Asians For Sale! The New York Times Suggests A Price For Asian Women (And Men)

Updated 12 JAN 2012 with video (at bottom).

The price that the New York Times is urging the Obama administration to sell the people of Taiwan to mainland China for is $49,793.8708 per person. The only thing Leftists, including their Communist faction, care about is money.  In this case, the New York Times agitates for selling almost 23 Million people into slavery for the  sum of $1.14 trillion.  If you think the NYT is trying to deflect criticism by sticking a former Marine on this topic, you are probably right.  That is another favorite tactic of the Left, see John F. Kerry (he served in Vietnam) and others.

Slaver Paul V. Kane

Op-Ed Contributor
To Save Our Economy, Ditch Taiwan
By PAUL V. KANE
Published: November 10, 2011

 . . .  There are dozens of initiatives President Obama could undertake to strengthen our economic security. Here is one: He should enter into closed-door negotiations with Chinese leaders to write off the $1.14 trillion of American debt currently held by China in exchange for a deal to end American military assistance and arms sales to Taiwan and terminate the current United States-Taiwan defense arrangement by 2015.

This would be a most precious prize to the cautious men in Beijing, one they would give dearly to achieve. After all, our relationship with Taiwan, as revised in 1979, is a vestige of the cold war.. . .

The NYT vision of Taiwan's future.

That was just the money quote.  More at the link. So the New York Times, along with this former Marine of indeterminate rank, have placed the price of $49,793.8708 on the lives and livelihoods of 22,894,384 living people, with a proposal to sell them into the slavery of Communism.

Yes, the same New York Times that employs Thomas Friedman, regular agitator for the mainland Chinese version of "capitalism", which resembles most closely the National Socialism of Adolph Hitler, with a higher death toll.

What has happened since the days of 1863 when Henry Raymond manned a Gatling Gun to defend the paper against rioting pro-slavery Democrats?  Nothing good, I assure you.

Update: I do not recognize Paul V. Kane in this video, allegedly of Marines urinating on corpses in Afghanistan.  I am not yet convinced that it is authentic either.

If you want to piss on corpses, piss on these.

Atheist Leftists Are Leftists First And Atheists Second, Or Less

Update: Christopher Hitchens died on 15 December, 2011.  National Review and Vanity Fair have the details.

Here we have Christopher Hitchens speaking to a group of atheists at a Freedom From Religion Foundation gathering.  He sounds like damn near the only atheist in the building:

One of the great things about Christopher Hitchens is that he is principled.  He dresses down a Leftist surrender monkey (around the 3:40 mark) and asks what he is doing in a conference like this.  He uses as an example the Greek Myth of Antaeus to respond to the ridiculous notion that if bin Laden is killed many will spring up in his place.

The point he makes is, there are religious zealots who are fighting us, killing human rights volunteers, etc. and they need to be stopped in the name of liberty for all.  The next questioner, a Marxist/Communist is "troubled" by Hitchens' earlier answer.  "You see how far the termites have spread" is the Hitchens money quote in response to the ridiculous question and the man's accusation that the West is the big "war crimes" instigator.

Hitchens continues in this clip about Islamic slaughter in East Timor and its appearance in the Al Qaeda/bin Laden manifesto:

Now, the point of all of this goes directly to the bigger issue of Atheism in the Socialist vs. Libertarian dialogue.

A hallmark of Socialists/Leftists is their professed atheism.  Not all of them to be sure, but one must mount a tremendous search to find a non-atheist among them.  In the libertarian ranks, the search is ever so slightly shorter.  That said about both, many a libertarian and many a Socialist will side with any non-Christian/Jew who wishes to attack Western Civilization.  Much like Murray Rothbard, on a different principle, clapping for Khrushchev  because "Khrushchev had killed fewer people than General Eisenhower, his host."

In the video clips above, Hitchens (now a libertarian Atheist) dresses down two pseudo-atheists for being against the Western response to being attacked by Islamic fundamentalists.  The basis of these pseudo-atheists' objection to the war against a religious theocracy is a recurring theme: Western free-market leaning governments caused the problem, so we should leave the jihadists alone and they will settle down.  Hitchens does not accept their arguments and dices them as any thinking human being should.

Now, for my own personal "bias", I am a Christian and libertarian who can agree with Hitchens in virtually all that he said in response to these people.  I do not want to impose my beliefs on others by force, terror, government coercion, or any other tactic that the jihadists are using.  Additionally, if some person or group want to force anybody else into a religion of any kind I feel that should be opposed, even with force of arms.

Sadly, many libertarians combine atheism and pacifism into a bizarre mix that results in a defacto support for any non-Christian group that is willing to attack the West.  Their atheism is more like an endless attack on Christianity from a non-denominational agnostic view than true atheism.  Perhaps there is a dose of false libertarianism in there too.

Natural rights do not enforce themselves.  Words to live by from quite a few libertarian and conservative thinkers.  If someone is trying to take your rights by any means, you have every right, indeed you have an obligation, to prevent them from doing so, even if force is required and the police power of the state is perfectly appropriate.  One can understand leaving our powder dry when some group of people outside of our control wishes to abuse each other, issuing official embargoes, strongly worded telegrams, and the like.  However, when they move to attack us and impose their version of il-liberty on us, including our allies, the gloves need to come off.