Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Defending Israel's Operations In Gaza

HonestReporting.com
A quick guide to some of the big issues.

This week, Israeli warplanes pounded Hamas strongholds in the Gaza Strip. The goal of the operation is to strike a major blow to Hamas's terror infrastructure and the ability of Hamas and its allied organizations to launch missiles and mortar shells at Israeli citizens and execute terror attacks of various kinds, such as kidnapping Israeli civilians.

As casualties mount, media coverage of the fighting will form public opinion, ultimately determining Israel's ability to complete the necessary operation. Following is a quick guide to some of the big issues.

Why is Israel bombing Gaza when innocent civilians are being killed?
Israel never targets civilians. The death of innocent civilians is regrettable under any circumstances and every effort is made to avoid civilian casualties. That imperative must be balanced with the need to protect Israeli civilians, who suffer from ongoing attacks from Gaza. But while the Palestinians fire Kassam rockets indiscriminately into Israeli territory, Israel launches pinpoint strikes at Hamas infrastructure. Prior to launching any large-scale attacks, Israel spent many months identifying Hamas' strongholds and training facilities. The Israeli Air Force also managed to hit "secret" targets such as underground missile launchers and arms catches -- a testament to Israel's great effort to ensure that air strikes weaken Hamas without harming innocent Palestinians.


Israel does not want a humanitarian crisis, and Hamas is the cause of the suffering and distress of the population there.


Unfortunately, Hamas has never shown the same level of concern for either Israeli or Palestinian civilians. On one hand, Hamas has fired thousands of missiles into Israeli territory, killing and wounding hundreds.

On the other hand, rather than seeking the well-being of the Palestinians under its control in Gaza, Hamas has exploited its civilian population -- and Israel's reluctance to cause civilian casualties -- by placing non-combatants in and around areas likely to be targeted by Israel. Hamas brings women and children up to the roofs of buildings housing terrorist activity in an attempt to prevent air strikes; it sends civilians to the line of fire; it works out of schools and mosques; it fires rockets out of crowded population centers; and it sends Palestinian mothers to murder Israeli children in suicide attacks.

In addition, many of Hamas' arms smuggling tunnels are hidden beneath the homes of Palestinian civilians.

This cynical use of human shields is illegal under international law and the cause of many needless Palestinian deaths. Therefore, the responsibility for Palestinian civilian casualties lies with Hamas, not Israel.

The number of Palestinians casualties is much higher. Isn't that proof of Israeli wrongdoing?
The reason that Israel suffers less casualties is because it has a superior army, and has spent millions of dollars on civil defense infrastructure (neighborhood bomb shelters, reinforced concrete playgrounds for children, etc.).

Also, Israeli hospitals are well-equipped to handle the wounded. Not just Jews, but Gazans, too! In Ashkelon's Barzilai Hospital, "dozens of Gaza Arabs are being treated... at the same time terrorists are bombarding the city." ("Israeli Hospital Cares for Sick and Injured Gaza Arabs," by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, Israel National News, December 29, 2008)

By contrast, in the Gaza hospitals, "armed Hamas militants in civilian clothes roamed the halls" where they shot and killed other Palestinians. ("No Early End Seen to 'All-Out War' on Hamas in Gaza," by Ethan Bronner and Taghreed El-Khodary, New York Times, December 29, 2008)
Shockingly, Hamas is not even allowing wounded Palestinians access to medical treatment. "We are waiting for the wounded Palestinians to cross. They are not being allowed to cross," Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit told reporters. Asked who was to blame, he said: "Ask the party in control on the ground in Gaza." ("Egypt: Hamas denying Gaza wounded treatment in Egypt," by Alaa Shahine, Reuters, December 28, 2008)


It is absurd to assign the "moral high-ground" to he who suffers the most causalities. By this yardstick, during World War Two the Axis forces would be considered the "victims" against the Allied "aggressors."


Isn't Israel's operation a violation of the Hamas truce?
Hamas is responsible for the situation, since it violated the calm, is firing against and attacking Israeli citizens, and is investing all its resources in arming itself and gathering power.

The truce brokered by Egypt was exploited by Hamas not only to employ terror against Israel's citizens, but also to gain strength and massively arm itself with the intention of increasing their capacity for terror and expanding the range of the threat against Israeli citizens. Hamas men were being smuggled out and were being trained in Iran and Syria.

Hamas shoots harmless, homemade rockets, and Israel responds with fighter jets and precision-guided missiles. Isn't that excessive force?
The Palestinians have long cultivated an image of victimhood to win world sympathy and demand Israeli restraint in the face of Palestinian aggression. In reality, the Palestinians' so-called "primitive" Kassam rocket has killed and wounded hundreds of Israeli civilians. The number of casualties would be even higher without Israeli security measures such as early-warning alarms in areas under rocket threat that allow Israelis to escape into bomb shelters. Hamas has also fired medium-range Grad-type Katyusha rockets, placing more than 250,000 Israeli civilians under direct threat of rocket fire.


Given the Palestinian fire power and their willingness to use it, it is clear that the charge of "excessive force" is simply the latest incarnation of the Palestinian strategy of "victimhood." Terror groups fire indiscriminately at innocent Israelis and then complain of excessive or disproportionate force when Israel fires back. But according to internationally accepted laws of war, Israel is permitted to respond with the force necessary to end the conflict.

It is also important to examine the intent behind the use of weapons. Palestinian terrorists do everything in their power to hurt or kill as many Israeli civilians as possible; Israel is using its advanced weaponry to protect Palestinian civilians from harm.


Isn't Hamas entitled to defend its territory against Israeli occupation?
Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip in 2005, uprooting thousands of its own citizens in order to uphold internationally-recognized borders in Gaza. The Palestinians have no further territorial claims against Israel in Gaza. But instead of working to improve the quality of life for its citizens, Hamas has focused on improving the range and accuracy of its Kassam missiles and mortars and increasing its store of weapons. The Palestinian rockets, therefore, can only be seen as aggression against Israel with no moral basis.


Palestinians have fired more than 6,000 rockets and mortars into Israel since the Israeli withdrawal -- all without provocation. The rocket fire even continued during the six-months of "calm" in the Gaza area that ended last Friday. Since then, Hamas stepped up rocket fire substantially, launching 170 rockets at Israel over eight days, an average of more than 20 rockets a day.


No country in the world would allow this type of onslaught against its citizens. As President-elect Barack Obama said during his visit to the rocket-battered town of Sderot five months ago, "If someone was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I would do everything to stop that, and would expect Israel to do the same thing."

Isn't Hamas the democratically-elected government in Gaza? Why is Israel trying to overthrow it?
Hamas promotes itself as the legitimate power in Gaza. In reality, Hamas is at its core a terrorist organization that refuses to renounce violence or recognize Israel's right to exist. Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and the European Union.

Hamas came to power in Gaza through a violent coup against the Palestinian Authority government. The international community continues to recognize the PA, under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, as the legitimate Palestinian government in the Palestinian territories. At the same time Israel is fighting terror, the government is deliberately and openly maintaining a political process with the Palestinian government Abbas. Hamas opposes these negotiations and any settlement with Israel, and constitutes an unstable element in the region.

Hamas steadfastly refuses to recognize Israel and continues to launch attacks on its neighbor. Since Hamas refuses to live in peace with Israel, the Israeli government has no choice but to seek Hamas' replacement.

View a short video on the current media coverage.

Foreign Ministry messages from Herb Keinon / Jerusalem Post

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Thanksgiving--1863

Lincoln's Thanksgiving Proclamation by Abraham Lincoln

I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens... to set apart... a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens.

Washington, DC, October 3, 1863

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict, while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well as the iron and coal as of our precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the imposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the divine purpose, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility, and union.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 3d day of October, A.D. 1863, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.

Abraham Lincoln

By the President:

William H. Seward,
Secretary of State.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Understanding Obama

Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer
By Ali Sina


I must confess I was not impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never has a politician in this land had such a quasi- "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total enigma with zero accomplishments, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is quite ignorant on most important subjects. Barack Obama is a narcissist. Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of "Malignant Self Love," also believes, "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist."

Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest, suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers' souls, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don't know it until it is too late.

One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse. "Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a stepfather. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995.

One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents.

Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone, and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them, and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention. If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Why should he implicate himself in issues that may become controversial when they don't help him personally? Those issues are unworthy by their very nature, because they are not about him.

Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him with a fellowship and an office to work on his book. The book took him a lot longer than expected and at the end it devolved into҆, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book "Dreams of My Father."

Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist, no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself?

Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month, or his aunt, who is in the U.S. illegally and lives in subsidized housing in Boston. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother or aunt. Why? Because his neither can be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself.

This election is like no other in the history of America. The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one must be a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others. They are simply self serving and selfish. Obama evinces symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton, for example. To him, reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous.

Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven.

Let's be honest. This is racism, pure and simple. The truth is that while everyone carries a misconceived collective guilt towards blacks for wrongs done by a bygone people to a bygone people, blacks carry a collective rancor, enmity or vendetta towards non-blacks and to this day want to "stand up" to the white man. They seem to be stuck in the last two centuries. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among whites. Blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among whites. White supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960s. Obama will set the clock back decades.

America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America, and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations. It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castros, Hezbollah, Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists, and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

White Guilt is Dead

WHITE GUILT IS DEAD

By Tom Adkins

Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I'm virtually euphoric. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled with America's flirtation with neo socialism. But there's a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America: The Era of White Guilt is over.

This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn't give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.

For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.

So today, I'm feeling a little "uppity," if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it's time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright's "God Damn America," Al Sharpton's Church of Perpetual Victimization, or Jesse Jackson's rainbow racism. Cornell West? You're a fraud. Go home. All those "black studies" programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.

Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I'm waiting.

Gangsta rappers? Start praising America. Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please…no more Ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah…pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.

To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America? I'm still waiting for the first black French President.

And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I've always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You're poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin' butt on the couch and complain "Da Man is keepin' me down," allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.

No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone's great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.

It's time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful…don't trip on streaking. There ya go, don't be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. They are filthy.

In fact, Obama's ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama's spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama's election has validated American conservatism!

So, listen carefully…Wham!!!

That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.

However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around.

Tom Adkins is the publisher of CommonConservative.com

Friday, April 25, 2008

Question and Answer

Posted By Pat Haruff on Yahoo Group "Homeowners of Sunland Village" 4/22/08

It just keeps climbing, yesterday it was $117 a barrel.

Maybe there will be a positive result to all of this....for years there has been talk about employees being able to do their jobs from home by computers, faxes,phone, etc but mostly nothing has been done.

Maybe this crisis will force corporations to evaluate the situation and just maybe there will finally be less cars on the freeway and that would also save tax money as we would have no need to build more freeways!

What do you think????

Pat Haruff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Answer, Tue., April 22, 2008

This is a complex issue. The price of a barrel of oil is partly a factor of demand and partly a factor of international currency rates. The drop in the dollar is as much to blame for the price of oil as is demand (ie Consumption) and production limitations (ie OPECholding back production to create increased cost.)

The issue of telecommuting employees is also a complex issue. Many corporations already allow selected employess to telecommute, jobshare, and other alternatives to the "Drive to the Office." But only so many jobs lend themselves to the telecommute. And, if we stop Manufacturing job losses to foreign companies, on foreign soil, and those jobs come back to the USA, those jobs cannot be telecommuted.

However, Americans are in love with their cars, and their cars are big guzzlers of gas. Ever notice how empty the HOV lanes are? Well hardly anyone car pools. Lite Rail will not solve the problem either. Since Lite Rail was approved, thousands of new homes have been constructed all over the valley making lite rail a non-issue. Urban planning in the Valley has always been sideways looking to solve problems of the moment, not forward looking to solve problems of the future. Solutions to high energy prices have to have complex solutions to these complex problems. Jobs, currency values, housing, banking and finance are problem areas that can be fixed with laws and policies.

Attitudes, about cars, commuting, and work, are impossible to legislate and will require a generation, or more, to change, maybe more. Taking a few, even many cars off the road will only work if we stop the insane building of super communities like Anthem. When you take 5,000 cars off the road and build 100,000+ new homes in Florence, you end up with 200,000 new gas guzzlers to contend with even if they don't drive more than 10 miles to work or recreation.

David Talbot

Friday, April 18, 2008

Bush to Carter: Go To Hell

Bush to Appoint Jimmy Carter Ambassador to Hell
By Scott Ott for ScrappleFace(2008-04-15)

As former President Jimmy Carter meets this week with Hamas leaders in the West Bank and Syria, sources at the State Department say President George Bush will soon honor Mr. Carter’s decades of freelance diplomacy by appointing him as the first U.S. Ambassador to Hell.

“Bush just wants Carter to go there,” said an unnamed State Department source, “and to set up an embassy, and try to be a good listener, open a communication channel, find common ground.”

Mr. Carter has said his discussions with prominent Hamas member Nasser al-Shaer today and with the group’s exiled leader Khaled Mashaal on Friday will seek to discover areas of flexibility on the part of the terrorist organization which exists to destroy Israel.

Mr. Bush reportedly chose Mr. Carter as U.S. Ambassador to Hell because it’s a post that will allow the aging former president “to just keep on doing what he’s been doing on the foreign relations front for many years.”

Monday, March 24, 2008

America, Then and Now

I received this from a neighbor CE, and asked for comments from a group of friends and former colleagues. Here's the article, comments follow:
------------------------------------------------
Everyone has a different opinion on the war and our current President. But this article probably makes sense to some of you who remember. Read it and give it some thought.

What a difference 60 years makes..!!! President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq. Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII.

It is not. Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders. Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not. And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter the people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty.

Americans put aside their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war. Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort. Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military. Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining. You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President.

Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made up beat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch even enlisted.

And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance and with prayers for our country and our troops! Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.
A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.

There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.

No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve. It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorrah and the Land of Oz.

We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.

We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause...Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits.

So...we either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing. America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall.

Comment 1: By KL.....
I couldnt agree more David. Our country has become fat and lazy. 911 woke them up a little, but it was no time till they went back to sleep. God help us if they dont wake up soon. This war will never be over, and we need to be the ones that choose the field of battle, if we dont, they will.Communism is Micky Mouse compared to Islam. I have read their "devils book", and there is no compromise with them. My opinion.....k

Comment 2: By.....JT
When we went to war against Japan on December 8, 1941, it was in response to their attack against the U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, then a territory of the United States. This was a direct attack on our own naval facility, where American lives were lost, not to mention something like a third of our entire navy materiel. There was no question about who had attacked us and that it was real war.

When the United States went to war against Iraq, some people thought it was in retaliation against the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the twin towers in New York City. However, all but four of the terrorists who attacked on that day were not Iraqi's. They were Saudi Arabians! Why in the world do we wage war against a nation against whom we had practically no beef?

Then, when people began to question the president's judgement, he said the war was because the Iraqi's had weapons of mass destruction. We found that not to be true as well. Iraq is not an oil trading partner of the United States. So, I ask again...why are we sending our young people to Iraq to fight and lose their lives there - nearly 4,000 to date?

I do not have the answer to that question, unless the answer is to devastate a generation of our youth or to waste vast sums of our money. Oh, the next comment we hear is that Osama Bin Laden is hiding in Iraq. Our soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan in order to find Osama there. As far as terrorist training bases, why would we attack Iraq when Russia, Syria and Romania are far more important players in that game?

The American people are not hearing the full truth. We need to bring our troops home. When a real enemy emerges, we need to deal with him at that time. Until then, we need to defend our own borders, support our troops, train them, rebuild our defenses and defend our country. It is not the business of the United States to make war around the world for everyone else.

Bless our troops. They have given unselfishly. Let us honor their bravery.

My response to JT......
Thank you for the reply and for your comments. Very thought provoking and very well written. Your list of countries providing training bases for terrorists could also include some countries in South and Central America. Here in our house we are also confused by the administrations pursuit of relations with China, North Korea, and Vietnam and yet we continue to ignore Cuba. At this point in history, Cuba today poses about as much a military threat to the United States as Andorra, Luxemburg, or Vatican City.

While I have serious concerns about the withdrawal of troops from Iraq right away, I agree that we are in a situation that we cannot possibly win. How we extricate our forces without a major civil war is going to take a great deal of finesse that is not readily apparent in this administration.

As for the number of soldiers killed in Iraq, more than 10 times that number of civilians are murdered here in the United States every year. Is that a rationale for remaining in in Iraq? No? I worry more about the flooded VA system, the devastation by the mismanagement our Reserves and National Guard forces, and fiscal mismanagement of military appropriations for the war.

The point of the article was to describe the differences in public and press attitudes between the 1940's and today. So far no one has mentioned how much opposition there was to our entry into WWII here in this country in the late 1930's and 1940's. My impression is that the article was not accurate, but the speed of news and the access to media is what is truely different today. In 1944, it took a long time to get an article from the front lines to the front page. Today, if a camel farts in Afghanistan, it's on You Tube in 30 minutes, in an email in 5 minutes, and around the world at the speed of light. (Sorry, I don't mean to be crude.)

Comment 3: By...........BW
My take on this is: a huge part of the problem with those not involved in the fight can go about their daily activities. No one sacrifices like it says below but more important, we’ve got all these fucking people that get everything for nothing, no contribution, effort to work-nothing. As long as we keep doling it out, they’re going to have their hands out.
BW

Comment 4: By.....JF
As the author says ......."There were a lot of things different back then."

For reasons, too many to list, many Americans have become very scheptical of their politicians, the President included, and therefore find it hard to believe all that they are told by them. The same thing goes for our media. I agree with the idea that we're being forced to confront fanatic Islamists, but I think it's harder for most people to see this group of people spread around the world as our "mortal enemies" versus the relatively localized Hitler and his Nazis or Tojo and his Japs and the atrocities they performed on a daily basis until they were defeated.

Comment 5: By.....BQ
Absolutely dead on—and heavy on the dead—the fear I have is that like your people, during hitlers rise, the majority of Americans have a belief that “it will all be ok”-“god wouldn’t let this happen” We need to be reminded by to 10s of millions who were slaughtered in NON-WAR action that “Man’s Inhumanity To Man” can never be underestimated when it comes to religion or race--bq

Additional Comments by......JT
I'm sorry to sound off on you. I just get really upset when I know 4,000 of our young folks have given their lives for a cause most of us probably don't understand.

Yes, you do bring up a good thought regarding U S relations with all the asian communist countries but not recognition of Cuba. Our congressman wants to recognize Cuba, but there seems to be a lot of Washington opposition for some reason. No clue from me about why, as I am also mystified........

I am aware that during 1938, 1939, and 1940 there was much anti-war sentiment in the United States not to become involved in Europe's business. The people really believed Woodrow Wilson's WWI would be "the war to end all wars" as he promised them. I have read many, many articles telling about how Roosevelt had promised Winston Churchill that the United States would enter the European theatre of the war but he needed a really good excuse as the people didn't support it. He created a "situation" with the Japanese through trade restrictions which, as history showed, culminated in their retaliation.

Communications are a true wonder, aren't they? You are right about the camel. Do you remember when having a telephone was a luxury?

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Was Moses High On Drugs

The following is my letter to the editor of the Jewish New of Phoenix, following publication of an article on Moses.

Dear Editor,

The article you printed in the March 7th edition under World Roundup, entitled “Was Moses High On Sinai?”, is a piece of complete fiction and totally flawed research. Why did you feel this article was worthy of your attention, let alone publication as “news”.

As my spiritual advisor, Rabbi Laibel Blotner (Chabad Mesa) asks the question, “Why not just say Moses did not exist?”

My PIT mentor, called his research flawed, the work of an ignoramus.

Rabbi Yuval Sherlow told Israel Radio: “The Bible is trying to convey a very profound event. We have to fear not for the fate of the biblical Moses, but for the fate of Science.”

Why not deny all the miracles HaShem demonstrated in Egypt and the 40 years in the desert, the parting of the sea, manna, and the miracle of the spring water? Why target the most significant leader in Jewish history?

Does this professor think all 611,000 witnesses present at Sinai were also on drugs? He paints a picture of some biblical Woodstock with every Hebrew man over 20 years old, stoned and seeing light after ingesting substances found in two plants in the Sinai Desert. After all, if Moses was on drugs all the males gathered would have to have been intoxicated as well, or they would have repudiated Moses accounts.

What you did not print was the following line from the article in “Time and Mind.” Shannon writes that he has, “partaken of the …brew about 160 times in various localities and contexts. On such occasions, one often feels that in seeing the light, one is encountering the ground of all Being….many identify this power as G_d, Shannon says.”

Do you know what you call a researcher who admits to taking hallucinogenic drugs 160 times? We call that person a drug addict. How nice that he’s teaching our children in Jerusalem. And how ignorant of you to give him the exposure he craves for his ridiculous “Research.”