Ruminations

Have been spending time, trying to understand what I consider irrational opponents (if that isn't self defeating; understanding the irrational) ... namely, the Islamofascists. Reading the Koran and Hadith, I have come to the conclusion that they (and their Wahabist enablers) are the logical conclusion to the teachings of Mohammed.

In all of my years (49), I have never been exposed to a more self-contradictory, illogical and bigoted belief system than Islam. The "Religion of Peace" argument is a fallacy. The Islamist, if true to his faith, must fight against modernity and western civilization ... the creed demands it. As I have stated numerous times, there has been no era of "Reformation" in the Moslem world. It is as if we still lived during the period of the divine right of kings and the inquisition ... Galileo under house arrest and the Sun circling the Earth.

Fortunately, we of the West survived our Reformation. The Age of Reason and Enlightment, that period when we began to develop our tolerance of "the 0ther" (religious/national/racial) was quickly followed by the Industrial and Post-Industrial ages, wherein the West became predominant and the East fell from its glory to become what it is today ... incapable of producing societies wherein individual liberty and the rule of law are the keystones. All you have to do is see how women (who must be roughly 50% of any viable culture) are treated (mistreated) in Moslem societies to understand what failures any state that is based on an Islamic code must be. Sad.

Sad but dangerous. In the 21st century individuals, let alone eschatological regimes, can come into the possession of horrendous tools of death. Therefore, the West must stay true to itself and deny any expansion of the Islamic worldview. That Muslims can be productive members of a society goes without saying, however, each individual, Moslem or non-Moslem, must buy into the social compact which means, for lack of better words, to each their own. No obligatory beliefs, no obligatory actions (save those that are demanded in a law abiding society) and acceptance of the the most common value of all "... do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

My study of late has not filled me with great confidence that a democratic, pluralistic society is possible in a predominantly Muslim country, but, then again, there is Turkey. It is possible, but then the question becomes, must you have an "Ataturk" to build such a society?

Enemy extremists (we'll just call them what they are; "terrorist cowards") open fire, with automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenades, on a girls school in a small Afghani village and are driven off by village residents ... open FIRE on a GIRLS school!!!

I know, I know, no culture is better than another and, in the Islamist's culture, girls/women are considered second class (third ... fourth ... no class?) "citizens " only good for procreation. Kinda puts that "no culture is better than another" bromide into perspective, eh?

Oh, and by the way, like scum, these "enemy extremists" (read terrorist cowards) are hard to be rid of, but an SOS pad and a little elbow grease does for scum ... firepower and courage will do for these gutless bas*^#ds!!

Check this out, Baby!

My Mother always said; "if you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all." Well, sorry Mom.

Eleanor Clift is an idiot!

I know, rather harsh, but when the shoe fits ...

"President Bush has this annoying tendency of enlarging problems, thinking that makes him a bold and visionary leader. An ordinary ceasefire that stops people from killing each other isn’t good enough for Bush and his diplomatic automaton, Condoleezza Rice, who sees the violence in Lebanon and Iraq as the “birth pangs of a new Middle East.”

Yeah, that Bush guy is an idiot. I mean, following the Yom Kippur war, those "ordinary ceasefires" have led to over three decades of peace and love ... maybe NOT! Oh, and let's just ruminate over the phrase, "diplomatic automaton." Automaton: NOUN:
Inflected forms: pl. au·tom·a·tons or au·tom·a·ta (-t)1. A self-operating machine or mechanism, especially a robot. 2. One that behaves or responds in a mechanical way.
Hmmm, let's see, the President has had a strategy towards Iran that was based on multi-lateral negotiations regarding their nuclear program. Well, in recent months, Secretary Rice has changed the plan and offered Iran a very sweet deal without multi-party concurrance. Agree with her plan or not, it's definitely not the act of a robot following its master's wishes. And yeah, the last sentence is what I meant ... Ms. Clift makes her living with the English language and is definitely aware of what using the term "automaton" alludes to.

"Secretary of State Rice is holding out for “a sustainable ceasefire,” which reminds me of the old Gershwin tune, “Nice Work If You Can Get It.” A grand bargain that can last into the future is a laudable goal but well out of reach for an administration that is weakened and isolated on the world stage. Why not settle for what every American government has done until this one? Stop the fighting first and then resolve the conflict as best you can..."(italics mine).

Why not ... well, here's why not Eleanor, hundreds and thousands of innocents have been brutally murdered because the ceasefires (what a joke) has been settled for, but the conflict has NEVER BEEN RESOLVED. Resolved means ended with both sides agreeing to the conclusion. Does the term Intifada mean anything to you? Oh, and as far as "resolution" goes, let's look at UN resolution 1559. You remember, the one where Israel was guaranteed that, if they retreated from Southern Lebanon, the UN would disarm Hezbollah and the safety of northern Israel was assured. That worked out well, now didn't it Eleanor?

" Living from crisis to crisis is no fun, but it’s better than the alternative of maimed children, hundreds of thousands of displaced Lebanese refugees and a million terrified northern Israelis confined to bomb shelters..."

Eleanor, does the phrase "cause and effect" mean anything to you? The reason the mid-east has experienced crisis after crisis (the most recent being just the latest installment) AND maimed children AND Israelis (Arabs too) confined to bomb shelters is, once again, because the Israelis have been forced to settle for an expedient, "feel good" continuance of the status quo.

"I spent the past week at a retreat in Abiquiu, N.M., called Ghost Ranch...it is a place to come for contemplation and spiritual rebirth. “Welcome to liberal Presbyterian heaven,” a gray-haired volunteer said as I checked in for my room assignment...I was there to participate in a seminar called “Discerning the Signs of the Times,” and much of our discussion centered on the Middle East. A fellow presenter, Dale Bishop, taught Iranian studies at Columbia University...He spent much of his time reminding us of Lebanon’s bloody history and how Iraq seems destined to go down the same path...The Lebanese continued to fight it out without U.S. forces, an outcome Bishop believes will eventually happen in Iraq. “And it’s not going to be pretty,” he says. “We walked into a huge mess, and we’re not going to achieve a military victory—and our pride prevents us from just leaving. We have to cover it over …” Here he paused a bit mischievously, mindful of his audience. “Maybe another aircraft carrier appearance saying ‘It’s over. We won. Goodbye’.” If making problems bigger doesn’t work, there’s always the option of walking away. Either way, it’s a new Middle East that’s being born, and it’s Bush’s baby."

Ah yes, a retreat for contemplation and spiritual rebirth in liberal heaven is just the place to find answers for living from crisis to crisis and maimed babies. Unfortunaely, a plan to resolve the situation isn't offered, no mention of the possibility of changing the paradigm. In fact, only an idiot like President Bush would think it could be done. There's only the choice of making the situation worse or abandoning our allies.

"... The Bush Doctrine in the Israeli-Hizbullah conflict is an extension of the theory applied in Iraq: that anything is better than the status quo. Bush’s worldview emanates from a childish need to do everything different from his predecessors. He operates from a gut belief that if he dares to reshuffle the deck in the Middle East, the result will be better than the hand American presidents traditionally play..."

Ah, not only an idiot, but an idiot with childish needs. Since he's stupid child, he can't base his policies on well thought out analysis, it has to be a "gut belief that if he dares reshuffle the deck in the Middle East, the result will be better than the hand American presidents traditionally play." Well, since the hand American presidents traditionally play have led directly to the past few decades of turmoil and death in the mid-east, maybe we should laud a president who dares great things.

Eleanor Clift is an idiot ... and an arrogant, spiteful, small woman to boot!

Sorry, Mom.

Immigration reform is the new political hot potato and as usual, only one side of the equation is being addressed. James Thayer has an enlightening article which boils down to a few points:
1. Corruption has destroyed the possibility of a growing entrepreneurial economy in Mexico.
2. Mexico is a disfunctional society where there is no opportunity for the common man to better his station in life.
3. These things being true, it makes sense for a person (usually young and probably illiterate) to try his luck in the US.

"... AS AMERICANS DEBATE illegal immigration, we tend to focus on the magnet that is the United States. We readily understand why people want to come here. But the pull of America is only half of the equation. The push of Mexico is the other half.
It is with good reason that Mexicans flee their own country.
We have two neighbors, of course. Our friends to the north happily export hockey players, timber, and Molson. The only Canadians waiting in line to get into the United States are seniors on crutches coming here for new hips. Canada "abounds in oil, natural gas, gold, silver, beaches, seafood, water, historic treasures, museums, industrial centers, and wonderful people."
Wait. That's College of William & Mary Professor George Grayson's description of Mexico, not Canada. Mexico has the same advantages Canada has. Why, then, does Canada work, while Mexico is so broken that its citizens flee en masse?..."

"... Corruption grinds away at Mexican business, and so do layers of government regulation, often promoted in the guise of nationalism. Foreigners cannot own property in Mexico within 100 kilometers of the border or 50 kilometers of the coast. To register the purchase of property takes, on average, five steps and 74 days. Mexican law limits foreign investment in certain industries, such as telecommunication, and sets the ratio of foreign-to-Mexican employees in foreign companies doing business in Mexico. Foreign money cannot be put into the electricity or petroleum industries. To start a business involves nine separate procedures and takes 58 days..."

"... These and an ocean of other regulations make doing business in Mexico complex, slow, and risky. The World Bank lists Mexico as 73rd out of 155 countries in ease of doing business (Canada is first), 125th in the ease of hiring and firing workers, and 125th in the ability to protect investors.
For much of the world, education and a job are paths to advancement. Not so for most Mexicans. Twenty-nine percent of Mexican youth don't finish high school. Half of all Mexican 15-year-olds are illiterate or only semi-literate. Mexico spends only $1,415 per year on students in elementary and secondary schools. (America spends $7,397 per student.) Professor Grayson says that "corruption, cronyism, crookedness, and feather-bedding suffuse the 1.3-million member" teacher's union..."

"... New jobs in Mexico tend to be in the sidewalk economy, where entrepreneurs can earn only a meager living selling CDs or phone cards or tomatoes. Marla Dickerson in the Los Angeles Times reports that "as many as half the nation's workers eke out a living in subsistence jobs such as street hawkers and day laborers because there is nothing for them in the legitimate economy." These folks usually work off-the-books, not paying business or income taxes. Dickerson points out that between 2000 and 2003 the Mexican sidewalk economy grew by 40 percent, whereas no new jobs were created in the formal economy. But, of course, the vendors do make payments: to the corrupt police who make their rounds..."

Ruminating Here - I am in favor of tightening border security and deporting those illegals who commit crimes in the US. Let's say that this comes to pass, what happens then?

IMHO, very soon after the "safety valve" of illegal immagration to the US is cut off, we will see Mexico in a crisis situation. The money that the millions of illegals send back to Mexico disappears, causing broad based economic hardshp. Countless young men, untrained, illiterate and unwanted, are now trapped in a situation where there is no hope, so crime and social unrest spiral out of control. The corrupt government (and police), which has been "exporting" their problems north are now incapable of controlling the situation. In such a situation, two scenarios seem the most likely.

In some instances in history, such a volatile environment breeds the national demagogue, the "man on a white horse" who promises a better life if the people follow him in "the revolution" and abide by his plan (fascist, national socialist, communist, or some variant thereof ... anyone remember the French Revolution with it's Reign of Terror, or perhaps Pol Pot?). Invariably, this spells disaster for the countries citizens and in most cases its neighbors as well. In other instances, the nation disintegrates into two or more smaller nations, based on racial, ethnic, religious or geographic lines (India, Yugoslavia and Czecho-Slovakia come to mind). While not usually as dangerous for the new countries' neighbors, it can spell disaster for the citizens of the new states and if not, is still always followed by a period of instability and insecurity. And, in either instance, the government/strongman or one of the new governments could ally themselves with such unsavory characters as Fidel Castro or his pupil, Venezuala'a Hugo Chavez.

The only hope for a smoother transition once we, the US, become serious about border security and illegal immigration, is to advise and assist Mexico in immediately changing the environment of corruption and it's laws on foreign investment, privatization and deregulation of its industries and investing heavily in education and worker training. This seems highly unlikely considering Mexico's seventy plus year history as a dysfunctional society, so we may be in for a number of years/decades of turmoil along our southern border.

Check this out, Baby!

I voted for President George W. Bush in both elections, not because we are of one mind (I disagree with a number of his policy decision), but because I was (and am) convinced he is the best man for the job and IMHO he has proven himself to be a man of character, determination, and yes, intelligence. Opposed to my point of view, we have that those stricken with BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), such as Howard Dean and the denizens of Daily Kos, Democratic Underground and Moveon.org., who are convinced President Bush is the embodiment of all that is evil. To act as a counterweight to their position, let me share a very interesting and perceptive article by Ronald Kessler, a former reporter for the Boston Herald, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times bestselling author. While one article will not end the debate, it contains numerous anecdotes that give insight into the kind of man we have residing in the White House. Here are a few money shots:

" ...Bush's refusal to exploit his personal life has meant that the public never glimpses what he is really like. When Bush invited his Yale class of 1968 to a reunion at the White House in May 2003, seven of his Yale friends and their wives stayed overnight at the White House. The guests illustrated the diversity of Bush's friends. One of them, lawyer Roland W. Betts, originally was a Democrat who married Lois Phifer, an African-American teacher Betts met when he was an assistant principal at a public school in central Harlem. Donald Etra, an Orthodox Jew, is a liberal Democrat and lawyer in Los Angeles who opposes many of the provisions of the Patriot Act. Another overnight guest, Muhammed Saleh, a Timex vice president, is a Muslem who was born in Jordan.
If Bill Clinton had hosted such a diverse group of friends as overnight guests, he would have called a prime time press conference. Clinton never failed to take the opportunity to parade his friend Vernon Jordan before the TV cameras. But Bush considers his private life private. He detests the idea of exploiting his friendships or private moments for political advantage. So the identities of his overnight guests — along with other vignettes that could be used to advantage—never appear in the media.
Those vignettes include touching or uplifting moments in the Oval Office. Susan Buckland, the associate director of the White House's Domestic Policy Council in charge of disability issues, is deaf. When she briefs the president, she reads his lips. The Clinton White House would have called in the press for a photo-op every time Buckland briefed the president. Yet again, the Bush White House has never told the media about her..."

" ...Bush's attitude goes back to the fact that, in many ways, he is an anti-politician. He did not seek office to win popularity or Chris Matthews' approval. He ran to achieve long-term fundamental change that would leave the country and the world a better, safer place. Bush is not particularly interested in his place in history either. Like any good CEO, he simply wants results. He views challenges as opportunities. And he is aware of how transitory opinion polls can be. When Harry Truman left office, his approval rating stood at 25 percent. Yet today, because of his firm approach to national security, Truman — whom the press portrayed as a simpleton — is viewed as one of the great presidents..."

As I posted before, agree or disagree with the man, but it's really hard not to like him.

Check this out, Baby!

As I have stated before, the biggest reason that Muslim societies trail the West so badly in wealth creation, technical innovation, the rule of law, personal liberty & etc. ... you know, developing modern societies ... is that there is no instance of a period akin to the West's "Reformation." There is still no tolerance between followers of different sects (denominations?), like the schism between Sunni and Shia, and each of those and the Sufi, nor is their tolerance/acceptance of any other religious teaching. Also, Muslim's do not see the nation state as above, or even co-equal, to the religion, a viewpoint we in the West must thank Henry VIII for. Well, it was reported today what may be a first, small step toward moderation.

Iraq's Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a Shia and their most senior and respected Imam, has issued a Fatwa stating that; "... all Muslims must respect the laws of their new countries and not commit any acts that would put anyone in danger..." Now I know this falls far short of the seventeen points nailed to the church door by Martin Luther, but let's all hope it is an example of Islam beginning to progress beyond the seventh century.

Check this out, Baby!

And now, the plot thickens:

"Baghdad, Jun. 13 – Some 50 Iranians along with an Iranian security forces commander have been arrested by Iraq’s security forces in the central province of Diyala, an Iraqi television channel reported.

"The arrests were made during a raid jointly by American and Iraqi forces late Sunday in the town of Baquba, 65 kilometres north of the capital, the Salahuddin television station reported.Those arrested were believed to be behind a spate of kidnappings and murders in an effort to further strain ethnic tensions in Iraq..."

Let's see here now ... 50 Iranian terrorists were captured near the town that was being used by Al Qaedh in Iraq as a major staging point and meeting place before their leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had his fatal run in with 2 500 lbs precision guided bombs. Hmmm ... our Mid-eastern and Islamic experts have told us, over and over again, that a follower of the Wahhabist sect of Sunni Islam (Zarqawi) would NEVER work with followers of the Shia sect (the Iranians). Well, 50 Shia are captured on Sunni turf during raids following Zarqawi's death and those raids were based on information gathered at the bombing site. Maybe our "experts" don't know as much as we pay them to know ... John Cole, Noam Chomsky, et al?

Anyhoo, I don't think I want to be one of those fifty:

"... arrested by Iraq's security forces ... Those arrested were believed to be behind a spate of kidnappings and murders in an effort to further strain ethnic tensions in Iraq..."

I get the feeling they'll be begging for transfer to Abu Ghraib or Guantanemo or anyplace where they are in the "Great Satan's" custody here shortly.

Check this out, Baby!

Good news from Iraq:

"Iraqi leaders will announce the makeup of the country's new government this weekend, then turn to the task of running a country increasingly divided along ethnic and religious lines.
After months of wrangling, those leaders say they have come up with a system that will help develop consensus on critical issues..."

Well within the timeframe yours truly mentioned previously. Let us all hope the "sausage making" that is politics begins in earnest this weekend.

Check This Out, Baby!