Hilo College Republicans Have A Great Speaker Scheduled

Grant Jones

June Arunga will be speaking by videoconference Thursday 9-15 at 1pm in room 350 of the UHH Library.

June is from Kenya and has witnessed firsthand the effects of corruption and socialism. She is a dynamic speaker who you will not forget:

Growing up in the Kenyan middle class, I watched as the standard of living in my household and that of my friends drastically declined in the span of 20 years even though my mother (the bread winner in the family) invested in two houses, was promoted at work and got raises in her salary.

Who is going to be the voice of freedom, which will introduce and promote and defend the role of free markets to high school and University students in Kenya? I hope to create an organization for young Kenyans that will help them understand the power that freedom has to improve opportunities for all Kenyans.

.

Ka Leo's "Liberal" View of Free Speech

Grant Jones

The University of Hawaii at Manoa's student paper, Ka Leo, has reprinted this editorial from the Daily Forty-Niner of Cal State Long Beach. The editorial defends the firing of Michael Graham by WMAL radio for his comments about Islam. Graham said on air: “Sadly, Islam has become a terrorist organization ... Moderate Muslims are those who only want to kill Jews.” Immediately after the airing of these views on air, the thought police of the "public's" airwaves sprung into action:

Luckily, groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations work to insure that people like Graham are not given a forum to create more hate and prejudice.

What the writer neglects to mention is CAIRs extremist views. The writer is correct in stating that as a private business the station is within its rights to fire Graham. What is interesting is the writer's, and Ka Leo's, very narrow definition of what is acceptable "dissent." While criminal trespass by an angry minority to enforce its political views on campus, and disrupt national security, is OK, "offensive" speech is not. As the editorial states the limits of dissent from the "right:"

People abuse freedom of speech, using it as a license to speak offensively or behave in ways that infringe upon other peoples’ rights. For example, take conservative talk show host Michael Graham’s statements last month...

Graham’s association of all Muslims with terrorists would be as erroneous as associating all Christians with the beliefs and practices of Quakers or Mormons...[Quakers and Mormons are terrorists?]

Graham should have known that making such extreme and blatantly false statements would have major repercussions. ["False" statements according to some should not be publicly debated.]

If he were allowed to continue, his ignorant statements might have influenced those who listen to his radio station.

Of course, the editorial includes the obligatory "Religion of Peace" mantra:

The Quran preaches the importance being kind and generous to others. People have interpreted the Quran to make it coincide with their own beliefs.

Some of the passages in the Koran being interpreted, can be found here:

2:191, And slay them wherever ye catch them.

4:84, Then fight in Allah’s cause.

4:141, And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumph) over the believers.

5:33, The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.

8:12, I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.

One must be in deep denial to dispute the fact that the world is experiencing a large upsurge of Moslem fundamentalism and therefore, Jihad.

Another strange view put forth in the editorial is that belief systems have "rights" which require the rest of us to refrain from making "offensive" statements. Of course, in this regard some beliefs are more equal than others.

Hat tip: Andrew Walden

Lincoln, Bush, Torture and Special Pleading In History

Grant Jones

James Ross's article "Bush, Torture and Lincoln's Legacy" published in the August issue of America Magazine has been making the rounds on the internet. Human Rights Watch has reposted it, along with BBS News and Amnesty International's blog links to it. So I must assume that Ross's essay is of some significance within "human rights" circles.

This essay is about the Bush administration's alleged abandonment of the Geneva Convention and the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere. With references to the "torture memos" and "unlawful practices," there is not much new here. What is of interest to me is that Ross invokes Abraham Lincoln as a contrast to the Bush Administration's treatment of prisoners:

Surprisingly little attention has been paid to President Bush's -- and everyone else's -- most admired president, Abraham Lincoln, on the laws of war. Despite the grave threat the Civil War posed to the nation, Lincoln recognized the value of broadly recognized rules of war that promote restraint and humanistic principles.

Ross notes that in order to codify the legal issues resulting from the Civil War, and the large number of Union prisoners both Confederate military and civilians from North and South, Lincoln turned to legal Scholar Francis Lieber of Columbia College. The result of Lieber's work was Lincoln's promulgation of General Orders 100, "Instructions for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field" on April 24, 1863. Ross quotes Article 16 of what became called the Lieber Code:

Military necessity does not admit of cruelty--that is, the infliction of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions.

This does not mean, of course, that these Articles where followed either in the field, in Union prisons or in areas experiencing guerrilla warfare such as Missouri. For example, the famous response to William Quantrill's murderous raid upon Lawrence, Kansas was General Order 11 issued on August 25, 1863. This order was the most extreme example of "total war" during the Civil War:

Issued August 25, 1863, by Brigadier General Thomas Ewing, Jr., commander of the District of the Border, with headquarters at Kansas City, Order No. 11 required all the inhabitants of the Western Missouri counties of Jackson, Cass, and Bates not living within one mile of specified military posts to vacate their homes by September 9. Those who by that date established their loyalty to the United States government with the commanding officer of the military station nearest their place of residence would be permitted to remove to any military station in the District of the Border or to any part of Kansas except the counties on the eastern border of that state. Persons failing to establish their loyalty were to move out of the district completely or be subject to military punishment.

In a letter to General John Schofield commanding in Missouri, Lincoln wrote "I am not now interfering, but am leaving to your own discretion." As has been noted, Abraham Lincoln was not a constitutional scholar. In cases of military, political or practical necessity he could be quite ruthless in suppressing the rebellion.

On the relative conditions of present day prisons at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and those in Afghanistan compared to Union prisons such as Elmira, I don't think much elaboration is required.

Last year when the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal erupted, endlessly, on the front pages several leftists chimed in by invoking Lincoln. Michael Berube titled an entry on his blog "Once the party of Lincoln, now the party of torture." A Nation Magazine article ended "Kim Scheppele, a University of Pennsylvania law professor, argues that the Bush Administration has turned Abraham Lincoln on his head."

In the context of Lincoln, the Lieber Code and Abu Ghraib Ross writes:

George W. Bush has a long way to go before he can claim Abraham Lincoln's legacy to a humane articulation of the laws of war. It is a legacy that has long served the interests of the United States and for which Americans can genuinely be proud. It is a legacy that with each feckless Pentagon investigation and half-hearted war crimes prosecution becomes forever imperiled. [Emphasis added]

There is a difference between articulating a policy and carrying it out. Ross uses this strange qualifier because, unlike the Nation and Michael Berube, he has actually studied this subject.

In 1991 Mark E. Neely published his landmark work The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties. In it there is an interesting section titled "Torture," Neely recounts what appears to be a widespread practice in Union prisons:

Handcuffs and hanging by wrists were rare, but in the summer of 1863 [after General Orders 100 was promulgated], the army had developed a water torture that came to be used routinely...

As Neely relates when this practice was discovered:

No one exploded in indignation or horror. No one issued a special order demanding that such practices cease. No one requested investigation or study. No one asked whether other prisoners than the one Lyons [British foreign minister] inquired aboutreceivedd such treatment. No one, except Lord Lyons, asked what law governed such cases. No one expressed any personal outrage or personal feeling at all, including Lincoln's secretary of state. [Pg. 109-112]

No one, except for fringe kooks, compares Lincoln to Hitler or calls him a fascist. Although, that the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners is far superior to that of the Lincoln administration's is a matter of historical record.

I should add at this point that I take a backseat to nobody in my admiration of Lincoln. However, I do not let that blind me to his faults or pretend that he was a plaster saint. For example, while Ross mentions Lincoln's most famous Proclamation, he neglects to note that Lincoln believed its success required another one, which he issued two days later.

The Proclamation Suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus reads in part:

Now, therefore, be it ordered, first, that during the existing insurrection and as a necessary measure for suppressing the same, all Rebels and Insurgents, their aiders and abettors within the United States, and all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to Rebels against the authority of United States, shall be subject to martial law and liable to trial and punishment by Courts Martial or Military Commission...

Lincoln ably defends his resort to such measures, largely designed to prevent agitation against the draft, in his letter to Erastus Corning. This letter is a must read as a summation of Lincoln's views of the constitutional issues involved.Characteristically, Lincoln also makes his argument from the perspective of necessity:

I understand the meeting, whose resolutions I am considering, to be in favor of suppressing the rebellion by military force by armies. Long experience has shown that armies can not be maintained unless desertion shall be punished by the severe penalty of death. The case requires, and the law and the constitution, sanction this punishment. Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wiley agitator who induces him to desert?

Like many of his contemporaries, Lincoln over estimated the size of the Copperhead element in the North. In the letter he explains his reasons for supported the arrest of the North's most famous traitor:

Mr. Vallandigham avows his hostility to the war on the part of the Union; and his arrest was made because he was laboring, with some effect, to prevent the raising of troops, to encourage desertions from the army, and to leave the rebellion without an adequate military force to suppress it. He was not arrested because he was damaging the political prospects of the administration, or the personal interests of the commanding general; but because he was damaging the army, upon the existence, and vigor of which, the life of the nation depends.

This is the "other" Lincoln who should not be forgotten. Lincoln was facing a very different war than the one the United States is waging today. Nevertheless, it is fair to say that Lincoln would qualify war far harsher than George Bush.

Update: Ahistoricality has commented on this post here.

.

It Has Been Four Years Now; Has America Learned?

Stuart K. Hayashi

Michael J. Hurd, a psychologist I greatly admire, wrote in 2001 that 9/11 was the day on which America finally grew up.

When I first read those words, I believed them to be true. Indeed, how could they be anything else? Had not Americans been able to fully comprehend the enormity of what had occurred?

Looking back on this, I have asked myself: Were Dr. Hurd and I right to conclude that this marked the end of American complacency?

Sadly, I believe that the answer is most honestly provided by this recent Cox & Forkum illustration.


UPDATE: For September, 11, 2005, Dr. Hurd has provided some additional thoughts.

UH Professors Recommend Marxist Bookstore

Grant Jones

An article in the University of Hawaii at Manoa student paper Ka Leo about the high cost of textbooks has this interesting admission:

According to some teachers, it’s common for professors to refer their students to Revolution Books on King Street for cheaper textbooks.

“Almost every teacher in the English department recommends their students to purchase the textbooks at Revolution. They are often cheaper and they give the professors free copies,” Professor Jonathan Morse said. [In the capitalist world, that's called a "kickback." Emphasis added]

According to Joy, a volunteer staff member at Revolution Books, textbooks are 10 percent cheaper at Revolution Books then the textbooks found in the UH bookstore. They also buy books back for about half the price students bought them for.

Student worker Ashley at the UHM bookstore says the problem is that Revolution Books does not always carry the same textbooks that the UHM bookstore does.

“We have the same English, women studies, and Hawaiian studies books as the UH bookstore, we take teachers suggestions, and we buy what we think helps the students,” Joy said. [Emphasis added]

A whole 10% off, that's the way to fight the Power Comrades. When I was attending the University of Hawaii at Hilo, I purchased most of my books online. By doing so I saved 50% or more on every book. Of course, by doing so I was supporting a regular business and not the Revolution.

It should be no surprise that many students can find required texts at the Commie bookstore. As the Comrades describe their merchandise:

Books on: Mexico • Philippines • Hawaii • Political Prisoners • Women's Liberation • Novels • History • Philosophy • People's Wars • African-American • Indigenous • Publications from the Revolutionary Communist Party USA and the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, and the Liberating Theory of Marxiam [sic] -Leninism-Maoism! [Emphasis in original]

I'm sure in UH's English, Hawaiian Studies and women studies departments students will "learn" all about "the Liberating Theory of Marxism - Leninism - Maoism!" The exclamation point is a nice touch.

That there are sick bastards in the world supporting ideologies responsible for the death of at least 100 million human beings in the last century doesn't surprise me. It is reprehensible that there are alleged "educators" with Ph.Ds who concur with the haters of human life. They are not limited to the three above named departments. The political science department contains several warmed over Marxists, for example.

Here are the fruits of such "education:"

The Save UH/Stop UARC group is demanding that the University of Hawai‘i reject the UARC proposal. The group is also demanding full disclosure of all past and present military programs at UH, according to the group’s Web site....

The Faculty Senate is expected to pass a resolution concerning the UARC at their next meeting on Sept. 21. The findings of the Ad Hoc Committee, as well as other materials, can be found at www.hawaii.edu/uhmfs.

Thanks to Stuart for bringing this to my attention.

Update: Andrew Walden has reposted this entry at Moonbat Central.

A Thousand Words

Grant Jones



A cartoon that says it all, well most of it, by Pritchett, via VoteHawaii. Peter Kay is back and has updated with posts from Scott Crawford's Hawaii Independence Blog (Sort of the anti-Fiftieth Star), state representative Jon Riki Karamatsu and yours truly.

Some Gifts for David Souter

Grant Jones

Some folks have been leaving gifts for Supreme Court Justice David Souter on the mailbox of his old New Hampshire home.

Souter should really take a break and do some reading. However, I'm sure he just wouldn't "get" Atlas Shrugged.

Hat tip: Objectivist Center

Bad Title, Good Message

Stuart K. Hayashi


Edward Hudgins, currently with the Objectivist Center and formerly with the Cato Institute, has come out with a very good op-ed about the Akaka bill.

I cringe when I tell you the title: "Fascism in a Lei." That title will immediately turn off a lot of Hawaii residents, not only because "fascism" is such a strong word, but because of the "lei" part. When someone on the mainland makes that kind of allusion to "Hawaiian exotica," it can come across as condescending to life-long Hawaii residents such as myself. It's like writing an op-ed about Alaska and naming it "Fascism in an Igloo."

And it would be too bad if Hawaii's residents rejected the op-ed according to the title alone, because its central point is spot-on:

When native Hawaiians -- or anyone else -- look in a mirror, what they ought to see, first and foremost, is not a native Hawaiian, not a citizen of that state and not even an American. They ought to see an individual, what they have made of themselves.

This world would be in a lot better shape if everyone -- from Hawaiians to Texans to Swedes to Cambodians -- understood Mr. Hudgins's observation.


UPDATE: The op-ed has been republished in Hawaii Reporter -- troublesome title and all.

Welfare State Debacle

Grant Jones

The usual suspects are blaming the complete breakdown of civility in New Orleans on everything except the anti-social types committing the rapes, murders and looting. The L.A. Times resident Stalinist, Robert Sheer, blames the "culture of greed." A National Public Radio interviewer keeps asking a guest leading questions about "race and class" as the causes of this disaster. Ralph Luker, never to be out done in moral hysteria, blames "self-righteous white jerks."

One question the above persons don't ask is why the horror stories in the media seem to be limited to New Orleans. Katrina cut a much wider swath through the Gulf Coast. Here is a list of Mississippi towns and cities that have been extensively damage. I have not read any reports of the complete breakdown of society as a result of Katrina outside of New Orleans.

As some writers have noted, the savagery at the Superdome is a microcosm of Life at the Bottom. Four years ago Theodore Dalrymple published a book titled Life at the Bottom: the Worldview That Makes the Underclass. Dalrymple is a physician and psychiatrist who spent many years working with England's "underclass" of long-term welfare recipients. He dramatical demonstrates that the breakdown of civility we witnessed in New Orleans has roots dating back decades:

Here is a searing account—probably the best yet published—of life in the underclass and why it persists as it does. Theodore Dalrymple, a British psychiatrist who treats the poor in a slum hospital and a prison in Engalnd, has seemingly seen it all. Yet in listening to and in observing his patients, he is continually astonished by the latest twist of depravity that exceeds even his own considerable experience. Dalrymple’s key insight in Life at the Bottom is that long-term poverty is caused not by economics but by a dysfunctional set of values, one that is continually reinforced by an elite culture searching for victims. This culture persuades those at the bottom that they have no responsibility for their actions and are not the molders of their own lives. Drawn from the pages of the cutting-edge political and cultural quarterly City Journal, Dalrymple’s book draws upon scores of eye-opening, true-life vignettes that are by turns hilariously funny, chillingly horrifying, and all too revealing—sometimes all at once. And Dalrymple writes in prose that transcends journalism and achieves the quality of literature.

Another English writer, Mark Steyn, also notes the connection between wallowing in self-pity and victimhood and the inability to function in normal human society:

On 9/11, the federal government failed the people; last week, local and state government failed the people. On 9/11, they stuck to the 30-year-old plan; last week, they didn't bother implementing the state-of-the-art 21st-century plan. Why argue about which level of bureaucracy you prefer to be let down by?

My mistake was to think that the citizenry of the Big Easy would rise to the great rallying cry of Todd Beamer: "Are you ready, guys? Let's roll!" Instead, the spirit of the week was summed up by a gentleman called Mike Franklin, taking time out of his hectic schedule of looting to speak to the Associated Press: "People who are oppressed all their lives, man, it's an opportunity to get back at society."

Unlike 9/11, when the cult of victimhood was temporarily suspended in honour of the many real, actual victims under the rubble, in New Orleans everyone claimed the mantle of victim, from the incompetent mayor to the "oppressed" guys wading through the water with new DVD players under each arm.

Welfare culture is bad not just because, as in Europe, it's bankrupting the state, but because it enfeebles the citizenry, it erodes self-reliance and resourcefulness.

The real author of the moral abyss that New Orleans became is the welfare state and the cult of passivity, irresponsibility and victimhood that it both creates and needs to sustain itself.

Eagle Forum: Say No To Race-Based Governments

Grant Jones

Eagle Forum has issued an Action Item providing information on which Senators to contact to defeat the Akaka Bill:

Capitol Switchboard: (202)-224-3121

TARGET MEMBERS: Alexander, Allen, Bennett, Bingaman, Bunning, Burns, Burr, Coleman, Craig, Domenici, Frist, Graham, Grassley, Harkin, Hatch, Martinez, McCain, McConnell, Murkowski, Smith, Talent, Thomas, Warner

.

"Peace:" Code for the Destruction of Israel

Grant Jones

Edward Cline has an essay posted at Capitalism Magazine on "Peace" as a stalking horse used to attack Israel:

Stalking-horse: A horse trained to conceal the hunter while stalking; something used to cover one’s true purpose; decoy. (American Heritage Dictionary)

That, in a nutshell, is how one may characterize the concern of Arab states for the plight and misery of Palestinians. The hunter is Islam. The prey is Israel. The stalking-horse plodding along the torturous “road map to peace” is international and Arab concern about the plight of the Palestinians. It is a decoy. The first altruist-pragmatist to reach for it will be annihilated.

Syria, Iran and probably Jordan are committed to nothing but recruiting and sending terrorists to aid the Palestinian Authority in its campaign against Israel, as well as funding and funneling terrorists to kill Americans and Iraqis in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Arabs welcomed Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, and spat in Israel’s face in gratitude. Ultimately, what they want is for Israel to withdraw from existence. Since Israel cannot be defeated militarily by the Arab states, the Gaza phenomenon is but an overture to that self-immolation. They know it. Israel doesn’t. Nor does the U.S.

The West holds pragmatism and accommodation in high esteem, as the sole means of ending “violence” and establishing “peace.” But all the peace initiatives of the past have not ended the violence.

.

After Katrina the Maggots Feast

Grant Jones

Mick Hume at Spike Online has this essay on the response to Katrina by some of the chattering classes:

The sea of effluent running through the streets of New Orleans this week has been accompanied by some equally putrid propaganda from those who try to seize on any disaster as proof of the rotten state of humanity - and of its American branch in particular.

No matter how many precautions we take, it is neither possible nor desirable entirely to eliminate risk from life even in the richest nation on Earth. That New Orleans has stood and thrived for so long as 'an inevitable city on an impossible site' is testimony to the strength of human resilience and determination to get on with life come what may. That spirit will be needed again now as America sets about rebuilding and repairing the damage. The cause will not be helped by those who seem determined to wash away our defences in a deluge of misanthropic doom-mongering.

Arthur Chrenkoff has quotes from the opportunistic parasites that thrive on human suffering.

Iraq Veterans in the Academy

Grant Jones

Talk about fish out of water, decorated combat vets' input not appreciated on campus:

Marine sergeant Marco Martinez, a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and a full-time psychology major at Saddleback College in Mission Viejo, Calif.

“A woman on campus had apparently learned I might be a Marine. When I told her I was, she said, ‘You’re a disgusting human being, and I hope you rot in hell!’ ” [Just don't question this creature's patriotism.]

Indeed, Martinez, who will be the first male in his family to receive a college diploma, says he is receiving more of an education than he bargained for: “There are a lot of people who don’t appreciate military service in college,” Martinez said. “If someone asks me about it, and I think that they’re not too liberal, I might tell them I was in Iraq. But I don’t tell them the full extent of it or anything about the Navy Cross.”

The Navy Cross — as in second only to the Congressional Medal of Honor. Martinez, formerly of 2nd Battalion, 5th Marines, is a bona-fide American hero and the first Hispanic American since Vietnam to receive the Navy Cross. During the Battle of At Tarmiya, one of Sergeant Martinez’s fellow marines had been hit in the legs and left for dead by five terrorists holed up in an adobe garden shed. That’s when Martinez used his body to shield the dying marine from the terrorist before mounting a 20-meter frontal charge at the bunker with nothing but a depleted rifle and a grenade. With enemy bullets pinging off his gear, Martinez unpinned the grenade, slammed his body into the adobe building, and lobbed the device into the window of the structure, killing all the terrorists inside.

Hat tip: Steve.

I Was Getting Worried

Grant Jones

Peter Kay hasn't updated Vote Hawaii in almost two weeks. I was beginning to wonder what was up with him. Not to worry, as I hoped he is off globe trotting. He is currently in India on business. You can hear all about here.

I have recently discovered two very different, but worth visiting "808" blogs. 808 is the area code for the entire state of Hawaii.

First, there is Fred at Checksum Crusader. Fred posts on politics and events of interest to Hawaii residents, included the Ewa Beach world baseball champs. Congratulations!

TikiPundit is always in character:

Hawaii Reporter, a conservative online rag, writes about a big story over on Kauai, that any property owner can relate to. Especially Hawaiians can relate to this. Has to do with massively-expanding property tax rates. It's worth reading, if you fear Big Government.

(And as a TikiPundit acolyte, you should not fear this. Your friendly local Hawaiian god reminds you that life will be a lot harder with Hawaiian independence, when I summon you all to work my taro fields and fish ponds, with no expectation that any of your labor will result in food on your table.)

.

Gas Cap Worries

Grant Jones

My wife and I live on the Big Island of Hawaii about fifteen miles from the nearest town. The only form of transportation in our area is private automobile. (Although, the hippies operate on the slogan "we don't need oil, we hitchhike.") Of course the cost of gas at the town's station is more than we would like to pay. However, we have had total confidence that when we pull up to the pump we will be able to purchase gas at the prevailing rate. This level of confidence is probably something most Hawaiians don't even think about. That it is possible on islands 2500 miles from anywhere for gas to be available even on the smallest islands and in the smallest towns.

After September 1st, this confidence will start to erode for good reason. Our idiotic state legislature has imposed a "Gas Cap" which limits the wholesale price by Public Utilities Commission (PUC) fiat. If the kleptocrats in the state house were truly concerned with helping the average motorist, instead of demagoguing the issue and increasing their power over business, they could have reduced the state's 57 cent a gallon tax. No, that is never an option with Democrats. Since the state is already well known as the most hostile to business in the Union, they must figure adding to the state's negative reputation isn't going to be a problem. Notice also that any private business that reaches a certain, undefined, size becomes a "public utility."

To her credit, Governor Linda Lingle has always been opposed to the Gas Cap and tried to have it rescinded:

Gov. Linda Lingle, who unsuccessfully sought repeal of the 2004 law passed by the state Legislature, has said she worries the cap will actually increase prices and create fuel shortages. The governor has the power to suspend the price caps if she determines they would cause a major adverse impact on the economy, public order, or the health, welfare or safety of the people of Hawaii.

Unfortunately, the governor seems determined for the inevitable "adverse impact" to occur before she acts. However, blockhead state senator Ron Menor, "chief architect of the law...is convinced it will lead to lower prices at the pump and should at least be given a chance." So, there you have it: two hundred years of economic science and experience can be dispensed with because some lawyer is convinced he can suspend Natural Law by legal edict.

Stuart has brought to my attention an excellent article on this issue "How To Create a Shortage" by economist William Anderson. Anderson is writing directly of Sen. Menor with his closing passage:

Legislatures rarely repeal bad laws just as presidents refuse to admit that their military adventures are mistakes. The oil and gasoline price controls of the 1970s began with an executive order in 1971 (as part of Nixon's "Phase One" wage and price freeze that accompanied the collapse of the Bretton Woods international monetary system), and were around for a decade before they were eliminated. One hopes that Hawaii's new system will not be in existence that long, but don't be surprised if legislators continue to ignore the free market and spit into the wind.

Instead, Menor and his ilk would rather give the economically impossible "a chance." Does he work in the statehouse or a gambling saloon?

Update, 8/31/05: The state legislature's timing is impeccable. From the same article quoted above:

As long as the market remains relatively calm, Hawaii won't have any real glitches, just as during most of the 1970s, there were no long gas lines. However, as soon as there is a disturbance in the market, whether it be a crude oil price shock [check], wars [check], rumor of wars [check], bad weather [check], or trouble at the refineries [check], the government "pricing" scheme quickly will fall apart.

.

When RINOs Attack

One of the defining characteristics of the species RINO* (Republican In Name Only) is its obsequious brown-nosing of their alleged political opponents in the Democratic Party, particularly those at the left-wing of that Party. Another trait common to the RINO is the vicious attacks it makes upon those to the right of them in the Republican Party, i.e. most of the rank-and-file.

No better example of these nasty attributes of the RINO can be found than that of state Attorney General Mark Bennett's statement at the recent debate on the Akaka Bill. Malia Zimmerman, at Hawaii Reporter, has posted audio clips from the debate and a transcript of Bennett's rant.

In Bennett's world all who disagree with his pseudo-history and the resulting dubious interpretation of Hawaiian history are...drum roll please...Holocaust Deniers:

I am Jewish and there are a lot of people in this world who are Holocaust deniers. They go around talking about the fact that the Holocaust didn't happen. That 6 million of my relatives were not burned in the ovens in Nazi Germany and the surrounding countries. And I get terribly offended when I hear people say things like that. There is just no question that historically, whatever the legal significance of it is, that the United States participated and supported the overthrow, whatever the significance of that is. There is no question that historically there was suffering as a result of the overthrow. The Department of Justice itself said, and I quote, As a result of the overthrow, laws suppressing Hawaiian culture and language and displacement from the land, the native Hawaiian people suffered mortality, disease, economic deprivations, social distress and population decline. We can have here a rational discussion about whether or not this bill is legal, whether or not this bill is good or bad, but it is ridiculous when people try to rewrite history in an offensive way and that's what happening here tonight.

Bennett being Jewish is totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand. He mentions it only to establish his Victim bona fides. He should also be aware that there are some of us who don't get our history from OHA talking points, Department of Justice lawyers, or the agenda driven Department of Hawaiian Studies at UH Manoa.

Bennett is surely aware that the hardships suffered by Hawaiians that he lists pre-date, by decades, the Overthrow. The rapid population decline of the Hawaiian people was a issue of deep concern no later than the reign of Kamehameha III. Does Bennett consider Ralph Kuykendall a Holocaust Denier? Perhaps so, since he also would have disagreed with Bennett's revisionist drivel:

The great chiefs of Hawaii may not have had actual ownership of Hawaii's land -- the aina -- but they were in charge of it. And no one was going to tell them what to do with the broad fertile valleys and productive fishponds they controlled. By the time of Kamehameha III in the 1830s, however, the commoners were facing a difficult time as foreign diseases and foreign lifestyle brought across the ocean decimated the population. As historian Ralph Kuykendall noted, the Hawaiian race in the 19th century was rapidly declining and extinction was openly predicted. Who, then, would occupy the land? "The connection between this and land question is perfectly obvious," Kuykendall wrote. "Foreigners having a prospective future interest in the land were anxious to convert it into a real and present one." At the same time, the chiefs were concerned that without a plan to meet the powerful foreign interests, Hawaii and its people would be obliterated. Chiefs had land but little cash -- and with commoners moving to the populated port areas, leaving the productive countryside, the chiefs had no source of revenue. So the great land revolution came.

Bruce Fein, arguing against the Akaka Bill, would not be intimidated by the likes of Bennett calling him a Nazi:

A commission was created in 1980 to study whether or not there was any reparations due to native Hawaiians because of the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani and whether or not there was any special recognition made by the United States towards native Hawaiians. The commission voted 6 to 3 against any affirmative findings in either of those cases – a far more reliable result than those composed at the Department of Justice by lawyers or those written in the halls of Congress by persons with political ambitions. And I resent Mr. Bennett’s attack on suggesting that somehow anyone who could criticize Queen Liliuokalani was a Holocaust denier. That’s an attempt at Ad Hominem rather than reasonable argument.

Now Mr. Fein, regarding this commission convened in 1980, according to Bennett's view of historigraphy, maybe its six member majority was made up of ex-Nazis who had escaped from the Fatherland in 1945. Yes, that would explain its otherwise "Holocaust Denying" finding.

Good job, Mark, Linda and "Duke." This "Holocaust Denier" will not forget this contemptable smear come November 2006. Although the Democrats have made a mess of Hawaii, you are also not fit for your office. I just hope the rank-and-file members of the Republican Party who oppose the Akaka Bill will remember what you really think of them come election time.

* This is not a new phenomenon, in the early 1960s Rockefeller (which one?) and Romney (who?) Republicans expended much time and energy attacking Barry Goldwater as an "extremist." For contemporary politicians of the Romney/Rockefeller ilk, RINO is a more useful, and accurate, term.

Update, 8/31/05: Linda Chavez wonders, "Do Republicans actually stand for anything? I wonder sometimes, especially when GOP lawmakers make appeals to traditionally Democratic voters by trying to out-pander the Democrats." Hawaii Reporter has the complete article.

Thanks for Amritas for the link to this article by Tim Chapman at Townhall:

Hawaiian Republican Governor Linda Lingle has enlisted the services of Washington, D.C. attorney Ben Ginsburg. Ginsburg has close ties with Karl Rove and the White House political shop which have enabled him to sell the Bush Administration on the potential “political benefits” of the Hawaii bill.

Lingle and others are confident that passage of the Hawaii bill will help the GOP’s image in Hawaii and build a platform for future GOP electoral success in the largely Democratic state.

While many aides familiar with the Hawaii bill think this reasoning is laughable, the White House has apparently bought it and as a consequence has quietly urged passage of the race-based governing bill.

Linda Lingle wants to be the Pete Wilson of the Hawaii GOP. Pete Wilson ex-governor of California and another racial politics success story.

.

Monumental Lies

Cox and Forkum on how the international Left wants to hijack the Ground Zero memorial and turn it into a monument to their self-loathing and America hatred:

A global network of human rights museums is urging the International Freedom Center to downplay America in its exhibits and programs at Ground Zero, the Daily News has learned.

"Don't feature America first," the IFC has been advised by the consortium of 14 "museums of conscience" that quietly has been consulting with the Freedom Center for the past two years over plans for the hallowed site. "Think internationally, where America is one of the many nations of the world."

Among its suggestions for the place where the United States was attacked and nearly 3,000 innocents massacred: "The Freedom Center must signal its openness to contrary ideas."

.

Proving the Critic's Case, Again

Grant Jones

Academic historian KC Johnson has a long very article in Inside Higher Education on academic bias against non-leftists that is well worth reading. He analyises the three most common arguments by his fellow academics who deny that such bias exists, or if it does why it's a good thing anyways:

Had members of the academic Establishment confined themselves to such arguments (or had they ignored the partisan-breakdown studies altogether), the intellectual diversity issue would have received little attention. Instead, the last two years have seen proud, often inflammatory, defenses of the professoriate’s ideological imbalance. These arguments, which have fallen into three categories, raise grave concerns about the academy’s overall direction.

1. The cultural left is, simply, more intelligent than anyone else. As SUNY-Albany’s Ron McClamrock reasoned, “Lefties are overrepresented in academia because on average, we’re just f-ing smarter.” The first recent survey came in early 2004, when the Duke Conservative Union disclosed that Duke’s humanities departments contained 142 registered Democrats and 8 registered Republicans. Philosophy Department chairman Robert Brandon considered the results unsurprising: “If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire.”

2. A left-leaning tilt in the faculty is a pedagogical necessity, because professors must expose gender, racial, and class bias while promoting peace, “diversity” and “cultural competence.” According to Montclair State’s Grover Furr, “colleges and universities do not need a single additional ‘conservative’ .... What they do need, and would much benefit from, is more Marxists, radicals, leftists — all terms conventionally applied to those who fight against exploitation, racism, sexism, and capitalism. We can never have too many of these, just as we can never have too few ‘conservatives.’”

3. A left-leaning professoriate is a structural necessity, because the liberal arts faculty must balance business school faculty and/or the general conservative political culture. University of Michigan professor Juan Cole, denouncing the “ridiculous and pernicious line” that major universities need greater intellectual diversity, complained about insufficient attention to the ideological breakdown of “Business Schools, Medical Schools, [and] Engineering schools.” UCLA’s Russell Jacoby wondered why ” conservatives seem unconcerned about the political orientation of the business professors.” Duke Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky more ambitiously claimed that “it’s hard to see this as a time of liberal dominance” given conservative control of the three branches of government.

Johnson makes short work of these arguments. But, in the comments section below the article several leftists and Johnson's colleagues do their best to prove him correct, again.

Hat tip: Cliopatria.

.

VDH On the Unholy Alliance

Grant Jones

In his weekly column Victor Davis Hanson addresses some of his more loonier critics:

I'll consider four diverse attacks (by a socialist, anarchist, racialist, and paleocon) on my support for the removal of Saddam Hussein, and the effort to prompt constitutional government in his place, that are emblematic of this bizarre new Left/Right nexus, shared pessimism, and paranoid methods.

.

Honolulu Star-Bulletin Smears Grassroot Institute

Grant Jones

Three days ago, the 22nd, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin published an article that is, to say the least, strange. Ostensibly, the article is about Senator Dan Inouye's response to being accused by ex-Senators Slade Gorton and Hank Brown of breaking his word. Gorton and Brown wrote an article which stated that the promise of those who supported the Senate apology of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, passed in 1993, would not be used to justify further legislation:

Former Sens. Slade Gorton (R-Wa.) and Hank Brown (R-Colo.) put their names to a lengthy opinion piece that appeared in Wednesday's Wall Street Journal criticizing Inouye for misrepresentations they claim he made to them about the intent of the apology.

They claim Inouye gave his word that the apology would not give special rights or privileges, reparations or land to native Hawaiians that would not be available to non-Hawaiians living in the state.

Classic. Brown and Gorton "put their names" on the piece, thus setting up the smear for later in the article. The Senators "claim Inouye gave his word;" Inouye either did or did not. This is simply a question of fact and a matter of public record. The reporter wants to give the impression that a question of fact is just a matter of opinion and conflicting "claims."

The article then states that Inouye is "unhappy" with the Senators for writing this article. Less than half-way through the article the reporter, Sally Apgar, goes into a weird tangent stating that the Grassroot Institute is behind the ex-Senator's letter. Dick Rowland and Malia Zimmerman must have the powers-that-be really rattled for this sort of thing to be printed in a allegedly respectable mainstream paper:

Partly with the help of the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii, a group opposed to the Akaka Bill, the opinion piece was e-mailed and drew national attention, including commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, who read it and railed against the bill on his national radio show.

In an online request to the Wall Street Journal to reprint the piece, the Star-Bulletin was told that the author must be asked for permission. The Wall Street Journal identified the author as Dick Rowland with the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii.

"Well, I'll be damned," said Rowland when asked about authorship. "No, I didn't write it."

Since when do retired U.S. Senator's require Grassroot Institute's help to write an article or get it on the Rush Limbaugh show? The Wall Street Journal did not identify the article's author as Dick Rowland (who must figure in largely in the Hawaii establishment's nightmares).

In a private e-mail to a mutual friend, John Fund, member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board and contributor to Opinion Journal, stated that the Journal gave the Star-Bulletin the Grassroot Institute's name for further contact info. And, "They probably also asked a trick question. We're used to the Honolulu media's obsession with us."

Malia Zimmerman also stated that she had nothing to do with Gorton and Brown's article. But the Star-Bulletin news-hawks aren't buying both Zimmerman's and Rowland's denial. After all Apgar did find this smoking gun as evidence of a Grassroot Institute-Hawaii Reporter-Wall Street Journal conspiracy to force public debate on a issue and bill which are of great importance to all of Hawaii's people:

Last week, Zimmerman's Hawaii Reporter promptly hosted both the Wall Street Journal opinion piece and a transcript of Rush Limbaugh's radio show criticizing the Akaka Bill.

Grassroots also has hired Bruce Fein as a spokesman and general counsel who is scheduled to speak as an opponent of the Akaka Bill in forums that will be televised tonight and tomorrow night.

Obviously, there is something going on here, and the Star-Bulletin is going to get to the bottom of it. This is what passes for Journalism in Hawaii. It also demonstrates how unhinged the Swells who run this state as their personal fiefdom become when some of the peasants have the temerity to ask questions.

Prof. Noel Kent of UH Manoa Abuses Academic Freedom

Grant Jones

Andrew Walden, editor of the Hawaii Free Press, has an expose in Ka Leo, the UHM student paper, of how anti-UARC professors plan to prostitute their profession in order to indulge in political activism:

UH professor Noel Kent wrote on the UH faculty listserve: ...Stop-UARC Coalition is developing a series of forums, concerts and other events to highlight the wide and growing opposition to UARC. September and October will be critical. You can support us by inviting our two-to-three person faculty/student teams to come to your classes after September 5 and make brief ten to fifteen minute presentations about the issue.

Do they even pretend anymore that these classroom presentations will be a balanced, objective assessment of the issue? Do the professors even bother to try and justify injecting politics into a curriculum/course where it is not germane?

.

Price Controls Cause Shortages

Grant Jones

Malia Zimmerman, editor of Hawaii Reporter, has had her article on Hawaii's "Gas Cap" law reposted on the Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal online. Hawaii's drivers generally pay 50 cents to a dollar more per gallon of gas than folks on the mainland. In order to fix this "problem" our state legislature has enacted a price cap for gasoline, set to go into effect on September 1st this year. Zimmerman correctly compares this farce to Nixon's price and wage freeze in the early 1970s. It will be as successful:

Charged with the unenviable job of implementing the gas-cap program, Hawaii's Public Utilities Commission says local industry expects the caps to increase prices by an estimated 30 cents a gallon, with costs on Oahu rising from the current price of $2.68 a gallon to more than $3. PUC says industry leaders also expect more shortages (especially in remote areas), the closure of one of two oil refineries, the halting of wholesale marketers' operations, and reduced investment in the state after the caps go into effect. Owners of gas stations on remote neighboring islands say prices will likely soar after Sept. 1, from just over $3 a gallon to more than $4.

Zimmerman states that our RINO governor, Linda Lingle, has the authority to prevent the gas cap law from going into effect, but she would rather wait for a "crisis:"

Gov. Lingle says she's against the gas caps but is required by law to wait until a "crisis" occurs before revoking the cap--she also notes that the Legislature could call a special session to make adjustments. But Republican lawmakers say she can--and should--stop implementation.

The state legislature is either completely ignorant of basic economics or they don't care what damage this law will do to Hawaii's economy or people just so long as they can exercise their anti-business bigotry. There is no third alternative:

But despite the frequent use of price controls, and despite the superficial logic of their appeal, economists are generally opposed to them, except perhaps for very brief periods during emergencies. The reason is that controls on prices distort the allocation of resources. To paraphrase a remark by Milton Friedman, economists may not know much, but they do know how to produce a surplus or shortage. Price ceilings, which prevent prices from exceeding a certain maximum, cause shortages. Price floors, which prohibit prices below a certain minimum, cause surpluses. Suppose that the supply and demand for automobile tires are balanced at the current price, and that the government then fixes a lower ceiling price. The number of tires supplied will be reduced, but the number demanded will increase. The result will be excess demand and empty shelves. Although some consumers will be lucky enough to purchase tires at the lower price, others will be forced to do without....

That price controls are the main culprit is particularly easy to see in the case of California electricity. Much of California's electricity is produced from natural gas, and the price of natural gas in December 2000 averaged more than $6 per million Btus, three times the price only one year earlier. At times in December, the spot price hit more than $50 per million Btus. As a result, power producers were charging a wholesale price that exceeded the retail price the utilities were allowed to charge. When you lose on every unit sold, you can't make it up on volume.

.

Code Pinko: Such Scum

Grant Jones

Here is a report from Cypercast News Service:

Washington (CNSNews.com) - The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., the current home of hundreds of wounded veterans from the war in Iraq, has been the target of weekly anti-war demonstrations since March. The protesters hold signs that read "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton."

The anti-war demonstrators, who obtain their protest permits from the Washington, D.C., police department, position themselves directly in front of the main entrance to the Army Medical Center, which is located in northwest D.C., about five miles from the White House. Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.

Code Pink Women for Peace, one of the groups backing anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas, organizes the protests at Walter Reed as well.

Code Pink, the group organizing the anti-war demonstrations in front of the Walter Reed hospital, has a controversial leader and affiliations. As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin has expressed support for the Communist Viet Cong in Vietnam and the Nicaraguan Sandinistas.

In 2001, Benjamin was asked about anti-war protesters sympathizing with nations considered to be enemies of U.S. foreign policy, including the Viet Cong and the Sandinistas. "There's no one who will talk about how the other side is good," she reportedly told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Benjamin has also reportedly praised the Cuban regime of Fidel Castro. Benjamin told the San Francisco Chronicle that her visit to Cuba in the 1980s revealed to her a great country. "It seem[ed] like I died and went to heaven," she reportedly said.

Then why did she come back, ran out of toilet paper?
Just don't question their patriotism.

What Happen To Those P-38L Fighters?

This is a strange story and sadly believable given the nature of the "striped pants boys" in the State Department back in the 1940s. What gives this story credibility is its source, none other that Martin Caidin, the man when it comes to aviation history.

I came across this passage as a casual aside in Caidin's Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38:

In 1949, more than 150 P-38L-5-LO Lightnings were stationed with the Fifth Air Force in Korea. At that time, for reasons mainly of economy (since the P-38s were almost all "low time" aircraft), the Fifth was ordered to convert to the North American P-51D Mustang as its standard fighter.

What to do with the Lightnings? Those people on the scene expected to turn them over to the South Korean Air Force. Washington, however, with the State Department breathing down its neck, refused the transfer on the grounds that the South Koreans, with these fighters in their hands, might "unnecessarily provoke the North Koreans."

The Lightnings were destroyed by having them chopped up with hand axes and bulldozers.

Washington officially denies this ever happened.

Little matter. The writer, and several hundred other men of the Fifth Air Force, saw it happen.

And one is led to wonder what the presence of these airplanes might have meant in the opening days of the Korean War, when we had a handful of P-82 fighters and all-too-few P-51s and P-80s.

Appeasement of the Krazy Kims goes back a long way.

Australian Government To Moslem Extremists: Accept Core Values or Leave

Grant Jones

Peter Costello, Treasury Minister of Australian, speaks truth that needs to be repeated throughout the West, including America:

PETER Costello is urging radical Muslim clerics to leave Australia if they do not share the nation's values ahead of today's national terrorism summit organised by the Prime Minister.

"If you don't like those values, then don't come here. Australia is not for you," Mr Costello said yesterday. "This is the way I look at it: Australia is a secular society, with parliamentary law, part of the Western tradition of individual rights."

In an interview with The Australian, Mr Costello said migrants needed to understand and respect the "core values" of democracy, a secular society and the equality of women.

And he warned that Australia needed to be clear that the nation's core values would not change. "If you are looking for a country that practises theocracy, sharia law -- which is anti-Western -- there are those countries in the world ... you will be happy there. But you won't be happy in Australia."

Mr Howard [Prime Minister] said in Sydney that he would be reminding the Islamic leaders at the summit that "our common values as Australians transcend any other allegiances or commitments".

Yesterday [Costello] he said: "I have seen people that say they believe in sharia law and theocracy. If that's their view, don't come to this country. This one is not for you. I don't think we can afford to be ambivalent about this point to young people or anyone else."

Hat tip: John Ray.

The Gangster Pact

On August 23, 1939 The Hitler-Stalin Pact was signed. The treaty freed Hitler from the threat of a two front war with both France and Russia after his attack on Poland only a week later. The treaty also contained a secret protocol which divided Eastern Europe up between the two totalitarian powers.

This was a major change of policy for the various Communist Parties around the world and their Fellow Travelers:

In 1935 the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern announced another change of direction. It now stressed the need for a “popular front,” a movement to create political coalitions of all antifascist groups. In the United States, the Communists abandoned opposition to the New Deal; they reentered the mainstream of the trade union movement and played an important part in organizing new unions for the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), for the first time gaining important positions of power in the union movement. As antifascist activists they attracted the support of many non-Communists during this period.

The party's attacks on Nazi Germany ended abruptly with the signing of the Hitler-Stalin nonaggression pact in Aug., 1939, and World War II, which immediately followed, was denounced as an “imperialist” war caused by Great Britain and France. American defense preparations and aid to the Western democracies were vigorously opposed as “war-mongering,” and Communist-dominated unions were quick to go out on strike. However, when Germany attacked Russia in June, 1941, the Communist position on the war changed overnight from “imperialist” to “democratic.” The party, under the leadership of Earl Browder, now went all out in its support of the war. Strikes were opposed as a hindrance to the war effort, and in 1944 the U.S. Communist party “disbanded” as a political party to become the Communist Political Association.

As soon as the war ended the Communist Party was reformed and immediately began shilling for its master and chief funding source: Joseph Stalin.

Columbia University's resident Stalinist, Louis Proyect considers Stalin "foolish" for trusting Hitler. Proyect, however thinks the pact was a:

legitimate principled measure taken to defend a socialist nation. The Nazi regime and Anglo-French imperialism were both reactionary and the Soviet people needed to maneuver to defend themselves as the vicissitudes of history unfolded. What is *not* principled is the political credibility that the Kremlin placed in the Hitler regime...

Hat tip: Security Watchtower.

What Academic Leftist Bias?

Grant Jones

Case Western Reserve University is looking for a new, tenure track, history professor:

As part of its general search (www.case.edu/artsci/dean/searches/history06.html), the Department of History at Case Western Reserve University invites applications for a tenure-track position to begin August 2006 in 20th-century U.S. history, with a focus on areas that examine issues of social justice. Specialists in the history of race or ethnicity, labor, poverty, criminal justice, gender/sexuality, and social movements are encouraged to apply. However, applicants in all fields of 20th-century U.S. history will be considered, so long as there is a focus on social justice.

I wonder if critics of "social justice" will be considered? Yeah, sure. This is how conservatives/libertarians, or just real liberals, are purged from the academy. Notice they are not advertising for a historian of American socialism, but rather for specialists in the Race-Class-Gender Matrix.

"Social justice" is just code for socialism:

Social justice is also used to refer to the overall fairness of a society in its divisions and distributions of rewards and burdens and, as such, the phrase has been adopted by political parties [italics added] with a redistributive agenda.

There are professional educators who make no secret that "social justice" is a political agenda embedded within the schools to change society to their liking:

Adams, Bell and Griffin (1997) define social justice as both a process and a goal. "The goal of social justice education is full and equal participation of all groups in a society that is mutually shaped to meet their needs. Social justice includes a vision of society that is equitable and all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure."

In other words, "social justice" is militant egalitarianism with a fig leaf.

Hat tip: Robert KC Johnson, who is fighting a lonely battle for intellectual diversity from inside the academy.

Weird Churchill Cartoons for Sale!

Drawn by none other than Grant Crowell

A Letter From the Mainland

Grant Jones

I just received this yesterday via a mutual friend:

Hello Colleagues,

I had a delightful surprise today when Dick Rowland, President of Grassroots of Hawaii, and his lovely wife, Maria, and Malia Zimmerman, a terrific reporter from Hawaii (do check the "Hawaii Reporter" website at http://www.hawaiireporter.com/) called me from Seattle, WA. They were in our state attending a gathering of state elected officials from across the country. We agreed to split the mileage distance between Seattle and my home, Toppenish, and met in the darling little former mining town of Roslyn, better known as the community used for filming the hit television show, "Northern Exposure."

Dick, Maria and Malia met me in the tiny town of Roslyn to give me an update on what's happening in Hawaii and to thank all of us "mainlanders" for speaking up to oppose the egregious "Akaka Bill" that will decimate our youngest sister state. They also urge us to please, PLEASE keep the pressure on our senators and congressmen to OPPOSE this bill. Here's Malia's poignant and distressing article about Hawaii's day of statehood. Today is Hawaii's birthday...click on Malia's article to see just how tough things are in the island state :

Hawaii Reporter: Hawaii Reporter

It is a truly sad time when so many citizens of varying ethnicities throughout our country have somehow decided that enjoying the freedoms, rights and privilege of being an American citizen is simply inadequate, insufficient, or worse, something to disdain and hate. Thankfully, there remains a majority of Americans who take pride in their country, their country's government, and who respect their fellow Americans.

Only the citizens in the 49 states who are Hawaii's sisters can save this youngest state from the motto: "Last Star On, First Star Off." (Be sure to note the photos in Malia's article on the link above!). The psychological, political and economic takeover of Hawaii's state elected officials is utterly complete. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, (a state agency, no less) is the power-player in the State of Hawaii, and clearly holds sway over all elected offices in the State, beginning with Governor Linda Lingle, throughout the Hawaiian legislature, and all county elected officials in the island state.

Senate Bill 147 (The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2005) will simply validate this ethnic power shift commandeered by OHA and radical ethnic extremists, and will essentially nullify any ability of the current state system to function in the future.

Government based upon ethnicity is the new game to collapse America internally while we simultaneously defend ourselves from external terrorists who share ethnocentricism and hate America ideology with those who believe that race trumps equality and freedom. The Akaka Bill, as well as all of Title 25 (federal Indian policy) and other race-based congressional blunders, have transformed American taxpayers into indentured servants, forever required to fully fund tribalism, and ethnic based governments for "time immemorial."

There will never be enough money. There will never, ever be a "thank you" from these same American citizens who find our government distasteful, cannot separate from America fast enough or far enough, but would scream bloody murder should they be separated from American federal funds guaranteed to meet every whim.

More despicable, in my view, are federal and state elected officials serving under a sworn oath to preserve and protect the U.S. Constitution and their constituents, who through either cowardice or cash, abandon the fundamental principles of the governments they serve. Federal and State elected officials now foment and facilitate race-based governments entirely tax-funded by the very constituents these same elected officials have abandoned.

If voters do not get these traitors out of public office, we will implode domestically before any external terrorist threat succeeds.

I urge each and all of you to absolutely hound your federal elected officials to VOTE NO!!! on S. 147 between now and September 6th, - a day the Senate has scheduled the bill to the Senate floor for a vote.

God save Hawaii. Because if it falls, we are all diminished. And if S. 147 succeeds, watch for the Aztlan Movement for their separate Latino/Mexican lands and governments in most of the Southwestern states.

In Hawaii, to respect your country, your state, your flag and your freedom is to be "insensitive." [An overstatement. There are many patriotic Americans in Hawaii, they just need to speak up.] Call me insensitive, please. And help circulate this request for help from our citizens in Hawaii who are proud of their statehood and their country.

Elaine Willman

Elaine Willman is president of Citizens Equal Rights Alliance in Washington State:

Howard Hanson, a CERA board member and co-founder of PERM in Minnesota wrote letters to Senator Coleman and Governor Pawlenty requesting the public meeting on Tribalism. In his letter to the Governor he quotes a new friend, Essie Washakie Skillings, daughter of a famous Shoshone Chief in Wyoming who wrote, "I cannot think of any issue more important in any government than the right of the people to be governed by laws, made by the people themselves." She goes on to say, "The Shoshone people are in a whole lot of trouble under the Shoshone Business Councils no separation of power. I see myself as an American and I will never reconcile or subject myself to a court and laws where the Business Council is the supreme legislative, governing, and judicial branch of the Shoshone Tribes Government"

Update, 24 August: Malia Zimmerman at Hawaii Reporter has more on Elaine Willman.
.

U.S.S. Kearsarge

It's easy to see why after firing a few rockets at the above warship the next order of business is to run like hell.

Murdoc has more.

.

The Popular Front Mind: A Review of Unholy Alliance by David Horowitz

Grant Jones

The thesis of this book is stated in the sub-title on the cover “Radical Islam and the American Left.” In this work Horowitz addresses both the nature of the American Left and its new affinity with Islamic terrorists. As an example of this alliance, Horowitz chronicles the career of Lynn Stewart who is a long time member of what he calls the “legal left.” At the bequest of William Kunstler and Ramsey Clark, in 1995, Stewart became the defense attorney for the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdul Rahman. Rahman has been convicted for his part in the 1993 World Trade Center attack.

Stewart went way beyond defending the Sheik. On February 10 2005, Stewart was convicted for smuggling messages from her client to his terrorist followers in Egypt. Steven Lubet, director of Northwestern University's program on advocacy and professionalism, dismissed Stewart’s claims of being a victim, "This case has nothing to do with zealous defense."

However, Horowitz notes that Lubet’s viewpoint was not shared by many in the legal profession. Stewart was defended by the ACLU, the