I must admit to be somewhat confused by religion in America. The leaders of the various infidel denominations all claim to be against same sex marriage. I, of course, fully agree with this. I mean, if you're a guy and you can't get a woman, don't debase yourself by being with another man. That kind of behavior is an affront to the gods of ALL religions, and is disgusting and indefensible. Instead do the right thing and go find yourself an attractive goat.

That's what I always do.

Anyway, I raise this issue because of something Pat Robertson--a leading infidel evangelical leader (and presumably opposed to homosexuality)--recently declared that he wanted to "take out" Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Granted, Robertson may not want to actually marry the man, but publicly declaring that he wants to date the guy is not much better.

Not that I was worried or anything, but I just heard that the temporary Iraqi President has said that he will not sign my death sentence even if it costs him his job. Apparently Jalal Talabani is strongly opposed to capital punishment and is a man of principles. I hate to admit it, but I truly admire a man like that.

But if I find out he's been putting his feet on my desk, I'm chopping his legs off at the knees.

The American Vice President, Dick Cheney, recently delivered a speech in which he compared America's situation here in Iraq to its experience in the Revolutionary War some 200 years earlier. He pointed out that when things looked bleak for George Washington and the Continental Army, they stuck it out and went on to defeat the British. And that, according to Cheney, is the challenge faced by America in Iraq.

That's actually a very good comparison to the current situation, but not exactly for the reasons he thinks. You see, if I remember my history correctly, it was the Americans who were the insurgents in that conflict, and they were trying to expel an occupying army.... And though it took eight years, the insurgents eventually WON!!!!

Come to think of it, wasn't the guy running the war for the invaders named King George?

Charges have been dropped against the Raging Grannies.

Who are they, Saddam? And can we have your autograph?

Thank you for asking. The Raging Grannies are a group of five grandmothers in Tucson who have been protesting the war against Iraq. Last month they went into a military recruitment center and tried to enlist. They wanted to come here to Iraq and fight so their family members could go home. The recruiters, however, decided to call the police and have the old ladies charged with trespassing.

The women should consider themselves fortunate. They could have ended up in the prison at Guantanamo Bay, in which case they'd STILL be waiting to be charged with a crime.

Oh, and as far as my autograph is concerned: The answer is no. While I am flattered by your request, I am also aware of the value of my signature among collectors and don't want to cheapen its worth. I will, however, be making an appearance at a Star Trek/Deposed Despots convention at the Beirut Hilton next January. I'll be signing 8 X 11 glossies of myself for $40 a pop.

I'll be the bearded guy sitting between William Shatner and Walter Koenig.

Finally, some good news!

The two day death toll for fighting among various political and ethnic groups here in Iraq has reached 100. The skirmishes were touched off when the parliament failed to vote on the new constitution, and everyone began blaming everyone else for problems with the document. But that's to be expected when you have things like political parties, opposition groups, and special interests.

It just goes to prove what I've been saying all along: Despotism is superior to democracy.

Yet another deadline has been missed in Iraq's quest to adopt a constitution. Parliament was supposed to vote on ithe document, but they can never get enough people together to convene. And, of course, the Shiites are blaming the Sunnis, and the Sunnis are blaming the Shiites for holding things up.

The solution to this stalemate is painfully obvious: Restore me to power, and Iraq won't need no stinkin' constitution.

I figured Iraq was headed for a simple, run of the mill three way civil war. Kurds vs. Shiites vs. Sunnis, that sort of good old-fashioned traditional internal bloodletting. Never in my wildest dreams, however, did I think a civil war would erupt among the stinkin' Shiites!

That certainly seems to be the direction things are headed, though. Earlier today supporters of that Shiite cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr--he's the fat one with the beard--tried to reopen an office of his in Najaf. But other Shiites who are opposed to him for some reason or another tried to block the move. There was shoving, words were exchanged, tempers flared, and four people died in the subsequent fighting.

As word of this spread among the Shiite community, violence erupted in a number other cities throughout the Shiite south.

It's nice to get some good news for a change.

Well, Iraq has sort of decided on a constitution, though it's a long way from being formally adopted. For one thing, my fellow Sunnis are refusing to accept it, probably because it fails to call for my return to power.

Granted, the Sunnis are a minority in Iraq, and some people will argue that for that reason the Sunnis should be kept to a minor role in any new national government. On the other hand, they have been in power for so long that they are not about to surrender it now.... Especially to a bunch of stinkin' Shiites.

So the fact remains that no national government can be formed without significant Sunni participation. On the other hand, the stinkin' Shiites will scream that no national government can be formed without them, since they are the majority of the population.

Quite a pickle, eh? Well, it seems that the only fair and equitable way to settle this little quandry is through a civil war.

More critics of President Bush are starting to surface within his own party. The latest is Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and his criticism of the President tends to carry more weight than most. While Bush spent less time in Vietnam than Jane Fonda, Hagel is a decorated veteran of that war.

According to him, the war in Iraq has made the Middle East even more unstable, and that instability will only worsen the longer the US remains here. He also says that it's absurd to suggest that American troop levels will still be over 100,000 four years from now. Hagel then goes on to say that Iraq is looking more and more like Vietnam.

That's ridiculous. I've seen pictures, and Vietnam had a lot more trees.

I didn't think there was anything in this world that could make me feel warmer and fuzzier than looking at naked pictures of the Dixie Chicks. But then I started following the stories about the evictions of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip. And let me tell you, nothing can beat the feeling I get in my pants from watching Jews beat up on other Jews.

Life is good.

President Bush has launched a five day push to defend his invasion of my peace loving nation which has never harmed anyone.... Well, except for Kuwait, Iran, the Shiites, and the Kurds. Probably a few others, too, which I've forgotten. But aside from those few exceptions, we were the friendliest darned neighbors you could ever hope to have.

As usual, he has begun by labeling the attack on Iraq as part of his "War on Terror." How this is, no one knows. After all, it has been well established that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. Even more importantly, we had no significant ties to Osama bin Laden and the rest of his bunch of religious wackos. And not only were there were NO Iraqis among the 19 hijackers, most of them were from countries that are US allies: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt. In fact, bin Laden himself is a Saudi!

But facts have never much mattered to Bush. Facts just get in the way of his view of the world. Facts are nothing more than a nuisance. Facts support the Theory of Evolution, and ONLY the Theory of Evolution. Facts are annoying. And that means facts need to be ignored when they contradict perceived reality.

And that's why Bush continues to invoke 9-11 whenever he justifies the war in Iraq.

Recently declassified documents from the US State Department provide further proof that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld marched off to war without a plan.

Oh, wait, sorry. My bad. They didn't march off to anything. Rather, it was the sons and daughters of the American people--the people who foolishly believed that their leaders knew what they were doing--that did the marching.

Turns out the State Department wrote a memo about six weeks before the start of the war warning that "a failure to address short-term public security and humanitarian assistance concerns could result in serious human rights abuses which would undermine an otherwise successful military campaign, and our reputation internationally."

Too bad no one listened.

Bush has finally admitted defeat in Iraq.

Well, not in so many words, but the White House is "lowering expectations" about what can be accomplished here. According to the same officials, "the United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges."

Um, excuse me, but then what exactly was the point of invading Iraq, toppling me from power, flushing hundreds of billions of dollars down the toilet, and directly causing tens of thousands of deaths?

In fact, you may recall that America's original reason for attacking was the elimination of my vast non-existent stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. It wasn't until that didn't work out that Bush decided to start saying that the reason he invaded was to create a thriving democracy in the heart of the middle east. And now even that alternate goal has blown away like a summer sandstorm!!

So then what has the United States accomplished, besides turning my country into a training ground for terrorists?

Well, according to Bush's radio address last Saturday, "Iraqis are taking control of their country, building a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself. And we're helping Iraqis succeed."

Huh? Who is he kidding? The people governing Iraq can't venture outside without heavy duty armed escorts or they'll be assassinated. There are car bombs--often several a day--going off all over the country. And the governing council can't agree on a damn constitution!

What good is freedom if you can't step outside without fear of getting blown into a thousand pieces?

Any pro-American government that does attempt to form won't last won't last without intense support from Bush. And it's that very support that will doom Iraq to lasting turmoil and ongoing terrorism. Bin Laden and his followers have already targeted the pro-western governments of other middle eastern countries for attacks, and anyone who tries to govern Iraq with American support will also be in the sights of Al Qaeda followers.

Well, if Bush ever decides to say that the reason for invading Iraq was to create an absolute, unadulterated mess, at least he'll finally be able to legitimately claim "mission accomplished."

So I'm looking through Yahoo's latest headlines when I came across this little gem: "Iraqi politicians warned of political turmoil after failing to meet a deadline on the country's new constitution."

Oh, yeah. That would be such a shame. After all, Iraq has been such an example of stability and tranquility for the last 2 years, it would be just awful if its track record should somehow be marred by turmoil.

Yesterday was the big day for the Iraqi constitution to be adopted, thereby heralding the birth of wonderful new era of peace, love, and democracy in Iraq.

Except, well, they had to put it off for another week. The new deadline is August 22. Feel free to place your bets on whether or not that will happen. My money's on "Not a chance in hell."

This is a perfect example of why despotism is a superior form of government: There's no need for pesky constitutions or other such nonsense because what you say is the law of the land. And if you change your mind overnight, so be it. There's no need to worry about what's legal and what's not, because you--as the tyrant--get to decide!

I miss those days.

Kids: Just say "no" to drugs. Otherwise your brains will turn to mush and you'll end up babbling utter nonsense that has absolutely nothing to do with the real world. Just look at the tragic example set by Donald Rumsfeld, who apparently has gotten into the medicinal marijuana cabinet once too often: "Despite their headline-grabbing violence, the insurgents in Iraq are failing," the Secretary of Defense said on Thursday in a speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council in Los Angeles, California.

August isn't yet half over, and 54 American soldiers have died in Iraq so far this month, and 1853 since the war began in March of 2003.

That's an intersting definition of the word "failing." One can only conclude that Rummy went to the same grammar school as Vice President Dick "Last Throes" Cheney.

It's all Bush's fault, you know. Remember when he challenged the insurgents to "Bring it on" two years ago? That was at the beginning of July of 2003. Any guess on how many US troops have died since then? Well, if you look at the stats at Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, and add up the monthly totals over the last two years (starting with July 1 of 2003 and through August 14 of this year), The number is 1647.

1647!!! That averages out to just over 63 dead per month.

The total for March-June of 2003--prior to Bush's challenge--was 206. That's a five month period, and it works out to less than 52 per month.

So don't blame the insurgents. All they did was accept an invitation from the President of the United States.

Here's the stupidest damn thing I've ever heard: Some official of the puppet government currently illegally occupying my palaces says that I could be executed after my first trial if I am convicted and sentenced to death.

HA!!!!

First of all, that statement assumes that there will even be a trial. At the rate the members of the current so-called Iraqi government are being kidnapped, beheaded, assassinated, and blown up, it's not entirely clear if there's going to be anyone left by the time my trial does roll around.

Secondly, the only reason I'm in jail is because my country was illegally invaded by some doofus who meant to actually invade Iran, but can't tell the difference between a "Q" and an "N." This is not surprising, however. What do you expect from some moron who is willing to ignore over a century of scientific research and declare that creationism should be taught in his country's public schools alongside actual science?

That debate was settled years and years ago! Everyone now knows man is descended from camels!

Thirdly, that trial is going to be for massacring Shiites! There's not a Sunni in this country that's going to convict me for that, so this trial is going to be nothing more than a waste of looted money.... Er, I mean, um, a waste of tax dollars!

Besides, if I'm put to death, who's going to put down the insurgency?

Poor President Bush....

The crazed mother of a marine who was killed after being in Iraq for only four days has camped outside the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas where he is vacationing. She wants to personally deliver her anti-war message to him, but he refuses to meet with the lady.

Now the woman is threatening to camp outside the White House itself once the President goes back to DC. Needless to say, the press is having a field day with this story.

Oh well.... That's what happens when you invade the wrong damn country.

Yesterday's Washington Post had a riveting article about a soldier who was wounded a few months ago by a mine. Two others in the Humvee he was in were killed in the same blast. Terry Rodgers describes the explosion and its immediate aftermath in a very matter of fact style.

But the best part of the article is towards the end. At one point, when he was recuperating in the hospital, a nurse asked Rodgers if he wanted to meet President Bush, who was touring the facility.

And Rodgers' response? "I don't want anything to do with him," he explains. "My belief is that his ego is getting people killed and mutilated for no reason -- just his ego and his reputation. If we really wanted to, we could pull out of Iraq. Maybe not completely but enough that we wouldn't be losing people -- at least not at this rate. So I think he himself is responsible for quite a few American deaths."

That pretty well sums it up.

What's the deal with the American intelligence services? Not only did they come up with the harebrained idea that I had all kinds of weapons of mass destruction, which of course I didn't since I'm such pacifist. In fact, just between you, me and the law enforcement agencies now monitoring your web surfing because they caught you reading this site, I secretly became a Quaker a few years ago. Why do you think you never saw me running around in those long flowing white dresses like other Arab leaders?

Where was I...? Oh, right, intelligence failures!

Now a Congressman (a type of democratically elected person) says he has uncovered evidence that a secret military intelligence group in the United States learned in 1999 that Mohammad Atta--the Egyptian leader of the 9-11 hijackers--was a member of Al Qaeda. However, they decided NOT to tell the FBI about it. Apparently lawyers at the Pentagon decided that since Atta and his group were in the country legally, there was nothing to warn the FBI about.

That's it. When in doubt, blame the damn lawyers.

One of the ongoing criticisms of the American occupation of Iraq--militarily speaking--has been that the Americans need more soldiers to quell the insurgency. Bush and Rumsfeld, however, have repeatedly said that if any commanders on the ground in Iraq were to ask for more troops, the request would be given. They simply haven't asked, and that's because more troops aren't needed.

Now we learn that the unit of marines from Ohio that lost those 20 soldiers last week had, in fact, asked for another battalion of a thousand men. For some reason the request was not granted.

And people say I'm the one with the credibility problem....

Did you know that the west still has troops in Kosovo, which is located in the former Yugoslavia? I certainly didn't; I thought they were all over here occupying my country.

At any rate, it looks like those guys have W-A-A-A-Y too much time on their hands. They're even sitting around making music videos of old Beach Boys songs!

Have you heard about this new Al Qaeda tape? Ayman al-Zawahri, the group's number two guy, released it the other day and it's already soared to the top of the Billboard Hot 100 Terror Threats chart. Of course, with the advent of file sharing, that no longer translates into big sales the way it used to.

Anyway, al-Zawahri stopped short of claiming direct responsibility for the London bombings but did say that Tony Blair's decision to keep British troops in Iraq was the cause. He also went on to say that more attacks would be coming, both in the British Isles and America.

Personally I find that absolutely hilarious, though I suppose Brits and Americans fail to see the humor in it. But if you stop and think about it, wasn't the whole reason for Bush's invasion of Iraq to prevent terror, not inspire more of it? Do you see the irony of it all? That's what makes it so funny!

So what went wrong? Why is the world still such a scary place?

Oh, right. Instead of going after the terrorists, and trying to capture or kill the guy who murdered almost 3000 of his fellow Americans on September 11, Bush decided to invade Iraq instead.

That makes about as much damn sense as fixing a flat tire by changing the fan belt.

In the past I have mocked the Americans' so-called torture techniques as being amateurish. Then I read this.

It seems that one of my generals, Abed Hamed Mowhoush, was captured a couple of years ago. His interrogators worked him over pretty thoroughly with beatings but he refused to cooperate.

So on the morning of Nov. 26, 2003, two Americans soldiers stuffed him in a sleeping bag, bound it up with electrical cord, and beat him yet again.

Mowhoush ended up dying in that sleeping bag. The Americans initially said he died of natural causes, but now the truth has finally come out.

In the past, Rumsfeld and other Bush officials have justified the harsh questioning of prisoners by arguing that they are not soldiers, but terrorists and thugs and therefore exempt from the protections of the Geneva accords. Yet here we have someone who is clearly a top military officer with the enemy, and he was literally beaten to death! If my people had captured a top US general and subjected him to the same brutal treatment, and he had ended up dead, what do you suppose would be Bush's reaction?

Right. He'd be talking it up as further evidence of the savagery and brutality of the evildoers who hate freedom and democracy.

Anyway, I have to admit that I'm impressed. Stuffed in a sleeping bag and bound with electrical cable, eh? Very impressive.

I'll have to add that one to my own repertoire.

The United States' tendency to go poking its nose into other countries business has gotten it into trouble yet again. This time it's Uzbekistan, which is one of those countries Bush couldn't find on a map drunk or sober. Come to think of it, neither could I, but that's besides the point.

The Uzbek government recently conducted a bloody crackdown on some protestors, killing several hundred of them. The US, apparently forgetting what it has been doing at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, protested and has been pushing for an international inquiry into the deaths.

In response, the government of that small country, which just happens to border on Afghanistan, and has been allowing the nosy Americans to maintain a base essential to their ongoing operations in that country, has decided enough is enough and told the United States to pack up and get out.

Isn't this a bit like calling the cops because your landlord is having a loud party, then acting surprised when you find your crap out in the street the next morning?

Special thanks to reader Tung Yin (see also July 30), who has just supplied the perfect defense for my upcoming trial:

"If you can't find the poison gas, Saddam gets a free pass."

With a line like that, it doesn't matter what kind of facts, photos, exhibits, maps of wind currents, eyewitness accounts, or grieving family members the prosecution throws before the jury. All they're going to remember is the line "If you can't find the poison gas, Saddam gets a free pass."

It's the classic California style defense strategy: Let the prosecution bore the jury with evidence, then you dazzle them with poetry.