Author: Operator Dan

Last week, Julian Assclown sat down for an interview with a CNN Europe reporter regarding Wikileaks’ new document releases. When the reporter started asking relatively softball questions about turmoil within Wikileaks and about Asslcown’s personal life, Julian walked off the set like a little bitch:

So Julian Assange is all about secrets…. just for Wikileaks and his personal life. The couple questions the reporter even give Assange a chance to blame the whole thing on a conspiracy by the Pentagon. Larry King interviewed him a couple of days later:

First of all, Larry King needs to get off the air, seriously he has completely lost it. He honestly believed Assclown walked off the set when he was watching a clip of his previous CNN interview. Yet again, Assclown can’t take the heat and whine likes a little girl.

So here is a proposal (and I am too lazy to act on it but whatever)… Wikileaks for Wikileaks. Wikileaks for Wikileaks (WfW) sole purpose will be to leak internal emails, memos, phone calls, and text messages from Wikileaks staff-both work-related and personal.

I wonder how Assclown would feel about that?

I am not a Geert Wilders fan. His ideas to ban the Koran and to prevent the building of new Mosques in the Netherlands go against my beliefs in property rights and free speech. I also am bothered that many conservatives whom I respect are building connections with him and his movement in Europe. That is not a good idea.

However, I am greatly disturbed by the fact that Wilders is on trial in the Netherlands for “hate speech” for expressing his views on Islam. The Dutch and the rest of Europe do not view free speech in the same way Americans do. Britain bans books and keeps a list of people who are prevented from entering the country based on the perception that they encourage hatred. Germany bans political parties, censors movies and video games, and arrests people who deny the Holocaust (most central European countries have laws like this in effect). France banned the burqa and the display of other religious paraphernalia.

When progressive talk up Europe and their social democracies, just remember these prohibitions are part of them.

I was reading this article about the dog handlers from my old unit (2nd Battalion, 1st Marines) and what they are doing to get ready to go to Afghanistan. One of the Marines interviewed at the end of the video in the article was in my squad for the last half of our Iraq deployment (and is an all-around good Marine). Good breakdown of what dogs do for our grunts in Afghanistan.

However, I saw this little gem at the end of the article:

The program, which first began in 2007, is being opposed by animal rights group PETA, 10News learned.

In a statement sent to 10News, the organization said: “No animal should be used in situations considered too dangerous for a human being, as those situations, obviously, too dangerous for the animal as well.”

First of all, anyone who has deployed with these dogs can tell you they are treated extremely well and their handlers don’t knowingly put them into situations that would result in their deaths or serious injury. They are trained to sniff out IEDs before they are set off and because of their lightweight and smaller size they are less likely to set off land-mines or pressure plates. Bottom line is these dogs save lives and are not simply being sent into battle to blow themselves up so a human doesn’t have to. But if PETA had their way, this life-saving tool would be removed from the battlefield. So I purpose this solution: If PETA doesn’t want us to use dogs to sniff out IEDs, then they should do a one-for-one swap of dogs for PETA members so the Marine Corps/Army/Navy/Air Force can train (or attempt to train) them to sniff out bombs and IEDs.

Its a win-win for everybody involved in my opinion.