Saturday, March 12, 2005



Iran is willing to co-operate to show the world it is not trying to make nuclear weapons, the country's president said Saturday as he faced increasing pressure from the United States and Europe over the Iranian nuclear program. The comments by Iranian President Mohammad Khatami came one day after the U.S. government softened its stance on Iran's nuclear program and agreed to support a European plan offering economic incentives to Tehran to give up any weapons ambitions. We are ready to co-operate with the world to give more certainty that Iran is not moving toward the creation of nuclear arms," Khatami said through an interpreter.

This is just another ploy. Iran is merely sending out Khatami - its "good cop" - to assuage the international community and give Putin some cover.

I am SURE that Bush - who wouldn't take crap from Arafat (even though it TOTALLY pissed off the EU, and who has now quarantined the Irish terrorist -- the Irish Arafat: Gerry Adams) - ain't falling for this Iranian crap.

We'll probably have to preemptively destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, and we'll probably do it ASAP: which means after the Lebanese elections.

Between now and then we'll focus on Lebanon, Syria, and Hizballah (and the Iranians in Lebanon). And we'll also get our ducks in a row for a punitive UNSC against Iran. Bolton will handle that - (very nicely, thank you) - and it will serve as a warm up for another tough UNSCR against North Korea later in the year.

When the anti-Iranian UNSCR comes up for a vote, Putin will be forced to either stand with us, or veto it and stand with Iran. I guess he will abstain. As will China.

Stay tuned.


Iranian officials have entirely dismissed the latest USA/EU efforts:


"The problem is that the Europeans should give up their illogical stance," Sirus Naseri, a senior member of Iran's nuclear negotiating team, told state television. "What we have said is that our fuel production will continue." But Washington and the EU say the only acceptable guarantee is for Iran to scrap its nuclear fuel production plans altogether and rely on the supply of reactor fuel from abroad. Hassan Rohani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, said a key Iran-EU meeting would be held in Paris on March 23. "It will be a very important session and we hope to reach an acceptable conclusion through legal and diplomatic means," the Jomhuri-ye Eslami newspaper quoted him as saying. "The continuation of the talks between Iran and Europe will depend on the March 23 meeting."

It seems to me that after talks are halted, we will then have to TRY to get a UNSCR against Iran (over Putin's veto). This will likely happen in the first two weeks of April. WHAT WILL HAPPEN AFTER THAT?! There's more below on that, so scroll down, and STAY TUNED!



More than a year after the collapse of his presidential campaign, the fight over public access to Howard Dean's gubernatorial records goes before the state's high court next week.The state is appealing a ruling from Superior Court Judge Alan Cook in February of last year saying that 86 boxes of records sealed by Dean when he left office in 2003 are presumed to be open. Cook ordered that Dean and the state had to identify each of the hundreds of thousands of documents in the boxes and say why each should be covered by executive privilege.
The only likely reason that Dean would want these papers sealed for TEN YEARS is because he knows there's stuff in'em he thinks would seriously damage him politically.

If the Vermont high court does what it should, then Dean will be damaged, and along with him the DNC! More HERE and HERE.

Stay tuned!

Friday, March 11, 2005


By having the USA join in with the Europeans - and by sweetening the "incentive pot" - the Bush Administration is, IN EFFECT, giving Iran ONE LAST CHANCE.

CHENEY said Friday that if Iran doesn't live up to its "international obligations to forego a nuclear program, then obviously we'll have to take stronger action."

And also, just importantly, this concerted effort means that the European leaders will each have an "out" with their electorates: they'll be able to say that there was NO RUSH TO THE UNSC - or to preemptive military action, if-and-when that becomes necessary.

In other words, now the ball is back in Iran's court, AND THE STAKES ARE HIGHER AND CLEARER: Cooperate now or the UNSC will order serious international sanctions.

I still firmly believe that Putin MUST BE BROUGHT INTO LINE in this matter. The Europeans and Bush must tell Putin to cancel - or at least SUSPEND - Russia's nuclear contracts with Iran, or Russia will be banished from the G8, or worse.

ONE OTHER POINT: This proves - ONCE AGAIN - that Bush is not a unilaterialist who prefers military force. Too bad the loony Left will NEVER acknowledge that!


"Reuters" and CNN and FT already report that Iran is signaling that they will NOT do what the EU and the USA wants them to do - (or that they are attempting a variation on Saddam's and Kim's cheat-and-retreat tactics).
The ball is back in the EU's court.

I expect that AFTER Bolton is confirmed, that the matter will be brought up to the UNSC, and that the UNSC will authorize international sanctions - UNLESS Russia vetoes it! If Russia vetoes it, then I expect that the USA will preemptively destroy ALL of Iran's nuclear sites ASAP with a sustained cruise missile attack. The question is: "WHEN?"

In the coming weeks, Syria and Hizballah will attempt to distract the USA and the EU and the UNSC. And we might have to deal with Syria first - before we launch a military attack against Iran. And the Lebanon situation might not come to head until MAY- when Lebanon holds elections.

That might give Iran until June - but certainly something definitive must happen not later than the autumn.

If Putin cancels Russia's nuclear contracts with Iran, and abstains on the UNSC amendment, then we might give sanctions a chance to work - a year, maybe: A year of sanctions might help Iran's democracy movement, and might push Iran toward TRUE democracy. ALSO: while the sanctions against Iran are in effect we might turn outn attention to North Korea.

Stay tuned.


ANWR is 16 MILLION acres. That's big.

The footprint for the STATE OF THE ART, WORLD-CLASS proposed oil drilling facility in ANWR is 2,000 acres. That's sounds big, but it isn't as big as it sounds. That's 1/8000ths of ANWR'S total area!

PUT IT INTO PERSPECTIVE: The NEVERLAND RANCH - Michael Jackson's ranch in California is 2744 acres - that's about 40% BIGGER than the proposed oil facility. (And what allegedly goes on in Neverland is more disgusting than what goes on in any an oil facility anywhere!)

By the way: Canada - our #1 foreign source for oil - currently extracts oil from an area in Canada right near ANWR, and just like ANWR - with the approval of the Native Americans who live there. If they can do it safely, so can Americans! ALSO: if Norwegians and Brits can safely extract oil from the dangerous North Sea, then we Americans can certainly extract oil safely from good old terra-firma!

And to those who claim that the ONE MILLION BARRELS P/D that ANWR might produce is a paltry amount which not worth the risk I say: When Iraq's oil production went UP to one-million barrels it was an important and positive milestone for Iraq and the global oil markets. Now, Iraq produces 2 million barrels a day. If ANWR produces 50% of what Iraq produces, then I'd say we were doing ALL RIGHT! The U.S. Geological Survey, updated May 2000, estimated that the area might contain up to 16 billion barrels of oil — five years of U.S. imports. That's nothing to sneeze at!

THEREFORE: Opposition to drilling in ANWR is irrational. Which is probably why it fits right in with Leftist policies.

More HERE (facts from the DOI), and HERE (why Canadian Native Americans favor drilling for oil in Canada, but oppose it in the USA).

WELCOME VIKINGPUNDIT READERS! And if your not one yet, you should be - at least twice a day!

**** UPDATE 3/14 --- MORE HERE.


If they were Republicans, that would've been the first thing in ALL the news reports!

I have the feeling that these two corrupt politicians aren't worried about being disenfranchised (after they're convicted): they KNOW that their party wants CONVICTED FELONS to vote!

NOW: when will prosecutors indict Democrats in Philly and Minnesota and Wisconsin and Washington for doing what these two Dems did in Orlando?!?!?!?!?

WELCOME BETSY'S PAGE READERS! And if you don't read it at least three times daily your missing one of the best news round-ups with commentary in the entire blogosphere!

BTW: maybe we should get a blogspheric pool going: guess how many days will go by before the MSM reports the fact that some Democrats have been indicted for voter fraud?

Thursday, March 10, 2005



Pakistan has confirmed that the former head of its nuclear weapons programme, AQ Khan, gave centrifuges for enriching uranium to Iran. It is the first time Pakistani officials have publicised details of what nuclear materials the disgraced scientist passed on to Iran. Information minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told the BBC's Urdu service that "a few" centrifuges were involved.

This should be the last straw, as far as BOTH Putin and Iran are concerned: it's time to issue both ultimatums:

To Putin we should say, "Cancel all nuclear contracts, or else suffer expulsion from G8, and international trade sanctions." If he refuses, well... then he would have made clear to all whose side he's really on.

To the mullah-tyrants in Iran we should say, "Dismantle all non-civilian nuclear sites, handover all dual use nuclear equipment and all centrifuges, and allow us to inspect anywhere/anytime (because you have now been caught LYING twice about your nuclear programs) or we will destroy all your nuclear sites - civilian and non-civilian, and destroy your navy and your air force with a sustained cruise missile attack that will make Operation Desert Fox - (which Clinton waged for 10 days against Saddam in 1998 - WITHOUT Congressional, NATO, or UNSC approval) - look like a picnic. We only give the mullah-tyrants as much time as it takes to stage all necessary assets to attack them.

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

LEBANON'S FORMER PM: Hizballah rally a HOAX!

FROM JIHAD WATCH: An astounding story from WND (thanks to Teri) about this rally:

JERUSALEM – The giant Hezbollah rally that drew nearly half a million purported supporters of Syria's occupation of Lebanon actually was a staged hoax with non-Lebanese citizens, Syrian workers, students and municipal employees coerced into joining the protest, former Lebanese Prime Minister Michel Aoun told WorldNetDaily in an exclusive interview this morning. "Yesterday's huge protest calling for Syria to stay made it look to the world like a large segment of the Lebanese population actually wants to live under Syrian occupation," said Aoun, speaking to WND from Paris. "But the protest wasn't what it appeared to be. It was an elaborately staged affair."


UPDATE: I saw a report on CNN filed by Brent Sadler - their Beirut bureau chief - who edited-in clips from alJazeera which he said were interviews with some of the MANY Syrians who were BUSED IN FOR THE HIZBALLAH RALLY!

When CNN posts a written version of this on-line, I'll post a link to it. (BTW: do you think that CNN is playing footsy with Hizballah in order to protect their Beirut bureau - the way they ADMITTED they did with Saddam to protect their Baghdad bureau? Just asking...)

UPDATE #2: This just in from the AP -

The group [Hizballah] mobilized its supporters in the heavily Shiite regions of the Bekaa and the south, with loudspeakers urging followers to travel to Beirut for the protest. The leading Beirut daily An-Nahar, which has been critical of Syria, reported that convoys of Syrians were being brought across the border in buses to take part but that could not be confirmed.Opposition leaders, who have been courting Hezbollah's support in their effort to oust Syrian troops, accused Lebanese intelligence agents of exercising pressure on municipalities, public schools and institutions to drive the numbers up.

Stay tuned! Oh, before I sign off, there's this: some estimates (one used in the AP report cited above, as a matter of fact) now put the crowd at around ONLY 200,000 - NOT a very good figure considering how many Syrians and Palestinian Arabs were there!


CARACAS: Venezuela is looking to accelerate talks with France's Total for a $5 billion heavy crude upgrading project, President Hugo Chavez said Wednesday. "We've given the green light..." said Chavez, following a meeting with Total President Thierry Desmarest in Paris. ... Total is a partner with Petroleos de Venezuela. ... Total invested $5 billion in Venezuela from 1998 through 2004, mainly in the Sincor project. Total also produces natural gas at the Yucal Placer field. The company plans to invest $150 million in Venezuela in 2005, mainly at Yucal Placer, but expects outlays to pick up in the coming years as new projects are approved. Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, hopes to nearly double crude oil production to 5 million b/d by 2009 with help from private companies.

The French did the same thing with another anti-American tyrant: Saddam. C'est la vie, I guess. After all, this is the entire M.O. and raison d'etre of France's foreign policy: exploit anti-American/anti-democratic regimes, and move in where the USA moves out.


The Bush Doctrine has now been officially extended to Northern Ireland.

On Tuesday, the IRA said it had offered to shoot the people [IRA members] it says killed the 33-year-old [Belfast man Robert McCartney] after a row in a city centre bar on 30 January. His family has rejected the offer. Hugh Orde said he had "no doubt" the IRA meant they would kill the men. Hugh Orde said IRA was offering to kill suspects. "This is an organisation theoretically on ceasefire. This is an organisation that is still prepared to kill people now from its own community"... Prime Minister Tony Blair told the House of Commons the IRA statement was "extraordinary". "It was quite an extraordinary thing to say. It cannot be in any shape or form justified," Mr Blair said. Irish Premier Bertie Ahern said the IRA statement was "extraordinary and horrific".

The US Special Envoy to Northern Ireland, Mitchell Reiss, said it was "time for the IRA to go out of business". Mr Reiss added: "It's time for Sinn Fein to be able to say explicitly, without ambiguity, without ambivalence, that criminality will not be tolerated."

CNN had the MONEY QUOTE: [Reiss to Sinn Fein],"You can't sign up for the rule of law a la carte."

Mexican Border and Neojihadist Terror

Jihad Watch has a post on the Mexican border linking to an AP article: "WASHINGTON (AP) - FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress on Tuesday that people from countries with ties to al-Qaida have crossed into the United States from Mexico, using false identities."

I blogged on this huge risk - one that the Mexican government is compounding- HERE on 2/14 and HERE on 2/17 .


And Iran PROVES that the Bush Doctrine is CORRECT!

HOW? WHY? Because, IF Iran had a REAL democracy, then the mullahs would be THROWN OUT - (or maybe even HUNG FROM LAMPOSTS!).

Most people EVERYWHERE want liberty and prosperity and peace and the rule of law - as enforced by consensually elected representatives.

When elected officials fail to deliver the goods, when their people suffer: they get tossed from office.

The neojihadist mullahs in Iran are no better than that Confucionary Stalinist in North Korea: they all squash their people under suffocating tyranny as they squander their people's wealth on international terror and WMD programs.

Most of the Iranian and Syrian and North Korean people - who are no different than you or me - want to end their suffering and end the tyranny which is its cause. And we should help them: because they are our brothers and sisters (and deserve freedom as much as we do), and because it will make us safer. When they are free and democratic they will focus on improving their own lives and on holding their own leaders to account - directly. They won't need to mess with us.

Tuesday, March 08, 2005


I've already heard many Lefties argue that Arafat's death and Hariri's assassination were MAJOR factors in the current wave of democracy in the Middle East - and NOT the Bush Doctrine or the Iraq War.

I guess the Lefties believe that Qadafy had a premonition that Arafat was gonna die, and that Assad MISSPOKE when he said - in his speech to his "parliament" - that he "was not another Saddam." And that Mubarak couldn't care less if the US Secretary of State refused to visit him to officially protest the lack of permissable political dissent in Egypt, and that Musharraf was just aching to send 70,000 troops to the lawless tribal areas. And that ... well, you get the idea!

The best response to this Left-wing nonsense, this delusionally dumb deluge of Democrat denial: "YEAH, RIGHT!"


Frist holds all the cards in the current judicial nominee Senate confirmation battle; Frist can void the Senate filibuster rule, and bring all of Bush's nominees to the floor for an up-or-down vote - as the Constitution specified.

Frist's move would force the Democrats retaliate by shutting-down the Senate - (something that would probably work as well for them as shutting down the federal government did for Gingrich - in other words: it would be a disaster for the Democrats, and a win for the GOP -- A DOUBLE WIN, since they'd get the president's nominees confirmed, too).

Frist seems afraid to void the Senate rule. Perhaps he thinks it could hurt his chances at being elected president in 2008?

I suggest that Frist be more concerned about how "NOT confronting the Democrats" will make him seem to those of us who voted for Bush in 2004. In other words: if Frist cannot even stand up to the Senate Democrats, then how can ANYBODY expect him to stand up to al Qaeda, or the French and the UN or the Left-wing dominated MSM?!

Mr. Leader, how you handle this crisis will show us your what your made of! Do you have what it takes to BE president? If you cave into the Democrats, then I believe YOU DO NOT!

Hizballah's "Men Only" Demonstration

****UPDATED**** 3/9/05**** SEE BELOW****

What does it say about the neojihadists that their demonstration in Beirut today was a man-only affair?

YUP: that's right: While watching news reports on TV and looking at jpegs at blogs, I couldn't help but notice a HUGE difference between the two sides in Lebanon: on the one hand, the anti-Syria demonstrations in Beirut were obviously, totally PLURALISTIC: men and women; Christians, Druze, and Sunni; and people of all ages; and they were all HAPPILY proclaiming their the occupation of their country by the fear-mongering forces of anger and repression. On the other hand, today's Hizballah demonstration was huge, but exclusively male - and angry looking; even their speakers sounded angry - ESPECIALLY Nasrallah.

I think this says a lot about each side - EVERYTHING, in fact.

Besides explicitly demonstrating their beliefs, each side implicitly demonstrated what kind of nation they would engender: the anti-Syrian side showed that they embody pluralism and democracy - and even "the pursuit of happiness." Hizballah showed that they are sexist, xenophobic, and violent-at-heart. This is a classic "Good versus Evil" match-up, and it's why we must be willing to support the anti-Syrian side with EVERYTHING we got!

AND ANOTHER THING: Were all those angry pro-Syrian men Lebanese?

I find that very VERY hard to believe. HERE'S WHY: news agencies estimated the Hizballah crowd at nearly one MILLION people - THAT'S 25% of Lebanon's population! And since it was a MALE ONLY crowd, that would mean that the total pro-Hizballah population (which after all - like the general population - include an equal amount of women) would account for 50% of the nation's population!

Well, that's MORE than the number of Lebanese Shia! YUP: according to the CIA, Lebanon has about 4 million people, of which only 35% are Shia. If half are male, then there are only 500,000 male Lebanese Shia - which means that maybe HALF of the pro-Syria, pro-Hizballah demonstrators WERE NON-LEBANESE - and were either Palestinian Arabs from the UN run refugee camps, or Syrians!

THEREFORE, I think ONE MUST CONCLUDE that many MANY MANY of the Hizballah men demonstrating were Syrian - or Palestinian Arabs from the UN refugee camps. (AT LEAST HALF!)

That's ANOTHER reason we must support the pluralistic, pro-democracy - LEBANESE side over the pro-Syrian forces!

UPDATE: Welcome ROGER L. SIMON readers! And if you're not one yet - YOU SHOULD BE - - EVERYDAY! And... WELCOME INSTAPUNDIT READERS! Glenn has other links on this issue - including one to a new AP story that suggests some cross-border busing - CHECK IT OUT! UPDATE #2: Welcome all you folks from NRO's The Corner - and thanks KJ! Please y'all check out a few other posts!

UPDATE #3: a few astute commenters - and a more recently filed AP report (cited above in the INSTAPUNDIT link) - relate that perhaps the crowd was ONLY HALF as big as earlier reports: ONLY 500,000 (and NOT 1 MIllion). Further, these more recently filed reports state that the crowd was largely segregated by gender; this may account for the fact that many MANY videos and MOST still photos showed only males.

This adjusts BUT DOES NOT NEGATE the thrust of my argument that: (1) Hizballah's crowd was mostly male; (2) that it was mostly VERY angry; (3) that its staging reveals that Hizballah is very sexist/gender-biased; (4) and that they may have coerced many people to attend. If there were 500,000 Lebanese Shias there, then it was nearly 50% of ALL the Shias in Lebanon! I believe that this is simply NOT LIKELY; therefore, I believe non-Lebanese people made up much of the Hizballah crowd.

Bottom-line: Commies Stalin and Mao got huge crowds. Commie Kim Jong Il still does. These leaders - like Nasrallah I suspect - made their people afraid NOT to show up and wave the flag. Which is another reason why I have more respect for the Christian, Druze and Sunni Lebanese who demontrate each day in Beirut's Martyr's Square: they show up and demonstrate at great peril. Whereas, I suspect that many of those in the Hizballah crowd were people who (like Stalin's and Mao's and Kim's tryannized people) were afraid NOT to demonstrate!

UPDATE: Welcome Dean Esmay readers! And also - welcome leftwing readers of ANTIWARBLOG . (That's right: those Lefties who THINK they're anti-war - but who're REALLY ON THE OTHER SIDE - have linked to this post! I'm glad they did; they are WELCOME to visit today and everyday and to leave comments AS LONG AS THEY ARE POLITE. Dialog is good, and openness to the other side is often an antedote to propaganda; in other words: maybe a few of them will learn something).

****UPDATE - From Jihad Watch:

The giant Hezbollah rally that drew nearly half a million purported supporters of Syria's occupation of Lebanon actually was a staged hoax with non-Lebanese citizens, Syrian workers, students and municipal employees coerced into joining the protest, former Lebanese Prime Minister Michel Aoun told WorldNetDaily in an exclusive interview this morning. "Yesterday's huge protest calling for Syria to stay made it look to the world like a large segment of the Lebanese population actually wants to live under Syrian occupation," said Aoun, speaking to WND from Paris. "But the protest wasn't what it appeared to be. It was an elaborately staged affair."

UPDATE - 3/10: Welcome PUBLIUS PUNDIT readers - and if your not one... YOU SHOULD BE; really: Publius does some AMAZING round-up on very topical events. One of the Best sites around! The above link will take you to his LEBANON round-up. Check it out and then check out the rest. That's an order!

UPDATE 3/12: Welcome to the intrepid and delusional loony-leftie readers of Tiny Revolution. Here's a special note just for you DU-type DOUBTERS -


"Many of the people were bused in from Syria and parts of Lebanon that are under Syrian control, reports CBS News' Edward Yeranian. "

Monday, March 07, 2005


There are reports that Italy paid $6 MILLION to get the communist reporter released. That's a HUGE WINDFALL for the terrorists - ESPECIALLY now.

And, that's HUGE motivation for this "kidnapping" and for future ones.

DRUDGE is also linking to a report from the WASH TIMES that asserts that the Italians kept the whole mission a SECRET - NO WONDER they got shot at as they SPED toward a checkpoint!



I just watched C-SPAN and saw Condi announce that John Bolton will become our next UN Ambassador, which is GREAT! He's a "no BS" neocon in the tradition of our two best previous UN Ambassadors: Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Daniel P. Moynihan. He'll be a GREAT UN Ambassador at an especially critical time: In the coming weeks, Syria and Iran and North Korea each have dates with the UNSC and DESTINY!


Powerline has another must read post on the current political divide in America. The post suggests that the divide is sociological; it relates articles and a book by NYTIMES columnist David Brooks, and a book by David Lebedoff.

Pundits - like Brooks and Lebedoff and Powerline's Hindera - who claim that geography or sociology determine which side of the political divide one is one ARE WRONG. And I am proof of it - because I have crossed the divide. My crossing-over was gradual and predates 9/11; (many MANY others crossed the divide AFTER 9/11 - hence the term "9/11 Democrat. For these people, 9/11 was a life-changing/EYE-OPENING event which changed their entire worldview).

The fact that people move across the divide without changing membership in any sociological groups (wheter elite or plebe or managerial or whatever) proves that the change is not sociological.

Here's my case: I was a Leftie from the 1960's until the Fall of the Wall; (my gradual drift to the center actually began from McGovern's massive defeat - which led me to believe that, (since the lesser of two evils is almost always a good choice), Democrats had to nominate more moderate politicians than McGovern to get, hold, and use power effectively. After the Fall of the Wall and the collapse of OSLO, I looked back and had to admit that Reagan and Thatcher (and Netanyahu and Sharon) had been right all along. I don't feel as if admitting that Reagan was right makes me suddenly "un-educated" - it makes me intellectually honest, and more commited to results than ideology.

Undeniably, in the USA there IS a great Left versus Right divide. The two things which are the BEST predictors of which side of the divide one is on are not sociological; they are better described as philosophical or metaphysical or ideological. They are: (1) how one feels about universalism versus relativism in the moral realm; and (2) how ones feels about individualism versus statism.

Those on the Left are relativists who believe in a strong state, and believe that individuals are defined by which groups they belong to. Those on the Right are universalists who believe that each person is sovereign over himself, and that the State derives its just powers ONLY from the consent of individuals. (This is why Leftists call Right-wingers "selfish.")

Hayek argued - and Thatcher and Reagan (and Teng Xiao Ping in China and Singh in India) proved - that Statism is the "road the serfdom," and that the Free Market is not only the most moral system, but the most efficient, creative and productive one, too.

Eventually, Leftists will be forced to admit this is as true in pension/retirement and health markets as it is in every other market. When that happens their jig is up. (Already sensing that their jig will be up soon, many of the Leftists are already fighting tooth and nail - deperately staving off having to admit they were wrong about everything either by using vicious attacks - as in "Bush is Hitler" or "BUSH LIED!"- or by just putting their head in the sand and denying reality - as when they deny that captialism saved China or that toppling Iraq is causing a klatogenetic explosion of democracy in the Middle East - just as the neocons said it could).

The demographic arguments - that Brooks and Lebedoff and Hindera make - are hollow compared to the ideological battle between what has failed (Leftist policies) and what is working (Rightist policies)!

That more Leftists live in cities - (Blue America is largely urban) - is partly a vestige of Democratic coalition politics and the welfare state - and partly a result of the fact that for too long the GOP never battled for voters in those hardcore Leftist urban centers. As the GOP continues to broaden its appeal to Hispanics and Blacks and Jews - (traditional city-dwellers and, generationally, core members of the Democratic coalition) - this will change.

Also: now that the "McGovern Wing" of the party has once again reasserted control of the party apparatus - (making the more centrist Clinton era seem more like an aberration when copmpared to the post-LBJ party) - they will drive out many of the remaining centrists - either to the GOP or or to official independence. And as a result, the sociological indicators will change - and be less predictive than they seem now.

In addition, as people like David Horowitz (with the unintended help of "Ward Churchillians") wrestle away the control of the Academy from the Leftists, fewer of our youngsters will be brain-washed into Leftist, anti-West, anti-traditional family, anti-American, morally relativist ideologies, (a Leftist program that - up until now - has been in full swing since the 1960's and the advent of "the counter-culture").

And as the Bush Doctrine is vindicated, more Leftists will be forced either to admit they were wrong - or condemn themselves to inane insignificance - the Loony Left.

When all this happens - (when the old Democratic coaliton splinters; when the Leftist Dems drive the rest of the Centrist Dems out of the party; when the Academy is liberated from Leftist control; and when the Middle East is more fully democratized) - the Left will simply fade away, vanish with a whimper - leaving an embarrassing question to posterity: "how could ANYONE have EVER really bought that Leftist CRAP anyhow!"

THIS NEEDS REITERATING: One of the major reasons many educated people "bought that crap" and became are Leftists is that they were BRAINWASHED BY THE LEFTIST ACADEMY. This is NOT hyperbole; it is fact. Here is an example: the "political spectrum" that we were all taught in the Academy places Communism on the Left and Fascism on the Right. BUT THIS IS FALSE. Need proof!? Where do you put ANARCHISM in that spectrum!? NO WHERE!

The TRUE poltical spectrum places communism and fascism on the extreme Left, and anarchism on the extreme Right, and mixed systems in the middle; (the USA system goes just Right of center and the Scandinaviam system goes just Left of center). Not only is this LOGICAL (first, because there is a proper place for anarchism, and second because it allows for a simple continuum of rights from MOST STATIST on the Left, to MOST INDIVIDUALIST/LIBERTARIAN on the Right), but it is HISTORICALLY ACCURATE: Mussolini and Hitler were BOTH SOCIALISTS - as were LENIN AND STALIN. Hilter was a National Socialist (= NAZI) who was ANTI-MARXIST; Mussolini was also a national socialist; the Russians were Marxists. They each had more in common with each other than with FDR or Churchill OR EVEN CHAMBERLAIN! Stalin and Trotsky and Hitler were all socialists - who hated each other as much as they LOVED the state and sought to get inidividuals to subordinate their personal liberty to the will of the state (as determined by an elite).

What does this have to do with BRAIN-WASHING!?!?!? EVERYTHING! The false spectrum was created by the Leftist Academy to make Marxism seem more like the IDEOLOGICAL OPPOSITE and enemy of Hitler and to have more in common with FDR than it did with Hitler - which is COMPLETELY FALSE.

There is another major LIE being foisted on to the students in the academy: that Gorbachev was more responsible for the Fall of the Wall than Reagan. And the reason for this lie is the same as the reason for thie other lie: to protect their FAILED Leftist ideology from utter disrepute.

Fortunately, the truth will win. As will markets that function. And, as will the universal human desire for liberty. Therefore, the Right will win, too.

ENDNOTE: because of the tenure-system, the Academy has become a closed system without the checks-and-balances necessary to prevent it (or any other system) from being taken over one group - and those who "play ball" with that group. This happens in ALL closed systems and is the basic reason why all system need checks-and-balances. Lack of checks-and-balances is also why the Catholic priesthood in America is such a mess. Opening up the Academy to Conservatives and the Catholic priesthood to married men will not only bring each system a balance of perspectives, but a natural and much needed check-and-balance.

ADDENDUM: There's another simple reason why I know that a sociological explanation isn't the best: it's too Marxist; it seeks to explain how individuals think by putting them into heuristic groups - managerial; urban; black; religious; rural - these are all epistemological groups that do not really exist; they have no ontological veracity. NEED PROOF?! A person is a member of many MANY groups/classes; how that person sees himself AT ANY GIVEN TIME is too complex for any prediction. During elections, politicians and pundits often want a people to see themselves - identify themselves - as mostly members of one group over the others - if they think it will help their candidate - but that doesn't make people more one thing or another. Take me as an example, again: I am an urban, Jewish, registered Democrat, graduate school educated person, in the Arts. And I voted BUSH! Like I wrote above: neither the Brooks, Lebedoff or Hindera dichotomies can explain me.

I simply argue that the current political divide is the result of the effects of the persistent bias in certain specific institutions, and the fact this bias is Leftist. (And I didn't even mention the MSM!) These institutions are gradually opening up to a plurality of views - and as a result the Left is losing their monopoly - and more and more people are seeing the Light, and the Left will be left in the shadows... Still Need proof? Look at Congress: it's been getting steadily more Right-wing since 1980. Want more proof? Only centrist southern Democrats have won the presiency since 1964! YUP: The country has been moving Right since at least 1980. And if the Democrat Party moves Left - as they seem to be - they will simply fall off the table, and into the dustbin of history. Where they'll belong.

Sunday, March 06, 2005


UPDATE - 3/8: Welcome CHRENKOFF readers (and if you're not one yet YOU SHOULD BE - EVERYDAY! And while you're here, please check out a few other posts.

UPI: ALGIERS, Algeria, March 5 :

Top Syrian official said Saturday the United States asked Syria to disarm the Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah guerilla organization. Syrian Information Minister Mehdi Dakhlallah told the government-run Algerian Radio that Washington asked Syria "for many things that have nothing to do with international peace, demanding things we have nothing to do with like disarming the Lebanese resistance," in clear reference to Hezbollah. He insisted this was a purely Lebanese issue and had nothing to do with Syria.

In my opinion, this means that ONLY if Syria pulls out ALL of its forces - military and secret police - can they get "off the hook" for this demand. Which is why it was made: it ramps up the pressure on Syria to withdraw - even if it means they abandon Hizballah (leaving it only a client of Iran).

If Assad withdraws (which - due to the Bush Doctrine - is now LIKELY), then I PREDICT that the Bush Administration will make the following two NEW demands: (a) that Hizballah be kept off the ballot of the impending Lebanese election UNLESS they disarm; (b) that if Hizballah refuses to disarm VOLUNTARILY, that any new Lebanese government forcibly disarms them.

These two demands will be made possible IF AND ONLY IF France and the UK allow the EU and the UN to classify Hizballah as an international terrorist organization - which now, ACCORDING TO THIS REPORT seems likely.

In addition, according to this report from HAARETZ, Israel is now demanding that IRANIAN MILITARY FORCES EVACUATE LEBANON:

Israel's official position is that the Syrian forces deployed in Lebanon are not the only foreign army in that country. Despite the fact that the Syrian force is a large one, and includes numerous units and an extensive intelligence set-up, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards play a significant and negative military role in Lebanon - a role that undermines Lebanese sovereignty.

I predict that (with the help of France - YUP FRANCE, believe it or not) the UNSC will reiterate the demand (already contained within UNSC #1559) that Iran voluntarily remove their forces from Lebanon. And that Iran will do so.

(If Iran won't withdraw NOW, then this will mean MORE SEVERE UNSC SANCTIONS - followed by WAR if Iran continues to keep the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Lebanon AFTER the Lebanese elections. Lebanon will try to expel them, and this could foment another WAR in Lebanon - only this time the Druze, Christians, and Sunnis will have US Joint Forces support against the Shias and the Iranian backed Hizballah, so this time around, the Shia/Iran strongholds will be destroyed much in the way Fallujah was - and just as quickly.)

The strategy behind these moves is CLEAR: By clearing out Lebanon, BUSH would accomplish TWO HUGE THINGS: (1) improve the chances of a peaceful settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs - IMMENSELY; and (2) considerably weaken both Syria and Iran - by hemming them in even more than they are now (because of the presence of USA forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean).

These two accomplishments - a comprehensive Israeli-Arab peace settlement (sans Syria), and further isolation of Syria and Iran - will strengthen our diplomatic efforts at regime change in both Syria and Iran.

Which is why I predict ORANGE REVOLUTIONS in Syria AND Iran by next autumn - with or without war.


"By the way, when's the next Not In Our Name rally? How about this Saturday? Millions of NIONists can flood into the centers of San Francisco, New York, Brussels and Paris to proclaim to folks in Iraq and Lebanon and Egypt and Syria and Jordan and Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority that all the changes under way in the region are most certainly Not In Their Name. "