Clinton to someone like Joseph Stalin, because she wanted socialized healthcare, is intellectually dishonest. Hillary may be a nasty old wretch, but she certainly doesn't hold a candle to such a vile human being like Stalin.

So keep your ears open for this recent trend, and watch how it plays out. I'm betting that the Bush-Hitler comparison is going to increase in frequency and that the results are going to blow up in the faces of these mentally ill radicals. But these are some of the same people who also compare the Pope to Hitler, so I guess we shouldn't be too surprised.