The Better Revolution

While the vast majority of recent revolutions in the Middle East have been radicalized ventured seeking to displace moderate dictators, the unrest which is occurring presently in Syria presents a rather unique and rare opportunity to fundamentally change the anti-American nations with Soviet ties into a working partner to foster democratic change that will shake up the status of the region and encourage long-term stability.

Syria as a country has historically been outside of America's list of dependable allies in the Middle East. After nearly 30 years of President Hafez al-Assad's rule, the country was transferred to a brief interim leader before the late ruler's son Bashar ascended to the generational throne of power. And ten years later, he shows no signs of desiring to emphasize moderation, especially considering Syria's close ties with the former Soviet Union and the more liberlized image it maintains about the Middle East. 

The revolution however is a unique attempt which America can use to bolster better diplomatic relations with both the country itself and its souther neighbor, Lebanon. It is primarily through Syria and Lebanon that Saddam Hussein managed to hide his nuclear weapons, and the two nations regularly pose an imminent threat to Israel through their strategies of shipping weapons to Hizbollah and related terrorist groups. 

(Photo credit goes to yourjewishnews.com)

More directly, a regime change in Syria would mean that the axis of radicalized powers surrounding Israel might finally be balanced to offset the rises of extremism in Egypt and Libya, as well as Iran. These nations have repeatedly posed a dramatic threat to international security, as well as the proliferation of human rights, and cutting their alliances would systematically reduce their influence to a great degree and guarantee further freedoms across the Central Eastern region.

Like other nations around it, Syria is critical to stability in the area, but it should not require the force witnessed in Iraq to bring it to its knees. The fear and imperialism of the al-Assads can finally be mitigated, but only if America is wise enough and acts to properly end this solidification of raw extremist power. We must act and be confident in the interest of the present day and generations of the future.

Jordan Wells

National Alliance Vice President for Policy

Canada: In Contempt of Democracy

Yesterday the government of Canada faced a test in front of the public and lost, falling to a confidence vote of 156-145 in what may truly turn out to be known as the supreme coup against democracy of this decade. The justification is weak, the intentions corrupt, and the perpetrators power-hungry modulators who seek only to put themselves in the history books without going through the established processes which had been set down generations prior by far better men on both sides of the political isle. Regardless of excuses, this travesty stands out as one of the heaviest rocks thrown against democratic ideals that the world has experienced in recent years.

(Photo courtesy of CTV.com)

In a pathetic attempt to justify their passage of a "contempt of parliament" bill the three party coalition of center-leftists propped up the fact that one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's ministers, Bev Oda, had failed to fund the anti-Jewish humanitarian group KAIROS due to concerns over its views. Instead of searching for honest debate, the Liberal and New Democratic parties chose to forge a call for no-confidence on the government, sinking it and forcing a new election for May 2nd, 2011. This all without considerations of one, Oda's logical stance alongside government policy, and two, the need for further debate on whether government funds should be used to back such private entities.

On a basic level, the forceful calls in the interest of change are simply the climax of the leftist desire to seize Canada's Parliament for themselves. Paul Martin's historic defeat in 2006 prevented the Liberals from continuing their grasp for two decades in power, and Stephane Dion's silencing in 2008 proved that Canadians had no desire to side with the pro-environment Quebecer. Now the ambitions of Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and New Democrat Jack Layton have boiled over in a move to throw the democratic results of the last election into the trash.

This trend is dangerous because it veers problematically close to anarchy whenever a party does not posses an absolute majority of seats in the lower house. Like any modern nation, Canada is not without its responsibilities and interests about the world, so parties should think twice before moving to erase history through the methods of political maneuvering that are so easily attained in a parliamentary system.

With countless present threats and a stagnated economy, Canada is as much at risk as its neighbors, and this attempt to avoid the methodological process of transition following an election is wrong and should not be endorsed by anyone. Canadians must give the Conservative Party its additional 20 seats to finally end this deadlock in May and allow Harper to rule without instability for the next four years of government existence.




Michael Veramendi

National Alliance Vice President for Foreign Issues

Latin America's Rising Force

Latin America is on the rise, whether other regions of the world are willing to admit it or not. With America's massive debts to China and the EU's inability to foster proper economic or military reactions in the modern day only the Deep South remains a viable player in both the expansion of armed forces capabilities of the free world. So while Barack Obama's state visit to foster economic cooperation may have appeared to be a simple gesture of diplomacy between the dominant world power leader and the historically subjugated Latin Americans, it really shows a turning of tables as far as the rule of international leadership extends.

(Photo credit goes to MercoPress.com)

From the outset one fact must remain clear: America is no longer entirely superior to its southern neighbors. With the wreckage of the economy in recent years the U.S. has been left in a humbled position, and the precarious debt which it holds with China only seems to suggest that this trend will continue. At the same time countries like Brazil and Chile have begun picking up market power, gaining ground without the same critical debt levels of the north and reined in by no foreseeable force from abroad. Even though the communists once controlled much of the region recent developments such as the collapse of both right and left wing governments has led to a string of mixed economies that so far seem to be succeeding.

In the department of armed forces, Latin America is also advancing particularly firmly, and this is best seen once more in Brazil Recent stats put their military size at just over 370,000 active with another 1.3 million in reserve, the once quiet nation is very ready to seize up its own role in the world should it come to its doorstep. In comparison to the rest of the world, these numbers are entirely impressive given the country's rather dormant activity over the past decade, and other surrounding armies may give the area the collective strength its needs to achieve greater influence in the world.

Markets also give way to the potential of a massive upswing in Latin America's influence and viability on the international stage. For one, auto markets have surged by 10% in each of the past 3-years, and the movement of American firms to the southern nations gives the zone a likelihood to only grow more powerful as its affairs develop into a stronger pro-market position.

There is no doubt that the future is still to be decided, yet American influence seems to be ever-waning, and the recent administrations of George W. Bush--and more pointedly, Barack Obama, do nothing to dissuade this approaching ultimatum. The endurance of the U.S. remains uncertain, but by all means Latin America should no longer expect to be a minor force in the near future.



Michael Veramendi

National Alliance Vice President for Foreign Issues

How Ireland Can Restore Prosperity

Over the past three years of the bumbling leadership demonstrated by Brian Cowen, the Republic of Ireland has sunken from a once-grand post in the EU to a staggering nation terribly in debt with the Euro coalition. His Fianna Fail administration failed to administer the values behind its founding principles, instead embracing market inflation for the sake of short-term economic endurance. It is for this reason primarily that the party was thrashed about in the February 28th election, losing 75% of its seats including that of the loyal Tanaiste Mary Coughlan, who now enters private life in followed by a dense cloud of scrutiny. Luckily however there is a new hope; if Taioseach Enda Kenny stands by his election principles, the nation can slowly creep back and reclaim its fading glories.

(Photo courtesy of  Cast a Bold eye Blog)

From the outset, Ireland was hit hard due to PM Bertie Ahern's irresponsible handling of the market crisis. For the benefit of liberalization, Ahern chose not to pursue financial regulations, instead leading the country down a doomed path of ignoring the kindling issues which would lead to its pitfall in late 2008. Thus the only way to ensure a real recovery is to use methodological assessments in a such a manner as to carefully tap into the problem and use regulatory arms of the national government to combat the rising issue of inflation.

Furthermore Kenny's policies should stand firm on the removal of the bailout conditions which have hurt Ireland following the recession and the Euro's unsteady positioning within its borders. When a nation is forced to undergo the humiliation of such a measure it loses credibility, and the Taioseach must avoid a course of operations that prevents the nation from renegotiating the issue affecting Europe and implementing reforms to better help its economic future.

So far, the Taioseach has been proposing reasonable policies which seek to ease the burden of the bailout's interest rate while still maintaining the corporate-friendly tax rates currently in place which have drawn many companies to his home nation for the best venture options possible. These tabled items are of critical necessity  and must be continued in order to allow the nation to return to its former standing as a trading power in Europe and around the world.

Difficult as it may be for other EU members to stomach, the demise of the Republic of Ireland would hurt them more than perhaps they wish to acknowledge. Because the Irish participate in such bountiful trade with the rest of the bloc, the financial insecurity resulting from the bailout would leave its future uncertain for generations, damaging to collective prosperity of the European coalition. If nothing else members of the European bloc must focus their policy on liberating their national markets, putting forward changes which will recreate the once incomparable trading power of the past with a modern shine destined for inevitable success.



John Lai

National Alliance Treasurer and Comptroller General

And France Takes the Lead!

You can tell something is wrong when the fiercest voice of opposition to a fanatical dictator like the one who clings desperately to control in the State of Libya is the French President. Indeed, despite the perfect assembly of conditions to justify the cause of action with international backing, Barack Obama's response to the conflict facing the citizens of Libya has been to dawdle in a staring contest with the North African rockstar as he commits atrocities against his own people.

(Photo courtesy of Gooseradio.com)

Thus far the flimsy explanation from the Whitehouse has been to point to the Bush Administration's seeming failure with intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq as a reason to hold the reins in frozen state. Fearing a backlash, they cower while the forces of Europe stand to take responsibility for what may  become the event of the century as far as it refers to democratic change. 

This raises perhaps the greatest irony of the 21st Century: France acting with more boldness than the United States of America in a foreign conflict. Since the end of the Second World War French governments have remained disinterested in international responsibility, with even the grandiose figure of Charles De Gaulle advocating a largely disengaged status of the French military both in Africa and across the entire world. Yet now President Nicholas Sarkozy stands (no doubt at least partially for political advantage) as a taller and more formidable leader than his American equivalent: a stunning turning of the world image table by all means. 

If this is the future of American foreign policy, then the world may truly see a dramatic realignment of influence from the land of the free to nations of the Old Republic--or perhaps even the Deep South of the world. Such a probability is disconcerting and yet not entirely impossible in the modern day consdering the continuous stumbling of America's foremost leader on the international stage. Should our country fail to show leadership, it is entirely justified for other nations to desire a means of filling the vacuum through their own means of foreign policy expansionism.  

The future is always uncertain, so it remains up to those with steady hands to claim it in the name of righteous democracy

Michael Veramendi

National Alliance Vice President for Foreign Issues 

The Audacity of Hate: Helen Thomas

"Every journalist, no matter their network, has a personal agenda. It falls to the people to discover those views before they are consumed by them." ~Unknown. There is nothing magnificent about that old quote, but perhaps it does not truly need to be. After decades of the rise in cable personalities and newspaper columnists it seems fair to warrant consideration of their own views and personal ambitions. Last year in December Helen Thomas helped her viewers out, and in March 2011 she reaffirmed her commitment to personal ideology over objective coverage. Unfortunately hers is w worldview of categorical hate; a coalesced desire to harm and destroy an ethnic and religious group which stands persecuted throughout the world to this very day. Beyond the pretext of Thomas' statements there is however a more sinister shadow to analyze: the rising hate which can--and already has translated into violence against Jewish people.

(Photo credit goes to mediaite.com)

The 90-year old reporter's unremarkable statements echo the common shallow attack used by sore anti-Semites around the globe: Jews should leave the land they stole (Palestine), and Jews somehow control the presidency, congress, news media, and banking system. Perhaps Thomas would like to consider her own race (Arab) and its tendency to control and starve the world of oil for monetary gain. Or mayhaps the Saudi King's profiting like a Westernized playboy while his people have nothing and lie miles below the poverty line.

No, one must suppose these things must be excused because inexplicably they will be blamed on the Jews (funny enough, given that Israel allows considerable free speech rights to both Muslims and Christians, a virtuous policy not common in the surrounding countries of the Middle East).

But to address the initial argument from the haters of Jews, what is truly wrong with that? Have human rights suffered under the Jews controlling of J-Street, as their critics imply? Is the fact that an American Jewish male or female is a member of an elite institution or works on Wall Street the damning proof needed to indict them for figurative (or even literal) slaughter? Success is not guaranteed to anyone in this world; what if Jewish citizens tend to be part of an oligopoly of it? Anyone inevitably can join if they work hard enough, so that proclaimed view is harshly ridiculous by all considerations.

Notwithstanding prior commentary, how can the Jews be faulted for wanting a quick and sensitive response to anti-Semitism? Since their coming into existence Judaic peoples have been persecuted, and this is merely their attempt at protecting themselves after the events of the Holocaust.

Then the hateful ruffians conspire with their secondary line of attack: Jews stole Palestine from the Arab-Muslims. Anyone who has ventured into the colorful subject known as World History knows that the Jews arrived in Palestine (the Promised Land) decades before the Muslim Faith was at infantile stages. At that point listed as the Israelites, the newcomers swept in and conquered the territory (entirely legitimate in the B.C. era, as all nations would and did agree). Years later the Jews would offer to protect the remaining Arabs of Palestine once the State of Israel formed, yet Pan-Arabian influences told otherwise, forcing the majority of Arab citizens in the Gaza Strip and Palestine to flee. It was from this that they would fabricate the tale of evil Judaic conquest that tore them from their homeland.

Some may be quick to brush off this issue as irrelevant, yet it should not be treated so lightly. Adolf Hitler succeeded in his carnage because the Jewish people considered his schemes impossible on a larger scale, and yet his triumph came while they stayed unawares. The same logic must be applied to the present day situation, as incredulous as it may be for a 21st Century person (intellectual or plain) to fathom. Groups from the radicals of the Middle East like Al Qaeda and Western movements led by bigots like David Duke must be carefully monitored and discredited before they gain further steam. American Jews in particular must be certain not to fall for the same mistakes as their forefathers did in pre-World War II Germany. All that it will take for evil to triumph is if wise men turn their minds aside and ignore growing threats to long-term security.

In the name of freedom and the enduring legacy of the Jewish People, America and Europe must stand to quash anti-Semitism before it grows stronger and more prone to successful missions against democracy and a free society.



Jordan Wells

National Alliance Vice President for Policy

A Time for Leadership

March 11th is not just a precursor to the day of Irish pride; it is also the second month anniversary of the Republican Party taking control of the House of Representatives with a decisive majority as well as gaining a stronger minority in the Senate. And yet another commemoration is due to be mentioned here. Despite the railing on of most candidates on cutting the budget and instating tough measures to ensure everlasting fiscal discipline, the GOP has already began falling into the pattern established during the 1990s, when it swept to power following a wave of anger against President William Clinton.

(Photo credit is to Little Miss Attila Blog))

Thus far the Republican proposals for debt reduction have been weak at best. With a paltry 9 billion currently on the table, the figures go nowhere near the 61 billion promised by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, or the 500 billion considered by Senator Rand Paul. The leadership has argued that these menial deductions are the only way to prevent a government shutdown, yet some might try and consider if this truly is the case. All of the funds which have been set on the table for elimination tend to focus themselves heavily in the extended services areas of the national budget; excess spending which does not actually begin to dent the larger picture. In order to actually reach a federal cease of operations the GOP would need to cut in far deeper than their preliminary agenda states, and therefore the frozen condition of their ranks is irrational from all angles.

Currently the Democrats hold the Senate, yet this is not a time to be playing coy about the responsibilities of the lower house and its new leadership. If the left-wing refuses to cooperate, then the GOP should allow the government to shutdown temporarily in order to show the extent of Harry Reid's simple follies with the lives of the American people. Continuing this game of minor adjustments will only lead to the mounting problem of solidifying enough support in the long run to keep the reformers in office and their mission alive.

Speaker Boehner has made the rather flimsy argument that only the smaller cuts will garner Democratic backing in the upper house, yet this point is moot considering how easily they will (as they have done before) sway once the pressure valve is activated. In sampling, Barack Obama's strong personal case against the extension of tax cuts became nothing after he realized the standing unlikelihood of his success. So if the Democrats insist on blocking the larger deficit reduction bills, they should be brought out in the public over this betrayal of common sense, providing coverage with a strong probability of sinking their future electoral endeavors.

Personal sacrifice is never something that the people of America readily and happily embrace, but even the most adamant about protecting their immediate prosperity must eventually come to understand that the current levels of debt are unsustainable, making prudent fiscal reactions a definitive cornerstone to national recovery, even if this means changes to the federal retirement system. Rather than voting for reformers and then complaining about the drastic measures they provide, Americans should be willing to make a decision to give away part of their individual well-being for the benefit of future generations. The burden may be heavier than most ideal, yet the outcome is better long-term.

Republicans now have only two possible outcomes to their efforts: honest success or political failure. The latter has been tried time and again to almost uniformly inadequate results, and so only the first remains viable. History is watching their choices in this troubled era, and one can only hope they do not cave to the status quo along the way.



Jason O'Grady

National Alliance Vice President for Economic Policy

Supporting the Women of Iran

Iran's people are hurting. The signs are everywhere. To avoid the fact which is so evident today is to flee from reason, yet the West seems inclined to do so out of political convenience. Since 1979 the land has been forced into a supremely fundamentalist state of being where women are denied basic human rights that the West looks to as necessary, and still its leaders have turned a blind eye, allowing radicals to gain strength as they do nothing.


Anyone who is mindful enough about the surrounding region will understand how devastating this reality is on the future of freedom and democracy in the world. The suppressing of women and their rights to vote and express themselves is a cruel manner by which forces standing for radical Islam have prevented progress from taking root and growing into a vital future within these nations. They realize that the inaction of the West is all they need to remove threats from their power which would otherwise journey to a point of no return, discrediting the sexist way and promoting true equality for women.

As the video shows above, women are placed under terribly unfair conditions by which they are inspected and told to change their clothing if its violates Islamic law in the streets of Tehran. This blatant lack of freedom is a tool used by the Ayatollah's oppressive regime to keep women "in their place," avoiding the potential threats which might otherwise surface as the female class becomes educated and more independent. 

Advocacy is not enough in the modern world, and these conditions are all signs of it. If the West truly believes in its own ideal then it must act quickly to end this terrible elimination of rights by those who wield power in an ultra-orthodox and insane manner. We must fight for this change before more women are forced into the ridiculous lifestyle due to inaction by those who can change it for the better.




Ayla Samadi

National Alliance Vice President for Cultural Issues

Unrest in the Middle East: Innocent or Coerced?

Across the EU and much of America, countless individuals are cheering the protesters for their success in toppling governments in Tunisia and Egypt--and  all the while some other people are also pleased. Though unlike the happily blissful western denizens, these figures are all smiles because they understand the exact consequences which will come from the change of regimes in the region better than the average American or European will likely ever be enlightened enough to discover. And while the masses are celebrating, they are scheming, for the revolutions follow their train of thoughts and planning with more preciseness than they had previously believed. These joyful notables are Bashir al-Assad of Syria, Mohammed ElBaradei of Egypt, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, and Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon.

(Photo courtesy of Long Live Jacob! blog)

What do these men have in common other than geographic proximity? They all command anti-Western views and are influential in their countries, making them the perfect alliance to surround and crush the State of Israel with their coordinated assaults on moderate regimes throughout the Middle East.

In the loud results of the revolutions few have been ready to point out the key pattern of successful--and failed revolutions across the area while some still rage on. We hear chants of democracy and triumphant glee, yet the final reports seem to ignore the singular truth of it all: extremist leaders in the region are holding strong with an almost prepared resistance, while the dormant governments of Egypt and Tunisia easily fell to the shouting rebels. In the latter nation's unrest, President Ben Ali's dominance collapsed within a matter of days, yet his North African brother Qadafi has held strong in Libya through a determined radical Islamic policy and a brutal crackdown on protesters not seen in more moderate governments.

When Hosni Mubarak stepped down in February to quell protests, many felt this would lead to the peaceful collapse of other governments, yet neighboring Iran seems to defy this view. Before opposing activists could muster a force and demonstrate, the Iranian authorities launched a systematic suppressant strategy that curbed the growing flames of opposition to their power. So despite the common mindset of freedom in the Middle East, the radicals are coming out on top while the moderates fall.


With Syria in the anti-Western camp and Lebanon now controlled by Hezbollah, the State of Israel is progressively being surrounded by a powerful alliance in the molding of Gamal Nasser's Pan-Arabianism during the 20th Century. Only this time Egypt will have a military trained by the United States and Iran will not play the role of the moderate empire as it did under the Shah's leadership in the past.

It is understandable that people desire to embrace changes in age-old systems of power, yet each movement must be complemented by either a new centrist force or the toppling of a dictatorial regime. The truth of the current protests is that they threaten to realign the Middle East into a supremely anti-Western bloc, spelling considerable trouble for American and European interests in the near future. Understanding this threat means responding to it, and America must do so by helping to preserve the present moderates who hold power and seeking to topple those with views verging into the extremities.



Andrew Rimmer

National Alliance Vice President for Communications

Pro-Castro or Pro-Freedom?

For now on 50 years American leaders have held firm to a non-engagement policy towards Fidel Castro's communist regime in Cuba, yet despite the embargo's dramatic lengths to nurse wounded national pride over past successes by the island dictator, its does little to promote economic tendencies favoring American companies or the toppling of the socialist government in the nation.

At the outset, it is somewhat easier to understand exactly why the embargo was put in place. The CIA's tactical failure and Jack Kennedy's inability to use sense and deploy bombers left what might have been the coup of the century into absolute disarray. Hoping to cover for himself and all the innocents who he allowed to die at the hands of Castro, Kennedy moved to support the embargo as a means of stalling Cuabn growth and punishing the nation's leader. Yet two factors stood in the way: Russian influence and the socialist tendency. Not only did the Kremlin send aid to Cuba; it also authorized a rush of military arms and nuclear weapons in hopes of being within 90 miles of the American coast during the 1960s, a move which easily might have sprung into war.

 (Courtesy of baiganchoka.com)

Then of course socialism has always been an option for the Cuban leader's methodology beyond the helping hands of the now-extinct Soviet assistance. And as time goes on, the lack of trade which the United States has supported leaves Castor with a viable blame for any mistake he makes (and has made) as leader of the nation. In a sorry attempt to preserve national image, America has actually bolstered the declining regime by preventing the spread of welath which would likely bring about its ruin.

In the world today it is difficult enough to find good trade partners who do not rely solely on their own exports, and Cuba is a fine example of this horrific dilemma. Instead of providing America with cheaper sugars and a vantage point for its companies, the nation is stringently anti-West and hard-nosed towards the leaders of Washington. As such American has created its own enemy, except in this case with no strategic reason to do so. Our intelligence services must deal with the additional threat of Cuba without an intense need to do so, a a tragedy of epic proportions in the modern world.

If it will ever come, the economic liberalization should be encouraged today. As long as Fidel Castro maintains a scapegoat for his troubles and policies of structural failure, Cuba will continue to hold views negative of Americans and their government's policy in the circles of foreign affairs. Bring an end to the blockage of trade, and the crimson revolutionary forces will capitulate in the face of market power.




Michael Veramendi

National Alliance Vice President for Foreign Issues