Nov 13, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
To: James Taranto, Opinion Journal Dear James:
You write yesterday that Gen.Clark reaches new heights of incoherence in explaining why he approves of our having fought in Kosovo but not in Iraq. But Clark's position, while wrong, is not incoherent.
Leftists support military action when it does nothing to increase American power or advance American interests; they oppose it when America benefits. Our action in Kosovo was purely "humanitarian," altruistic, self-sacrificial--since we sought no gain for ourselves, they are all in favor. Invading Iraq, on the other hand, was self-interested--and therefore wrong in their eyes.
When Democrats accuse the president of waging war under "false pretenses" or of spilling "blood for oil" these are left-wing code words for what they really object to: America's unapologetic assertion of its own interests.
Sincerely yours,
Paul Blair
Manhattan
Nov 12, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
The Daily Pennsylvanian reports on Professor Yaron Brook's talk "Why We Are Losing the War on Terrorism":"The war in Iraq has done nothing to quell terrorism," Brook said. "We must grind [terrorists] to dust until victory is achieved." Since 9/11, Brook has been advocating a more aggressive American response to terrorism
...he explained that the U.S. has not eradicated terrorism because it has not been sufficiently brutal. He asserted that the U.S. response must target not individual terrorists, but rather, must fight against militant Islam and the states that sponsor it. "Our enemy is not terrorism," Brook said. "Our enemy is militant Islam. To stop them, we must kill or capture their leaders -- military and spiritual. The states that support militant Islam must be the first targets."
...He also indicated that he would not preclude the use of nuclear weapons in the United States' current war. "War is about destroying the enemy," Brook said. "I'm willing to do whatever it takes to win, and I would not rule out nuclear weapons."
..."The talk was excellent," Drexel student Andrew Sternberg said. "He made me see things much more clearly and helped me realize that there's an alternative to the liberal anti-war ideas." [Daily Pennsylvanian, "Speaker: U.S. Not aggressive enough", November 07, 2003]
Recommended Reading: End States That Sponsor Terrorism
Nov 12, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Writes Allen Forkum:
The Nov. 11 New Yorker editorial -- Getting Warmer -- is a typical example of global warming advocacy. It starts out sounding very certain about global warming with sentences like this:
[T]he evidence that human activity is changing the planet's climate has continued to mount, as has evidence of the consequences.
But later, when discussing criticism of the theory, you get less certain sentences like this:
Though it's impossible to determine exactly how much of the current warming trend is the result of atmospheric changes wrought by man and how much is caused by natural climate variation, the vast majority of credible studies in fact point to the former as the more significant factor.
Scientific certainty is crucial because there's nothing uncertain about the freedoms environmentalists propose to take away from us. Without scientific certainty, the alleged global warming can never be curtailed by government action, only mankind will be curtailed. And that is the real goal of environmentalists.
Here's what is being said about some of those "credible studies." From a National Post article by Tim Patterson, Kyoto debunked:
The growing number of scientists who dispute the treaty's scientific foundation [regarding global warming] have become increasingly vocal, regularly pushing their case in the media as groundbreaking studies continue to be published that pull the rug out from under Kyoto's shaky edifice.Of these, none may have the long-term impact of the paper published yesterday [Oct. 28] in the prestigious British journal Energy and Environment, which explains how one of the fundamental scientific pillars of the Kyoto Accord is based on flawed calculations, incorrect data and a biased selection of climate records.
(Hat tip: Adam Ierymenko, via HBL)
One of those vocal scientist is S. Fred Singer, whose group, The Science & Environmental Policy Project, is known for debunking the "science" of environmentalism. In a recent press release, Singer commented on global warming and the Climate Stewardship Act:
"The UN-IPCC science panel, which is most often cited by supporters of this proposal, based its conclusions on three major claims. And although widely publicized, none of them pass muster. They have been or are being disproved by actual data."
But just to cover their bases, environmentalist scaremongers have a new doomsday scenario: Global warming could trigger a new ice age.
Nov 11, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
Writes Allen Forkum: Today is the 50th anniversary of Veterans Day. You can learn more about here: VFW: Origins of Veterans Day. From Edwin A. Locke, Giving Real Meaning to Veterans Day: Fighting for Freedom is No Sacrifice:
Because human life is so precious, war should never be undertaken unless our rights are threatened. It is often said that our soldiers must sacrifice themselves for our country. This is precisely what we must not ask them to do. A sacrifice entails the surrender of a greater value for a lesser one. But if a man loses his life on the premise, "I would rather die than live in slavery," it is a tragic loss—but it is not a sacrifice. Such a man is acting in his own interests, to protect his most precious values.
Meanwhile, Democrats Use Veterans Day to Attack Bush.
Nov 10, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From CBS' 60 Minutes:...part of the Palestinian leader's wealth was in a secret portfolio worth close to $1 billion -- with investments in companies like a Coca-Cola bottling plant in Ramallah, a Tunisian cell phone company and venture capital funds in the U.S. and the Cayman Islands. Although the money for the portfolio came from public funds like Palestinian taxes, virtually none of it was used for the Palestinian people; it was all controlled by Arafat...
...The stockpile went well beyond the portfolio. Arafat accumulated another $1 billion with the help of -- of all people -- the Israelis. Under the Oslo Accords, it was agreed that Israel would collect sales taxes on goods purchased by Palestinians and transfer those funds to the Palestinian treasury. But instead, Indyk says, "that money is transferred to Yasser Arafat...
...Palestinians certainly paid dearly for something else [Salam Fayyad, a former World Bank official] uncovered: a system of monopolies in commodities -- like flour and cement -- that Arafat handed out to his cronies, who then turned around and fleeced the public. Fayyad says it could accurately be seen as gouging his own people. "And especially in Gaza which is poorer, which is something that is totally unacceptable and immoral, actually."
Of all the monopolies, none was as lucrative or as corrupt as the General Petroleum Corporation, the one for gasoline. The corporation took the fuel it purchased from an Israeli company and watered it down with kerosene, not only defrauding the Palestinian drivers, but wrecking their car engines. Fayyad says the Petroleum Corporation charged exorbitant prices, and Arafat got a hefty kickback...
...There's yet another stash of money Arafat might be asked about: the funds he collected when he was chairman of the PLO in exile. The PLO's former treasurer told us he saw Saddam Hussein hand Arafat a $50 million check for supporting him during the first Gulf War. And there were other large gifts from the KGB and the Saudis. [Arafat's Billions, November 9, 2003]
Nov 10, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Since its founding in 1948 Israel has been under siege--courageously fending off hostile neighbors while defending itself against Arab terrorists. In a Mideast dominated by Arab monarchies, theocracies and dictatorships--Israel is a free country standing as the lone bastion of Western civilization in that region. Yet for decades Israel has faced growing international pressure--often led by the United States--to compromise with its enemies, and act against its self-interest. In this talk, Dr. Brook argues that the United States should unequivocally support Israel's effort at self-defense; that allowing Israel to rid itself of terrorist and foreign military threats is in America's best interests. Israel is our only true ally in the Mideast, and supporting it is the only moral thing for the United States to do.
The Moral Case for Supporting Israel
By Yaron Brook, Ph.D.
Tuesday, November 18, 7:30 PM
University of Southern California
3620 McClintock, Los Angeles, CA 90089
Seely G. Mudd (SGM) Building, Room 123
Q & A follows the lecture.
More information: aynrand@usc.edu
Yaron Brook is the best commentator on the Middle East that I know. He brings moral clarity better than any of the scholars in the field.--Editor
Nov 8, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
Afghanistan unveiled a post-Taliban draft constitution Monday....The draft starts by declaring that "Afghanistan is an Islamic Republic..."
"The religion of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam. Followers of other religions are free to perform their religious ceremonies within the limits of the provisions of law," the draft states, according to an English translation provided by the government. While avoiding direct mention of Shariah, Islamic holy law, the draft states that "in Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the sacred religion of Islam and the values of this Constitution." [Associated Press, 11/3/03]
Nov 7, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
New York Sun columnist Andrew Wolf on how to use schools to destroy cities:The test for the city's "science" schools, Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, has become the ultimate high-stakes test. The reason is simple. These schools are among the best anywhere, but the choices beyond are abysmal, particularly the schools that children can attend as a matter of right without a special admission process. In Riverdale and dozens of other similar communities in the city, it has long been the widely held belief that if you don't "make" Science or Stuyvesant, you're in deep trouble....
This was recognized by the New York Times, which reported in early 1997 that Kennedy's principal told another prospective Riverdale parent that in order to ensure the safety of her son, she should "teach him to strut, not walk, and to watch what was going on behind him." ...What was left to this parent was the city's Education Option, known as "Ed-Opt" high schools....Places are assigned according to a curve: 16% of the places are reserved for the highest-scoring students, 68% for those in the vast middle, and 16% for those at the bottom....
New York magazine examined this issue more than five years ago, using the Baruch College School as an example of how the system worked. For the 100 openings, 553 students applied from the top scoring group, vying for just 16 places; 878 came from the mid-range group, from which 68 were chosen, and just 63 of the applicants came from bottom, vying for 16 places. Thus, the odds that a low-scoring child would be admitted exceeded 1-in-4; 1-in-13 for the child in the middle, and 1-in-35 for the best performing students. This is meritocracy turned on its head. Of course, this system was created with the best of intentions, not to "leave any child behind." The presumption was that the middle class would fend for itself. And they did, more often than not with their feet. [New York Sun, 11/7/03]
Nov 7, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
The crackdown reached the near-absurd yesterday when [Russian oil company] Yukos faced possible fresh charges for allegedly failing in its duty properly to monitor rabbit coupling at a farm in Siberia. Regional agriculture ministry inspectors found that female and male rabbits were often kept together in groups of up to four, a violation of the norms. "Couplings take place unsystematically, and no zoological-technological records are kept," the Interfax news agency quoted a ministry report as saying. [Daily Telegraph, 11/7/03]
Nov 7, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 24, 2003:UNLV students had a tough time grabbing a copy of the Rebel Yell before class Thursday morning. About 30 distribution stands for the campus newspaper were wiped out of the latest edition. The copies were tossed into several garbage bags and left in the University of Nevada, Las Vegas amphitheater, covered with a sheet that read, "Rebel Yell Wake Up." ...Student columnist Alexander Marriott is not surprised. ...He has been compared to Adolf Hitler and accused of supporting "genocide, rape and slavery." ...The comments came in response to Marriott's opinion piece, "Christopher Columbus, we salute you."... ["COLUMN BACKLASH: Outrage aimed at UNLV paper"]
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 23, 2003:
[Alexander Marriott] was fired Monday following allegations he plagiarized his Sept. 29 column...Judkins said Marriott's column, "Christopher Columbus, we salute you," mirrors a 2002 Capitalism Magazine article, "Did Christopher Columbus Discover America?" written by Michael Berliner...
...Berliner said when he read Marriott's column in the Review-Journal, re-printed in the Oct. 12 opinion pages, he had no problem with the content. "It never struck me that it was plagiarism," he said. Berliner said no one from the Rebel Yell staff ever contacted him before or after firing Marriott. A former professor for 15 years at California State University, Northridge, he said he has graded enough essays to spot plagiarism. Berliner said he and Marriott seem to have similar beliefs, but different writing styles...Berliner said he sent an e-mail to Rebel Yell opinion editor Irene Marquette suggesting Marriott was fired for something other than plagiarism.
...Judkins said she reached her decision to fire Marriott after showing the printed version of the column to two UNLV professors, who compared it to Berliner's article. One was Cathy Scott, a part-time journalism instructor at UNLV. Judkins said she could not recall the name of the other professor who believed Marriott plagiarized. Scott, who has no official connection to the Rebel Yell, said several sentences seemed to be taken directly from Berliner, and the overall writing seemed too advanced for a college student... ["UNLV Rebel Yell columnist accused of plagiarism, fired"]
(This unnamed professor could be "English prof Jane Hafen" according to Las Vegas Review-Journal editorialist Thomas Mitchell, who was told that Hafen was an "instigator of the plagiarism charge.")
Here are some letters defending Alex.
From the Rebel Yell, November 5th, 2003:
A column by Rebel Yell columnist Alexander Marriott on Sept. 29 entitled "Christopher Colombus, We Salute You" was not plagiarized. Mr. Marriott has been reinstated to his position as staff columnist on the Rebel Yell. We apologize to Mr. Marriott for all inaccurate characterizations of his writing.
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal, November 06, 2003:
UNLV's student newspaper has apologized to newly reinstated columnist Alexander Marriott for its allegation that he committed plagiarism. The retraction, apology and notice of Marriott's reinstatement to the Rebel Yell was printed Wednesday. "We apologize to Mr. Marriott for all inaccurate characterizations of his writing," the statement reads...Berliner, an editor at the Ayn Rand Institute in California and a former professor, did not believe his work was appropriated by Marriott. Neither did Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. The student newspaper's faculty adviser, Mary Hausch, also questioned the allegation. Judkins resigned last week. ["UNLV writer accepts apology from Rebel Yell"]
Writes Megan Lee in the Rebel Yell:
The overall attitude that I have found on this campus consists of a few basic principles. Mostly it is multiculturalism to a ridiculous extent, a very biased denial of the validity or importance of any invention, discovery or idea founded by someone who was not a female or a minority, and the quick silencing of anyone who thinks differently. These attitudes are not conducive to a freethinking university and in my opinion are contradictory to themselves. How can it be that all thoughts are considered to have merit, except for those that differ from a vastly, dare I say, left wing prejudice? We are so concerned about what is politically correct that we do not care what is correct or fair any longer...What kind of a society have we become if in the middle of a university-the place where all things are supposed to be questioned and all thought is supposed to be free-all opposing opinions or conservative voices can be silenced simply because they do not agree with the status quo?
...It's time that the student body understood that stifling the ideas of others makes them no better than their opinion of the man that Mr. Marriott originally thanked. And so, Alexander Marriott, though I have never met you, I salute you for bringing to the surface a problem that has been plaguing our university. I only hope that others who have been bullied, shouted and threatened to silence will once again be able to find their voice and bring back the diversity that makes us a forum for free thought.
Alexander Marriott also writes for Capitalism Magazine.
Related Articles:
Christopher Columbus, We Salute You by Alexander Marriott
The legacy of Columbus was not death and destruction.
Did Christopher Columbus "Discover" America? by Michael Berliner
It was Columbus' discovery for Western Europe that led to the influx of ideas and people on which America was founded--and on which it still rests.
The Real Museum Looters by Keith Lockitch
Iraqi Museum Looting Pales in Comparison to Broad-Daylight Attacks on Western Civilization by Multiculturalists
The Absurdities Underlying Multiculturalism by Walter Williams
For the multiculturist/diversity crowd, culture, ideas, customs, arts and skills are a matter of racial membership where one has no more control over his culture than his race. That's a racist idea but it's politically correct racism. It says that one's convictions, character and values are not determined by personal judgement and choices but genetically determined. In other words, as yesteryear's racists held: race determines identity.
Nov 6, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From Cox and Forkum:
This cartoon was inspired by Charles Johnson's LGF post, Press In Quagmire Frenzy:
Well, this was entirely predictable; taking a run around the major media sites this morning reveals the press in full bore Quagmire Mode after yesterday's missile attack that brought down a US helicopter and killed 16 soldiers.The New York Times: News Analysis: As Casualties in Iraq Mount, Will Resolve Falter?
The Washington Post: New Attacks Intensify Pressure on Bush.
And of course, what would a quagmire be without the Spectre of Vietnam?
Nowhere in any of these reports is the slightest hint of awareness that if the US were to pull out of Iraq now, jihadis around the world would be emboldened to launch more attacks against US interests everywhere, seeing the US as a paper tiger. Osama bin Laden said this outright -- that our withdrawal from Somalia (where there was much less at stake) proved to him the US had no spine.
The media is on the side of the enemy. Their desire to see the US fail in Iraq is palpable. And the Democrats aren't far behind, as their primary concern (after mouthing empty sympathies) is, very obviously, how to use this attack against President Bush.
The war isn't only taking place in the Middle East -- it's right here in America too.
Nov 6, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
The Pacific Legal Foundation, a prominent constitutional public interest law firm, has sued the Federal government over its denial of a family's only access road to its property trapped inside the Wrangell-St. Elias Park in Alaska. The National Park Service has been bullying this family for most of the year, refusing to allow it access over an existing right of way. The Bush Administration has so far refused to intervene and reign in the agency. This case is typical of National Park Service behavior and should be a clear warning against this agency's presence anywhere. The National Park Service not only exemplifies government mismanagement of its own land, its authority and exercise of power supersedes the moral right of private property.One reason why this case is very important to the viros is that they are trying to redefine guaranteed rights of way to private property to exclude "motorized vehicles". Another is that they are trying to establish that a 'right of way' across Federal land is subject to 'environmental review' and therefore denial.--Erich Veyhl
Nov 5, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From LifeNews.com:Shortly after President Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban into law, a federal judge in [Lincoln,] Nebraska said the pro-life law is unconstitutional and issued a temporary injunction against it. "It seems to me the law is highly suspect, if not a per se violation of the constitution," said U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf. Kopf agreed with a previous Supreme Court decision and said the law should have included a health exception.
[Anti-abortion] groups say a health exception is unnecessary and would make the ban useless as any reason can be given to justify a partial-birth abortion as necessary to protect a mother's health. "While it is also true that Congress found that a health exception is not needed, it is, at the very least, problematic whether I should defer to such a conclusion when the Supreme Court has found otherwise," Kopf said.
[...] U.S. Justice Department attorney Anthony Coppolino told Kopf that he should show deference to Congress' findings that the abortion procedure is not medically necessary. [...]
Kopf also said the bill did not present "an objective" presentation of the facts and had a "serious vagueness problem." He also wondered why Congress didn't invite those who perform partial-birth abortions to testify [to Congress]. [LeRoy Carhart, who performs partial-birth abortions in Omaha] has been in court before in an attempt to block a ban on partial-birth abortions. He sued to overturn Nebraska's state ban and, in 2000, the Supreme Court agreed that the law was unconstitutional. [It] was Kopf who originally ruled that the Nebraska ban was unconstitutional.
Recommended website: www.AbortionisProLife.com
Nov 5, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the NY Post:NEW YORK — A 14-year-old New Jersey schoolboy [Scott Switzer, of Colts Neck] — whose dad [a Navy engineer aboard the USS Detroit in the Persian Gulf] and stepdad are in the military — was suspended for five days because he drew a "patriotic" stick figure of a U.S Marine blowing away a Taliban fighter, officials said yesterday. "He's been punished for the drawing," said Tinton Falls [Middle] school superintendent Leonard Kelpsh. "We felt it was highly inappropriate, and we took it very seriously."
...Scott, who turned 14 Tuesday and was headed back to school Wednesday, said he was unjustly disciplined for his sketch of "a war scene." "Truth be told, it's a Marine shooting a terrorist Taliban," he told The Post. "It's just a picture. What upsets me most is that the principal would dare say it's not normal. To me, it's patriotic."
...a local psychologist who examined the teenager said the sketch was benign...Scott's mother said school officials described the drawing as "not the work of a normal mind." Scott said he understood the school's concern for student safety, but was offended by the principal's comments. "Truth be told, I'm more upset that he'd insinuate that I'm mentally unstable," he said. "I'm the class clown. I'm not a bully." ["'Patriotic' Stick Figure Drawing Troubles School", October 29, 2003]
No Scott you are the class hero. The bullies are the monsters who run your school. Compare this action to the professor in the U.S. who advocated the death of American soldiers:
At an anti-war "teach-in" this week, a Columbia University professor called for the defeat of American forces in Iraq and said he would like to see "a million Mogadishus" -- a reference to the Somali city where American soldiers were ambushed, with 18 killed, in 1993. "The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military," Nicholas De Genova, assistant professor of anthropology at Columbia University told the audience at Low Library Wednesday night. "I personally would like to see a million Mogadishus." The crowd was largely silent at the remark. They loudly applauded De Genova later when he said, "If we really believe that this war is criminal ... then we have to believe in the victory of the Iraqi people and the defeat of the U.S. war machine." ... [Teach-in organizer Eric] Foner said that because of the university's tradition of freedom of speech, it was unlikely De Genova would suffer professionally in any way because of what he said. "A person's politics have no impact on their employment status here, whether they are promoted, whether they are fired or whether they get tenure," Foner said. [Newsday, 3/27/03]
Related: Academic "Freedom" at Columbia U. and Columbia's Anti-American Professors and Freedom of Speech.
Nov 5, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From BBC:[...] The American defence department has begun a recruitment drive for local draft boards, raising questions about a possible revival of conscription. A notice on a department website invites United States citizens over the age of 18 to volunteer for the boards. The board members will decide who can be exempted if a draft is needed. [...] There has been no draft in the US since it was ended by Congress in 1973, the year that US troops pulled out of Vietnam. [...] Pentagon officials have denied any move to re-instate the draft, saying that this would require a conflict of the magnitude of World War II. They say the Selective Service System (SSS), which runs the draft boards, is merely launching a routine recruitment drive as 80% of places are now vacant.
