Paxety Pages

 

 

France Prepares To Attack!

PPI–Mahone Dunbar

At a press conference earlier this week, a belligerent and saber-rattling Jacques Chirac of France defended his country's nuclear arsenal and warned terrorists of the world that if they struck at France with a weapon of mass destruction he would consider responding with nuclear weapons against the countries they used as operational bases.

Unused to such stern warnings from the cheese-eating, mime-loving frogs, the warning sent tremors throughout the Islamic world - tremors of laughter, that is. Usama Ben Laden, responding to Chirac's threat on an audio tape sent to Al Jazerra TV, said, "Ohhhhhh, that's so scary," before dissolving into a fit of laughter. The CIA has verified that the voice on the tape is Arabic and that the peals of laughter appear to be real.

However, after a member of Chirac's staff quickly informed him that a nuclear response would impact women and children - not to mention the poor, and minorities - unfairly, he was said to be reconsidering, perhaps using his contingency plan for fighting Islamic terrorism first - offering them more jobs, better housing, free education and a pass on any violence or destruction they had caused.

After Chirac left the press conference, Mouchavan Idioté, spokesperson for President Chirac's office, amplified the French President's contingency policy on terrorism, saying, "After all, we have employed these options before and they have a history of success. They finally quit burning our cars, didn't they?" After pausing to remind reporters that cheese canapés and wine were available in the back, Idioté continued, "The threat to, in effect, bomb the Islamic world back into the stone age ("Which in their case would only be a couple of decades," an unidentified voice shouted from the back of the press conference) , was just a fit of pique, you see. The President was a little ticked, and spoke harshly - after all, he's seventy-three, you know. So, as we say here in France, His cheese is getting a little moldy. I mean, really, the idea that France would act aggressively at all is just pure silliness, don't you think?"

When asked if Chirac's threats would cause Islamic and North African French immigrants and their progeny to tone down their violence against the state, second generation Frenchman, Pierre Abdullah Mohammed, a spokesperson for the rioters, said, "The old fart had better shut up before we burn the rest of their cars."

Back in the United States reaction to Chirac's initial comments were tepid. Since neither the United States nor Israel had anything to do with the threatened use of nuclear annihilation on these particular enemies, the liberal media in the United States - including the New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, CNN and the formerly major network news sources - when they noted the French threat at all, mentioned it only in passing.

An unnamed source at the NYT said, "As long as it's not George W. Bush using nuclear weapons in defense of America, we don't really care what happens. In fact, when the first report came over the wire, one reporter read it and simply said, 'Guess what everyone? The leader of a western nation just threatened to use a nuclear bomb against Islamic nation that sponsor terrorism against them,' and the staff went crazy here. Some reporters immediately fell to the floor and began spinning around like tops; other began foaming at the mouth, wailing, and rending their clothes and screaming invectives at warmongering George Bush. Then we found out it was France, and not America that had made the threat. You can imagine the disappointment. We had to call in a grief counselor."

Meanwhile, back in France, innumerable, insufferable peace group coalitions of gay/lesbian/pro-abortion anti-war badly-dressed and ill mannered socialists led by Cindy Sheehan are not picketing the halls of power in France 24/7 in protest of the doddering Chirac's nuclear swaggering.

Iran, The Bomb, And The Future Of The Jews

At the same time, in Iran, where a real nuclear threat looms, religious hatred and bigotry have taken an academic turn. Iranian leaders have announced a plan to organize a conference to examine the ‘scientific’ evidence of the Holocaust. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who recently suggested that European nations take the Jews back, said, " For over a half a century, those who seek to prove the Holocaust have used every podium to defend their position. Now they should listen to others."

One of those others is presumably Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, who said that "the WWII slaughter of 6 million European Jews was a myth," and that it was now up to Iranian leaders to make that myth a reality. As to what really happened to the Jews in WWII, and what the conference hopes to prove, Mohammed Aliakbar, Asefi's deputy chief of Holocaust research, explained. "Number one: Islamic scientists can prove that all the pictures made of Jewish concentration camp victims during World War II were digitally enhanced. A prominent Iranian historian, Dareini Mohammed, has explained away the rest of the evidence: "All the movie footage of starving Jews being released from concentration camps was merely the clever product of Jewish film makers from Hollywood; all the soap products and supposed human-skin lampshades and such were actually made from pork products; all the gold supposedly gathered from the teeth of Jewish victims was actually the result of the bad advice from greedy Jewish dentists, who, in an effort to increase their obscene profits, recommended that European Jewry would experience better health if they got their teeth extracted. So, what was a poor German to do, but pick up all the gold from these teeth? As for those tattooed numbers on the wrists of concentration camp survivors? Merely a fad among European Jews, who loved math. You see, all the old Klan literature from the United States actually had it right all the time."

 

Democracy In Action At Home And Abroad

Wednesday, in a clear demonstration of how fickle and dangerous democracy really is, Hamas won a stunning victory in the Palestinian elections. Hamas, the party which masterminded dozens of suicide bombings in Israel, now controls the majority of seats in Palestine. This bodes ill for the idea of peace in the Middle East. But the real message here is: never underestimate the slimy underbelly of the democratic principle; i.e., with democracy (majority rule), any radical idea, whether the preservation of racial purity by the Nazis, forced agrarian labor for African immigrants, the institution of radical religious rule by Islamic leaders, or the idea that the Pope is infallible and speaks for God, can dominate a nation or people and gain legitimacy -as long as Jimmy Carter approves the voting process.

The election of Hamas also prompts the following questions: What do you do when the will of the majority consists of ideas that are a danger to everyone else who doesn't share their belief system? Or, what do you do when the majority gets in power through more or less democratic means, or by popular revolution in hopes of stopping tyranny and establishing a democracy, and then shuts down the democratic process?

If you think the will of the majority of your fellow citizens should always rule supreme, you must not be a black American, a German Jew, a Russian, Chinese, or Cuban communist and any of the many people who have been in the ideological minority in the past. This is why our wise founding fathers were against democracy. Best definition of popular democracy in action: twelve wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

And that brings us back to the importance of polls as expressions of the will of the majority. The importance of polls in a democratic context has become so entrenched in America that we now get frequent announcements in the press, such as "X number of Americans now believe in UFOs, bigfoot, etc.," as if the changing percentage of ‘belief’ has anything to do with the state of reality prior to or after the poll was taken. If 98% of Americans come to believe the moon is made of green cheese, would you then sprinkle grated moon rock on your salad?

And speaking of the fickleness of polls as expressions of popular will, that brings us ‘round to Hillary. A recent CNN/Gallup poll revealed that only 16 percent of voters said they would back Senator Hillary in a presidential bid, while 51 percent said they definitely won't vote for her. So, with Hillary weak, and no strong Republican contender on the horizon, is there anyone who can unify presidential voters in the 2008 elections?

No sooner had the Hillary poll results been published than a web rumor - that Juan Paxety, of Paxety Pages, was thinking starting a grass-roots movement for a third party candidate for the 2008 presidential race, with himself as the candidate - quickly begin making the rounds.

This correspondent decided to visit Mr. Paxety at his palatial estate and query him about the truth of the rumor.

Conchita, Mr. Paxety's comely personal assistant, led me to the sun room where Mr. Paxety was having his usual breakfast - several large glasses of bourbon followed by an orange. Without further preamble, I asked him about the rumor.

"Yes, I've seen that," Paxety said, pausing to exhale a cumulus cloud's worth of blue smoke from one the Cuban cigars personally sent to him each month by Fidel Castro.

Well, is the rumor true?"

"Hmmmmm, let’s just say I'm thinking a coalition - a strong and hitherto unrealized bond between the red state southern vote, the good ole' boy, Old South, and blue state rad-libs, the pro-Palestinian, pro-abortion, Anti-Bush, Hollywood liberal left. The unifying context will be anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, the radical subtext where the extremes of the red and blue waters flow together."

"That does sound like untapped territory. Any hints for our readers about a possible party platform?"

"I’m still in the developmental phase there, but I’m thinking now, mandatory abortion for Jewish babies, up to thirty-six months after conception, which will appeal to the left, combined with a strong pro-nuclear stance for the right, which would take the form of the US supporting the re-introduction of above ground nuclear testing for Korea, Pakistan and Iran, with Israel as the locus. I could go on, but I'm beginning to frighten myself," he said, setting his cigar in the ashtray and shakily reaching for a large glass filled with amber fluid. I was just about to ask him why an anti-castroite like himself was receiving free cigars from Cuba when I realized he'd nodded off, ending the interview.

As far as Mr. Paxety's chances in the upcoming presidential election, we'll just have to wait and see what poll numbers develop.

 

Update - Hans Bricks has an interesting observation on Palestinian democracy.