« October 2004 | Main | December 2004 »
November 30, 2004
GOP Wins = Conservative Losses
As much as Jonah Goldberg gets whacked around in libertarian circles, once in a while he has something good to say. Today, for example, he has a fairly perceptive column entitled "The Party of Order," subtitled "Why did the GOP win? Hint: It's not good stuff."
The overall thrust of the piece is that the party that offers the most stability and order in a world of instability and disorder is the one that wins. Unfortunately, providing stability and order means changing little, particularly as regards rolling back big government. Thus, a win for the GOP means government will continue to grow, not shrink.
As Goldberg puts it:
Anyway, here's the point. The rate and degree of societal change depend on a lot more factors than mere partisan politics. Technology, economics, culture, foreign events, demography, and for all I know the tides can play much larger roles in forcing change on society. I fear that the Republican party's success in recent years has much to do with the fact that they are perceived as a port in the storm, not the means of reversing the storm. It's entirely possible that the GOP will continue to rack up more and more victories even as society moves further and further to the left. Even Bush came out in favor of some kind of civil unions toward the end of the campaign.
The problem for conservatives is that a party dedicated to "security" or "order" is going to be less ideologically conservative (i.e. for aggressive reform, downsizing government, expanding markets, etc.) even as it becomes more temperamentally small-c conservative. Bush has straddled this divide without that much commentary over the last four years. When he said, "the government must move" when someone is "hurting," it was written off as either squishy liberalism or gross pandering. What if it's neither?
Too bad the gang at NR never seems to recognize this stuff when it comes election time, at which point they can be found lining up in lockstep behind whoever the GOP puts up, regardless of his "small-c conservative" bona fides.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:56 AM | Comments (0)
But Abu Ghraib Was Just the Work of "a Few Bad Apples"
The International Committee of the Red Cross has charged in confidential reports to the United States government that the American military has intentionally used psychological and sometimes physical coercion "tantamount to torture" on prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
The finding that the handling of prisoners detained and interrogated at Guantánamo amounted to torture came after a visit by a Red Cross inspection team that spent most of last June in Guantánamo.
The team of humanitarian workers, which included experienced medical personnel, also asserted that some doctors and other medical workers at Guantánamo were participating in planning for interrogations, in what the report called "a flagrant violation of medical ethics."
Fortunately, the abuses at Abu Ghraib were the work of "a few bad apples," not official policy justified by, say, Alberto Gonzales.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:04 AM | Comments (0)
They Hate Us for Our Freedom
We've all heard the neocon mantra a thousand times: The terrorists hate us for our freedom.
We've also all heard the sensible response to this: They hate us for our policies.
Now a federal advisory committee called the Defense Science Board has issued a report that says--drum roll please--"Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies."
Tom Regan has a nice roundup of media coverage of the report and some interesting details about the report itself and who composed it.
(Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:41 AM | Comments (0)
November 29, 2004
That Pre-9/11 Mindset
Critics of the current régime's so-called "War on Terror" are often accused of having a "September 10th" or "pre-9/11" mindset. (Our ever-articulate Prince President garbled both descriptions into the phrase "pre-September 10th mentality" during the first debate.) The suggestion is that everyone's worldview should have been radically transformed by the events of September 11th; anyone whose worldview wasn't so altered, anyone who continues to favour diplomacy over a resort to military force, must simply be blind to reality.
But there's a problem with this argument: it assumes that everyone's worldview needed changing. After all, any worldview that was radically altered by the September 11th attacks must have been radically mistaken to begin with. But anyone whose understanding of the world was substantially correct would not have had his or her overall view of things shaken by those events.
Why didn't more of us ("us" being those of the anti-war/anti-state persuasion, whether "left" or "right") abandon our way of thinking in response to 9/11? Because 9/11 didn't teach us anything we didn't already know. We've been saying for decades that the U.S. government's arrogant interventions around the world have only been increasing the risk of blowback, and that the State, in the event of such blowback, would be as ineffective at protecting the civilian population as it is at everything else. The 9/11 attacks simply corroborated our "pre-9/11 mindset."
If you read the whole column (and you should), notice the nice zinger Long gets in as the last paragraph. It's a satisfying conclusion to a great column.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 04:04 PM | Comments (0)
November 27, 2004
War: a Euphemism for Cold-Blooded Mass Murder
Lew Rockwell has a link to this Village Voice article on his main page today, and it's well worth reading. The author, Evan Wright, was an embedded reporter with the Marines in Iraq, and he offers his thoughts on the killing of the unarmed man in the mosque and the more general murder that takes place in war. It's not pretty.
Here are two paragraphs which really struck me (and, yes, I've slightly "fixed" the language from the original):
The Marines constantly debated the morality of what they were engaged in. A sergeant in the platoon told me he had consulted with his priest about killing. The priest had told him it was all right to kill for his government so long as he didn't enjoy it. By the time the unit reached the outskirts of Baghdad, this sergeant was certain he had already killed at least four men. When his battalion commander praised the unit for "slaying dragons" on the way to Baghdad, the sergeant later told his men, "If we did half the s**t back home we've done here, we'd be in prison." By then, the sergeant told me, he'd reconsidered what his priest had told him about killing. "Where the f**k did Jesus say it's OK to kill people for your government? Any priest who tells me that has got no credibility." . . .
Another Marine in the unit I followed—a Democrat's dream, he returned home from fighting in Falluja in time to vote for Kerry—added, "Americans celebrate war in their movies. We like to see visions of evil being defeated by good. When the people at home glimpse the reality of war, that it's a bloodbath, they freak out. We are a subculture they created and programmed to fight their wars. You have to become a psycho to kill like we do. To most Marines that guy in the mosque was just someone who didn't get hit in the right place the first time we shot him. I probably would have put a bullet in his brain if I'd been there. If the American public doesn't like the violence of war, maybe before they start the next war they shouldn't rush so much."
Posted by Mike Tennant at 08:48 PM | Comments (0)
November 26, 2004
Ancient Chinese Secret, Huh? III
"7. For there has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefitted.
8. Thus those unable to understand the dangers inherent in employing troops are equally unable to understand the advantageous ways of doing so.
9. Those adept at waging war do not require a second levy of conscripts nor more than one provisioning."
Posted by Patrick Yancey at 04:30 PM | Comments (0)
November 24, 2004
Need to Get to Baghdad Airport? It'll Cost You $340.53 a Mile
Think it costs an arm and a leg to get an airport "limo" here in the U.S. of A.? Try this on for size:
A 15-mile stretch between Baghdad airport and the city centre is said to be the world's most expensive taxi ride.
Small convoys of armoured cars and Western gunmen charge about £2,750 ($5,108) for the perilous journey. . . .
The high-speed drive costs four times more than the £670 Royal Jordanian charges for a one-way flight from London to Baghdad via Amman.
If that all isn't enough to convince you of how well things are going in our colony, try this on for size: "At least 10% of each reconstruction project budget in Iraq goes on protection."
(Link courtesy LewRockwell.com.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 12:54 PM | Comments (0)
I'm Tom Ridge, and I Approved This Message
Between spoonfuls of cereal, a little girl in pajamas looks across the kitchen table and innocently asks her mother some chilling questions: "What if something happens? Should I stay where I am and wait for you?"
She may not understand the implications, but she's talking about terrorism. Now the government wants parents to provide answers.
In a series of new TV, radio and print ads, the Department of Homeland Security is encouraging parents to talk to their children about what to do if disaster strikes.
But . . . but . . . but I thought we were safer now! If the government is protecting us so well, why do we need to tell our kids what to do in case of a terrorist attack? (Never mind that any particular child has a much better chance of breaking his neck on the playground than of being caught in the middle of a terrorist attack.) Thank goodness for the DHS!
Read the whole thing here. (Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 12:46 PM | Comments (0)
November 23, 2004
Ancient Chinese Secret, Huh? II
"5. When your weapons are dulled and your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, neighboring rulers will take advantage of your distress to act. And even though you have wise counselors, none will be able to lay good plans for the future.
6. Thus, while we have heard of blundering swiftness in war, we have not yet seen a clever operation that was prolonged."
Posted by Patrick Yancey at 06:35 PM | Comments (0)
Oppose the Occupiers, Get Executed
The interim Iraqi government of Iyad Allawi has threatened to charge anti-US occupation imams with high treason, which carries capital punishment, an Iraqi newspaper reported Saturday, November 20.
Interim Interior Minister Fallah Al-Naqib said imams inciting “bloodshed from their pulpits” will be treated as traitors and brought to justice, said Al-Moatamar newspaper, the mouthpiece of Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress.
Once again the blessings of liberation are brought to the Iraqi people. Preach against the occupying army, and its puppet ruler will have you executed.
How could anyone but the most ruthless, anti-freedom terrorists oppose what our government is doing in Iraq?
Read the whole thing here. (Link courtesy Antiwar.com.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)
November 22, 2004
Ancient Chinese Secret, Huh?
From "The Art of War," translated by Samuel Griffith, Oxford University Press, 1963:
"3. Victory is the main object in War. If this is long delayed, weapons are blunted and morale depressed. When troops attack cities, their strength will be exhausted.
4. When the Army engages in protracted campaigns, the resources of the state will not suffice."
--Chapter II, "Waging War"
Posted by Patrick Yancey at 06:25 PM | Comments (0)
Dunking Through Hoops for Their Customers
Here's a good column by Jason Whitlock on the aftermath of the Pistons-Pacers-fans brawl on Friday. This guy actually understands the free market and seems to appreciate, rather than resent, its workings. For example:
American sports fans, particularly those who consistently shell out the hundreds of dollars it takes to attend a professional game, are fed up with black professional basketball players in particular and black professional athletes to a lesser degree.
Yeah, let's cut through all the garbage and get to the real issue. The people paying the bills don't like the product, don't like the attitude, don't like the showboating and don't like the flamboyance. The NBA, which relies heavily on African-American players, is at the forefront of fan backlash. Stern realizes this, and that's why, spurred on by the Detroit brawl, he is reacting decisively.
What the players must come to grips with is that just because race is an element in the backlash, that doesn't mean the backlash is fueled by racism.
We're witnessing a clash of cultures. A predominately white fan base is rejecting a predominately black style of play and sportsmanship.
Who is on the right side of this argument? The group that is always right in a capitalistic society. The customer. That's why Stern, endorsed by his owners, came down hard on the players. He stated that the NBA would take steps to ensure that its fans improved their behavior. But Stern knows the real solutions are in the hands of his players. A good businessman caters to his audience. They don't play country music at my dad's inner-city bar for a reason. . . .
We, black people, begged for integration. We demanded the right to play in the major leagues, the NBA, the NFL, the NHL. These leagues accommodate a white audience. As long as the customer base is white, the standard for appropriate sportsmanship, style of play and appearance should be set by white people.
(Yeah, I have to credit Rush Limbaugh with bringing this to my attention. Once in a while he's still right.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 04:15 PM | Comments (0)
Two Success Stories From Iraq
As we all know, the major media is obsessed with reporting only the bad news from Iraq and completely ignores all the good news coming out of there. (Just ask Sean Hannity, who just last week was lamenting this fact once again.) In the interest of rectifying this situation, I submit the following two stories for your consideration:
- The Washington Post: "Acute malnutrition among young children in Iraq has nearly doubled since the United States led an invasion of the country 20 months ago, according to surveys by the United Nations, aid agencies and the interim Iraqi government. . . . Iraq's child malnutrition rate now roughly equals that of Burundi, a central African nation torn by more than a decade of war. It is far higher than rates in Uganda and Haiti."
- The Chicago Tribune: "In recent months, tens of thousands of Iraqis have made similar decisions [to leave Iraq], some spurred by the hazards of daily life in Iraq, some by their personal experiences of kidnapping or armed robbery, and others simply because they see no future in a country that seems to grow more violent with each passing day."
Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:02 AM | Comments (0)
November 19, 2004
Dungy Down On Interracial Love?
www.foxsports.com reports that Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy found last Monday's little skit intro to the Dallas-Philadelphia game "racially offensive".
"Reaction ranged from amusement to anger. Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy found it racially offensive."
"To me that's the first thing I thought of as an African-American," Dungy said Wednesday.
"I think it's stereotypical in looking at the players, and on the heels of the Kobe Bryant incident I think it's very insensitive. I don't think that they would have had Bill Parcells or Andy Reid or one of the owners involved in that," he added, a reference to the coaches in the game.
ABC's intro showed Sheridan wearing only a towel and provocatively asking Owens to skip the game for her as the two stood alone in a locker room. She drops the towel and jumps into Owens' arms. Owens is black and Sheridan is white. "
Now, I saw the skit, and thought it was kind of funny. Especially when Terell Owens states after Sheridan jumps in his arms, "oh well, guess they are going to have to win this one without me." And while I do think it was inappropriate in the sense that many young children watch MNF with their parents, I somewhat dumbfounded at what was racially offensive. The woman in the skit came to seduce the man. The man was not the sexual predator in this case. Is the fact that Owens is black and Nicolette Sheridan white the problem???
Posted by Duke Heberlein at 07:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Why We Fight
Justin Raimondo goes back to the fundamentals with a more philosophical column entitled "Why We Fight." It's a good primer on the reasons to oppose war and a nice break from his usual news-driven writing. Here's a sample:
[The bottom line] is this: American imperialism is bad for America. It undermines our republican (small-'r') institutions, it renders the effort to roll back Big Government futile, and it corrupts our character as a people. It also kills those it is supposed to be "liberating" – a moral conundrum that none of the advocates of America's "benevolent hegemony" acknowledge, let alone have an answer to.
War has a degenerative effect on republican institutions, and fatally undermines the rule of law and constitutional government, for the simple reason that war is lawlessness. While we all pretend that there are "rules of war," and every nation swears to abide by the Geneva Conventions, everybody knows that this is balderdash pure and simple. If you want to see the "rules of war" in operation, take a look at that video of a U.S. Marine blasting the head off a wounded insurgent in a Fallujah mosque. That is the true face of war, which is why no American television station has dared show the full unedited footage.
War centralizes political authority and economic power, investing all power in the state – and assigning obedience, rather than freedom, to the top rank in the social hierarchy of values. This, for libertarians, is the crux of the matter.
Read it all. It's a nice reminder of exactly, um, why we fight.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:25 AM | Comments (0)
November 18, 2004
Some Dictators Are More Equal Than Others
George W. Bush, Sept. 21, 2004:
For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability.
The Financial Times, Nov. 17, 2004:
The US has proposed its largest arms sales package to Pakistan in more than 14 years, underlining the country's role as a close ally of Washington in the war on terror.
The Pentagon notified Congress about the $1.2bn package late Tuesday. It includes eight P3-C Orion surveillance aircraft, six Phalanx rapid fire guns for the Pakistan navy, and more than two thousand TOW 2 missiles for the army.
The package would mark the first significant arms sale to a US ally since this month's re-election of President George W. Bush.
Some dictators get their countries invaded by the U.S.; others get billion-dollar weapons deals. Notice how this deal was kept secret until after the election.
If I were Musharraf, I'd be stockpiling weapons now because I could be the target in just a few short years. Think: Saddam Hussein.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:23 AM | Comments (0)
Iraq Redux
The United States has intelligence indicating Iran is trying to fit missiles to carry nuclear weapons, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said.
Powell partially confirmed claims by an Iranian opposition group that Tehran is deceiving the United Nations and is attempting to secretly continue activities meant to give it atomic arms by next year.
"I have seen intelligence which would corroborate what this dissident group is saying," Powell told reporters Wednesday as he traveled to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Santiago, Chile. "And it should be of concern to all parties."
OK. Where have we heard this before? Remember all those dissident groups that said that Saddam Hussein had mountains of WMD, and all the intelligence Powell (and other administration officials) said validated those claims?
They're leading us down the same garden path again. Let's hope Americans have learned from their mistakes.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)
The Sky's the Debt Limit
The party of fiscal responsibility strikes again!
A divided Senate approved an $800 billion increase in the federal debt limit Wednesday, a major boost in borrowing that Sen. John Kerry and other Democrats blamed on the fiscal policies of President Bush.
The mostly party line, 52-44 vote was expected to be followed by House passage Thursday. Enactment would raise the government's borrowing limit to $8.18 trillion - $2.23 trillion higher than when Bush became president in 2001, and more than eight times the debt President Reagan faced when he took office in 1981.
Why bother with the "debt ceiling" at all? Congress never fails to raise it when they want to spend more money.
Of note also is this:
Democrats complained that the bill - which will let non-defense, non-domestic security programs grow by about 2 percent next year - was too stingy.
If Republicans think they can get Democrats to like them by spending more money, they're dreaming. No amount of spending is going to satisfy the Dems. In that case, how about providing a genuine alternative by actually cutting spending? That, of course, would never do for either wing of the Government Party.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:10 AM | Comments (0)
IRS cracking down on "abusive" tax shelters
Provisions aimed at curbing abusive tax shelters and increasing penalties for shelter promoters and participants. Material advisors will be required to file a new information return, yet to be developed by IRS, for any reportable (or listed) transaction. It will include information identifying and describing the transaction; information regarding the expected tax benefits from the transaction; and other information requested by IRS as a result of this act. Failure to provide the requested information with respect to a reportable transaction could result in a $50,000 penalty. The penalty for failure to file the requested information with respect to a listed transaction is much stiffer. That penalty, if assessed, will be the greater of $200,000 or 50% of the gross income derived by the person required to file the information return. The Act also requires organizers and promoters of potentially abusive tax shelters to maintain a list of all persons purchasing interests in these tax shelters. The penalty for failure to make the list available when requested by IRS within 20 days may be assessed at $10,000 per day for each day of failure after the 20th business day.
Posted by Rob at 10:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 16, 2004
NR Says Democracy Unviable in Middle East
Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of something called the American Center for Democracy, argues at National Review Online that the Palestinians are not ready for democracy.
The president should not fall into the trap of prematurely creating an independent Palestinian state. What Arafat left behind is not a functioning, viable democratic society but an utterly corrupt terrorist entity. A change of leadership alone is not enough to undo decades of indoctrination in hate; it will take several generations to reverse the culture of death, destruction, and corruption that Arafat has so successfully established with the generous help of the Arab League and the European Union.
So, on the one hand, the U.S. can take over Iraq, which was "not a functioning, viable democratic society" and which, as we have been constantly told, was "an utterly corrupt terrorist entity" and magically implant a free, democratic society in a matter of months; but on the other hand, it's powerless to do the same thing for the Palestinians.
Then again, expecting consistency from Neocon Review (except when it comes to expanding government under Republicans) is like expecting Louie Anderson to turn down a cheeseburger.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:53 PM | Comments (0)
November 15, 2004
Louisiana 15-Year Old Drivers Must Register for Draft
Louisiana 15-year-olds register for draft
State requires boys to fill out form to get driver's license
08:28 PM CST on Saturday, November 13, 2004
Associated Press
ALEXANDRIA, La. To get a driver's license, 16-year-old Nathan Chevalier
had to preregister for a nonexistent military draft.
"I just can't believe it," said Larry Chevalier, Nathan's father.
Even though his father had questions, Nathan filled out the form to register
with the Selective Service so he could get his license.
"They wouldn't let him get it otherwise," Mr. Chevalier said Saturday.
Even a 15-year-old boy who wants a learner's permit in Louisiana must
provide information to be forwarded, when he turns 18, to the Selective
Service System, which would run a military draft if Congress authorized one.
The same goes for any 16-, 17- or 18-year-old who wants his the law
applies only to males first driver's license or state ID card.
"They can't even be a conscientious objector to signing up," Mr. Chevalier
said.
The state forwards the information to a federal center, which holds it until
the boy's 18th birthday, when he is old enough to enter military service. It
is used to automatically register him with Selective Service.
Few noticed the law when the Legislature passed it in 2003, officials aid.
Rudy Sanchez, general counsel for the federal Selective Service System, said
he didn't know about Louisiana's preregistration requirement.
"Louisiana shouldn't be registering 15-year-olds. We don't even register
16-year-olds," he said last week.
Federal law provides only for "early submission" of information by a young
man who is at least 17 years and three months old, he said. When he turns
18, it is forwarded to the proper database.
The law requires only that young men register within 30 days before or after
their 18th birthdays.
Other states have passed laws requiring young men to register with Selective
Service when they get a driver's license, but none requires it of
15-year-olds, he said.
Everett Bonner, state director of Selective Service, said information
collected by the Office of Motor Vehicles is forwarded to a federal data
management center.
"They do accept it. I can promise you. They do not process it until the
young man turns 18," he said.
He said registering young men when they get their driver's licenses is a
convenience and a way to help those who don't know they must register.
There is no national military draft, and President Bush has said there are
no plans to reinstate one.
Posted by Rob at 05:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 11, 2004
Palestinian State of Mind
Tom DiLorenzo hits a home run with a brief paragraph on the idea of a Palestinian state:
Does the Middle East -- and the world -- need yet another state? All the other Arab states are vicious and corrupt despotisms; why create another one? If such a state is created it will do what all other states do: rapidly take more and more of its citizens' income through taxation, squander most of it on things that are of no benefit to the taxpayers, deprive the citizens of more and more of their liberties, conscript them into its armies to fight unnecessary and aggressive wars, brainwash their children with "public" education, strangle their businesses with regulations, assault the public with a daily barrage of lies and propaganda, and generally behave like one gigantic criminal enterprise. This is one idea that ought to be buried along with Arafat.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 03:23 PM | Comments (0)
November 10, 2004
Take A Bullet, Get a Trinket
I’ve looked at thousands of images of the Iraq war and this one is the most telling and amazing; nothing gross or bloody, just disgusting.
This is a great visual affirmation that your mind, “heart,” body and soul belong to the Oh Holy State. Resistance is futile.
Posted by Roger Young at 05:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 09, 2004
British Sheeple Line Up to Be Shorn
CNN reports:
A new X-ray machine at London's Heathrow airport, which sees through passengers' clothes, has been attacked by civil liberties campaigners as a "voyeur's charter."
The machine uses low-level radiation to see through clothing, producing an anatomically detailed black and white image of the body underneath.
Capable of detecting solid objects concealed under clothing, it started a four month trial in October.
Randomly picked passengers are asked if they will volunteer to be scanned by the machine.
"I stood in front of the screen and they took three pictures in different positions," said passenger Pernille Nielsen.
"I don't mind if the pictures are a little more personal as long as I'm safe in air -- that's what matters," she told Reuters.
Another passenger, Maria Love, said: "It's all about being safe, and I really have no problem with it."
A spokeswoman for BAA Heathrow said 98 percent of participants gave positive feedback. . . .
Heathrow, which for security reasons declined to say how the new X-ray machine improves on current scanners, denies the machines could cause embarrassment.
"It's a very low dose X-ray, the images are not stored, it's same sex operated and the operator that sees the image will not see the person," said the airport spokeswoman.
"There will not be a situation that could cause embarrassment," she added.
The British sheeple are buying into this invasion of privacy. We all know American sheeple will, too, in time--and the "conservatives" will be the first in line.
(Link courtesy Drudge Report.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 03:33 PM | Comments (0)
More Imperial Lunacy Frum National Review
Our old pal David Frum has penned a few words on the current obliteration of Fallujah and last week's election (both great things, of course).
First Frum says that Kerry was "massively rejected" and Bush was "massively voted in" by the voters. I don't know about you, but a 51% - 48% victory which came down to the electoral votes in one state hardly seems to me like either a massive win for Bush or a massive loss for Kerry.
A more telling insight into Frum's thought process is this sentence: "In the longer term, though, the 2004 election puts us on a safer path, by forcing Middle Eastern regimes and populations to reckon with the real determination of the American people--and then make the choice whether to cooperate with them or accept the consequences of stiffing them."
If that isn't the arrogance of an imperial power, then I don't know what is. The U.S. has an election, Bush wins, and the rest of the world therefore had better accept whatever the "American people" (read: the Bushies) stipulate or else face annihilation.
No wonder some people can't tell the difference between the Left and the Right anymore!
Posted by Mike Tennant at 01:06 PM | Comments (0)
One Man's Terrorism Is Another Man's Liberation
Muslim fundamentalist insurgents seeking to topple the government are holed up in a conservative city with little sympathy for secularism or pluralism. They raise the banner of Islam, and they call on the rest of the country to rise up and expel the oppressors. The government reacts by massing forces around the city. It demanded that the militants surrender or the city give them up. If not, the city would be destroyed. Fallujah this week? Yes, but it was also the Syrian city of Hama in the spring of 1982.
The fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood seized Hama as the first step towards its goal of a national uprising against the secular Baathist regime. The Syrian President demanded their surrender. His army shelled the city, and special forces went in to kill or capture the militants. The Syrians employed the same strategy that the US is using now. Its tanks and artillery waited outside the city; they fired on militants and civilians alike. Its elite units, like the American Marines surrounding Falljuah today, braced themselves for a bloody battle.
The US condemned Syria for the assault that is believed to have cost 10,000 civilian lives. The Syrian army destroyed the historic centre of Hama, and it rounded up Muslim rebels for imprisonment or execution. Syria's actions against Hama came to form part of the American case that Syria was a terrorist state. Partly because of Hama, Syria is on a list of countries in the Middle East whose regimes the US wants to change.
Read the whole thing here.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:44 AM | Comments (0)
Sunni Party Quits Iraqi Government over Fallujah
"A major Sunni political party has quit the interim Iraqi government and revoked its single minister from the Cabinet in protest over the U.S. assault on the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, the party's leader said Tuesday," reports USA Today.
But we're going to have free, fair, and open elections there come January. Right?
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:41 AM | Comments (0)
Ohio, the Heart of It All
First we had the story that "an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus."
Now it emerges that another Ohio county "locked down the county administration building on election night and blocked anyone from observing the vote count" because of "concerns about potential terrorism."
The party of Lincoln is still the party of Lincoln. They're just more subtle about the way they rig wartime elections these days.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:38 AM | Comments (0)
November 08, 2004
Noonan Nonsense
Peggy Noonan, the wispy Reaganette, has written a curious piece. She claims the election results show that the United States is not the deeply divided country the mainstream media claims.
Bush wins the popular vote 51-48%. You really cannot be more divided than that without being split right down the middle, 50-50. Maybe she was one girl who had trouble with math.
Mainstream media? What do you call the Wall Street Journal? She seems to lack any hesitation being named a contributing editor at that unworthy “MSM” publication.
Noonan considers it a feather in the cap for Bush that he received 59 million votes, breaking Ronald Reagan's old record of 54.5 million. Of course, no mention was made of the fact that the country’s population has grown considerably in the last twenty years giving the resultant increase in eligible voters. Not surprisingly, no mention was made of the millions of qualified voters who sat out the yearly scam. They’re irrelevant, of course.
Posted by Roger Young at 01:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Left? Right? What's the Difference?
In the adult Sunday School class I attend, we got sidetracked slightly into a mildly political discussion yesterday. Some were talking about "the Left" and "the Right" and clearly equating those schools of thought with the Democrats and the Republicans, respectively.
Finally someone in the class asked, "Could someone please explain to me the differences between the Left and the Right? I've listened to [local conservative talk-show host] and [local liberal talk-show host], and I can't tell the difference."
Bingo. It often takes a relatively apolitical person to recognize the fact that the identification of each side with a particular political party has relegated both sides to being nothing more than flacks for politicians. After all, if the Right were really true to its principles, it could never support George W. Bush or practically any other Republican; and similarly, if the Left were really true to its principles, it would not be mourning the victory of Bush over Kerry.
Need more proof that the official Right is practically indistinguishable from the official Left? Check out this column by National Review's David Frum (author of the "axis of evil" speech), in which he (a) argues in favor of a federal tax on high-calorie, high-fat foods and (b) states that "almost all conservatives" favor Medicare and Medicaid. Yikes!
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:00 AM | Comments (0)
November 07, 2004
Why the CIA Should Be Abolished
It seems no matter how much one learns about the foreign entanglements of the U.S. government, there is always so much more lurking beneath the surface. Chalmers Johnson, in a review of Steven Coll's Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and bin Laden, takes us through that secret history in some detail, demonstrating again that 9/11 and the current mess in Afghanistan are directly traceable to the actions of our own government. (This, of course, makes Johnson, Coll, and Yours Truly proud members of the "blame America first" crowd.)
Here's a sample:
It should by now be generally accepted that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on Christmas Eve 1979 was deliberately provoked by the United States. In his memoir published in 1996, the former CIA director Robert Gates made it clear that the American intelligence services began to aid the mujahidin guerrillas not after the Soviet invasion, but six months before it. In an interview two years later with Le Nouvel Observateur, President Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski proudly confirmed Gates' assertion. "According to the official version of history," Brzezinski said, "CIA aid to the mujahidin began during 1980, that's to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan. But the reality, kept secret until now, is completely different: on 3 July 1979 President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And on the same day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained that in my opinion this aid would lead to a Soviet military intervention."
Asked whether he in any way regretted these actions, Brzezinski replied: "Regret what? The secret operation was an excellent idea. It drew the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? On the day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, saying, in essence: 'We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War.'"
Nouvel Observateur: "And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?"
Brzezinski: "What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?"
Even though the demise of the Soviet Union owes more to Mikhail Gorbachev than to Afghanistan's partisans, Brzezinski certainly helped produce "agitated Muslims," and the consequences have been obvious ever since. Carter, Brzezinski and their successors in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, including Gates, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, and Colin Powell, all bear some responsibility for the 1.8 million Afghan casualties, 2.6 million refugees, and 10 million unexploded land-mines that followed from their decisions. They must also share the blame for the blowback that struck New York and Washington on September 11, 2001. After all, al-Qaida was an organization they helped create and arm.
Johnson concludes that "neither the Americans nor their victims in numerous Muslim and Third World countries will ever know peace until the Central Intelligence Agency has been abolished." On that point, as on so many others, he is absolutely correct.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:13 AM | Comments (0)
November 06, 2004
Your Tax Dollars at Work
The Air Force Research Lab's August "Teleportation Physics Report," posted earlier this week on the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) Web site, struck a raw nerve with physicists and critics of wasteful military spending.
In the report, author Eric Davis says psychic teleportation, moving yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real and can be controlled." The 88-page report also reviews a range of teleportation concepts and experiments:
• Quantum teleportation, a technique demonstrated in the last decade that shifts the characteristics, but not the location, of sub-atomic particles at great distances.
• Wormholes, a highly theoretical possibility whereby the intense gravitational field near black holes could rip open entrances to distant locales.
• Psychokinesis, or psychic teleportation. In support of the idea, the report cites UFO reports, Soviet and Chinese studies of psychics and U.S. military studies of spoon-bending phenomena.
Read the whole thing here.
Remember, though, that according to conservatives, anyone who dares oppose a dime of "defense" spending is a blame-America-first, left-wing pacifist who is "with the terrorists."
(Thanks to Antiwar.com for the link.)
Posted by Mike Tennant at 03:12 PM | Comments (0)
Striking the Root of Republican Tricks
Prolific Root Striker Anthony Gregory, who must spend 32 hours a day at the keyboard, has written another great column at LewRockwell.com. This is the one to send to your libertarian and conservative friends who genuinely believe that the GOP is on their side and that Bush was the lesser of two evils in the last election. Here's a sample:
One of the few reasons many libertarians think the Republicans are preferable is a matter of aesthetics. The Democrats are simply shrewder, slimier, and more dishonest.
That’s the greatest Republican lie of all. Here is a party that has enlarged government far more than the opposition, and yet is still perceived – even by those who should know better – as the party of smaller government. Here is a party that calls itself pro-life, even as it federally funds abortions and cherishes war. Here is a party that lies about weapons of mass destruction and aggressively bombs, invades and occupies a country that meant us no harm, and gets away with saying the media are too hard on them and that Clinton was the real liar. Here is a party that accepts every fundamental premise in the culture of statism and favors the continuation or amplification of every government program under the sun, and yet can get away with talking about how they take our side, not the side of the government they control. That’s shrewd. That’s slimy. That’s dishonest.
The Republicans have done too much damage, and no good, to the cause of liberty. They have made both right and left think that capitalism is the equivalent of imperialism, guaranteeing we will have neither true economic liberty nor peace, and marginalizing those of us who want both. These rabid elephants in sheep’s clothing have taken far too many libertarian lambs to the slaughter, all the while pulling our own rhetorical wool over their eyes.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 02:46 PM | Comments (0)
November 03, 2004
A Couple of Election Funnies
Here are a couple of comic strips that accurately depict the election.
- Real Life Adventures on the phony two-party system.
- Non Sequitir on the inspiration for the election process. (This one courtesy Roger Young.)
Enjoy!
Posted by Mike Tennant at 10:36 AM | Comments (0)
November 02, 2004
Keeping Cool on the Taxpayers' Tab
The New York Times reports:
In the spring of 2002, as the weather warmed up for the first time since the 9/11 attack, federal and state officials announced a plan to reimburse New Yorkers who replaced air-conditioners damaged by dust and debris from the collapse of the World Trade Center. People who bought air purifiers to rid their apartments of microscopic particles from the fallen buildings would receive government money as well.
Because so much time had passed and because the problem was believed to be so widespread, the government offered to pay without requiring proof that the recipients had actually been affected by the catastrophe. By May 2002, the program was even promising cash advances to people who could not afford air-conditioners or air purifiers, without requiring them to present receipts.
It was an honor system of sorts, one that relied on the belief that people shaken by a national tragedy would not turn around and use it for personal gain - in this case, a free air-conditioner as warm weather approached.
But a federal audit released yesterday suggests that that is exactly what happened.
About 62 percent of the people who were reimbursed for air-quality products were not eligible, based on a sample of 4,435 applicants. Given that as many as 225,000 people asked for money back, the finding could mean that roughly 140,000 people used the program improperly, according to Dennis White, an official who worked on the audit for the Department of Homeland Security. . . .
Some people who applied for - and received - money were miles from ground zero. And a program that had been budgeted for $15 million ballooned to more than $45 million.
Yet no matter how many examples of waste, fraud, and abuse of government programs exist, people will still persist in viewing each one as an isolated incident in need of "reform."
Posted by Mike Tennant at 11:16 AM | Comments (0)
November 01, 2004
You Needn't Be a Number
(by Nicholas Strakon) In view of tomorrow's ceremony, I cannot resist quoting
at some length something I once wrote:
Instead of voting on Tuesday, why not talk to someone you know about Liberty, Peace, and Justice? Why not discuss some honorable alternatives with a niece or nephew who is in danger of joining the military or the civilian bureaucracy? Why not spend an hour or two trying to come up with ways to avoid, elude, or
undermine leviathan, or cast it into disrepute?
Here's an idea. Practice remembering politicians' lies, contradictions, goofy promises, and failed programs so you can remind your neighbors of them two years from now when the pols try to sell the same confounded buncombe
again. Or write a hard-hitting letter to the editor: as an old newspaperman I can tell you that the letters section usually attracts a big readership. (Don't bother
writing "your" congressman, of course: for one thing, he actually belongs to someone else.)
If you're willing to deal with the state's court system and its lawyers even tangentially, donate a few bucks to some political prisoner's defense. Or help support his family while he's in the state's Rape Gulag. Give a few more simoleons to some forum devoted to Liberty, Peace, and Justice. Sit down on Tuesday and read some history -- some Robert Caro or some Walter Karp. Read a chapter of Thucydides. Study some free-market economics: get
your intellectual ammunition in order. Or get your real ammunition in order and head for the range, because a man who would be free must be acquainted with the means of self-defense.
Just don't vote. It's silly and it's ugly and it makes you small and weak. You may not be a free man, but by God you needn't be a number.
-- From the conclusion of my column "You are not a number!
=Or,= Once again I'm voting for rain," November 3, 2002,
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/lights123.htm.
Posted by Rob at 01:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Strike the Funny Bone
On a lighter note, enjoy this Sunday's Pardon My Planet comic strip.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:49 AM | Comments (0)
Some Articles From the "In" Bin (Laden)
Some interesting links from Antiwar.com on the bin Laden tape:
- Justin Raimondo's excellent column, "The Truth Hurts"
- A story from the AP that the State Department tried to stop al-Jazeera from airing the tape, which seems to indicate that the administration didn't view it as a positive, despite the spinning of the GOP's media mouthpieces
- A story from the Weekend Australian which points out that just a week ago, Dick Cheney said, "You'll notice there haven't been any bin Laden tapes on the air . . . we think he's probably in a deep hole some place, in hiding." Oops.
Posted by Mike Tennant at 09:23 AM | Comments (0)