Monday, June 21, 2004
Secession
Secession--not just for wacko Libertarians anymore. Welcome to the "sovereign Christian nation of South Carolina".
Sunday, June 06, 2004
Ronald Reagan, Rest in Peace
"When the Lord calls me home, whenever that may be, I will leave with the greatest love for this country of ours and eternal optimism for its future. I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead." — Ronald Reagan, Nov. 5, 1994
"I hope that when you're my age you'll be able to say, as I have been able to say: we lived in freedom, we lived lives that were a statement, not an apology." — Ronald Reagan, March 28, 1985
Monday, May 31, 2004
Back to Blogging
So, my faithful readers, I'm back. Not only that, but thanks to the new Blogger features, you can now syndicate me, too!
Friday, April 30, 2004
KGB Resurrection?
Jamie Glazov brings together at FrontPageMagazine Ion Mihai Pacepa, the former acting chief of Communist Romania’s espionage service, James Woolsey, CIA Director from 1993-95, and Vladimir Bukovsky, a former Soviet dissident, for a discussion of the supposed "re-Sovietization" of Russia. Their opinion is damning.
While I would agree that Russia's foreign policy in Yugoslavia and the Middle East has been atrocious, compared to the chaos it experienced in terms of economics and national security in the 1990s, I think Putin's reforms have been mostly positive. To call them fascism is a bit more than ridiculous, and smacks of the anti-national security rhetoric usually reserved by the far left for Israel and the U.S. (and rightly criticized by FrontPage).
One could talk about a "re-Sovietization" if Putin was running the country while ignoring the wishes of the people. He remains incredibly popular, however.
In response to Woolsey, I don't think oil has necessarily negatively affected Russian politics that much more than it has U.S. politics.
FP: So Mr. Bukovsky, Putin is clearly consolidating his powerful control of Russia. He is placing myriad former KGB officers in his presidential administration posts and has appointed Mikhail Fradkov, also KGB, as chief of government. The Russian media is increasingly practicing self-censorship and political opponents face increasing violence and intimidation. Russia is clearly going back to an authoritarian security state and Putin has made himself somewhat of an oligarch.
...
Woolsey: Once again, I have no substantial disagreement with the views of these two remarkable men. It seems to me that the direction of Russia is decidedly negative and that the question for us in the West is the one Lenin was fond of posing: "What is to be done?"... Putin has used the economic prosperity produced by a strong oil market to consolidate his power and lead Russia toward a form of fascism -- oil prices have given him the idea that he can do anything he wants. Oil can tend to centralize power in any society except in a mature democracy such as Norway.
While I would agree that Russia's foreign policy in Yugoslavia and the Middle East has been atrocious, compared to the chaos it experienced in terms of economics and national security in the 1990s, I think Putin's reforms have been mostly positive. To call them fascism is a bit more than ridiculous, and smacks of the anti-national security rhetoric usually reserved by the far left for Israel and the U.S. (and rightly criticized by FrontPage).
One could talk about a "re-Sovietization" if Putin was running the country while ignoring the wishes of the people. He remains incredibly popular, however.
In response to Woolsey, I don't think oil has necessarily negatively affected Russian politics that much more than it has U.S. politics.
Monday, April 26, 2004
Kerry's Man in Iraq
Cuba and Libya on the UN Human Rights Commission, oil-for-food corruption, and now this? Kerry's plan for a large UN role in Iraq may be backfiring big time, and will cost him in Florida. His great hope in Iraq happens to be the former Algerian foreign minister with certain "interesting" political views.
What's interesting, of course, is that the Bush administration has been relying heavily on Brahimi, as well. And it was Brahimi who helped forge an interim government in Afghanistan after the U.S. overthrow of the Taliban. Hmmmm.
P.S. A less somber aside, via Reuters:
P.P.S. A more somber one: Human Rights Watch is upset with the UN Commission on Human Rights... because the U.S. is on it!
"[Lakhdar Brahimi is] one of the most skilled and capable people with respect to Iraq and the Middle East," Kerry said. "He can talk to all the parties. He would be a perfect example of somebody whom you could ask to really take over what Paul Bremer's doing, de-Americanize the effort and begin to put it under the United Nations' umbrella."
Brahimi told France's Inter radio on Thursday that Israeli policies toward Palestinians and Washington's support for them hindered his search for a caretaker Iraqi regime that would take power on June 30 when the U.S.-led occupation ends.
"The big poison in the region is the Israeli policy of domination and the suffering imposed on the Palestinians."
Brahimi said his job was complicated by Iraqi perceptions of "Israel's completely violent and repressive security policy and determination to occupy more and more Palestinian territory."
What's interesting, of course, is that the Bush administration has been relying heavily on Brahimi, as well. And it was Brahimi who helped forge an interim government in Afghanistan after the U.S. overthrow of the Taliban. Hmmmm.
P.S. A less somber aside, via Reuters:
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has a problem with Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N. envoy to Iraq -- his name.
The Massachusetts senator has the vowels down but can't seem to corral the right consonants.... For two days last week, Kerry referred to the envoy as Brandini, not even taking a stab at Lakhdar.
P.P.S. A more somber one: Human Rights Watch is upset with the UN Commission on Human Rights... because the U.S. is on it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
