In what has become an all too familiar practice for world leaders when times get tough at home, the Prime Minister of Canada, Paul Martin, is blaming the US for a record number of murders in Ontario’s largest city. In 2005, there have been 78 murders in Toronto, with over half the result of gun violence. Naturally, there can be but one cause in a situation like this…why it’s America of course. America is exporting violence to the streets of Canada. That makes perfect sense, in fact why not blame America for every murder committed everywhere in the past 230 years?

Martin, along with the mayor of Toronto, argue that the easy availability of guns, some of which have been illegally smuggled in to Canada from the US, has led to the high murder rate. In fact, the mere existence of guns has been known to drive gun owners, gun shop owners, soldiers, policemen, gun manufacturers and distributors into mad demon possessed killing rages. In fact even seeing a gun will drive a person to kill, or so the story goes according to the prime minister.

So why is Martin blaming America for the tragedy of gun violence in Canada? Because Canada isn’t the heaven on earth, Canadian officials would have us believe. Because Canada faces real problems of poverty, unemployment and cultural permissiveness and criminal victimization, which are fertile grounds for criminality. Its much easier for Martin to place blame on America, rather than own up to the fact that their country faces real problems requiring real solutions. This sentiment was echoed by, Toronto security analyst, John Thompson, calling Martin’s position a “cop out.” As Thompson noted, Canada has a gang problem, not a gun problem. For politicians like Paul Martin, a Mussolini in training, its much easier to distract the electorate, especially in the run up to an election, with phony assertions of blame rather than recognize Canada’s real problem issues.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/12/27/canada.crime.ap/index.html

As we noted several days ago, the Iraqi elections were indeed credible. The Sunnis who make up less than 20% of the Iraqi population charged fraud after preliminary results indicated that their parties only won about 19% of the seats in parliament. Apparently the Sunni skill of bomb-making doesn’t extend to mathematics. The Sunnis were so “outraged” that they took to the streets. This is a tactic the Sunnis, who are new to democracy, borrowed from their supporters in the American Democratic Party, who trumpet a similar charge when they loose elections. If you can’t win legitimately then castigate the results and sow the seeds of doubt in order to de-legitimize the actual winner.

Unlike the Democrats, however, the Sunnis have been chiefly responsible for a murderous terror campaign in Iraq, that has led to the deaths of thousands of innocent men women and children. They rue the day Shiites assume a leadership role in the country after 70 years of Sunni oppression, most recently under the iron fist of Saddam Hussein. The Sunnis therefore have threatened violence, big surprise, if their assertions of fraud are not investigated. Now the UN has come out in support of the Iraqi parliamentary elections noting that they were very much above board, as we have stated.

What the Sunnis hope to accomplish is to instill a sense of fear in the Shiite majority so much so that they will grant concessions to the Sunni, giving them a greater voice in government, disproportionate to their electoral standing. What the new Iraqi government does at this point will be critical. If the government stands firm and refuses to knuckle under to intimidation, there is a real chance democracy may take hold in Iraq. If they appease these groups under threat of violence, Iraq’s democracy will be permanently weakened setting a precedent, which will be impossible to shake. A government that submits to threats can never successfully govern.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1448317

Shortly before the Christmas holiday, 4th grade teacher Kate Rudloff was out for the day and her class was being covered by a substitute, who during a reading of a Christmas poem, told the class the truth about Santa Clause, noting that Santa (i.e., Saint Nicholas) died in 394 AD in modern day Turkey and upon this individual, the modern fairy tale of Santa is based.

Many kids, who had been lied to by their parents since their earliest memories, reacted with shock and outrage. How could Santa not be real, they pondered? Naturally parents were furious. After all their attempts to deceive their children in order to get them to behave, while secularizing a religious holiday for material gain, had gone awry. Parents contacted the PTA, the principal and the school board. Some demanded that the substitute be disciplined, others that she not be allowed to sub at their school again. Why? Because she refused to lie to their children?

The school reacted by showing kids the movie “Polar Express” and parents reassured, their misguided children that Santa was indeed real. Some even made reference to the editorial: "Yes, Virginia, There Is a Santa Claus." Well sorry to rain on the parade of quite a few parents, but no there is no Santa Clause and those who engender this lie to their children are doing a disservice to themselves and their children. Perhaps it could be argued that this sub acted in poor judgment, after all its not her place to dictate how some parents choose to raise, and mis-0inform, their children, she would have been well advised to leave well enough alone, but to be disciplined for not promoting a lie, what nonsense!
http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3349275

According to a recent report, college graduates today aren’t as proficiency as they should be when it comes to literacy skills. According to Michael Gorman with the American Library Association, "Only 31 percent of college graduates can read a complex book and extrapolate from it." This isn’t surprising in fact it shouldn’t come as a surprise if most could not even define the word “extrapolate.” As we at the Phalanx have been warning for some time, this generation is entering an era of diminished returns when it comes to intellect and appreciation for knowledge. The long and short of it is there is no appreciation for knowledge.

We live in an era of distraction, of bread and circuses. The consequences of this report can and will be far reaching. Not only for today’s adults but future generations as well. The test conducted, were by no means far reaching, they were simply designed to measure the average adult’s ability to read and understand simple instructions and tasks through reading. This included reading the labels of food products and understanding a newspaper editorial. The results show a significant decline in just the last decade. It’s no surprise that this decline coincides with the rise of the Internet.

Experts are at odds over what the cause may be for this alarming trend, but we aren’t. Some argue it’s a shift in culture and demographics, which is a tired and dishwatery excuse at best. Others contend that there is a problem in the educational system, which is partially true, but the fundamental cause is clear. It is the same cause for America’s consistently poor showing in head to head academic measurements with other industrialized and developing countries.

American culture, with few exceptions, places little value on knowledge or education. When children come home from school, do they see mom and dad reading or engaged in intellectually stimulating conversations? No, they see mom and dad watching an inane situation comedy or the umpteenth football came of the season. The trend continues at school where kids are bombarded with distractions to their education, distractions such as obsession with school sports, even at the expense of academics, obsession with appearance, obsession with sex, obsession with music and other counterculture icons. As a society we immortalize the achievements of athletes and musicians, while ignoring the accomplishments of scientists or businessmen and women.

These misplaced values aren’t lost on children who place no more value on reading than they do working in a mill town. The results of this study should come as a warning, a warning which is likely to go unheeded. And sadly there may come a day when our convenience and sloth obsessed culture discovers that we are no longer number one, and not even number 20 as we already are in terms of education.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/1205/26natliteracy.html

Sunni Muslims took to the streets en masse to decry last week’s parliamentary elections. Sunnis claim the elections were rigged in favor of the Shiite-Kurd coalition, who are expected to dominate in the new parliament once the results are officially announced next month. Unlike in previous elections Sunnis turned out in force at the polls, but so too did the Shia and the Kurds.

By a form of reasoning that only makes sense to the Sunnis, who took time out of their busy schedule of killing their fellow Iraqis, the Sunnis should dominate, just as they did under the iron hand of Saddam Hussein. Sunni clerics have fanned the flames of discontentment among Sunnis, who will now certainly return their nasty habit of killing innocent men, women and children. Some blame, Shia dominated Iran for complicity in the “election fraud” as they see it.

There is one fact the Sunni seem to have forgotten. Shia, outnumber Sunni by a considerable margin in Iraq (in fact Sunni make up less than 20% of Iraq’s total population, while Shia account for over 60%), so it stands to reason that Shia candidates would dominate in a new parliament. According to some preliminary figures, the Iraq Accordance Front, a collation of Sunni Arab parties, received approximately 19% of the vote, which is directly proportionate to the Sunnis population in Iraq. The Sunni’s however, aren’t going to let a pesky thing like facts stand in the way of a good protest.

So what lies at the heart of these unfounded allegations, which were even rejected by the United Nations? The Sunnis are afraid a Shia dominated government will exact revenge on the Sunni for years of state sponsored murder and oppression. The Sunnis are making it known, through these protests, that if they don’t have their say in the new government, there will be no peace for Iraq, a promise they have already lived up to for well over a year.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-12-23-election-challenge_x.htm

It is distinctly possible that the Nazis ran a more objective court system than the new Iraqi government. In what other court system in the world can a defendant repeatedly stand in the docket a repeatedly yell at the judge and launch into irrelevant tirades about a court’s legitimacy? In what other court system in the world can the accused simply refuse to attend court on their own say so? This is not a court proceeding, this is a circus that makes a mockery of justice.

Saddam Hussein is a defendant, accused of very heinous crimes. A high profile defendant, yes, but a defendant nonetheless and he should be treated as such. He should not be allowed to launch into pro-Saddam diatribes in the middle of court. If this defendant is incapable of maintaining self control in court then he should be restrained and if need be bound as his lawyers argue over his fate. Saddam, ever the master of treachery and propaganda, is using this trial to achieve his own ends. He seeks to castigate others while absolving himself of any blame or responsibility for years of slaughter and mass murder.

There is no doubt Hussein will be found guilty (but then again perhaps there is doubt), and he knows that, but he now seeks to change his image in the mind of ordinary Iraqis, championing himself as a martyr for Iraqi nationalism. Let us not forget that these proceedings are televised and shown live to the Iraqi public. The Iraqi government must take steps now to restore some semblance of justice. If this trail denigrates into a farce, as it appears to be doing, the message will not be lost on the Iraqi public. Their respect for justice and the rule of law will be sorely tested.

While we can understand why the Iraqis wanted to televise the trial, to show Saddam as the caged animal he is, it was most certainly a mistake to allow this trial to be televised. It gives Saddam Hussein a regular platform to launch into his tirades, like Mussolini from the balcony. The former Iraqi leader is far too shrewd for his captors, having escaped from similar predicaments in the past. Whether or not he will escape from this trial is now anybody’s guess.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/22/saddam.trial/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Should companies be compelled to make life easier for their competitors? Why should Microsoft make life easier for its competitors, does that not fly in the face of the spirit of free market competition? The EU has threatened the Redmond software company with daily fines of 2 million euros unless it complies with an order to give competing firms greater access to Microsoft technology. The company was ordered to provide interface documentation that would allow non-Microsoft work group servers “to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers.” Microsoft argues, correctly so, that turning over such information violates intellectual property rights, which it does.

Essentially, the EU is ordering Microsoft to prop up failed companies who can’t compete on the merits of their own products. Why should a company be required to aid its competitors? Some would argue that Microsoft is a monopoly? A monopolistic situation, however, implies a lack of choice; where there is one supplier for a particular product, in this case an operating system. This supposition is clearly flawed. At no point in the history of modern personal computing has their ever been a true monopoly in operating systems, as there has always been a plethora of choices for consumers. Consumers can choose between Linux, Solaris, Mac OS, Windows, Unix, etc…

Because 75% (or more) of consumers prefer Microsoft products is not an acceptable grounds for alleging Microsoft is an illegal Monopoly. Indeed, even if Microsoft were to become the only supplier of operating systems in the world, this came about as a result of competition in which rival producers failed to measure up. If General motors were to developed a new, highly efficient automobile engine, should that company be compelled to simply turn over its research to rival carmakers so they could compete? Of course not. Should Coca Cola be compelled to turn over its secret formula just to aid Pepsi? Should Kentucky Fried Chicken reveal all of the original herbs and spices used in preparing its chicken just to aid Popeye’s?

Microsoft, because of its unparalleled and unrivaled success, however, must submit itself to arbitrary and socialistic business rules in order to placate European regulators. In a free market environment firms produce goods and services, which consumers then purchase. Those goods and services, which have the greatest appeal to consumers will become a success. Those goods and services that lack appeal go the way of OS/2, the Commodore 64 and the Amiga. Even though we are and have for some time been loyal fans of the Mac OS, anyone with common sense can clearly see that this ruling is flawed and anti-free market.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4552214.stm

In a party line vote, which saw some members switch sides. The US Senate barely passed a bill calling for cuts of $40 billion in the next budget. It should be noted that this is the first cap on spending increases since 1997 and at that it is only a drop in the bucket. When talking about a budget of trillions of dollars, $40 billion is practically meaningless.

Under Bush, government spending has expanded significantly, and this spending has not been limited to the war on terror. The President has declared 2009 as a target date for cutting the deficit in half. This is a lofty goal, but given the spending spree enjoyed by Washington politicians, there is real doubt that such a goal can be achieved. Much of the cuts in the bill passed yesterday involved entitlement programs. Though these cuts are only nominal, Democrats were no less angry, arguing it will adversely affect the poor and the middle class, a charge that has no basis in reality or common sense.

Again the Democrats fail to recognize that such entitlement programs have done little to alleviate poverty in the past 40 years. In reality it is inaccurate to categorize this meager bill as a budget cut. The country will continue to spend more on these services than at present, this can hardly be construed as a “cut.” The bill simply calls for a cap on the rate of increase. This reality is lost on many Americans due to the failure of our educational system, which places little emphasis on understanding economics. Sadly, the Washington crowd will not accept the inescapable need for genuine budgetary reform.

The US budget is far too large, and requires a massive overhaul. In the last few years, the government has re-embraced a carefree spending attitude, after having balanced the budget some time ago. What is truly needed are strict limits on spending, with certain legal measures in place to prevent excessive spending, such as a balanced budget amendment.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20051222-122615-6877r.htm

A prisoner, who has been accused of at least seven rapes used bed sheets to escape from a Miami lockup. Reynaldo Elias Rapalo escaped on Tuesday. He was noticed by a visitor who saw a prisoner scaling the walls like Spiderman using a makeshift rope. Since that time authorities have scanned neighborhoods and communities and even contacted authorities in Honduras, in an attempt to track down the rapist.

Rapalo, has been accused of targeting women as young as 11 and well into their 70s and was set to go on trial later this winter. So how did this rapist escape? Apparently he simply climbed through the ceiling in his cell to the roof and then scaled the wall using bed sheets. How is it that a serial rapist can manage a relatively easy escape? Why would a prison be designed whereby inmates have access to the roof? What kind of planning is this? “We're looking at every avenue of how we can fix this problem,” a prison official noted.

The solution however is quite simple. Instead of designing these unnecessarily complicated prisons, why not construct a medieval style structure with only one entrance and one exit? Prisoners could congregate and sleep in a massive communal area. Guards would oversee operations from a high vantage point, inaccessible by prisoners, sharpshooters would ensure civil behavior in the prison. There would be no privacy and certainly no opportunities to construct makeshift ladders or time to plot elaborate escape plans.

Rapalo’s escape puts the entire city of Miami on edge, especially those women living in the area close to the prior attacks. This man represents a serious threat to society. Police have warned that he should be considered armed and dangerous, which would make a shoot to kill order entirely justified.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-21-fla_x.htm

The picture you see to your right is NOT ANWR, but the leftist, determined to block oil and gas exploration in Alaska would have you believe otherwise. The picture, below, however, is a fair depiction of the region in question. Today the Senate handed yet another defeat to those determined to open ANWR to drilling. The left would have us believe that drilling to the Alaskan refuge would have a grave impact on the environment and native species, but this is a misnomer. The left would also have us believe that the amount of oil in ANWR is insignificant. This too is incorrect.

To be accurate the amount of oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge would not lead to a significant reduction in gas prices, but this is not and should not be our primary objective. Our primary objective must be to lessen our dependence on an unreliable and at times, hostile source of energy, like Venezuela and the Middle East. Is new exploration the only answer? No! Drilling and new exploration is only one aspect of a much-needed national energy policy. Something both parties have failed miserably to produce. While at least the GOP has managed to come up with a partial plan, which consists solely of drilling for new sources of oil. The Democratic plan has been non-existent.

What is need is a comprehensive, multi-pronged strategy. Something the Phalanx has been calling for for some time. This strategy would include both a long term and short-term component. In the long term, we MUST find alternatives to this non-renewable and finite resource. A plethora of options are available to us, including synthetic liquid fuels (SLF) derived from coal, Ethanol derived from corn and sugar cane, hydrogen and fuel cell powered vehicles. In the short term we must pursue strategies that lessen our susceptibility to the volatile oil market. This includes increasing use of hybrid technology and greater fuel efficiency for existing vehicles.

Increasingly manufacturers have demonstrated that these technologies needn’t be cost prohibitive and if the US government took steps to provide incentives for manufacturers to produce and consumers to purchase, such a strategy could prove quite effective. Sadly the good ole boys in Congress, who lack both vision and incite continue to pursue one-sided strategies or no strategies at all. Yes, we must drill in ANWR, but we mustn’t limit our thinking to only one solution to solve our nation’s energy needs. Truly, it would be a shame if the next generation remains dependent upon technology developed over 10 generations ago.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/21/arctic.drilling.ap/index.html

If there is one thing Washington politicians can be relied upon for, its hypocrisy. Time and time again, the rival parties trade positions on issues in a game of political musical chairs. During the Bush administration, the left has played this game with increasing skill. Such skill became readily apparent when the entire Democratic party forgot that they had been calling for Saddam Hussein’s ouster for years and they also forgot claims made by every person of influence in the party from Clinton on down that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Perhaps the Democrats really did forget or more accurately, they correctly assumed that their hypocrisy would be ignored by the press, as they sought to undermine the president.

The hypocrisy of the left with regard to issues of race and equality is readily apparent as well and has been for decades. The Democratic Party, which champions itself as the party of equality, lacks any minority representation in the upper echelons of leadership and regularly promotes programs that bind the poor to the state, like foster children, preventing them from breaking the bonds of poverty. Now it seems what’s old is new again. The left recently erupted in furry over the revelation that the NSA has been involved in domestic surveillance activity, without prior court oversight or authorization. Many leftists have expressed shocked at the revelation and openly called for investigations.

This shock as we reported Sunday, is all a game of smoke and mirrors. There is no shock. Senate Democratic Leader, Harry Reid and House Democratic Leader, Nancy Pelosi have admitted having prior knowledge of the project and have received regular briefings on the program. Only now that they see and opportunity to win political points do they express phony outrage. So is the president correct, is the use of foreign intelligence appropriate for spying on US citizens? Most assuredly not, the program appears extra-legal at best and if such forms of espionage are necessary then that should be the domain of the FBI. What’s the point of having a Bill of Rights, if our government can bypass or constitutionally protected rights on their own say so?

The inappropriate nature of the program, however, doesn’t lend support to the Democratic position, as they have been complicit in such activities for years. Under Bush’s predecessor, Clinton oversaw the expansion of the massive Echelon project, which is a massive surveillance program involving the US intelligence community, as well as those of Canada, Britain and Australia. This program initially developed to intercept Soviet communications during the Cold War was expanded in the 1990s and is used for commercial and individual surveillance. Echelon is used to eavesdrop on practically every form of electronic communication and data transmission in the world.

Democratic complicity in domestic intelligence gathering is further evidenced by the fact that both of the last two Democratic presidents authorized US intelligence to do the exactly the same thing that Bush is now being criticized for. Clinton authorized searches and surveillance of US citizens without court order and Carter, the supposed champion of human rights did the same thing during his watch. Links to the executive orders authorizing such intrusions are linked below.
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-12949.htm
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-20-bush-skepticism_x.htm

Elbridge Gerry would be proud. No other governor in Massachusetts history has had a more profound impact on the American electoral process than this 19th politician. Gerry is most famous for his role in redrawing the congressional districts in his home state, enabling his party to secure victory. The practice quickly became known as gerrymandering and hasn’t fallen out of favor with today’s equally unscrupulous politicians. Recently, the Supreme Court announced that it would address the issue of gerrymandering insofar as it relates to a redistricting map in the state of Texas. This time, the maps were drawn by Republicans. The GOP, however, is not alone in this practice as Democrats have attempted to use the power of redistricting to enhance their political power as well.

The problem of gerrymandering extends from the fact that the process is entrusted in the hands of politicians, which is no more reliable than the proverbial fox guarding the hen house. Indeed, since each of us have some measure of political bias we are all inclined to fudge if given the opportunity. The solution to gerrymandering, however, is quite simple. An independent commission in each state should oversee the process. A commission whose sole purpose it is to redraw congressional, legislative and other political maps. This commission should be forbidden from using any information other than population statistics. Voting patterns, income level, education level, home valuations, race and ethnicity, etc should not be used in the redistricting process, thereby ensuring an unbiased and largely objective map. Better still the process could be accomplished in a matter of seconds by feeding the applicable data into an aptly designed computer-mapping program.

Sadly such a solution will not even enter the mindsets of the Supreme Court as they evaluate the Texas case, in fact none of the parties involved would favor such a move as it would deny them the opportunity to manipulate the electoral process further still. Throughout history politicians in this country since Elbridge Gerry have used this gerrymandering process to silence their rivals or to oppress certain groups. In this latest case the Democrats charge that the Texas map denies them equal and fair treatment. The constitution, however, doesn’t recognize political parties as a distinct group, whose rights must be protected. Indeed, such affiliation shouldn’t even be considered in the redistricting process. In fact such information should not be recorded in the first place. Citizens should not be required to register with a party in order to vote, much note have that participation measured and counted for use by crafty politicians to shape their shadowy agendas. While detailed census information is valuable, the law should expressly forbid such data from being used for political expedience.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1219/p08s02-comv.html

Yesterday a US District Court Judge ruled that teaching intelligent design in a school science class is a violation of the constitution. The move, which is certain to anger Christian groups, is the correct one. It is not the place of the state to espouse or teach religion or spirituality. The state is a poor teacher as it is, as witnessed by our public education system. It is foolhardy at best to expect our public schools, therefore, to teach religious dogma in the classroom. In 2004, the school board of Dover, PA decreed, that intelligent design (i.e., creation) should be talk in Dover science classes. The premise being that students should be made aware of the premise that man (and the universe) was created by an unseen intelligent (and presumably omnipotent) power.

Our spiritual beliefs should be apparent to any longtime reader of the Phalanx, nonetheless, it is incumbent upon the state to avoid interference in matters of faith. Yes evolution is a theory and yes there are alternative theories, including many scientific theories. These theories, however, are theories of a scientific nature and thusly, appropriate fields of study for a school science class. Intelligent design, regardless of one’s spiritual beliefs is not a matter of science, but a matter of faith and it would be grossly inappropriate, not to mention, unconstitutional to mandate the government teach matters of faith to our children.

Those interested in religious education should take the steps to provide their children with a faith based education in a private or church based school, rather than shirk their parental responsibility in lieu of the state. If a parent can’t afford to do this they must rely on home and church to instill these values, otherwise parents should not have children they can’t afford to care for. Much like the welfare brethren who constantly scream for higher minimum wage and increased government handouts. We at the Phalanx never ceased to be amazed by the fact that people who supposedly call for a strict and literal interpretation of the constitution (i.e., conservatives) never tire in their efforts to use the government to impose their will on others. Christ did not call for the state to impose his faith on others; he sought to lead by example, perhaps its time that his supposed followers did the same.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/intelligent.design/

This week, the Law Commission in the United Kingdom proposed introducing grades or categories of murder, not unlike the system in operation in the United States. Presently, murder convictions in the UK carry a mandatory life sentence, as they should. There is no 1st or 2nd degree murder. Now under new proposals from the commission, courts should consider a person’s intent and whether or not there was an intention to kill.

Frankly, a person’s intention is and should be considered irrelevant. The fact of the matter is a person is dead due to the actions of another, in such a case a person should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Only in a situation of self-defense or an accident should there be an exception. Murder is murder, no manslaughter, vehicular homicide and so on and so forth. Why should we hold such a carefree and cavalier attitude toward the value of human life? If a person kills out of rage or through methodical planning it should make no difference, just as it makes no difference to the mortality of the victim who is just as dead.

Under the British proposals, for example, a person who’s plan was to cause "serious harm," but not kill, could be charged with 2nd degree murder. Such a proposal is a victory for criminality. If a person intends to cause harm and their actions result in the death of another, that is murder without question and no distinction should be made in Britain, America or anywhere else for that matter. It is unfathomable that a civil society would seriously consider such a move. We at the Phalanx can only ask why.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4544238.stm

In what would be an all too familiar scene on the streets of Paris, commuters in the nation’s largest city must face the grueling task of traveling to and from work without public transit. In many American cities such a strike would only inconvenience a select few, but in a city where most residents don’t even own cars a transit strike can be truly devastating. More than 7 million passengers, who normally use NYC transit each day, must now confront the chaos of New York streets, thanks to transit union. "This is a fight over dignity and respect on the job, a concept that is very alien to the MTA," the union president argued. What it really is, however, is extortion.

So what do the union members want? Higher pay, naturally. They called for salary increases greater than the 3% proposed by the transit authority and refused calls for new employees to pay a portion of healthcare costs, like most workers in America already do. As mayor Bloomberg noted, a transit strike is illegal and will result in significant financial penalties for all strikers. These financial penalties aren’t sufficient. Each and every striker should be given an ultimatum: return to work or be dismissed outright with no pension whatsoever. Criminals should not be given deference, especially when they exhibit a complete disregard for the welfare of others, in this case 7 million others.

The proposals made by the transit authority were completely within reason and in line with workers in most any other public or private work setting. If new employees are unhappy with the package of offerings and incentives the transit authority provides, then they would be advised to seek employment elsewhere, as is their right. These strikers who on average earn over $50,000 per year, should be pleased with the salaries they earn as is, after all we’re talking about driving a bus, not brain surgery. If anything, transit workers make too much, relative to the level of skill required to operate a bus or subway train and should forfeit their raises for those public servants who risk life and limb each and every day (i.e., fireman and police). If NYC officials are wise, they will host massive job fair during this strike to interview replacements for these strikers. Perhaps this could also be an opportunity for NYC to explore automation, perhaps not for buses but certainly for trains, some communities have already ventured down this road with great success. The cost savings alone would be tremendous.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-20-nyctransit_x.htm

Within the past week, it has been revealed that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to spy on US citizens in communication with foreigners abroad. The left is obviously “outraged” not so much because they object to the practice, however. Can anyone truly believe that the socialists in this country wouldn’t gladly authorize domestic spying should they one day come to power? The left is outraged because it is politically expedient and represents another opportunity to castigate the president, given the fact that their tired strategy of downplaying success in Iraq is starting to wane. Frankly we at the Phalanx, while not pleased with the idea of domestic spying without due process, were certain that this practice was under way by the NSA for years. So we did some checking and you know what…we were right. Not only has the NSA been spying on our communications since the Clinton era but even the revelation that the NSA under Bush has continued the practice comes as no surprise to the leftist leadership. Both Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid, have admitted having known about the program and received frequent briefings on the subject.

In spite of this reality, leftists expressions of shock and outrage abound as they now call for investigations, hearings and so forth. The reality is the left cares nothing for civil liberties, only politics as they again try to undermine the president for their own political purposes. An NSA program known as Echelon has been in operation for years, long before Bush came to power. This set-up allows the NSA to eavesdrop on telephone conversations, emails, etc…Under President Clinton, the program, which also involves Britain, Canada and Australia reached its zenith, long before the war in Iraq, Sept 11 or the invasion of Afghanistan, yet where was the outrage then?

Echelon has been an open secret in Washington for years, yet the left was mysteriously silent, indeed, they were complicit in its operation. Now the left will do as they did with Iraq, and once again the media will work in tandem with the left so as not to allow the left’s word’s to betray them. It is important to remember that in Washington, memories are short and alliances are paper-thin. It should be noted however, that regardless of who is to blame, the idea that we are spying on our own citizens is reprehensible. We are a nation of laws and such extra-legal steps to secure our borders represents a degrading of our way of life. This is not the position of the left, irrespective of their “outrage” and sadly its not the position of the right either.
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=58353
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-18-nsa-70s_x.htm
http://www.endtimeprophecy.org/Content/Articles/Articles-Echl/echln-12.html
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html

By the millions, Iraqis are lined up to cast votes in Parliamentary elections for a new permanent government. No more voting for interim leaders or constitutions, finally, the Iraqis will decide on who will lead for the next four years. Regardless of your position on the war in Iraq, there is no debating the fact that these elections represent a monumental achievement for a nation, which only a few years ago, was ruled by a brutal murderous tyrannical government. The polls, which will close at 9:00 AM eastern time, have seen huge numbers turn out, even among Sunnis. These elections, if successful, will serve as a model for the Middle East, something the radicals of Islam want desperately to prevent.

In spite of the success of the elections, in spite of the large turnout (putting turnout in this country to shame), and in spite of the relative calm and upbeat attitude of most Iraqis, there is one group who will try to the uttermost to castigate these elections as either a failure or meaningless. Who would be so foolish as to argue the elections currently underway in Iraq are a failure? The left, naturally. The likes of Howard Dean, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi want nothing more than to portray this experiment in Iraq as a failure, for the same reason that they have tried in vein to convince us that the thriving American economy is failure. The left, like most politicians, are driven by an insatiable desire for political power and influence. To achieve that end their political opponents must be defeated and the best way to defeat an opponent is to dismiss that rival as a failure.

This desire for power and influence is nothing new in politics. What is new is the depraved leftist desire for America to fail at every turn. Left yearns for America to fail in Iraq, to fail in the war on terror, to fail on the economy. The left desperately clings to hope of failure, only then can they succeed. To this end they will employ any means to disparage an opponent, even at the expense of national security. This is evidenced by their hypocritical position on Iraq. Where once they called for Saddam ouster under Bill Clinton, now they long for his return. Where once they spoke highly of the economy, even when it was performing poorly (as during the 2000 election) now they falsely claim that 4.3% economic growth and unprecedented job growth is failure.

The agenda of the left is readily apparent to the learned, which is why the left cultivates a culture of dependency, with relatively no emphasis on independent achievement or objective thought. Make no mistake about it; a victory in Iraq is a victory for America, though it may be a defeat for the left. We should further note that a victory for the left is a defeat for America and puts us on the road to serfdom, in the words of author F.A. Hayek.
Link to New York Times article

In a further example of the continued erosion of the American educational system, three Florida high school students are facing charges after an oral sex-escapade at a local high school (in the classroom of all places). Apparently one student (aged 18) paid a 16-year-old girl to engage in oral sex with another. Are we the only ones wondering what kind of class it is were a 16-year-old and an 18-year-old would interact? Either the 16-year-old is really smart, which we doubt, or the 18-year-old is a buffoon, which is highly probable.

These three represent new entrants into the coveted role of “dredge of society.” Here we have an institution of learning, presumably, but are the kids focused on learning or improving their opportunity for success in life? Of course not, they are interested in sexual perversion and prostitution. What a fine example their parents must have set for their children. Can there be any doubt what type of parents these three children must have? One child is a whore, another a john and the third a pimp. Such a fine collection of miscreants is certainly the reason why America continues to lag behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of academic prowess.

So who’s to blame? Is it the school? No, unless they have a pro-oral sex in the classroom policy. Is it the teacher? Highly unlikely! The blame squarely falls on the parents, who during their child’s formative years in which they were supposed to be instilling a value for hard work, knowledge and respect for others, they were either instilling an entitlement philosophy, which holds that all one’s needs can and must be fulfilled at their leisure, without regard for others or they were instilled with no values whatsoever, which would account for the fact that these vermin so easily succumbed to carnal urges, not unlike a rat or dog. Yes, we said it; these children are no different than rats or dogs. Transfer to an alternative school, is hardly sufficient for these people. They should be expelled. Let their parents play a larger role in their education and home school them for the duration, and thereby prevent their negative influence from corrupting others.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/topstories/news-article.aspx?storyid=48816

What’s the leader of a tyrannical authoritarian regime to do if they’ve been “elected” on a pledge to aide the nation’s poor, stir economic growth and create jobs? The answer to that question is quite simple; you follow the model of Hugo Chavez, well known for his skill in pulling a Mussolini. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has taken this message to heart, knowing full well he is unable and perhaps unwilling to take steps to promote opportunity for his people. After all to create opportunities for individual achievement lessens a person’s dependence upon the state, in this case a radical authoritarian theocratic state. Ahmadinejad is no less aware, however, that his people expect results and here is where the art of pulling a Mussolini is honed into a science.

President Ahmadinejad must distract his people from the realities of his own failed promises and do so in such a way as it unites his people behind a common vision or goal. For the radicals in Iran, that distraction is readily apparent: anti-Semitism. Hatred of Israel and calls for its eventual destruction have been a hallmark of Iranian foreign policy since 1979. Given this reality it should come as no surprise that President Ahmadinejad has repeated his much maligned supposition that stories of the Holocaust are a “myth.” Ahmadinejad, who made similar claims last week, and has already called for Israel to be wiped off the map, argued that the Holocaust was invented by Europeans as justification for the creation of a Jewish state in the heart of the Middle East. The land, therefore, should be returned and if the Europeans persist in making the claim of Nazi extermination of Jews, then Europeans are to blame and should set aside land in their territory for a Jewish state.

With this new statement, it can be argued with a large degree of certainty, that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is perhaps one of the most ignorant world leaders in the annals of human history (or perhaps the most cunning), putting poor Hugo Chavez to shame. We at the Phalanx won’t bother to argument the merits of Ahmadinejad’s claim that the holocaust is a myth. To do so would make as much sense as to argue that the sun doesn’t exist or the Vietnam war never happened or the internet doesn’t exist. The claim is devoid of merit, reason or historical validity. By making the statement, however, Ahmadinejad accomplishes two goals: he ruffles the feathers of his hated enemy and distracts his people from his own personal failures as the caretaker for a tyrannical “revolution.”

The reality is there has been a sizeable Jewish presence in modern day Israel for over 30 centuries. It is the birthplace of Judaism and Israelis have lived and died in the region since before Mohammad or Islam were even blips on the radar. Perhaps Ahmadinejad would consider returning the lands stolen by Muslims as they expanding (through conquest) across the Middle East, Europe, Asia and Africa. These lands were controlled by Christians, Jews and indigenous groups for centuries, yet Ahmadinejad is conveniently silent on the legitimacy of these holdings. Perhaps once these land adjustments are made then Ahmadinejad can call Israel to task for any perceived injustice he feels have been inflicted.

And what of these injustices? For all Ahmadinejad’s talk about supporting the Palestinian cause, what has he or Iran done for the Palestinian cause, other than train suicide bombers? Not much. Have they provided financial aide? Have they offered educational opportunities for Palestinian youth? Have they sought to create opportunities for growth and development in Gaza or the West Bank? No all they have done is to foment terror and violence, which is the principle reason why that region of the world is one of the poorest on Earth. Ahmadinejad, like his predecessors and his contemporaries, is all talk and that we can depend upon.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4527142.stm

In 1972, an Islamic terror group, Black September, slaughtered the entire Israel Olympic Team at the Munich Olympics. The group stormed the Olympic Village taking the athletes hostage, and demanded the release of fellow militants in Israel and Germany. The inept German government botched the operation from the start and in the end Black September gunned down all of the Israelis. The government of Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir resolved to hunt down the murders and those who planned the operation (Operation Wrath of God).

This year, acclaimed film director and producer, Steven Spielberg will release “Munich” a film that chronicles the events that followed the terror attack on the Munich Olympics. The film, which is slated to be released later this month, has already come under attack. Some argue the film portrays the events following Munich as “score settling.” Many Israelis are up in arms over the film. They argue the reprisal killings carried out by Israel’s hyper secret service, the Mossad, were designed to prevent future terror attacks, which it was, but even if it wasn’t what’s wrong with revenge, what’s wrong with retribution? Yes Israel had a score to settle and rightly so. One could argue the US had a score to settle after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor or after the September 11th terror attacks. Does that mean our response was any less justified? Certainly not!

Since when is it wrong to punish a murderer for their evil deeds? Israel, was wholly within its right to hunt down the perpetrators of slaughter and terrorism as it not only eliminates the possibility of future mayhem committed by these madmen, but it also serves as a lesson to other potential terrorists who may harbor similar designs.
Link to Reuters article

Several polls have showed a steady increase in the President’s job approval rating. Only a few weeks ago. President Bush’s approval rating hovered around the 30s now that number is beginning to climb. For some time now the Phalanx has lamented the fact that Bush has allowed the left to set the agenda in Washington. He has allowed the left to cast the economy in a negative light, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. He has allowed the left to control the spin on the Iraq war, in spite of all available common sense (and Democratic hypocrisy). He has walked away from fight after fight on social security, school reform, Medicare, etc…

Having a president who is resolute in his convictions is meaningless if he is unwilling to take the time to convince the American people that he is doing the right thing. Without the support of the public no leader can govern effectively. It seems the president has finally gotten the message. More and more, the president has been speaking about Iraq, speaking about progress in the war, speaking about democracy and speaking about tough decisions. He has even begun to speak about the amazing vitality and resilience of the American economy, though not nearly as much as we would like, certainly not as much as Clinton in the 90s or Reagan in the 80s.

The president still must do more. He has an obligation to provide clear direction and up until a few weeks ago he had failed miserably in that task. Today we can give him a C-, but much more work is needed. Its time the president dispel the Iraq War propaganda perpetrated by the left. Its time the president, tout the progress (significant in every respect) of the American economy. In short, its time the president acted like the president and not some timid schoolboy, incapable of speaking up for himself. The President, however, has his work cut out for him. There is a growing population indoctrinated with the entitlement philosophy who have come to expect reward without effort. There is a growing chorus from the minimum wage (and minimum skill) workers of America who expect greater return for their minimum skill jobs and then there is the leftist Democratic part, determined to convince everyone that subservience to the state is the path to progress.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-12-bush-approval_x.htm

Today most everyone is familiar with the scourge of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Iran has made no secret of its desire to develop an indigenous nuclear program. The Iranians, ridiculously claim this program is designed for peaceful energy purposes. Countries rich in natural resources like oil and natural gas don’t invest billions in secret labs and production facilities for peaceful energy purposes. Countries don’t hide their plans from the entire world when they are engaged in peaceful activities. The fact that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons is all but an open secret.

For some time now, Britain, France and Germany (EU3) have been negotiating with Iran to hopeful force Iran to terminate its nuclear program. Iran, as one would expect, has balked at any and all suggestions that would result in a termination of its nuclear program. At the same time its president has made no secret of his desire to eradicate the nation of Israel. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, noted that Israel would be “wiped off the map.” He followed-up this asinine statement with a demand for Israel to be moved to Europe. Making his feelings on the issue of Israel all but clear.

The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has already warned that Iran may be only months away from developing the ability to produce nuclear weapons at its leisure. This places enormous strains on Israel as Iran has made no secret of its desire to destroy Israel and the Islamic Republic is busy developing a nuclear weapons capability. It has already developed long-range ballistic missiles for delivering such weapons and most recently it signed a billion dollar deal with the appeasement minded Russia to purchase anti-aircraft technology. By all accounts, Iran is gearing up for a showdown. This puts Israel in a catch-22. If they sit back and wait for Iran to develop these weapons, Israel will be in grave danger (by Spring 2006, Iran will have systems in place to counter an air assault). If Israel strikes now, it risks an all out war with Iran and perhaps the entire Mid-east. Furthermore, how can Israel sit back and wait, given Iran’s stated goal of wiping the Jewish state “off the map.” Would any country, in a similar situation, wait for the inevitable?

Apparently Israel has resolved to give Iran until March, that’s when the IAEA issues its next report on Iran, if the UN and the EU3 can’t compel Iran to turn back from the brink, Israel has made it clear that it will move to put an end to Iran’s nuclear program. “We have the ability to deal with this and we’re making all the necessary preparations to be ready for such a situation,” noted Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. If Israel does indeed strike, the fallout will be tremendous. Those timid world leaders who now condemn Iran will turn on Israel, knowing full well the country had no choice. The Islamic world will call for all out war. Global terror will likely increase 10, perhaps 100 fold. Iran, for its part has already been maneuvering to increase its involvement in terror operations. According to the Times of London, Iranian officials recently met with the heads of several terror groups before those groups stepped up terror attacks against Israel. As we speak the pieces are now falling into place as the next major Mid-East war is set to begin in March.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1920074,00.html

In 2003, no country cried louder than France when it came to the issue of the war in Iraq. France was so virulently opposed to the war you would have assumed Jacques Chirac and Saddam Hussein were kissing cousins. France went out of its way to protect Saddam and Iraq from an eminent US and coalition invasion. So what has been France’s reward for standing up for the forces of radical Islam? France is now seen as vacillating and weak and therefore a prime and easy target for Islamic radicals.

Appeasement, as we have seen time and time again throughout history only emboldens an aggressor. Aggressors do not respect weakness, it is simply regarded as an opportunity to exploit a weaker player and bring about a desired outcome. Witness Hitler after the betrayal at Munich in 1938, “this is my last territorial demand in Europe,” the German dictator exclaimed and less than a 6 months later Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia and then the rest of Europe. Only a few years earlier Hitler had watched as Mussolini carved up Ethiopia and Albania without so much as a whimper from the appeasement minded League of Nations.

Today, we see that the lessons of appeasement have yet to be embraced by some. France and other European nations like Italy and Spain who have demonstrated such weakness and cowardice in the face of radical Islam find themselves easy prey. Only a few weeks ago, Islamic youth were rioting in the streets of Paris and other French cities and what was the French government’s response? Promises of more assistance, more welfare programs and more dialogue. The message to radical is clear: make a nuisance of your self, cause chaos and mayhem and reap the rewards. Now reports from France indicate an Islamic Terror Network operating in the country was planning major attacks. This is a country that went out of its way to appease radical Islam. Yes indeed a lesson has been learned, unfortunately, the lesson has been learned by the terrorists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4520862.stm

“Look at me, look at me, look at me” is the rallying crying for protests scheduled for tonight’s game between the Atlanta Falcons and the New Orleans Saints. Hurricane Katrina evacuees plan to protest at the Georgia Dome in Atlanta because New Orleans plans to host Mardi Gras festivities next March. New Orleans officials and the tourism industry are anxious to paint the Big easy in a different light hoping it will spur a re-birth of tourism and revitalize the dormant tourism industry and the city itself, which is now bankrupt has ¾ of the cities residents have been scattered across the country.

Katrina evacuees, however, object, arguing that focusing attention on revelry distracts from the suffering of Katrina victims and planned efforts at reconstruction. Protestors argue that it is “insensitive” to host a party with so many suffering. In reality, these evacuees are upset because the return of Mardi Gras to New Orleans means that the New Orleans poor will no longer be the center of attention. What would these people have the city of New Orleans do? Wallow in self-pity in perpetuity? Tourism is one New Orleans’s largest industries. Hotels, restaurants and other travel destinations in the city depend on tourists. A large number of New Orleans residents work in this industry. The return of Mardi Gras is essential for New Orleans and those interested in returning to work anytime soon. After all, without tourism what else does the Big Easy have going for it? Not much unless you are in the law enforcement or social welfare business.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/1205/12mardigras.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-11-new-orleans-tourism_x.htm

In the leftist mind there is nothing greater in life than the state. The state is religion surpassing, Christ, Buddha and Mohammed in the minds of the left. The state, as the supreme entity, therefore has absolute authority to dictate every aspect of our lives. Sadly, this view is not only harbored by leftist, but some on the right also look upon the state as an arm of their personal religious and moral beliefs and seek to impose their will through government.

For the statist, which includes all on the left and many on the right, subservience is key. It should come as no surprise, then that the state often exerts its authority over the individual in increasingly bizarre and unusual ways. Who knew, for example, that the sale of a transit token was illegal (even at face value)? Apparently Don Pirone didn’t know, he came to the aide of a fellow rider at an Atlanta transit station. Pirone noticed a rider having difficulty with a token machine and offered him a token of his own. The grateful rider gave Pirone the $1.75 cost for the token and went about his way.

Sadly, that’s not the end of the story as two adages come together in a perfect whirlwind (“no good deed goes unpunished” and “the state is supreme”). A transit cop with the Atlanta transit authority (MARTA) witnessed the transaction and placed Pirone under arrest. After such vile felons must be stopped no matter the cost. Police confiscated the $1.75 and cited Pirone, after detaining him for over 2 hrs. Pirone will now have to answer the charges in court. MARTA defended the policy, arguing the officer was wholly justified in its “crack down.”

In the words of William Lloyd Garrison, “that which is not just is not law.” While Garrison was referring to the far more serious issue of slavery, the premise is sound. This transaction involved two consenting adults, there was no deception and no one’s rights were violated; yet the state saw fit to intercede in order to regulate behavior. If Pirone, had received $1000 for the token, it should be of no concern to the government, so long as no parties were coerced. Where does it end? The Supreme Court has already ruled that our property is not our own. Now it seems all actions must first meet with government approval before they can be sanctioned. Our lives therefore are no longer our own as the state exerts increasing authority over the individual.
http://wsbradio.com/news/1209tokenarrest.html

Anyone who has ever done it, must know how difficult it is to move a house. Its an arduous an expensive process, which isn’t always successful. Now imagine moving an entire country of over 7 million people. That’s exactly what Iranian strongman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, proposed yesterday in a speech in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. The Iranian President, who has already stated that he would very much like to see Israel “wiped off the map” noted that he doubted the validity of the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad said: "Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces and they insist on it to the extent that if anyone proves something contrary to that they condemn that person and throw them in jail…Although we don't accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question for the Europeans is: is the killing of innocent Jewish people by Hitler the reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?"

The president went on to argue that if the Holocaust did occur as Europeans “claim,” then they should cede some of their territory for the creation of a Jewish state, he specifically volunteered Germany or Austria. The Iranian painted Israelis as outsiders having no reason to reside in the former Palestine and therefore Israel should be moved. Regardless of the fact that Israel is the historical home of Jews. Apparently the schools in Iran aren’t quite up to snuff if Ahmadinejad is convinced that Jews and Israelis have no place in the region. Exactly, where does he suppose Judaism originated. Exactly where did historical figures like King David rule?

There has been a sizeable and continuous Jewish presence in present day Israel for thousands of years, long before there was even an Islam. Perhaps Ahmadinejad would be willing to cede territories in the Mid-East and Asia that were conquered by Muslims during their expansionistic period, which they now seek to revive. Iran, as a matter of state policy has declared its intention to destroy the state of Israel, at the same time the renegade Islamic Republic, continues to support terrorism on a global scale. Now the country is seeking the development of an indigenous nuclear weapons program a prospect, which poses great danger for the civilized world, of which Iran clearly wants no part.
Link to Reuters article

When a people, either by force, complacency or ignorance submit to an authoritarian government, invariably the people will suffer. There is no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship as it inevitably deprives people of one of God’s most essential gifts: free will. We have seen throughout history the price people of paid when submitting to dictatorship. The annals of history read like a who’s who on Hell’s most famous citizens: Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Khan, Napoleon, Ivan the Terrible and so on all of these historical figures valued political power far more than acting in the interests of the people they supposedly represent. Today, there are no regimes as brutal and as murderous as a Hitler or a Stalin, but there are quite a few that rise to the level of a Mussolini.

Frequent readers of are certainly familiar with the travails of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, but what of Africa’s tin pan tyrant? What of Robert Mugabe? Mugabe made a name for himself by leading Rhodesia (later Zimbabwe) out of oppression at the hands of that country’s white minority government. Like most politicians however, Mugabe became corrupted with power. As president of Zimbabwe his decline into madness began when Mugabe decided to institute land reform. Mugabe argued that White owned farms, which account for the vast majority of land ownership should be distributed to the majority black population, after all, this land was stolen form the native inhabitants during the colonization of Rhodesia in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

Frankly, Mugabe’s basic premise was sound. The land was stolen and the native inhabitants were entitled to compensation of some form, but that compensation should have come from the government, if at all, or more aptly from Britain, the instigator of Rhodesian colonization in the last century. In taking land from White farmers, Mugabe, deprived Zimbabwe of its most fertile and productive land. Zimbabwe for years was known as the breadbasket of Africa, producing enough food stores to supply its needs and those of its neighbors. After land reform, this land passed into the hands of unskilled subsistence farmers with no knowledge of modern agricultural techniques. As a result, Zimbabwe began to experience food shortages and starvation has now become a major problem for the countries 12 million people.

As a dictator, Mugabe has used oppression, violence and political favoritism to ensure his continued hold on power. During the last presidential “election” he ensured his own victory through fraud at the expense of the vocal opposition. Since then Mugabe has sought to punish those who support his political rivals. Most recently he has ordered the demolition of townships across the country, which the government says were constructed illegally. As a result, over 700,000 people have lost their homes and their livelihood. To make matters worse, Mugabe has denied UN offers of assistance for the new homeless of Zimbabwe. Mugabe, naturally denies the fact that his evictions were targeted at his political rivals, claiming the demolition of thousands of homes was designed to clear out crime infested cities (and we thought eminent domain was a problem).

The UN now says Zimbabwe is in meltdown and the country is spiraling into chaos. They point to halving of the Zimbabwean life expectancy, food shortages, lack of social services, etc. Indeed, Mugabe even disallowed the UN from supplying tents to the hundreds of thousands of homeless who now reside in the streets thanks to their esteemed president. At a UN Conference only this summer, Mugabe along with Hugo Chavez, charged that it was America and the West at the root of third world poverty. Perhaps on that day his mirror was broken. As we see, the price of dictatorship is high indeed and its roots are all too subtle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4101228.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4508078.stm

People living in the Arctic regions of the globe have come up with a new get-rich-quick scheme and yes the litigious curse strikes again. Residents of Canada, the US, Russia and several Scandinavian countries have joined forces to bring about a lawsuit against the United States. So why are these people suing the United States? Because America is the world’s number 1 polluter and therefore solely responsible for global warming and the destruction of the Arctic habitat.

This is yet another example of the entitlement mentality run amok, these people who obviously have contributed nothing toward the betterment of their own lives, now seek to blame others for their short comings and in the process earn a fast buck. This pending lawsuit, if it ever comes to pass, is flawed on many levels. In the first place, there is no documented proof of damage to their habitat. Indeed, by their own admission they charge that pollution will not has, but will (future tense) damage their habitat. "For Inuit, warming is likely to disrupt or even destroy their hunting and food-sharing culture as reduced sea ice causes the animals on which they depend to decline, become less accessible, and possibly become extinct," a spokesperson for the opportunists noted.

In most countries, including the US, a party cannot sue for damages that have not yet been inflicted. In the second place, there is a considerable amount of evidence that points to the fact that some rise in temperatures is consistent with a cycle of warm and cold spells the Earth has endured for millennia and indeed, such temperature fluctuations are in some ways attributable to increases in solar activity. Assuming, as the president has recognized, that some global temperature change is a result of man-made causes, how is it that these people came to sue the United States? By most measures the US accounts for 25% of carbon emissions in the world, as well as 25% of the world’s economic output. Why hasn’t the European Union been mentioned? Where are China, India and Japan? Why have these countries been omitted? If anything these countries are far more responsible as their level of pollution is disproportionate to the their economic and industrial output.

Assuming everything is true, which it isn’t, and carbon pollution alone is responsible for global warming, these people have not even been harmed by their own admission and even if they had, why single out the US? The answer to that is simple. These people are both opportunists who seek to earn their fortune through frivolous lawsuits, rather than actual work and at the heart of it; they are anti-Americanists, who seek to blame America exclusively for the world’s troubles.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/07/051207182757.ht1oak7y.html

In another nod to the secularists, President Bush ushered in the festival of Holiday (i.e., Hanukah) yesterday with a lighting of the traditional “Holiday Candles” (i.e., Menorah). Holiday commemorates the good luck (i.e., miracle) in which oil at the Jewish building (i.e., Temple) incredibly (i.e., miraculously) burned for 8 days, rather than 1. “This act commemorates the victory of freedom over oppression, and of hope shining through darkness. Today, that light still burns in Jewish homes and synagogues everywhere. And, today, that light will burn here in the White House,” the president noted. He meant to say however, “lets light this meaningless candle as a symbol of nothing honoring nothing to appease and placate all atheists everywhere.” The president was joined by a Houston resident with an unusual hat (i.e., Rabbi Skoff), who represented some organization in Houston (i.e., United Orthodox Synagogue in Houston). Ultimately this holiday activity had no real meaning beyond that which pleases every American on an equal basis.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051206-4.html

What’s more important than security, peace of mind and moral fortitude? If you are Russian the answer is clear: money. Russia has been criticized, most vocally by the United States and the EU, for agreeing to a $1 billion arms sale to Iran. But why? Iran is an acknowledged sponsor of terrorism. It gives tacit and in many cases blatant approval (and financing) for terror attacks around the globe. Russia, on the other hand, has been a frequent target of Islamic terror. Hundreds upon hundreds of Russians have died at the hands of Islamic militants, including dozens of children just last year. Yet Russia continues to provide military aide and assistance to Iran.

Russia is largely to blame for the current Iranian nuclear weapons crisis, having provided the Islamic republic with crucial technology to enrich Uranium. Russia has sold Iran intricate missile technology with which the tyrannical state can now threaten its neighbors and now Russia has agreed to sell “defensive” weapons to Iran, including sophisticated anti-Aircraft equipment. Russia, naturally defended the agreement noting they were completely within their right to sell arms to Iran, without western interference. What Russian officials really mean to say is “we need the money” and thus we are willing to appease terrorists and sponsors of terrorism for financial gain. For all Vladimir Putin’s tough talk about stand tall in the face of Islamic terror, it is just that: talk.

Russia has sacrificed its long-term security interests for short-term cash infusions, which is why the authoritarian Putin would not hesitate to sell weapons systems to hostile regimes including Iran. Sadly, Putin’s actions will only result in the deaths of more Russian children. But then again, given Russia’s track record, they are perfectly willing to sacrifice the lives of their own people, in pursuit of state policy.
Link to Reuters article