Saturday, February 05, 2005


Professor Ward Churchill said some awful stupid things. Anti-American things. For a long time, his stupidity and evilness got a pass from the "academy" and the Old Media.

The blogosphere did not give him a pass, though, and finally Churchill's evil stupidity is receiving the treatment it always deserved: revulsion, ridicule and contempt.

But he can't be fired for saying what he said.

HE CAN be fired for lying and claiming he was an American Indian when he was NOT. (It's a violation of the basic academic Honor Code, and probably invalidates his employment contract with the state of Colorado). He should be fired for this lie - at once.

More HERE from Steven Taylor of POLIBLOGGER - with LOTTSA LINKS!



Israeli security officials said on Saturday that it appears the Palestinian Authority is continuing with the same "revolving door" policy from the past when it would arrest suspects involved in terror against Israel but release them shortly after. "It is a shame that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has not yet acted on the ground to disarm terror organizations and crackdown on terror," a security official said. Palestinian security forces on Saturday briefly arrested three leaders of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which claimed responsibility for a recent attack that lightly wounded two Israeli soldiers. The arrests marked the first such detentions since Mahmoud Abbas was elected Palestinian Authority chairman last month; however, the three were released five hours after they were arrested, party members said.

If Abbas thinks that Israel will accept sham arrests and phony police deployments than he - and the rest of the PA - is in for a rude awakening. This is the LAST chance the Palestinian Arabs have for a NEGOTIATED settlement; if they blow this then Israel will separate unilaterally: at a pace and to boundaries of its own choosing - which is sure to be better for Israelis and worse for Arabs. IOW: this is the last chance for the Palestinian Arabs to have a say in their future. If they abdicate to the neojihadist terrorists then they will lose their nascent democracy and any say in their own future. I think this will pan out in a matter of MONTHS - BEFORE summer. Stay tuned.

"Culture of Life" expanding

FNS (AP): Couple Could Sue Over Discarded Embryo

CHICAGO — A couple whose frozen embryo was accidentally destroyed at a fertility clinic (search) has the right in Illinois to file a wrongful-death lawsuit, a judge has ruled in a case that some legal experts say could have implications in the debate over embryonic stem cell research. In an opinion issued Friday, Cook County Judge Jeffrey Lawrence (search) said "a pre-embryo is a 'human being' ... whether or not it is implanted in its mother's womb." He said the couple is as entitled to seek compensation as any parents whose child has been killed.

Coming on the heels of the Peterson case - in which he was convicted of murdering his own unborn child (as well as his wife) - this indicates to me that MORE AND MORE he public is beginning to accept that a human life begins at CONCEPTION. (Which should be self-evident since what else is being "CONCEIVED" if not a life!?)

As Bush has often argued, abortion will become a thing of the past when the culture changes, when attitudes change; then unwanted pregnancies will go to term - and the baby be put up for adoption, or - sometime in the future - all UNWANTED pregnancies will end either with adoption or an "EMBRYO TRANSPLANT" which would remove the emryo from the woman who doesn't want it, and transplant it into the womb of a woman who DOES want it. (God, I wish there were some scientist-doctors working on this! After all, abortion is a bad solution to an unwanted pregnancy: just because one woman doesn't want the baby/embryo/fetus doesn't mean that another woman wouldn't want it. IN OTHER WORDS: science should find a way to allow a pregnancy to be terminated WITHOUT terminating the fetus, but by transferring the fetus to a woman who might want to be pregnant but who is unable to CONCEIVE. This would transform the situation from "win-lose" into "win-win" and MOOT the abortion debate forever - because it's a moral solution to the REAL problem: unwanted pregnancies.)

UPDATE: BTW - according to the Bible (Exodus), a person who causes a miscarriage must make restitution.


UPDATE 3: Type "Mattis" into the search engines of the Washington Post, the ew York Times, the Boston Globe and the Los Angeles Times and you will find tories here, here, here, and here on United States Marine Corps General James Mattis' remarks on war fighting made this past Tuesday.

Type "Eason Jordan" into those same search engines and you will get nothing concerning Jordan's scandalous accusation at Davos on January 27 that the American military "targeted" and killed a dozen journalists in Iraq. Zip. Nothing.

The elite media instantly saddles up to ride to the condemnation of a speech given by a warrior much beloved and respected by his troops --a genuine hero and charismatic war-winner who believes in closing with and killing the enemy before they kill his troops and more civilians, and for those ideology of fascism he has complete contempt.

But let the speech be given by a MSM big, and let the subject be a slander on the entire American military, and the result is total MSM silence.

This is why there is near complete contempt for the MSM among center-right people. Think about it. Every major paper has an anti-Mattis story. Not one has even mentioned Jordan.

Cancel a MSM subscription today. And find a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine to thank for their service.

Hypocrisy is the main condition of the Left and the Old Media they dominate. Their aversion to Bush makes them convulse in hypocritical convolutions.

The Left hates Bush because of his unabashed belief in, and open dependence on, universalism and the sanctity of each and every individual human life. The Left is insanely committed to relativism and the priority of class consciousness - which makes them believe that there is no such thing as right or wrong (apart from how it is defined locally/culturally), and that each individual is of value only by virtue of which groups they're in: racial; religious; class; gender; sexual preference; etc. The Left favors hiring/entry policies NOT based on individual merit, but membership in a group; the Left favors tax policies NOT based on treating all income and each income earner the same, but policies that tax richer folks more. Instead of individual culpability, the Left blames social and political conditions for the crimes of individual thugs - they've done this since the 1950's, and on everything from gangs, all the way up to 9/12/01 - when the Left blamed the USA for the attacks on 9/11/01.

Rather than promote a free society in which persons are judged and rewarded based on their individual merits, the Left wants a powerful state to determine the winners and losers based on their membership in a variety of groups (most seen as victims of other groups) - groups which are in fact imaginary - merely heuristic devices and mental constructs coined by the "intellectual" Leftwing elitists who crave control of the state in order to make the world a socialist utopia. Of course, Hayek and history have demonstrated that this imaginary "Road to Shangi-la" is really the road to servitude and poverty; IOW: "The Road to Serfdom."

The Left realizes that the success of a meritocratic society - both economically, and as an engine for spreading liberty and democracy and free markets all over the world - is a direct threat to everything they believe in. Which is why they've pulled out all the stops when confronting Bush. And, it's why they denigrate the recent Iraqi election: They see their own continued demise in the electoral victory of the Iraqi people.

It's been becoming ever more clear to the Left since the 1980's - (and the election of Thatcher and Reagan, and their successful reliance of Hayekian economic polices, and the opening up of China under Teng Xiao Ping, and the collapse of the USSR) - that Leftist ideology has been a complete and abysmal misadventure. As a former left-winger myself, I know that those who remain on the Left are emotionally unable to admit failure and move on. That's why they fight dirty - and lie, and cheat, and try to steal elections, and hypocritically cover the news and spread propaganda: Maintaining their misguided belief system requires that they fight hard to keep reality out.

But it ain't working, thank God - and thank the blogosphere!

So: Either the Left takes a deep breath, admits they were wrong about the 20th Century or they will vanish in the 21st - either by dwindling to electoral insignificance, or by self-immolation. Their choice. And ultimately, it matters not: Humanity can and will continue the centuries long march toward liberty and democracy without them! As the wise man once said: "Lead. follow, or get out of the way." Bush is leading; it's time for the Left to follow us, or get out of the way.

More at Capt's Quarters here and here and here and here.

Friday, February 04, 2005

Let's Give Fidel the Finger!

It's time to let the Cuban people decide on their own government. It's time to give Fidel the finger - PURPLE FINGER THAT IS - and allow the Cubans to have a multi-party democracy in which each and every Cuban has a vote. Unless, of course, someone wants to explain to me why the Cubans don't deserve democracy and basic universal human rights...

CLICK HERE and read Vaclav Havel on the pitiful ingrates of Old Europe and the heroic dissidents in Cuba.


Thursday, February 03, 2005


(1) Can LOW RISK bonds ever return more over time than HIGHER RISK STOCKS?

NO. So limiting the so-called "trust fund" to T-bills/bonds means that the fund is NOT as big as it could be; this limits payout potential. In effect, the payroll tax means that people are going to get a lesser/smaller return on their contributions than they might get if they just put the payroll tax in an IRA. Since most poorer folks do not have money leftover after payroll taxes and fixed expenses, this MOST hurts the poor; (richer folks can afford to pay the payroll tax and still have money leftover to fund and IRA).

(2) Can tax receipts received by the Federal government grow faster than direct investments in the economy WITHOUT THE FEDS RAISNG TAXES (and damaging the economy)?

NO. So, the ONLY way that the paleo-libs can keep the fund solvent is to RAISE TAXES. That is especially bad for poor folks (the payroll tax is the MOST regressive, anti-poor tax) and raisng taxes is bad for the economy. In effect, the paleo-libs policy is too screw the poor and to drain the economy.

(3) If bonds are better than stocks (and if this is Krugman's and other paleo-libs chief objection to individualization/partial privatization of Social Security), than why don’t they favor partially privatization and then limit each individual account to bonds?

Because they are religiously opposed to any change to FDR's Ponzi Scheme, aka: Social Security.

(4) Can the current system offer people inheritability?

NO. And inheritability would be a HUGE BOON to poor people.

(Heck - assuming more and more states allow "gay marriage" - the current system can't even offer gay-widows/widowers their "spouses" checks without an increse in the payroll tax or a cut in payments!)

I think the answers to these questions prove that Krugman and the paleo-libs are wrong on the facts, and essentailly favor keeping a system that is archaic and anti-poor. I KNOW: RIGHT NOW I AM POOR, AND THE ONLY WAY I CAN GET SOMETHING LIKE A "401k" would be if it came out of my payroll taxes. Rich folks already have both.

Or, look at it this way:

WOULD YOU WANNA USE A PHONE FROM 1935? WOULD YOU WANNA DRIVE A CAR FROM 1935 ON US 95? WOULD YOU WANNA FLY TO EUROPE IN A 1936 PLANE? So why would ANYONE wanna government retirement stipend system designed in 1935?!

It is time to innovate. NO: IT IS PASSED TIME! Partial privatization is OVERDUE.

EVEN IF there is no looming demographic shortfall, it is time to make innovative changes.

Of course, there IS a looming demographic crisis. When the paleo-libs deny there is a looming demographic shortfall, they're denying what Clinton and other libs admitted six years ago. Which is sort of like the paleo-lib position on Saddam: he was a grave threat to them in 1998 - when Clinton was in power - but a well-contained pussycat as soon as Bush became president.

The majority of people see through this HYPOCRISY. As a result Bush will win on partial privatization - just as he won on Iraq and the prescription drug plan and his education bill.

(YEAH I KNOW: there are 8 questions in this post!)

Leftist Surrealism

What is it about Leftsts that makes them so SURE that "Global Warming" is real, but that the demographic challenges that Social Security will necessarily face in the coming decades are not?

I think it's part of a pattern: The Left seems to be more afraid of phony threats than real ones - ALL THE TIME. They feared AsKKKroft more than Binladen. They feared Sharon more than Arafat. They feared Reagan more than Gorbachev.

Any more examples? Any theories?

Wednesday, February 02, 2005


This is a link to one of the many MANY jokes about the hostage hoax.

This is a link to a photo of the Bulgarian hostage's torso-less head dripping with blood being held aloft by a ruthless neojihadist savage.

The prior makes light of the latter in ways that must hurt the families of those so brutally slaughtered.

The jokesters of the hoax have no sympathy and no shame.

UPDATE: Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette - (who DID think the jokes on the hoax were funny) - posted today that more than 232 civilian contractors have been murdered in Iraq. 232 families destroyed by ruthless hostage-taking, bomb-making, beheading savages. Which is why I still feel that jokes - such as posting a photo of Homer Simpson as a hostage (linked to above) - are in bad taste: they belittle the huge risks and sacrifices that contractors have made in the GWOT. And for what?! A momentary snicker. Shame.


On the road to serfdom, that is!


Socialism is just not as effective as a free-market at creating prosperity.

The sooner that Continental Europe gets a "THATCHER" the sooner they become economically vital.

Why the politicos of Old Europe don't risk bold change it is simple: they're all IGNORANT COWARDS and CHEATS! (And sluts... no: only kidding; they're not ALL sluts.)

Look; it's simple: China and India have LEAPT right over Old Europe - in terms of economic growth - because they've Thatcherized/Reaganized their economies.

If Old Europe fails to cut taxes, cut the size of their state and cut protective trade practices they will become poorer and poorer. They're already demogaphically set to become VERY OLD and VERY MUSLIM. In effect, the Old Europe will become like Turkey, the nation most of them fear letting into their voondaful socialist club, zee EU.

I give Old Europe until the next round of elections: Chirac and Schroder are due for elections in the next couple of years. If they're replaced by status quoists then Old Europe is DOOMED, I tell you DOOMED! (And if Blair is relaced by a Labour Leftwinger then the UK will suffer as well.)

What does this mean for the USA? It means - (because it is likely that Old Europe will collapse) - we should pay much more attention to and invest more heavily in India and China. As long as they keep liberalizing their economies and politics - their futures are great, and our involvement/investments with them will return great dividends. Investing in Old Europe is more like throwing away good money after bad. MORE HERE.


According to the NYTIMES. Amazing, really: the Pope is old, frail and he has Parkinson's. And an amazing will to live. I wish him a speedy recovery. (See my gloomier/earlier link-laden post below.)

Sharon, Mubarak, Abbas, Abdullah to meet in Egypt next Tuesday

Good news from the JPOST: "Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accepted an invitation on Wednesday from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to meet on Tuesday in Sharm e-Sheikh, Egypt along with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Jordan's King Abdullah II was also invited to attend the summit. PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei confirmed Abdullah had accepted the invitation."

The momentum is building, and it's carrying things in a good direction. FINGERS CROSSED!


From LGF comes news from DAVOS:

Eason Jordan, the CNN exec who admitted that they deliberately misreported news from Saddam's Iraq on behalf of Saddam's regime in order to keep their Baghdad office open claimed that the US military in Iraq had murdered 12 journalists in order to cover up aspect of the war. He quickly backtracked, a little, but the charge is essentially still out there.

I think this outrageous anti-American charge reveals a lot about CNN and the Old Media in general: Both - (like most college faculties) - are dominated by Leftwingers: and they are willing to lie in order to hurt America.

Jordan's lie is essentially like Rather's lie.

REMEMBER THIS TOO: this charge comes from the same folks who - all over Iraq -somehow always manage to show up with cameras just BEFORE a suicide bomber blows himself up and murders innocent Iraqis or American and Iraqi Soldiers. Obviously, they're always tipped-off by the terrorists as to when and where an attack will occur and all they do is rush to the scene in order to get video. This makes their coverage essentially function as propaganda for the terrorists. People like Jordan and Old Media companies like CNN essentially function as propagandists for the enemy.

As such, it is further proof that MANY in the Old Media are not only NOT OBJECTIVE, but they're actively supporting our enemy.

They're worse than liars; they're traitors and accomplices of terrorists and murderers.

CLICK HERE and read WIZBANG on the issue. And CLICK HERE, too (HUGH HEWITT has links to many other bloggers on the case).


The Pope is seriously ill. He has pulled through before - against long odds; he may pull through again. I pray for what is best and consistent with God's plans.

He has been a Pope of great historic dimensions - within and without his Church. He helped defeat the USSR, and for this the whole of humanity owes him a great debt.

On other issues his record has been mixed, especially of late: I think that the Vatican has dropped the ball on their sex scandals, and that a return to a married clergy is needed to save the Church in Europe from disappearing. This Pope has not acted well on these fronts - in my humble AND NON-CATHOLIC opinion. (I am not Catholic, but have read A LOT about the Church's history - especially about it from the 5th Century to the 20th.)

Here is a list of the SEVEN Cardinals I feel might most likely be selected (in order of likelihood) in the inevitable and still sad event of the Pope's eventual crossing-over:

Juan-Luis Cipriani-Thorne (Peru, 12/28/43);
Jean Louis Tauron [you must scroll down with this link] (France, 4/3/43);
Polycarp Pengo (Tanzania 8/5/44);
Vinco Puljic (Bosnia-Herzegovina, 9/8/45);
Josef Bozanic (Croatia 3/20/49);
Crescenzio Seppe (Italy, 6/2/43);
Angelo Scola (Italy, 11/7/41).

(Links take you to official English Bio's/cv's and a photo.)

These are the youngest Cardinals with the best pedigrees/resumes, and they're from countries with special histories and cultures.

A majority of Cardinals in the conservative College of Cardinals may feel that the background and ethnicity three of these potential popes (the South American, the African, and the two from the Balkans) gives each of them a unique potential to deal with the issues and problems that the Church is likely to confront in the near future: maintaining conservative doctrine while innovating the Church's apparatus in order to continue to grow in the Third World and to begin growing again (instead of shrinking) in the old bastions of Catholicism - like most of Western Europe, (especially France - where the Church is under severe threat of vanishing, and where a "French Pope" might make a HUGE difference). The Italian Cardinals are, naturally, "hometown favorites."

Other bloggers may have more insight into the current political intrigues of the CoC's. Or gossip. This list merely represents my somewhat educated guess. I think the CoC's will pick a conservative from a country or region that has seriously dealt with all forms of outreach and a Cardinal who has been good at it. Additionally, the Church has been growing most in Africa and South America - which may give these two Cardinals an edge that they might not have enjoyed a few decades ago. All "look" papal.

That being said, I want to again extend my wishes for a speedy recovery for the Pope. I hope that not too many of you feel that thinking about who may become the next Pope is ghoulish. Mature people make preparations for the inevitable. The Pope's age and frailty mean that his eventual passing - as sad as that is for many MANY millions of people - is much closer than ever before.

UPDATE: more on succession speculation HERE and HERE and HERE and REAL ODDS-MAKING HERE and HERE.

******* UPDATE 3/31/05: Here's a link to the current odds on who the next pope might be. Most on this particular oddsmaker's list are TOO OLD in my opinion. In my opinion, a Cardinal is too old if he is older than 62. In my opinion, the CofC will ONLY pick an old Cardinal to be the next Pope is there is a long deadlock. I do NOT think that is likely - the Church is in great need of an ENERGETIC and young Pope who can be the kind of Pope that JPII was before he was shot (in an assassination attempt that was plotted by the USSR).


I guess I'm the ONLY ONE who is relieved it was a hoax - that no US soldier was kidnapped and threatened with beheading - and finds that LAUGHING about it - and coming up with other potential hoaxes, (as the blogfather INSTAPUNDIT did and as the usually sober and BRILLIANT Powerline did - and many other bloggers - did, too), IS IN VERY BAD TASTE!

Must I remind the blogosphere that the neojihadists still hold hostages, and they HAVE BEHEADED dozens and dozens of REAL PEOPLE, including Daniel Pearl.

Making light of them and their ruthless practices demeans the people they've already murdered and those they currently hold - and those who serve in harms way AND MIGHT BE TAKEN HOSTAGE.

I suggest that those who think it's funny (and suggest in their blogs that we'll next see claims of Mr. Bill or BERT & ERNIE or Miss Piggy taken hostage) - should volunteer to take the place of a current hostage!


The hoax was crude and cruel; making light of it it bad form, too.


LOOK: I think it's GREAT to have a sense of humor about things - BUT as long as there are hostages whose lives are threatened by ruthless thugs (who HAVE BEHEADED people), we shouldn't make light of it.

It crosses the line for me, a line between good taste and bad taste.

I think if someone made jokes about the people who jumped out of the WTC it would also be in bad taste... (like maybe someone could write a joke about how the jumpers were pyrophobes who weren't not afraid of heights); NOT FUNNY! Neither would I find it funny or in good taste to make jokes about abortion.

It'd be better - in better taste - to make fun of our enemies, and not the victims of our enemies.

UDPATE #2 - BOTTOM-LINE: I guess I am disappointed in the pro-war side for making light of this hoax. I expect this kind of sick humor from the DU, not us!


UPDATE #3 - TWO QUESTIONS: If it was a USA teen prankster making a sick joke (and who hacked the hoax onto the jihadist web-site) and NOT a jihadist who posted the hoax, then who are you making fun of by "piling on" with the doll/hoax jokes? And at who's expense, the jihadists or the families of hostages? Maybe Iraqi kidnappers get paid a bounty by the neojihadists, and they have to post a vidoe of their victims in order to collect, and maybe a kidnapper posted this hoax to collect a bounty he hadn't "earned?"

It matters not - not to me, at least. WHY?!

Because there ARE families out there who have had their loved one's head savagely cut off.

And there are other families out there with loved ones who are now hostages.

And there are families out there who have loved ones in harms way RIGHT NOW - fighting in Iraq or working on reconstruction projects there. They are all potential hostages.

I would rather NOT laugh than say something that would hurt these familes or make light of their plight or potential plight.

Obviously I'm in the minority - most pundits are piling on, and commenters at various threads are generally saying I should "lighten up." Maybe, I should. But, there certian things I will not make fun of. A cheap little laugh is not worth hurting people whose loved ones have been slaughtered by the ruthless enemy we are fighting, or whose loved ones are in danger because they are in the front lines.

And we also should keep in mind that right here in the USA a family of four Egyptian Copts were SLAUGHTERED by our neojihadist enemies. So all of us here in the USA - especially bloggers who favor fighting back - should remember: the next hostage might be someone we know, someone we love, or even US.

I don't think that's funny. It's a sick joke, in bad taste, and it ain't funny.

UPDATE #4: A great and leading blogger - Jayson Javitz of POLITICAL VICE SQUAD (and the fabulous blog Polipundit) - wrote me, defending the "jokes about the hoax;" he wrote that - "It's not to make a political statement, in and of itself, it's just twisted irony."

I think he's RIGHT! That's the "why," at least. Nobody thinks their hurting anyone by joking about hostages (except maybe the people who deserve it - like the neojihadists). The BRILLIANT Betsy Newmark of Betsy's Page said the same thing on a short thread at her great blog.

Yet, I will not budge. I guess that makes me a middle-brow with high-brow leanings - someone who enjoys battling the seemingly never-ending downward spiral in pop discourse; the idea that when it comes to humor "anything goes!"

I'm battling windmills, in a way - I know - but I think people should think before they crack the easy - and sometimes inadvertently mean or hurtful rejoinder. And maybe I've done that, a little, by posting on the "jokes about the hoax."

In other words: I'm more a fan of (and miss) Johnny Carson's thoughtful and warm humor and regret the "Letterman-ish snideness" and the general snarkiness that passes for humor these days.
Especially on issues of such public import as the GWOT. But Lettermen is very popular - as is snarkiness in the blogospere. I don't mind sayng: I don't like that kind of humor one bit - even of it does little good and makes many people think I need to "lighten up." What's right is right. What's in bad taste - is in bad taste. Popular, or not. PERIOD.

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Commie Autocrat Gorby Criticizes Iraqi Elections

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev called the Iraqi parliamentary elections a profanation. In an interview with the Interfax news agency, he said the elections are “very far from what true elections are. And even though I am a supporter of elections and of the transfer of power to the people of Iraq, these elections were fake.” “I don’t think these elections will be of any use. They may even have a negative impact on the country. Democracy cannot be imposed or strengthened with guns and tanks,” the agency quoted Gorbachev as saying. Earlier, the Russian Foreign Ministry said it respected the results of Iraq’s elections. However, the statement said that it was important for the Iraqi people to acknowledge and accept the poll’s results. Russian President Vladimir Putin also welcomed the parliamentary elections in Iraq, calling it a “step in the right direction” and a “positive event”.

Gorby has about as much credibility on demcoracy as Putin! Utopianist totalitarians like him should shut up and get out of the way of the only AUTHENTIC REVOLUTION: the demcoracy revolution!


Two of the suicide bombers who staged attacks in Baghdad during the Iraqi election Sunday were Syrian and Chechen, an interior ministry source said. The source also said some attackers had been detained during the day. About seven suicide bomb attacks, most by individuals who just carried belts packed with explosives toward polling stations and other targets, were carried out during the election. The interior ministry said 36 people were killed in all insurgent attacks during the day. The interior ministry source confirmed the Chechen and Syrian nationalities of two of the attackers and added: "We have arrested some people but I cannot give figures or nationalities." A Kurdish party said that a Sudanese had carried out a suicide bomb attack in the town of Khanaqin on Saturday killing four adults and a child.

The enemy is united in its war against the West and democracy. Isn't it time we were united, too!? (Meaning: Isn't it time that Old Europe and the paleo-Lefties saw the light and joined with Bush in the GWOT?! Or is their hatred of America too strong!?)


That's more people than we hold Gitmo, and these Vietnamese prisoners were all guilty of lesser offenses than the fellas we're holding in Gitmo. Many, in fact, were just people who wanted religious freedom.

Somehow, I musta missed all the Leftwing protests over their captivity. And, I guessed I also missed the news item about when the ACLU filed a suit in the Hague and Germany to get them freed... Heh!

This is just another example of an old truth: the Left only dislikes the authoritarian regimes which aligned themselves to the USA. Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Kim, Fidel, Allende, Mugabe, Che, Chavez - they're all "OKAY" to Lefties because they were all anti-American.

This PROVES that to the Left anti-Americanism TRUMPS human rights - and even our national security.

Sure: the USA DID make some unsavory allies during WW2 and the Cold War (WW3); that's just good strategy: we used Stalin to defeat Hitler, and we used other authoritarians to defeat the USSR.

Now that the Cold War is over - and the USA is the ONLY SUPERPOWER (or HYPERPOWER, to use a French term coined during the CLINTON ERA!) - the USA is freer to attack totalitarianism everywhere, but we still need some help from non-democrats in the GWOT - the war against neojihadism, or "WW4." Musharraf, the Saudis, and Putin come to mind as unsavory allies we need right now.

The test in these alliances is theur utility: whether they're really really helping us in WW4, or not; tolerating these authoritarian regimes must be dependent on how well they help us achieve our greater goal of defeating neojihadism.

The Left has no such "test" when it come to their continued support for tyrants and tyranny (or THEIR criticisms of our efforts in WW4) - which further proves that their chief aim remains hurting the USA, and not human liberation or universal human rights.



Abbas and Russia go way back:

Abbas went to college in Moscow - getting a degree in anti-Zionism; he earned his Ph.D. in history from Moscow's Oriental College. His doctoral thesis denies that six million Jews died in World War II). Abbas also speaks Russian and like Arafat was probably a longtime KGB agent. Putin was also a lifelong KGB agent before being made VP by Yeltsin.

Well, Abbas was just in Moscow where he held meetings in with former KGB agent Putin. Here's what Abbas said: “There is no doubt Russia’s presence on our side, our co-operation on a bilateral basis, its role in the mediating quartet will be decisive in establishing peace in the Middle East,” [according to] Itar-Tass.

IMHO: Putin will have about as good an effect on "the Arab side" and on Israeli-Arab relations as he did in on democracy in Ukriane.

By aligning himself with Putin, Abbas proves he STILL deserves to be treated very VERY skeptically: only if-and-when and as he takes ACTIONS against jihaoterrorists can he be regarded as a partner for peace.

Monday, January 31, 2005


Katherine Lopez of NRO's THE CORNER points to a recent post by ROGER L. SIMON which cited an earlier article by AUSTIN BAY (now of his own blog) at STRATEGYPAGE.

K-lo, Roger and Austin make the point that the so-called "insurgents" are really - and ought to be really called - "reactionaries." (Perhaps they think that this name is not only more accurate - which it is - but that it will also emphasize to Lefties everywhere that they should unambiguously support the Coalition of the Willing and the Iraqi Government in the current war against the neojiahdists and neobaathists in Iraq.)

Actually - IMHO, the best name for the "insurgents" is not "reactionaries" but COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARIES.

The one true revolution was and still remains the democratic revolution - the one we started in 1776, and that has been steadily bringing liberty and democracy to more and more of humanity EVER SINCE. Truly, a democratic revolution is what's happening now in Iraq.

LIBERTY - after 229 years, it's STILL the most revolutionary thing out there!



Early returns are in: And they show that Teddy Jo Kopechne has carried Fallujah! YUP: the Leftwing has clearly carried the hearts and minds of the neojihadists and neobaathists - or is that carried their water!? Heh!