Archive for June, 2008

Had a note from an American professor friend in Canada bemoaning…

Posted in General on June 20, 2008 by johnmwilliams

the decline in Muslim students in the US. Of course, he’s a far left ideologue, as are most academics. His assertion was that the Bush Administration had made things so inconvenient for Muslim students that they were going elsewhere–places like Australia, England and Canada.

I explained that the only program I’ve seen radically changed since 9/11 is the Visa Waiver Program where visitors from certain countries could come to the US for up to 90 days without acquiring a visa. That list had included many Middle Eastern countries prior to 9/11 and doesn’t include any now. And the rules used to allow a visitor to change his/her status after arriving in the US (ie, from tourist to student) without much more than a notification to INS, but now requires a new application and far more rigorous background check for any stay beyond the 90 days.

So while we may have made it more difficult to just fly into the US and stay for 90 days without anything more than a passport, I don’t think the new guidelines would be considered extreme by any rational person and I can’t imagine that any of the countries that have supposedly benefited from these new rules would have less stringent guidelines.

I then addressed his assertion that Muslim students have come under increased scrutiny–and I conceded that it might very well be that Muslim students are coming under more scrutiny than they were before 9/11. And anything above “none” would seem oppressive, especially when all the newspapers and fellow academics are assuring a student that he’s being scrutinized far beyond what is reasonable. I asked, if a student comes to this country, how much scrutiny does he expect? How does he know whether it’s “too much” or “too little” and compared to what?

I then posited that I found it far more plausible that Muslim students, based on the wild-eyed rantings of the anti-war crowd accusing President Bush of everything from turning the US into a police state to using the Patriot Act to lock up any Muslim he didn’t think looked western enough, would try to avoid the US at all costs and wouldn’t even apply for visas. I then asked that if he disagreed to give me one message–any message–any snipet or tidbit–that the left in this country broadcast to the rest of the world during the last 5 years that would encourage a Muslim (or anyone else, for that matter) to come to this country? So, I asked, isn’t the left once again bemoaning a situation that is primarily of its own making? I haven’t received an answer.

Advertisements

Pat Buchanan’s new book “Churchill, Hitler and ‘The Unnecessary War’: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World”

Posted in General on June 17, 2008 by johnmwilliams

I like Pat Buchanan. He’s generally been an equal opportunity critic, and I like his individualist bent in criticizing both parties regardless of their professed adherence to populism. But he should stay away from history. Based on his articles where he defends his new book, it’s a bunch of twisted, contorted crap that has no foundation in reality outside the rarified air of Buchanan’s world where Hitler was just a reasonable, moderate statesman who only wanted a port. The only assertion in his book that has a modicum of truth in the historical context is that the Treaty of Versailles provided the path for Hitler’s ascension to assume the mantle of the Third Reich (again, relying solely on the articles he’s written in defense of his book). On this one truth, Buchanan tries to construct a world out of whole cloth that never existed and attempts to create equivalency between the claims and grievances of the Nazis and Allies. Claiming that Hitler had a moral entitlement to the Sudetenland (or Danzig or any other piece of property) lends credence to any terrorist in the world with a beef over internationally recognized borders.

Read any of the definitive works on Adolph Hitler and you’ll find that his public pronouncements were calculated solely to convince the Lindbergs and Fords (and apparently Buchanans) of the world that he wanted “peace.” Just like Osama bin Laden wants “peace.” All dictators and terrorists want “peace”–as long as they can have whatever they demand. There are volumes and volumes of private letters, memoranda, and official orders that make clear Hitler’s intent, regardless of his public pronouncements, to dominate all of Europe–with or without war. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, the definitive biography Adolph Hitler, and a host of other well-documented sources make it plain that Hitler was attempting to deliberately deceive the international community in hopes of postponing war until he could sufficiently mobilize his war machine.

In that light, he had his bluff called when the Poles balked at his offer of “peace” and he was forced to start the war in ernest, and so begins the pattern seen throughout the conquest of Europe–“I wanted peace, but the Poles refused to let me annex Poland! But don’t worry–I want peace–so just let me have this little piece of land and everything can get back to normal.”

In that sense, Buchanan has become the ULTIMATE appeaser and would have made a great member of America First!

Unfortunately, those people didn’t have the benefit of real history to evaluate the situation. Buchanan does–and that makes his work even more suspect in my mind. Why would he deliberately ignore the documented evidence of Hitler’s intentions (and subsequenst actions) and instead try to base history on little more than Nazi propaganda? I would say this book will be his final undoing, at least as far as serious folks go.

Myth 1: WMD were the primary reason we went to war in Iraq

Posted in Defense of George W. Bush on June 11, 2008 by johnmwilliams

FACT:  George W. Bush mentioned WMD only as an item we could not afford for Saddam to obtain.  The illusion that the Bush Administration harped on WMD was created wholly by the press.  Did the Bush Administration talk a lot about WMD?  Yes-because it was all the press was interested in discussing.  Transcripts of press conferences show that the press didn’t give one whit about democracy or a free Iraq.  They were obsessed with WMD-and asked question after question after question focused solely on the WMD threat from Iraq.  But any time the President spoke, his message was far more concerned with freeing Iraq and establishing a country to lead the Middle East out of the culture that was breeding the radical Islamists like those who carried out 9/11.  You don’t believe me?  See George W. Bush’s speech to the American Enterprise Institute in February, 2003 (immediately following the invasion earlier that month):  http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030226-11.html  It’s quite typical of the speeches he was giving at the time.  You can see that all the “moving goalposts” and other propaganda from the media (trying to cover its primary role in convincing the public that Saddam possessed WMD) are built on myths the media conjured up to try to avoid taking responsibility for its role of exaggerating the threat of WMD for the sake of readership and audience share.

Hello world!

Posted in Uncategorized on June 11, 2008 by johnmwilliams

Hi.