Watch Stolen Honor - online, at no cost.

The entire film "Stolen Honor" about Senator Kerry's betrayal of United States P.O.W.'s in Vietnam, together with the mini-documentaries by the Swift Boat Veterans who served with Senator Kerry, can be downloaded and seen for free.

You can read about the background behind the film Stolen Honor here. Stolen Honor features interviews with 17 Vietnam POWs, whose time in prison amounted to 109 years and three months. 

It's not likely you will have the opportunity to see them share their experiences and perspective on John Kerry on any of the mainstream media stations, so watch it while you can, and preferably before the election -- for as much as Senator Kerry is making his military service a plank of his campaign and claiming the support of veterans across the nation, these men deserve a chance to be heard as well.

Will Michael Moore "Document and Deter" Anti-Republican Voter Intimidation?

Michael Moore's "videoarmy" is enlisting members around the nation, according to the following email sent to Ohio's Online Filmmaking Community:

Message from Carl at Michael Moore's office . . . "I am writing to you from the office of filmmaker Michael Moore. We are reaching out to the Ohio Filmmaking community to ask you to volunteer your time and talents to help deter election fraud, voter intimidation and vote suppression, and to document on tape any instances that may occur on November 2nd. If you interested in joining this effort, or are already planning to be present with your camera, please let us know as soon as possible. Please email a telephone number where you can be reached, and indicate what equipment and skills you could bring to bear on this effort. In the subject line of the email, please write your city name. Feel free to circulate this email to others that may be interested. They don't need to be professional filmmakers to help out. Thanks!" -- Carl videoarmy@michaelmoore.com

All very well and good, but I have one question for Mister Moore -- will his videoarmy "document and deter" incidents of anti-Republican voter intimidation as well?

Bush, Bin Laden, and Iraq -- Response to a Sam Miller

I don't get very many commentators on my blog -- hell, it comes as a suprise that people actually read this blog, so when one commentator pipes up, the least I could do is respond. Sam Miller (hey Sam!) responds to an earlier post of mine by asking:

One simple question:

Did Bush get Bin Laden?

[he had 3 years]

Sam elaborates on his commment here, in response to the recent re-appearance of Bin Laden on video.

Bin Laden is back. On tape. But that is bad enough. Bush had three years. The world was willing to help him after 9/11 to get Bin Laden. He could have gotten him. He didn't. He failed us. He said he would smoke him out. He didn't.

9/11 needs a strong reaction: Get the guys who did it, and make sure it never happens. It happened during Bush' watch. . . .

[A]nd, just to be clear: There is NO connection between Iraq and 9/11. Try to find a quote of Bush where he would say that loud and clear what you might have in your head. You will not find anything. Bush suggested it in indirectly often enough. But he never said it, since there was no evidence. There was no evidence because it was not so.

In response to the first point, it is worth noting that General Tommy Franks, former U.S. commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, rebuked Kerry's charge that Bush "let Osama escape" in an op-ed for the New York Times Oct. 19, 2004. Since the Times' article is no longer available online, the Washington Post will suffice:

"I was responsible for the operation at Tora Bora, and I can tell you that the senator's understanding of events doesn't square with reality," . . .

Franks, who has endorsed the Republican president's re-election bid, challenged Kerry's contention that U.S. forces had the fugitive al Qaeda leader surrounded but "outsourced" the job of capturing him to Afghan forces in the rugged Tora Bora region of eastern Afghanistan.

We don't know to this day whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora in December 2001. Some intelligence sources said he was; others indicated he was in Pakistan at the time; still others suggested he was in Kashmir," wrote Franks, who led the invasions of Afghanistan and later Iraq as chief of the U.S. military's Central Command.

"Tora Bora was teeming with Taliban and Qaeda operatives, many of whom were killed or captured, but Mr. bin Laden was never within our gasp."

Franks contended that the American military did not outsource military action, although "we did rely heavily on Afghans because they knew Tora Bora."

(Retired U.S. General Attacks Kerry Over Bin Laden, Reuters. October 19, 2004).

Regarding the "connection between Iraq and 9/11" -- it depends on what one means by such an assertion. While it is true that Saddam Hussein had no direct connection with 9/11, it is a recognized fact that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda had channels of communication, that Iraq provided financial and moral support for terrorism, and that it served as a "safe haven" for Islamic terrorists of all stripes. It is a recognized fact that Iraqi intelligence operatives assisted in the engineering of the first attack on the World Trade Center and it is highly probable that they faciliated a meeting of those who were responsible for the second attack on September 11th, 2001.

Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard has done extensive research into this subject, beginning with an analysis of a memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. ("Cased Closed" Weekly Standard Nov. 24, 2003). Dan Darling, another blogger who's analysis and knowledge of this subject I respect, did a six part analysis of this memo and Haye's article, and also believes there was indeed a connection.

Hayes went on to publish The Connection : How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America, which is one of the most thorough books on the subject to date, as well as critiquing the misleading reporting of the media that gives rise to the "Bush lied" meme. (If you don't have time to read the book, most of Hayes' articles are compiled in one place here (scroll down).

So, to Sam, I would say check out the above, read the book, come back and we'll discuss it.

Finally, I would propose that although finding and capturing Bin Laden is indeed a crucial element to the war on terrorism, it will not in the least mean the end of Al Qaeda or militant Islam's jihad on Western civilization. Norman Podhoretz made the excellent case that we are involved in a new kind of war in his article World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to Win (a rather long article -- see this post for a summary of key points). If Kerry's history as an antiwar activist means anything, I believe his priority is to cut and run more than anything, and his belief that we ought to rely on France and Russia (Friends of Saddam Hussein implicated in the U.N. "Oil For Food" scandal) doesn't exactly instill within me a feeling of confidence.

I don't agree with President Bush on every single issue, but I do have faith that our present Commander in Chief will "stay the course" in this international war on terror.

Ten Worst Media Distortions of Campaign 2004

The Ten Worst Media Distortions of Campaign 2004, by Brent H. Baker, Rich Noyes and Tim Graham. Media Research Center:

No matter who wins or loses this year’s presidential election, Campaign 2004 will be remembered for the unprecedented partisanship of the so-called mainstream media, as the Media Research Center has documented all year. Here are our awards for the ten most-biased episodes in Campaign 2004, along with commendations for those instances when journalists rose above their bias and approached their craft in a fair and balanced way.

Documentary Evidence: Hanoi Directed John Kerry during 60's

Ok, so the 60's were oh, so before-my-time, but do we really want somebody who had a rather cozy relationship with the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam War coaching our troops as Commander in Chief?

The first documentary evidence that Vietnamese communists were directly steering John Kerry's antiwar group Vietnam Veterans Against the War has been discovered in a U.S. archive, according to a researcher who spoke with WorldNetDaily.

One freshly unearthed document, captured by the U.S. from Vietnamese communists in 1971 and later translated, indicates the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese delegations to the Paris peace talks that year were used as the communications link to direct the activities of Kerry and other antiwar activists who attended. . . .

World Net Daily has the story.

BlogsOfWar has updates.

Have you seen the Vietnam POW produced documentary "Stolen Honor" yet? -- You can watch it for free online.

Saddam Hussein and Terrorism

HusseinAndTerror.Com.

Pretty much everything you wanted to know -- but didn't -- about the former dictator on Iraq and his ties to international terrorism.

The Truth About Iraq

The Truth About Iraq. A new website to counter the negativity of the mainstream media:

After working in Iraq for nine months doing focus groups and polling and advising Ambassador Bremer on Iraqi public opinion, Steven Moore returned to the United States in May 2003. Upon returning, he was astounded to find how sharply his experience in Iraq differed from that being communicated on television. Even more staggering, were some of the questions being asked by average Americans who genuinely consider themselves, well-informed:

• Aren't we just shoving democracy down the throats of the Iraqis?
• Are all the Iraqis rallying around the "freedom fighters" fighting the US forces?
• Wouldn't things be going much better if we had gotten United Nations support?
• Don't the Iraqis just want to be ruled by clerics?

These were questions asked by well-read, intelligent, middle of the road people. Having spent nine months living among Iraqis, working every single day to understand the Iraqi mindset, Moore believed he had unique insight into the Iraqi people.

In order to help Americans better understand the Iraqi people, Moore began speaking to groups around California and on a variety of radio programs throughout the United States. Though radio is an important medium, television still remains the most effective medium to reach the largest number of people in the shortest possible time.

A team comprised of experts with specific and relevant experience has now been created. Their expertise will ensure the successful achivement of the following goals:

1. raise money to produce and air a 30 second television spot that reminds Americans that they can be proud of the good work being done in Iraq by the US and Coalition Forces, and
2. spread the message via the Internet about this project.

With your help, America can be proud.

Thanks to Arthur Chrenkoff who has certainly done his part to spread good news about Iraq and Afghanistan with his regular updates.

John Edward's Hair [tm]

If you thought the footage of the Bush administration "pre-press conference grooming" was amusing in Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911, check out JOHN EDWARD'S HAIR.

Yikes.

Jack Daniels vs. Modern Drunkard

Foreign policy, the war in Iraq, the minimum wage . . . nothing remotely compares to the travesty of this report from Modern Drunkard Magazine that Jack Daniels Distillery is tampering with their traditional recipe by reducing the alcohol content of their whisky from 86 to 80 proof, a scandal which I'd discovered through my daily perusal of The Old Oligarch.

I've always been a Jack Daniels man, and so I dashed off a quick email to Phil Lynch (VP of Corporate Communications and Public Relations at Brown-Forman) to voice my discontent, assuring him that "Until this grievous breach of tradition is repaired, I will be switching my choice of spirits."

So a week later, I recieve the following from Jack Daniels:

Hello Christopher,

We sure appreciate your taking the time to write. The folks at Modern Drunkard Magazine are worked up about our lowering the proof of our Black Label whiskey a little bit. Apparently they're judging our whiskey simply by how much alcohol is in it. We're awfully glad you've given us the opportunity to respond, and to explain how important quality and tradition are here at the Jack Daniel Distillery.

It might interest you to know that we've been bottling Black Label at 80 proof for several years in a number of states and countries. Our number one concern is to make sure our whiskey is of the highest quality. That means starting out with select grains for our mash and the cool, iron-free water that flows from the Cave Spring. It means maturing our whiskey in new white oak barrels. It also means following through with an extra step of mellowing our whiskey drop by drop through 10 feet of charcoal to make it a smooth sipping Tennessee Whiskey.

Look, I'm concerned about quality as much as the next guy, but I grew up with 86 proof. I like 86 proof. You don't mess with a man's whiskey. But Tom Jervis thinks I doth protest too much:

You see, Mr. Jack's whiskey-making tradition is very important to all of us at the Jack Daniel Distillery. That's why we take it to heart when folks suggest that a lower proof whiskey is somehow a lower quality. Fact is everywhere we've been at 80 proof the number of folks enjoying our whiskey is growing. Mr. Jack lowered the proof of his whiskey when he went from selling it by the barrel to selling it by the bottle because he knew that's the way folks actually were drinking it - at a lower proof. The same is true today.

We hope you'll reconsider your decision and stay with our Tennessee Whiskey. We realize that quality and tradition mean a lot to you, just as they have to Jack Daniel's for more than 135 years. So we would like to invite you, if you're ever traveling near Lynchburg, to take the time to drop by the Distillery and enjoy a taste of our Tennessee Whiskey with our team of tasters. We are confident you will agree that our taste and quality have not changed! Please call (931) 759-7822 and ask for Randy Fanning, and he'll make sure you have a personal tasting.

Again, thanks for writing. We hope we'll hear from you again soon.

Regards,

Tom Jervis
Jack Daniel Distillery

Well, Mr. Jervis sounds like a right fine gentleman, and I'd be willing to give him the benefit of a doubt. I'd even like to take up his offer for a personal tasting, but honestly it's going to be some time before I'm in the neighborhood.

So, I'm posting this with the understanding that my readers won't mind giving Randy Fanning a call and sampling the 80 proof in my stead. Anybody game?

TV On The Radio

I've recently discovered TV On The Radio and have been listening to them non-stop. There's not much to see on the website, but I recommend their albums Desperate Youth, Blood Thirsty Babes and the Young Liars EP.

Psychedelic, hypnotic, repetitive, innovative, moody, groovy, dark, soothing. To get a feel for them, check out their video to Staring at the Sun, which drew me to explore the rest of their music. Tell me what you think.

Democracy comes to Afghanistan

The Afghan Election in Pictures and The Afghan Election in Words, courtesy of The Argus ("watching central Asia and the Caucasus").

A very fine blog.

Jacques Derrida, R.I.P.

"Postmodernist" philosopher Jacques Derrida died today. He was 74.

• "Deconstructionism Founder Derrida Dies", by Elaine Ganley, Associated Press. Oct. 9, 2004.
• Obituary New York Times Oct. 9, 2004.
• Jack M. Balkan offers a respectful personal tribute.
• Eamonn Fitzgerald has some parting thoughts, and recalls a story of "Derrida Consumed by Crabs."
• "Derrida, Death and Forgiveness", Andrew J. McKenna reviews Derrida's The Gift of Death (First Things 71 (March 1997): 34-37).
• "The Meaninglessness of Meaning", by Rober Kimball. "Jacques Derrida is dead, but his baneful ideas live on." Wall Street Journal Oct. 12, 2004.
• The Remedy has the best one-liner eulogy one could hope for the founder of deconstructionism:
  To paraphrase what Metternich said of the death of Castleraugh: "I wonder what he meant by that?"

David Brooks and Paul Bremer counter liberal distortions

In "The Report That Nails Saddam", New York Times Oct. 9, 2004), David Brooks dismantles the spin and distortion of the Duelfer Report on Iraq:

. . . Duelfer makes clear on the very first page of his report that it is a story. It is a mistake and a distortion, he writes, to pick out a single frame of the movie and isolate it from the rest of the tale.

But that is exactly what has happened. I have never in my life seen a government report so distorted by partisan passions. The fact that Saddam had no W.M.D. in 2001 has been amply reported, but it's been isolated from the more important and complicated fact of Saddam's nature and intent.

But we know where things were headed. Sanctions would have been lifted. Saddam, rich, triumphant and unbalanced, would have reconstituted his W.M.D. Perhaps he would have joined a nuclear arms race with Iran. Perhaps he would have left it all to his pathological heir Qusay.

We can argue about what would have been the best way to depose Saddam, but this report makes it crystal clear that this insatiable tyrant needed to be deposed. He was the menace, and, as the world dithered, he was winning his struggle. He was on the verge of greatness. We would all now be living in his nightmare.

Paul Bremer was also compelled to correct similar distortions of his remarks by the mainstream press ("What I Really Said About Iraq" New York Times Oct. 8, 2004):

In recent days, attention has been focused on some remarks I've made about Iraq. The coverage of these remarks has elicited far more heat than light, so I believe it's important to put my remarks in the correct context.

In my speeches, I have said that the United States paid a price for not stopping the looting in Iraq in the immediate aftermath of major combat operations and that we did not have enough troops on the ground to accomplish that task. The press and critics of the war have seized on these remarks in an effort to undermine President Bush's Iraq policy. . . .

The press has been curiously reluctant to report my constant public support for the president's strategy in Iraq and his policies to fight terrorism. I have been involved in the war on terrorism for two decades, and in my view no world leader has better understood the stakes in this global war than President Bush.

Can we say, "liberal bias in the media"?

The Duelfer Report and Kerry's "Global Test"ers

• Glenn Reynolds lays out the complete collapse of John Kerry's foreign policy case, and the reason for that collapse.
• For those who don't have time to read 1000+ pages of the Duelfer report, Pearly Gates takes some time out of blogging baseball to provide a useful summary of relevant points pertinent to the debate on U.S. foreign policy.
• Turns out Saddam bribed politicians around world to secure an early lifting of sanctions, according to Robin Gedye, Foreign Affairs Writer of the Telegraph. Likewise, according to The Scotsman, Hussein paid off Russia, France and China (three of the five UN Security Council members with the power to veto war) to keep the United States at bay:
  Tariq Aziz, the former Iraqi deputy prime minister, told the ISG that the "primary motive for French co-operation" was to secure lucrative oil deals when UN sanctions were lifted. Total, the French oil giant, had been promised exploration rights.

  Iraqi intelligence officials then "targeted a number of French individuals that Iraq thought had a close relationship to French President Chirac," it said, including two of his "counsellors" and spokesman for his re-election campaign.

  They even assessed the chances for "supporting one of the candidates in an upcoming French presidential election." Chirac is not mentioned by name.

These are the countries John Kerry wants to appeal to for a "global test" concerning the U.S.' credibility to protect itself by preemptive measures?

John Kerry's "Global Test" - Fallout and Feedback

Kerry: No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.

But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

Here we have our own secretary of state who has had to apologize to the world for the presentation he made to the United Nations.

Bush: Let me -- I'm not exactly sure what you mean, "passes the global test," you take preemptive action if you pass a global test.

My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to protect the American people, that you act in order to make this country secure.

Transcript Bush - Kerry Presidential Debate, Sept. 30, 2004.

In related news . . .

• "Meet The Graders [of John Kerry's "Global Test"], by Anne Bayefsky. National Review October 4, 2004.
• "Polish President disses Democrat President wannabe", by Arthur Chrenkoff. October 3, 2004.
• "I Didn't See This Question On Kerry's Global Test" Blog "Just One Minute" wonders "Clearly, the UN and the world community will never endorse a US effort to aid the Zionist imperialists. Would Kerry support Israel despite its inability to pass the global test?"
• Transterrestial.com has discovered the Global Test Kerry was referring to. (As one might expect, it's biased towards the French).