Another sports "hero" has fallen off his pedestal. Michael Phelps was pictured smoking pot through a bong on the front page of the British tabloid, News of the World. Or to put it in other words, another role model "gone to pot."
Phelps, who received world-wide acclaim for winning a record eight gold medals in swimming at the Beijing olympics, has received millions of dollars in commercial endorsements for his unprecedented feat. So far, only cereal maker Kellogg has announced it will not renew its lucrative sponsorship contract with the pot smoking role model. It is possible that other sponsors may follow suit.
To his credit, Phelps immediately 'fessed up' to his transgression. Unlike Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, both of whom appear to have lied when they denied ever using any steroids and human growth hormones, Phelps publicly admitted his "mistake" and apologized to his fans.
This brings me to comment on a couple of frequently misused words - mistakes and heroes. Does one make a mistake when he intentionally commits a wrongful act. Not to my way of thinking! A mistake is when you add three and three and come up with five. A mistake is when you're driving and turn right instead of left. A mistake is when you overcook the Thanksgiving Day turkey.
The illegal use of steroids and growth hormones is not a mistake. It's a crime. Thefts, fraud, assaults, rapes and smoking pot are not mistakes. They're all crimes. So, when Phelps and other wrongdoers admit to making a mistake, are they really confessing to breaking the law, or do they mean getting caught was the mistake they made?
Hero! It sickens me to see how often the word is misused. Michael Phelps, Michael Jordan, Muhammed Ali (who refused to serve his country when he was drafted during the Vietnam War), Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and a legion of other star athletes are not heroes. They're outstanding sports figures. They're stars and entertainers, but not heroes. They may well be role models. But no matter how outstanding, they have not earned the honor of being called a hero.
A hero is someone who risks his own life trying to save the life of another person or risks his life on behalf of his country. Our front-line troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are heroes. A firefighter rushing into a burning building is a hero. A cop facing down a dangerous criminal is a hero. And so is someone who crawls out on a frozen pond in an attempt to save the life of an animal that has broken through the ice. These true heroes deserve far more recognition than a bunch of star athletes with inflated egos.
Take O.J. Simpson. Like most other athletes, he never ever did anything even remotely heroic. He never risked his life to save someone else's. He never served a day in the military, nor a day as a firefighter or police officer. Yet Simpson was worshipped as a hero by millions of American football fans for running over and around opposing players. And though he fell from his pedestal when he was arrested for murdering his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, his die-hard fans continue to consider O.J. a hero. What an awful misuse of the word!
On the other hand there was Pat Tillman. He gave up a solid pro football career to serve his country by enlisting in the army after 9/11. Tillma was killed in action while serving on the front lines in Afghanistan. Now there is a true hero! His heroism had absolutely nothing to do with sports. By his sacrifice, Tillman has exposed all those other star athletes as fake heroes.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
TO ALL ISRAELIS, including those presently in the United States:
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Friday, February 06, 2009
BAILOUT PLAN EXPLAINED BY MONKEY BUSINESS
If you are confused by how the Wall Street Bailout Plan works, here is an explanation that was recently sent to me:
MONKEY BUSINESS
Once upon a time a man appeared in a village and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each.
The villagers, knowing there were many monkeys, went to the forest and started catching them. The man bought thousands at $10 and, as supply started to diminish, the villagers stopped their effort.
He then announced that he would buy monkeys at $20 each. This renewed the villagers efforts and they started catching monkeys again.
Soon the supply diminished and people started going back to their farms. The offer increased to $25 each and the supply of monkeys became so scarce it was an effort to even find a monkey, let alone catch it!
The man now announced that he would buy monkeys at $50 each! However, since he had to go to the city on some business, his assistant would buy on his behalf.
The assistant told the villagers, "Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that my boss has already collected. I will sell them to you at $35 and when my boss returns, you can sell them to him for $50."
The villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys for 700 billion dollars.
They never saw the man or his assistant again, only lots and lots of monkeys!
Now you have a better understanding of how the WALL STREET BAILOUT PLAN WORKS !!! It doesn't get much clearer than this........
MONKEY BUSINESS
Once upon a time a man appeared in a village and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each.
The villagers, knowing there were many monkeys, went to the forest and started catching them. The man bought thousands at $10 and, as supply started to diminish, the villagers stopped their effort.
He then announced that he would buy monkeys at $20 each. This renewed the villagers efforts and they started catching monkeys again.
Soon the supply diminished and people started going back to their farms. The offer increased to $25 each and the supply of monkeys became so scarce it was an effort to even find a monkey, let alone catch it!
The man now announced that he would buy monkeys at $50 each! However, since he had to go to the city on some business, his assistant would buy on his behalf.
The assistant told the villagers, "Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that my boss has already collected. I will sell them to you at $35 and when my boss returns, you can sell them to him for $50."
The villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys for 700 billion dollars.
They never saw the man or his assistant again, only lots and lots of monkeys!
Now you have a better understanding of how the WALL STREET BAILOUT PLAN WORKS !!! It doesn't get much clearer than this........
CONVICTED BY JUNK SCIENCE EVIDENCE AND SCIENCE FICTION TESTIMONY?
The National Academy of Sciences, a very prestigious gourp, is set to release a report this month on the use of scientific evidence by law enforcement. What the report boils down to is that evidence on fingerprinting, firearms identification, analysis of bite marks, blood splatter, hair, handwriting, etc. has been developed by "shoddy practices" and that "such analyses are often handled by poorly trained technicians who then exaggerate the accuracy of their methods in court."
This report is an indictment of the nation's crime labs, including the highly regarded FBI lab. It is predicted that defense attorneys will use the report in court to discredit "scientific" evidence and that there will be an avalanche of appeals claiming that defendants were convicted of crimes by junk science evidence and science fiction testimony. Attorneys defending Casey Anthony for the murder of her 2-year-od daughter Caylee have already stated they will use the Academy's report to discredit evidence from the trunk of her car - the detection of chloroform, the odor of human decomposition, hair and a stain said to belong to Caylee.
Here is the story as reported yesterday in The New York Times:
Science Found Wanting in Nation's Crime Labs
By SOLOMON MOORE
Forensic evidence that has helped convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is often the product of shoddy scientific practices that should be upgraded and standardized, according to accounts of a draft report by the nation’s pre-eminent scientific research group.
The report by the National Academy of Sciences is to be released this month. People who have seen it say it is a sweeping critique of many forensic methods that the police and prosecutors rely on, including fingerprinting, firearms identification and analysis of bite marks, blood splatter, hair and handwriting.
The report says such analyses are often handled by poorly trained technicians who then exaggerate the accuracy of their methods in court. It concludes that Congress should create a federal agency to guarantee the independence of the field, which has been dominated by law enforcement agencies, say forensic professionals, scholars and scientists who have seen review copies of the study. Early reviewers said the report was still subject to change.
The result of a two-year review, the report follows a series of widely publicized crime laboratory failures, including the case of Brandon Mayfield, a lawyer from Portland, Ore., and Muslim convert who was wrongly arrested in the 2004 terrorist train bombing in Madrid that killed 191 people and wounded 2,000.
American examiners matched Mr. Mayfield’s fingerprint to those found at the scene, although Spanish authorities eventually convinced the Federal Bureau of Investigation that its fingerprint identification methods were faulty. Mr. Mayfield was released, and the federal government settled with him for $2 million.
In 2005, Congress asked the National Academy to assess the state of the forensic techniques used in court proceedings. The report’s findings are not binding, but they are expected to be highly influential.
"This is not a judicial ruling; it is not a law," said Michael J. Saks, a psychology and law professor at Arizona State University who presented fundamental weaknesses in forensic evidence to the academy. "But it will be used by others who will make law or will argue cases."
Legal experts expect that the report will give ammunition to defense lawyers seeking to discredit forensic procedures and expert witnesses in court. Lawyers could also use the findings in their attempts to overturn convictions based on spurious evidence. Judges are likely to use the findings to raise the bar for admissibility of certain types of forensic evidence and to rein in exaggerated expert testimony.
The report may also drive federal legislation if Congress adopts its recommendations. Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama, who has pushed for forensic reform, said, "My hope is that this report will provide an objective and unbiased perspective of the critical needs of our crime labs."
Forensics, which developed within law enforcement institutions — and have been mythologized on television shows from "Quincy, M.E." to "CSI: Miami" — suffers from a lack of independence, the report found.
The report’s most controversial recommendation is the establishment of a federal agency to finance research and training and promote universal standards in forensic science, a discipline that spans anthropology, biology, chemistry, physics, medicine and law. The report also calls for tougher regulation of crime laboratories.
In an effort to mitigate law enforcement opposition to the report, which has already delayed its publication, the draft focuses on scientific shortcomings and policy changes that could improve forensics. It is largely silent on strictly legal issues to avoid overstepping its bounds.
Perhaps the most powerful example of the National Academy’s prior influence on forensic science was a 2004 report discrediting the F.B.I. technique of matching the chemical signatures of lead in bullets at a crime scene to similar bullets possessed by a suspect. As a result, the agency had to notify hundreds of people who potentially had been wrongfully convicted.
In its current draft report, the National Academy wrote that the field suffered from a reliance on outmoded and untested theories by analysts who often have no background in science, statistics or other empirical disciplines.
Although it is not subject to significant criticism in the report, the advent of DNA profiling clearly set the agenda. DNA evidence is presented in less than 10 percent of all violent crimes but has revolutionized the entire science of forensics. While DNA testing has helped to free more than 200 wrongfully convicted people, "DNA was a shock to police culture and created an alternative scientific model, which promoted standardization, transparency and a higher level of precision," said Paul Giannelli, a forensic science expert at Case Western Reserve University School of Law who presented his research to the National Academy. Enforcement officials, Mr. Giannelli said, "chose to say they never make mistakes, but they have little scientific support, and this report could blow them out of the water."
Peter J. Neufeld, a co-director of the Innocence Project, a nonprofit group that uses DNA evidence to exonerate the wrongfully convicted, presented to the academy a study of trial transcripts of 137 convictions that were overturned by DNA evidence and found that 60 percent included false or misleading statements regarding blood, hair, bite mark, shoe print, soil, fiber and fingerprint analyses.
The courts have long struggled with the proper role of scientific evidence. In a 1993 landmark decision, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the Supreme Court held that scientific testimony had to meet an objective standard. Federal courts have occasionally excluded evidence like handwriting and hair analysis.
Donald Kennedy, a Stanford scientist who helped select the report’s authors, said federal law enforcement agencies resented "intervention" of mainstream science — especially the National Academy — in the courts.
He said the National Institute of Justice, a research arm of the Justice Department, tried to derail the forensic study by refusing to finance it and demanding to review the findings before publication. A bipartisan vote in Congress in 2005 broke the impasse with a $1.5 million appropriation.
Mr. Shelby also accused the National Institute of Justice of trying to infiltrate the forensic study panel with lobbyists for private DNA analysis companies, who were seeking to limit the research to DNA studies.
The National Institute of Justice said it would not comment until the report was released. But a preview of potential turf wars played out in the presentations to the National Academy in December 2007. A forensic expert from the Secret Service blasted the F.B.I. for developing questionable techniques "on an ad-hoc basis, without proper research."
He said the Secret Service wanted the National Academy "to send a message to the entire forensic science community that this type of method development is not acceptable practice."
Everyone interviewed for this article agreed that the report would be a force of change in the forensics field.
One person who has reviewed the draft and who asked not to be identified because of promises to keep the contents confidential said: "I’m sure that every defense attorney in the country is waiting for this report to come out. There are going to be challenges to fingerprints and firearms evidence and the general lack of empirical grounding. It’s going to be big."
This report is an indictment of the nation's crime labs, including the highly regarded FBI lab. It is predicted that defense attorneys will use the report in court to discredit "scientific" evidence and that there will be an avalanche of appeals claiming that defendants were convicted of crimes by junk science evidence and science fiction testimony. Attorneys defending Casey Anthony for the murder of her 2-year-od daughter Caylee have already stated they will use the Academy's report to discredit evidence from the trunk of her car - the detection of chloroform, the odor of human decomposition, hair and a stain said to belong to Caylee.
Here is the story as reported yesterday in The New York Times:
Science Found Wanting in Nation's Crime Labs
By SOLOMON MOORE
Forensic evidence that has helped convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is often the product of shoddy scientific practices that should be upgraded and standardized, according to accounts of a draft report by the nation’s pre-eminent scientific research group.
The report by the National Academy of Sciences is to be released this month. People who have seen it say it is a sweeping critique of many forensic methods that the police and prosecutors rely on, including fingerprinting, firearms identification and analysis of bite marks, blood splatter, hair and handwriting.
The report says such analyses are often handled by poorly trained technicians who then exaggerate the accuracy of their methods in court. It concludes that Congress should create a federal agency to guarantee the independence of the field, which has been dominated by law enforcement agencies, say forensic professionals, scholars and scientists who have seen review copies of the study. Early reviewers said the report was still subject to change.
The result of a two-year review, the report follows a series of widely publicized crime laboratory failures, including the case of Brandon Mayfield, a lawyer from Portland, Ore., and Muslim convert who was wrongly arrested in the 2004 terrorist train bombing in Madrid that killed 191 people and wounded 2,000.
American examiners matched Mr. Mayfield’s fingerprint to those found at the scene, although Spanish authorities eventually convinced the Federal Bureau of Investigation that its fingerprint identification methods were faulty. Mr. Mayfield was released, and the federal government settled with him for $2 million.
In 2005, Congress asked the National Academy to assess the state of the forensic techniques used in court proceedings. The report’s findings are not binding, but they are expected to be highly influential.
"This is not a judicial ruling; it is not a law," said Michael J. Saks, a psychology and law professor at Arizona State University who presented fundamental weaknesses in forensic evidence to the academy. "But it will be used by others who will make law or will argue cases."
Legal experts expect that the report will give ammunition to defense lawyers seeking to discredit forensic procedures and expert witnesses in court. Lawyers could also use the findings in their attempts to overturn convictions based on spurious evidence. Judges are likely to use the findings to raise the bar for admissibility of certain types of forensic evidence and to rein in exaggerated expert testimony.
The report may also drive federal legislation if Congress adopts its recommendations. Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama, who has pushed for forensic reform, said, "My hope is that this report will provide an objective and unbiased perspective of the critical needs of our crime labs."
Forensics, which developed within law enforcement institutions — and have been mythologized on television shows from "Quincy, M.E." to "CSI: Miami" — suffers from a lack of independence, the report found.
The report’s most controversial recommendation is the establishment of a federal agency to finance research and training and promote universal standards in forensic science, a discipline that spans anthropology, biology, chemistry, physics, medicine and law. The report also calls for tougher regulation of crime laboratories.
In an effort to mitigate law enforcement opposition to the report, which has already delayed its publication, the draft focuses on scientific shortcomings and policy changes that could improve forensics. It is largely silent on strictly legal issues to avoid overstepping its bounds.
Perhaps the most powerful example of the National Academy’s prior influence on forensic science was a 2004 report discrediting the F.B.I. technique of matching the chemical signatures of lead in bullets at a crime scene to similar bullets possessed by a suspect. As a result, the agency had to notify hundreds of people who potentially had been wrongfully convicted.
In its current draft report, the National Academy wrote that the field suffered from a reliance on outmoded and untested theories by analysts who often have no background in science, statistics or other empirical disciplines.
Although it is not subject to significant criticism in the report, the advent of DNA profiling clearly set the agenda. DNA evidence is presented in less than 10 percent of all violent crimes but has revolutionized the entire science of forensics. While DNA testing has helped to free more than 200 wrongfully convicted people, "DNA was a shock to police culture and created an alternative scientific model, which promoted standardization, transparency and a higher level of precision," said Paul Giannelli, a forensic science expert at Case Western Reserve University School of Law who presented his research to the National Academy. Enforcement officials, Mr. Giannelli said, "chose to say they never make mistakes, but they have little scientific support, and this report could blow them out of the water."
Peter J. Neufeld, a co-director of the Innocence Project, a nonprofit group that uses DNA evidence to exonerate the wrongfully convicted, presented to the academy a study of trial transcripts of 137 convictions that were overturned by DNA evidence and found that 60 percent included false or misleading statements regarding blood, hair, bite mark, shoe print, soil, fiber and fingerprint analyses.
The courts have long struggled with the proper role of scientific evidence. In a 1993 landmark decision, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the Supreme Court held that scientific testimony had to meet an objective standard. Federal courts have occasionally excluded evidence like handwriting and hair analysis.
Donald Kennedy, a Stanford scientist who helped select the report’s authors, said federal law enforcement agencies resented "intervention" of mainstream science — especially the National Academy — in the courts.
He said the National Institute of Justice, a research arm of the Justice Department, tried to derail the forensic study by refusing to finance it and demanding to review the findings before publication. A bipartisan vote in Congress in 2005 broke the impasse with a $1.5 million appropriation.
Mr. Shelby also accused the National Institute of Justice of trying to infiltrate the forensic study panel with lobbyists for private DNA analysis companies, who were seeking to limit the research to DNA studies.
The National Institute of Justice said it would not comment until the report was released. But a preview of potential turf wars played out in the presentations to the National Academy in December 2007. A forensic expert from the Secret Service blasted the F.B.I. for developing questionable techniques "on an ad-hoc basis, without proper research."
He said the Secret Service wanted the National Academy "to send a message to the entire forensic science community that this type of method development is not acceptable practice."
Everyone interviewed for this article agreed that the report would be a force of change in the forensics field.
One person who has reviewed the draft and who asked not to be identified because of promises to keep the contents confidential said: "I’m sure that every defense attorney in the country is waiting for this report to come out. There are going to be challenges to fingerprints and firearms evidence and the general lack of empirical grounding. It’s going to be big."
RESPONSE TO BUCHANAN'S DEFENSE OF WHITE AMERICA
I have a leftie pal who has a very different take on Pat Buchanan's defense of white America which I posted on my blog yesterday. In fairness to all concerned, here is his response:
I read your introduction and Buchanan's piece is still unmitigated bullshit. As you point out, blacks were and to some degree still are getting the short end of the stick, but Buchanan, like so many of his ilk, chooses to use numbers in a way that is crap.
Of course blacks steal from whites more than blacks. Remember Willie Horton's answer to why he robbed banks (that's where the money is) so it makes sense.
Yes, the older generation of Jackson and Sharpton have worn out their welcomes, but so far as gratitude goes what are blacks supposed to say; "Thank you master for letting us off the farm and lives as share croppers, and out of second or third rate schools, and keeping us out of unions where the pay rate is better than doing pick up work?"
The problem here is that Buchanan is the last of the racists left over from the administration of a president (Nixon) who resigned rather than face the music. People like that should not be provided a platform to spread their hate, no matter how many kernels of truth they may plant in their rants.
I read your introduction and Buchanan's piece is still unmitigated bullshit. As you point out, blacks were and to some degree still are getting the short end of the stick, but Buchanan, like so many of his ilk, chooses to use numbers in a way that is crap.
Of course blacks steal from whites more than blacks. Remember Willie Horton's answer to why he robbed banks (that's where the money is) so it makes sense.
Yes, the older generation of Jackson and Sharpton have worn out their welcomes, but so far as gratitude goes what are blacks supposed to say; "Thank you master for letting us off the farm and lives as share croppers, and out of second or third rate schools, and keeping us out of unions where the pay rate is better than doing pick up work?"
The problem here is that Buchanan is the last of the racists left over from the administration of a president (Nixon) who resigned rather than face the music. People like that should not be provided a platform to spread their hate, no matter how many kernels of truth they may plant in their rants.
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
To all Israelis, including those presently in the United States:
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Thursday, February 05, 2009
BUCHANAN DEFENDS WHITE AMERICA
Pat Buchanan, the conservative columnist who was President Nixon's speech writer, is most definitely not one of my favorite political columnists. Once in a while though he does write something worth considereing by all of us. Last March, Buchanan wrote a column about Obama's race speech, the one he gave after Jeremiah Wright, his pastor and mentor, had given his "God Damn America" tirade of a sermon. Buchanan's column was widely criticized as a racist diatribe.
Today, a friend sent me another Buchanan column which contains some of the same material from his previous column and which will undoubtably be subjected to the same racist allegations. Actually this "new" column was published on August 6, 2008 by Stand Up America.
I will be the first to admit that over the years blacks have had good cause to be unhappy with white Aneruca, Forget about slavery - that was abolished by Lincoln's Emanciapation Proclamation. Once freed, blacks were denied even the semblance of equality in our predominantly white society. The southern Jim Crowe laws were a travesty that continued well past the mid-nineties. Denied a quality public school education, blacks were doomed to live in poverty.
By the late-nineties many blacks had achieved entry into the middle-class. But some civil rights leaders, notably Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, have perpetuated a perception of black victimology which fed on white guilt and has actually worked to the detriment of black Americans. Had blacks stopped blaming whites for all their problems, they might well have come along a lot further. How much longer are whites expected to keep paying for the old racism and discrimination?
Because much of what he writes about in the new column has a definite ring of truth to it, I have chosen to reproduce Buchanan's column from Stand Up America.
BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America . Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude??
Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids. Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
Be a better friend,
Patrick J. Buchanan
Today, a friend sent me another Buchanan column which contains some of the same material from his previous column and which will undoubtably be subjected to the same racist allegations. Actually this "new" column was published on August 6, 2008 by Stand Up America.
I will be the first to admit that over the years blacks have had good cause to be unhappy with white Aneruca, Forget about slavery - that was abolished by Lincoln's Emanciapation Proclamation. Once freed, blacks were denied even the semblance of equality in our predominantly white society. The southern Jim Crowe laws were a travesty that continued well past the mid-nineties. Denied a quality public school education, blacks were doomed to live in poverty.
By the late-nineties many blacks had achieved entry into the middle-class. But some civil rights leaders, notably Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, have perpetuated a perception of black victimology which fed on white guilt and has actually worked to the detriment of black Americans. Had blacks stopped blaming whites for all their problems, they might well have come along a lot further. How much longer are whites expected to keep paying for the old racism and discrimination?
Because much of what he writes about in the new column has a definite ring of truth to it, I have chosen to reproduce Buchanan's column from Stand Up America.
BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America . Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude??
Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown, and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids. Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America? Is it really white America's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
Be a better friend,
Patrick J. Buchanan
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
EDUCATION IS THE DIFFERENCE
Dr Farrukh Saleem is an Islamabad-based freelance columnist who has written an article entitled, "Why are Jews so powerful?" He starts out by writing, "There are only 14 million Jews in the world - seven million in the Americas , five million in Asia, two million in Europe and 100,000 in Africa . For every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims. Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together. Ever wondered why?" He added, "Over the past 105 years, 14 million Jews have won 15-dozen (180) Nobel Prizes while only three Nobel Prizes have been won by 1.4 billion Muslims (other than peace prizes)."
Saleem, a Muslim, then went on to list the names of more than 70 Jews acknowledged for outstanding achievements in science, medicine, finance, government, technology and philanthrophy among other fields. I am not going to bore you by reproducing that rather extensive part of his article. Here, however, is the rest of it:
So, why are Jews so powerful?
Answer: Education.
Why are Muslims so powerless? There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas . Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew there are over one hundred Muslims. Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?
Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around 500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims. The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407. In 2004, Shanghai Jiao Tong University compiled an 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' , and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500.
As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent. A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent. Some 98 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world had completed primary school, while less than 50 per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same.
Around 40 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world attended university while no more than two per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same.
Muslim-majority countries have 230 scientists per one million Muslims. The US has 4,000 scientists per million and Japan has 5,000 per million. In the entire Arab world, the total number of full-time researchers is 35,000 and there are only 50 technicians per one million Arabs (in the Christian world there are up to 1,000 technicians per one million). Further, the Muslim world spends 0.2 per cent of its GDP on research and development, while the Christian world spends around five per cent of its GDP.
Conclusion: The Muslim world lacks the capacity to produce knowledge.
Daily newspapers per 1,000 people and number of book titles per million are two indicators of whether knowledge is being diffused in a society. In Pakistan , there are 23 daily newspapers per 1,000 Pakistanis while the same ratio in Singapore is 360. In the UK , the number of book titles per million stands at 2,000 while the same in Egypt is 20.
Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge.
Exports of high technology products as a percentage of total exports are an important indicator of knowledge application. Pakistan 's export of high technology products as a percentage of total exports stands at one per cent. The same for Saudi Arabia is 0.3 per cent; Kuwait , Morocco , and Algeria are all at 0.3 per cent while Singapore is at 58 per cent.
Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to apply knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't producing knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't diffusing knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't applying knowledge.
And, the future belongs to knowledge-based societies.
Interestingly, the combined annual GDP of 57 OIC-countries is under $2 trillion. America , just by herself, produces goods and services worth $12 trillion; China $8 trillion, Japan $3.8 trillion and Germany $2.4 trillion (purchasing power parity basis).
Oil rich Saudi Arabia , UAE, Kuwait and Qatar collectively produce goods and services (mostly oil) worth $500 billion; Spain alone produces goods and services worth over $1 trillion, Catholic Poland $489 billion and Buddhist Thailand $545 billion. (Muslim GDP as a percentage of world GDP is fast declining).
So, why are Muslims so powerless? Answer: Lack of education.
All we do is shout to Allah the whole day and blame everyone else for our multiple failures.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: Because of this article, it would not be at all surprising to have some Muslim clerics issue a Fatwa calling for the death of Farrukh Saleem.)
Saleem, a Muslim, then went on to list the names of more than 70 Jews acknowledged for outstanding achievements in science, medicine, finance, government, technology and philanthrophy among other fields. I am not going to bore you by reproducing that rather extensive part of his article. Here, however, is the rest of it:
So, why are Jews so powerful?
Answer: Education.
Why are Muslims so powerless? There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas . Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew there are over one hundred Muslims. Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?
Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around 500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims. The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407. In 2004, Shanghai Jiao Tong University compiled an 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' , and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500.
As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent. A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent. Some 98 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world had completed primary school, while less than 50 per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same.
Around 40 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world attended university while no more than two per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same.
Muslim-majority countries have 230 scientists per one million Muslims. The US has 4,000 scientists per million and Japan has 5,000 per million. In the entire Arab world, the total number of full-time researchers is 35,000 and there are only 50 technicians per one million Arabs (in the Christian world there are up to 1,000 technicians per one million). Further, the Muslim world spends 0.2 per cent of its GDP on research and development, while the Christian world spends around five per cent of its GDP.
Conclusion: The Muslim world lacks the capacity to produce knowledge.
Daily newspapers per 1,000 people and number of book titles per million are two indicators of whether knowledge is being diffused in a society. In Pakistan , there are 23 daily newspapers per 1,000 Pakistanis while the same ratio in Singapore is 360. In the UK , the number of book titles per million stands at 2,000 while the same in Egypt is 20.
Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge.
Exports of high technology products as a percentage of total exports are an important indicator of knowledge application. Pakistan 's export of high technology products as a percentage of total exports stands at one per cent. The same for Saudi Arabia is 0.3 per cent; Kuwait , Morocco , and Algeria are all at 0.3 per cent while Singapore is at 58 per cent.
Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to apply knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't producing knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't diffusing knowledge.
Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't applying knowledge.
And, the future belongs to knowledge-based societies.
Interestingly, the combined annual GDP of 57 OIC-countries is under $2 trillion. America , just by herself, produces goods and services worth $12 trillion; China $8 trillion, Japan $3.8 trillion and Germany $2.4 trillion (purchasing power parity basis).
Oil rich Saudi Arabia , UAE, Kuwait and Qatar collectively produce goods and services (mostly oil) worth $500 billion; Spain alone produces goods and services worth over $1 trillion, Catholic Poland $489 billion and Buddhist Thailand $545 billion. (Muslim GDP as a percentage of world GDP is fast declining).
So, why are Muslims so powerless? Answer: Lack of education.
All we do is shout to Allah the whole day and blame everyone else for our multiple failures.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: Because of this article, it would not be at all surprising to have some Muslim clerics issue a Fatwa calling for the death of Farrukh Saleem.)
OBAMA IS REACHING OUT TO THE MUSLIM WORLD
Brett Ratner, a trustee of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, received an alarming letter from a friend which is evidence of an Islamic tsunami sweeping across Europe. With Islam already firmly rooted in large parts of Africa and Asia, a wave of immigration from Muslim countries has been changing the face of France, England, Germany and other European nations.
The surge of Islamists comes to light every time there is a flareup in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Huge demonstrations and numerous violent acts against Jews and Jewish institutions occurred during the Second Intifada and are now taking place all over Europe because of Israel's attack on Gaza. Even during periods of calm, these religious zealots have been imposing their ideology on public schools and European culture.
In the United States we can be thankful that we do not have a Muslim immigration problem. The Latinos from Mexico and Central America come here only to better their lives and those of the families they've left behind in Latin America. Unlike the Muslims in Europe, they do not try to impose any ideology or religious practices on the rest of us.
Ratner wrote, "I feel compelled to share with you a shocking and radically disturbing correspondence I have just received from a well known and well respected journalist friend from Paris. My friend wishes to remain anonymous because of fear for her job and the well being, safety and even life of herself and her family. Why these mortifying circumstances should be true will become obvious as you read her chilling words."
President Obama made it clear in his innaugural speech and in his television interview with Al Arabiya that his administration will be reaching out to the Muslim world which he sees as "filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives" while practicing a peaceful religion. After you read this letter, you might ask yourself - WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD OBAMA WANT TO REACH OUT TO THESE HATE-FILLED PEOPLE?
Dear Brett,
I am sending you this e-mail regarding the situation in France concerning the Israeli offensive in the Gaza strip. I doubt I will tell you something that you already don't know, but still, things look pretty grim right now. We already reached an all time low in this country during the second Intifada. The phenomenon which appeared during that time, especially in the high schools located in the Parisian suburbs, where the majority of the students are Muslim, has not disappeared.
To summarize in a few words a very complicated and painful situation, it is impossible for an individual, whether a student or a teacher, to say that you are a Jew. If you say so, you'll end in a hospital. Don't show any hostility to Al-Qaeda, or Hamas, you'll be exposed to the same kind of violence. You can also talk to some of these kids, they're open to discussion. Many of them dream to become a martyr and blow up themselves. It's after all understandable, that's what they hear in their mosque.
The situation right now is much worse. And it's only the beginning. We had demonstrations every Saturday in every big city in France, and also smaller cities, against the Israeli bombings in Gaza. There's nothing wrong with that per se. We live in a democracy after all. These demonstrations have a different flavor. The 20.000 people demonstrating in Paris were not in the streets to claim peace but to shout that Israel should be destroyed. Israeli flags were burned, the support was for Hamas, not Fatah (as you know, this organization has betrayed his own people), and you could see giant pictures of Nasrallah. One of the sentences you could hear, repeatedly, was "Death to the Jews and the Zionists". This was going on in Paris among other places. Two weeks ago the demonstrators stopped Place de l'Opera, shouted Allah is great and prayed [to] Allah. This is a fact, not bad science-fiction. In Mulhouse, the demonstrators wanted to end the day at the synagogue, and destroy it. The police prevented it.
It's a pretty bad time right now to pray in a synagogue in the eastern part of France – bombs are being thrown once in a while, let's say once a week – or in a Parisian suburb.
Now, who are these people? Where do these demonstrators come from? You have the usual suspects like the Communist party, the various Trotskyites parties, members of the National Front, people known to be close to revisionists groups and, mainly, ordinary people, from North Africa who suddenly claim that Allah, Hamas and the destruction of Israel matter more than their French citizenship. What we saw in the past three weeks were the first massive Islamic demonstrations in France. And they're not going to disappear like that. A peace agreement in the Middle-East won't make things disappear.
Just this week-end, a famous French stand-up comedian called Arthur could not perform in a French city. There too many demonstrators outside the concert hall, the police could not manage security inside the building. Now, who is Arthur? A Zionist loony? Someone who said death to all Palestinians? Arthur did not even give his advice about what's going on in the Middle-East. He's just a Jew. Obviously a crime nowadays.
I sometimes wonder how people are going to react to this situation. Not Jewish people. For them, we already know. But let's say my colleagues at (media outlet deleted), in the place known to be one of the center of the so called French elite.
A few of them don't enjoy these demonstrations. Only a few of them. The vast majority doesn't understand the danger Israel is facing with Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah. They don't understand the danger our country is facing with a growing minority who believe that the law of the French republic matters less than the Islamic law. It is a problem, a huge one.
Sincerely yours,
/Name Withheld/
The surge of Islamists comes to light every time there is a flareup in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Huge demonstrations and numerous violent acts against Jews and Jewish institutions occurred during the Second Intifada and are now taking place all over Europe because of Israel's attack on Gaza. Even during periods of calm, these religious zealots have been imposing their ideology on public schools and European culture.
In the United States we can be thankful that we do not have a Muslim immigration problem. The Latinos from Mexico and Central America come here only to better their lives and those of the families they've left behind in Latin America. Unlike the Muslims in Europe, they do not try to impose any ideology or religious practices on the rest of us.
Ratner wrote, "I feel compelled to share with you a shocking and radically disturbing correspondence I have just received from a well known and well respected journalist friend from Paris. My friend wishes to remain anonymous because of fear for her job and the well being, safety and even life of herself and her family. Why these mortifying circumstances should be true will become obvious as you read her chilling words."
President Obama made it clear in his innaugural speech and in his television interview with Al Arabiya that his administration will be reaching out to the Muslim world which he sees as "filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives" while practicing a peaceful religion. After you read this letter, you might ask yourself - WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD OBAMA WANT TO REACH OUT TO THESE HATE-FILLED PEOPLE?
Dear Brett,
I am sending you this e-mail regarding the situation in France concerning the Israeli offensive in the Gaza strip. I doubt I will tell you something that you already don't know, but still, things look pretty grim right now. We already reached an all time low in this country during the second Intifada. The phenomenon which appeared during that time, especially in the high schools located in the Parisian suburbs, where the majority of the students are Muslim, has not disappeared.
To summarize in a few words a very complicated and painful situation, it is impossible for an individual, whether a student or a teacher, to say that you are a Jew. If you say so, you'll end in a hospital. Don't show any hostility to Al-Qaeda, or Hamas, you'll be exposed to the same kind of violence. You can also talk to some of these kids, they're open to discussion. Many of them dream to become a martyr and blow up themselves. It's after all understandable, that's what they hear in their mosque.
The situation right now is much worse. And it's only the beginning. We had demonstrations every Saturday in every big city in France, and also smaller cities, against the Israeli bombings in Gaza. There's nothing wrong with that per se. We live in a democracy after all. These demonstrations have a different flavor. The 20.000 people demonstrating in Paris were not in the streets to claim peace but to shout that Israel should be destroyed. Israeli flags were burned, the support was for Hamas, not Fatah (as you know, this organization has betrayed his own people), and you could see giant pictures of Nasrallah. One of the sentences you could hear, repeatedly, was "Death to the Jews and the Zionists". This was going on in Paris among other places. Two weeks ago the demonstrators stopped Place de l'Opera, shouted Allah is great and prayed [to] Allah. This is a fact, not bad science-fiction. In Mulhouse, the demonstrators wanted to end the day at the synagogue, and destroy it. The police prevented it.
It's a pretty bad time right now to pray in a synagogue in the eastern part of France – bombs are being thrown once in a while, let's say once a week – or in a Parisian suburb.
Now, who are these people? Where do these demonstrators come from? You have the usual suspects like the Communist party, the various Trotskyites parties, members of the National Front, people known to be close to revisionists groups and, mainly, ordinary people, from North Africa who suddenly claim that Allah, Hamas and the destruction of Israel matter more than their French citizenship. What we saw in the past three weeks were the first massive Islamic demonstrations in France. And they're not going to disappear like that. A peace agreement in the Middle-East won't make things disappear.
Just this week-end, a famous French stand-up comedian called Arthur could not perform in a French city. There too many demonstrators outside the concert hall, the police could not manage security inside the building. Now, who is Arthur? A Zionist loony? Someone who said death to all Palestinians? Arthur did not even give his advice about what's going on in the Middle-East. He's just a Jew. Obviously a crime nowadays.
I sometimes wonder how people are going to react to this situation. Not Jewish people. For them, we already know. But let's say my colleagues at (media outlet deleted), in the place known to be one of the center of the so called French elite.
A few of them don't enjoy these demonstrations. Only a few of them. The vast majority doesn't understand the danger Israel is facing with Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah. They don't understand the danger our country is facing with a growing minority who believe that the law of the French republic matters less than the Islamic law. It is a problem, a huge one.
Sincerely yours,
/Name Withheld/
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
To all Israelis, including those presently in the United States:
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
A SAD COMMENTARY FROM DANNY PEARL'S FATHER
In yesterday's Wall Street Journal, an op-ed piece entitled "Daniel Pearl and the Normalization of Evil: When will our luminaries stop making excuses for terror?" was a sad commentary on the attitudes of Jimmy Carter, Bill Moyers and their ilk in the media and in the academic community. It was written by Judea Pearl, the father of slain journalist Danny Pearl. Judea Pearl is a professor of cumputer science at UCLA and president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, which he founded in memory of his son to promote cross-cultural understanding.
Here is Professor Pearl's op-ed piece from The Wall Street Journal:
This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?
The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.
Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.
No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.
But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.
I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism -- the ideological license to elevate one's grievances above the norms of civilized society -- was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable "tactical" considerations.
This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone.
But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.
Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.
The media have played a major role in handing terrorism this victory of acceptability. Qatari-based Al Jazeera television, for example, is still providing Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi hours of free air time each week to spew his hateful interpretation of the Koran, authorize suicide bombing, and call for jihad against Jews and Americans.
Then came the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, the unrepentant killer who, in 1979, smashed the head of a four-year-old Israeli girl with his rifle after killing her father before her eyes. Al Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society's role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera's management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.
Some American pundits and TV anchors didn't seem much different from Al Jazeera in their analysis of the recent war in Gaza. Bill Moyers was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a "resistance" movement, together with honorary membership in PBS's imaginary "cycle of violence." In his Jan. 9 TV show, Mr. Moyers explained to his viewers that "each [side] greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression." He then stated -- without blushing -- that for readers of the Hebrew Bible "God-soaked violence became genetically coded." The "cycle of violence" platitude allows analysts to empower terror with the guise of reciprocity, and, amazingly, indict terror's victims for violence as immutable as DNA.
When we ask ourselves what it is about the American psyche that enables genocidal organizations like Hamas -- the charter of which would offend every neuron in our brains -- to become tolerated in public discourse, we should take a hard look at our universities and the way they are currently being manipulated by terrorist sympathizers.
At my own university, UCLA, a symposium last week on human rights turned into a Hamas recruitment rally by a clever academic gimmick. The director of the Center for Near East Studies carefully selected only Israel bashers for the panel, each of whom concluded that the Jewish state is the greatest criminal in human history.
The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting, uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, "Scholars say: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza," to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph -- another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western minds.
Danny's picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.
Here is Professor Pearl's op-ed piece from The Wall Street Journal:
This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?
The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.
Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.
No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.
But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.
I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism -- the ideological license to elevate one's grievances above the norms of civilized society -- was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable "tactical" considerations.
This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone.
But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.
Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.
The media have played a major role in handing terrorism this victory of acceptability. Qatari-based Al Jazeera television, for example, is still providing Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi hours of free air time each week to spew his hateful interpretation of the Koran, authorize suicide bombing, and call for jihad against Jews and Americans.
Then came the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, the unrepentant killer who, in 1979, smashed the head of a four-year-old Israeli girl with his rifle after killing her father before her eyes. Al Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society's role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera's management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.
Some American pundits and TV anchors didn't seem much different from Al Jazeera in their analysis of the recent war in Gaza. Bill Moyers was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a "resistance" movement, together with honorary membership in PBS's imaginary "cycle of violence." In his Jan. 9 TV show, Mr. Moyers explained to his viewers that "each [side] greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression." He then stated -- without blushing -- that for readers of the Hebrew Bible "God-soaked violence became genetically coded." The "cycle of violence" platitude allows analysts to empower terror with the guise of reciprocity, and, amazingly, indict terror's victims for violence as immutable as DNA.
When we ask ourselves what it is about the American psyche that enables genocidal organizations like Hamas -- the charter of which would offend every neuron in our brains -- to become tolerated in public discourse, we should take a hard look at our universities and the way they are currently being manipulated by terrorist sympathizers.
At my own university, UCLA, a symposium last week on human rights turned into a Hamas recruitment rally by a clever academic gimmick. The director of the Center for Near East Studies carefully selected only Israel bashers for the panel, each of whom concluded that the Jewish state is the greatest criminal in human history.
The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting, uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, "Scholars say: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza," to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph -- another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western minds.
Danny's picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
To all Israelis, including those presently in the United States:
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
In California last month, "moderate" Palestinian demonstrators carried Arabic signs which read, "Slaughter The Jews," "Palestine Is Our Land And The Jews Are Our Dogs," "With Our Soul, With Our Blood,We Will Cleanse You Oh Palestine," and "Death To The Jews." In Ohio they chanted, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea." And in Flrorida, "moderate" Palestinians kept shouting, "Gas the Jews" and "Go back to the ovens."
So, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel by voting for the LIKUD party candidates!
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Monday, February 02, 2009
THE MIDDLE EAST
I just received this parody on the NCAA's Big 12 Conference and think it's clever and worth putting in this blog.
If The Big 12 Was In The Middle East...........
KANSAS: Saudi Arabia. Not altogether a bad place; has had historical success in oil and basketball, and continues to be a world leader in those areas. However, parts of the ruling family tends to thrive on its excess, much to its detriment; a certain prince's fondness for American culture (especially for its sweet baked goods) could very well lead to its downfall.
KANSAS STATE: Armenia. No one wants to be here, especially the Armenians. What's more, nobody really knows where it is. First came to prominence just a decade ago, and nobody can really remember it existing as an independent nation before that. Primary exports: Corn, junior college transfers.
NEBRASKA: Egypt. Was once a great power; its history, through the ages, is matched by few. Has languished in recent years, failing to recognize its new place in the world order as a follower, and not the leader it once was. Its people tend to be the friendliest to its neighbors, though still harboring a long simmering, yet contained, hatred for Israel.
COLORADO: United Arab Emirates. An incredibly refined populace-- probably because it's impossible to make it your home unless you're incredibly wealthy. Does its best to compete with its neighbors, but has resigned itself to being the playground of the region, instead of one of its traditional powers. Doesn't have a baseball team.
IOWA STATE: Afghanistan. There's really no reason that this nation should even exist, and if it weren't for previous colonial empires, it probably wouldn't. Easily overlooked over the last 300 years, its people are a ramshackle alliance of groups that don't belong anywhere else. Wishes to God, Allah, and whoever else that it would either cease to exist, or be swallowed up by Pakistan to the south, or the University of Iowa to the west.
MISSOURI: Turkey. Still trying to figure out how it got mixed up in this region, anyway. They're a member of NATO. Shouldn't they be in the Big Ten?
OKLAHOMA STATE: Syria. Nobody pays attention to them until they start mouthing off to the other nations around it. Will occasionally attack its neighbors, with varying success, with most of its successes coming in areas that others couldn't care less about, like wrestling.
TEXAS TECH: Iran. Really, REALLY wants to be noticed in the international community. Will go so far as to fake the development of nuclear weapons, or choose homicidal, maniacal, self-aggrandizing men as their president/basketball coach, just to get noticed. Incredibly eccentric as a nation. Has a deep-seated hatred of both Israel and Iraq--and a huge inferiority complex to go along with it. Very arid, dry climate featuring frequent windstorms.
BAYLOR: Lebanon. Everything they do is just a cluster, and no matter what they do, nothing ever seems to get better. Every once in awhile, it'll nip at the ankles of one of the larger nations, and piss those other nations off just enough to where they're smacked down and consequently can't achieve anything noteworthy for the next ten years.
OKLAHOMA: Iraq. Lies, cheats, and steals to get its way in the international community. If caught doing something wrong, or illegal, its excuse is that "everybody else has done it, we just get caught." No one wants to live here, but everybody that does wishes they could move away. Recently has undergone minor restructuring due to numerous ethics violations.
TEXAS: Israel. Pretty much everyone else in the region hates them. Can destroy lesser countries at will using incredibly advanced tactics. Not relegated to the stone-age lifestyle of many of its neighboring nations. Home of God's chosen people.
TEXAS A&M: Palestine. Doesn't actually exist as an entity to really be dealt with, but loves nothing more than to take pot-shots at Israel, just to tick them off. Economy based on farming, with an emphasis on sheep. Continuously complains that they're the real power in the region, and that their status should supersede that of Israel. Religious zealotry abounds; small, infrequent attacks on its neighbors are hailed as moral victories.
If The Big 12 Was In The Middle East...........
KANSAS: Saudi Arabia. Not altogether a bad place; has had historical success in oil and basketball, and continues to be a world leader in those areas. However, parts of the ruling family tends to thrive on its excess, much to its detriment; a certain prince's fondness for American culture (especially for its sweet baked goods) could very well lead to its downfall.
KANSAS STATE: Armenia. No one wants to be here, especially the Armenians. What's more, nobody really knows where it is. First came to prominence just a decade ago, and nobody can really remember it existing as an independent nation before that. Primary exports: Corn, junior college transfers.
NEBRASKA: Egypt. Was once a great power; its history, through the ages, is matched by few. Has languished in recent years, failing to recognize its new place in the world order as a follower, and not the leader it once was. Its people tend to be the friendliest to its neighbors, though still harboring a long simmering, yet contained, hatred for Israel.
COLORADO: United Arab Emirates. An incredibly refined populace-- probably because it's impossible to make it your home unless you're incredibly wealthy. Does its best to compete with its neighbors, but has resigned itself to being the playground of the region, instead of one of its traditional powers. Doesn't have a baseball team.
IOWA STATE: Afghanistan. There's really no reason that this nation should even exist, and if it weren't for previous colonial empires, it probably wouldn't. Easily overlooked over the last 300 years, its people are a ramshackle alliance of groups that don't belong anywhere else. Wishes to God, Allah, and whoever else that it would either cease to exist, or be swallowed up by Pakistan to the south, or the University of Iowa to the west.
MISSOURI: Turkey. Still trying to figure out how it got mixed up in this region, anyway. They're a member of NATO. Shouldn't they be in the Big Ten?
OKLAHOMA STATE: Syria. Nobody pays attention to them until they start mouthing off to the other nations around it. Will occasionally attack its neighbors, with varying success, with most of its successes coming in areas that others couldn't care less about, like wrestling.
TEXAS TECH: Iran. Really, REALLY wants to be noticed in the international community. Will go so far as to fake the development of nuclear weapons, or choose homicidal, maniacal, self-aggrandizing men as their president/basketball coach, just to get noticed. Incredibly eccentric as a nation. Has a deep-seated hatred of both Israel and Iraq--and a huge inferiority complex to go along with it. Very arid, dry climate featuring frequent windstorms.
BAYLOR: Lebanon. Everything they do is just a cluster, and no matter what they do, nothing ever seems to get better. Every once in awhile, it'll nip at the ankles of one of the larger nations, and piss those other nations off just enough to where they're smacked down and consequently can't achieve anything noteworthy for the next ten years.
OKLAHOMA: Iraq. Lies, cheats, and steals to get its way in the international community. If caught doing something wrong, or illegal, its excuse is that "everybody else has done it, we just get caught." No one wants to live here, but everybody that does wishes they could move away. Recently has undergone minor restructuring due to numerous ethics violations.
TEXAS: Israel. Pretty much everyone else in the region hates them. Can destroy lesser countries at will using incredibly advanced tactics. Not relegated to the stone-age lifestyle of many of its neighboring nations. Home of God's chosen people.
TEXAS A&M: Palestine. Doesn't actually exist as an entity to really be dealt with, but loves nothing more than to take pot-shots at Israel, just to tick them off. Economy based on farming, with an emphasis on sheep. Continuously complains that they're the real power in the region, and that their status should supersede that of Israel. Religious zealotry abounds; small, infrequent attacks on its neighbors are hailed as moral victories.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE INDEBTED TO CHARLES DARWIN
Charles Darwin was born 200 years ago and his treatise on natural selection and evolution in "On the Origin of Species" is now 150 years old. His "Descent of Man" (1871) has been widely misinterpreted as holding that man's ancestors were apes. [Actually, that theory had been put forth earlier in Thomas Huxley's "Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature" (1863).] Darwin's theory of evolution has led to the establishment of DNA fingerprinting, an invaluable tool in the administration of justice.
Needless to say, fundamentalist Christians have been up in arms ever since Darwin's theory came into play. Social conservatives on the Texas State Board of Education are now tinkering with the public school science curriculum by trying to insert the teaching of "intelligent design" (creationism) alongside Darwin's theory as an alternative to evolution for students to puzzle over. Several other states have already inserted this foolish dilution of science into biology courses.
Eric Berger's story, "Scientists Use Darwin Theory to Develop New Technologies," in yesterday's Houston Chronicle included the application of evolution in the establishment of DNA fingerprinting as now employed by law enforcement. Here is part of Berger's story:
'Darwin’s observations in A Naturalist’s Voyage Around the World eventually led to the notions of natural selection and evolution, theories he laid out in On the Origin of Species, the 150th anniversary of which comes in December.
Thanks to the discovery of DNA’s structure in 1953 and the mapping of the human genome half a century later, biologists now say they understand the mechanisms by which genes mutate and species evolve. And they’re using that knowledge in increasingly powerful ways.
One of the first and most well-known uses of evolutionary theory has come in law enforcement.
Among the 3 billion or so chemical bits, or letters, in human DNA are those that change slowly and those that mutate rapidly. Scientists realized that short segments of DNA vary greatly from person to person as a result. The finding gave rise to the concept of DNA fingerprints to identify individuals.
By the late 1980s, scientists were testifying in court about the reliability of DNA evidence to convict criminals. Such evidence has become a powerful forensic tool.
"It’s had a tremendous impact on criminal justice, not the least of which has been to free a lot of innocent people," said Rusty Hardin, now a defense lawyer who in 1988 prosecuted the first Harris County case that used DNA evidence.'
Berger's story also provided information on how Darwin's theory has led to the creation of smarter computer programs and advances in the field of medicine. Thanks to the theory of evolution, DNA fingerprinting is used to establish the guilt of criminals and to exonerate the innocent. For that technology, the administration of justice is indebted to Charles Darwin.
Needless to say, fundamentalist Christians have been up in arms ever since Darwin's theory came into play. Social conservatives on the Texas State Board of Education are now tinkering with the public school science curriculum by trying to insert the teaching of "intelligent design" (creationism) alongside Darwin's theory as an alternative to evolution for students to puzzle over. Several other states have already inserted this foolish dilution of science into biology courses.
Eric Berger's story, "Scientists Use Darwin Theory to Develop New Technologies," in yesterday's Houston Chronicle included the application of evolution in the establishment of DNA fingerprinting as now employed by law enforcement. Here is part of Berger's story:
'Darwin’s observations in A Naturalist’s Voyage Around the World eventually led to the notions of natural selection and evolution, theories he laid out in On the Origin of Species, the 150th anniversary of which comes in December.
Thanks to the discovery of DNA’s structure in 1953 and the mapping of the human genome half a century later, biologists now say they understand the mechanisms by which genes mutate and species evolve. And they’re using that knowledge in increasingly powerful ways.
One of the first and most well-known uses of evolutionary theory has come in law enforcement.
Among the 3 billion or so chemical bits, or letters, in human DNA are those that change slowly and those that mutate rapidly. Scientists realized that short segments of DNA vary greatly from person to person as a result. The finding gave rise to the concept of DNA fingerprints to identify individuals.
By the late 1980s, scientists were testifying in court about the reliability of DNA evidence to convict criminals. Such evidence has become a powerful forensic tool.
"It’s had a tremendous impact on criminal justice, not the least of which has been to free a lot of innocent people," said Rusty Hardin, now a defense lawyer who in 1988 prosecuted the first Harris County case that used DNA evidence.'
Berger's story also provided information on how Darwin's theory has led to the creation of smarter computer programs and advances in the field of medicine. Thanks to the theory of evolution, DNA fingerprinting is used to establish the guilt of criminals and to exonerate the innocent. For that technology, the administration of justice is indebted to Charles Darwin.
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
To all Israelis, including those in the United States:
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
If you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, vote for the LIKUD party candidates in order to make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel.
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
The so-called "moderate" Palestinians and their leaders have repeatedly declared that their ultimate goal is the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea."
If you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, vote for the LIKUD party candidates in order to make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel.
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Sunday, February 01, 2009
WARNING FOR PET OWNERS AND GARDENERS
Kay Daly, a wonderful lady with whom I often disagree politically, sent me a warning for pet owners and gardeners in which she wrote, "please pass this on to the caring people you know whether they have pets or not, whether they're gardeners or not..........Join those of us who hope there's a special hell for those who justify what they do or sell because "....only a small percentage of _______(fill in the blank with your choice of humans, livestock and pets, whatever tries to live and grow) will be damaged or die." When did that justification become the basis for safety concerns, for ethical behavior?"
Kay pleads, "Please tell every dog or cat owner you know. Even if you don't have a pet, please pass this on to those who do." So in keeping with her request, I thought that placing the information she sent into my blog would give it the wide distribution it deserves.
Here is the information which, like Kay, I am asking my readers to pass on:
Recently the doting owner of two young lab mixes purchased Cocoa Mulch from Target to use in their garden. They loved the way it smelled and it was advertised to keep cats away from their garden. Their dog Calypso decided that the mulch smelled good enough to eat and devoured a large helping. She vomited a few times which was typical when she eats something new but wasn't acting lethargic in any way. The next day, while on her morning walk, she had a seizure and died instantly.
Although the mulch had NO warnings printed on the label, upon further investigation on the company's website, this product was found to be HIGHLY toxic to dogs and cats.
Cocoa Mulch is manufactured by Hershey's, and they claim that 'It is true that studies have shown that 50% of the dogs that eat Cocoa Mulch can suffer physical harm to a variety of degrees (depending on each individual dog). However, 98% of all dogs won't eat it.'
This Snopes site gives the following information: http://www.snopes..com/critters/crusader/cocoamulch.asp
Cocoa Mulch, which is sold by Home Depot, Foreman's Garden Supply and other Garden supply stores, contains a lethal ingredient called 'Theobromine'. It is lethal to dogs and cats. It smells like chocolate and it really attracts dogs. They will ingest this stuff and die. Several deaths already occurred in the last 2-3 weeks.
Theobromine is in all chocolate, especially dark or baker's chocolate which is toxic to dogs. Cocoa bean shells contain potentially toxic quantities of theobromine, a xanthine compound similar in effects to caffeine and theophylline.
A dog that ingested a lethal quantity of garden mulch made from cacao bean shells developed severe convulsions and died 17 hours later. Analysis of the stomach contents and the ingested cacao bean shells revealed the presence of lethal amounts of theobromine.
Kay pleads, "Please tell every dog or cat owner you know. Even if you don't have a pet, please pass this on to those who do." So in keeping with her request, I thought that placing the information she sent into my blog would give it the wide distribution it deserves.
Here is the information which, like Kay, I am asking my readers to pass on:
Recently the doting owner of two young lab mixes purchased Cocoa Mulch from Target to use in their garden. They loved the way it smelled and it was advertised to keep cats away from their garden. Their dog Calypso decided that the mulch smelled good enough to eat and devoured a large helping. She vomited a few times which was typical when she eats something new but wasn't acting lethargic in any way. The next day, while on her morning walk, she had a seizure and died instantly.
Although the mulch had NO warnings printed on the label, upon further investigation on the company's website, this product was found to be HIGHLY toxic to dogs and cats.
Cocoa Mulch is manufactured by Hershey's, and they claim that 'It is true that studies have shown that 50% of the dogs that eat Cocoa Mulch can suffer physical harm to a variety of degrees (depending on each individual dog). However, 98% of all dogs won't eat it.'
This Snopes site gives the following information: http://www.snopes..com/critters/crusader/cocoamulch.asp
Cocoa Mulch, which is sold by Home Depot, Foreman's Garden Supply and other Garden supply stores, contains a lethal ingredient called 'Theobromine'. It is lethal to dogs and cats. It smells like chocolate and it really attracts dogs. They will ingest this stuff and die. Several deaths already occurred in the last 2-3 weeks.
Theobromine is in all chocolate, especially dark or baker's chocolate which is toxic to dogs. Cocoa bean shells contain potentially toxic quantities of theobromine, a xanthine compound similar in effects to caffeine and theophylline.
A dog that ingested a lethal quantity of garden mulch made from cacao bean shells developed severe convulsions and died 17 hours later. Analysis of the stomach contents and the ingested cacao bean shells revealed the presence of lethal amounts of theobromine.
HATRED AND EUPHORIA
Peter Berkowitz, a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, had a great op-ed piece in the January 31, 2009 issue of The Wall Street Journal. Here is his column:
BUSH HATRED AND OBAMA EUPHORIA ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN
By Peter Berkowitz
Now that George W. Bush has left the harsh glare of the White House and Barack Obama has settled into the highest office in the land, it might be reasonable to suppose that Bush hatred and Obama euphoria will begin to subside. Unfortunately, there is good reason to doubt that the common sources that have nourished these dangerous political passions will soon lose their potency.
At first glance, Bush hatred and Obama euphoria could not be more different. Hatred of Mr. Bush went well beyond the partisan broadsides typical of democratic politics. For years it disfigured its victims with open, indeed proud, loathing for the very manner in which Mr. Bush walked and talked. It compelled them to denounce the president and his policies as not merely foolish or wrong or contrary to the national interest, but as anathema to everything that made America great.
In contrast, the euphoria surrounding Mr. Obama's run for president conferred upon the candidate immunity from criticism despite his newness to national politics and lack of executive experience, and regardless of how empty his calls for change. At the same time, it inspired those in its grips, repeatedly bringing them tears of joy throughout the long election season. With Mr. Obama's victory in November and his inauguration last week, it suffused them with a sense that not only had the promise of America at last been redeemed but that the world could now be transfigured.
In fact, Bush hatred and Obama euphoria -- which tend to reveal more about those who feel them than the men at which they are directed -- are opposite sides of the same coin. Both represent the triumph of passion over reason. Both are intolerant of dissent. Those wallowing in Bush hatred and those reveling in Obama euphoria frequently regard those who do not share their passion as contemptible and beyond the reach of civilized discussion. Bush hatred and Obama euphoria typically coexist in the same soul. And it is disproportionately members of the intellectual and political class in whose souls they flourish.
To be sure, democratic debate has always been a messy affair in which passion threatens to overwhelm reason. So long as citizens remain free and endowed with a diversity of interests and talents, it will remain so.
In October 1787, amid economic crisis and widespread fears about the new nation's ability to defend itself, Alexander Hamilton, in the first installment of what was to become the Federalist Papers, surveyed the formidable obstacles to giving the newly crafted Constitution a fair hearing. Some would oppose it, Hamilton observed, out of fear that ratification would diminish their wealth and power. Others would reject it because they hoped to profit from the political disarray that would ensue. The opposition of still others was rooted in "the honest errors of minds led astray by preconceived jealousies and fears."
Indeed, the best of men, Hamilton acknowledged, were themselves all-too-vulnerable to forming ill-considered political opinions: "So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes, which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions, of the first magnitude to society."
In surveying the impediments to bringing reason to bear in politics, it was not Hamilton's aim to encourage despair over democracy's prospects but to refine political expectations. "This circumstance, if duly attended to," he counseled, "would furnish a lesson of moderation to those, who are ever so much persuaded of their being in the right, in any controversy."
As Hamilton would have supposed, the susceptibility of political judgment to corruption by interest and ambition is as operative in our time as it was in his. What has changed is that those who, by virtue of their education and professional training, would have once been the first to grasp Hamilton's lesson of moderation are today the leading fomenters of immoderation.
Bush hatred and Obama euphoria are particularly toxic because they thrive in and have been promoted by the news media, whose professional responsibility, it has long been thought, is to gather the facts and analyze their significance, and by the academy, whose scholarly training, it is commonly assumed, reflects an aptitude for and dedication to systematic study and impartial inquiry.
From the avalanche of vehement and ignorant attacks on Bush v. Gore and the oft-made and oft-refuted allegation that the Bush administration lied about WMD in Iraq, to the remarkable lack of interest in Mr. Obama's career in Illinois politics and the determined indifference to his wrongness about the surge, wide swaths of the media and the academy have concentrated on stoking passions rather than appealing to reason.
Some will speculate that the outbreak of hatred and euphoria in our politics is the result of the transformation of left-liberalism into a religion, its promulgation as dogma by our universities, and students' absorption of their professors' lesson of immoderation. This is unfair to religion.
At least it's unfair to those forms of biblical faith that teach that God's ways are hidden and mysterious, that all human beings are both deserving of respect and inherently flawed, and that it is idolatry to invest things of this world -- certainly the goods that can be achieved through politics -- with absolute value. Through these teachings, biblical faith encourages skepticism about grand claims to moral and political authority and an appreciation of the limits of one's knowledge, both of which well serve liberal democracy.
In contrast, by assembling and maintaining faculties that think alike about politics and think alike that the university curriculum must instill correct political opinions, our universities cultivate intellectual conformity and discourage the exercise of reason in public life. It is not that our universities invest the fundamental principles of liberalism with religious meaning -- after all the Declaration of Independence identifies a religious root of our freedom and equality. Rather, they infuse a certain progressive interpretation of our freedom and equality with sacred significance, zealously requiring not only outward obedience to its policy dictates but inner persuasion of the heart and mind. This transforms dissenters into apostates or heretics, and leaders into redeemers.
Consequently, though Bush hatred may weaken as the 43rd president minds his business back home in Texas, and while Obama euphoria may fade as the 44th president is compelled to immerse himself in the daunting ambiguities of power, our universities will continue to educate students to believe that hatred and euphoria reflect political wisdom. Urgent though the problem is, not even the efficient and responsible spending of a $1 trillion stimulus package would begin to address it.
BUSH HATRED AND OBAMA EUPHORIA ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN
By Peter Berkowitz
Now that George W. Bush has left the harsh glare of the White House and Barack Obama has settled into the highest office in the land, it might be reasonable to suppose that Bush hatred and Obama euphoria will begin to subside. Unfortunately, there is good reason to doubt that the common sources that have nourished these dangerous political passions will soon lose their potency.
At first glance, Bush hatred and Obama euphoria could not be more different. Hatred of Mr. Bush went well beyond the partisan broadsides typical of democratic politics. For years it disfigured its victims with open, indeed proud, loathing for the very manner in which Mr. Bush walked and talked. It compelled them to denounce the president and his policies as not merely foolish or wrong or contrary to the national interest, but as anathema to everything that made America great.
In contrast, the euphoria surrounding Mr. Obama's run for president conferred upon the candidate immunity from criticism despite his newness to national politics and lack of executive experience, and regardless of how empty his calls for change. At the same time, it inspired those in its grips, repeatedly bringing them tears of joy throughout the long election season. With Mr. Obama's victory in November and his inauguration last week, it suffused them with a sense that not only had the promise of America at last been redeemed but that the world could now be transfigured.
In fact, Bush hatred and Obama euphoria -- which tend to reveal more about those who feel them than the men at which they are directed -- are opposite sides of the same coin. Both represent the triumph of passion over reason. Both are intolerant of dissent. Those wallowing in Bush hatred and those reveling in Obama euphoria frequently regard those who do not share their passion as contemptible and beyond the reach of civilized discussion. Bush hatred and Obama euphoria typically coexist in the same soul. And it is disproportionately members of the intellectual and political class in whose souls they flourish.
To be sure, democratic debate has always been a messy affair in which passion threatens to overwhelm reason. So long as citizens remain free and endowed with a diversity of interests and talents, it will remain so.
In October 1787, amid economic crisis and widespread fears about the new nation's ability to defend itself, Alexander Hamilton, in the first installment of what was to become the Federalist Papers, surveyed the formidable obstacles to giving the newly crafted Constitution a fair hearing. Some would oppose it, Hamilton observed, out of fear that ratification would diminish their wealth and power. Others would reject it because they hoped to profit from the political disarray that would ensue. The opposition of still others was rooted in "the honest errors of minds led astray by preconceived jealousies and fears."
Indeed, the best of men, Hamilton acknowledged, were themselves all-too-vulnerable to forming ill-considered political opinions: "So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes, which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions, of the first magnitude to society."
In surveying the impediments to bringing reason to bear in politics, it was not Hamilton's aim to encourage despair over democracy's prospects but to refine political expectations. "This circumstance, if duly attended to," he counseled, "would furnish a lesson of moderation to those, who are ever so much persuaded of their being in the right, in any controversy."
As Hamilton would have supposed, the susceptibility of political judgment to corruption by interest and ambition is as operative in our time as it was in his. What has changed is that those who, by virtue of their education and professional training, would have once been the first to grasp Hamilton's lesson of moderation are today the leading fomenters of immoderation.
Bush hatred and Obama euphoria are particularly toxic because they thrive in and have been promoted by the news media, whose professional responsibility, it has long been thought, is to gather the facts and analyze their significance, and by the academy, whose scholarly training, it is commonly assumed, reflects an aptitude for and dedication to systematic study and impartial inquiry.
From the avalanche of vehement and ignorant attacks on Bush v. Gore and the oft-made and oft-refuted allegation that the Bush administration lied about WMD in Iraq, to the remarkable lack of interest in Mr. Obama's career in Illinois politics and the determined indifference to his wrongness about the surge, wide swaths of the media and the academy have concentrated on stoking passions rather than appealing to reason.
Some will speculate that the outbreak of hatred and euphoria in our politics is the result of the transformation of left-liberalism into a religion, its promulgation as dogma by our universities, and students' absorption of their professors' lesson of immoderation. This is unfair to religion.
At least it's unfair to those forms of biblical faith that teach that God's ways are hidden and mysterious, that all human beings are both deserving of respect and inherently flawed, and that it is idolatry to invest things of this world -- certainly the goods that can be achieved through politics -- with absolute value. Through these teachings, biblical faith encourages skepticism about grand claims to moral and political authority and an appreciation of the limits of one's knowledge, both of which well serve liberal democracy.
In contrast, by assembling and maintaining faculties that think alike about politics and think alike that the university curriculum must instill correct political opinions, our universities cultivate intellectual conformity and discourage the exercise of reason in public life. It is not that our universities invest the fundamental principles of liberalism with religious meaning -- after all the Declaration of Independence identifies a religious root of our freedom and equality. Rather, they infuse a certain progressive interpretation of our freedom and equality with sacred significance, zealously requiring not only outward obedience to its policy dictates but inner persuasion of the heart and mind. This transforms dissenters into apostates or heretics, and leaders into redeemers.
Consequently, though Bush hatred may weaken as the 43rd president minds his business back home in Texas, and while Obama euphoria may fade as the 44th president is compelled to immerse himself in the daunting ambiguities of power, our universities will continue to educate students to believe that hatred and euphoria reflect political wisdom. Urgent though the problem is, not even the efficient and responsible spending of a $1 trillion stimulus package would begin to address it.
BIBI NETANYAHU FOR PRIME MINISTER
To all Israelis, including those in the United States, if you value the long-term survival of the Jewish state, vote for the LIKUD party candidates in order to make BIBI NETANYAHU the Prime Minister of Israel.
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
(Please note: This unsolicited endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahu will be repeated daily until the February 10th parliamentary elections.)
Saturday, January 31, 2009
100 ZIP AND YOU'RE FIRED
Although it took place a couple of weeks ago, I still have some very strong feelings about this event. As you probably know, a Texas girls high school basketball game in Dallas ended with a 100-0 score. Covenant, a private Christian school, was the lopsided winner and Dallas Academy, a private school for kids with learning disabilites (LD), was the scoreless victim.
When Micah Grimes, the Covenant coach, was criticized for letting his girls run up the score, he fired back with an e-mail to the Dallas Morning News. Some Covenant administrators had called the score "shameful," but Grimes wrote that he would not apologize "for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity." That got coach Grimes fired.
Despite the 100 zip score, Jeremy Civello, the Academy coach, saw the game as a win. "My girls never quit," he said. "They played as hard as they could to the very end. They played with all their hearts at 70-nothing, 80-nothing and 100-nothing. I was really proud of them. That's what I told them after the game."
Did Grimes deserve to be fired? You bet he did! While the Academy girls played "with all their hearts," the Covenant coach and his girls were heartless. Because their opponents were players with disabilities, Grimes and his girls dishonored themselves, as well as their school.
It did not matter that they represented a Christian school. The Christian thing would have been to hold down the score once victory was assured. The Christian thing would have been to let the Academy girls score a few goals. But coach Grimes was merciless and very un-Christian-like by letting his girls run up the socre against some girls with LD. And the Covenant girls are not blameless either. To hell with the coach! Those girls could have practiced some good sportsmanship by slowing the game down on their own.
We reap what we sow. We are too sports crazy. UCLA football coach Red Sanders first said it and legendary Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi immortalized it - "Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing." In the athletic departments of our colleges and universities, winning trumps learning. That's why many college football players fail to graduate and that's why most college basketball players are borderline illiterates.
Back in 1950, my college football team beat a team from California by more than 70 points. After the game, the other coach rushed over and, livid with rage, screamed at our coach, "You God damn son of a bitch, you just cost me my job!" Unfortunately, that "win at any cost" concept is bound to trickle down to the high school level. Thus we end up with some asshole coach letting his team slaughter a group of kids with LD.
When Micah Grimes, the Covenant coach, was criticized for letting his girls run up the score, he fired back with an e-mail to the Dallas Morning News. Some Covenant administrators had called the score "shameful," but Grimes wrote that he would not apologize "for a wide-margin victory when my girls played with honor and integrity." That got coach Grimes fired.
Despite the 100 zip score, Jeremy Civello, the Academy coach, saw the game as a win. "My girls never quit," he said. "They played as hard as they could to the very end. They played with all their hearts at 70-nothing, 80-nothing and 100-nothing. I was really proud of them. That's what I told them after the game."
Did Grimes deserve to be fired? You bet he did! While the Academy girls played "with all their hearts," the Covenant coach and his girls were heartless. Because their opponents were players with disabilities, Grimes and his girls dishonored themselves, as well as their school.
It did not matter that they represented a Christian school. The Christian thing would have been to hold down the score once victory was assured. The Christian thing would have been to let the Academy girls score a few goals. But coach Grimes was merciless and very un-Christian-like by letting his girls run up the socre against some girls with LD. And the Covenant girls are not blameless either. To hell with the coach! Those girls could have practiced some good sportsmanship by slowing the game down on their own.
We reap what we sow. We are too sports crazy. UCLA football coach Red Sanders first said it and legendary Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi immortalized it - "Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing." In the athletic departments of our colleges and universities, winning trumps learning. That's why many college football players fail to graduate and that's why most college basketball players are borderline illiterates.
Back in 1950, my college football team beat a team from California by more than 70 points. After the game, the other coach rushed over and, livid with rage, screamed at our coach, "You God damn son of a bitch, you just cost me my job!" Unfortunately, that "win at any cost" concept is bound to trickle down to the high school level. Thus we end up with some asshole coach letting his team slaughter a group of kids with LD.
Friday, January 30, 2009
A SUPPLIER TELLS OFF GENERAL MOTORS
When Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America, called on all GM employees and suppliers to contact their legislators and urge them to support a federal bailout for the Big Three automakers, the president of Knox Machinery in Franklin, Ohio responded with an angry letter. Here is an abridged copy of that supplier's letter:
From Gregory Knox,
In response to your request to contact legislators and ask for a bailout for the Big Three automakers please consider the following, and please pass my thoughts on to Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America.
Politicians and Management of the Big 3 are both infected with the same entitlement mentality that has spread like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping this nation, awaiting our new "messiah", Pres-elect Obama, to wave his magic wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream" Believe me folks, The dream is over!
This dream where we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without paying the price for these atrocities this dream where you still think the masses will line up to buy our products for ever and ever.
Don't even think about telling me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford, GM, Chrysler, TRW, Delphi, Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM's throughout the Midwest during the past 30 years and what I've seen over those years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.
Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America, states: "There is widespread sentiment throughout this country, and our government, and especially via the news media, that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management which it certainly is not."
You're right Mr. Clarke, it's not JUST management ….how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass, so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour work week. How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics for putting out too many parts on a shift and for being too productive (We certainly must not expose those lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we??!)
Do you folks really not know about this stuff? How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea: "over the last few years we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors." What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?! Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them? The K car vs. the Accord? The Pinto vs. the Civic?!? Do I need to go on? What a joke!
We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades. It's time to pay for your sins, Detroit.
I attended an economic summit last week where brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu, from the Institute of Trend Research , surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of "bailout money". "Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems," but despite what people like politicians and corporate magnates would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day and the following very important thing would happen….where there had been greedy and sloppy banks, new efficient ones would pop up. That is how a free market system works. It does work, if we would only let it work"
But for some nondescript reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right and that capitalism doesn't work - that we need the government to step in and "save us" Save us my ass, Hell - we're nationalizing and unfortunately too many of our once fine nation's citizens don' t even have a clue that this is what is really happening. But, they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams….yeah - THAT'S really important, isn't it…!
Does it ever occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades in this country?... How can that be??? Let's see… Fuel efficient… Listening to customers…. Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul….
Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr. W. Edwards Deming four decades ago when he taught that by adopting appropriate principles of management, organizations could increase quality and simultaneously reduce costs. Ever increased productivity through quality and intelligent planning. Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like "the enemy" Efficient front and back offices…. Non union environment….!
Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone anything they really don't already know down deep in their hearts.
I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into - my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did when I was their age. I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) - I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their act ions and work through it. Radical concept, huh..? Am I there for them in the wings? Of course - but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults.
I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government. Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins. Bad news people - it's coming whether we like it or not. The newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to "make it all go away." I laughed a s I heard Obama "reeling it back in" almost immediately after the final vote count was tallied. "we really might not do it in a year or in four" Where the Hell was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for office?
Stop trying to put off the inevitable folks…! That house in Florida really isn't worth $750,000.. People who jump across a border really don't deserve free health care benefits..! That job driving that forklift for the Big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year…. We really shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe..! ;
That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home..! Let the market correct itself folks - it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna' be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it all, is a nation that appreciates what it has and doesn't live beyond its means and gets back to basics….and redevelops the patriotic work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world and probably turns back to God. Sorry - don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you the "bad news". I hope you take it to heart.
Gregory J. Knox
President
Knox Machinery, Inc.
Franklin, Ohio 45005
From Gregory Knox,
In response to your request to contact legislators and ask for a bailout for the Big Three automakers please consider the following, and please pass my thoughts on to Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America.
Politicians and Management of the Big 3 are both infected with the same entitlement mentality that has spread like cancerous germs in UAW halls for the last countless decades, and whose plague is now sweeping this nation, awaiting our new "messiah", Pres-elect Obama, to wave his magic wand and make all our problems go away, while at the same time allowing our once great nation to keep "living the dream" Believe me folks, The dream is over!
This dream where we can ignore the consumer for years while management myopically focuses on its personal rewards packages at the same time that our factories have been filled with the worlds most overpaid, arrogant, ignorant and laziest entitlement minded "laborers" without paying the price for these atrocities this dream where you still think the masses will line up to buy our products for ever and ever.
Don't even think about telling me I'm wrong. Don't accuse me of not knowing of what I speak. I have called on Ford, GM, Chrysler, TRW, Delphi, Kelsey Hayes, American Axle and countless other automotive OEM's throughout the Midwest during the past 30 years and what I've seen over those years in these union shops can only be described as disgusting.
Troy Clarke, President of General Motors North America, states: "There is widespread sentiment throughout this country, and our government, and especially via the news media, that the current crisis is completely the result of bad management which it certainly is not."
You're right Mr. Clarke, it's not JUST management ….how about the electricians who walk around the plants like lords in feudal times, making people wait on them for countless hours while they drag ass, so they can come in on the weekend and make double and triple time for a job they easily could have done within their normal 40 hour work week. How about the line workers who threaten newbies with all kinds of scare tactics for putting out too many parts on a shift and for being too productive (We certainly must not expose those lazy bums who have been getting overpaid for decades for their horrific underproduction, must we??!)
Do you folks really not know about this stuff? How about this great sentiment abridged from Mr. Clarke's sad plea: "over the last few years we have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors." What the hell has Detroit been doing for the last 40 years?! Did we really JUST wake up to the gaps in quality and efficiency between us and them? The K car vs. the Accord? The Pinto vs. the Civic?!? Do I need to go on? What a joke!
We are living through the inevitable outcome of the actions of the United States auto industry for decades. It's time to pay for your sins, Detroit.
I attended an economic summit last week where brilliant economist, Alan Beaulieu, from the Institute of Trend Research , surprised the crowd when he said he would not have given the banks a penny of "bailout money". "Yes, he said, this would cause short term problems," but despite what people like politicians and corporate magnates would have us believe, the sun would in fact rise the next day and the following very important thing would happen….where there had been greedy and sloppy banks, new efficient ones would pop up. That is how a free market system works. It does work, if we would only let it work"
But for some nondescript reason we are now deciding that the rest of the world is right and that capitalism doesn't work - that we need the government to step in and "save us" Save us my ass, Hell - we're nationalizing and unfortunately too many of our once fine nation's citizens don' t even have a clue that this is what is really happening. But, they sure can tell you the stats on their favorite sports teams….yeah - THAT'S really important, isn't it…!
Does it ever occur to ANYONE that the "competition" has been producing vehicles, EXTREMELY PROFITABLY, for decades in this country?... How can that be??? Let's see… Fuel efficient… Listening to customers…. Investing in the proper tooling and automation for the long haul….
Not being too complacent or arrogant to listen to Dr. W. Edwards Deming four decades ago when he taught that by adopting appropriate principles of management, organizations could increase quality and simultaneously reduce costs. Ever increased productivity through quality and intelligent planning. Treating vendors like strategic partners, rather than like "the enemy" Efficient front and back offices…. Non union environment….!
Again, I could go on and on, but I really wouldn't be telling anyone anything they really don't already know down deep in their hearts.
I have six children, so I am not unfamiliar with the concept of wanting someone to bail you out of a mess that you have gotten yourself into - my children do this on a weekly, if not daily basis, as I did when I was their age. I do for them what my parents did for me (one of their greatest gifts, by the way) - I make them stand on their own two feet and accept the consequences of their act ions and work through it. Radical concept, huh..? Am I there for them in the wings? Of course - but only until such time as they need to be fully on their own as adults.
I don't want to oversimplify a complex situation, but there certainly are unmistakable parallels here between the proper role of parenting and government. Detroit and the United States need to pay for their sins. Bad news people - it's coming whether we like it or not. The newly elected Messiah really doesn't have a magic wand big enough to "make it all go away." I laughed a s I heard Obama "reeling it back in" almost immediately after the final vote count was tallied. "we really might not do it in a year or in four" Where the Hell was that kind of talk when he was RUNNING for office?
Stop trying to put off the inevitable folks…! That house in Florida really isn't worth $750,000.. People who jump across a border really don't deserve free health care benefits..! That job driving that forklift for the Big 3 really isn't worth $85,000 a year…. We really shouldn't allow Wal-Mart to stock their shelves with products acquired from a country that unfairly manipulates their currency and has the most atrocious human rights infractions on the face of the globe..! ;
That couple whose combined income is less than $50,000 really shouldn't be living in that $485,000 home..! Let the market correct itself folks - it will. Yes it will be painful, but it's gonna' be painful either way, and the bright side of my proposal is that on the other side of it all, is a nation that appreciates what it has and doesn't live beyond its means and gets back to basics….and redevelops the patriotic work ethic that made it the greatest nation in the history of the world and probably turns back to God. Sorry - don't cut my head off, I'm just the messenger sharing with you the "bad news". I hope you take it to heart.
Gregory J. Knox
President
Knox Machinery, Inc.
Franklin, Ohio 45005
WHAT IS AN AMERICAN?
I could not resist reproducing this jewel from Australia:
You probably missed this in the rush of news, but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper, an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.
So an Australian dentist wrote an editorial the following day to let everyone know what an American is. So they would know when they found one. (Good one, mate!!!!)
"An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish , Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani or Afghan.
An American may also be a Comanche, Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navaho, Apache, Seminole or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.
An American is Christian , or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan..The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them chooses.
An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.
An American lives in the most prosperous land in the history of the world.
The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence , which recognizes the God given right of each person to the pursuit of happiness.
An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need, never asking a thing in return.
When Afghanistan was over-run by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country!
As of the morning of Septembe r 11, Americans had given more than any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.
The national symbol of America , The Statue of Liberty , welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, temp EST tossed. These in fact are the people who built America
Some of them were working in the Twin Towers the morning of September 11 , 2001 earning a better life for their families. It's been told that the World Trade Center victims were from at least 30 different countries, cultures, and first languages, including those that aided and abetted the terrorists.
So you can try to kill an American if you must. Hitler did. So did General Tojo , and Stalin , and Mao Tse-Tung, and other blood-thirsty tyrants in the world. But, in doing so you would just be killing yourself . Because Americans are not a particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom.. Everyone who holds to that spirit, everywhere, is an American."
You probably missed this in the rush of news, but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper, an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.
So an Australian dentist wrote an editorial the following day to let everyone know what an American is. So they would know when they found one. (Good one, mate!!!!)
"An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish , Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani or Afghan.
An American may also be a Comanche, Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navaho, Apache, Seminole or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.
An American is Christian , or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan..The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them chooses.
An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.
An American lives in the most prosperous land in the history of the world.
The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence , which recognizes the God given right of each person to the pursuit of happiness.
An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need, never asking a thing in return.
When Afghanistan was over-run by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country!
As of the morning of Septembe r 11, Americans had given more than any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.
The national symbol of America , The Statue of Liberty , welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, temp EST tossed. These in fact are the people who built America
Some of them were working in the Twin Towers the morning of September 11 , 2001 earning a better life for their families. It's been told that the World Trade Center victims were from at least 30 different countries, cultures, and first languages, including those that aided and abetted the terrorists.
So you can try to kill an American if you must. Hitler did. So did General Tojo , and Stalin , and Mao Tse-Tung, and other blood-thirsty tyrants in the world. But, in doing so you would just be killing yourself . Because Americans are not a particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom.. Everyone who holds to that spirit, everywhere, is an American."
JUDAS ASPARAGUS
This funny parody was forwarded to me by a friend. If it offends you, then I'm sorry that you can't take a joke. What would Jesus do if he read this? He would have a good laugh like most of us.
THE CHILDREN'S BIBLE IN A NUTSHELL
In the beginning, which occurred near the start, there was nothing but God, darkness, and some gas. The Bible says, 'The Lord thy God is one, but I think He must be a lot older than that.
Anyway, God said, 'Give me a light!' and someone did.
Then God made the world.
He split the Adam and made Eve. Adam and Eve were naked, but they weren't embarrassed because mirrors hadn't been invented yet.
Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating one bad apple, so they were driven from the Garden of Eden.....Not sure what they were driven in though, because they didn't have cars.
Adam and Eve had a son, Cain, who hated his brother as long as he was Abel.
Pretty soon all of the early people died off, except for Methuselah, who lived to be like a million or something.
One of the next important people was Noah, who was a good guy, but one of his kids was kind of a Ham. Noah built a large boat and put his family and some animals on it. He asked some other people to join him, but they said they would have to take a rain check.
After Noah came Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jacob was more famous than his brother, Esau, because Esau sold Jacob his birthmark in exchange for some pot roast. Jacob had a son named Joseph who wore a really loud sports coat.
Another important Bible guy is Moses, whose real name was Charlton Heston. Moses led the Israel Lights out of Egypt and away from the evil Pharaoh after God sent ten plagues on Pharaoh's people. These plagues included frogs, mice, lice, bowels, and no cable.
God fed the Israel Lights every day with manicotti. Then he gave them His Top Ten Commandments. These include: don't lie, cheat, smoke, dance, or covet your neighbor's stuff.
Oh, yeah, I just thought of one more: Humor thy father and thy mother.
One of Moses' best helpers was Joshua who was the first Bible guy to use spies. Joshua fought the battle of Geritol and the fence fell over on the town.
After Joshua came David. He got to be king by killing a giant with a slingshot. He had a son named Solomon who had about 300 wives and 500 porcupines. My teacher says he was wise, but that doesn't sound very wise to me.
After Solomon there were a bunch of major league prophets. One of these was Jonah, who was swallowed by a big whale and then barfed up on the shore.
There were also some minor league prophets, but I guess we don't have to worry about them.
After the Old Testament came the New Testament. Jesus is the star of The New. He was born in Bethlehem in a barn. (I wish I had been born in a barn too, because my mom is always saying to me, 'Close the door! Were you born in a barn?' It would be nice to say, 'As a matter of fact, I was.')
During His life, Jesus had many arguments with sinners like the Pharisees and the Democrats.
Jesus also had twelve opossums.
The worst one was Judas Asparagus. Judas was so evil that they named a terrible vegetable after him.
Jesus was a great man. He healed many leopards and even preached to some Germans on the Mount.
But the Democrats and all those guys put Jesus on trial before Pontius the Pilot. Pilot didn't stick up for Jesus. He just washed his hands instead.
Anyways, Jesus died for our sins, then came back to life again. He went up to Heaven but will be back at the end of the Aluminum. His return is foretold in the book of Revolution.
THE CHILDREN'S BIBLE IN A NUTSHELL
In the beginning, which occurred near the start, there was nothing but God, darkness, and some gas. The Bible says, 'The Lord thy God is one, but I think He must be a lot older than that.
Anyway, God said, 'Give me a light!' and someone did.
Then God made the world.
He split the Adam and made Eve. Adam and Eve were naked, but they weren't embarrassed because mirrors hadn't been invented yet.
Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating one bad apple, so they were driven from the Garden of Eden.....Not sure what they were driven in though, because they didn't have cars.
Adam and Eve had a son, Cain, who hated his brother as long as he was Abel.
Pretty soon all of the early people died off, except for Methuselah, who lived to be like a million or something.
One of the next important people was Noah, who was a good guy, but one of his kids was kind of a Ham. Noah built a large boat and put his family and some animals on it. He asked some other people to join him, but they said they would have to take a rain check.
After Noah came Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jacob was more famous than his brother, Esau, because Esau sold Jacob his birthmark in exchange for some pot roast. Jacob had a son named Joseph who wore a really loud sports coat.
Another important Bible guy is Moses, whose real name was Charlton Heston. Moses led the Israel Lights out of Egypt and away from the evil Pharaoh after God sent ten plagues on Pharaoh's people. These plagues included frogs, mice, lice, bowels, and no cable.
God fed the Israel Lights every day with manicotti. Then he gave them His Top Ten Commandments. These include: don't lie, cheat, smoke, dance, or covet your neighbor's stuff.
Oh, yeah, I just thought of one more: Humor thy father and thy mother.
One of Moses' best helpers was Joshua who was the first Bible guy to use spies. Joshua fought the battle of Geritol and the fence fell over on the town.
After Joshua came David. He got to be king by killing a giant with a slingshot. He had a son named Solomon who had about 300 wives and 500 porcupines. My teacher says he was wise, but that doesn't sound very wise to me.
After Solomon there were a bunch of major league prophets. One of these was Jonah, who was swallowed by a big whale and then barfed up on the shore.
There were also some minor league prophets, but I guess we don't have to worry about them.
After the Old Testament came the New Testament. Jesus is the star of The New. He was born in Bethlehem in a barn. (I wish I had been born in a barn too, because my mom is always saying to me, 'Close the door! Were you born in a barn?' It would be nice to say, 'As a matter of fact, I was.')
During His life, Jesus had many arguments with sinners like the Pharisees and the Democrats.
Jesus also had twelve opossums.
The worst one was Judas Asparagus. Judas was so evil that they named a terrible vegetable after him.
Jesus was a great man. He healed many leopards and even preached to some Germans on the Mount.
But the Democrats and all those guys put Jesus on trial before Pontius the Pilot. Pilot didn't stick up for Jesus. He just washed his hands instead.
Anyways, Jesus died for our sins, then came back to life again. He went up to Heaven but will be back at the end of the Aluminum. His return is foretold in the book of Revolution.
FRIEDMAN OUGHT TO KNOW BETTER
For years, Thomas L. Friedman, the all knowing, all seeing Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times columnist has advocated a "two state" solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, one that would eventually lead to the extinction of the Jewish State. But I thought he had finally come to his senses when he told the round table panel on ABC This Week (1-11-09) that when people on the other side of its borders have homemade rockets, the chances of Israel accepting an independent Palestinian state are zero. Instead of a Palestinian state, Friedman called for a radical new approach to the conflict - a "NATO Trusteeship" for the West Bank and the Gaza strip.
Alas, that didn't las long. Now he is back advocating that Israel take suicidal steps to achieve a "lasting" peace. In his January 26 Times column Friedman wrote: 'We’re getting perilously close to closing the window on a two-state solution, because the two chief window-closers — Hamas in Gaza and the fanatical Jewish settlers in the West Bank — have been in the driver’s seats. Hamas is busy making a two-state solution inconceivable, while the settlers have steadily worked to make it impossible.
And if the Jewish settlers continue with their "natural growth" to devour the West Bank, it will also be effectively off the table. No Israeli government has mustered the will to take down even the "illegal," unauthorized settlements, despite promises to the U.S. to do so, so it’s getting hard to see how the "legal" settlements will ever be removed. What is needed from Israel’s Feb. 10 elections is a centrist, national unity government that can resist the blackmail of the settlers, and the rightist parties that protect them, to still implement a two-state solution.
Because without a stable two-state solution, what you will have is an Israel hiding behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon and a Fatah-run failed state in Ramallah.'
In his January 27 Times column Friedman suggested that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia revise his 2002 peace proposal in favor of a "five state solution." Abdullah's original peace proposal called for:
(1) a full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
(2) Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
(3) The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
In return, all the Arab states would sign a peace agreement with Israel and establish normal diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.
Friedman suggested that Abdullah send President Obama a letter outlining a revised peace proposal. Here is part of what the all knowing, all seeing columnist said the king's letter should contain.
'I am proposing what I would call a five-state solution:
1. Israel agrees in principle to withdraw from every inch of the West Bank and Arab districts of East Jerusalem, as it has from Gaza. Any territories Israel might retain in the West Bank for its settlers would have to be swapped — inch for inch — with land from Israel proper.
2. The Palestinians — Hamas and Fatah — agree to form a national unity government. This government then agrees to accept a limited number of Egyptian troops and police to help Palestinians secure Gaza and monitor its borders, as well as Jordanian troops and police to do the same in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority would agree to five-year "security assistance programs" with Egypt in Gaza and with Jordan in the West Bank.
With Egypt and Jordan helping to maintain order, Palestinians could focus on building their own credible security and political institutions to support their full independence at the end of five years.
3. Israel would engage in a phased withdrawal over these five years from all of its settlements in the West Bank and Arab Jerusalem — except those agreed to be granted to Israel as part of land swaps — at the same pace that the Palestinians meet the security and governance metrics agreed to in advance by all the parties. The U.S. would be the sole arbiter of whether the metrics have been met by both sides.
4. Saudi Arabia would pay all the costs of the Egyptian and Jordanian trustees, plus a $1 billion a year service fee to each country — as well as all the budgetary needs of the Palestinian Authority. The entire plan would be based on U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338 and blessed by the U.N. Security Council.'
Of course, those are not Abdullah's proposals, they are Friedman's. For security reasons alone, Israel cannot afford to withdraw from "every inch" of the West Bank and from Arab East Jerusalem. And most certainly, that very tiny state cannot afford to swap any "inch for inch" land from Israel proper for the West Bank settlements it has to retain. Where does Friedman think that land can come from? In one part of the state, Israel proper is less than nine miles wide.
Friedman ought to know better. Surely he must know that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas speaks with a forked tongue. When speaking in English to American and European audiences, Abbas says he wants two states, Palestine and Israel, existing peacefully side by side. But whenever he speaks in Arabic to the Palestinians and other Jew-hating Arabs, that is a far cry from what he says. Time after time Abbas has made it clear in Arabic that there can be only one state, and that state is Palestine. And Friedman surely knows that other "moderate" Palestinian leaders continually declare that their ultimate goal is for Palestine to be liberated "from the river to the sea," a one-state solution that would extinguish the Jewish state.
And surely Friedman must know how deeply the Palestinians hate Jews. He doesn't even have to go to the Middle East to experience that hatred. He can hear that hatred loudly expressed by Palestinians right here in the good old U.S.A.
In San Francisco, Palestinians demonstrating against Israel's conflict with Hamas carried Arabic signs which read: "Itbach al Yahud" (slaughter the Jews), "Falastin balad'na w'al Yahud qalab'na" (Palestine is our land and the Jews are our dogs), "ba ruh, ba dam, nafdeek ya Falastin" (with our soul, with our blood, we will cleanse you oh Palestine), "al mawt al Yahud" (death to the Jews).
In Columbus, Ohio, led by an Ohio State University professor, about 300 Palestinians and their supporters protested Israel's attacks on Gaza by chanting, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea" and "Long live the intifada." The views expressed at the rally were that Israelis are colonialists, illegally there, murderers, and genocidal maniacs.
And in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Palestinians demonstrating against the Gaza attacks extolled the Nazi extermination camps of the Holocaust by shouting, "Gas the Jews!" and "Go back to the ovens!"
The Palestinians have celebrated every terrorist attack against innocent Jewish men, women and children, whether carried out inside Israel or elsewheres in the world. Time after time, the Palestinians have called for "Death to the Jews." Does the all knowing, all seeing Friedman really believe that Israel can make peace with a people determined to destroy the Jewish state?
Friedman says that without a two-state solution, Israel will be "hiding behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon and a Fatah-run failed state in Ramallah." Well, Mr. Friedman, let me tell you something - hiding behind that high wall will be a lot better than no Jewish state at all to hide in!
Alas, that didn't las long. Now he is back advocating that Israel take suicidal steps to achieve a "lasting" peace. In his January 26 Times column Friedman wrote: 'We’re getting perilously close to closing the window on a two-state solution, because the two chief window-closers — Hamas in Gaza and the fanatical Jewish settlers in the West Bank — have been in the driver’s seats. Hamas is busy making a two-state solution inconceivable, while the settlers have steadily worked to make it impossible.
And if the Jewish settlers continue with their "natural growth" to devour the West Bank, it will also be effectively off the table. No Israeli government has mustered the will to take down even the "illegal," unauthorized settlements, despite promises to the U.S. to do so, so it’s getting hard to see how the "legal" settlements will ever be removed. What is needed from Israel’s Feb. 10 elections is a centrist, national unity government that can resist the blackmail of the settlers, and the rightist parties that protect them, to still implement a two-state solution.
Because without a stable two-state solution, what you will have is an Israel hiding behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon and a Fatah-run failed state in Ramallah.'
In his January 27 Times column Friedman suggested that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia revise his 2002 peace proposal in favor of a "five state solution." Abdullah's original peace proposal called for:
(1) a full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
(2) Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
(3) The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
In return, all the Arab states would sign a peace agreement with Israel and establish normal diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.
Friedman suggested that Abdullah send President Obama a letter outlining a revised peace proposal. Here is part of what the all knowing, all seeing columnist said the king's letter should contain.
'I am proposing what I would call a five-state solution:
1. Israel agrees in principle to withdraw from every inch of the West Bank and Arab districts of East Jerusalem, as it has from Gaza. Any territories Israel might retain in the West Bank for its settlers would have to be swapped — inch for inch — with land from Israel proper.
2. The Palestinians — Hamas and Fatah — agree to form a national unity government. This government then agrees to accept a limited number of Egyptian troops and police to help Palestinians secure Gaza and monitor its borders, as well as Jordanian troops and police to do the same in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority would agree to five-year "security assistance programs" with Egypt in Gaza and with Jordan in the West Bank.
With Egypt and Jordan helping to maintain order, Palestinians could focus on building their own credible security and political institutions to support their full independence at the end of five years.
3. Israel would engage in a phased withdrawal over these five years from all of its settlements in the West Bank and Arab Jerusalem — except those agreed to be granted to Israel as part of land swaps — at the same pace that the Palestinians meet the security and governance metrics agreed to in advance by all the parties. The U.S. would be the sole arbiter of whether the metrics have been met by both sides.
4. Saudi Arabia would pay all the costs of the Egyptian and Jordanian trustees, plus a $1 billion a year service fee to each country — as well as all the budgetary needs of the Palestinian Authority. The entire plan would be based on U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338 and blessed by the U.N. Security Council.'
Of course, those are not Abdullah's proposals, they are Friedman's. For security reasons alone, Israel cannot afford to withdraw from "every inch" of the West Bank and from Arab East Jerusalem. And most certainly, that very tiny state cannot afford to swap any "inch for inch" land from Israel proper for the West Bank settlements it has to retain. Where does Friedman think that land can come from? In one part of the state, Israel proper is less than nine miles wide.
Friedman ought to know better. Surely he must know that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas speaks with a forked tongue. When speaking in English to American and European audiences, Abbas says he wants two states, Palestine and Israel, existing peacefully side by side. But whenever he speaks in Arabic to the Palestinians and other Jew-hating Arabs, that is a far cry from what he says. Time after time Abbas has made it clear in Arabic that there can be only one state, and that state is Palestine. And Friedman surely knows that other "moderate" Palestinian leaders continually declare that their ultimate goal is for Palestine to be liberated "from the river to the sea," a one-state solution that would extinguish the Jewish state.
And surely Friedman must know how deeply the Palestinians hate Jews. He doesn't even have to go to the Middle East to experience that hatred. He can hear that hatred loudly expressed by Palestinians right here in the good old U.S.A.
In San Francisco, Palestinians demonstrating against Israel's conflict with Hamas carried Arabic signs which read: "Itbach al Yahud" (slaughter the Jews), "Falastin balad'na w'al Yahud qalab'na" (Palestine is our land and the Jews are our dogs), "ba ruh, ba dam, nafdeek ya Falastin" (with our soul, with our blood, we will cleanse you oh Palestine), "al mawt al Yahud" (death to the Jews).
In Columbus, Ohio, led by an Ohio State University professor, about 300 Palestinians and their supporters protested Israel's attacks on Gaza by chanting, "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea" and "Long live the intifada." The views expressed at the rally were that Israelis are colonialists, illegally there, murderers, and genocidal maniacs.
And in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Palestinians demonstrating against the Gaza attacks extolled the Nazi extermination camps of the Holocaust by shouting, "Gas the Jews!" and "Go back to the ovens!"
The Palestinians have celebrated every terrorist attack against innocent Jewish men, women and children, whether carried out inside Israel or elsewheres in the world. Time after time, the Palestinians have called for "Death to the Jews." Does the all knowing, all seeing Friedman really believe that Israel can make peace with a people determined to destroy the Jewish state?
Friedman says that without a two-state solution, Israel will be "hiding behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon and a Fatah-run failed state in Ramallah." Well, Mr. Friedman, let me tell you something - hiding behind that high wall will be a lot better than no Jewish state at all to hide in!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
OBAMA TELLS AL ARABIYA PEACE TALKS SHOULD RESUME
In an obvious attempt to court the Muslim world, President Obama's first interview (1-26-09) since taking office was granted to Dubai-based Al Arabiya TV, and not to an American television network. The following is a partial transcript of Hisham Melhem's interview with President Obama on Al Arabiya, the portion that deals with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
MELHEM: Mr. President, thank you for this opportunity, we really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
MELHEM: Sir, you just met with your personal envoy to the Middle East, Senator Mitchell. Obviously, his first task is to consolidate the cease-fire. But beyond that you've been saying that you want to pursue actively and aggressively peacemaking between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Tell us a little bit about how do you see your personal role, because, you know, if the President of the United States is not involved, nothing happens – as the history of peace making shows. Will you be proposing ideas, pitching proposals, parameters, as one of your predecessors did? Or just urging the parties to come up with their own resolutions, as your immediate predecessor did?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the most important thing is for the United States to get engaged right away. And George Mitchell is somebody of enormous stature. He is one of the few people who have international experience brokering peace deals.
And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often theUnited States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues --and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.
Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what's best for them. They're going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it's time to return to the negotiating table.
And it's going to be difficult, it's going to take time. I don't want to prejudge many of these issues, and I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that we think that this is going to be resolved in a few months. But if we start the steady progress on these issues, I'm absolutely confident that the United States -- working in tandem with the European Union, with Russia, with all the Arab states in the region -- I'm absolutely certain that we can make significant progress.
MELHEM: You've been saying essentially that we should not look at these issues -- like the Palestinian-Israeli track and separation from the border region -- you've been talking about a kind of holistic approach to the region. Are we expecting a different paradigm in the sense that in the past one of the critiques -- at least from the Arab side, the Muslim side -- is that everything the Americans always tested with the Israelis, if it works. Now there is an Arab peace plan, there is a regional aspect to it. And you've indicated that. Would there be any shift, a paradigm shift?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia --
MELHEM: Right.
THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage --
MELHEM: Absolutely.
THE PRESIDENT: -- to put forward something that is as significant as that.I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.
I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of thePalestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan.
These things are interrelated. And what I've said, and I think Hillary Clinton has expressed this in her confirmation, is that if we are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress.
Now, Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.
And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs.
MELHEM: I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me – one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because – mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories.
Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state -- and you know the contours of it -- within the first Obama administration?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
But it is not going to be easy, and that's why we've got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that's what's going to be necessary.
MELHEM: Mr. President, thank you for this opportunity, we really appreciate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much.
MELHEM: Sir, you just met with your personal envoy to the Middle East, Senator Mitchell. Obviously, his first task is to consolidate the cease-fire. But beyond that you've been saying that you want to pursue actively and aggressively peacemaking between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Tell us a little bit about how do you see your personal role, because, you know, if the President of the United States is not involved, nothing happens – as the history of peace making shows. Will you be proposing ideas, pitching proposals, parameters, as one of your predecessors did? Or just urging the parties to come up with their own resolutions, as your immediate predecessor did?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think the most important thing is for the United States to get engaged right away. And George Mitchell is somebody of enormous stature. He is one of the few people who have international experience brokering peace deals.
And so what I told him is start by listening, because all too often theUnited States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues --and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response.
Ultimately, we cannot tell either the Israelis or the Palestinians what's best for them. They're going to have to make some decisions. But I do believe that the moment is ripe for both sides to realize that the path that they are on is one that is not going to result in prosperity and security for their people. And that instead, it's time to return to the negotiating table.
And it's going to be difficult, it's going to take time. I don't want to prejudge many of these issues, and I want to make sure that expectations are not raised so that we think that this is going to be resolved in a few months. But if we start the steady progress on these issues, I'm absolutely confident that the United States -- working in tandem with the European Union, with Russia, with all the Arab states in the region -- I'm absolutely certain that we can make significant progress.
MELHEM: You've been saying essentially that we should not look at these issues -- like the Palestinian-Israeli track and separation from the border region -- you've been talking about a kind of holistic approach to the region. Are we expecting a different paradigm in the sense that in the past one of the critiques -- at least from the Arab side, the Muslim side -- is that everything the Americans always tested with the Israelis, if it works. Now there is an Arab peace plan, there is a regional aspect to it. And you've indicated that. Would there be any shift, a paradigm shift?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia --
MELHEM: Right.
THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage --
MELHEM: Absolutely.
THE PRESIDENT: -- to put forward something that is as significant as that.I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.
I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of thePalestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan.
These things are interrelated. And what I've said, and I think Hillary Clinton has expressed this in her confirmation, is that if we are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress.
Now, Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.
And so what we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs.
MELHEM: I want to ask you about the broader Muslim world, but let me – one final thing about the Palestinian-Israeli theater. There are many Palestinians and Israelis who are very frustrated now with the current conditions and they are losing hope, they are disillusioned, and they believe that time is running out on the two-state solution because – mainly because of the settlement activities in Palestinian-occupied territories.
Will it still be possible to see a Palestinian state -- and you know the contours of it -- within the first Obama administration?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
But it is not going to be easy, and that's why we've got George Mitchell going there. This is somebody with extraordinary patience as well as extraordinary skill, and that's what's going to be necessary.
Monday, January 26, 2009
HATRED - MICHAEL MOORE, YOU EARNED IT!
I received "a note from Michael Moore" that is being circulated on the internet by the far-left. Moore, the producer of documentaries slamming American capitalism, is jumping up and down with glee over the election of Barack Obama. His note was so sickening that it made me want to puke. That is why I sent him the following e-mail message:
Mr. Moore
While I wish President Barack Obama well, your "note" of January 20 is nothing more than a very bad case of vomit-inducing radical left-wing claptrap.
It is obvious that, as you see it, everything the republicans have done has been evil, going back all the way to the Reagan presidency.
I am neither a republican nor a democrat, and I have no use for those on the far-right and those, like you, on the far-left. I am no admirer of George W. Bush, but the things you accuse him of are outrageous. I wonder how your hero Obama would have reacted had 9/11 occurred on his watch?
You complained about being subjected to a lot of hate. Well, I can understand why - you earned it! You admire Marxists like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, and you hate republicans and capitalism. So what do you expect but to be the object of hatred yourself. I suspect you actually thrive on being hated.
I hope all that far-left hatred you have espoused over the years has cost you a helluva lot more than what you plan to tell your followers some day.
/signed/, Retired
Professor of Criminal Justice
(Unfortunately, after numerous attempts, I gave up trying to get this message through to Moore. Each time I tried, I received a failure notice advising me his mailbox was full.)
And here is Michael Moore's vomit-inducing note:
Just Hours Away ...a note from Michael Moore
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
Friends,
This happy, happy day!
We have made it through the Dark Ages and here we are, in one of the most redemptive moments history has ever witnessed. Barack Obama is our best hope to get it right, to heal our national soul, to reach out to the rest of the world with an olive branch instead of shocking brutality.
I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you who has worked to make this day happen. For many, the madness goes back, not eight years but twenty-eight years, to the tragic day Reagan was sworn in to dismantle our precious "government of the people" and our beloved way of life.
To all of you who have spoken up and spoken out, who have written letters and marched for peace, for all of you who never gave up, you are the true heroes today. Many of you have suffered great economic losses. Some of you have endured a loved one being shipped overseas to senseless and shameful wars, and thousands of you have seen those loved ones returned home, no longer alive. It has been a heartbreaking time.
But the sun comes out at noon today. The disgraced outgoing president will slide out the side door and head to Crawford to sell the Hollywood set known as the Bush "ranch" before he settles down in an exclusive neighborhood in Dallas. I would encourage Mr. Bush to issue one final pardon before noon today -- his own. He had better issue a blanket pardon for all crimes that may have been committed since 2001 by himself, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the whole gang. Serious laws were broken, a war was concocted on a lie, and now, please, justice must be carried out.
So let us move forward and fix the horrible mess we are in. We are fortunate to have a new president who is smart and kind and committed to serving his country. Take a moment today and think about what you can do to join him in helping him do his job. We're all in this together. Our country has been so profoundly wrecked by an administration who decided to mug our constitution and then steal what they can for their Wall Street cronies on the way out the door.
Here is my plea: Let's not leave Barack Obama alone to clean up the mess. As he takes his oath today, please take one yourself -- to work harder than ever to end these wars, create universal health care, save our planet, end poverty, increase knowledge and establish a true government "of, by and for the people" (instead of "of, by and for the lobbyists, the bankers, and the war profiteers").
On a personal note, it's no secret that I have had to suffer an avalanche of hate and attack as I stuck my neck out to simply do my job. Some day I will tell you what the true cost of this has been for me, but not today. Today is a time for celebration and optimism and hope. I'm glad we all lived to see this incredible moment. And I thank each of you for your support of my work and your dedication to our democracy.
12:01pm can't come soon enough! Happy Inauguration Day!
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com
Mr. Moore
While I wish President Barack Obama well, your "note" of January 20 is nothing more than a very bad case of vomit-inducing radical left-wing claptrap.
It is obvious that, as you see it, everything the republicans have done has been evil, going back all the way to the Reagan presidency.
I am neither a republican nor a democrat, and I have no use for those on the far-right and those, like you, on the far-left. I am no admirer of George W. Bush, but the things you accuse him of are outrageous. I wonder how your hero Obama would have reacted had 9/11 occurred on his watch?
You complained about being subjected to a lot of hate. Well, I can understand why - you earned it! You admire Marxists like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, and you hate republicans and capitalism. So what do you expect but to be the object of hatred yourself. I suspect you actually thrive on being hated.
I hope all that far-left hatred you have espoused over the years has cost you a helluva lot more than what you plan to tell your followers some day.
/signed/, Retired
Professor of Criminal Justice
(Unfortunately, after numerous attempts, I gave up trying to get this message through to Moore. Each time I tried, I received a failure notice advising me his mailbox was full.)
And here is Michael Moore's vomit-inducing note:
Just Hours Away ...a note from Michael Moore
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
Friends,
This happy, happy day!
We have made it through the Dark Ages and here we are, in one of the most redemptive moments history has ever witnessed. Barack Obama is our best hope to get it right, to heal our national soul, to reach out to the rest of the world with an olive branch instead of shocking brutality.
I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you who has worked to make this day happen. For many, the madness goes back, not eight years but twenty-eight years, to the tragic day Reagan was sworn in to dismantle our precious "government of the people" and our beloved way of life.
To all of you who have spoken up and spoken out, who have written letters and marched for peace, for all of you who never gave up, you are the true heroes today. Many of you have suffered great economic losses. Some of you have endured a loved one being shipped overseas to senseless and shameful wars, and thousands of you have seen those loved ones returned home, no longer alive. It has been a heartbreaking time.
But the sun comes out at noon today. The disgraced outgoing president will slide out the side door and head to Crawford to sell the Hollywood set known as the Bush "ranch" before he settles down in an exclusive neighborhood in Dallas. I would encourage Mr. Bush to issue one final pardon before noon today -- his own. He had better issue a blanket pardon for all crimes that may have been committed since 2001 by himself, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the whole gang. Serious laws were broken, a war was concocted on a lie, and now, please, justice must be carried out.
So let us move forward and fix the horrible mess we are in. We are fortunate to have a new president who is smart and kind and committed to serving his country. Take a moment today and think about what you can do to join him in helping him do his job. We're all in this together. Our country has been so profoundly wrecked by an administration who decided to mug our constitution and then steal what they can for their Wall Street cronies on the way out the door.
Here is my plea: Let's not leave Barack Obama alone to clean up the mess. As he takes his oath today, please take one yourself -- to work harder than ever to end these wars, create universal health care, save our planet, end poverty, increase knowledge and establish a true government "of, by and for the people" (instead of "of, by and for the lobbyists, the bankers, and the war profiteers").
On a personal note, it's no secret that I have had to suffer an avalanche of hate and attack as I stuck my neck out to simply do my job. Some day I will tell you what the true cost of this has been for me, but not today. Today is a time for celebration and optimism and hope. I'm glad we all lived to see this incredible moment. And I thank each of you for your support of my work and your dedication to our democracy.
12:01pm can't come soon enough! Happy Inauguration Day!
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com
Friday, January 23, 2009
SHALOM
President Barack Obama has appointed former Senator George Mitchell as his special Middle East envoy. Mitchell, who brokered a peace in Northern Ireland and led the investigation into steroid use by Major League Baseball players, has been given the task to jump-start the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and see them through to fruition.
Speaking of his new role during a welcome for Secretary Hillary Clinton at the State Department, Mitchell said he believed there was "no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended." Obama told the same gathering that Israel must re-open the border crossings into the Gaza Strip "to allow the flow of aid and commerce." His call for the border crossings to be opened for the flow of "commerce" indicates a definite shift toward the Palestinians, something I predicted would happen if Obama won the presidency.
A good friend has just sent me a joke which is not only very funny, but which also speaks to Mitchell's appointment. Here is that joke:
While on assignment in Jerusalem, a CNN journalist heard about a very old Jewish man who had been going to the Western Wall to pray, twice a day, every day, for a long, long time.
She watched him pray and after about 45 minutes, when he turned to leave, using a cane and moving very slowly, she approached him for an interview.
'Pardon me, sir, I'm Rebecca Smith from CNN. What's your name?'
'Morris Fishbein,' he replied.
'Sir, how long have you been coming to the Western Wall and praying?'
'For about 60 years.'
'60 years! That's amazing! What do you pray for?'
'I pray for peace between the Christians, Jews and the Muslims. I pray for all the wars and all the hatred to stop. I pray for all our children to grow up safely as responsible adults, and to love their fellow man.'
'How do you feel after doing this for 60 years?'
'Like I'm talking to a fucking wall.'
Shalom
Speaking of his new role during a welcome for Secretary Hillary Clinton at the State Department, Mitchell said he believed there was "no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended." Obama told the same gathering that Israel must re-open the border crossings into the Gaza Strip "to allow the flow of aid and commerce." His call for the border crossings to be opened for the flow of "commerce" indicates a definite shift toward the Palestinians, something I predicted would happen if Obama won the presidency.
A good friend has just sent me a joke which is not only very funny, but which also speaks to Mitchell's appointment. Here is that joke:
While on assignment in Jerusalem, a CNN journalist heard about a very old Jewish man who had been going to the Western Wall to pray, twice a day, every day, for a long, long time.
She watched him pray and after about 45 minutes, when he turned to leave, using a cane and moving very slowly, she approached him for an interview.
'Pardon me, sir, I'm Rebecca Smith from CNN. What's your name?'
'Morris Fishbein,' he replied.
'Sir, how long have you been coming to the Western Wall and praying?'
'For about 60 years.'
'60 years! That's amazing! What do you pray for?'
'I pray for peace between the Christians, Jews and the Muslims. I pray for all the wars and all the hatred to stop. I pray for all our children to grow up safely as responsible adults, and to love their fellow man.'
'How do you feel after doing this for 60 years?'
'Like I'm talking to a fucking wall.'
Shalom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)