Feb 20, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
From The Archives: United Nations Declaration of Human Rights Destroys Individual Rightsby Glenn Woiceshyn (December 11, 1998)
On December 10th the United Nations celebrated the 50th anniversary of its Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a five-page, 30-article document specifying everyone's alleged rights. Rather than celebrate it, we should condemn it as a destroyer of rights and a charter of tyranny.
Feb 20, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
John Lewis is one of the most hard hitting intellectuals around -- especially when he gets going in his Q&As. If you are a 100 miles within the area make sure to attend! -- CapMag
Who: Dr. John Lewis, historian at Ashland University
What: A talk on how we can and why we must defeat Totalitarian Islam—first and foremost by destroying the current regime in Iran
When: Wednesday, February 28, 7:30 PM–9:30 PM
Where: George Mason University, Fairfax Campus, Johnson Center, 3rd Floor, Meeting Room C
The public and media are invited. Admission is FREE.
Summary: In the wake of 9/11, and in the face of rising threats to their freedoms and rights, Americans are uncertain about what a proper foreign policy should be. The uncertainty arises from the philosophical influences of pragmatism and altruism, which have misguided Americans and their leaders for decades. Mentally crippled by this uncertainty, America has failed to address the cause of the threats against her and, in so doing, has bolstered it.
This talk consults the historical precedent of American policy towards Shintoism in post-1945 Japan to show that a proper policy today would first identify Islamic Totalitarianism as the cause of the threat facing the West, and then direct American resources toward eliminating the political imposition of Islamic Law. If Americans want to end the threats against their lives and liberty, they must first identify the advocates of political Islam (those who seek to impose Islamic Law by force) as the true enemy, and then destroy that enemy—beginning with the Islamic State of Iran. This is the only way to reestablish American security.
For more information on this talk, please email info@theobjectivestandard.com. To read the article on which the talk is based, click here.Feb 19, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Three weeks ago, President Bush made it clear that engaging Iran militarily was not being pursued:"Some are trying to say that because we're helping ourselves in Iraq by stopping outside [Iranian] influence from killing our soldiers or hurting Iraqi people that we want to expand this beyond the borders," Bush said. "That's a presumption that's simply not accurate. We believe that we can solve our problems with Iran diplomatically."
Since then even more evidence of Iran's maleficence in Iraq has been revealed, yet Bush continues to evade the necessity of truly confronting Iran. From CNN: Bush blames Iraq weapons on 'part of' Iranian government.President Bush said Wednesday that "a part of the Iranian government" is involved in sending deadly explosives into Iraq ...
But the president Wednesday rejected as "preposterous" suggestions that the United States was creating a basis for conflict with Iran.
"My job is to protect our troops, and when we find devices that are in that country that are hurting our troops, we're going to do something about it, pure and simple.," he said "... Does this mean you're trying to have a pretext for war? No. It means I'm trying to protect our troops. That's what that means."
"Protect our troops"? What's preposterous is leaving the Iranians completely unmolested while they kill our troops in Iraq. Here again are articles indicating Iran's war-making in Iraq:
Rumsfeld: Iraq bombs 'clearly from Iran' (CNN, August 10, 2005)
EXCLUSIVE: Iraq Weapons -- Made in Iran? (ABC News, March 6, 2006)
Rumsfeld accuses Iran of troublemaking in Iraq (AP via Army Times, March 7, 2006)
Casey cites Iran hand in attacks by Iraqi Shiites (The Washington Times, June 23, 2006)
Barbero: Iran training Shiite insurgents (AP via Army Times, August 24, 2006)
Donkeys harboring weapons stopped at Iran-Iraq border (Army Times, November 2, 2006)
Iran involvement suspected in Karbala compound attack (CNN, January 31, 2007)
Iraqi insurgents using Austrian rifles from Iran (The Telegraph, February 13, 2007)
From the Ayn Rand Institute: Support Our Troops: How the Democrats and Republicans Can Truly Support our Military and Defend America by Alex Epstein.[A]lmost everyone wants to give our troops the resources they need to do their jobs: the best weapons, armor, provisions, and training available -- as well as praise, gratitude, and encouragement. But for our government to truly support our troops, it must do far more than help them do their jobs; it must give them the right jobs to do -- the jobs that will effectively defend America while minimizing the risk to their lives. Our government must place soldiers' lives at risk only when American freedom is threatened, and during war it must give them the objectives and tactics that will defeat the enemy as quickly as possible.
The conservatives' Iraq war does not meet this standard. It could have--if the war had been undertaken as a step in defeating the anti-American, terrorist-sponsoring regimes of the Middle East and thus rendering the region non-threatening. Instead, President Bush made the war's primary focus the welfare of Iraqis--above all, their "freedom" to elect whatever regime they wished, no matter how anti-American. Further sacrificing Americans to Iraqis, Bush and his subordinates imposed crippling "rules of engagement" (also supported by liberals) that place the lives of civilians in enemy territory above our soldiers. Our hamstrung troops in Iraq have not been allowed to smash a militarily puny insurgency; instead, they have been forced to suffer an endless series of deaths by an undefeated enemy, while Islamic totalitarians worldwide rejoice in our defeat.
One does not support our troops by sending them to fight wars of self-sacrifice and then thanking their corpses. The conservatives' call to "stay the course" in Iraq--or to add 20,000 troops to that course--is harmful to America and its troops because the mission has been conceived and conducted in defiance of American interests.
If the conservatives do not support our troops, then do the liberals? Absolutely not.
Observe that while liberals criticize the Iraq war for killing our troops, they propose no alternative policy that would protect America against Islamic totalitarianism and its state supporters, including the militant, terrorist theocracy of Iran. Liberals' only policy proposal is that we not take military action in Iraq or in any other country beyond Afghanistan.
Also see Washington's Make-Believe Policy on Iran by Elan Journo.
Related: Dead Ball.
From Hot Air: Video: Troops tell Geraldo they support the surge. Notable comments from two different soldiers: "untie our hands" and "let us take the gloves off."
From The Moscow Times: Iraq Closes Border Crossings With Iran, Syria for 72 Hours.The U.S. military said Wednesday that the aim was to choke off the flow of weapons and foreign fighters into the country.
The flow will find another way if we don't stop it at the source.Feb 15, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
Irvine, CA--In response to Bush administration claims that Iran is supplying Iraqi insurgents with deadly weapons, liberals say they are worried that the administration is making the case for military action. The "New York Times" accuses the administration of "saber-rattling," while the paper's leading columnist, Paul Krugman, says that "a powerful faction in the administration is spoiling for a fight."
"The truth," said Alex Epstein, junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, "is exactly the opposite. The real problem with the Bush administration regarding Iran is that it, like its critics, is evading the massive case against this committed enemy of America.
"Iran is the leading state-supporter and champion of Islamic Totalitarianism--the ideological movement that is the root cause of the present terrorist threat. Ever since Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979, it has been constitutionally committed to expanding ‘the sovereignty of God's law throughout the world.' It has made good on this commitment by waging terrorist warfare against Israel and America through Hezbollah and other subsidiaries. Its success in terrorizing the West has encouraged other Islamic Totalitarian terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda. The regime is furiously pursuing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, with which its president promises to ‘wipe Israel off the map'--while its spiritual leaders declare their ultimate goal with weekly chants of ‘Death to America.'
"Yet since 9/11, the Bush administration has done absolutely nothing about the Iranian threat--and its liberal critics promote ‘cooperation' with the regime, even praising Iran for being ‘quite helpful to the United States in the months after [9/11]'! What explains this insanity?
"Our intellectual and political leaders have evaded the true nature and scope of the enemy we face. Immersed in the modern dogmas that all cultures are equal and all religions are peaceful, they will not acknowledge that the 9/11 terrorists are part of a religious-ideological movement fueled by Muslim peoples and states. They prefer the fiction that we are at war only with a relative handful of stateless, un-Islamic terrorists. Thus, they can delude themselves, Iran is not our mortal enemy, but only a misguided potential coalition partner in a ‘war on terrorism.'
"Iran needs to be attacked and defeated, the sooner the better. This does not mean another Iraqi boondoggle in which our soldiers try to bring the good life to warring tribes; it means the destruction of an enemy regime without apology. We must make it clear that we will no longer tolerate--or evade--aggression from the Islamic Totalitarians."Feb 14, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
Irvine, CA--Politicians and commentators from both parties are claiming that "income inequality" is a danger to America. They propose to alleviate it by raising taxes on the wealthy and expanding various welfare programs.
But, said Alex Epstein, a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute, "Income inequality--even vast income inequality--is a good thing. It is not income inequality but its critics that truly threaten this country.
"America is supposed to be a free nation, in which each individual can earn as much money as his ability and effort permit. If this results in vast ‘income inequality'--because different individuals in different professions with different abilities and work ethics create vastly different amounts of wealth--that is a good thing, not a problem for the government to ‘fix.'
"Opponents of income inequality complain that the wealthy ‘command' an unfair share of national income--as if the wealth in America were a preexisting national pie, of which everyone is entitled an equal slice. But this is false. The vast wealth in America hasn't fallen from the sky; it has been created through the productive activities of individuals in a free market. No one has a right to more money than he has freely earned--and no one has a right to claim that others have earned ‘too much.'
"For those who want to make more money, the solution is simple; enter a new field, develop new skills, start a business, or do anything else to make yourself more productive. But do not ask the government to loot the successful on your behalf. Nothing could be more unjust or more un-American than that."Feb 12, 2007 | Dollars & Crosses
Irvine, CAVenezuelan president Hugo Chavez has recently announced plans to nationalize utilities and telecommunications companies.
"Chavez claims that this theft of private property from its owners is necessary to improve the lot of the poor in Venezuela," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "But as history has shown, nationalization is both immoral and impractical. Industries under state control are highly inefficient and much less productive than private industries free to function in a capitalist market. As production is throttled, rich and poor alike suffer.
"Marxist policies always lead to poverty and disaster. There can be no significant progress, prosperity or wealth creation in a social system that does not recognize individual rights, particularly property rights. Property rights are both moral and practical.
"If Venezuelans want to avoid an economic disaster that will eventually wipe out their savings, their investments, their businesses and their livelihoods, they must get rid of Chavez and reject the Marxist ideology he embodies."
Cartoon by Cox and Forkum.
Three weeks ago, President Bush made it clear that engaging Iran militarily was not being pursued: