I've stated in a couple of previous blogs that I don't believe man is the cause for most of the current warming trend of our planet. I stated the reasons why were because Mars was warming faster than Earth according to NASA and that I remember the same scientists 30 years ago were saying we were in an ice age, which we obviously were not. Al Gore is starting to get some criticism by scientists for at the very least exaggerating the effect man has on global warming. Gore has recently said "there is no debate" on whether or not man is the primary cause for warming. The nutty left eh? He actually said opposing voices shouldn't be heard. Really? They shouldn't be heard? Damn, that's cold. Pardon the pun. It's that "free speech as long as they like it" monster that keeps popping up under the beds of the far left. It's also that brainwashing they're trying so hard to do. That's another reason why I don't believe in man causing much of the warming. They really are trying to brainwash people. Why? It's because of what I stated in a previous blog, scientists are dying for the attention that no one paid to them in high school. Al Gore took this global warming issue as his platform like Miss America does with feeding the hungry. Al won't answer this question though, if man is causing global warming then how come Mars is warming even more than our planet? Doubt he's even been asked. Not by the media certainly. Gore is the media darling. He won the Nobel Peace Prize on this issue over a woman (Irena Sendler) who saved Jewish children from the Nazis during WWII and was tortured by the Gestapo after getting caught. Can't reward a Jew-saver since they already rewarded a Jew-killer with the reward in Yasser Arafat.

Retired meteorologist John Coleman recently said that man causing global warming is a myth. For those of you who do not know John Coleman, I'll tell you what I know about him. He worked for Chicago tv stations doing the weather spending at least most of the time with Channel 5 NBC. I used to watch him when I was younger and remember him well. Before meteorologists depended on computers to tell them the weather, Coleman predicted the weather on his own and did it correctly. People in Chicago remember John Coleman because he was the last accurate weatherman ever. I also remember him saying years ago when all the scientists were swearing up and down we were in an ice age said they were wrong. He's already on record taking on these middle-child scientists dying for attention and was proven correct. I bring up John Coleman many times when I talk to people about how he said we weren't in an ice age when most of the other scientists said we were, and that was before his recent comments. I didn't even know he was alive still. It was good he came out and provided a point of view from someone who still has his head on his shoulders and was proven to be correct once before. Should you take his word or the word of scientists who swore up and down 30 years ago we were in an ice age? Hmm... tough one.

There was a poll taken among high school students on whether or not they believe man is the greatest cause for global warming and most said they didn't believe it. It seems that the attempted brainwashing is having a countereffect on people. The more that scientists say there is no debate on whether man is causing global warming, the more skeptical people have become. For good reason too. We were already down this road. I'm not the frozen guy from "Encino Man" because we weren't in an ice age. None of you are icicles either. Florida isn't going to be part of the ocean floor. You won't be living next door to Spongebob Squarepants.

After a two-year study done at prestigious Purdue University in my homestate of Indiana led by Professor Ayhan Irfanoglu (civil engineering), the findings support the government's account of why the Twin Towers came down. Sorry nuts. Bush didn't do it afterall. The steel which supported both structures were not made fireproof, which is now code in all structures being built today. Purdue is near the top, if not the top engineering school in the whole world and a two-year study showed their due diligence in this case. They used 3-D animation and a state of the art computer program to detail what would happen to the Twin Towers in the wake of the event of 9/11.

Half of the building's weight were in the columns, which were concentrated at the cores of the towers. The steel, which was not fireproof melted. "When that happens, the whole structure comes down" said Irfanoglu. He also said "if the columns were more distributed, maybe, the fire could not take them out so easily." Because the steel and concentration of weight was in the middle of the building, and the steel melted, the whole structure would come straight down because the outsides of the building would have to go down with the middle. So what happened to the 550 professors and scholars who founded the "Scholars For 9/11 Truth"? They came out quickly after 9/11 to say 9/11 was done by controlled demolition. What will be their explanation of this finding? I bet they will be pretty silent for a while.

This is a classic example of people who think they are much smarter than they actually are. Their ego drives them to not see what everyone else sees. That way they aren't like everyone else. The "common man". The "common man" is stupid and uneducated in their eyes, so therefore they HAVE TO see things differently. If they don't, then they will be like the "common man". Their ego just can't accept such a proposition. To these people history never happened. What I mean by that is there is no historical event that can't be debunked by effort in tearing down history's account of events. No matter how solid history's account is, to help them feel smarter they make up their version of history. If these people try hard enough, they can somehow make sense that there really is no United States of America. That we are still an extension of Brittania. I don't have to tell you that there really is a United States, do I? 

Let me clue you 9/11 conspiracy nuts in on something. History has happened. Much of it just the way we learned about it in school. Most things did not have alternative endings or hidden secrets that you think you are the only one to know about. You're not part of some minute group of people who have unlocked the real secrets behind history. You're not the Templar Knights. Some things just happened. Accept it. How do we get at this point in time if history didn't just happen? Anyone can break down a historical event even if history's account is accurate. Anyone can do it. It doesn't make you any smarter than everybody else I'm sorry to say. You're wasting your time and twisting your mind just to feed your ego. From what I've seen over the last ten years or so, this is a buffet you all have been munching on, too. What will be your dessert of a conspiracy theory? One has to wonder.

This goes to prove that these scholars and professors really know nothing more than the everyday person. They might know more in that concentrated area, but overall they are no smarter than Joe Shmoe. Unlike Joe Shmoe though, they have to try to outthink every damned thing that goes on. We all saw the planes crash into the Twin Towers. No one reported any CIA guys putting explosives into the Twin Towers beforehand. No one saw a second explosion in these buildings that would be indicative of a controlled demolition. When they show buildings being demolished, we see the explosions inside the building. Did you see the second explosions in the Twin Towers just before they came down? Neither did I. Where was the demolition's control station if it was a demolition? Aie aie aie, this one is just too easy. I guess that's the problem with these idiot 9/11 Truthers. It is too easy. Will those who see this report say "okay, we were wrong"? Hell no they won't. They will either say Purdue was threatened by the Bush Administration to go along with their account, or they will try to find the smallest part of that report to twist and say "see, we told you so! Bush did it!"

Before the incident where soldiers were called "cold-blooded murderers" by Rep. John Murtha (D. Pa), there were many other incidents which led to escalation there up to the incident in 2005. In 2003, the mayor and his son were assassinated by terrorists. Terrorists later in 2004 rounded up dozens of local police officers and executed them publicly in a soccer stadium. Haditha was in control by the terrorists. American soldiers went into Haditha to take the town back in 2005. During the fight for Haditha, twenty-four Iraqi civilians were killed, including eleven women and children. For this, American soldiers were called "cold-blooded murderers" by former Marine, John Murtha. Way to show that "brothers-in-arms" spirit, eh? It wasn't only Murtha who hung these men out to dry. Much of our bureaucratic military also did. It was one of those bureaucrats that let Murtha know about the incident and that our soldiers murdered civilians in cold blood. Murtha wrongfully parroted it to the entire world. I really hope he gets everything he owns taken from him.

If you're going to send our young men and women to war, some who don't want to be there for sure, then why hang them at the first sign of impropriety? Our young men and women are ruled by many who are save-asses just hoping to be promoted. Any sign of anything that makes them look bad, they come down hard because they are desperate to move up. Haditha isn't the only example I will give.

Terrorists are terrorists, so therefore they use terrorist tactics. Like maybe dressing up like the civilians in the city. This was very evident in the incident in Haditha. Four of the Marines were initially charged with murder. In an early report to the media, an Iraqi soldier said the Marines acted properly since it was THE TERRORISTS who hid among civilians. Justin Sharratt's (one of the Marines charged) father pieced together two stories in the media which told him everything anyone would need to know. It took our military two years to put the pieces together. An informant, Muhammad Hassan Hamadi, warned US Marines that Al Qaeda was intent on demonizing the mission. He was later detained and cooperated with the investigation. That was done in late 2005. So why the wait? Why hang the lives of Marines in the balance for two years when everything seemed to clear them of any wrongdoing?

In Afghanistan there is Lieutenant General Francis Kearney. He is one of these save-asses. Two Green Berets, Captain Dave Staffel and Master Sergeant Troy Anderson were near the Pakistani border. They were both charged with murder. Who did they murder you ask? A terrorist named Nawab Buntangyar. He was an expert at bombmaking. Buntangyar was "vetted as a target" by American commanders, which means he could legally be killed after positive identification. Staffel and Anderson were about 100 yards away and Afghan police positively identified him. Staffel gave Anderson the order to take him out, which he did. Clean shot. No worry about Buntagyar becoming a suicide/homicide bomber (which he organized many of in Afghanistan). Just the death of a terrorist who organized suicide/homicide and roadside bombs. Lieutenant General Francis Kearney charged them with premeditated murder. They were quickly cleared. Kearney didn't stop there. All in all they had to be cleared THREE times by investigators before the story received national attention. Even with a terrorist legally abled to be killed, a terrorist who's modus operandi is suicide bombing, Kearney wanted to hang these two soldiers.

If our military leaders won't have the backs of our fighting men and women, then don't send them to war. Let them stay home and be with their families. Let them protect our borders. Let them live here without much of a risk to their lives as they would be fighting overseas. Everyone of our soldiers volunteered to become a soldier. People like Kearney are trying to tie the hands of our soldiers which obviously would risk their lives. Not Kearney's life. He's safe in an office. A soldier shouldn't have to ask "if I shoot this terrorist, what charges can they bring against me?" If they ask that, then they're already dead. Really, if you military leaders are going to do this, then don't send our men and women overseas to risk their lives. This is a call not just to our military leaders, but to President Bush and the next President of the United States as well.

There is no greater honor a person can do as an American than to serve in the armed forces. Most Americans feel this way also. While most feel people who serve in the military, especially those in wartime should be saluted for their sacrifice, some don't see it that way. Many look down on the military. Democrats say things against the military regularly. Some people who vote democratically say and do worse things. Those on the nutty left think of those who serve in the military as being stupid and feel they only serve their country because they have no other option available. No matter that those who serve in the military scored above the average with their grades in high school. This is a continuation of the Hippy Movement from the late '60s. Hippies camoflauged their love of drug-use and promiscuity with unidentified minors by saying they were against the Vietnam War. Most were too stoned to really know much about the war, but these gatherings were the happening places to be. They got laid and got stoned. The war was way back among the list of their priorities. I'll argue with anyone on that all day long. They did call those who they wanted to bring home "babykillers", didn't they? They didn't care about Americans risking their lives in a winless war. Why would they call them "babykillers" then? Why did they spit on those who returned? Why did they mock and humiliate those who returned? One was even shot because he was a Vietnam Vet. Imagine that. A man who probably didn't want to go fight in that useless war managed to survive the VC but was shot by one of his own countrymen because he was in Vietnam. The media at the time played right into the hatred. John Kerry spoke before a hearing and said "They (soldiers) told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country." He was praised as a hero for saying this by the media. Many people who served in Vietnam thought otherwise. How a man can say, not that he saw these things himself, but only was TOLD these things and repeat it before an international audience is beyond me. The Vietnam Vets took incredible humiliation all over the spectrum. Most were in a war they didn't want to be in. They were in a war we didn't try to win. They were in a war we shouldn't have been involved with in the first place. Then their own countrymen turned on them if they did survive the war. History has proven that those people who did those things to the Vietnam Vets were wrong. The media also said they didn't present the veterans in the best light. They promised to never do it again. Here is today. Time has proven the media not only to be wrong, but liars to boot.

The New York Times put stories about Abu Graib over 60 times on its front page. Over 30 in consecutive days. I don't think an alien invasion would get that type of coverage. Then on October 22nd, Navy Seal Lt. Michael Murphy posthumously was awarded the Medal of Honor. So far, he is the only one to get this distinguished honor in either Iraq or Afghanistan. The New York Times felt it was appropriate to mention this story in their Metro section. Abu Graib over 60 times on the cover, Lt. Michael Murphy awarded Medal of Honor in the Metro section. No excuse but predictable. Yet another rock of proof upon the Mount Everest of evidence of bias in the media. Lt. Michael Murphy knew he was going to be killed but did so to save others. Sadly only one managed to have his life spared in Afghanistan. If the NY Times is against the Iraqi War, which is obvious, then why slight Lt. Murphy since he was in Afghanistan? Didn't we go into Afghanistan because of Al Qaeda and the Taliban? They're for that war, right? NYC was the site of the worst terrorist attack in history. This is the NEW YORK Times, right?

CNN said they wouldn't show the whole footage of Saddam Hussein being hanged. Obviously that's the right thing to do. No one wants to see that, I hope. We all know what happened. But why would CNN then air a TERRORIST SHOT VIDEO of an American soldier being sniped and dying? Terrorists took this video and gave it to CNN like they were Al Jazeera of the West, and then CNN played right into their hands and put it on air. That actually shocked me that they would do that. Again though, no full footage of Saddam being hanged, but footage of an American soldier being sniped by terrorists gets aired. "No, there's no bias in the media. What are you talking about?"

John Murtha said a while back before any facts came out that the incident in Haditha wasn't a gunfight. It was American soldiers who murdered innocent people in cold blood. He said this in a press conference. He hanged them on international television. Recently those soldiers that were involved in that incident in Haditha were all cleared. All cleared. Will Murtha apologize? I bet he won't. He won't say he's wrong. He probably somehow believes he was right in doing what he did. He probably doesn't believe he put other troops in jeopardy even though most Americans would think so. He certainly didn't do a good job of trying to convince Iraqi civilians to help us now, did he? He should be and probably will be sued by the soldiers who were called cold-blooded murderers. He should have everything he owns taken from him. He should also be removed from office if he doesn't step down. This will never happen though. He's a hero to the DNC.

While the military is being kicked off our college campuses (one incident was near riotous), terrorists are being invited to speak and even take classes. Former Taliban spokesman Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi became a Yale student. Couldn't that invitation to become a Yale student go to ..... I don't know.... AN AMERICAN STUDENT! This man was the spokesman of a group that killed women for nothing and allowed Bin Laden and Al Qaeda free reign to train and make ready to commit terrorist attacks, including 9/11 on America. I have NO IDEA why this guy was even allowed in our country to begin with. He was the spokeman of the damn Taliban! Columbia University won't allow the military on campus but welcomed terrorist Ahmadinejad. He was received warmly by the audience until the audience seemingly for the first time learned of his stance on homosexuals. Will they in turn say "ok, we had a man who not only vows to wipe Israel off the map, but was also involved in the kidnapping of Americans in Tehran during the Carter Administration, so maybe we should also accept the US military from now on"? Hell no, that isn't happening.

We should all not only support and praise our military, but defend them against the scum of our society who speak ill of them. We should write our representatives to voice our displeasure at anything they say against our military men and women. They are risking their lives for all of us, so we should spend a little time and do the things we should do for them. Contact John Murtha and tell him you were disgusted at him calling our soldiers cold-blooded murderers. Contact John Kerry for saying our troops are terrorizing women and children in the dead of night. Contact DICK Durbin for comparing Gitmo to a Russian Gulag. Contact Barack Obama for saying we're air raiding villages and killing innocent people in Afghanistan. Contact all those who questioned the integrity of General Petraeus and those who did not vote to condemn Moveon.org's ad. Obviously doing all of that would be hard to do, so pick a few and let them have it. Our troops are fighting for us, let's show them we have their backs too.

"To not to challenge the stupid is to err" is a new motto we should all live by. Okay, it's my motto and I just made it up, but hey, it's a good one. When someone says something completely stupid, no matter how smart the person is PERCEIVED to be, then it's like saying you believe in what they are saying. Whether it looks that way to other people, or to the stupid person themselves, you are saying to them you agree with their opinion. I don't mean saying something stupid that is harmless or a "blonde moment" like my friend was thinking. I mean when someone says something stupid about someone else. Saying things that are untrue. Saying things that can do harm. Saying things that are totally unbelievable like "the Americans secretly funded the Nazi War Machine so that way our country would have an excuse to invent the atom bomb." In a time when people don't realize that they say stupid things, we should all let them know it is stupid. Years ago I'm sure when someone said something stupid you could just turn your head and that person would take that as "damn, that was stupid to say wasn't it?" Not anymore. Ego is too high among people. This is the age of conceit. They think no matter how stupid their thought is that it's right. Why? Because their genius butts came up with it.

People in the spotlight are the best examples of this. People in the spotlight surround themselves with people that become bobbleheads. They agree with everything this person says. Why? Because their job or salary is on the line. No way are you going to tell your boss that he's stupid to say Bill O'Reilly pulled cables from the engine of JFK Jr's plane causing the deadly crash. At best you'll say "that O'Reilly is kinda mean". Of course I'm not speaking for all of you. Some of you will say "take this buttkissing job and shove it". Surrounded by "yes" men and "yes" women, those in the spotlight think that everything they can come up with must be right since everyone agrees with them. This helps their deterioration into insanity. I'm not just talking about those in Hollywood, I'm also talking about professors and politicians.

Professor (now FORMER professor) Ward Churchill compared the victims in the World Trade Center attack of 9/11 to "little Eichmanns". This was shortly written after 9/11. Adolf Eichmann was a Nazi logistical expert who orchestrated things such as the moving of Jews to the ghettos and the Nazi extermination camps. He hid in Argentina after WWII under a false name but the Israelis found him, brought him to the newly reborn Israel and tried then hanged him. Now it's not remotely a possibility for a sane person to draw comparisons between Eichmann and people who are working at the financial center of the USA. Some insanos might say "yeah, it's so simple but you can't see it because you're .... whoa!! the colors!!!... because you're blind maaan." That speaks for itself. There is no comparison that can be made between Eichmann and the people in the Twin Towers other than they all woke up in the morning. The title "tenured Professor" told Ward Churchill "you're smarter than everyone". This led to him getting mushy and cozy with his insane side. It probably happened one romantic night over dinner with that special bottle of Chteau Margaux under a moonlit sky. The next day he probably came up with the theory that Dick Cheney was hiding in a bunker in Mars in the weeks after the attacks. Now this idiot Churchill must have said and done stupid things quite a bit before that. It came out that there's nothing original that has come from this guy aside from the "little Eichmanns" comment. He made a painting that was nearly a split image from an already done painting. His American Indian background has been challenged. His thesises have been said to have been credited to someone else. I guess technically those were the reasons why he lost his job at the University of Colorado, but it was really the backlash over his "little Eichmanns" statement. Let's be honest. Anyone who can somehow compare people who were murdered by terrorists to a MURDERER should not be teaching ANYWHERE, so that is definitely enough to fire him. Any argument in favor of this jackass will fall on deaf ears over here. But perhaps he could have been saved if someone told him what he said was stupid a long time ago.

Professor Boyce Watkins of Syracuse University said that Juan Williams was just a "happy negro" twice on CNN. This went unchallenged amazingly enough. Now Watkins and CNN are both in trouble. Watkins for saying Williams was a "happy negro" twice because Williams dared to set the record straight on what Bill O'Reilly actually said, and CNN for not challenging his idiotic comments. If anyone has seen Juan Williams with Bill O'Reilly, you can attest that they don't agree on most things. They debate against eachother quite a bit. But with Juan Williams being called a "happy negro" by Watkins and CNN not challenging him, this made CNN complicit with his opinion. This is why "to not to challenge the stupid is to err." Heidi Collins from CNN conducted the interview on the show Newsroom. Watkins also compared O'Reilly to Ahmadinejad and a murderous villain in a movie. Somehow in his twisted mind he was able to do this. Does this make him a genius? No, it makes him a lunatic idiot. Will he get fired? Probably not. To university officials all over the country, Watkins said something "thought provoking". If Watkins was white and said that about Juan Williams.... OH BROTHER! All hell would break loose. He wouldn't even smell his professorship anymore.

Actor (I guess) James Brolin was doing a radio interview to promote his movie "The Hunting Party" on WPLR in New Haven, Connecticutt with hosts Chaz and AJ. I don't know who they are but I respect them. Chaz and AJ noted it was the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and Brolin said mockingly "right, oh yeah. Happy 9/11!" A stunned Chaz replied "well that's kind of a weird thing to say". Brolin laughing said "I hear silence." Chaz said "yeah well we're here right outside of New York, and I know people who lost family members... so we don't say 'happy 9/11' around here." Brolin still chuckling said "celebrate the day, right?" Brolin who's married to fellow left-wing loon Barbara Streisand, tried to cover what he said by saying it was a "horrible situation" but was cut off by Chaz saying "I think you'd be better off talking about the movie." Jeff Wald, Brolin's manager (would you switch jobs with this guy?) later explained "he wasn't making fun of the tragedy. He was horrified by it. It was an off-the-cuff remark." He's not even expecting us to believe this excuse but he has to say it. His career depends at least partly on James Brolin. He is Brolin's "yes" man. Instead of maybe nipping Brolin in the bud many years ago and finding another job or person to represent, he decided that agreeing with everything Brolin said was the best thing to do. I'm not blaming him. I want to make that clear. Brolin going nutty enough to say "happy 9/11!" was his own fault. He's an alleged adult. Since Chaz and complicitly AJ confronted this jackass, they did the right thing. They didn't care he was an actor who might somehow make them money. They heard something grotesque and challenged the moron who said it.

When people you know say stupid and insensitive things, don't laugh or just go along with it for the sake of anything you can come up with in your mind. Set them straight. Not only will you take a stand against stupidity and insensitivity, but you'll be doing your friends a favor. Because it could be them one day saying "the Americans secretly funded the Nazi War Machine so that way our country would have an excuse to come up with the atom bomb." Do you want to avoid an argument now and later watch them go batty to the point you can't be around them anymore? Or would you rather confront stupid and insensitive things and help make your friend think about being a better person later on? Do you want your friend to turn into Dale Gribble from "King of the Hill"? There are enough of those around, don't you think?