Arnold Schwarzenegger was great tonight.
Address to the Republican National Convention
August 31, 2004
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Thank you.
What a greeting! This is like winning an Oscar! ...As if I would know!
Speaking of acting, one of my movies was called "True Lies." It's what the Democrats should have called their convention.
My fellow Americans, this is an amazing moment for me. To think that a once-scrawny boy from Austria could grow up to become Governor of California and stand in Madison Square Garden to speak on behalf of the President of the United States that is an immigrant's dream. It is the American dream.
I was born in Europe ...and I've traveled all over the world. I can tell you that there is no place, no country, more compassionate more generous more accepting and more welcoming than the United States of America.
As long as I live, I will never forget that day 21 years ago when I raised my hand and took the oath of citizenship.
Do you know how proud I was? I was so proud that I walked around with an American flag around my shoulders all day long.
Tonight, I want to talk about why I'm even more proud to be an American -why I'm proud to be a Republican and why I believe this country is in good hands.
When I was a boy, the Soviets occupied part of Austria. I saw their tanks in the streets .I saw communism with my own eyes. I remember the fear we had when we had to cross into the Soviet sector. Growing up, we were told, "Don't look the soldiers in the eye. Look straight ahead." It was a common belief that Soviet soldiers could take a man out of his own car and ship him off to the Soviet Union as slave labor.
My family didn't have a car -- but one day we were in my uncle's car. It was near dark as we came to a Soviet checkpoint. I was a little boy, I wasn't an action hero back then, and I remember how scared I was that the soldiers would pull my father or my uncle out of the car, and I'd never see him again. My family and so many others lived in fear of the Soviet boot. Today, the world no longer fears the Soviet Union and it is because of the United States of America!
As a kid I saw the socialist country that Austria became after the Soviets left. I love Austria and I love the Austrian people - but I always knew America was the place for me.
In school, when the teacher would talk about America, I would daydream about coming here. I would sit for hours watching American movies transfixed by my heroes like John Wayne. Everything about America seemed so big to me so open, so possible.
I finally arrived here in 1968. I had empty pockets, but I was full of dreams. The presidential campaign was in full swing. I remember watching the Nixon and Humphrey presidential race on TV. A friend who spoke German and English, translated for me. I heard Humphrey saying things that sounded like socialism which is what I had just left. But then I heard Nixon speak. He was talking about free enterprise, getting government off your back, lowering taxes, and strengthening the military. Listening to Nixon speak sounded more like a breath of fresh air.
I said to my friend, "What party is he?" My friend said, "He's a Republican." I said, "Then I am a Republican!" And I've been a Republican ever since! And trust me, in my wife's family, that's no small achievement! I'm proud to belong to the party of Abraham Lincoln, the party of Teddy Roosevelt, the party of Ronald Reagan and the party of George W. Bush.
To my fellow immigrants listening tonight, I want you to know how welcome you are in this party. We Republicans admire your ambition. We encourage your dreams. We believe in your future. One thing I learned about America is that if you work hard and play by the rules, this country is truly open to you. You can achieve anything.
Everything I have my career my success my family I owe to America. In this country, it doesn't make any difference where you were born. It doesn't make any difference who your parents were. It doesn't make any difference if, like me, you couldn't even speak English until you were in your twenties.
America gave me opportunities, and my immigrant dreams came true. I want other people to get the same chances I did, the same opportunities. And I believe they can. That's why I believe in this country, that's why I believe in this party and that's why I believe in this President.
Now, many of you out there tonight are "Republican" like me in your hearts and in your beliefs. Maybe you're from Guatemala. Maybe you're from the Philippines. Maybe Europe or the Ivory Coast. Maybe you live in Ohio Pennsylvania or New Mexico. And maybe just maybe you don't agree with this party on every single issue. I say to you tonight I believe that's not only okay that's what's great about this country. Here we can respectfully disagree and still be patriotic still be American and still be good Republicans
My fellow immigrants, my fellow Americans how do you know if you are a Republican? I'll tell you how.
If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government...then you are a Republican! If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group... then you are a Republican! If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does... then you are a Republican! If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children ... then you are a Republican! If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope of democracy in the world ... then you are a Republican! And, ladies and gentlemen ...if you believe we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism ... then you are a Republican!
There is another way you can tell you're a Republican. You have faith in free enterprise, faith in the resourcefulness of the American people ...and faith in the U.S. economy. To those critics who are so pessimistic about our economy, I say: Don't be economic girlie men!
The U.S. economy remains the envy of the world. We have the highest economic growth of any of the world's major industrialized nations. Don't you remember the pessimism of twenty years ago when the critics said Japan and Germany were overtaking the U.S.? Ridiculous!
Now they say India and China are overtaking us. Don't you believe it! We may hit a few BUMPS -- but America always moves ahead! That's what Americans do!
We move prosperity ahead. We move freedom ahead. We move people ahead. Under President Bush, and Vice President Cheney, America's economy is moving ahead in spite of a recession they inherited and in spite of the attack on our homeland.
Now, the other party says there are two Americas. Don't believe that either. I've visited our troops in Iraq, Kuwait, Bosnia, Germany, and all over the world. I've visited our troops in California, where they train before they go overseas. And I've visited our military hospitals. And I can tell you this: Our young men and women in uniform do not believe there are two Americas!
They believe we are one America and they are fighting for it! We are one America - and President Bush is defending it with all his heart and soul!
That's what I admire most about the President. He's a man of perseverance.
He's a man of inner strength. He is a leader who doesn't flinch, doesn't waiver, does not back down. My fellow Americans, make no mistake about it terrorism is more insidious than communism, because it yearns to destroy not just the individual but the entire international order.
The President didn't go into Iraq because the polls told him it was popular. As a matter of fact, the polls said just the opposite. But leadership isn't about polls. It's about making decisions you think are right and then standing behind those decisions. That's why America is safer with George W. Bush as President.
He knows you don't reason with terrorists. You defeat them. He knows you can't reason with people blinded by hate. They hate the power of the individual. They hate the progress of women. They hate the religious freedom of others. They hate the liberating breeze of democracy. But, ladies and gentlemen, their hate is no match for America's decency.
We're the America that sends out Peace Corps volunteers to teach village children.
We're the America that sends out missionaries and doctors to raise up the poor and the sick. We're the America that gives more than any other country, to fight AIDS in Africa and the developing world. And we're the America that fights not for imperialism but for human rights and democracy.
You know, When the Germans brought down the Berlin Wall America's determination helped wield the sledgehammers. When that lone, young Chinese man stood in front of those tanks in Tiananmen Square America's hopes stood with him. And when
Nelson Mandela smiled in election victory after all those years in prison America celebrated, too.
We are still the lamp lighting the world especially for those who struggle. No matter in what labor camp they slave no matter in what injustice they're trapped -- they hear our call ... they see our light ... and they feel the pull of our freedom. They come here as I did because they believe. They believe in US.
They come because their hearts say to them, as mine did, "If only I can get to America." Someone once wrote -"There are those who say that freedom is nothing but a dream." They are right. It's the American dream.
No matter the nationality, no matter the religion, no matter the ethnic background, America brings out the best in people. And as Governor of the great state of California -- I see the best in Americans every day ... our police, our firefighters our nurses, doctors and teachers our parents.
And what about the extraordinary men and women who have volunteered to fight for the United States of America! I have such great respect for them and their heroic families.
Let me tell you about the sacrifice and commitment I've seen firsthand. In one of the military hospitals I visited, I met a young guy who was in bad shape. He'd lost a leg had a hole in his stomach ... his shoulder had been shot through.
I could tell there was no way he could ever return to combat. But when I asked him, "When do you think you'll get out of the hospital?" He said, "Sir, in three weeks." And do you know what he said to me then? He said he was going to get a new leg ... and get some therapy ... and then he was going back to Iraq to serve alongside his buddies! He grinned at me and said, "Arnold ... I'll be back!"
Ladies and gentlemen, America is back! back from the attack on our homeland- back from the attack on our economy back from the attack on our way of life. We're back because of the perseverance, character and leadership of the 43rd President of the United States George W. Bush.
My fellow Americans ...I want you to know that I believe with all my heart that America remains "the great idea" that inspires the world. It's a privilege to be born here. It's an honor to become a citizen here. It's a gift to raise your family here to vote here and to live here.
Our president George W. Bush has worked hard to protect and preserve the American dream for all of us. That's why I say ... send - him - back to Washington for four more years!
Thank you, America -- and God bless you all!
Rudy Giuliani was brilliant in his address to the Republican Convention tonight.
Address to the Republican National Convention
August 30, 2004
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
Welcome to the capital of the World.
New York was the first capital of our great nation. It was here in 1789 in lower Manhattan that George Washington took the oath of office as the first President of the United States.
It was here in 2001 in lower Manhattan that President George W. Bush stood amid the fallen towers of the World Trade Center and said to the barbaric terrorists who attacked us, "They will hear from us."
They have heard from us!
They heard from us in Afghanistan and we removed the Taliban.
They heard from us in Iraq and we ended Saddam Hussein's reign of terror.
They heard from us in Libya and without firing a shot Qadhafi abandoned weapons of mass destruction.
They are hearing from us in nations that are now more reluctant to sponsor terrorists.
So long as George Bush is President, is there any doubt they will continue to hear from us until we defeat global terrorism.
We owe that much and more to those loved ones and heroes we lost on September 11th.
The families of some of those we lost on September 11th are here with us. To them, and all those families affected by September 11th, we recognize the sacrifices your loved ones and you have made. You are in our prayers and we are in your debt.
This is the first Republican Convention ever held in New York City.
It makes a statement that New York City and America are open for business and stronger than ever.
We're not going to let the threat of terrorism stop us from leading our lives.
From the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, to President George W. Bush our party's great contribution is to expand freedom in our own land and all over the world.
And our party is at its best when it makes certain that we have a powerful national defense in a still very dangerous world.
I don't believe we're right about everything and Democrats are wrong about everything.
Neither party has a monopoly on virtue.
But I do believe that there are times in our history when our ideas are more necessary and important for what we are facing.
There are times when leadership is the most important.
On September 11, this city and our nation faced the worst attack in our history.
On that day, we had to confront reality. For me, standing below the north tower and looking up and seeing the flames of hell and then realizing that I was actually seeing a man a human being jumping from the 101st or 102nd floor drove home to me that we were facing something beyond anything we had ever faced before.
We had to concentrate all of our energy, faith and hope to get through those first hours and days.
And I will always remember that moment as we escaped the building we were trapped in at 75 Barclay Street and realized that things outside might be even worse than they were inside the building.
We did the best we could to communicate a message of calm and hope, as we stood on the pavement seeing a massive cloud rushing through the cavernous streets of lower Manhattan.
Our people were so brave in their response.
At the time, we believed we would be attacked many more times that day and in the days that followed. Spontaneously, I grabbed the arm of then Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik and said to Bernie, "Thank God George Bush is our President."
And I say it again tonight, "Thank God George Bush is our President."
On September 11, George W. Bush had been President less than eight months. This new President, Vice President, and new administration were faced with the worst crisis in our history.
President Bush's response in keeping us unified and in turning the ship of state around from being solely on defense against terrorism to being on offense as well and for his holding us together.
For that and then his determined effort to defeat global terrorism, no matter what happens in this election, President George W. Bush already has earned a place in our history as a great American President.
But let's not wait for history to present the correct view of our President. Let us write our own history.
We need George Bush now more than ever.
The horror, the shock and the devastation of those attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and over the skies of Pennsylvania lifted a cloud from our eyes.
We stood face to face with those people and forces who hijacked not just airplanes but a religion and turned it into a creed of terrorism dedicated to eradicating us and our way of life.
Terrorism did not start on September 11, 2001. It had been festering for many years.
And the world had created a response to it that allowed it to succeed. The attack on the Israeli team at the Munich Olympics was in 1972. And the pattern had already begun.
The three surviving terrorists were arrested and within two months released by the German government.
Action like this became the rule, not the exception.
Terrorists came to learn they could attack and often not face consequences.
In 1985, terrorists attacked the Achille Lauro and murdered an American citizen who was in a wheelchair, Leon Klinghoffer.
They marked him for murder solely because he was Jewish.
Some of those terrorist were released and some of the remaining terrorists allowed to escape by the Italian government because of fear of reprisals.
So terrorists learned they could intimidate the world community and too often the response, particularly in Europe, was "accommodation, appeasement and compromise."
And worse the terrorists also learned that their cause would be taken more seriously, almost in direct proportion to the barbarity of the attack.
Terrorist acts became a ticket to the international bargaining table.
How else to explain Yasser Arafat winning the Nobel Peace Prize when he was supporting a terrorist plague in the Middle East that undermined any chance of peace?
Before September 11, we were living with an unrealistic view of the world much like our observing
Europe appease Hitler or trying to accommodate ourselves to peaceful co-existence with the Soviet Union through mutually assured destruction.
President Bush decided that we could no longer be just on defense against global terrorism but we must also be on offense.
On September 20, 2001, President Bush stood before a joint session of Congress, a still grieving and shocked nation and a confused world and he did change the direction of our ship of state.
He dedicated America under his leadership to destroying global terrorism.
The President announced the Bush Doctrine when he said: "Our war on terror begins with Al Qaeda, but it does not end there.
It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.
"Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists."
And since September 11th President Bush has remained rock solid.
It doesn't matter how he is demonized.
It doesn't matter what the media does to ridicule him or misinterpret him or defeat him.
They ridiculed Winston Churchill. They belittled Ronald Reagan.
But like President Bush, they were optimists; leaders must be optimists. Their vision was beyond the present and set on a future of real peace and true freedom.
Some call it stubbornness. I call it principled leadership.
President Bush has the courage of his convictions.
In choosing a President, we really don't choose a Republican or Democrat, a conservative or liberal.
We choose a leader.
And in times of danger, as we are now in, Americans should put leadership at the core of their decision.
There are many qualities that make a great leader but having strong beliefs, being able to stick with them through popular and unpopular times, is the most important characteristic of a great leader.
Winston Churchill saw the dangers of Hitler while his opponents characterized him as a war-mongering gadfly.
Ronald Reagan saw and described the Soviet Union as "the evil empire" while world opinion accepted it as inevitable and belittled Ronald Reagan's intelligence.
President Bush sees world terrorism for the evil that it is.
John Kerry has no such clear, precise and consistent vision.
This is not a personal criticism of John Kerry.
I respect him for his service to our nation.
But it is important to see the contrast in approach between the two men;
President Bush, a leader who is willing to stick with difficult decisions even as public opinion shifts, and John Kerry, whose record in elected office suggests a man who changes his position often even on important issues.
When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, John Kerry voted against the Persian Gulf War. Later he said he actually supported the war.
Then in 2002, as he was calculating his run for President, he voted for the war in Iraq.
And then just 9 months later, he voted against an $87 billion supplemental budget to fund the war and support our troops.
He even, at one point, declared himself an anti-war candidate. Now, he says he's pro-war. At this rate, with 64 days left, he still has time to change his position at least three or four more times.
My point about John Kerry being inconsistent is best described in his own words when he said, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."
Maybe this explains John Edwards' need for two Americas - - one where John Kerry can vote for something and another where he can vote against the same thing.
Yes, people in public office at times do change their minds, I've done that, or they realize they are wrong or circumstances change.
But John Kerry has made it the rule to change his position, rather than the exception. In October, 2003, he told an Arab-American Institute in Detroit that a security barrier separating Israel from the Palestinian Territories was a "barrier to peace."
A few months later, he took exactly the opposite position. In an interview with the Jerusalem Post he said, "Israel's security fence is a legitimate act of self defense."
The contrasts are dramatic. They involve very different views of how to deal with terrorism.
President Bush will make certain that we are combatting terrorism at the source, beyond our shores, so we can reduce the risk of having to confront it in the streets of New York.
John Kerry's record of inconsistent positions on combatting terrorism gives us no confidence he'll pursue such a determined course.
President Bush will not allow countries that appear to have ignored the lessons of history and failed for over thirty years to stand up to terrorists, to dissuade us from what is necessary for our defense.
He will not let them set our agenda. Under President Bush, America will lead rather than follow.
John Kerry's claim that certain foreign leaders who opposed our removal of Saddam Hussein prefer him, raises the risk that he would accommodate his position to their viewpoint.
It would hardly be the first time he changed his position on matters of war and peace.
I remember the days following September 11th when we were no longer Democrats or Republicans, but Americans determined to do all we could to help the victims, to rebuild our city and nation and to disable our enemies.
I remember President Bush coming here on September 14, 2001 and lifting the morale of our rescue workers by talking with them and embracing them and staying with them much longer than originally planned.
In fact, if you promise to keep it just between us so I don't get in trouble it was my opinion that the Secret Service was concerned about the President remaining so long in that area.
With buildings still unstable, with fires raging below ground of 2000 degrees or more, there was good reason for concern.
Well the President remained there and talked to everyone, the firefighters, the police officers, the healthcare workers, the clergy, but the people who spent the most time with him were our construction workers.
Now New York construction workers are very special people. I'm sure this is true all over but I know the ones here the best. They were real heroes along with many others that day, volunteering immediately. And they're big, real big. Their arms are bigger than my legs and their opinions are even bigger than their arms.
Now each one of them would engage the President and I imagine like his cabinet give him advice.
They were advising him in their own words on exactly what he should do with the terrorists. Of course I can't repeat their exact language.
But one of them really went into great detail and upon conclusion of his remarks President Bush said in a rather loud voice, "I agree."
At this point the guy just beamed and all his buddies turned toward him in amazement.
The guy just lost it.
So he reached over, embraced the President and began hugging him enthusiastically.
A Secret Service agent standing next to me looked at the President and the guy and instead of extracting the President from this bear hug, he turned toward me and put his finger in my face and said, "If this guy hurts the President, Giuliani you're finished."
Meekly, and this is the moral of the story, I responded, "but it would be out of love."
I also remember the heart wrenching visit President Bush made to the families of our firefighters and police officers at the Javits Center.
I remember receiving all the help, assistance and support from the President and even more than we asked.
For that I will be eternally grateful to President Bush.
And I remember the support being bi-partisan and actually standing hand in hand Republicans and Democrats, here in New York and all over the nation.
During a Boston Red Sox game there was a sign held up saying Boston loves New York.
I saw a Chicago police officer sent here by Mayor Daley directing traffic in Manhattan.
I'm not sure where he sent the cars, they are probably still riding around the Bronx, but it was very reassuring to know how much support we had.
And as we look beyond this election and elections do accentuate differences let's make sure we rekindle that spirit that we are one one America united to end the threat of global terrorism.
Certainly President Bush will keep us focused on that goal. When President Bush announced his commitment to ending global terrorism, he understood - - I understood, we all understood - - it was critical to remove the pillars of support for the global terrorist movement.
In any plan to destroy global terrorism, removing Saddam Hussein needed to be accomplished.
Frankly, I believed then and I believe now that Saddam Hussein, who supported global terrorism, slaughtered hundreds of thousands of his own people, permitted horrific atrocities against women, and used weapons of mass destruction, was himself a weapon of mass destruction.
But the reasons for removing Saddam Hussein were based on issues even broader than just the presence of weapons of mass destruction.
To liberate people, give them a chance for accountable, decent government and rid the world of a pillar of support for global terrorism is something for which all those involved from President Bush to the brave men and women of our armed forces should be proud.
President Bush has also focused on the correct long-term answer for the violence and hatred emerging from the Middle East. The hatred and anger in the Middle East arises from the lack of accountable governments.
Rather than trying to grant more freedom, create more income, improve education and basic health care, these governments deflect their own failures by pointing to America and Israel and other external scapegoats.
But blaming these scapegoats does not improve the life of a single person in the Arab world. It does not relieve the plight of even one woman in Iran.
It does not give a decent living to a single soul in Syria. It certainly does not stop the slaughter of African Christians in the Sudan.
The changes necessary in the Middle East involve encouraging accountable, lawful governments that can be role models.
This has also been an important part of the Bush Doctrine and the President's vision for the future.
Have faith in the power of freedom.
People who live in freedom always prevail over people who live in oppression. That's the story of the Old Testament. That's the story of World War II and the Cold War.
That's the story of the firefighters and police officers and rescue workers who courageously saved thousands of lives on September 11, 2001.
President Bush is the leader we need for the next four years because he sees beyond today and tomorrow. He has a vision of a peaceful Middle East and, therefore, a safer world. We will see an end to global terrorism. I can see it. I believe it. I know it will happen.
It may seem a long way off. It may even seem idealistic.
But it may not be as far away and idealistic as it seems.
Look how quickly the Berlin Wall was torn down, the Iron Curtain ripped open and the Soviet Union disintegrated because of the power of the pent-up demand for freedom.
When it catches hold there is nothing more powerful than freedom. Give it some hope, and it will overwhelm dictators, and even defeat terrorists. That is what we have done and must continue to do in Iraq.
That is what the Republican Party does best when we are at our best, we extend freedom.
It's our mission. And it's the long-term answer to ending global terrorism. Governments that are free and accountable.
We have won many battles at home and abroad but as President Bush told us on September 20, 2001 it will take a long-term determined effort to prevail.
The war on terrorism will not be won in a single battle. There will be no dramatic surrender. There will be no crumbling of a massive wall.
But we will know it. We'll know it as accountable governments continue to develop in countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.
We'll know it as terrorist attacks throughout the world decrease and then end.
And then, God willing, we'll all be able on a future anniversary of September 11th.
To say to our fallen brothers and sisters. To our heroes of the worst attack in our history and to our heroes who have sacrificed their lives in the war on terror.
We will say to them we have done all that we could with our lives that were spared to make your sacrifices build a world of real peace and true freedom.
We will make certain in the words of President Bush that they have heard from us.
That they have heard from us a message of peace through free, accountable, lawful and decent governments giving people hope for a future for themselves and their children.
God bless each one we have lost, here and abroad, and their families.
God bless all those defending our freedom.
God bless America.
The weekend witnessed an assault by the mainstream media against Swiftboat Veterans for Truth and their varied allegations about the conduct of John Kerry while in Vietnam and upon his return to the United States. Lengthy articles in the Washington Post and the Washington Times took the "Swiftees" to task for supposedly impugning the record of a war hero. Never mind the fact that the Post and Times have not published lengthy exposes about the political nastiness that masquerades as MoveOn.org.
Leftist hypocrisy has surely climaxed with hostile scrutiny of financial contributors to the Swiftees. Bob Perry is a long time friend and supporter of President Bush. His $100,000 donation that helped Swifttees get started has been singled out as though it were the root of all evil. In Democrat circles, a citizen who seeks to give voice to his political opinions by donating to 527 organizations is a pariah- if his opinions are conservative that is. If the citizen happens to be George Soros and the amounts donated happen to exceed $15 million, all given to leftist attack groups, well, then he is a public benefactor of the highest order.
National Review today published an excellent analysis by Victor Davis Hanson of President Bush's announcement of troop withdrawals from Europe. Hanson argued that the withdrawal of troops no longer needed in Europe will force the nations and peoples of Europe to reenter the world as it exists today- a world that very much demands the defense of freedom by those who enjoy it.
Hanson wrote: "... we had created an unhealthy passive-aggressiveness in Europe that clinicians might identify as a classic symptom of dependency. Europe — now larger and more populous than the United States — has reduced defense investment to subsidize a variety of social expenditures found nowhere in the world. So insular had its utopians become under the aegis of NATO's subsidized protection that it was increasingly convinced that the ubiquitous United States was the world's rogue nation, the last impediment to a 35-hour work week, cradle-to-grave subsidies, and wind power the world over."
He continued: "The real significance of Bush's decision will be felt inside Europe itself. Our gradual departure will bring slow reckoning to the nations of Europe, not just in places like Poland, worried about 10 percent of old Germany inside its borders, but also and especially in the west among nations like Denmark and Holland. Their no-nonsense leaders have ignored the mob's cheap antics and treasured the idea that real Americans in uniform were always nearby, whose sanctity meant their own security, and whose imperilment guaranteed that a $600 billion military would immediately rush to stand side-by-side on their ramparts. So their concerns — as bilateral partners — must be addressed."
He added: "Gut-check time is approaching. In places like Brussels, Berlin, and Oslo, in the next half-century citizens will slowly decide who wishes and does not wish to be an ally of the United States of America. Some will prefer opportunistic neutrality and thus go the Swedish and Swiss route. Others in their folly may ape French and Spanish bellicosity, and think isolating the U.S., selling weapons to the Middle East, or going on maneuvers with the Chinese might work. Still more may prefer to remain staunch friends like the Poles and Italians, realizing that, for all the leftist slurs about unilateralism, never in the history of civilization has such a powerful country as the United States sought advice and cooperation from weaker friends about the wisdom, efficacy, and consequences of using its vast military. But this is no parlor game any more. Islamic fascism, scary former Soviet republics, rogue Middle Eastern nuclear states, an ever more proud and muscular China thirsty for oil — these and more specters are all out there and waiting, waiting, waiting..."
Worth reading.
Writing in the Weekly Standard today, William Kristol quoted remarks made by John Kerry on the subject of troop withdrawals from Korea and Europe before and after the recent announcement by President Bush that such withdrawals will be implemented, to document yet another Kerry flip-flop:
"On Monday, during a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, President Bush announced that he intends to modify the configuration of American forces in both South Korea and Europe. On Wednesday, Sen. Kerry, speaking before the same audience, sharply criticized the president's decision.
Appearing on ABC's This Week on August 1, however, Sen. Kerry responded to a question by host George Stephanopoulos on Iraq. Stephanopoulos asked Kerry whether, as president, he could "promise that American troops will be home by the end of your first term?" Kerry's answer:
"I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. . . . I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps. There are great possibilities open to us. But this administration has very little imagination."
Apparently, Sen. Kerry wanted to appeal to the "get-the-boys-back-home" sentiment in the country when he spoke on This Week. Yesterday, addressing a convention of veterans, Kerry was busy burnishing his credentials as a hawk by suggesting that cutting our forces in Korea "is clearly the wrong signal to send" at this time.""
Kerry's comments raise the legitimate question, does he believe in anything other than a politics of convenience.
The New York Times today reported that Alex Ho, a candidate with the Democratic Party of Hong Kong, was arrested in Dongguan on charges of soliciting prostitution. Ho has been sentenced without due process to six months detention, a period of time sufficient to disqualify him from participating in a local council election he was likely to win.
According the government controlled New China News Agency, "... Ho and a 25-year-old woman were found naked in a room at the Huiyuan Hyatt Hotel at 5 a.m." The Times noted that, "... mainland authorities are supposed to notify Hong Kong officials promptly of the arrest of a Hong Kong citizen, no such notification had been received about Mr. Ho."
According to Fred Li, a senior member of the Democratic Party, Ho was, "... held without access to a lawyer or to family members until he signed a confession that he had hired the prostitute..." Li continued, "... Mr. Ho initially refused to sign, but did so when told he would be released ... if he signed, and when threatened with prosecution for rape if he did not sign." Ho was not released, but instead was sentenced to a period of detention corresponding to government political objectives.
Prostitution, while illegal, is common in China. Were laws against it strictly enforced, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would lack untainted leadership in sufficient numbers to continue imposing itself on the Chinese people. The motive for the detention of Alex Ho is not prostitution, it is found in this statement by Times: "Democrats delivered a sharp setback to pro-Beijing candidates in neighborhood elections last November, and polls have suggested they will do well in the Council elections." Lacking a legitimate means to impose themselve on Hong Kong, the thugs who rule the CCP resort to bullying, which is their first instinct.
From an article by David Tubbs and Robert George in City Journal:
"It is often remarked that marriage tends to "civilize" sexuality—particularly male sexuality. Although the complete picture is more complex than that, there is truth in this remark. But there is no magic in a word. Redefining marriage means abolishing it and shifting the label to a new institution—one for which there are no grounds of principle for sexual exclusivity or monogamy. Thus redefined, marriage won't function to civilize anybody. If marriage is redefined out of existence, our entire society will be harmed, but the harm will be distributed unequally. In the libertine utopia of "sexual freedom," women and children will suffer the most."
Worth reading.
In National Review today, Michael Ledeen argued that Iraq is but a battlefield in the war against terrorism. Echoing the principal theme from, "The War Against the Terror Masters," his dated but still relevant book, Ledeen asserted a pattern of cooperation between Sunni and Shi'ite terror organizations and the regimes in Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia that orchestrate and support them. Ledeen contended, and I agree, that winning the war against terrorism will require confronting the "terror masters" in Damascus, Tehran, and Riyadh using military and polical means.
On a subject the media do not want to cover, this website is worth visting: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
In National Review yesterday, Mustafa Akyol argued that the violent detention and beheading of Western hostages by Islamists is not condoned by the Koran. Akyol wrote that, "... the kidnappings and murders we see today, like all other acts of terrorism committed against civilians, are un-Islamic cruelties. They stem from a kind of necrophilic nihilism, not from the essence of Islam." In his article, Akyol cited verses from the Koran to bolster his contention that Islam requires hospitality and safe passage for what he characterized as "prisoners of war."
Andrew McCarthy destroyed Akyol's argument in an article published today by National Review. While welcoming Akyol's condemnation of terrorist barbarity, McCarthy put the verses cited by Akyol into proper Koranic context, added several verses of his own, and provided illustrations from the life of Muhammed, to demonstrate that Islamists are not necessarily misconstruing their religion. McCarthy ended with these words: "I applaud Akyol for condemning the depravity of the militants who have savaged Johnson, Berg, il-Sun, Pearl, and others. But I don't believe he has made a compelling case for the "Islamic condemnation of the al Qaeda killings." Such a case would require taking these troubling verses and incidents head-on, and providing a cogent explanation of why they should not be interpreted as jihadists have interpreted them."
Both articles are worth reading- Akyol for an understanding of the Islamic theology wished for by many Muslims, and McCarthy for an understanding of Islamic theology in reality.
At once encouraging and discouraging, the Washington Post today reported that, “A papal emissary investigating suspected homosexuality and child pornography among student priests shut down the Austrian seminary at the center of the scandal Thursday, saying his probe had resulted in “very painful” revelations of sexual misconduct.”
In the face of what is seemingly persistent pedophilia and homosexual activity throughout the Church, it is encouraging that a papal emissary has acted with speed to close the seminary for an unspecified period of time, and has ordered students who wish to continue studying for the priesthood to undergo screening to verify suitability. Two of the thirty-six students at the seminary have left, but the content and volume of the evidence of depravity would seem to indicate involvement by many more students and of and duplicitous homosexual relationships with staff and teachers. One prays that the papal emissary will take all necessary measures to completely and finally end the depravity.
Good news aside, it is utterly discouraging to read that in a Catholic seminary, “…40,000 photos and numerous videos… some featuring child pornography” have been discovered on computers, and that other photographs have been found showing, “… students kissing and fondling each other and their older religious instructors.” It is downright devastating to read that, Kurt Krenn, the Bishop of St. Poelten refuses to resign, and that he has been ordered by the Church, “… to stop speaking to reporters after he described the photos of priests kissing and fondling as "childish pranks" and made other comments playing down the affair.”
The papal emissary may have authority to purge and cleanse a sinful seminary, but his authority does not extend to the chair of an errant bishop. In this, as in other cases of sexual deviancy that have so harmed the Church, the news will not be entirely encouraging until bishops like Krenn who have so failed their flock, make the fullest act of contrition for their failings- managerial or personal- by resigning.
National Review today published an excellent article by Donna Hughes on the effect of Islamization in Sudan. Even as the media and the Western world raise awareness of the horrific crimes committed by the Sudanese government against non-Arab citizens, nothing is done to stop the genocide. Governments and politicians who in the aftermath of the Rwanda genocide vowed never again to tolerate such crimes against humanity can only be bothered to pass resolutions- toothless threats. Kofi Annan talks. The Arab world is silent. The Islamic nations are silent. America and Britain are preoccupied. The French don't care. In the meantime, innocents suffer and die, or if less lucky are enslaved by Islamic bigotry and Arab racism.
In an article in Opinion Journal today, Claudia Rosset pressured the United Nations to release to the public all documents relating to the Oil for Fraud program. Rosett noted that the U.N. has some 15 million relevant documents in hand and collects more each day. The Oil for Fraud investigation headed by Paul Volker is not expected to release a report in the near future- the overwhelming volume of reading material is a critical obstruction. Rosset proposed the cleanising effect of daylight on the documentation and she is right- let free journalists investigate and the truth will come out. Then again, the truth is what Kofi Annan wants least of all.
With apologies, I have been slow in posting and responding the past few days. A massive increase in comments posted by "spambots" compelled me to upgrade to Movable Type version 3.0 and implement a comment registration system. I apologize for the incovenience of registering with the site in order to post comments. I have spent hours deleting links to pornography sites and feel that I have no alternative. Rest assured, Soldier of the Mind will treat information gathered from comment registration with absolute confidentiality.
John Kerry and Teresa Heinz attended Mass in Albuquerque, New Mexico on Sunday and reportedly received the Eucharist. After determining that Michael Sheehan, the Archbishop of Santa Fe, has decided not to confront pro-abortion politicians with Eucharist sanction, Domenico Bettinelli wondered whether, "... the Kerrys are planning their journeys around the U.S. so that on Sundays they’re in dioceses where they are welcome to receive Communion. After all, they were heading to Denver later that day and they probably would not have been welcome to receive Communion there."
This campaign advertisement, Kerry on Kerry, demolishes the pretense that John Kerry has a principled approach to the liberation of Iraq. Using his own words, the advertisement proves that Kerry has tailored his message about Iraq to suit his his political needs without respect for truth or principle.
An interesting case that raises questions about religious liberties and religious discrimination was reported by the Miami Herald yesterday:
"A woman is suing her former employer, a telecommunications firm with Muslim workers and clients, claiming she was fired because she ate pork products in the company lunchroom. Pork is unclean, according to Islamic beliefs, and Rising Star Telecommunications CEO Kujaatele Kweli said his company has a policy against openly eating or preparing the meat. But the attorney for Lina Morales, an administrative assistant fired in March 2003, said the company admits there is no written policy against pork. And when Morales complained she was being disciplined for a policy of which she was unaware, she was fired for insubordination."
A Central Florida news station, Local 6, reported that, "Morales, who is Catholic, was warned about eating pizza with meat the Muslim faith considered "unclean. She was then fired for eating a bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwich, according to the report." Local 6 quoted Kweli as saying, "Our point of view is to respect the laws of the land and the laws of the land as I understand it is to the accommodate people's right to practice their religions if you can."
The practice of religion (or atheism for that matter) is a critical freedom- inseparable from freedom of conscience- and much worth protecting. The state, however, has a compelling interest in commerical workplaces free from discrimination. It is one thing for a religious organization, a church or charity for example, to create a workplace that does not contradict religious beliefs. It is altogether another thing for a commercial enterprise dominated by a religious group to impose beliefs and practices on employees of differing or no faith. In the former case, employees accept the religious mission of their employer as a fact of employment, in the latter case there is no such mission and no such consent- there is only discrimination.
Having said as much, any matter imposing secular standards over and above religious practice is not to be dismissed lightly- regardless of the religion in question. Recent court decisions in California and in other jurisdictions have held, for example, that charities of the Catholic Church must include contraception and abortion amongst health benefits offered to employees. This, despite the Church's irreconcileable moral and dogmatic opposition to the "benefits." What the court decides in one case will take hold in others.
Kweli confuses religious liberty with religious discrimination and Rising Star Telecommunications is in clear violation of employment law. Friends of the First Amendment should not rush to celebrate a likely victory, however, because the precedents established when courts impose secular norms too often impact religious liberty in future disputes.
Update: Tom at Redhunter also addressed this story today.
The New York Times today reported on efforts in Canada to allow Muslims to apply Sharia in disputes over property, inheritance, marriage and divorce. The Times is late in reporting on the establishment of the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice in Canada. In “Justice Canadian Style,” responding to an April 28 article in the Washington Post addressing the same subject, I argued that Sharia is the antithesis of civil justice.
The Times report is distinguished from that of the Post by quotations that boggle the mind and reasoning that demands comment. For example, in introducing what would seem to be a Canadian multicultural ideal, the Times wrote, “The late Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau dreamed of a Canada in which distinctive customs and identities could live side by side in harmony. Turning nationalism on its head, there would be no dominant Canadian identity, no melting pot, no official culture.
The Times continued, “H. Donald Forbes, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, said he cannot be sure how Mr. Trudeau would have responded to the idea of Shariah tribunals, “but I think he would go along.” He added that as long as the arbitration is voluntary, Mr. Trudeau would probably have concluded that “this kind of meaningful accommodation was in the spirit of multiculturalism.””
No dominant national identity? Is this not a recipe for balkanization? While common sense does exist in parts of Canada, Daimnation is proof, one can not be faulted for wondering whether Canadian common sense is destined to be overwhelmed by a people disinclined toward self preservation.
The Times did provide evidence that not all Muslims in Canada support the option of Sharia: “…some Canadian Muslim women - who say Muslim law is already applied behind closed doors - say efforts to apply it openly… would represent a dangerous precedent.” The Times quoted Homa Arjomand, an Iranian born counselor for battered women, “Here in Canada, girls are segregated from boys at private Islamic elementary schools, then forced into arranged marriages through Shariah at the age of 13, 14 or 15 to men over twice their age. How much choice do these women have?”
The Times dismissed Arjomand’s concern by noting that, “… the Ontario government has appointed Marion Boyd, a feminist activist and former provincial cabinet member to review the 1991 arbitration law.” The Times then cited an example of coexistence between religious and secular law: “It would not be the first time laws have changed to balance religion and secular rights. A group of Canadian Jewish women pressed the federal government in 1990 to enact a law to help Jewish women seeking a religious divorce against recalcitrant husbands who under Orthodox rules have the upper hand in such cases.”
This might be encouraging if Jewish law compared to Sharia like plowshares compare to plowshares, but the accurate comparison is of plowshares to swords. Jews have history as proof of the Torah's adaptability to host cultures. Islam has no similar record. Instead, Islam and Sharia, invented to authenticate a conquest, demand ascendancy.
The Times quoted Boyd: "How do we honor two commitments, to multiculturalism and equity to the rule of law, that often seem to come into conflict? We have been struggling a bit. There really are conflicting values."
There really are conflicting values? Ms. Boyd just realized this? The Muslim women she is to protect- pressed by their culture into the arms of Sharia- should worry.
Update: Jane at Armies of Liberation also addressed this story today.
Arab News Daily on Sunday published an editorial by Jane at Armies of Liberation, an occasional visitor to this site, addressing John Kerry's approach to national security. This quote sums it up, "John Kerry offers ... little global vision beyond restoring alliances in Europe."
Underplayed or hidden altogether by the New York Times and Washington Post is polling data indicating that John Kerry and John Edwards have benefited not at all from the recent Democrat convention. CNN reported yesterday that an opinion poll taken at the weekend found Kerry to be, “… running slightly ahead of Bush among registered voters but slightly behind among likely voters. … In each case, the difference between the two men was less than the margin of error, making the results a statistical tie.”
When Michael Dukakis, Bill Clinton and Al Gore enjoyed sizeable surges in polling data following their conventions, the surges were front page news in the established media. One can not help but wonder why surging Democrats are a story to be reported while sputtering Democrats are no story at all. The silence couldn't possibly be purposeful... could it?
Media bias aside, a post convention bounce may not be necessary to win elections, but the lack of any bounce must worry Democrats. It is logical to expect that nearly a week of unfiltered campaigning would result in at least a minimal surge at the polls. That is, if the message of the campaign has any resonance with undecided voters. Lacking clear positive indications in polling numbers, it is appropriate to question whether Kerry's message falls flat.