Iraq is Being Liberated, Even if the Whole World Says Otherwise

Oct 1, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

"Yes, the occupation is a blessed and promising liberation for Iraq, even if the U.N., Europe, Russia, India, and all the Arabs say otherwise. The logic of international law could be of interest to the French, the Germans, the Russians and the Arabs, who are enamored with it… but not to us, the Iraqis. International law should not be of interest to us in any form or shape, because Saddam's dagger was dripping Iraqi blood, not Russian or Arab [blood]. Saddam's plague wreaked havoc with us, the Iraqis, not with the Arab League's minions, nor the Russians or the Chinese! The Iraqi tragedy, which exceeded any rational boundaries, was and continues to be at the epitome of its viciousness and degeneracy.

"While others were sipping Araq [an alcoholic drink] in the most upscale resorts in Baghdad, thousands [of Iraqis] were being buried alive in Iraq's sands, deserts, lagoons, [and] vast and godforsaken plains. And while Arab journalists, intellectuals, politicians, and poets came to sing with their trilling voices, to beat the drums [in support of Saddam] and to take pictures with Latif Nassif, Jassim and Nawal Al-Aloussi, and the rest of the Ba'ath Party 'gang'- hundreds of [Iraqi] poets, scientists, and writers were dying [on] the war-front and in torture dungeons. During more than three decades, the dagger of death extricated Iraqis from their homes, their families, their work places, their schools and their [children's] playgrounds…"

"Look at the mass-graves… [Lest you say] no more than a few thousands, 10, 20, 50 thousand… No, there are hundreds of thousands of bodies that have not been unearthed as of yet, hundreds of thousands of human lives who could have become a rich resource for humanity. Every Iraqi, every Arab, and every human being should ask himself for the reason they were murdered, before he [waves] the banner of international law. We the Iraqis were candidates [to have the same fate as] the Hutu and the Zulu tribes, the Cambodians, the victims of the Holocaust and the millions of Russians massacred at the hands of Stalin. Considering the blindness of international law and the apathy and lack of compassion of our Muslim brethrens… and supposing that the U.S. had remained silent and in a truce with Saddam, we could have lost millions of additional lives in wars waged by Saddam, his sons and his grandsons.

"If the justification for the war was not very clear prior to its onset then following the liberation there has been no doubt about it in the mind of anyone who has any sense. It has become clear in light of waves of Arab mercenaries crossing the borders [into Iraq]… Saddam Hussein prepared for war, and anyone who claims otherwise is lying blatantly. It is true that he did not deploy his missiles, and it is true that he did not strap explosives to hundreds of thousands of his suicide seekers and guards so that they can blow themselves in the midst of Americans and Brits -- the way Abd Al-Aziz Al-Rantisi [of Hamas] was hoping. But Saddam prepared a different weapon, more effective and more dangerous…

"Saddam Hussein's war was not against the Americans… Saddam's war was first and foremost against the Iraqis, including his own clan and household relatives. Therefore, his weapon… was more degenerate than any WMD, and he convinced himself that with it he could cast his fear on others. Saddam Hussein released from prison tens of thousands of the most die-hard criminals and murderers, after eliminating the last political prisoners he had in his hands…

"Therefore, the liberation of Iraq is an utterly blessed and positive deliverance, even if Germany, France, Russia, China and all the Arabs say otherwise." ["It is Liberation, Even if the Whole World says Otherwise," Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), September 29, 2003.]

Catch Vingt-Deux

Sep 30, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Happy Birthday Ludwig Von Mises

Sep 29, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Fig Leaf Diplomacy

Sep 24, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

There was good and bad in President Bush's U.N. speech. Unfortunately, the good was completely undercut by the bad. By repeatedly acknowledging the legitimacy of the United Nations -- going as far as to equate its founding principles with America's -- Bush surrendered the moral high ground to our enemies.

The Good: Bush rightly praised many of the accomplishments of the U.S. military forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also took a swipe at Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and the PA. But most importantly, Bush invoked 9/11 and alluded to the (now long dead) Bush Doctrine:

"Events during the past two years have set before us the clearest of divides: Between those who seek order, and those who spread chaos; between those who work for peaceful change, and those who adopt the methods of gangsters; between those who honor the rights of man, and those who deliberately take the lives of men, and women, and children, without mercy or shame.

"Between these alternatives there is no neutral ground. All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization. No government should ignore the threat of terror because to look the other way gives terrorists the chance to regroup, and recruit, and prepare. And all nations that fight terror, as if the lives of their own people depend on it, will earn the favorable judgment of history."

This is a strong moral statement: "All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization."

The question is: Why is Bush saying this in an appeal to an organization that openly embraces many who "spread chaos," "adopt the methods of gangsters," and "deliberately take the lives of men, and women, and children"?

The Bad: The answer, judging by Bush's statements, is that Bush feels it is necessary to morally justify the self-defense of the United States in U.N. terms. He lauded the U.N. a number of times, but this quote sums it up:

"Helping Afghanistan and Iraq to succeed as free nations in a transformed region -- cutting off the avenues of proliferation, abolishing modern forms of slavery -- these are the kinds of great tasks for which the United Nations was founded."

He didn't criticize the dictatorship members of the U.N. He didn't condemn or even acknowledge their active participation in the "war against civilization." [Correction: Bush did at least say, "Arab nations must cut off funding and other support for terrorist organizations" -- however, he did not name the nations nor indicate what would happen if they didn't stop supporting terrorism.]

Yet the one time he mentions Israel, it is a criticism: "Israel must work to create the conditions that will allow a peaceful Palestinian state to emerge." As if Israel isn't fighting a war against Palestinian terrorists who "deliberately take the lives of men, and women, and children."

The climax of this moral equivalence came at the end of his speech:

"The founding documents of the United Nations and the founding documents of America stand in the same tradition. Both assert that human beings should never be reduced to objects of power or commerce, because their dignity is inherent. Both recognize a moral law that stands above men and nations, which must be defended and enforced by men and nations. ... And both point the way to peace, the peace that comes when all are free."

U.N. member Syria -- who is allowing terrorists into Iraq to kill U.S. soldiers -- is on the U.N. Security Council. U.N member North Korea regularly threatens to turn America into a nuclear "sea of fire." U.N. member Iran -- who just two days ago displayed missiles painted with "We will crush America under our feet" and "Israel must be wiped off the map" -- is considered by even the State Department to be the world's worst sponsor of terrorism. And let's not forget that Saddam's bloody Iraq was a U.N. member before being felled by American-lead coalition forces despite U.N attempts at obstruction.

Does anybody really believe that an organization that allows such members cares about "the peace that comes when all are free"?

Let's hope that Bush sees the difference between the founding principles of America and the U.N. Glenn Woiceshyn did an excellent job a few years back explaining that difference: UN Declaration of Rights Destroys Rights.

But even giving Bush the benefit of the doubt, it's shameful that he would say there isn't any difference, especially if it's political kow-towing to get other countries' help in Iraq.

A September 4th Wall Street Journal editorial described the motivation behind Bush's renewed appeals to the U.N.:

"White House spokesman Scott McClellan yesterday said that some countries, such as India, need a U.N. imprimatur before they dispatch troops to Iraq. Mr. Bush wants to provide that fig leaf -- our words, not Mr. McClellan's -- but the current coalition will retain civilian and military control in Baghdad. ... If this is how it all works out, the inevitable U.N. wrangling may well be worth it."

Commenting on the editorial, Objectivist scholar Harry Binswanger rightly noted:

"The 'fig leaf' we are to supply is more like a feather pulled from the wing of the American eagle. [...] Rather than seek the 'imprimatur' of the U.N., we should regard any approval they would give us as a stain of dishonor."

John Burns on Western Reporting on Iraq

Sep 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Terror, totalitarian states, and their ways are nothing new to me, but I felt from the start that this was in a category by itself, with the possible exception in the present world of North Korea. I felt that that was the central truth that has to be told about this place. It was also the essential truth that was untold by the vast majority of correspondents here. Why? Because they judged that the only way they could keep themselves in play here was to pretend that it was okay.

There were correspondents who thought it appropriate to seek the approbation of the people who governed their lives. [...] Senior members of [Iraq's] information ministry took hundreds of thousands of dollars of bribes from these television correspondents who then behaved as if they were in Belgium. [...]

In one case, a correspondent actually went to the Internet Center at the Al-Rashid Hotel and printed out copies of his and other people's stories--mine included--specifically in order to be able to show the difference between himself and the others. He wanted to show what a good boy he was compared to this enemy of the state. He was with a major American newspaper.

Yeah, it was an absolutely disgraceful performance. CNN's Eason Jordan's op-ed piece in The New York Times missed that point completely. The point is not whether we protect the people who work for us by not disclosing the terrible things they tell us. Of course we do. But the people who work for us are only one thousandth of one percent of the people of Iraq. So why not tell the story of the other people of Iraq...?

[...] We now know that this place was a lot more terrible than even people like me had thought. There is such a thing as absolute evil. I think people just simply didn't recognize it. They rationalized it away. [Editor & Publisher]

For responses, including one by Dan Rather click here.

Related Reading: Saddam Hussein's Real Ministers of Disinformation Come Out of the Closet

United Nations Loves Dictators, But Hates George Bush

Sep 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

From FoxNews: Bush to Ask U.N. for Cooperation in Iraq.

"I will make it clear that I made the right decision, and the others that joined us made the right decision. The world is a better place without Saddam Hussein," Bush said in the interview taped Sunday in the Oval Office.

As we've said before, though the U.S. may in fact need help in Iraq, President Bush is wrong to try to deal with the U.N., an organizations whose primary goal is to prop up and legitimize dictatorships at the expense of America.

The U.N. is Evil is a Web site dedicated to compiling op-eds detailing the U.N.'s systematic assault on individual rights, the sovereignty of free nations, and the rule of law.

An op-ed from by Robert Tracinski sums it up nicely: America Should Withdraw From The United Nations and Let It Collapse:

Yes, there is a value to cooperating with other nations -- but only with free nations who share a commitment to standing up against the threats of terrorism and dictatorship. Any time free nations agree to subordinate themselves to a collective consensus with hostile dictatorships, it is only the free nations that lose -- and it is only the dictatorships that gain. Indeed, the dictatorships run the United Nations. Within weeks of September 11, terrorist-sponsor Syria was invited to chair the United Nations' Security Council. Iraq and Iran are scheduled to trade chairmanship of its disarmament committee, while Libya is set to chair its human rights commission.

More Board of Ed Follies

Sep 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

A fetish was made about the delivery of books and materials for the first day of classes. "For too many years," said the mayor, "we heard stories about books not being in classrooms in time for the first day of school. I am proud to say that we made good on our promise in January, and here they are, ready for Monday's classes." Yes, most books and materials were delivered on time. But most of these were books for classroom libraries to encourage independent reading--nice to have in place the first day of school, but hardly the centerpiece of the first couple of week's classroom activity.

 The cost of this new efficiency, however, was that scores of back-office people who normally processed new employees were dispatched to the schools to count the books and make sure they were distributed to classrooms. Because of this diversion of resources, 5,000 new teachers didn't get their first regular paychecks this past Monday, 10 times the number than were similarly inconvenienced last year. New teacher retention is one of the key problems in schools across the nation, particularly here in New York City; one quarter of this year's crop can be expected to leave by next September.This won't help. [NY Sun]

Iran’s Three Wishes

Sep 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Reuters reports this morning: Iran Shows Off Missile Might Amid Nuclear Concerns.

Iran, under mounting pressure to dispel fears it is developing nuclear arms, Monday paraded six of its newly deployed medium-range missiles, military analysts say could reach Israel or U.S. bases in the Gulf.[...]

Television pictures showed one of the missile carriers displayed a defiant message in bold letters on a giant yellow banner facing Khatami which said: "We will stamp on America." Iran insists its nuclear scientists are not working on a weapons program but trying to meet soaring electricity demand.

From FoxNews: Iranian Nuke Official: Tehran Will Scale Back Cooperation With U.N. Watchdog Agency.

Iran will scale back its cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog in response to the agency's Oct. 31 deadline for Tehran to prove its atomic programs are peaceful, Iran's representative to the agency said Monday.

‘Every Planet on Earth’

Sep 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

"My vision is to make the most diverse state on earth, and we have people from every planet on the earth in this state. We have the sons and daughters of every, of people from every planet, of every country on earth..." (September 18, 2003, San Francisco Chronicle, Hat Tip - J. Taranto)

Vaclav Havel and Lech Walensa Blast Western Support of Cuba

Sep 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Today, it is the responsibility of the democratic world to support representatives of the Cuban opposition, irrespective of how long the Cuban Stalinists manage to cling to power. The Cuban opposition must enjoy the same international support as political dissidents did in divided Europe.

It cannot be claimed that the American embargo of Cuba has brought about the desired result. Neither can this be said of the European policy, which has so far been considerably more forthcoming towards the Cuban regime.

It is time to put aside transatlantic disputes about the embargo of Cuba and to concentrate on direct support for Cuban dissidents, prisoners of conscience and their families.

Europe ought to make it unambiguously clear that Castro is a dictator, and that for democratic countries a dictatorship cannot become a partner until it commences a process of political liberalisation. [Daily Telegraph]

Who’s Lying Now, Mr. Kerry

Sep 20, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

[Sen.] Kerry also claimed, "We are at risk of being the first generation in history to pass this place off in worse shape than we were handed it by our parents." That's at odds with the claims of many environmental experts and historians. "The long-term trend of declining air pollution has continued under the first year of the Bush administration, according to preliminary EPA data, and is certain to continue for the rest of this decade and beyond," wrote the American Enterprise Institute's Steven Hayward in a recent article warning of "Eco-Hysteria."

"It would be virtually impossible for anyone, no matter how tenacious or determined, to prevent continued and substantial reductions in air pollution," wrote another AEI fellow, Joel Schwartz, in a recent study.

Cartoon: Back In the Day

Sep 18, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

The cartoon was inspried by the second photograph in this story: Clinton praises Democratic candidates in Iowa. And the Iraqi tyrant happens to be in the news this morning: 'Saddam' Tape Urges Iraqis to Fight Americans.

Oppose Medicare Expansion: Subsidizing Pharmaceuticals Will Kill Drug Research and Development

Sep 17, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

"In addition to discovering and testing drugs, pharmaceutical companies also face enormous administrative costs to obtain FDA approval to put drugs on the market," Richard E. Ralston, AFCM's executive director, explained in an op-ed. "If drug firms know that a drug's price is established by the state--not by patients--there is no interest in discovering, testing and creating new drugs."

While Ralston said he welcomes the latest effort by some House Republicans, led by Pennsylvania Rep. Patrick Toomey, to block the worst ideas in the recently approved Medicare drug bills, Ralston insisted that preserving the world's highest quality drugs means total opposition to any expansion of Medicare.

"A free market in pharmaceuticals is the only way to insure the flow of new, breakthrough drugs and competitive pricing," Ralston contended. "Controls on drugs, doctors, and cost will distort the drug market from the science stage to the pricing stage."

Ralston urged seniors who treasure their independence, including those covered for prescription drugs through employer-based plans, to tell

Congress: "Leave my drugs--which means those who produce them--alone!"

Americans for Free Choice in Medicine, (AFCM), founded in 1993, is the nation's only educational organization based on individual rights, personal responsibility and free market ideas in medicine.

The “Freedom Fighters” at Hamas

Sep 16, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

Most coverage of Hamas in the Western media betrays a quite astonishing misunderstanding of its role and its aims. The received wisdom is that, although its tactics may be repellent, Hamas is a group of freedom fighters battling against the Israelis for their rights--something akin to nationalist terrorist groups such as the IRA or ETA, which, however foul their methods, have an aim--national self-determination--that can be shared by perfectly decent, non-violent supporters.

It follows logically that any Israeli response to Hamas is reported as merely tit for tat and, in its own way, equally destructive to the chances of a negotiated settlement. Both sides are as bad as each other [...]

That view, however widely it may be propagated, is so warped that it can only raise suspicions about the agenda of those who peddle it. The comparison with the IRA is entirely specious. If the IRA had espoused not merely the separation of Northern Ireland from the UK but also the murder of every Unionist and every Anglican in Great Britain, the abolition of the United Kingdom and its replacement with a Catholic state, run by the IRA and dedicated to converting the rest of the world to Catholicism by force, then there might be some merit in the comparison.

[...] Talk of "negotiation" with Hamas is meaningless--as meaningless as the idea that you can negotiate with Osama bin Laden. You cannot negotiate with the man who intends only your murder and the destruction of your country and who is prepared to die--and kill you in the process--rather than settle for less.

Stay of Execution

Sep 15, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

The local paper ran an AP story with this headline: "Israel ignores outrage at its threat to remove Palestinian leader." It should have read: "Media ignore outrages committed against Israel by Palestinian leader." As usual, Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs is on top of things, compiling these stories this weekend:

Here is a sample of what Arafat's Palestinian Authority is teaching its children ... 'I'm prepared to kill Jews wherever they are' says Palestinian schoolgirl.

"I came here to defend President Arafat against the occupiers who are killing us every day. I'm prepared to make a big sacrifice. I'm prepared to go to the Jews myself and to kill them wherever they are just as they killed us and destroyed us," she said.

For more, be sure to check out Charles' Palestinian Child Abuse Slideshow. To deal with this threat, an Israeli authority naturally mentioned that killing Arafat is definitely one of the options. This is exactly the option we, the United States, chose for Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and everyone directly associated with them. But as the same article indicates, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Israel should not be allowed that option.

He said that if Arafat was either exiled or killed, "I think you can anticipate that there would be rage throughout the Arab world, the Muslim world and in many other parts of the world. The United States does not support either the elimination of him or the exile of Mr Arafat...the Israeli government knows that," Powell said.

In other words, do as we say, not as we do.

Not surprisingly, we have this news today: Palestinians Demand U.N. Protect Arafat.

UPDATE: FoxNews reports: Israel Backs Off Killing Arafat Option.

Israel backed off Monday from threats to kill Yasser Arafat, while the incoming Palestinian prime minister ceded control over many Cabinet appointments to Arafat's Fatah party despite Israeli demands that the veteran Palestinian leader be stripped of authority.

The 184

Sep 14, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

The Pentagon Memorial campaign is trying to raise money for a memorial.

The goal [...] is to construct a memorial commemorating the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the Pentagon and the 184 lives lost in the Pentagon and on American Airlines Flight 77.

The Pentagon Victims
The Flight 77 Victims

Earlier this year, a Department of Defense news release featured some technical facts regarding how well the Pentagon withstood the impact of the hijacked airliner: Engineer Study Reports Pentagon Was Built Tough.

But this article reveals just how far off the deep end some have gone to deny such basic facts about the Pentagon attack:

[The Zayed International Centre] hosted Thierry Meyssan, the French author of "9-11, The Big Lie," which seeks to implicate U.S. military officials in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Meyssan's book suggests that the Pentagon was hit by an American missile, and not a hijacked airliner and that the attacks were plotted to promote a U.S. military agenda that included waging war in Afghanistan.

The French press ridiculed the book, but it became a best seller in France for three months. The Pentagon has called the allegations in the book "more than insulting."

News from Afghanistan has been overwhemled by news from Iraq, but our troops are still bravely meting out justice there: U.S. General Sees Taliban in Afghanistan.

Taliban fighters, paid and trained by al-Qaida, are pouring into Afghanistan from Pakistan, the top American commander in Afghanistan said Sunday.

Lt. Gen. John Vines said the Taliban were trying to regroup and regain control of the country they ruled until ousted by the United States in late 2001. His comments to reporters traveling with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld were the first confirmation from a top U.S. military official of reports of a Taliban resurgence out of Pakistan into Afghanistan.

American, Afghan and coalition forces have responded with military operations against the radical Islamic fighters. As many as 200 Taliban have been killed this week alone, Vines said.

Thank you, men and women of the armed forces, for keeping up the fight. (Click here for ways to support the troops.)

Justice for Arafat

Sep 14, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses

The Jerusalem Post's editorial calling for killing--not expelling--Arafat is right on target, even if years too late. Arafat has been a terrorist murderer for decades and deserves exactly the same fate as bin Laden deserves.

While there has been no shortage of excuses and rationalizations to leave Arafat alone, the fact remains that no solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is possible with Arafat alive. Exiling him would be a mockery of justice and would not stop him from inciting further terrorism against Israel.

Taking him out would not only advance the prospects for peace in the region but would show to every Palestinian terrorist that Israel means business and that the days of moral cowardice and appeasement towards its enemies are over; it would show that Israel will no longer cave in to "world opinion" or to pressure from American presidents.

It is a shame that the Sharon and the Bush Administrations have still not decided to kill the murderer. As long as they remain oblivious to the need to carry out justice, the blood of innocent Israelis will not stop flowing.