Monthly Archives: December 2011

Another Look at Putin

While CHT has had some positive pieces on Putin (here, here, here and here), below is a more critical appraisal of Putin.

 

Interview with Russian nationalist leader Alexander Belov

Parliamentary elections in Russia took place on December 4 under a great of scrutiny from external observers and nationalist dissidents inside Russia. Nationalists face an increasing crackdown by the Putin regime which has recently banned a number of nationalist protest groups despite a huge turnout for the recent annual Russian March which attracted thousands of Russian nationalists and patriots from various groups.

The election results indicate that Putin’s United Russia party has lost support (losing 77 seats) but they still have an absolute majority of seats in the Russian Duma. The full result is as follows: United Russia: 238 seats; Communist; 92 seats: Just Russia (Social Democrats); 64 seats: Liberal Democrats (nationalist) 56 seats.

Below is an exclusive interview with one of Russia’s most prominent Nationalist activists, Alexander Belov.

 

1. According to the media, there were about 5,000 people on the March. What was the real turnout? 

The media quoted different figures. From 5,000 to 20,000 people. Major media outlets have referred to a representative of the Ministry of Interior who claimed 7000 attended the march. I believe that the actual number of participants was more than fifteen thousand people Continue reading

Why the establishment really fears Ron Paul

What’s behind all the frothing attacks on Ron Paul, the “scary racist”? As Jack Hunter says, “Let’s cut the crap”:

The GOP establishment’s main beef with Ron Paul is his foreign policy. This ideological chasm is the subtext to most attacks on Paul from the right. To their credit, some of Paul’s critics are man (or woman) enough to confront the congressman on this subject directly. Paul welcomes these challenges and wants his fellow Republicans to debate what a true conservative foreign policy should look like. But the members of the Republican establishment do not want any such discussion. In fact, they fear it.

It’s not just the “GOP establishment” that fears and loathes Ron Paul. Charles Johnson, the liberal interventionist at Little Green Footballs, has also piled on Paul, and he’s joined by the multicult storm troopers at One People’s Project.

What do these three seemingly divergent groups have in common?

They’re all totalitarian wannabes, that’s what. They know that only an all-powerful central government can feed their endless appetite for control over others. And an aggressive foreign policy is the prerequisite of an aggressive domestic policy.

The good news is that their fear is very real. Ron Paul’s success is a direct rejection of big government. With 64% of Americans now viewing the government as their greatest threat, and active duty military personnel backing Ron Paul more than any other candidate, vital support of the warfare-welfare state is rapidly evaporating.

So no wonder the chickenhawks and their leftist allies are screaming “Racist!” at the top of their lungs. It’s their last resort, and they know it.

The Dave Weigel Moment, Part II

David Weigel must be enjoying his moment back from JournoList exile. No doubt he was excited to tell his family and friends he was on the Rachel Maddow show the other night and tell them the New York Times cited his article. Don’t believe me? Read for yourself:

“The New York Times finally does a big take-out on Ron Paul’s ties to the seamier* sides of the conservative movement. No disrespect intended, but… well, what took so long? Here’s one of the key points in the story, explaining why Ron Paul’s allies thought they should go after racists and convert them to the cause…This is new to the Paper of Record, but Julian Sanchez and I wrote about this — these two exact essays…Why has it taken four years for these public domain facts to become “news”?

Weigel has complex relationship with Ron Paul (I was going to use tortured but that might be too strong.) I think he likes Paul, said he supportive of him back in 2008. But judging by his recent writing  in Slate, he also has the knife out ready stab Paul in the back to cover his own ass once again. But if he thinks this will absolve him from saying nice things about Paul over the years think again. He’ll be tarred and feathered one more time like it or not. We all know that’s how the race card is played inside the Beltway, especially by people who don’t like a particular person. Weigel survived one excommunication, can he survive two?

You know, it’s funny for a writer one who once worked at Reason not to realize libertarianism practiced right in front of your eyes. What did Ron Paul say in the last debate? “I don’t want to be a President who will run your life.” Ergo he’s going to be  libertarian President. He doesn’t micromanage, he doesn’t look over people’s shoulder, he’s not a control freak. Is that poor management practice? I suppose from the perspective of journalists used to the “Imperial Presidency” it is. But it’s what makes Ron Paul, Ron Paul. He does, as what Paul Wellstone once said: “Try not to live your life separate from the words you speak.” And that’s how he’ll conduct himself as President. He won’t be in your living room every night. He won’t make news every day. Some days, you won’t notice he’s the President. And that’s exactly the idea.  He’s a 21st Century Calvin Coolidge waiting to be elected. Because the only way to save the Constitution is to reign in the Executive Branch.

Now if one thinks that’s a disqualifier for the highest office in the land, it’s a fair argument. But that’s should be the argument, not whether Ron Paul is racist. If eve a little worm like Eric Dondero said he never wrote those words (“he was a figurehead”) in what was basically a fan club newsletter, then why are we arguing about words he never wrote and which already said he repudiated and took moral responsibility for? Why is this not enough? My guess is Weigel (and others too) want him to throw someone under the bus and blame him for all those words? But what would that solve and or prove? Nothing. Then he’d attack him for hanging around racists and “kooky” people as you usually Weigel often does in his writing. And what kind of a man takes responsibility and then blames someone else for his own lack of negligence? A typical politician that’s who (It was the staffer’s fault!). And people wonder why he has hardcore support.

This has nothing to do with race but everything to do with desperate opponents who the past four years never bothered with the “newsletters” until one day Paul was on top of an Iowa opinion poll. Now they want to say Iowa doesn’t count, just like they did with the Straw Poll. What are they going to say if he wins New Hampshire? Or South Carolina? They don’t count too?  There’s no answer Ron Paul can give the media which is going to satisfy them. Weigel’s Reason story on the newsletters sat around for four years with neither himself, or anyone else for that matter, doing any new reporting. This only leads to one conclusion: Weigel had come to terms with Paul’s answer and pretty much like everyone else didn’t take Paul’s campaign seriously until this past month. Now it’s an issue. It wasn’t back when he was at five percent. Now he wants answers. Now he wants to play “journalist.” Too late pal.

Muslim who threatened Pam Geller killed in attack on police officer

Let’s see if we can figure out who’s ultimately responsible for this:

Using a knife and a handgun, Jameela Cecila Barnette, 53, assaulted an officer from the department’s Precinct 3 who had knocked on her apartment door after responding to an alarm, Cobb Police spokesman Sgt. Dana Pierce said. Despite receiving injuries to his arm, Pierce said the officer, who is not being identified at this time, fired his service weapon to stop the assault.

On her blog, Pam Geller notes that the suspect had not only threatened her, but also U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-New York), and New York state Sen. Greg Ball, who had investigated Muslim influence on domestic terrorists.

What Geller overlooked, though, is how much Jameela Barnette may have been influenced by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s slander against Geller and her Stop Islamization of America organization. According to the SPLC, Pam Geller is an “Islamophobe” and “professional Muslim hater”, and the organization Geller and Robert Spencer founded is a “hate group.”

It seems easy to conclude that Jameela Barnette would see anyone who questioned the role of Islam in domestic terror as an enemy motivated only by “hate.”

After all, when nutcase Jared Loughner killed six people at a Tucson, Arizona, political rally, the SPLC didn’t hesitate to conclude Loughner had acted on the “antigovernment paranoia” caused by conservatives who opposed Obama’s leftist agenda.

So it seems fair to me to condemn the SPLC by the same standards it condemns others.

How cultural snobbery went to the Left Coast

This is a very good article which first appeared in The American Prospect on how the American Left was tagged with the cultural snobbery/”elitist” label (class warfare anyone?) which I forgot to include in yesterday’s list.

This response letter I found at The Washington Monthly, which had linked to the TAP article, pretty much explains how Hollywood and the mass entertainment industry works as it does. Indeed, you can find the 1% in more places than just Wall Street:

Continue reading

Articles for Your Consideration – Christmas Edition

Merry Christmas to all of our readers at CHT. By now you’ve probably dispensed with opening presents, church, watching A Christmas Story and are probably talked out with relatives or are done with Christmas dinner. So if your back on the computer (and I know some of you are) perhaps these articles my make good reading for the duration of this blessed day.

Again Merry Christmas to you all and hope for a better new year than the last

“Twas the Night before Liberal Christmas” by J.J. Jackson at Liberty Reborn

“Occupy Extreme and Establishment Moderate” by SARTRE at BATR

“The Greatest Christmas Carol” by Gary North at Lew Rockwell.com

“The Soldier’s Choice” by Timothy Egan at New York Times website

“The Story of Christmas Truce of 1914″ at the Guardian

“Immigration Impasse” by Jim Antle at TAC

“Grim Christmas” by Dr. Srdja Trifkovic at Chronicles

 

Our friend Roy Moore has just filed his paperwork to run for the Alabama Supreme Court once again. His wife email use a Christmas poem I would like to share:

 

“The Stranger” by Judge Roy Moore
The old man was alone by the fire that night;
His wife and his kids were in bed.
Christmas was near, but he was out of a job
And could barely keep his family fed.
It was snowing outside and cold in the room,
Because he had little wood left to burn.
This would be a sad Christmas with cupboards so bare,
For he had run out of places to turn.
In the firelight dim, he folded his hands,
And knelt by an old chair to pray.
“Dear Lord,” he said, as a tear he shed,
“I don’t know just what I should say.”
Then came a knock on the door; he could pray no more;
‘Twas a young man in the shivering night.
His coat was old and his shoes were worn;
He was really quite a pitiful sight.
“I’ve been walking all night,” the young man said,
“And my home is still far away.
If I may warm by your fire for a while,
Only a minute I will stay.”
The old man threw a log on the fire,
And made him a bite to eat.
“You’re very kind, sir,” said the young lad,
As the old man gave him his seat.
“Where are you bound on this cold winter night,
Dressed so ragged and bare?”
“I’m headed home,” replied the young man,
“My father waits for me there.
“I wouldn’t care about this ragged old coat,
If only his face I could see.
When I get home, I’ll have all I need,
For there with my father I’ll be.”
He then went to leave, so the old man got up,
And brought out the only coat he had.
“Here, take my coat,” he said with a smile,
“For the weather is exceptionally bad.”
The lad said goodbye before the old man could ask,
For he wanted his name to know.
But when he looked out the door, the stranger had gone,
And not a trace could be found in the snow.
But there in the yard was a new stack of wood,
Higher than a man could build.
And when he looked in the kitchen, he couldn’t believe
That all the cupboards were filled.
The chair in which the stranger had sat,
Was now one made of pure gold.
On the back of the chair, a note was pinned,
And this is the message it told.
“My Father and yours are one and the same,
You’ve been a good brother to me.
What a man sows, so shall he reap,
And thus, it shall always be.
“When I knocked on the door, you opened it to me,
And gave me what you needed too.
Now as you have done for a stranger in need,
So shall it be done unto you.”

 

 

Who Leads the Attack On Ron Paul?

The usual suspects, that’s who:

From the remorseless liars that brought America into the Iraq War, have kept the US mired in Afghanistan for now over a decade, oversaw the genocide in Libya wrought by NATO-backed Al Qaeda terrorists, and are attempting to incite war with both Syria and Iran, comes a frothing, if not entirely elementary attack against one of the few obstacles that stands in their way of perpetual war fought at America’s expense but for their personal gain. That obstacle is Ron Paul and the Constitutional reawakening he has spurred.

These people profit from the Empire’s international murder racket, and Ron Paul’s call to restore sanity would put an end to their sweet little gig. So naturally the pro-war, any war gang tosses anything it can at him.

These people can’t argue the facts, so they scream “Racism!” at their enemies. As I’ve argued before, both buttoned-up Neocons and the Halloween Left share the same lust for power and hatred of traditional America, and see big government as a weapon they can use to take what they want.

Tancredo: “More Refugees Now!”

I am assuming that Tancredo is one of the paid agents of the Marxist terrorist organization, MEK, but this is a pretty sad low:

Why are the dissidents not allowed to leave the camp and be welcomed as refugees in the United States?

Tom Tancedo, 12/21

Basically, Tom Tancredo is asking this country to take on 3,400 more foreigners–and not just any foreigners–but the strange tribe that makes up the MEK.

As mentioned on another thread, the interventionist who claims to be anti-immigration is either naive, or intentionally lying.  Interventionism leads to immigration, as Tancredo so sadly proves.

Neocons Urge Obama to intervene in Syria

As Iraq slides into chaos and civil war, thanks to the destabilizing Bush invasion, spokesghouls for the war industry are itching for yet another romp through the Middle Eastern minefield. In a letter published in The Weekly Standard (of course!), Elliott Abrams, Max Boot, Douglas J. Feith, Robert Kagan, and, of course, William Kristol, demand Obama use his imperial authority to launch a new war we can’t afford in a region of the world where we shouldn’t be messing.

In other words, the same gaggle of draft dodgers and war speculators that lied us into Iraq want us to mire ourselves in Syria. America needs to lay off that Kristol Meth.

Race or death

Being a journalist I’m not going to argue with a collegue for persistence. I just wish Gloria Borger was just as persistent in finding out whether there were WMD’s in Iraq as she was asking whether Ron Paul wrote his little fan newsletters or not. The  latter is just politics. Actual lives were at stake when it came to Iraq. Apparently to Borger, one was more important than the other. It’s too late to play “journalist” now and ask the “really tough questions.”

To their credit, people like Connor Friesdorf and Andrew Sullivan and Reason magazine (which went the the opposite way four years ago) realize the bigger picture at stake. Others will take their pot-shots to stop a man whom they view as a mortal threat. But what  the whole newsletters issue really comes down to, whether these words which even a scumbag like Eric Dondero said Paul never wrote are as important as what’s going on right now in the world where brown children in Afghanistan and Pakistan are being blown away from Obama’s killer drones as collateral damage or whether Iranian children might have the same done to them if Iran is attacked by the U.S. and or Israel.

If being the PC police, pleasing the SPLC and being clear of conscious of the taint of “racism” is more important than what’s being done in their name and their tax money in southwest Asia which Ron Paul wishes to stop. We’ll find out what’s more important to people, trivialities or human life.

I’ve changed my mind about amnesty

It’s all about fairness.

Consider: A man who only wanted a share of the American dream ignored a law. But his children are blameless. So why shouldn’t they be allowed to remain in the home their father provided for them through years of hard work? And why should they have to surrender the only life they’ve ever known?

After all, the children have gone to college and are working at becoming contributing citizens and good Americans. Can’t we all find a place in our hearts to forgive them and accept them, rather than condemn them for something they had no say in? Should the children be punished for the crimes of their father?

Amnesty isn’t a popular term, but sometimes it’s the right thing to do.

So it’s agreed: Bernie Madoff’s children should be allowed to keep their father’s money. Because it makes just as much sense as amnesty for illegal aliens.

Jeffrey Lord: When Attacks on Ron Paul Fail, then Attack his Voters

Get this. The reason Ron Paul is polling well in Iowa is because it’s Iowa. Jeffrey Lord is a special kind of dense. He is so dense he doesn’t know he is dense. He keeps repeating the same untruths (that non-interventionism is inherently left-wing) over and over again despite being corrected repeatedly. My reply is below:

I get it. When your attacks on Ron Paul aren’t working, then attack the people who vote for him.

First, you continue with the lie that non-interventionism is inherently left-wing. You have been corrected on this so many times, and I know you read these responses since you reply, that you have no excuse. You are engaging in demagoguery.

Second, you are making the case against yourself and don’t even know it. It is not a coincidence that non-interventionism was the preferred policy of heartland Americans in flyover country. And it is not a coincidence that support for war came from elite internationalists on the East Coast. So if you want to throw your hat in with elitist internationalists then be my guest. I’ll throw mine in with parochial Americans in the Heartland. Lord, you are a shill and you don’t even realize you are a shill.

Why we fight

The coincidence of Vaclav Havel and Kim Jong Il dying within hours of each other provides us with a rich opportunity to contrast two very different men. This cartoon from Kevin Siers says it all:


Here’s the full quote from Havel:

“A state that denies its citizens their basic rights becomes a danger to its neighbors as well: internal arbitrary rule will be reflected in arbitrary external relations. The suppression of public opinion, the abolition of public competition for power and its public exercise opens the way for the state power to arm itself in any way it sees fit. A state that does not hesitate to lie to its own people will not hesitate to lie to other states.”

What struck me was how this echoed Robert E. Lee’s prophetic warning to Lord Acton:

“[T]he consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.”

Both Lee the Confederate and Havel the anti-communist described the ultimate enemy of freedom and security: the consolidation of power. R.J. Rummel’s studies confirm that the greatest threats to an individual’s life and liberty come not from foreign sources, but from his own government. Just as the tyranny of Reconstruction gave birth to the imperial rampages of the DC Empire (which continue to this day), the domestic and war crimes of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were made possible – or inevitable – by the same mechanism, an all-powerful central government. The message is clear: Big Government is the enemy.

That’s why electing the other Establishment party is no solution. For proof, look at how Obama expanded both the war in Afghanistan and the Bush-Cheney assault on the Bill of Rights.

The only answer is devolution, the resumption of local self-determination. The only way to end the terror and corruption of the megastate is to dismantle it, and that means the return to human-scaled political units.

The good news is that the process has already begun. Secession is on the rise all around the world. Know hope.

Ron Paul Newsletters Defended

I hesitate to bring up the Ron Paul newsletters, but I will. If someone is going to Google “Ron Paul Newsletters” I hope maybe they will find there way here to balance the attack articles from anti-Paul shills.

You knew that if Ron Paul started to rise some neocon hacks would dig back up the newsletter story. And they have although I won’t do them the favor of linking to them. I actually think Paul is somewhat to blame for his newsletter problem. The abjectness of his disavowal gave credence to the charge that they were that bad to begin with, but the quotes in question were clearly pulled out of context for shock value and when read in context are easily defensible from a conservative standpoint. Justin Raimondo does a good job of demonstrating this in this article. In fact, some of the supposedly shocking quotes happen to be true. Martin Luther King was a philanderer? Umm … well he was and this is common knowledge. Black men commit disproportionate amounts of crime? Umm … well they do and this too is common knowledge. So I guess part of the charge is that Paul spoke truth that isn’t supposed to be spoken?

What Paul should have done is apologized for what is arguably indelicate language but pointed out that the allegedly offending quotes were pulled out of context for shock value, and in context are easily defensible. That option has passed for Paul because he has essentially conceded with his disavowals the premise that they are “racist.” But it hasn’t passed for us, his defenders.

 

Paul Supporters – Let’s Discuss the Coming Paul Bashing Amongst Ourselves

I will start with a disclaimer: I am a huge Ron Paul supporter. I supported him in 2008 from the start. I have supported him all this campaign season. I even have documented evidence for anyone who doubts my Paul supporting bona fides that I was calling for him to run for President even before he announced in 2007 and almost no one knew who he was. As a paleoconservative and not a libertarian, I have some issues with Ron Paul and I have never hesitated to make those clear, but he is clearly the best candidate of them all and is so right (and so alone in being right) on so many issues that I can forgive him on the issues where I believe he is wrong.

That said, I have never believed that Ron Paul could win the nomination nor be elected President. I have always considered his campaigns to be message campaigns, although this year he has clearly done a better job of running a “real” campaign, as his presence in Iowa attests. While I don’t think it helps to pour water on people’s enthusiasm, and I think the candidate always needs to maintain the pretense that he is in it to win it, I do think it is important to temper expectations. When I read or hear people say Ron Paul is the only Republican who can beat Obama, I cringe a little.

One of my concerns has been that if Ron Paul happened to win an early state or look like he might, then the weight of the Establishment - left, right and center – as Patroon points out below, would go ugly. So far a lot of the attacks on Ron Paul have been from ideological stakeholders (Mark Levin, Jeffrey Lord, Rush Limbaugh, National Review, etc.) who feel threatened by Ron Paul and feel he is encroaching on their turf and potentially spreading dangerous ideas that the rubes shouldn’t be exposed to lest it corrupt their minds, hense the hysterics to shout him down rather than engage his ideas. However, the main elements of the Establishment have so far patted Paul on the head. But if it looks like he is going to win Iowa or does win Iowa, then all bets are off.

Now I hesitate to go further, because I don’t want to be accused of giving anyone any ideas, but I also don’t want to be accused of flattering myself believeing that many people other than a core group read what I post here. I also think that my observations that follow are so obvious that it is not possible they haven’t already occurred to people. 

Continue reading

Gentlemen, war has been declared

The latest weekend Public Policy Poll for Iowa was just released and for the first time Ron Paul now leads in Iowa over Mitt Romney with Newt Gingrich sliding into third place and the other candidates bunched together at 10 percent of the vote. I know for a lot of Paulians this is the moment they’ve been waiting four years for.

But Paul supporters should remember the old saying be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it. By taking first with two weeks to go before the caucus means the media “blackout” of Paul will be lifted. Unfortunately it also means the attacks and smears are going to come at him fast and furious now. If you wanted Paul to be taken seriously as a candidate well you’ve got your wish but also means he’s going to be in for serious scrutiny and serious assaults from all sides of the political spectrum.

Continue reading

Burn after reading

Some wars end with a bang (Hiroshima) and others just burn themselves out (Korea). And some end in a rather bizarre manner as the U.S. troops withdrawl from Iraq suggest.  As said troops arrived in Kuwait this morning, we find out that apparently the military was pretty careless with some of its files kept during the occupation. Along with broken surplus military equipment discarded at local junkyards throughout Iraq, also disposed in manner one would take recyclables to the local dump, were thousands of pages of classified documents.  There must have been the rationale among the personnel responsible for disposal, in the mad rush to get rid of things before  before final departure, that Iraqi  junkmen wouldn’t make head or tails of such documents and burn them anyway along with the rest of the trash. But they didn’t reckon with an intrepid New York Times reporter finding this stuff before it headed to the burn file.

What the documents entail was the deaths Iraqi civilians by U.S. Marines in an incident in the village of Haditha. There will be those disappointed few persons were held accountable for their actions in Iraq and many more were acquitted in variety of trials. Yet in reality, even if there were more convictions in military courts, these persons would have been privates and corporals, not generals nor the policy makers responsible for putting said troops into the middle of hostile territory and expecting them to respect the rules of civilized warfare when the enemy would not play by those rules in order to have any kind of advantage against such forces and expecting them to do so in day to day struggle for survival. This is why no one will really know how many civilians died in Iraq because many such incidents probably went unreported because they’ve became so common place: person or a family not stopping at checkpoints getting blasted by on-edge soldiers or any manner of misunderstandings which resulted in tragic deaths. Persons reading the reports on what happened at Haditha may be appalled by the attitudes of some in uniform towards what happened in such cases, and certainly it’s disturbing. But it’s also understandable from an individual’s own determination not to wind up like of buddy of theirs who got blown up by a insurgent hiding amidst the crowd. You can’t ask a soldier to become a cop. That’s not what they are trained to be or do.  And in doing so we ensured there would always be a steady supply of  insurgents avenging the deaths of family members shot by U.S. troops whether accidently or not.

Of course this really wasn’t a “war” by then but an occupation and rebellion in response to this occupation. The “war” phase ended when U.S. forces captured Baghdad. I can still remember the soldiers saying “the quicker we get to Baghdad the quicker we get home.” That never happened and it never happened because the fantasy thinking of the policy makers and the military brass as to what was going to happen and their inability to adjust or even admit what was going on went things didn’t go according to plan.. The end result was a lot of needless deaths which ultimately left behind a broken country which is no longer the bulwark against Iran it was when Saddam was in charge.  Perhaps the neocons should ponder this when celebrating “victory” and clamoring for attack on Iran.

For a good summary of the aftermath of Iraq please read this article by Andrew Bacevich in today’s Washington Post.