Bill's Comments

One.....
Two.....
Three...
Four....
Five....

"It's going to be one of those nights," he thought as he lay counting the chimes on his hall clock.

Six....

He didn't realize he'd lost awareness. "After we get enough information to invade without detection, make sure you put him back at the same time spot, Jar-del."

"Certainly. There will be some cultural event that we can exploit."

Seven....
Eight....
Nine.....
Ten......
Eleven...
Twelve...
Thirteen.

"Huh, I need to have that clock checked," he thought as he drifted off to sleep.

The next night thousands of space aliens knocked on doors..."Trick or Treat!"


[One Hundred Below is a literary blog form created by Kevin of Kevin's Walk. It has also been used by the Maximum Leader. I thought I would try my hand with something I thought up years ago.]

The Headlines I saw:

Obama declines comment on hostage crisis off Somalia...
Pirates raise stakes with attack on US crew...
FBI joins effort in hostage standoff...
Captain worried pirate traffic was picking up...
Navy warship arrives at scene...
CLINTON 'DEEPLY CONCERNED'...
Holder considering options...
Petraeus: US will increase presence near Horn of Africa...
Kerry calls for pirate hearings...
Analysis: Hillary warned there'd be days like this...

The headlines I would like to see:

Somali pirate base destroyed
Navy and Marines take out pirate base, hundreds captured or killed
Somalia blockaded until remaining pirates captured

I suppose the next thing will be to call for an international conference to negotiate with the pirates.

This latest piece by Walter Williams, a top economist, spells it out very simply--the government is leading us to total economic failure by 2050 at the latest.

Thanks to Jewish World Review for the link.

From today's WSJ Opinion Journal, the spelling out of the causes of the surrender of the US in the future. Here are the payoff paragraphs:

Mr. Gates justifies these cuts as a matter of "hard choices" and "budget discipline," saying that "[E]very defense dollar spent to over-insure against a remote or diminishing risk . . . is a dollar not available to take care of our people, reset the force, win the wars we are in." But this calculus is true only because the Obama administration has chosen to cut defense, while increasing domestic entitlements and debt so dramatically.

The budget cuts Mr. Gates is recommending are not a temporary measure to get us over a fiscal bump in the road. Rather, they are the opening bid in what, if the Obama administration has its way, will be a future U.S. military that is smaller and packs less wallop. But what is true for the wars we're in -- that numbers matter -- is also true for the wars that we aren't yet in, or that we simply wish to deter.

....War is not a choice, only defeat or victory are the choices.

From the WSJ Opinion Journal

Benjamin Netanyahu formally became Israel's Prime Minister last week, and he could not have been blunter about the strategic challenge ahead: "It is a mark of disgrace for humanity that several decades after the Holocaust the world's response to the calls by Iran's leader to destroy the state of Israel is weak, there is no condemnation and decisive measures -- almost as if dismissed as routine." He added, "We cannot afford to take lightly megalomaniac tyrants who threaten to annihilate us."

Americans in key positions have noticed this Israeli message. In a meeting Thursday at the Journal, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told us that "there is a leadership in Israel that is not going to tolerate" a nuclear Iran. Tehran's atomic designs, he said, were a matter of "life or death" for the Jewish state. "The operative word is 'existential.'" When we asked him whether Israel was capable of inflicting meaningful damage to Iran's nuclear installations, his answer was a simple "Yes."

The Admiral was also clear about Iran's challenge to the U.S. "I think we've got a problem now. . . . I think the Iranians are on a path to building nuclear weapons." For the time being his counsel is diplomacy, noting that "Even in the darkest days of the Cold War we talked to the Soviets." But, he added, "we don't have a lot of time."

If Israel decides to strike Iran the consequences -- intended and unintended -- will be felt far and wide, including in Iraq where, Admiral Mullen says, Iran's ability to cause mayhem "has not maxed out at all." We thought readers might like to know how the Chairman sees the threat, and how well he appreciates Israel's peril.

.....or deliberately refuses to.

Ayn Rand once wrote that she did not want "Atlas Shrugged" to be prophetic because she would no longer be a romantic novelist, but a naturalist. From where I sit, she is becoming very disappointed, whereever she is, her atheism notwithstanding.

Every time Timothy Geithner is quoted, I think Wesley Mooch. Even though our President is more charismatic than the ordinary Mr. Thompson, he certainly is providing the same kinds of programs. The unions have tried to dictate the destruction of secret balloting, and the academics are all on board. I equate Peter Singer to Professor Ferris. There is already talk of intellectual strikes in the conservative commentary.

There is one big difference, the Thompson Harmonizer is far deadlier now as atomic weapons in the hands of insane national leaders, Kim Il Jong, and Armedinajhad, soon coming to a neighborhood near you.

A couple of years ago, I posted an apocalyptic vision of multiple nuclear strikes in this country. Since then others have published similar ones. What is really scary is we all predict sometime next year for it to occur.

Prophecy is never fun if it is right, and disappointment is not the word for it.