Friday, March 31, 2006
The Greatest Danish Offense
How can we expect the religion of peace to control their anger in the face of the Danish onslaught to their sensibilities? The national symbol of Denmark is the statue of the Little Mermaid, a story by Hans Christian Andersen. They take their schoolkids there to see it - to teach them to hate the prophet - and see a a naked woman, (well - a naked fish-woman).
It is a tribute to the restraint of Islam that this mermaid is not back at the bottom of the sea! This offense will not be around much longer - remember the Afghan Buddhas.
Iranian Naval Exercise
Iran's Persian Gulf military exercise started today. The name of the exercise - according to Iran's national news agency is - Holy Prophet (PBUH). The purpose of the exercise is to show the US and the rest of the world they can shut down oil delivery out of the Persian Gulf.
We know it will be quite a mess stopping Iran from achieving their nuclear ambitions. We have to step back and take the view from 20,000 ft for a moment. We are watching Iran prepare a nuclear arsenal. Iran's president and spiritual leader have both publicly and repeatedly committed themselves to a nuclear strike against Israel. Israel will retaliate. We will have nuclear war in the Middle East if Iran goes unchecked - it is a virtual certainty.
If you think the threat to the oil supply is high now because of Iran's navy - wait until you see what the supply picture looks like when they're tossing nuclear weapons around.
The nuclear jihad will not stop with Israel. One of the first steps Iran will take with a nuclear weapon may be to export it. They would like Hezbollah to have a few, and the Chechnyans. Charles Krauthammer is predicting hyperproliferation. You should read the article. Imagine the response to the next offensive cartoon.
Do we wait now? Americans want to wait - they want to give Iran the benefit of the doubt. But this is self-delusion, there is no doubt what will take place. We do not need another Neville Chamberlain lesson. Waiting now is complicity in the deaths of ten's or hundred's of thousands of innocent people. Can we call waiting under these circumstances anything but evil?
The Queen of Denmark recently said: We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance. That is quite right. If we act now, we will have 98% of the UN calling us wreckless American imperialists. If we do not act now, we will have a nuclear jihad. Nuclear sticks and stones will break our bones, Kofi's names will never hurt us.
We know it will be quite a mess stopping Iran from achieving their nuclear ambitions. We have to step back and take the view from 20,000 ft for a moment. We are watching Iran prepare a nuclear arsenal. Iran's president and spiritual leader have both publicly and repeatedly committed themselves to a nuclear strike against Israel. Israel will retaliate. We will have nuclear war in the Middle East if Iran goes unchecked - it is a virtual certainty.
If you think the threat to the oil supply is high now because of Iran's navy - wait until you see what the supply picture looks like when they're tossing nuclear weapons around.
The nuclear jihad will not stop with Israel. One of the first steps Iran will take with a nuclear weapon may be to export it. They would like Hezbollah to have a few, and the Chechnyans. Charles Krauthammer is predicting hyperproliferation. You should read the article. Imagine the response to the next offensive cartoon.
Do we wait now? Americans want to wait - they want to give Iran the benefit of the doubt. But this is self-delusion, there is no doubt what will take place. We do not need another Neville Chamberlain lesson. Waiting now is complicity in the deaths of ten's or hundred's of thousands of innocent people. Can we call waiting under these circumstances anything but evil?
The Queen of Denmark recently said: We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance. That is quite right. If we act now, we will have 98% of the UN calling us wreckless American imperialists. If we do not act now, we will have a nuclear jihad. Nuclear sticks and stones will break our bones, Kofi's names will never hurt us.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
New WTC Design
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Afghanistan - A Turning Point
We have reached a turning point in Afghanistan. America and it's allies have dethroned the Taliban and enabled formative steps to a democracy. By any measure a victory - the pinnacle of special operations warfare to date. We cannot, however, send any more soldiers to defend a society prosecuting Christians for their faith.
Abdul Rahman has been whisked out of the country - a brave and lucky man. Michelle Malkin refers us to a Novopress.info report that more Christians are being arrested. There will be some low-profile beheadings to make up for the loss of Islamic dignity entailed in letting Rahman go in one piece.
We have two choices:
1) Abandon them to their fate - which will be hideous - coming back when and if we need to take out more of the pointy-ended infrastructure of Islamic fascism.
2) Colonize it, and impose civilized order - which means repressing Islam as understood by the Afghans.
We lack the will for the second - although it would be by far the more humane.
We'll be leaving soon.
Abdul Rahman has been whisked out of the country - a brave and lucky man. Michelle Malkin refers us to a Novopress.info report that more Christians are being arrested. There will be some low-profile beheadings to make up for the loss of Islamic dignity entailed in letting Rahman go in one piece.
We have two choices:
1) Abandon them to their fate - which will be hideous - coming back when and if we need to take out more of the pointy-ended infrastructure of Islamic fascism.
2) Colonize it, and impose civilized order - which means repressing Islam as understood by the Afghans.
We lack the will for the second - although it would be by far the more humane.
We'll be leaving soon.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
Reform Muslims
There are muslims who believe their faith is compatible with a democratic state that does not recognize the primacy of Islamic law. These, however, are not moderate muslims, they are reform muslims. The essential nature of the moderate muslim is well-defined by Charles Krauthammer.
The West is hoping for the moderate muslims to gain ascendency and thereby head-off immediate violence. Understandable, but not a solution to the problem that brought us 9/11. Promoting moderate muslims is an attempt to kick the can down the road a few years. It may work until their numbers are so great that Sharia can become the governing law through their votes.
Jordan is the example state for moderate muslim leadership - they responded to Zarqawi's attack on a wedding by calling for his death. That's good for America, in as much as we want him dead too - but there has been no protest in Jordan to suicide bombs at Israeli weddings, and there was no protest in Jordan over the killing of 3000 Americans in the 9/11 attack. Jordan's moderation means they reject Zarqawi and his ilk - but they do not believe Islam should hold no favored status in law and that Christians, Jews, and atheists have an equal right to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
There are muslims who do believe that. They are rare, and they keep quiet because they would like to live, but they are out there.
We need to be doing our utmost to provide an environment where reform muslims can speak out and draw converts to their view. To do that, we must be completely committed to the principles that we, as Americans, claim to uphold. If we cannot defend freedom of expression with respect to some fairly innocuous cartoons, what encouragement are we providing to those of the muslim faith who reject global Islam as the desired end-state of civilization? And global Islam would indeed be the end-state of civilization - that much is clear. Moderate Islam is the same strategic goal with different tactics. Reform Islam is what we want - a different strategic goal. We don't have to create it - it is out there. We need to support it.
One might argue - no doubt they will argue - that Islam is no different than Christianity - the Christians await the rapture as their strategic goal. That is true for some portion of the Christian faith - and it is not something that needs to be repressed or fought. Christians awaiting the rapture do not seek to exterminate those who disbelieve. Moreover, Christians believe that if they were to adopt the tactics of an Osama Bin Laden - they'd be left out of the rapture - not - as in Islam - arriving in a privileged position to enjoy their virgins.
We cannot treat Christianity and Islam, or Buddhism and Islam, or Judiasm and Islam, or secular humanism and Islam, as morally-equivalent. They are not. Islam, according to its most popular proponents, sanctions any manor of immoral practice to promote the caliphate. No other major religion, nor secular atheism - take that position - in fact, all of these other faiths are showing a great deal of hesitation about any use of force to defend their faith from being overrun by Islam. We must be more proactive. Islam will be reformed, or there will be millions of casualties. That is not hyperbole. There will be a nuclear-armed jihadist soon, maybe in Iran, maybe Pakistan, or maybe France. Whichever it is - they will seek to start the final battle with the infidels. That's in the lifetimes of most who read this.
If we are to avoid that - Islam must change. It can change from within. In order for that to happen we must stop pretending that moderate muslims, muslims who prefer the slow war, are amenable to Western civilization. They are not. We aggrandize moderate muslims as the spokespersons of reason we have been looking to speak to in the Islamic world. They fane interest in working within Western civilization until they can replace it.
Unfortunately, I do not believe America has the backbone for this - to provide the unflinching defense of our founding values which would enable reform in the muslim world. Even worse, the common agreement to our founding values is largerly gone. America was exceptional, it brought freedom to more human beings than any other creation of man. We become less exceptional daily. Our schools don't teach a thing about what Americans are - rather - they celebrate keeping as much of one's 'own culture' as one can - as if the fact that they are here, in America, is nothing - like being in a Holiday Inn. This is the new state of western civilization - nothingness - a whiteboard - atheistic, self-indulgent, cynical, a substrate for delusional constructions of imagined glory of some other culture.
By state law in California, all public school students are taught about the exceptional contributions of Ceaser Chavez to America. They will not be taught about any Medal of Honor recipients - in fact - they won't know what it is. They will be taught that tolerance is the one common value we can share with you at a public school - tolerance and non-violence - no more Columbines - beyond that - go back to your "real" culture - your non-American culture - to find some values. And no - you cannot have a voucher - it's important that you celebrate labor victories with those of us represented by the the NEA. Now get out there and protest - it builds character. This is what we teach our kids. What answers will they have when Sharia comes knocking - wearing the mask of the victim of bigotry? Our schools, the ones we pay for, teach our kids that the very best thing they can be is devoid of judgements of anybody except those who would judge, those are the bad people. The muslims, they're just celebrating their culture. Don't tell the kids anything about "honor" killings in Islam - that's promoting violence - instead - have an introduction to the Koran, and play-up their sensitivities to insults to the prophet so we don't have any nastiness here on school grounds.
Sooner or later we're going to have to decide if there's anything the founding fathers gave us that's worth defending - because Sharia is coming.
The West is hoping for the moderate muslims to gain ascendency and thereby head-off immediate violence. Understandable, but not a solution to the problem that brought us 9/11. Promoting moderate muslims is an attempt to kick the can down the road a few years. It may work until their numbers are so great that Sharia can become the governing law through their votes.
Jordan is the example state for moderate muslim leadership - they responded to Zarqawi's attack on a wedding by calling for his death. That's good for America, in as much as we want him dead too - but there has been no protest in Jordan to suicide bombs at Israeli weddings, and there was no protest in Jordan over the killing of 3000 Americans in the 9/11 attack. Jordan's moderation means they reject Zarqawi and his ilk - but they do not believe Islam should hold no favored status in law and that Christians, Jews, and atheists have an equal right to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
There are muslims who do believe that. They are rare, and they keep quiet because they would like to live, but they are out there.
We need to be doing our utmost to provide an environment where reform muslims can speak out and draw converts to their view. To do that, we must be completely committed to the principles that we, as Americans, claim to uphold. If we cannot defend freedom of expression with respect to some fairly innocuous cartoons, what encouragement are we providing to those of the muslim faith who reject global Islam as the desired end-state of civilization? And global Islam would indeed be the end-state of civilization - that much is clear. Moderate Islam is the same strategic goal with different tactics. Reform Islam is what we want - a different strategic goal. We don't have to create it - it is out there. We need to support it.
One might argue - no doubt they will argue - that Islam is no different than Christianity - the Christians await the rapture as their strategic goal. That is true for some portion of the Christian faith - and it is not something that needs to be repressed or fought. Christians awaiting the rapture do not seek to exterminate those who disbelieve. Moreover, Christians believe that if they were to adopt the tactics of an Osama Bin Laden - they'd be left out of the rapture - not - as in Islam - arriving in a privileged position to enjoy their virgins.
We cannot treat Christianity and Islam, or Buddhism and Islam, or Judiasm and Islam, or secular humanism and Islam, as morally-equivalent. They are not. Islam, according to its most popular proponents, sanctions any manor of immoral practice to promote the caliphate. No other major religion, nor secular atheism - take that position - in fact, all of these other faiths are showing a great deal of hesitation about any use of force to defend their faith from being overrun by Islam. We must be more proactive. Islam will be reformed, or there will be millions of casualties. That is not hyperbole. There will be a nuclear-armed jihadist soon, maybe in Iran, maybe Pakistan, or maybe France. Whichever it is - they will seek to start the final battle with the infidels. That's in the lifetimes of most who read this.
If we are to avoid that - Islam must change. It can change from within. In order for that to happen we must stop pretending that moderate muslims, muslims who prefer the slow war, are amenable to Western civilization. They are not. We aggrandize moderate muslims as the spokespersons of reason we have been looking to speak to in the Islamic world. They fane interest in working within Western civilization until they can replace it.
Unfortunately, I do not believe America has the backbone for this - to provide the unflinching defense of our founding values which would enable reform in the muslim world. Even worse, the common agreement to our founding values is largerly gone. America was exceptional, it brought freedom to more human beings than any other creation of man. We become less exceptional daily. Our schools don't teach a thing about what Americans are - rather - they celebrate keeping as much of one's 'own culture' as one can - as if the fact that they are here, in America, is nothing - like being in a Holiday Inn. This is the new state of western civilization - nothingness - a whiteboard - atheistic, self-indulgent, cynical, a substrate for delusional constructions of imagined glory of some other culture.
By state law in California, all public school students are taught about the exceptional contributions of Ceaser Chavez to America. They will not be taught about any Medal of Honor recipients - in fact - they won't know what it is. They will be taught that tolerance is the one common value we can share with you at a public school - tolerance and non-violence - no more Columbines - beyond that - go back to your "real" culture - your non-American culture - to find some values. And no - you cannot have a voucher - it's important that you celebrate labor victories with those of us represented by the the NEA. Now get out there and protest - it builds character. This is what we teach our kids. What answers will they have when Sharia comes knocking - wearing the mask of the victim of bigotry? Our schools, the ones we pay for, teach our kids that the very best thing they can be is devoid of judgements of anybody except those who would judge, those are the bad people. The muslims, they're just celebrating their culture. Don't tell the kids anything about "honor" killings in Islam - that's promoting violence - instead - have an introduction to the Koran, and play-up their sensitivities to insults to the prophet so we don't have any nastiness here on school grounds.
Sooner or later we're going to have to decide if there's anything the founding fathers gave us that's worth defending - because Sharia is coming.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
The Drug War - Let's Change Strategies
America is fighting a "war on drugs" that cannot be won. The consequences of pretending we can eradicate the use of illegal drugs, cocaine and heroin in particular, has been to promote and sustain hyper-violent gangs which make their living penetrating the US border and subverting foreign governments that might otherwise be inclined to develop into responsible states. Our tactics are creating and sustaining international criminal organizations that are well-armed, well-practiced at moving people and material into the United States, and well-funded. These organizations and states have been used by the Islamic fascists, and that alliance of convenience will continue unless and until we do something to change the economics of illicit drug use in America.
The problem is massive - but we can take some snapshots to get an idea of the whole.
Afghanistan
America and its allies have removed the Taliban and sponsored the formation of a democratic government in Afghanistan, a great achievement. This new government, however, is facing an economic death-spiral. Poppies are the only successful cash crop. To respect the policies of America and its allies, Afghanistan is forced to keep the poppy trade illegal and to play-along with the facade that it's going to be eradicated. That in turn, forces farmers - who need to eat - to work with gangs that subvert the government and sustain terrorists to export their product. A democracy with some semblance of law and order cannot be sustained when the leading export is deemed illegal. Afghanistan will revert to the status of a narco-state run by criminals if we do not change the economic landscape.
In contrast, if heroin trade were legalized and regulated, the farmers would not be forced to work with gangs of Islamic fascists to export their product. The price of heroin would drop as demand in the illegal channel is replaced with legal demand. That would, in turn, encourage farmers to find other crops and remove a sustaining source of funds for Islamic fascism. Heroin use in the United States creates a demand that will be met. That demand makes it impossible for a government in Afghanistan that is forced to treat poppies as an illegal crop to survive.
Bolivia
The Bolivians have elected Evo Morales as their new president. President Morales has a personal web-site describing his political philosophy - a remarkable fact in and of itself - but a subject for a different essay. Evo Morales's home-page declaration begins:
We, Aymaras and Quechuas, original nations of the Andes, have survived the onslaught of the white man until today thanks to our coca leaf. From the moment the white man came to our land he has tried to control our leaf for his own enrichment. He has abused it here and now he is abusing it everywhere else. Since it has escaped his control he is intent on destroying it.
He has labeled our sacred plant a drug, to be prohibited and eliminated under universally binding drugs conventions. With these conventions the United Nations have offended and betrayed the Aymara and Quechua Nations.
Under the cover of these conventions and after impoverishing our people with their neoliberal policies, the United States government, foremost enemy of the Indians, has used its dollars to bribe the officials of Bolivia, corrupt its institutions and pit white Bolivians against us. Recently the United States Embassy in La Paz has funded a mercenary force with orders to eliminate the coca plant and the Indians defending it.
I have to agree with Evo on this one. Rather than fight our drug war by prevention and treatment in the United States - we've exported the fight into a war against farmers in Central and South America. Bolivians would not be inclined to despise the United States if not for the fact that we insist on destroying their crops. To what avail? Here's the CIA World Factbook's economic summary:
world's third-largest cultivator of coca (after Colombia and Peru) with an estimated 28,450 hectares under cultivation in June 2003, a 23% increase from June 2002; intermediate coca products and cocaine exported mostly to or through Brazil, Argentina, and Chile to European and US drug markets; eradication and alternative crop programs under the MESA administration have been unable to keep pace with farmers' attempts to increase cultivation; money-laundering activity related to narcotics trade, especially along the borders with Brazil and Paraguay
Cultivating coca has not destroyed Bolivia, they have lived with it being freely available for thousands of years. America's war on the cultivation of coca, on the other hand, has done quite a bit to destroy Bolivia - and to turn it into a lawless narco-state. Bolivia is dominantly Christian, and should be an ally in the war on Islamic fascism - but they are more likely to align themselves with Islamic fascists than us, because the Islamic fascists are fighting the people who keep trying to destroy Bolivia's cash crop. Obviously, by the CIA's estimate, our efforts to prevent or reduced the cultivation of the coca plant are failing massively at their intended purpose. What we are doing is pushing Bolivia away from us and into alliances with Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and President AhWantMyJihad.
Evo Morales is a socialist. But one has to think about what it means to be a capitalist in Bolivia before we can draw quick conclusions from this label. To be a capitalist in Bolivia means that one accepts the restrictions imposed on coca cultivation by the "free market" Americans. The "captitalists" want to dictate production for the farmers. The drug cartels and the Islamic fascists, on the other hand, are all in favor of Bolivia producing as much cocaine as the stupid Americans can snort - and enriching themselves and their families in the process. Would you be a "capitalist" in Bolivia? It means voting to starve out farmers in your own country to support an obviously failed strategy to protect Americans from themselves.
Now consider instead, the consequences of legalizing cocaine. Importation is made through legal channels, and the trade is taxed to support treatment and prevention. The impetus to use criminal cartels to export their product goes away. The motivation to support and use a money-laundering system outside of financial regulation is much reduced. The cocaine middle-men start losing money and, guess what, that means they'll dry up. No one wants to join a gang if they can't get their Beemer and some cool automatic weapons.
MS-13
National Geographic has produced a remarkable documentary on the origin, growth, and character of the MS-13 gang. National Geographic appears to have had some serious mission creep over the years - but the documentary is worth watching. It chronicles MS-13's rise from among a small group of El Salvadoran immigrants in Los Angeles to an international, rich, violent, well-organized criminal enterprise delivering illicit drugs to pitiful Americans.
Now MS-13 is the most dangerous gang in America according to National Geographic and Newsweek. They have been implicated in a scheme to smuggle Al Qaeda members into Boston. They could be out of business tomorrow. Legalize and tax the drugs, and treat the addicts - MS-13 goes away. It's not a gang people join for an ideology - they want the money.
Domestic Drug Abuse
By way of disclosure - I have no personal interest in making cocaine and heroin legal. I would not touch them if they were delivered free to my doorstep. As a parent, I have considerable fear of the consequences should my children ever try them - but I know my children's defenses against these drugs don't have much to do with crop-dusting in Bolivia.
The argument is often made that legalization will increase use. That may be true, and it may not. Tobacco and alcohol use are in decline. There will be people lost to cocaine and heroin, as always. We have to ask what price our country is paying to protect these people from themselves. How is it Bolivia has functioned with coca leaves freely available? How was Al Qaeda preventing heroin from running down there terrorist training camps in Afghanistan? They never had a poppy eradication program. Domestic drug abuse is a domestic problem, not a problem we should export.
Funding Terrorism
We are all acutely aware now that our dependency on foreign oil has funded the Islamic fascism which is sweeping Europe and beginning in America. It's not just oil that's funding Islamic fascism. Human nature is tragic, their will be heroin and cocaine use in America for as long as America exists. We cannot eradicate it, just as prohibition could not eradicate alcohol. Our failed attempts to turn foreign plant cultivation into a US command economy is building and sustaining criminal empires and governments that oppose the US at every turn. The drug war is furthering the cause of Islamic fascism.
We should treat cocaine and heroin like alcohol. Legalize, regulate, tax, and punish for misuse that puts others in danger. We'll have better success reducing drug addiction and we'll stop making enemies out of allies to serve our national drug fetish.
The problem is massive - but we can take some snapshots to get an idea of the whole.
Afghanistan
America and its allies have removed the Taliban and sponsored the formation of a democratic government in Afghanistan, a great achievement. This new government, however, is facing an economic death-spiral. Poppies are the only successful cash crop. To respect the policies of America and its allies, Afghanistan is forced to keep the poppy trade illegal and to play-along with the facade that it's going to be eradicated. That in turn, forces farmers - who need to eat - to work with gangs that subvert the government and sustain terrorists to export their product. A democracy with some semblance of law and order cannot be sustained when the leading export is deemed illegal. Afghanistan will revert to the status of a narco-state run by criminals if we do not change the economic landscape.
In contrast, if heroin trade were legalized and regulated, the farmers would not be forced to work with gangs of Islamic fascists to export their product. The price of heroin would drop as demand in the illegal channel is replaced with legal demand. That would, in turn, encourage farmers to find other crops and remove a sustaining source of funds for Islamic fascism. Heroin use in the United States creates a demand that will be met. That demand makes it impossible for a government in Afghanistan that is forced to treat poppies as an illegal crop to survive.
Bolivia
The Bolivians have elected Evo Morales as their new president. President Morales has a personal web-site describing his political philosophy - a remarkable fact in and of itself - but a subject for a different essay. Evo Morales's home-page declaration begins:
We, Aymaras and Quechuas, original nations of the Andes, have survived the onslaught of the white man until today thanks to our coca leaf. From the moment the white man came to our land he has tried to control our leaf for his own enrichment. He has abused it here and now he is abusing it everywhere else. Since it has escaped his control he is intent on destroying it.
He has labeled our sacred plant a drug, to be prohibited and eliminated under universally binding drugs conventions. With these conventions the United Nations have offended and betrayed the Aymara and Quechua Nations.
Under the cover of these conventions and after impoverishing our people with their neoliberal policies, the United States government, foremost enemy of the Indians, has used its dollars to bribe the officials of Bolivia, corrupt its institutions and pit white Bolivians against us. Recently the United States Embassy in La Paz has funded a mercenary force with orders to eliminate the coca plant and the Indians defending it.
I have to agree with Evo on this one. Rather than fight our drug war by prevention and treatment in the United States - we've exported the fight into a war against farmers in Central and South America. Bolivians would not be inclined to despise the United States if not for the fact that we insist on destroying their crops. To what avail? Here's the CIA World Factbook's economic summary:
world's third-largest cultivator of coca (after Colombia and Peru) with an estimated 28,450 hectares under cultivation in June 2003, a 23% increase from June 2002; intermediate coca products and cocaine exported mostly to or through Brazil, Argentina, and Chile to European and US drug markets; eradication and alternative crop programs under the MESA administration have been unable to keep pace with farmers' attempts to increase cultivation; money-laundering activity related to narcotics trade, especially along the borders with Brazil and Paraguay
Cultivating coca has not destroyed Bolivia, they have lived with it being freely available for thousands of years. America's war on the cultivation of coca, on the other hand, has done quite a bit to destroy Bolivia - and to turn it into a lawless narco-state. Bolivia is dominantly Christian, and should be an ally in the war on Islamic fascism - but they are more likely to align themselves with Islamic fascists than us, because the Islamic fascists are fighting the people who keep trying to destroy Bolivia's cash crop. Obviously, by the CIA's estimate, our efforts to prevent or reduced the cultivation of the coca plant are failing massively at their intended purpose. What we are doing is pushing Bolivia away from us and into alliances with Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and President AhWantMyJihad.
Evo Morales is a socialist. But one has to think about what it means to be a capitalist in Bolivia before we can draw quick conclusions from this label. To be a capitalist in Bolivia means that one accepts the restrictions imposed on coca cultivation by the "free market" Americans. The "captitalists" want to dictate production for the farmers. The drug cartels and the Islamic fascists, on the other hand, are all in favor of Bolivia producing as much cocaine as the stupid Americans can snort - and enriching themselves and their families in the process. Would you be a "capitalist" in Bolivia? It means voting to starve out farmers in your own country to support an obviously failed strategy to protect Americans from themselves.
Now consider instead, the consequences of legalizing cocaine. Importation is made through legal channels, and the trade is taxed to support treatment and prevention. The impetus to use criminal cartels to export their product goes away. The motivation to support and use a money-laundering system outside of financial regulation is much reduced. The cocaine middle-men start losing money and, guess what, that means they'll dry up. No one wants to join a gang if they can't get their Beemer and some cool automatic weapons.
MS-13
National Geographic has produced a remarkable documentary on the origin, growth, and character of the MS-13 gang. National Geographic appears to have had some serious mission creep over the years - but the documentary is worth watching. It chronicles MS-13's rise from among a small group of El Salvadoran immigrants in Los Angeles to an international, rich, violent, well-organized criminal enterprise delivering illicit drugs to pitiful Americans.
Now MS-13 is the most dangerous gang in America according to National Geographic and Newsweek. They have been implicated in a scheme to smuggle Al Qaeda members into Boston. They could be out of business tomorrow. Legalize and tax the drugs, and treat the addicts - MS-13 goes away. It's not a gang people join for an ideology - they want the money.
Domestic Drug Abuse
By way of disclosure - I have no personal interest in making cocaine and heroin legal. I would not touch them if they were delivered free to my doorstep. As a parent, I have considerable fear of the consequences should my children ever try them - but I know my children's defenses against these drugs don't have much to do with crop-dusting in Bolivia.
The argument is often made that legalization will increase use. That may be true, and it may not. Tobacco and alcohol use are in decline. There will be people lost to cocaine and heroin, as always. We have to ask what price our country is paying to protect these people from themselves. How is it Bolivia has functioned with coca leaves freely available? How was Al Qaeda preventing heroin from running down there terrorist training camps in Afghanistan? They never had a poppy eradication program. Domestic drug abuse is a domestic problem, not a problem we should export.
Funding Terrorism
We are all acutely aware now that our dependency on foreign oil has funded the Islamic fascism which is sweeping Europe and beginning in America. It's not just oil that's funding Islamic fascism. Human nature is tragic, their will be heroin and cocaine use in America for as long as America exists. We cannot eradicate it, just as prohibition could not eradicate alcohol. Our failed attempts to turn foreign plant cultivation into a US command economy is building and sustaining criminal empires and governments that oppose the US at every turn. The drug war is furthering the cause of Islamic fascism.
We should treat cocaine and heroin like alcohol. Legalize, regulate, tax, and punish for misuse that puts others in danger. We'll have better success reducing drug addiction and we'll stop making enemies out of allies to serve our national drug fetish.
Democracy - Wrong Goal
I've been blog-absent for a while now, partly because I do have to pay a mortgage, and partly out of frustration with the failure of the world to quickly adopt my opinion. So - for you 7 regular readers out there - my humble apologies. Back to the fight:
In Afghanistan - our success story in the GWOT - we have a man on trial for his life for converting from Islam to Christianity. Michelle Malkin's blog is covering the story in detail. The democracy we have created there is incompatible with civilization as we know it. This is Article 3 of the Afghan constitution:
In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.
It is simple - the constitution is secondary - and Imam's decide what is and is not contrary to the provisions of Islam. We have succeeded in scrapping the Taliban as the ruling body. We have not succeeded in standing-up a government compatible with respect for individual liberty.
According to CNN, Tony Blair's imminent speech on the war of ideas with the terrorists will include this:
"This is not a clash between civilizations, it is a clash about civilization," Blair will say in a speech this afternoon, according to extracts released by his official spokesman.
"'We' is not the West. 'We' are as much Muslim as Christian or Jew or Hindu. 'We' are those who believe in religious tolerance, openness to others, to democracy, liberty and human rights administered by secular courts," he will say.
That is fine by me - and I have immense respect for Mr. Blair - but by this standard we have lost in Afghanistan - we enabled the Afghan vote, we helped stand up a government, they have a constitution, and they explicitly reject this view.
At the end of the day what's fundamental about Western civilization is not that we use voting to change governments, but that we agree there are fundamental rights of the individual that are non-negotiable, independent of the government's interests. It's the Bill of Rights that counts. It's not so much about how one changes governments as it is about what governments cannot do.
The principle that the sovereignty of the individual is inviolate can be upheld by a monarch as well as, or even better than, a democracy. Hitler was democratically elected, individual sovereignty declined. Hamas was democratically elected, individual sovereignty declined. Jimmy Carter claims AhWantMyJihad was democratically elected, individual sovereignty has declined.
The greatest force for the spread of the principle of supremacy of individual liberty was the British empire. The British brought along due process and common law, not mandates from the Church of England. There are not a few countries in the Caribbean and Africa where you can find a lot of the citizens willing to tell you in private that things were better before the British left. What happened? They got independence - and democracy - and individual sovereignty declined.
We have a principle that comes ahead of democracy - namely limited government. That is what we need to export first in the war of ideas. A monarch that protects free speech, freedom of religion, and a free press, is far more a natural ally to Western civilization than a freely-elected Islamic state executing apostates. We have the cart in front of the horse.
In Afghanistan - our success story in the GWOT - we have a man on trial for his life for converting from Islam to Christianity. Michelle Malkin's blog is covering the story in detail. The democracy we have created there is incompatible with civilization as we know it. This is Article 3 of the Afghan constitution:
In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.
It is simple - the constitution is secondary - and Imam's decide what is and is not contrary to the provisions of Islam. We have succeeded in scrapping the Taliban as the ruling body. We have not succeeded in standing-up a government compatible with respect for individual liberty.
According to CNN, Tony Blair's imminent speech on the war of ideas with the terrorists will include this:
"This is not a clash between civilizations, it is a clash about civilization," Blair will say in a speech this afternoon, according to extracts released by his official spokesman.
"'We' is not the West. 'We' are as much Muslim as Christian or Jew or Hindu. 'We' are those who believe in religious tolerance, openness to others, to democracy, liberty and human rights administered by secular courts," he will say.
That is fine by me - and I have immense respect for Mr. Blair - but by this standard we have lost in Afghanistan - we enabled the Afghan vote, we helped stand up a government, they have a constitution, and they explicitly reject this view.
At the end of the day what's fundamental about Western civilization is not that we use voting to change governments, but that we agree there are fundamental rights of the individual that are non-negotiable, independent of the government's interests. It's the Bill of Rights that counts. It's not so much about how one changes governments as it is about what governments cannot do.
The principle that the sovereignty of the individual is inviolate can be upheld by a monarch as well as, or even better than, a democracy. Hitler was democratically elected, individual sovereignty declined. Hamas was democratically elected, individual sovereignty declined. Jimmy Carter claims AhWantMyJihad was democratically elected, individual sovereignty has declined.
The greatest force for the spread of the principle of supremacy of individual liberty was the British empire. The British brought along due process and common law, not mandates from the Church of England. There are not a few countries in the Caribbean and Africa where you can find a lot of the citizens willing to tell you in private that things were better before the British left. What happened? They got independence - and democracy - and individual sovereignty declined.
We have a principle that comes ahead of democracy - namely limited government. That is what we need to export first in the war of ideas. A monarch that protects free speech, freedom of religion, and a free press, is far more a natural ally to Western civilization than a freely-elected Islamic state executing apostates. We have the cart in front of the horse.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
This should be interesting.
Drudge Report brings us this headline:
Gay-vs.-Muslim Soccer Set in Netherlands
I don't think this is going to work out too well, but it's entertaining reading. The best quote:
Gay Muslims can take their choice of teams, she said. "People can have many identities."
Indeed - perhaps some of the players can switch sides at halftime.
Gay-vs.-Muslim Soccer Set in Netherlands
I don't think this is going to work out too well, but it's entertaining reading. The best quote:
Gay Muslims can take their choice of teams, she said. "People can have many identities."
Indeed - perhaps some of the players can switch sides at halftime.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Cartoon Jihad Final: Islamic Fascism-1 Civilization-0
Mark Steyn sums up the score on the cartoon jihad in the Western Standard, oddly enough one of the few Western media outlets to stand up to the threat. I've written about the Western Standard before, you might consider supporting it.
Monday, March 13, 2006
then as farce...
Over 15 years ago, in 1990, Germany was reunified. At the time, an acquaintance of mine who had emigrated from Germany, said it was likely a mistake, that the world was safer with Germany split. His feeling was that a reunited Germany was likely to descend, once more, into hell. I thought his foreboding to be meaningless pessimism.
Now I am beginning to reconsider.
Some art is art, it's meaning is in and of itself. Other art is art with a mission, art intended to lead, or at least symbolize the leading edge of the culture. Transcendent art retains its meaning across centuries. Art with a mission is not art 20 years later. Mozart is art, Brokeback Mountain is art with a mission.
There are brave artists, but not nearly so many as they themselves would have you believe. The art with a mission crowd, as a rule, picks targets that don't threaten to behead the artist. Thus we have a cross in urine - but no Korans in urine (I'm not counting the one's that were scrunched up to get in the toilets at Guantanomo Bay - because the soldiers did not submit the work to the National Gallery).
The art with a mission crowd in Germany is turning ugly indeed. They are busy celebrating suicide bombers blowing-up Jews (HT Davids Medienkritik), exploring the comedic aspects of Nazism, and revisiting the enlightenment achieved by gassing Jews to death (HT Drudge Report).
History is indeed repeating itself, we had the tragedy, we're witnessing the farce, and next up is another tragedy.
The common ground of the Islamic fascists and the German fascists is, of course, to finish the job Hitler started. One might expect, with the Islamists claiming Germany for Islam, and the neo-Nazi's claiming Germany for Germans - they would be killing one another off. We should be so lucky. The Islamists celebrate Hitler - and the neo-Nazi's and the Islamists will find it convenient to ignore their differences for a while - to get on with other business - first kill all the Jews.
If you are Jewish and living in Germany, or France for that matter, it's a good time to get out. No one will come to save you there. There are thousands of innocent people being tortured to death in North Korea - but the civilized world does not rise in unison to stamp out this evil - and it is evil. Instead we harangue the President for being so stupid as to speak the truth. No one will stamp out the next holocaust either - save yourselves.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Major Bieger & Farah
This is the new picture hanging in my office - arrived yesterday - nicely framed as shown. The soldier is Major Bieger, and he is trying to comfort Farah while rushing her to an American hospital in Iraq. Farah was injured when a car bomb attacked Major Bieger's unit while a bunch of kids were hanging around waving to the soldiers. Farah did not make it.
You can read the story on Michael Yon's online magazine here. You can order your own copy of the picture from the gallery. By doing so, you'll be supporting Michael's incredible one-man, self-funded odessey to report some of the truth of what Americans are doing on the ground in Iraq.
I like having the picture in my office - it's a sad story - but it is good to have on the wall. When I hear John Kerry or Wesley Clark talking about how our soldiers are roughing up women and children in Iraq - well - it's good for me to remind myself that we have a Major Bieger and a Michael Yon.
PortGate Part II
A radio news report has Sen. Schumer attempting to introduce legislation in the Senate for an up-or-down vote on the sale of port facilities to a UAE-owned company, and the Republican leadership working against it. As noted earlier - the Democrats are not engaged in principled opposition - but they would indeed like to score some points on the Bush administration.
Before the Republicans hamstring themselves trying to kill the legislation in favor of a "thorough 45-day review" - they should consider their options. The Democrats are handing the Republicans a loaded gun. Don't be afraid to pull the trigger. Amend the bill to include these points:
1) Since the assumption of the bill is that we are less secure with the UAE involved in port management, we will also require the TSA treat all passengers and cargo arriving on aircraft passing through the UAE as potential terrorist threats and subject them to security procedures appropriate at that threat level,
and, even better:
2) Recognizing that port security is essential to national security - full background checks on all workers at ports will be required. Those using false identification or with a felony record are to be barred from the ports immediately, independent of any union work rules.
Paste-up Chuckie's bill and take it to the floor - let's see how bad the Democrats want to be #1 on national security.
I am personally heartened by the coverage this issue has received, and spillover into other areas of domestic in-security. I agree with the President's strategy - we need to go get the bad actors where they live - but since we haven't quite got them all - leaving the doors open to another attack here is just plain stupid.
Before the Republicans hamstring themselves trying to kill the legislation in favor of a "thorough 45-day review" - they should consider their options. The Democrats are handing the Republicans a loaded gun. Don't be afraid to pull the trigger. Amend the bill to include these points:
1) Since the assumption of the bill is that we are less secure with the UAE involved in port management, we will also require the TSA treat all passengers and cargo arriving on aircraft passing through the UAE as potential terrorist threats and subject them to security procedures appropriate at that threat level,
and, even better:
2) Recognizing that port security is essential to national security - full background checks on all workers at ports will be required. Those using false identification or with a felony record are to be barred from the ports immediately, independent of any union work rules.
Paste-up Chuckie's bill and take it to the floor - let's see how bad the Democrats want to be #1 on national security.
I am personally heartened by the coverage this issue has received, and spillover into other areas of domestic in-security. I agree with the President's strategy - we need to go get the bad actors where they live - but since we haven't quite got them all - leaving the doors open to another attack here is just plain stupid.
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Can Islam Reform Itself?
The National Review Online has begin putting together Opinion Duels, wherein some of the critical issues of our time are debated by some outstanding proponents. Yesterday featured Andrew McCarthy and Mansoor Ijaz debating whether or not Islam can reform itself (Hat Tip: The Jawa Report). It is very much worth reading.
Mansoor Ijaz is a pro-American Muslim man - very smart, well-spoken, and not an apologist for acts of terrorism. So I was anxious to read the debate - because I would like to have a kernel of hope that Islam has a path to reform short of losing a war with the West. (If Islam wins the war with the West - a real possibility - reform will of course be unnecessary).
Sadly - after reading the debate - I see even less hope now of avoiding a war with Islam in total than I did before. Today we have a war with the active Islamic fascists. The cartoon jihad convinced me that the ranks of the active Islamic fascists are going to swell dramatically. I was hoping the debate would give me some way to back out of that conclusion - but it did no such thing. In fact, Mansoor was unintelligible - simultaneously describing Islam as a religion with no problems and its followers as in need of massive reform.
Dennis Prager often makes the point that he cannot judge a religion per se, and there is no need to, he can judge by the behavior of those who practice it. To do anything else is a bit ridiculous - I am not going to become a theologian of Islam in order to understand those who would kill me or let me live only by their law. That is what Mansoor asks of us - for the West to become Islam's theologians, to define for Islam what portions of the Quran they can ignore and what they should stick with. We can't do that - it's futile - we are not their new Imams. An attempt to do so would only create more immediate enmity. It would label anyone promoting reformation of Islam from within as a tool of the infidel.
What we can do - and must do if we intend to keep things like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - is to make sure that Muslims reap the full benefits of, and pay the full price for, their decisions as to what Islam means today.
Mansoor Ijaz is a pro-American Muslim man - very smart, well-spoken, and not an apologist for acts of terrorism. So I was anxious to read the debate - because I would like to have a kernel of hope that Islam has a path to reform short of losing a war with the West. (If Islam wins the war with the West - a real possibility - reform will of course be unnecessary).
Sadly - after reading the debate - I see even less hope now of avoiding a war with Islam in total than I did before. Today we have a war with the active Islamic fascists. The cartoon jihad convinced me that the ranks of the active Islamic fascists are going to swell dramatically. I was hoping the debate would give me some way to back out of that conclusion - but it did no such thing. In fact, Mansoor was unintelligible - simultaneously describing Islam as a religion with no problems and its followers as in need of massive reform.
Dennis Prager often makes the point that he cannot judge a religion per se, and there is no need to, he can judge by the behavior of those who practice it. To do anything else is a bit ridiculous - I am not going to become a theologian of Islam in order to understand those who would kill me or let me live only by their law. That is what Mansoor asks of us - for the West to become Islam's theologians, to define for Islam what portions of the Quran they can ignore and what they should stick with. We can't do that - it's futile - we are not their new Imams. An attempt to do so would only create more immediate enmity. It would label anyone promoting reformation of Islam from within as a tool of the infidel.
What we can do - and must do if we intend to keep things like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - is to make sure that Muslims reap the full benefits of, and pay the full price for, their decisions as to what Islam means today.
