• Monday, August 23, 2004

    McCain - Between a Rock and a Hard Place!

    I think the article linked to the title may go too far ... but

    McCain "endorses" Bush, but gives favoritism to Kerry in so many things.

    Bush can ignore Kerry if he wants on charges of "smears" but McCain mentioned directly in Kerry's counter-attack ads is stuck in the middle.

    What will he say at the Republican convention and on the 'stump' throughout the campaign?

    Does he or does he not think he was a victim of a "smear" in 2000?

    Does he or does he not think that a man's truthfulness, not only on his own record, but in later "smearing" all Vietnam vets as baby-killers and dopers, is important?! The above linked article goes too far, I think another POW said it best -- Kerry gave away for free what they had to torture us to sign our names to.

    Ed Koch for Bush

    For the 1st time, the former NY mayor is giving his endorsement to a Republican president!
    He says the fight against terrorism and Bush's doctrine of pre-emption is top priority!
    Kudos to Ed, realizing how this ties in to security for Israel as an issue near to American Jews' hearts which is better entrusted to Bush and the Republicans, than to the greatly wavering, Palestinian sympathizing Democrats.

    Says "While I don't agree with Bush on a single domestic issue, they are all trumped by the issue of terrorism". Terrorism is a domestic issue! For NY especially it was and is an issue of economic impact. Hope Ed comes around on other issues of preserving the values of American society, but for now. Hurrah! How ya doin'? You're doing great!

    Sunday, August 22, 2004

    Iraqi soccer players used?

    And they prove what point?
    Umm, freedom of speech
    Yes, they can be angry that foreigners with weapons are in their streets, killing their friends who choose to be insurgent. They ask, wouldn't we be if foreigners invaded the US? Yes, but if a Hitler had run America for 30 years, and just this last December had been captured in a hole, couldn't you be a little patient about a new tomorrow?

    Saturday, August 21, 2004

    Prager : Religion on the Line

    Hey, Beverly and I saw Dennis Prager and a priest, rabbi, and 2 pastors?
    What's the punch line? It's Religion on the line, bringing back live a Sunday night radio program that Dennis Prager had on KABC for years.

    Sunday, August 1: Topic - "Does God Intervene in your Life?"

    We loved the first one, examining the various theological view on how God intervenes in our lives. Of course, it was the 2 protestants that had the most disagreements. The impact of disease, the Holocaust, everything was up for discussion. A Hindu in the audience asked the most provocative question on whether Christians with their "one way" theology were too judgmental for a healthy society, as Prager countered that the impact on our American society has been most healthy and that he judges beliefs on their effect on behavior not on the "absolutism" of a doctrine. Most interesting to me that evening - that Orthodox rabbi was most interested in sharing the mysticism of some beliefs that are Kabbala in origin.



    Next up, sexuality especially the hot topic - same sex marriage!





    Revisiting Four Feathers

    Where have I been the last month?
    Well, for one thing I've been reading! My initial post was based on a recent viewing of the Four Feathers movie.

    The book, however, is quite another experience. As the foreword by a literary critic says, there are no battle scenes in the book. Its structure is that of a late Victorian romance and so it is.
    He, A.E. Mason, was also a playwright and it shows. I'd like to see the book done as a play (the crowd scene in prison would be the most challenging!)

    It's basically a romance, a mystery solved by a blind sleuth to his own detriment, yet freeing all concerns from a life of regret. And of course like I said in my review of the movie " But it also examines the nature of loyalty and courage... it is in essence examining the code of honor of the British empire. Do we have a similar code of honor as a people, should we? What obligations do individuals have to a nation, to friends and family in setting of strong cultural bonds?

    Wednesday, August 11, 2004

    Iraq - 911? No - 1936!

    Why DID we do it? And was it worth it? In the wake of commission and congressional hearings, for a moment let's put aside sarin shells and Abu Gharib.

    One word, actually one number says it all: “1936”. Let me explain why by relating a story, a true history, recorded now just 68 years ago. Yet it ends up a tale of what never happened, and therefore a great calamity, the greatest shared tragedy the world has ever known, did happen. Such are the missed opportunities to change history by bold, and perhaps righteous, action.

    The imperialist powers of Britain and France, for indeed they were still masters of colonial empires that stretched around the world, looked to the east and worried about the foe they had defeated 18 years ago, defeated with the help of a coalition of nations that led to it being termed the World War.

    This foe was rebuilding its industry and its military. Though clearly violating the Versailles Treaty ending the Great War and the subsequent provisions of the League of Nations (precursor to the United Nations), such a move was restoring the pride and sovereignty of this nation. The nation, Germany, led by a former foot-soldier who had survived the deprivations of the trenches, and had returned along with many others, with a burning sense of humiliation and need for a renewed, strong, “pure” nation. As time went on, he claimed that other races, other cultures were corrupting forces. And Britain and France were such hypocrital nations, decadent with corruption and mixing of races, and they oppressed Germany with reparation payments that impoverished the people as a vain attempt to keep them down. The West had even “invaded” the industrial region of Germany several years back to get their “pound of flesh” of reparations, and the upshot of that were those pictures everybody has seen of wheelbarrows full of worthless German money.

    But NOW was the moment for Britain and France to act. A defeated foe was rising again, a foe that had premiered the use of chemical weapons on the battlefield in 1915. The Nazis were already oppressing certain portions of the population, most notably the Jews, beyond the limits of normal European cultural patterns of racial discrimination and anyone who read Hitler’s Mein Kampf should have known where it was heading.

    YET though many were the international protests of treaty violations, they DID nothing. Why? Was it “imperialist” guilt? Did they just want to avoid a conflict, wanting desperately not to bring back memories of so much loss in the trenches? They dared not believe that this rude upstart Hitler would re-make Germany from a defeated foe into the most aggressive power the world has ever seen, and made unlikely alliances with a true "axis of evil" to threaten the whole world.

    1936 – I hope I showed you it was not all black and white – there were “reasons” and “excuses” for inaction. And YET – if France and England had acted, whether or not from pure hands and selfless motives, a PRE-EMPTIVE invasion leading to the overthrow of the Nazi regime would have been the RIGHT thing to do, even if some innocents would have died and the Western powers “look” like the aggressors. So MANY lives, so much loss could have been spared. How would history have been different?!

    Do I REALLY need to close the analogy with Iraq? In fact, we did not strike decisively, completely, until after Saddam has committed horrible crimes against the Kurds, the Shiites, in fact all of his people. Even after the Desert Storm defeat, he was able to use the United Nations sanctions program, now infamous as “Oil for Food” to build palaces, have his sons torture athletes and train terrorists, and send blood money to suicide bombers’ families in Palestine each time Jews died.

    Maybe Saddam is a penny-ante Hitler, but he is still is the Hitler of our age. We could not let HIM represent a restored pride in the Middle East, not Saddam! Is it a forlorn hope that democratic institutions can flourish in Central Asia? Uh, ask Turkey,India, Israel, or even Russia that question? Can anyone believe that a federation of Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites will hold together – or will it fall apart painfully like Yugoslavia or Lebanon? I mean, who can believe that a multi-racial society can survive and thrive? Oh wait, jeez, look around you right in your neighborhood, I certainly hope so!!

    Yes, it is messy, it is painful,it is costly, maybe it is a “bad” situation. But look at Iraq, where it’s been, where it can go. What has happened in Iraq is the least “bad” scenario that a just God (or Jehovah or Allah or however you may deem to call the Almighty) could have conceived as a fate for the Iraqis.

    Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and the peace of Baghdad. And God Bless America!!