Search Results

NOT ANTI-WAR, MERELY ON THE OTHER SIDE: How I Was Interrogated By The New York Times.

Do you tell your sexual thoughts to your commander?” “Do you tell your secrets to your commander?” “Do you think an authoritarian organization such as the MEK can bring democracy to Iran?” “One of your friends has already told us he confesses his sexual thoughts to his commanders. Do you?”

Don’t be mistaken. This is not an episode of “Law & Order.” They are actual questions a New York Times correspondent, Patrick Kingsley, posed to me in January when he visited Ashraf-3, northwest of Tirana, the Albanian capital, where thousands of members of the Iranian opposition have been residing since 2016, following attempts by Tehran to wipe us out when we lived in Iraq.

I couldn’t help but find the Times’ approach an eerie reminder of the methods of the regime’s interrogators. When they arrested two of my friends, they tortured them to get information about other resistance members. They told one of them that his friend had already given all his information, so he too should give information about the others.

Well of course, he’s obviously suspect: why would anyone be opposed to one of the Times’ favorite tourist destinations?

NOT ANTI-WAR, MERELY ON THE OTHER SIDE: Ted Cruz Slams Dianne Feinstein: Trying To Send Millions To Iran, While Blocking Relief To American Businesses.

NOT ANTI-WAR, JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE: What You Won’t Learn From the NYT Op-Ed by the Taliban’s Deputy Leader.


Shot: Kevin McCarthy Backs House Dems Into Corner, Will Introduce Resolution Supporting Iranian Protestors.

—The Daily Wire, this morning.


Hangover: Democrats Always Choose America’s Enemies Over America.

—Kurt Schlichter, Townhall, Monday.


The “crazy” lines aren’t helpful, especially when she attributes her state’s supposed insanity to one factor: “They’re called Republicans,” eliciting laughter and applause from a leftist crowd.  Remember, she’s trying to run as a moderate, cross-partisan uniter.  Part of her potential victory coalition must include a chunk of Republican voters.  But the most brutal line is this one, delivered in an out-of-state speech to liberal activists:

“I want to talk to you about some of the things that I think that you can do to stop your state from becoming Arizona.”

Sinema is asking Arizonans to elect her to represent them. She thinks they’re crazy people and that other states should go out of their way to avoid being like her own constituents.


Last month CNN reported on the anti-war group* which Sinema co-founded in the early 2000s. The group promoted itself with flyers which depicted a U.S. soldier as a skeleton with a machine gun and which encouraged people to resist “U.S. terror in Iraq and the Middle East.” Sinema claimed she hadn’t drawn the flyers and didn’t approve them but another poster featuring a black tank with a US flag which read “STOP the OILigarchy” featured her personal email address as a point of contact.

Sinema is currently presenting herself as a centrist Democrat who often doesn’t side with the far left. This interview is from a month ago. Her pitch is that she’s running in a purple state and party labels don’t really matter to Arizonans. In other words, please don’t hold my party label against me.

* As Glenn likes to say, not anti-war, merely on the other side: Will Kyrsten Sinema’s Terrorist Connection Doom Her Chance to Win Jeff Flake’s Senate Seat?

Related: Everything is seemingly spinning out of control: Crazy Days.


How quickly everyone forgets that “America First” was once the consensus position across elements of the political spectrum. Back in 1940, Americans skittish about running headlong in the European war formed a number of committees to try and stay out of the wars in Europe and Asia. On both the patriotic right and the socialist left, groups like America First and the League of American Writers agitated for American neutrality, and pushed back against FDR’s interventionism.

Reminder: Stalinist lefties Pete Seeger, Dalton Trumbo and even Charlie Chaplin were also against America entering WWII and then — seemingly under orders! — turned on a dime when Hitler violated his nonaggression pact with Stalin in mid-1941. To coin an Insta-phrase, “Not anti-war, just on the other side.”

ED DRISCOLL: Not Anti-War, Just On The Other Side.

THEY’RE NOT ANTI-WAR — THEY’RE JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE: Home from the war… and our troops are greeted by abuse from Muslim protesters.

TIM BLAIR: “The International Solidarity Movement denied three years ago it had any connection to Tel Aviv suicide bombers. That denial might be a little harder to believe now that ISM activists have been photographed clowning around with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.”

They’re not anti-war. They’re just on the other side.

NOT ANTI-WAR BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE: A group that calls itself the Armed Revolutionary Fascists vandalized Jewish stores in Rome and defaced them with swastikas and pro-Hezbollah propaganda.

THE NEW CLIMATE OF FEAR IN AMERICA seems to have claimed another victim:

A local soldier back from the war in Iraq said he was beaten at an area concert because of what was printed on his T-shirt, NBC 4’s Nancy Burton reported. . . .

According to a Columbus police report, six witnesses who didn’t know Barton said the person who beat him up was screaming profanities and making crude remarks about U.S. soldiers, Burton reported.

Not anti-war. Just on the other side.

UPDATE: In response to a later link back to this post on August 8, 2006, Reader Ted Gideon emails that this report turned out to be false.

I don’t promise not to link to stories that turn out to be wrong (how could I?) just to correct errors when they appear. And, actually, I’m glad this looks not to have been true.

GERARD VAN DER LEUN is ashamed to be a Democrat. Personally, I haven’t entirely given up hope for the Democratic Party, though things do look rather grim now.

UPDATE: A reader sends this link to Nicholas Kristof’s NYT non-blog, where he’s worried about the tone of his lefty email:

Frankly, it chills me that well-meaning people are hoping that young Americans will be maimed and killed so as to punish the hawks and lessen their chances of holding on to power.

Note to Kristof: They’re not “well-meaning,” and it’s odd that you’d think so in light of these sentiments. And they’re not anti-war. They’re on the other side, and they’re admitting it. Somehow, I think that if Republicans were expressing these kinds of sentiments under a Democratic Administration, it would merit more than a blog entry.


TONY JONES: John Pilger, do you still maintain that the world depends on what you call “the Iraqi resistance” to inflict a military defeat on the coalition forces?

JOHN PILGER: Well, certainly, historically, we’ve always depended on resistances to get rid of occupiers, to get rid of invaders. And what we have in Iraq now is I suppose the equivalent of a kind of Vichy Government being set up. And a resistance is always atrocious, it’s always bloody. It always involves terrorism. . . . Now, I think the situation in Iraq is so dire that unless the United States is defeated there that we’re likely to see an attack on Iran, we’re likely to see an attack on North Korea and all the way down the road it could be even an attack on China within a decade, so I think what happens in Iraq now is incredibly important.

TONY JONES: Can you approve in that context the killing of American, British or Australian troops who are in the occupying forces?

JOHN PILGER: Well yes, they’re legitimate targets. They’re illegally occupying a country. And I would have thought from an Iraqi’s point of view they are legitimate targets, they’d have to be, sure.

TONY JONES: So Australian troops you would regard in Iraq as legitimate targets?

JOHN PILGER: Excuse me but, really, that’s an unbecoming question.

With some revealing answers.

UPDATE: Lovely observation:

Perhaps the most telling comment from Pilger was that the only countries he feared the US might go after were all fascist dictatorships.

That’s today’s Left. Go figure.

THEY’RE NOT ANTI-WAR — they’re just on the other side:

Just when you thought the German “peace” movement couldn’t get much more hypocritical they take things to a whole new level. Last week the unbelievable lack of protest at the German government’s plutonium and arms deal with Communist China made it seem as the peace freaks had all rolled up into a big ball for a long winter hibernation.

Not so! The German TV news program “Panorama” uncovered some of the wonderful activities that particularly dedicated cadres of the German peace movement are currently engaged in. In the spirit of peace, a number of groups have started a fund-raising campaign entitled “10 Euros for the Iraqi Resistance”. The money will be provided to the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance (IPA) a group dedicated to carrying out attacks against US soldiers in Iraq in collaboration with Saddam loyalists. The common goal is to “liberate” the Iraqi people from the evil imperialist American occupiers. On their website these groups gush with enthusiasm about turning Iraq into another Vietnam for the USA.

I think that one reason so many lefties have gone crazy regarding the war is that it is exposing their hypocrisy — and even more damaging to their self-image, their lack of moral stature — so clearly.

UPDATE: Bill Herbert has more on this.

ANTI-AMERICAN PROTESTERS IN FLORENCE ARE “singing communist anthems.” Go figure. Most of the “anti-war” protests in Italy seem to have been the product of communist organizers, which — as David Corn has written — seems to be the case in the United States, too.

What this protest demonstrates is that it was a waste of time, at least in terms of satisfying anti-American critics of “unilateralism,” to go through the United Nations. Anti-American protesters won’t be satisfied by that sort of thing. And these are, in fact, anti-American protesters, not anti-war protesters.

UPDATE: Steven Den Beste isn’t impressed, either.