Oct 17, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
FoxNews reports: Annan: Iraq War Hasn't Made World Safer.The U.S.-led war in Iraq hasn't made the world any safer, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said in a British TV interview aired Sunday. "I cannot say the world is safer when you consider the violence around us, when you look around you and see the terrorist attacks around the world and you see what is going on in Iraq," Annan told the ITV network. "We have a lot of work to do as an international community to try and make the world safer," he said. Annan has previously described the U.S.-led war that toppled Saddam Hussein as "illegal."
FoxNews also reports: Oil-for-Food Probe Includes Annan's Son.The Justice Department criminal probe into the U.N. Oil-for-Food program is focusing on several individuals, among them U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's son, FOX News has learned. Kojo Annan, the secretary-general's son, was employed by a U.N. contractor that monitored food and medicine shipments that were flowing into Iraq as part of the multibillion-dollar program created in late 1996. The Oil-for-Food program is now being probed by the Justice Department and Congress as a boondoggle that enriched Saddam Hussein and others. A report delivered last week by Charles Duelfer found that Saddam was able to "subvert" the $60 billion U.N. Oil-for-Food program to generate an estimated $1.7 billion in revenue outside U.N. control from 1997-2003. [...] FOX News was unable to locate Kojo Annan for comment but his father told reporters at the United Nations earlier this year that there was no connection.
UPDATE -- October 20: From Claudia Rosett at The Wall Street Journal: La République des Bananes: Kofi Annan tries to explain away France and Russia's Oil for Food wrongdoing.In defending Russia, China and France, Mr. Annan further implied that Saddam's traffic went only to companies, not governments, and therefore could not possibly have swayed state policies. Perhaps Mr. Annan has forgotten that all Saddam's contracts were funneled into Oil for Food via the official U.N. missions of the respective countries. Although earlier this year Mr. Annan and some of his aides were busy excusing Mr. Annan's Secretariat from any responsibility for Oil for Fraud, by way of blaming the U.N. member-state missions, especially those on the Security Council.
Maybe Mr. Annan also forgot that both China and Russia, however nonbanana their status at the U.N., have yet to enter the era of genuine private property rights. In both these nations, there is a hazy line between state and private sector, no fair and impartial rule of law to define that line, and no press free enough to delve deeply into such matters as when, by whom and at what price it might have been crossed. Maybe Mr. Annan also forgot that large business interests, even when private, can wield a certain amount of lobbying clout, even in France.
And maybe he just hasn't had time to read the lists of oil vouchers handed out liberally by Saddam to assorted French former officials and Russian politicians and state entities--alleged bribes now presumably under investigation by the U.N.'s own "independent inquiry" led by former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. Earlier this year, an aggrieved Mr. Annan warned critics of the Oil for Food program to shut up and wait for Mr. Volcker to wend his way toward a final report. Apparently, when it comes to Saddam's biggest clients, Mr. Annan sees no problem with his own policy of pre-emptive exoneration.
Oct 17, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
From yesterday's New York Times: Nader Emerges as the Threat Democrats Feared.With less than three weeks before the election, Ralph Nader is emerging as just the threat that Democrats feared, with a potential to tip the balance in up to nine states where President Bush and Senator John Kerry are running neck and neck. Despite a concerted effort by Democrats to derail his independent candidacy, as well as his being struck off the Pennsylvania ballot on Wednesday, Mr. Nader will be on the ballots in more than 30 states. Polls show that he could influence the outcomes in nine by drawing support from Mr. Kerry. They are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin.
Usually we post cartoons three or four days a week. But in the run up to election day, we've decided to fill in the empty days by reposting cartoons that are still relevant (we'll go back to the old schedule after the election). This cartoon was first posted on February 18, 2004.
UPDATE -- October 19: From FoxNews: 'Nader Factor' Still a Concern.Politicos on both sides of the aisle are pondering just what effect independent candidate Ralph Nader may have on the 2004 presidential election -- a race that could hinge on the number of votes the independent candidate pulls. On Monday, Nader announced a 10-state campaign swing he is embarking on between now and Election Day, which will include Alabama, Connecticut, Louisiana and New York as well as key swing states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
"We're trying to get as many votes as possible, which means we're going into states that are characterized as safe states, battleground states and states that fall in between," he said at a Washington news conference.
Oct 17, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
An excerpt from Robert Tracinski's article "How to Be an Anti-Bushite for Bush: Working for a Pro-War Opposition and a Secular Right" is online at TIADaily.
Oct 16, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
When asked to name his heroes, John Kerry named three people:
1) Michael J. Fox (actor afflicted with Parkinson's Disease who has endorsed Kerry so that government money will be thrown into stem cell research, thus guaranteeing that Parkinson's is never cured.)
2) Christopher Reeves (who just died, and who his running mate claimed would have walked again had Kerry been the President.)
3) Former Georgia Senator Max Cleland who lost both legs and one arm in Vietnam.
It's amazing that all of his "heroes" either actively support his campaign, or represent an emotional link to one of his few popular election issues. Also, all of his heroes were/are cripples, people striken with debilitating ailments. Of course if the same question were asked to President Bush, I'm sure one of his answers would be that carpenter from Nazareth. Why can't any of these people pay homage to a real hero once in a while? Has no one ever heard of George Washington????Oct 15, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
This is the final of three new Michael Moore cartoons that we created for a companion book to the new DVD, FahrenHYPE 9/11. It turns out that we're not only in the book. We were pleasantly surprised to see three Cox & Forkum cartoons in the movie.
My impression after one viewing: FahrenHYPE 9/11 is a very welcome rebuttal to Moore's film. (You can view a trailer here.) Using relevant facts and context, the documentary takes Moore to task for many of the deceptions in Fahrenheit 9/11, covering issues such as: the 2000 election, quotes from Bush, the Afghanistan pipeline, American-Saudi relations, the Iraq war and much more. Featured commentators include: Dick Morris, Ron Silver, Zell Miller, Ann Coulter, Dave Kopel, David Frum, Frank Gaffney, David Hardy and Jason Clarke. And other people appearing in the film explain why they consider themselves to have been exploited by Moore.
I was also impressed that the film is not merely a fact-checking critique. It goes further, naming Islamofascists as the enemy, briefly recounting their attacks against America over the years, and even listing attacks that have been thwarted in America -- all of which make Moore's claim that "there is no terrorist threat" that much more ridiculous (as if the 9/11 attacks weren't enough to do so).
I have not completely read the companion book, but it appears to be as informative as the movie (we have one personal complaint: some of our cartoons are stretch out of proportion!). The book contains interview transcripts, editorials, commentary on the making of the film, and lots more editorial cartoons besides our own.
In short: Not only does FahrenHYPE 9/11 help set the record straight, it is also a refreshing presentation of people standing up for America's right to defend herself against terrorists and their state sponsors.
Obviously Cox & Forkum played a small part in this project, so you can take my recommendation for what it's worth. But I think FahrenHYPE 9/11 is a much-needed exposé of Moore's smoke and mirrors, in his own medium. The companion book adds further details and entertainment. I recommend both to anyone interested in 9/11, the Islamic terrorist threat, and the presidential election -- especially if you've already seen Fahrenheit 9/11.
ATTENTION STUDENTS: Some students are showing FahrenHYPE 9/11 on their college campuses as an antidote to presentations of Fahrenheit 9/11. Jason A. Nunnelley has set up a Web site to help with such efforts: MustHaveInfo.com. If you'd like to do the same on your campus, contact Jason.
UPDATE -- October 20: Michael Moore recently appeared on the campus of the University of Wisconsin. Ryan Schenk wrote the following about the event:Last night, Michael Moore came to the campus of the University of Wisconsin, and gave a speech on the Student Union outside by the lake. It was packed. I went to it, not wanting to miss a spectacle, and to see with my own eyes what it is we're fighting. And I saw it.
If anyone is still wondering whether the Left is actually rooting for our enemies, namely Islamic Fascists and their terrorist comrades, let me quote Michael Moore: "We cannot win this war! We can't. We SHOULDN'T win this war...I mean, who the hell are we!!!! The ARROGANCE!!!! We're like, 'Oh, we're going to come and invade your country, and force you to be free,' and then wooptie woo, f*** you!" This was met with loud cheers, applause and laughter by the audience.
Much of the speech consisted of the usual America-bashing, ridiculing the idea that America is such a great country; and of course there was tons of class warfare, charges of racism, sexism, etc.
He screamed out to the Bush supporters, who were yelling out "four more years" and such, "Why don't you go fight in the war. I have some enlistment papers right here; come up and sign them if you think you're so brave!" Then I walked over to this group to give them some support, and to see the inevitable confrontations.
One guy, who looked like a professor, said to me, "You're a bunch of Nazis. Why don't you shut the hell up." I gave him a word or two, in a semi-respectful way. Another guy tried to dump a pitcher of water or beer on us, but missed and hit two girls who were screeching at us to "shut up." He got pulled away by the police. It was pretty orderly. And the group that I joined was not obnoxious at all. I couldn't hear the speech while with them, but only because I was right in the middle of the "four more years" and "flip-flop" chants.
What I was most amazed at was how the crowd cheered with joyous rage at the most evil statements, by such an evil person. The cheers were the loudest when the speech was about how terrible America is, and how we don't have the right to defend ourselves militarily.
Oct 15, 2004 | Dollars & Crosses
Sinclair Broadcasting plans to air a program over its 62 stations, based on a documentary critical of John Kerry's anti-war activism. Excerpts from Brit Hume's interview with Mark Hyman, V.P. Corporate Relations for Sinclair Broadcasting:
MARK HYMAN: [...] We've decided to produce a 60-minute program that is going to deal with specific allegations made by these Vietnam POWs. So far, nothing is scripted. There's nothing that's been finalized. We've only invited one person to join us, that's Senator John Kerry. So far, nothing has been shot. There is an existing documentary, which provides the basis for these allegations. This is where these allegations are made, but there's nothing else that's been done. So complaints about content about a program that doesn't even exist is like complaining about a referee's call in a game that has not yet been played. There's nothing to complain about. [...]
HUME: [...] we heard a little bit from the Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton earlier. I want to get your reaction to something else that Chad Clanton said, if we can.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[KERRY SPOKESMAN: CHAD] CLANTON: I think they're going to regret doing this, and they better hope we don't win.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUME: Now, Clanton went on to say when questioned, that that there wasn't a threat. However, how do you interpret that?
HYMAN: I'm at a loss for words, almost. It certainly sounded like a threat. And for a campaign official for a presidential candidate to imply that they might use something, such as the independent regulatory process of the FCC, to exact revenge against media organizations that they find to be enemies or not supportive of their cause, is just astounding. And it's something that should cause concern for every media organization in the country, if this is going to be a precedent for this campaign or any other campaign should they win.
HUME: And the two complaints that have been filed about this program that is, as you point out, a work in progress, one says, of course, that it's an improper political contribution. And the other says that it is a violation or an improper use of the public airwaves. Your reaction to that charge — those charges.
HYMAN: Well, I understand there have been some suggestions that if there's information in this program that might be unflattering toward John Kerry that it should be considered an in-kind contribution to George Bush. Using that same logic, or that same reasoning, that would suggest that every bomb from here on forward that goes off in Iraq that's reported in the news, should be considered an in-kind contribution to John Kerry. The notion is absurd.
The news is what it is. It's going to be good, it's going to be positive, it's going to be negative. It's going to have all sorts of effects on candidates always. And when the news comes out, it ought to be reported. There shouldn't be a moratorium based on legitimate news, just because it may or may not affect one candidate or the other. That's just absurd. [FOX News, "Special Report With Brit Hume:Why Does Sinclair Broadcasting Want to Air Anti-Kerry Film?" October 12, 2004]
Also FOX reports: "FCC Chairman Michael Powell said Thursday the federal agency would not block Sinclair from airing the program, noting that the commission has never taken such action and that no rules allow it to prevent the broadcast. On Tuesday, the Democratic National Committee filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission contending that airing the film should be considered an illegal in-kind contribution to the Bush campaign."
FoxNews reports: Annan: Iraq War Hasn't Made World Safer.
From yesterday's New York Times: 