Mar 31, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the Washington Post:Journalist Peter Arnett, covering the war from Baghdad, told state-run Iraqi TV in an interview aired Sunday that the American-led coalition's first war plan had failed because of Iraq's resistance and said strategists are "trying to write another war plan." Arnett, who won a Pulitzer Prize reporting in Vietnam for The Associated Press, garnered much of his prominence from covering the 1991 Gulf War for CNN. He is reporting from the Iraqi capital now for NBC and its cable stations.
From a CNN transcript of Peter Arnett speaking Iraqi state television:
In answer to your question, it is clear that within the United States there is growing challenge to President Bush about the conduct of the war and also opposition to the war. So our reports about civilian casualties here, about the resistance of the Iraqi forces, are going back to the United States. It helps those who oppose the war when you challenge the policy to develop their arguments....
I've been mainly in Baghdad in the past few weeks. But, clearly this is a city that is disciplined, the population is responsive to the government's requirements of discipline and my Iraqi friends tell me there is a growing sense of nationalism and resistance to what the United States and Britain are doing....
The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance now they are trying to write another war plan. [CNN, 3/31/03]
My outrage was tempered by this later story from Fox News:
NBC fired journalist Peter Arnett on Monday, saying it was wrong for him to give an interview with state-run Iraqi TV in which he said the American-led coalition's initial plan for the war had failed because of Iraq's resistance. Arnett called the interview a "misjudgment" and apologized.
To express such a stupid opinion is unprofessional. To express it in an interview with the propaganda tool for our enemy is treasonous.|
Update: Oh, and he got hired by the UK Mirror already. Fox Reports that the UK Mirror is "vehemently opposed to the war." Punch a wall, slam the desk, throw a glass. Just don't kick the dog. I like dogs.
From Cox and Forkum:
Mar 31, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the folks over at protestwarrior.com (be sure to check out the other shots in their protest gallery):
Other signs worth noting:
- Other than ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism & Communism War Has Never Solved Anything
- Saddam Only Kills His Own People It's None of Our Business!
- Communism Has Only Killed 100 Million People Let's Give It Another Chance
- End Racism & Sexism Now! Kill All White Males
- Socialist Action Network working to perfect the ultimate police state
- [Pictures of Arafat and Saddam] "America, how can we concentrate on pushing the Jews into the sea while you wage your RACIST war against our people?"
- My son suicide bombed a bus full of Israelis and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt (and $25,000 from Saddam)
- Say NO to War! unless a Democrat is president...
- Stop the vicious spread of Wealth Creation! Vote GREEN Let's all be poor and miserable equally!
Related Item: Pave France.
Mar 30, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Dr. Andrew Bernstein will present Highlights from his soon-to-be-published book, The Capitalist Manifesto. This seminar features key points and principles that have emerged from three years of research on this topic. The book's subtitle is: The Historic, Economic and Philosophic Case for Laissez-Faire, and topics come from all three of these broad fields. Dr. Bernstein will present his integrated analysis of the development of Capitalism. The format will be lecture interspersed with opportunities for Q&A in an intensive half-day seminar.
Mar 29, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Here's another example of how public decision-making is impossible without a notion of individual rights:
On the same day that the Anti-Defamation League reported that the number of anti-Semitic incidents at universities has increased by 24%, the number three Republican in the Senate, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, and some of his colleagues met with Jewish activists to explore solutions to the trend. By the end of the meeting yesterday, Mr. Santorum was talking about introducing legislation that could cut federal funding to colleges where anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiments are prevalent--or more generally, where "ideological diversity" is lacking. [New York Sun, 3/27/03]
Santorum doesn't want the government to stop funding ideas--just to stop funding bad ideas. But that is necessarily to put the government in the position of the arbiter of ideology. The government has no business in the field of ideas at all, but again this is only clear to a person with some notion of individual rights. Having the government encourage "ideological diversity" is just a way of producing more ideological irresponsibility.Mar 29, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
New York's state government passed a draconian smoking ban:
"Let the individual decide if he wants to kill himself or not," said Assemblyman Anthony Seminerio, a Democrat from Queens. "And let the individual decide if he wants to go into a smoking environment. … You cannot tell the people of this state how to run their lives. You can try, but you'll never do it." But Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, in an impassioned speech in favor of the bill, argued that tobacco users have no right to "poison" the people around them. "We pass laws here every week infringing on people's rights to make their own decisions," said Mr. Bruno, a Republican from Rensselaer County."Every time you stop at a stop sign somebody is infringing on your right to go right through that intersection. Why? Because it's for the public good, that's why." [New York Sun, 3/27/03]
Bruno's analogy is incorrect. The right to put up a stop sign accrues to the government by virtue of the fact that it owns the streets; you don't have a "right to make your own decisions" on someone else's property. But the government is not the owner of eating establishments and hotels.
Bruno's statement reveals his utter contempt for any notion of individual rights--which means that he has no grounds for saying that tobacco users have no right to "poison" people around them, either. The only defensible notion of the "public good" is one that is truly common to all members of society--which means one that doesn't require sacrificing some people's good for the benefit of others--which means social interaction based on voluntary consent. If you enter or work for an establishment that permits smoking, you have consented. The fact that the alternatives might be inconvenient for you is completely irrelevant; you have no right to demand that the universe exist for the sake of your convenience.Mar 29, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Thousands of people left yesterday. Despite now being in allied territory no one showed any relief or was prepared to say anything about politics. "You wouldn't expect me to answer that, would you," said one man with a smile when I asked if he was pleased that Basra's Ba'athists were on the way out. [Daily Telegraph, 3/28/03]
What's Al-Jazeera going to say about this?
Iraqi paramilitary forces in Basra fired mortars and machine guns Friday on about 1,000 Iraqi civilians [!!!] trying to leave the besieged city, forcing them to retreat, British military officials and witnesses said.Britain's 7th Armored Brigade apparently tried to fire back, but stopped out of fear that civilians would be wounded, said Lt. Cmdr. Emma Thomas....British pool reports described Iraqi forces with mortars mounted in pickup trucks firing on the fleeing civilians, sending some running back into Basra. Panicked women and children scattered on a bridge over a canal and down its embankments to avoid machine-gun fire, the reports said. One Iraqi woman badly wounded by shrapnel was carried into a British vehicle that whisked her off for treatment. [Associated Press, 3/28/03]
From the folks over at