THE MIDGET BRAIN

THE MIDGET BRAIN
Ahmadinajad, the Midget Brain political leader of Iran, has made a variety of scurrilous statements about Israel, the Jews, and the Holocaust. He proposes the destruction of the State of Israel, a holocaust for the Jewish People, and the denial of a major historical event that was set in motion by an equally midget brained national political leader, Adolf Hitler.
The Jewish People survived the Holocaust and created the modern State of Israel. Over the millennia of its existence, this People has contributed to the advancement of the human race. They have shown the way of morality, the equality of all people - including that of women, legal systems, medical advancement throughout their history, science and the arts, literature, and creativity across the spectrum of human endeavor. Today, despite their small number compared to other nations and ethnic groups, they have won more Nobel Prizes, suffered the lowest losses in the flattened world economy, have created more uses for electronic devices, hold more seats on the New York Stock exchange than most of the world’s nations, and, Midget Brain, have one of the most advanced and capable well-trained and well-equipped armies of the world.
Those who hold this Iranian midget-minded monster in high esteem should provide him with warnings about his threats against the Jewish People. Today, after having suffered the tragedy of near extinction in Europe, and after fighting and winning against overwhelming odds in the face of four wars of extinction by the combined armies of the Muslim world, and after suffering continued border attacks supported by surrounding Muslim nations and wreaking havoc and destruction on those attacking nations, Israel has provided sufficient warning to all its war-like enemies that they must beware of the outcome of attacks on the Jewish Nation. The history of the David and Goliath conflict should provide the necessary paradigm for today’s antagonists.
“So David volunteered to fight Goliath. It took some persuasion, but King Saul finally agreed to let David fight against the giant. Dressed in his simple tunic, carrying his shepherd's staff, slingshot and a pouch full of stones, David approached Goliath. The giant cursed at him, hurling threats and insults.
David said to the Philistine, "You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the Lord Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied ... today I will give the carcasses of the Philistine army to the birds of the air ... and the whole world will know that there is a God in Israel ... it is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves; for the battle is the Lord's, and he will give all of you into our hands."
As Goliath moved in for the kill, David reached into his bag and slung one of his stones at Goliath's head. Finding a hole in the armor, the stone sank into the giant's forehead and he fell face down on the ground. David then took Goliath's sword, killed him and then cut off his head. When the Philistines saw that their hero was dead, they turned and ran. So the Israelites pursued, chasing and killing them and plundering their camp. Israel today has a “pouch of stones” in readiness.

Jerusalem Artichoke: Yes in My Backyard (YIMBY)

Jerusalem Artichoke: Yes in My Backyard (YIMBY)

WELCOME TO THE LAND OF THE THINKER WRITER PROTAGONIST.

I'll address two issues. The Holocaust was a seminal event in Jewish/Israeli history no less than Moses talking with God on Mount Sinai or Abrham's journey to Mount Moriah. That event is much more than what you see and describe, and certainly more impactful for the generations whose lives were touched by it. Yet equally important for the narrative of our people as its history unfolds today in the furnaces, the crematoria if you will, of conflicts designed to destroy us.

Dealing with the life you chose to lead and the spot in which you chose to lead it, mandates an awareness of the impact that you have on the future, not only of your small family, but on the future of your People and the Palestinian People. I look forward to how you will address the conflict as it affects your daily life and the lives of those around you; Jew and Arab.

Write AND PUBLISH!

Nachum - November 14, 2009

The World has Two Classes

The world, your world, has two classes; the Rich and Powerful, and The Rest of Us. If you don't know which class you belong to, you are in "The Rest of Us."

Politically, if you are in the leadership grouping of any government other than a dictatorship, you are The Rest of Us.
Militarily, if you are in any rank but not the dictator, you are The Rest of Us.
Religiously, if you are any level including the top rank of your religious structure, you are The Rest of Us.
Artistically, no matter how high you are in your field or how wealthy and well-known you are, you are The Rest of Us.
Professionally, no matter how high in your field or how wealthy and well-known you are, you are The Rest of Us.
Financially and industrially, if you do not know what class you are in, you are The Rest of Us.
If you are employed by the Rich and Powerful, you are The Rest of Us.

If your world is not connected to the whole world, you may be the Rich and Powerful, but not for long if your world has anything worth acquiring by the whole world's Rich and Powerful.

The Rich and Powerful eat at the table. The Rest of Us eat under the table, and then only the crumbs, the left-overs, the tough parts, the small or burnt portions. The Rest of Us fight each other for whatever is under the table. The Rest of Us kill each other for whatever is under the table - often in the belief that we will be rewarded with a place at the table. That almost never happens, and if it does, it is only temporary.

The Rich and Powerful travel apart from The Rest of Us. They vacation apart from The Rest of Us. They belong to clubs closed The Rest of Us. They know each other and help each other. They belong to families that have been known for generations. They belong to families that have known each other for generations. Money is not a key into the world of the Rich and Powerful. Vast money may be forged into a key, but not always.

The Rich and Powerful need The Rest of Us. The Rest of Us do not need the Rich and Powerful. More correctly, we do not need the Rich and Powerful to exploit and enslave The Rest of Us. But The Rest of Us must learn how to undo the burden of exploitation and slavery.

How? By rejecting religion, patriotism, unequalism and inequality, and by teaching and learning the need for self -fulfillment to the extent of each individual's capability, and cooperative functioning and sharing.

WHEN WILL PEACE COME?

WHEN WILL PEACE COME TO THE MIDDLE EAST?

So long as the Arab/Muslim world continues to show death-dealing animosity to Israel's existence, Israel will simply continue to prepare itself for war. When the bombs stop falling on Israel, when the Saudi text-books that show Israel's destruction as a good thing to young Arab minds, when the oligarchies of the Arab world show a willingness to normalize relations with Israel, when every Muslim and Arab terrorist organization in existence ceases its active war against the Jews and Israel, when the new nuclear-powered Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, ceases his denial of the Holocaust to loud applause by the Muslim world, and when 85% of the Palestinians cease to wish for, work for, pray for, the destruction of Israel and death to the Jews, peace will come.

HISTORY versus TRUTH

The time frame of history begins with pictures on the walls of caves and ends at today's newspaper and website writings and pictures. Oral history, however close to the truth of the past it may be, relies on the vagaries of memories and limited presentations to small audiences.

The need for written records matched the growth of settled populations and competition fostered by accumulation of wealth. Mercantilism and religion joined forces to increase their control over populations and wealth. Somehow, the history of financial dealings and transactions, and the word of God, became entwined. The leaders of both these forces relied on the past for their present power; the one for stories of success and the other for stories of communication with God.

Quite obviously, conflicting needs led to conflicting accounts of past events and transactions. The very definition of truth became fungible. The statements of high priests were the ineffable truth. The wealthy and powerful, by force of position created the truth. Thus, the history of events and transactions became subject to the needs and desires of the victors of wars or the people who paid the writers to create the history of events. Kings, Pharaohs, High Priests, Emperors, and their minions, dictated history and history thus became what was written.

If we call what was, the truth, and we call what was written, history, it becomes readily apparent that the two may not be identical. This can be demonstrated by two versions of the same event as depicted by winners and losers of wars.

As a starting point, Israel's "War of Independence" became Palestinian Arabs' "Naquba" or "Tragedy." Israel describes the exodus of the Palestinians as responsive to the demands of the invading Arab armies to clear the way for them to throw the Jews into the sea. The Palestinians assert that the Jews attacked the civilian population mercilessly, forcing them to flee into exile and leave their homes and homeland for the refugee camps in neighboring Arab countries. Both histories have become immutable truths. Both truths are immutable history to their believers.

More familiar but with fewer details, which is the "true history," the two-faced history of America's westward movement from the initial landings of Europeans on the east coast through the declarations of statehood of the western territories of what is now the United States of America or the tragic history of the slaughter and theft of their lands of Native Americans in that same period?

The lesson to be learned here is that the "Truth" and "History" of the same events may be at variance and this syndrome has been repeated from the beginning of recorded events and shall always be repeated. That history repeats itself is the nature of history. A corollary is that power uses history to guide its actions in the present and thus, contrary to Santayana's warning, knowingly repeats the lessons learned from history. With this in mind, a search for the facets of events as seen by those affecting them and affected by them is mandated, keeping in mind that the powerful, usually the "winners," write the histories though the truth might lie elsewhere.

RELIGIOUS SADISM

Adherents of many religions, from the flock to the shepherd, find satisfaction in cruelty to others ostensibly mandated by the commandments and the laws passed down to the present day practitioners of cruelty. From self-flagellation to torture of others in the fulfillment of their God’s requirements as they and the factotums of their faith dictate, cruelty and the infliction of pain fulfill their sense of piety and obeisance to their God.

The lash, the wheel, stoning, the long fall from the precipice and the fire at the stake, all fill the need for the infliction of unbearable pain and for the deep satisfaction that comes from observing and sharing in the rituals of one’s religion, however cruel.

From the days of Egyptian Pharaohs’ lash, through the Roman practice of feeding Christians to lions to the roaring approval of the coliseum’s crowds, to Torquemada’s re-education of recalcitrant non-believers and the burning of Joan of Arc at the stake to the immense approval of the supposedly more religious observers, cruelty and the infliction of severe and deadly pain were religious norms.

These early tortures served as tutorials for today’s Islamic practices to obtain adherence to Koranic requirements for modesty, abstinence, killing of Jews and Westerners, and obeisance to law as dictated by the Imams of the religion.

The early Hebrews substituted a lamb for their sacrificial offerings and ceased that act of cruelty with the second destruction of their temple and the destruction of temple worship. Such sacrifices acquired the name of “Sa-ir l’aza’zel,” “Emissary to Hell,” in recognition of the inhumanity of the act. And in precognition of events in 2008 and 2009, Hell was located in Gaza.

Apparently, civilization does not require the elimination of cruelty in religious practice for the so-called civilized world is mum in the face of an enormous variety of cruel and painful religious practices.

HOW THE WORLD WORKS

THE SYSTEMS AND FORMULAS OF THE WORLD

Have you ever thought about how the world works, that is, our world on the planet Earth? And did you ever think about how the world worked in the past, before telephones and airplanes, and before cars and trucks were invented? How did peoples and countries communicate with each other, if they did communicate with each other? What did they try to do to make their lives comfortable and how did they measure success in the world of ten thousand years ago and five thousand years ago? Who and how did what in the many different societies that existed over the millennia since mankind emerged from caves and started living in homes that they built on land that they owned and farmed, using tools that they made and materials that they pulled from the earth? And how were leaders chosen, if they were chosen? Who rose to the top and how did they rise to the top of their societies?

Our world generally operates within systems and uses formulas to achieve local successes. The systems are interconnected and the formulas are similar from nation to nation and from one international entity to another. The international connection enables trade for mutual benefit and the internal systems are designed to accommodate differences such as currency, language and cultures, economic level, and political establishments. Except in cases of rogue states or states that are in the process of violent change or collapsing, these statements hold true.

Natural resources like oil that are in huge universal demand and huge populations that provide low cost labor, skew the systems and formulas as much as internal warfare, regime change, and major natural disasters do over shorter time periods. The drive for power and wealth acquisition brings a measure of tranquility to international exchanges that benefit the elites in whatever combination of nations are engaged.

Internal systems and formulas are based on how wealth and allegiance are achieved. Variations between and within the systems reflect the nature of a nation’s wealth, history, government, culture, people, and often, religion. The history, language, natural resources, and geography of a nation are key determinants of wealth acquisition. A typical formula has multi-generational power continuation that regardless of huge disparities in wealth distribution, auger for economic stability. That power can be embedded in government or in royal symbolism or in religious unity within a country. Governments as a matter of course represent power elites that invest the money to obtain government sinecures for their lackeys. “What is good for General Motors is good for the country,” used to be considered instructions for government functioning. With General Motors teetering on bankruptcy at the end of 2008, the slogan requires a name change, perhaps to the more truthful and realistic, “What’s good for the wealthy and powerful, is good for the country.”

Success is measured in accumulation of wealth just as failure is measured in loss of wealth.

THE POWER OF PREJUDICE

Who ever thought that prejudice has power to change the world? It does. It is as powerful a mass human motivator as religion and belief, patriotism and nationalism, greed and need for wealth, exploration and exploitation for conquest and expansion, loyalty, obedience, and unquestioning respect for royalty and authority. They are all two-faced indoctrinated motivators of guiltless human behavior.

Prejudice, racism, and hatred of the “Other,” are taught to the young as a good, just as are religion and patriotism. The fruit of this education lies in the acceptance of heinous tasks as promotion of benefits for humanity. Crusading armies created and motivated to convert or kill accept their mission as holy. Rape, mayhem, and slaughter, destruction of whole societies, “spoils of war” and theft of land and property, are all accepted as the commission of beneficial acts for those who “belong” to the right and righteous nation, ethnicity, or religion.

This is not the world of early man. This is the world of the 21st century. Today is the time of the Pharaohs, the time of Torquemada and the Crusades and Nazi Germany. Today’s use of power is the same as the use of power throughout the history of Man. Wealth and weaponry clearly enable power to be exercised. Less clear is the harmful use of religion and patriotism to achieve the goal of wealth and power aggrandizement. And finally, it is most difficult to accept the teaching of prejudice as consciously or subconsciously intentional to achieve the same goal.

The destruction of Aztec and Mayan civilizations, the conquest of the natives of North America, the Nazi Holocaust and the Rape of Nanking, Cambodian torture and today’s slaughter in Darfur, along with large and small episodes of conquest and destruction of “Other” peoples and their societies through the centuries by warriors steeped in hatred.

Can we call this behavior primitive? Can we call it savagery? Can we call such behavior modern and civilized?

What People, what religious group has stated, “To save a single life is to save the whole world?” That People has been a primary target for destruction throughout its existence. It is today the single most abhorred People in the world. It is the People that has saved more lives and given life more meaning than any other group through the centuries of human existence. Yet it is powerless against the humongous power of the prejudice arrayed against it. It is the Jewish People.

To be or not to be, that is the question;
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing, end them. To die, to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to — 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life,
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch[1] and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.[2]
”

THE AHMADINEJAD MODEL

The historical combination of religious leaders and economic power elites traditionally has the economic forces in first or superior position of power within any given political/national system. The early pharoanic systems were models emulated through centuries wherein religious leaders assumed advisory roles to those in power. This most likely came about because of the need for warring capability only occasionally found combined in religious leaders. Early Jewish leaders from Moses to the Kings of Israel managed this duality of economic and military mastery together with a direct connection with God that enabled them to conduct the affairs of state with success.

The prevalent world model of governance has economic leaders backed by religious minions who agree to be supportive while staying out of their way in exchange for acceptance of and high regard for their sanctuaries, their mumbo-jumbo, and their connections with God who will be called upon to approve the works and deeds of the wealthy regardless of any negative impact on the masses. This holds true for the most primitive and backward societies to the most sophisticated, conditioned only on the requirement that the leader or leadership is non-religious and interested primarily in the retention of economic power.

Enter into the modern world by virtue of Iran’s apparent acquisition of nuclear capability, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He is neither a wealthy wielder of power in the society nor is he a religious leader or part of the religious hierarchy that controls Iran. So what is he? First of all he is deeply religious and adheres to the faith and its religious leaders without question. He has a doctorate in civil engineering and traffic transportation planning (whatever that means.) Therefore he is probably trusted by Ayatollahs to understand and explain to them the mechanics of the modern world. And, he is a political animal. He has held a variety of political positions, both appointed and elected, including being elected as mayor of Teheran; no small feat. He has joined religious/political/militaristic organizations throughout his career. Their support for him has been evident in this recent election to the presidency (as it was when initially elected.)

The controlled election of Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, establishes a new and modern model for power elite control of a society. He is the economic/financial/ military handmaiden of the religious powers of Iran. He is to the Ayatollah government of Iran, the corridor through which power flows to and from the power elites of the country. This reversal of control is unknown in any other relatively modern society in the world today. And it grows out of the power of religious fundamentalism in control of huge economic resources. This is the Ahadinejad Model for control of power and wealth.

Now we must wait to see how other states with powerful religious fundamentalist bodies deal with this model. We look at the conflict in Afghanistan between the government supported by the United States and the Taliban as a potential place for reversal. This is, after all, the goal of Al Quaida. Saudi Arabia may be the next big power in line to fall. There are other hot spots. Time will tell.

RELIGIOUS INFESTATION IN THE MUSLIM WORLD

As religions spread in the world because of the need for economic powers to control masses of people in ways other than war, the ascendancy of religion in the Muslim world created a monolithic human entity. And because the economic powers lost the battle for supremacy over this particular mass of people, the advances that economic activity bestowed on the rest of the world, were lost to the Muslim world.

Every sphere of human activity and creativity was controlled by and driven by religious hierarchies, intent on preservation of their power over their masses of people through the mumbo-jumbo of incantations and head-banging prayers. Today, we see that this religious infestation has caused and continues to cause the huge dichotomy, disconnect, and destructive tremors between the tectonic plates of the primitive religious world and the modern religious world.

Perhaps were there not mass communication devices such as radio, television, and computers, an absence of knowledge of the other, ignorance of the nature and quality of life on the other side of the divide, would have minimized the need for the Shamans of Islam to protect their hegemony over their people by educating them in the ways of human slaughter. Martyrdom would have been limited to the loonies of the religion.

But, what is, is. This is our world and we need to understand it out of our need to protect ourselves and our progeny. We have few tools available to us to combat the evils of religion, simply because our own power elites have exploited mankind’s need to believe in a higher power and instituted relatively benign religions among the masses, incorporating stolen value systems for educational purposes to keep the masses cowed and in their place.

Today, by force of arms, our societies try to keep the religious primitives at bay. But now, even the primitives have acquired weapons, including the most destructive kinds. And they are howling at the gates and the walls of our societies. And they have presented the world with a conundrum; the Ahmadinajad Model. Let’s see where it goes from here.

ISRAEL - YOU GO FIRST

Egypt’s President Mubarak is on the way to speak with Barack Obama about how to achieve peace in the Middle East. He and his advisers and their fellow Arab leaders across the entire Arab world are all agreed that Israel is the one holding up the peace process by its “occupation,” its refusal to negotiate the status of Jerusalem, and by its refusal to allow the return of refugees from the 1948 war.

I suppose if I were an Arab and a Muslim and if I was indoctrinated to believe that Israel was a rogue state created to salve the world’s conscience for an unproven holocaust in which millions of Jews were killed by Nazis, and that pariah state was created on land stolen from its inhabitants of thousands of years who were chased out by an Israeli army supported and funded by the Western world, it would not be hard for me to believe that Israel should agree to take the first step toward peace by agreeing in advance of negotiations to commit suicide.

However, if I were a student of Middle East history without a connection to the conflict, I could reasonably conclude that Israel has survived a continuous onslaught of annihilation by its neighbors pre-dating its announcement of nationhood. I would also know that Israel is the only democracy of the twenty-odd oligarchic states that surround it. I would also know that the Arab states are poverty-stricken and that Israel has one of the highest Gross Domestic Products in the world that leads to an unrivaled jealousy by neighboring populations that live in poverty, ignorance, religious superstition, poor health, political impotence, and little hope to share in their rulers’ wealth.

So, naturally, having little to offer in the way of achieving peace and knowing that peace has little to offer their populations in the way of achieving modernity, the Arab rulers wisely are now attempting to entice the United States into helping wipe out the only functioning modern democratic state in the region that presently sets a bad example for their down-trodden populations mired in religious sectarian class conflict.

I believe the wait for Israel to go first in offering to settle the conflict by allowing itself to be sliced into pieces will not be a pleasant one for the Arabs sitting in the hot sun waiting patiently for this to happen. Israel will not go first.

RACHEL RACHEL

THERE ARE TWO - OR MORE - SIDES TO EVERY STORY

As an Arab house was being demolished by the Israeli army (for being the house of a terrorist,) Rachel threw herself in front of the bulldozer performing the demolition.

Was she murdered by the bulldozer operator who, perhaps having seen her, could have stopped his machine in time not to harm her?

Did the operator not see her?

Was she intent on becoming a martyr?

Did she slip and fall unintentionally and was thereby crushed?

Did she think the operator would stop his machine before he reached her and therefore did not extricate herself in time?

Whatever. The sad fact is that a young woman was killed by a bulldozer operated by the Israeli army as it was demolishing a terrorist house.

Peace advocates and Arab sympathizers are using Rachel's death for propaganda purposes to forward and support their agendas, placing Israel in the harshest light possible for "murdering" her.

Many Israel supporters are actively opposed to using the incident to vilify Israel and have reacted vociferously to counter the peacenik/Arab attack. This contretemps has split the Jewish community in the United States into opposing camps after a showing of a film of the incident. On the one hand, the morality of Thou Shalt Not Murder is sticking out. And on the other, beating up on Israel at every opportunity by a substantial portion of the world does get tiresome and irksome to those who are close to supporting Israel, right or wrong, out of perceptions of Jewish persecution and anti-Semitism.

So, is there a "Right" and a "Wrong" side to this event. Yes, for sure, and it only depends upon whwre you stand and where your heart lies.

TRUISMS THAT ARE NOT!

TRUISMS THAT ARE NOT!

Part One

When I think about telling youngsters about the world as I see it, the appearance of commonly accepted beliefs more often than not is at variance with reality. That makes it difficult to convince or persuade inexperienced acolytes raised to believe the myths of their parents, teachers, scout leaders, preachers, and assorted mongers of platitudes, of this paradox. As examples; patriotism, belief in God, the value of hard work, and a variety of slogans and proverbs designed to lead masses to believe in behaviors potentially inimical to themselves yet beneficial to a small class of people.

The primary goal of this propaganda is an orderly society wherein the wealthy and powerful retain and enjoy their wealth and power and the lower classes are convinced of the correctness of their estate and their happy state in the society. Look at Great Britain and the rigidity of its classes that fill the minds of its people to this day. Look at India and its sects and China that modernly has recreated extreme class divisions accepted by its people with equanimity despite the “communist” names given to its classes.

Though a multitude of warnings against such naïveté exist in proverbs and quotations as are found in Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, it is rare to find a jaundiced eye amongst that class of people eager to find acceptance of peers, bosses, successful people, and elders and higher classes of all kinds built into the mores of the quiescent societies. Discontent with your place and the thought of re3volution are No No’s.

Though this appears to be a highly cynical view of the world, it more denotatively is skepticism. When ideas are presented as for the “common good,” serious investigation is called for. A study of the Ten Commandments is an excellent training ground for careful analysis of the goals of the creators of the document; an orderly society untrammeled by dissent and unperturbed by inequality. For such a study, the value of scientific proof immediately becomes apparent.

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are a second set of documents that lend themselves to this study of happy inequality. This despite the fact that
“All men are created equal” is proclaimed loudly. And so, slavery existed for hundreds of years before the proclamation and nearly a hundred years and a war after the proclamation.

The essence of “Truisms That Are Not” is to maintain stable rigid classified societies. The aim of this polemic is to introduce single class societies as humanistic, fair, and reasonable, as the path to a well ordered society of the peoples of the earth of the future. This will not happen without class warfare.

A SUCKER IS BORN EVERY MINUTE

A SUCKER IS BORN EVERY MINUTE

P.T. Barnum’s quote was never more apt than as evidence of the American People’s naivete about government-provided health care. The so called Health Care Debate is not a debate but rather a war that entails the outpouring of millions of dollars by health care insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, the American Medical Association and their associations and other for-profit leeches on the bodies of the sick for their assault on the Obama effort to provide health care for millions of uninsured and under-insured Americans. And the people, in their obvious gullibility, are being convinced that they will be better off in the hands of profit-making insurance companies than in the hands of a proven, effective, government-run health care delivery system such as Medi-Care.

Another famous quote that defines this criminal usage of their health care dollars by the rapacious insurance industry is this; “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American People.” There are many instances of proof of this assertion. However, looking at the activities by insurance companies in their blatant savage attack on a government-run single-payer health care system provides sad evidence that George Orwell was correct in turning Up to Down and Good to Bad in the moronic minds of masses of people. Fear is the poison being spread by connotative word mongers in the pay of the profiteers. SOCIALISM, LONG DELAY, FREEDOM TO CHOOSE, CANADA, and a host of pejoratives designed to spread misinformation and havoc in town-hall meetings across the country.

The only surprise in this debacle is the apparent total absence of preparedness by the Obama administration for this war. Simply looking at the destruction of Michael Moore’s epic presentation “Sicko” and of Michael Moore himself, red flags should have been flying. The Clinton insurance company-sabotaged attempt to enter this fray on behalf of the American People provide clear evidence of the capability of the health insurance industry to mount a devastating attack on what is so apparently a needed health care program for the people.

The outcome of the good and legitimate intentions of the government still hangs in the balance. But knowing that money talks and knowing of the malleability and the inability of the plain folk of America to defend themselves in the face of this propaganda onslaught, their final choice is highly questionable.

AN ORWELLIAN PIG - DICK CHENEY

AND AN ORWELLIAN IDIOT - GEORGE W. BUSH

George Orwell's epic classic, "1984," is a MUST READ for every American who can put down his or her beer can. For that matter, it's a must read for everyone who knows how to read.

Only then, will the reality of how the world operates become clear. Some readers may think of North Korea, Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, or other scamming countries. That's simply not enough. This great work depicts how power operates on a political level in ALL countries.

The expose' now taking place about the Bush/Cheney years in the White House is a clear description of power usurpation by monied elites. As this scabrous drama unfolds, the useless deaths of thousands of American soldiers and the repulsive nature of religious fundamentalism allied with the arms merchants of the world and the oil mogul states and companies driven by profit motives can only make the vomitous years of that American presidency bloodier and bloodier.

I hereby promise to purchase "1984" for anybody who requests it.

Send your request to: chum@meyerslink.com and give me your mailing address.

NEW YORK TIMES HEALTH CARE REPAIR

The New York Times editorial board is as obtuse about health care repair as the rest of the country’s citizens.

In its lead editorial on July 7, 2009 titled, “Financing Health Care Reform” that ran about twenty-four column inches, not a single mention was made of the insurance companies that are the prime culprits responsible for the existing health care mess.

Though the percentages vary from analyst to analyst, it is reasonable to state that the insurance companies suck approximately twenty-five cents out of every dollar spent on health care in the United States. In fighting this travesty, other legal and illegal money-sucking activities are committed by entities involved in providing health care of various kinds. The insurance companies and their fellow criminals, the pharmaceutical companies, are the reason that the United States tops the list for health care cost and is TWENTY-FOURTH IN THE WORLD in providing health care.

Everyone, including our president, talks about health care “coverage” and “insurance.” They do not address the core idea of health care DELIVERY.

And the insurance industry has convinced the American People that they for sure don't want government telling THEM who should treat them or telling THEM what they need in the way of health care. NO! The American People should want the INSURANCE INDUSTRY telling them what, when, and where, and especially IF they should get health care. The INSURANCE INDUSTRY WILL TAKE BETTER CARE OF THEM THAN THE GOVERNMENT!! HOO HA! Are the American People dopes and dupes, or what?

Health care is as essential for the population as roads and red lights. The government provides roads and red lights. No one complains. Let the government do its job of providing health care. Get the insurance companies to stop sucking from the teats of the health care provider industry. GET THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY OUT OF HEALTH CARE!!!

IRAN - JULY - 2009 - EXPECTATIONS AND PREDICTIONS

IRAN - JULY -2009 EXPECTATIONS AND PREDICTIONS

The news and the information coming out of Iran relating to the recent election create blaring warning signals for the world. The establishment of a militaristic theological state that benefits the military and theological establishments seems an ordered future for Iran. With the creation of atomic capability in this closed society, the world is threatened with an atomic catastrophe that will make Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem like firecrackers.

The first victim of this “new order” will be Israel, of course. Now desperately attempting to create a rocket response barrier to annihilation while also trying to convince the world of imminent danger to established order, Israel is in the position of Chicken Little running around claiming the heavens are falling because of the acorn that fell on her head. But Ehud Barack is no Chicken Little. The intelligence apparatus renowned for its high capability is sounding a reasonable alarm.

Yet, what can the world do? The effete United Nations has shown both its ineffectiveness in conflict situations and its bias against Israel that results from the preponderance of anti-Israel Arab and Muslim nations who vote anti-Israel knee-jerk resolutions ad infinitum. The sordid story of Palestinian victimhood at the hands of their Arab brethren who point to Israel as the source of their calamitous existence is expanded to tie the hands of the world peace body even when the very existence of their states and their peoples is threatened by this atomic threat.

Iran will have its way with the world, having learned well the lessons taught by that theatrical state, Korea. The difference appears to be that with all its pomposity and swagger, Korea recognizes that its geographical position has placed it at China’s and the world’s mercy. Iran believes that it possesses a magic formula of geographic and maritime location and oil in the ground that will someway impress rational nations and prevent them from intruding on its nefarious plans to “only” eradicate Israel as an example of its machismo, in defiance of civilized functioning.

I predict that Israel will be forced to act, as it did in 1967, preemptively, to assure its continued existence. In some bizarre way and for some inscrutable reason, the world is forcing it to do so without support. In addition, the world will turn on Israel for doing the world’s work.

The trigger that sends the bullet on its way will be the murder of Iranis who dared to challenge the military-theocratic complex.

ELENA BONNER SAKHAROV TALKS

HUMAN RIGHTS AND ISRAEL’S RIGHT TO LIFE

Elena Bonner, the widow of great scientist and dissident Andrei Sakharov and an outstanding human rights activist in her own right, is truly one of the heroes of the modern age. (It was my privilege to interview Bonner nearly two years ago for this article.) Yesterday, the 86-year-old grande dame of the Russian human rights movement spoke at the Oslo Freedom Forum. Her speech, of which Ms. Bonner sent me an English translation, is worth reproducing in full. Ms. Bonner is a woman of strong and outspoken opinions; agree or disagree, she is always worth hearing.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Friends,

In his invitation to this conference, the president of the forum, Thor Halvorssen, asked me to talk about my life, the suffering I have endured, and how I was able to bear it all. But today all that seems to me quite unnecessary.
So I will say only a few words about myself.
At the age of 14, I was left without my parents. My father was executed, my mother spent 18 years in prison and exile. My grandmother raised me and my younger brother. The poet Vladimir Kornilov, who suffered the same fate, wrote: “And it felt that in those years we had no mothers. We had grandmothers.” There were hundreds of thousands of such children. Ilya Ehrenburg called us “the strange orphans of 1937”.
Then came the war. My generation was cut off nearly at the roots by the war, but I was lucky. I came back from the war. I came back to an empty house. My grandmother had died of starvation in the siege of Leningrad . Then came a communal apartment, six half-hungry years of medical school, falling in love, two children, and the poverty of a Soviet doctor. But I was not alone in this. Everyone lived this way.
Then there was my dissident period followed by exile. But Andrei and I were together! And that was true happiness.
Today, summing up my life (at age 86, I try to sum up my life every day I am still alive), I can do so in three words. My life was typical, tragic, and beautiful. Whoever needs the details — read my two books, Alone Together and Mothers and Daughters. They have been translated into many languages. Read Sakharov’s Memoirs. It’s a pity his Diaries haven’t been translated; they were published in Russia in 2006. Apparently, the West isn’t interested in Sakharov right now.
The West isn’t very interested in Russia either, a country that no longer has real elections, independent courts, or freedom of the press. Russia is a country where journalists, human rights activists, and migrants are killed regularly, almost daily. And extreme corruption flourishes of a kind and extent that never existed earlier in Russia or anywhere else. So what do the Western mass media discuss mainly? Gas and oil — of which Russia has a lot. Energy is its only political trump card, and Russia uses it as an instrument of pressure and blackmail. And there’s another topic that never disappears from the newspapers — who rules Russia ? Putin or Medvedev? But what difference does it make, if Russia has completely lost the impulse for democratic development that we thought we saw in the early 1990s? Russia will remain the way it is now for decades, unless there is some violent upheaval.
During the years since the fall of the Berlin wall, the world has experienced incredible changes in an exceptionally short period. But has the world become better, or more prosperous for the six billion eight hundred million people who live on our small planet? No one can answer that question unambiguously, despite all the achievements of science and technology and that process which we customarily call “progress”. It seems to me that the world has become more alarming, more unpredictable, and more fragile. This alarm, unpredictability, and fragility are felt to some extent by all countries and all individuals. And civic and political life becomes more and more virtual, like a picture on a computer screen.
Even so, the picture of life, formed by television, newspaper, or radio remains the same — there is no end to the conferences, summits, forums, and competitions from beauty contests to sandwich eating ones. They say people are coming together — but in reality, they are growing apart.
And that isn’t because an economic depression suddenly burst forth, and swine flu to boot. This began on September 11, 2001. At first, anger and horror was provoked by the terrorists who knocked down the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and by their accomplices in London , Madrid and other cities, and by the shaheeds, suicide bombers who blew themselves up at public spaces like discotheques and wedding parties whose families were rewarded $25,000 each by Saddam Hussein. Later, Bush was blamed for everything, and as always, the Jews — that is, Israel . An example was the first Durban Conference, and the growth of anti-Semitism in Europe , noted several years ago in a speech by Romano Prodi. Then there was Durban-2; the main speaker was Ahmadinejad proposing to annihilate Israel .
So it is about Israel and the Jews that I will speak. And not only because I am Jewish, but above all because the Middle Eastern conflict since the end of World War II has been a platform for political games and gambling by the great powers, the Arab countries and individual politicians, striving, through the so-called “peace process,” to make a name for themselves, and perhaps win a Nobel Peace Prize. At one time, the Nobel Peace Prize was the highest moral award of our civilization. But after December 1994, when Yasir Arafat became one of the three new laureates, its ethical value was undermined. I haven’t always greeted each selection of the Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Storting with joy, but that one shocked me. And to this day, I cannot understand and accept the fact that Andrei Sakharov and Yasir Arafat, now posthumously, share membership in the club of Nobel laureates.
In many of Sakharov’s publications (in his books Progress, Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom and My Country and the World, in his articles, and in his interviews), Andrei Dmitrievich wrote and spoke about Israel . I have a collection of citations of his writing on this topic. If it were published in Norway , then many Norwegians would be surprised at how sharply their contemporary view of Israel differs from the view of Sakharov.
Here are several citations from Sakharov:
“ Israel has an indisputable right to exist.” “ Israel has a right to existence within safe borders.” “All the wars that Israel has waged have been just, forced upon it by the irresponsibility of Arab leaders.” “With all the money that has been invested in the problem of Palestinians, it would have been possible long ago to resettle them and provide them with good lives in Arab countries.”
Throughout the years of Israel ’s existence there has been war. Victorious wars, and also wars which Israel was not allowed to win. Each and every day — literally every day — there is the expectation of a terrorist act or a new war. We have seen the Oslo Peace Initiatives and the Camp-David Hand-shake and the Road-map and Land for Peace (there is not much land — from one side of Israel on a clear day you can see the other side with the naked eye).
Now, there is a new (actually, quite old) motif currently in fashion (in fact it’s an old one): “Two states for two peoples.” It sounds good. And there is no controversy in the peace-making Quartet, made up of the U.S. , the UN, the EU, and Russia (some great peace-maker, with its Che chen war and its Abkhazian-Ossetian provocation). The Quartet, and the Arab countries, and the Palestinian leaders (both Hamas and Fattah) put additional demands to Israel . I will speak only of one demand: that Israel take back the Palestinian refugees. And here a little history and demography are needed.
According to the official UN definition, those who have fled from violence and wars are considered refugees — but not their descendants who are born in another country. At one time the Palestinian refugees and the Jewish refugees from Arab countries were about equal in number — about 700,000 to 800,000. The newly-created state of Israel took in the Jews (about 600,000). They were officially recognized as refugees by UN Resolution 242, but not provided with any UN assistance. Palestinians, however, are considered refugees not only in the first generation, but in the second, third, and now even in the fourth generation. According to the UN Works and Relief Agency’s report, the number of registered Palestinian refugees has grown from 914,000 in 1950 to more than 4.6 million in 2008, and continues to rise due to natural population growth. All these people have the rights of Palestinian refugees and are eligible to receive humanitarian aid.
The entire population of Israel is about 7.5 million, among them about 2.5 million ethnic Arabs who call themselves Palestinians. Imagine Israel then, if another five million Arabs flood into it; Arabs would substantially outnumber the Jewish population. Thus created next to Israel will be a Palestinian state cleansed of Jews, because in addition to the demand that Palestinian refugees return to Israel , there is also the demand that Judea and Samaria be cleansed of Jews and turned over to Palestinians – while in Gaza today there is not a single Jew remaining.
The result is both strange and frigthening, and not because Israel will be actually destroyed – it’s a different time and different Jews. It is terrifying to see the short memory of the august peace-making Quartet, their leaders and their citizens if they let this happen. Because the plan “two states for two peoples” is the creation of one state, ethnically cleansed of Jews, and a second one with the potential to do the same thing. A Judenfrei Holy Land - the dream of Adolph Hitler come true at last. So think again, those who are still able, who has a fascist inside him today?
And another question that has been a thorn for me for a long time. It’s a question for my human rights colleagues. Why doesn’t the fate of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit trouble you in the same way as the fate of the Guantanamo prisoners?
You fought for and won the opportunity for the International Committee of the Red Cross, journalists, and lawyers to visit Guantanamo . You know prison conditions, the prisoners’ everyday routine, their food. You have met with prisoners subjected to torture. The result of your efforts has been a ban on torture and a law to close this prison. President Obama signed it in the first days of his coming to the White House. And although he, like President Bush before him, does not know what to do with the Guantanamo prisoners, there is hope that the new Administration will come up with something.
But during the two years Shalit has been held by terrorists, the world human rights community has done nothing for his release. Why? He is a wounded soldier, and fully falls under the protection of the Geneva Conventions. The Conventions say clearly that hostage-taking is prohibited, that representatives of the Red Cross must be allowed to see prisoners of war, especially wounded prisoners, and there is much else written in the Geneva Conventions about Shalit’s rights. The fact that representatives of the Quartet conduct negotiations with the people who are holding Shalit in an unknown location, in unknown conditions, vividly demonstrates their scorn of international rights documents and their total legal nihilism. Do human rights activists also fail to recall the fundamental international rights documents?
And yet I still think (and some will find this naïve) that the first tiny, but real step toward peace must become the release of Shalit. Release — not exchange for 1000 or 1,500 prisoners who are in Israeli prisons serving court sentences for real crimes.
Returning to my question of why human rights activists are silent, I can find no answer except that Shalit is an Israeli soldier, Shalit is a Jew. So again, it is conscious or unconscious anti-Semitism. Again, it is fascism.
Thirty-four years have passed since the day when I came to this city to represent my husband, Andrei Sakharov, at the 1975 Nobel Prize ceremony. I was in love with Norway then. The reception I received filled me with joy. Today, I feel Alarm and Hope (the title Sakharov used for his 1977 essay written at the request of the Nobel Committee).
Alarm because of the anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment growing throughout Europe and even further afield. And yet, I hope that countries, their leaders, and people everywhere will recall and adopt Sakharov’s ethical credo: “In the end, the moral choice turns out to be also the most pragmatic choice.”

RELIGION vs. MORALITY - IRAN - JUNE 2009

AN ELECTION WAR

Early in their founding eras, religions discovered an enemy in morality. In the ensuing wars between them, religious leaders, as all leaders attempt to do in time of war, found ways to undermine their enemies’ strengths. A monstrous strategy grew out of a simple military tactic; dress and speak like the enemy, infiltrate his ranks, discover what and where his weapons are and what his battle plans are, and by playing his game and taking over his assets, pretend to be him and destroy him. Thus, religion co-opted morality and now uses it as cover for nefarious acts.

Events in Iran today, June of 2009, show the schism between religious practice and moral functioning and the preaching of morality. These events also show clearly the essence of the religion-power combination. The tremendous overt psychological power of religion over the masses combined with economic power over human activity, both constructive and destructive, make it almost impossible for the masses to revolt for a better life. The election and the subsequent fraudulent functioning of the religious leaders and their supreme religious leader on behalf of economic and military power elites is a clear demonstration of religious immorality.

Can this nascent non-religious Iranian Revolution succeed even to the minimalist extent of the Russian Revolution? Religious power was beaten by the leadership’s education and subsequent laws against religion, driving it underground for five decades. However, the economic power elite soon subverted the success of the masses and with the aid of capitalist nations, including the United States, succeeded in taking control of life in the Soviet Union for the benefit, not of the masses, but for the benefit of the elites.

Customarily, economic power elites control governments. In Iran, since the revolution led by Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini in 1979, religion took over the government, but, and here’s the rub, the power elites remained in power behind the curtain of religion which was behind the curtain of government, as evidenced by the aggrandizement of military capability and capital growth. In much of the world, and certainly the Western world, religion is behind the curtain of the economic power elites and those elites, behind their curtain, control the governments.

In the coming days and weeks in Iran, the morality of religion will prove to be the immoral weapon and the chimera it is.

JIMMY CARTER RIDES AGAIN

Jimmy Carter, a former president of the United States, is again self-involved in the Middle East Mess. He has come to “Save” Palestinians from Judaism. Maybe he is not aware that Palestinians are Muslims and he should be saving them from the decadence and savagery of Islamic fundamentalism, as practiced by Hamas.

Carter has decided that the ills, trials, and tribulations of life of the Palestinians in Gaza can be corrected by Israel being more generous with the lives of its citizens. When rockets were landing in Jewish Israel, Carter stayed home to write his book about the separation of Jews and Arabs imposed by the Apartheid State of Israel. Perhaps if rockets landed in the Peanut State of Georgia, Carter might have understood the need to protect his friends and family from the depredations of Georgia-hating Arabs. He might then have understood that providing the rocketeers with life-sustaining peanuts keeps the rockets flying.

Why can’t Jimmy leave the Jews alone? What keeps him scratching this pimple? For some strange reason, Carter wants the world to accept the terrorist organization, Hamas, into its bosom, this despite its avowed intent to destroy the Jewish State.

Ah-h-h, now I get it. Destroy Israel. Now his missionary zeal makes sense. By destroying Israel, the world will move closer to the immolation promised by Armageddon. So long as Israel protects holy Jerusalem and the biblical lands, it interferes with the Second Coming. So, using the agency of Arab hatred and destructive intent, the great Christian religionist, Jimmy Carter will remove the obstacle to that wonderful event. By so doing he will achieve martyrdom.

I have a better solution for Carter’s desire for martyrdom; let him convert to Islam and become a suicide bomber who blows himself up – hopefully a solo event – and thereby achieve his apparent desired goal.

RUPERT MURDOCH SPEAKS

This is an address by Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and CEO, News Corporation and one of the most famous people in the world's media today. He delivered this response upon receiving the National Human Relations Award given him by the American Jewish Committee on March 4th, 2009 in New York City. It is well worth reading.

Thanks for those kind words, Hugh.

Over the years, some of my wildest critics seem to have assumed I am Jewish. At the same time, some of my closest friends wish I were.

So tonight, let me set the record straight: I live in New York . I have a wife who craves Chinese food. And people I trust tell me I practically invented the word "chutzpah".

Ladies and gentleman, I thank you for having me tonight. I also want to thank Nelson Peltz … Michael Gould … and the many co-chairs for the time and effort they have put into this event. I am humbled by the honor you have given me - because this award speaks more to your good work than it does to mine.

Michael, I was fascinated to hear you talk about this history of this fine organization. The American Jewish Committee started in response to the persecution of Jews in Czarist Russia . And your response took a very American form: An organization that would speak up for those who could not speak for themselves.

In the century since your founding, the American Jewish Committee has become one of the world's most influential organizations. Yet though your concerns begin with the safety and welfare of Jews, these concerns are anything but parochial. The reason for this is clear: You know that the best guarantee of the security of Jews anywhere is the freedom of people everywhere.

Your good work has helped bring real and lasting changes to our world. Unfortunately, while some threats have been defeated, new ones have taken their place. And these new threats remind us the AJC's work is more vital than ever.

In Europe , men and woman who bear the tattoos of concentration camps today look out on a continent where Jewish lives and Jewish property are under attack - and public debate is poisoned by an anti-Semitism we thought had been dispatched to history's dustbin.

In Iran , we see a regime that backs Hezbollah and Hamas now on course to acquire a nuclear weapon.

In India , we see Islamic terrorists single out the Mumbai Jewish Center in a well-planned and well-coordinated attack that looks like it could be a test run for similar attacks in similar cities around the world.

Most fundamentally, we see a growing assault on both the legitimacy and security of the State of Israel .

This assault comes from people who make clear they have no intention of ever living side-by-side in peace with a Jewish state - no matter how many concessions Israel might make. The reason for this is also clear: These are men who cannot abide the idea of freedom, tolerance, and democracy. They hate Israel for the same reasons they hate us.

At I speak, the flashpoint is Gaza . For months now, Hamas has been raining down rockets on Israeli civilians. Like all terrorist attacks, the aim is to spread fear within free societies, and to paralyze its leaders. This Israel cannot afford. I do not need to tell anyone in this room that no sovereign nation can sit by while its civilian population is attacked.

Hamas knows this better than we do. And Hamas understands something else as well: In the 21st century, when democratic states respond to terrorist attacks, they face two terrible handicaps.

The first handicap is military. It's true that Israel 's conventional superiority means it could flatten Gaza if it wanted. But the Israeli Defense Forces - unlike Hamas - are accountable to a democratically chosen government.

No matter which party is in the majority, every Israeli government knows it will be held accountable by its people and by the world for the lives that are lost because of its decisions. That's true for lives of innocent Palestinians caught in the crossfire. And it's also true for the Israeli soldiers who may lose their lives defending their people.

In this kind of war, Hamas does not need to defeat Israel militarily to win a big victory. In fact, Hamas knows that in some ways, dead Palestinians serve their purposes even better than dead Israelis.

In the West we look at this and say, "It makes no sense." But it does make sense.

If you are committed to Israel 's destruction, and if you believe that dead Palestinians help you score a propaganda victory, you do things like launch rockets from a Palestinian schoolyard. This ensures that when the Israelis do respond, it will likely lead to the death of an innocent Palestinian - no matter how many precautions Israeli soldiers take.

Hamas gets away with this, moreover, because they do not rule Gaza by the consent of those they claim to represent. They rule by fear and intimidation. They are accountable to no one but themselves.

This is the chilling logic of Gaza . And it helps explain why even a strong military power like Israel can find itself at a disadvantage on the ground.

The second handicap for Israel is the global media war. For Hamas, the images of Palestinian suffering - of people losing their homes, of parents mourning their dead children, of tanks rolling through the streets -create sympathy for their cause.

In a battle marked by street to street fighting, the death of innocents is all but inevitable. That is also true of Gaza . And these deaths have led some to call for Israel to be charged with war crimes by an international tribunal.

But I am curious: Why do we never hear calls for Hamas leaders to be charged with war crimes?

Why, for example, do we hear no calls for human rights investigations into Hamas gunmen using Palestinian children as human shields? Why so few stories on the reports of Hamas assassins going to hospitals to hunt down their fellow Palestinians? And where are the international human rights groups demanding that Hamas stop blurring the most fundamental line in warfare: the distinction between civilian and combatant?

I suspect the answer has to do with the same grim logic that leads Hamas to provoke a military battle it knows it cannot win. Whether Israel is ever found guilty of any war crime hardly matters. Hamas gets propaganda win simply by having the charge made often and loudly enough.

In this, Israel finds itself in much the same position the United States found itself in Iraq before the surge. There, al Qaeda realized that it was in its interests to provoke sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni - no matter what the cost to innocent Iraqis. That is the nature of terror. And what we are seeing in Gaza is just one front in this much larger war.

In the West, we are used to thinking that Israel cannot survive without the help of Europe and the United States . Tonight I say to you: Maybe we should start wondering whether we in Europe and the United States can survive if we allow the terrorists to succeed in Israel .

In this new century, the "West" is no longer a matter of geography. The West is defined by societies committed to freedom and democracy. That at least is how the terrorists see it. And if we are serious about meeting this challenge, we would expand the only military alliance committed to the defense of the West to include those on the front lines of this war. That means bringing countries such as Israel into NATO.

My friends, I do not pretend to have all the answers to Gaza this evening. But I do know this: The free world makes a terrible mistake if we deceive ourselves into thinking this is not our fight.

In the end, the Israeli people are fighting the same enemy we are: cold-blooded killers who reject peace … who reject freedom … and who rule by the suicide vest, the car bomb, and the human shield.

Against such an enemy, I will not second-guess the decisions of a free Israel defending her citizens. And I would ask all those who support peace and freedom to do the same.

I thank you for listening. I thank you for this award. And I thank you for all you are doing to make our world a safer and freer place.

REPLY TO NORTH KOREA NUKES.

What NK and Iran have are angry paranoid nukes. Both perceive they have been oppressed or invaded by the West, NK in 1950 and Iran a few years later when the CIA got rid of a nationalist leader who wanted a fair shake for Iran. Truman agreed with that but as soon as he was replaced by Ike, Dulles ordered CIA to proceed. This is recent history to these two victims of imperialism, as they perceive it, and they don't trust America. They feel they can never have enough protection against us and will not disarm just to improve Obama's chances for reelection. Iran sees it's position with Israel as kill or be killed. They know Israel would've already attacked if it could have done so successfully. If we felt that way about enemies, we'd act overly defensive too. Hey, wait a minute! Guess what? We do! Why, we tail and imprison suspicious foreigners at the drop of a fez. Our native rightwing terrorists are allowed to march around with assault rifles and shoot up liberals at will as we hunt down veiled women and send them packing, making friends all over the world.

HARVEY CHAIMOWITZ

H

NORTH KOREA’S NUKES

NORTH KOREA’S NUKES – A CONTRIBUTION TO WORLD PEACE – June 2009

The “Haves” say the Have-Nots” may not have what they have. The Big Nuke Nations, Russia, China, England, France, and the United States, have enough Nukes ready to blast each other and the world out of existence. This condition is known by its acronym, MAD. MAD means Mutual Assured Destruction. In their collective wisdom, these five nations realize that MAD really means world peace. So now, they all possess Peace Nukes.

Peace Nukes are preventive medicine for any nation sick enough to think that Nukes can be used to further the quality of life within their own nation. Such nations are creating Maybe Nukes.

Other countries are now joining the Haves group. North Korea wanted Nukes. North Korea made Nukes. Are they Peace Nukes or Maybe Nukes? Iran wants Nukes too. Iran is making Nukes. Are they Peace Nukes or Maybe Nukes? Pakistan and India have Nukes and maybe they will not use them to bring peace between these two antagonistic neighbors. They are definitely Maybe Nukes.

Israel has Nukes. They are definitely NOT Peace Nukes. They are Maybe Nukes. They have them to assure peace with their billion-plus Arab enemies who also want to obtain Nukes for the sake of peace by wiping out Israel. Syria asked North Korea for help in acquiring some Maybe Nukes. North Korea obliged and began sending that peace-loving nation the elements of Maybe Nukes. Israel responded with a non-Nuke attack on Syria’s planned Maybe Nuke facility. THAT was an act of war!

Israel does not believe that Iranian Nukes are Peace Nukes. The past and present president of Iran, Achmadinajad, has clearly stated his strong desire to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. The question facing Israel, and the world, is this, “Are North Korea and Iran governed by madmen?” For sure they do not possess Peace Nukes. Do they possess Mad Nukes? Or is there a third category of Nukes bubbling to the surface of this witch’s brew, “Use Nukes?”

The world is waiting uneasily for the answer with bated breath.

SICK HEALTHCARE

The date is June 13, 2009. The president and congress (controlled by Democrats) are in the process of creating a health care program to assure that every citizen in the United States has “Health Care Coverage.” To guarantee that end, a so-called “Public Plan” is being devised so people in need of health care services will have a choice between going to an insurance company for health care payments and going to the United States government for payment for their health care needs.

Public Plan is being opposed by potential losers if the plan comes into being and is being called a variety of names, from socialized medicine to government controlled health care and wastrel government intervention into the private sector. A battle is taking place in Congress, in the media, and in the minds of the American People. The trenches on the anti-Plan side are filled with money. The pro-Plan people also have financial backers who are far less wealthy or powerful. But they have fairness in their trenches.

The insurance industry attempted to derail this endeavor into being still-born by promising to reduce health care costs over the next ten years by one trillion dollars. They could certainly accomplish this by adding more “Deny” desks to their offices and to the offices of physicians who are their prostitutes. The denial of health care by the insurance industry to up their profits is as natural as banks upping their interest rates on loans.

The American Medical Association is opposed to government involvement in health care delivery out of concern that physicians will not make as much money as they believe they should. That is completely understandable, is it not?

Many health care providers oppose the plan in the belief that by ensuring health care for everyone, they will be paid less for their services than they are at present. The government has traditionally been slow to hand out money to anyone who does not have money. The providers are concerned they may fall into that powerless condition. Hospitals and clinics and those who care for the indigent have small weak lobbies in Washington. So they anticipate that the insurance companies will continue to rake in their huge profits while money is squeezed out of the health care delivery systems, as it is now by those so-called health care insurers. “So-called” because they really do nothing in the way of delivering health care to anyone.

But, perhaps the government will inch forward into fulfilling its role as government in providing for the basic needs of its citizenry; needs like roads and traffic lights, water and sewage disposal, and, YES, health care.

WEAPONS OF WAR = MANKIND’S FUTURE

Historians write about the past and try to bring understanding to bear on current actions ala Santayana’s dictum.

Futurists attempt to predict the future to enlarge understanding of possibilities our progeny and our descendants may face.

Looking at today’s world and tracking the events and the powers that have brought us to where we are to provide a platform from which to scan the future, historians and futurists may reasonably conclude that, aside from natural phenomena, even those brought on by man’s actions on earth, weapons of war are certainly among the instruments that will determine mankind’s future on earth if not the key instruments in creating that future.

From rocks and clubs, through the ages of spears and swords and bows and arrows, and then explosive powder used in myriad manners and forms from simple destructive explosions through sophisticated machine guns with huge fire-power and cannons throwing explosive projectiles many miles with deadly accuracy and smart bombs that can penetrate the toughest barriers delivered by aircraft and rockets, up to today’s atomic bombs capable of immeasurable devastation of life and property, we see the growth of control of events and people through weaponry.

Where are we going?

India and Pakistan, each with huge hungry populations, created and maintain, at huge cost, atomic weaponry. In Darfur, rape, maiming, and murder are carried out by men with weapons who themselves come from hungry families. Gaza, destroyed by Israel in retaliation for rocket fire aimed at the civilian population by Hamas, a terrorist group that seized control of the impoverished Strip that is now being fed weaponry rather than food or the tools of reconstruction by sympathetic militaristic regimes in Syria and Iran.

The United States spends a fifth of its annual budget on the military and that is only a part of what is spent on personal arms in the country. Winchester, Colt, Garand, and other arms-makers names have been around for a century-and-a-half and still going strong. Aircraft and ships of war abound. Tanks and trucks, atom bombs and rockets, small arms and weaponry and ammunition of all kinds abound. And these weapons are made available to allies and others around the world, some illegally. All the nations of the world are armed and prepared for war, offensive or defensive, internal and over their borders.

We are going to war. That’s where we are going. That is mankind’s future. Bloodshed and violence will be the leitmotif of so-called “Civilization.”

Why? Because there’s money in it! Lots of money!!

WEALTH vs. TERROR

PREPARE FOR SUICIDE BOMBINGS

In this era of unconventional warfare, the use of human bombs has become common. Though generally motivated by religious zealotry accompanied by low intelligence or extreme belief, the suicide bombers are motivated by family monetary need in equal measure. It can reasonably be assumed that the greater the poverty in the world, the more common suicide bombing will become.

Unscrupulous leaders of hatred will more and more utilize this reservoir of highly effective bombs to achieve their mission of terror – the destruction and murder of civilians and civilian properties. Therefore, a war on poverty is equally a war against terror. And a war on poverty will in all likelihood reduce the numbers of hatred groups and hatred leaders.

These unproven yet logical assumptions may penetrate the corridors of political power through the benefits that reduction in destruction may bring to power elites and their wealth and property. For example, a reduction in air travel was reversed when an increase in airport surveillance was initiated by governments. The government of Israel has foiled terrorist plots through the extensive use of Arab intelligence operators feeding information to the intelligence apparatus in return for Israel monetarily feeding Arab civilians and raising their standard of living.

A comparison can also be made between terror in wealthy nations compared with the incidence of terror in poorer nations. Terror is hugely common in the Muslim world where the per capita income is significantly lower than Christian nations where terror is almost non-existent. A measure of the increase in terror incidents in wealthy nations shows the direct correlation with the increase in low-income immigrant communities, often Muslim.

So the answer to terror is, MAKE THE PEOPLE WEALTHIER!

ANTI-SEMITISM RE-VISITED

ANTI-SEMITISM REVISITED FOR UNDERSTANDING

Why anti-Semitism? Why the hatred of the Jews with no foundation for the hatred? Hatred taught at home in childhood is understandable. But hatred learned in adulthood simply to be part of whatever group it is that hates Jews is less understandable. Why not hate monkeys or apples or skyscrapers? Simply, they are not people. You can’t elevate yourself by hating apples or monkeys, now can you? Join a group that hates any group of people and you then “belong” easily. No questions asked about why you are a Nazi or a member of the John Birch Society or a WASP who can’t stand the smell of Jews. Or maybe you belong to a group that hates the Christ killers.

Or maybe you are a Muslim and your Koran tells you to despise and kill Jews. Perhaps you are Arab or an Arab sympathizer who hates Jews because they wrongfully claim biblical lands as their ancestral home and the State of Israel has stolen Arab land for its nationhood. And you claim to not be an anti-Semite but just think the Jews have committed a crime and should be punished by death and annihilation.

On the other hand, the Nobel Peace Prize committee, without any Jews on board, seems to be in love with Jews, having awarded them a disproportionate number of prizes out of all relationship to their numbers on earth for having brought benefits and good to mankind. And there is no earthly endeavor for which Jews have not earned honor and respect, almost, for achievements in advancing knowledge and the quality of life for humankind.

But, “Let’s Kill the Jews,” because they own the banks, control the earth’s governments, propagandize through their mass ownership of news media, and their numerous doctors kill Christian babies in their hospitals and homes to harvest their blood to drink on their Passover holiday. The People of the Book are hated for teaching their children to read in places where non-Jewish homes raise fatherless children in drug infested neighborhoods where not a dime is spent on a book or even a newspaper. The Jews are exploiting Us by their reading, their learning, their educational drive and humanistic values. We hate them for keeping us down-trodden while showing off their easily-gained wealth.

There seems to be no society on earth that is not ready to kill Jews. The downward slide of humanity into an abyss of killing, ignorance, poverty, illness, and despair, starts with the killing of Jews and people who resemble them. It starts with the killing of the intelligentsia, the learned, the hard-working, the wealthy, the caring, the humanistic, the tolerant and accepting followers of the Ten Commandments, the Jews and the people like them.

When any human being becomes educated by killing another, the downward slide will stop and humanity will start climbing out of the feces with which it has covered itself. On that day, killing another will be an act of God. And it will show that God does indeed not exist.

SOMALIA 2009 - HOW AND WHY RELIGION WORKS

Somalia is being torn apart by religious factions using all the factionalism of that primitive country. Today's New York Times article (May 24, 2009)by Jeffrey Gettleman on the destruction taking place there covers several columns. Only one sentence in the article explains the "Why?" of it.

Peaceful clans, tribes, religious orders, are now engaged in savage total warfare. Jihad against fellow Muslims. The weapons and transportation and training are being supplied from ???? and by ???? These once peaceful poorly educated and poorly fed people are out there with expensive weapons drawing blood from their mirror images. They are chopping off hands and heads with religious zeal, motivation, and righteousness.

How did this happen? How did Darfur, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and all the others happen? Where were these people before they were transformed into religious murderers and by whom were they transformed into religious murderers?

Here's the sentence, the revelation, the rational and motivation for all wars.

"The Sufis, a loosely organized religious brotherhood, also drawing from many different clans, had studiously avoided getting gummed up in Somalia's back-and-forth clan battles, OFTEN NO MORE THAN THIN COVER FOR POWER STRUGGLES BETWEEN BUSINESSMEN AND WARLORDS."

All wars have an economic base and motivation. Perhaps Dick Cheney, former vice-president of the United States, having met with a cabal of oil company magnates, exploiting the ignoramus president George W. Bush and his jingoistic mentality, led the United States into war in Iraq utilizing a THIN COVER for businessmen AND warlords to reap huge profits, the true goal of the war.

INFINITY vs. BEGINNING and ENDING

INFINITY - WHY and WHY NOT?

An assumption has been made based on research performed by a variety of scientists that in the beginning, the universe came into being by a Big Bang. An assumption also exists that after a huge amount of time and a reverse process to the Big Bang, the universe will probably cease to exist.

I am not a scientist. I am a thinker.

I think that science is not able to accept the concept of infinity. It talks a good line about it but the utility of the concept seems to escape them. Playing with numbers and even generally with time is the closest that science (scientists) comes to accepting infinity's existence. The very definition of the word does not find meaning for them.

By accepting infinity's existence, one can readily accept the fact that there is not nor was any begininng to what we call everything, namely, the universe. And we can also easily accept the fact that there will be no end to everything.

The form of things certainly changes. The speed of things changes. The power - however measured - changes. The universe changes. And those changes may or may not be observable, measurable, understood, and believed. The forms of things are infinite.

But, there never was a beginning nor will there be an end. We are in infinity. We are in a form and the universe is in a form, that is observable, measurable, and understood, at this place and time of infinity. We can imagine other forms and other places and other times, but we cannot prove that they existed outside of now or infinity.

IN THE BEGINNING - WHO?

IN THE BEGINNING

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

Just as there is no God other than in the minds of mankind, there is no “beginning” other than in the minds of mankind.

A good revelatory opening sentence to this book of religious chicanery might be, “In the beginning of mankind’s mental capacity, Man created God and Man claimed that God created the beginning and in that “beginning” He created what Man saw as the totality of existence, “the heavens and the earth.”

Now, believers and non-believers, scientists of all stripes and all fields of study and religionists of the world whose power resides in the obeisance of believers, all are searching for “The Beginning.” They are searching for some event in some moment of time – as time is defined by common agreement – that will makes sense of the creation of the universe scientifically and theologically.

It is a nonsensical search. The beginning of time and the beginning of the universe must occur simultaneously because of the mind of man and the limitations that religion and science place on the mind of man based on the meaning of words and language. The word, “beginning” will have a different meaning denotatively – and subsequently connotatively – at every endless step of the way to finding the beginning of the universe.

Perhaps a new word will come into existence that will define a non-beginning based on an eternal existence, an infinite existence, of the “beginning” of the universe as a “point in time that is infinite,” and therefore not a “point” in time. This new word cannot stray far from the existential meanings of words in existing languages.

My suggestion for this word or phrase, embedded in the first sentence of the new Book of Genesis, is; genesis (the origin or coming into being of something.)

The opening line of the bible and the opening line in scientific texts on how the universe was created would then read, “In the Genesis, man created God and man said that God created the Genesis of the universe. The bible and the scientific texts could then comfortably take their different paths to exploring the genesis of the universe.

A TWO-STATE SOLUTION?

The Judgment of Solomon

The saying is based upon the Biblical passage in 1 Kings 3:16-28, where two new mothers approach Solomon, bringing with them one dead baby boy. Each mother presents the same story and accusation: She and the other woman live together and have both recently given birth to baby boys. One night, soon after the birth of their respective boys, the other woman woke to find that she had smothered her own baby in her sleep. In anguish and jealousy, she took her dead son and exchanged it with the other's child. The following morning, the woman discovered the dead baby, and soon realized that it was not her own son, but the other woman's.

After some deliberation, King Solomon calls for a sword to be brought before him. He declares that there is only one fair solution: the live son must be split in two, each woman receiving half of the child. Upon hearing this terrible verdict, the boy's true mother cries out, "Please, My Lord, give her the live child - do not kill him!" However, the liar, in her bitter jealousy, exclaims, "It shall be neither mine nor yours - divide it!" Solomon instantly gives the live baby to the real mother, realizing that the true mother's instincts were to protect her child, while the liar revealed that she did not truly love the child.

Solomon by his wisdom avoids the destruction of the subject matter of the dispute (the baby). There is no reason to believe that destruction was ever his intent
Today the world is looking at a similar enigma involving two Peoples; the Palestinian People and the Jewish People. The land from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River is coveted by both Peoples. More to the point, the Jewish People lives under the death threat of the Arab – and Persian – world. The Palestinians have been and are supported in their wish to drive the Jews into the sea by the inhabitants of the world of Islam. That world is actively training the martyrs who will attempt to carry out the annihilation. The Nazi Holocaust that destroyed over six million Jews is to be partially completed by the Muslim destruction of the State of Israel’s Jewish population. So, despite that destruction, the Jewish People will continue to live and bring benefit to the world as they have for all the millennia of their existence.

Enter Barack Obama, the new president of the United States. Wielding the tremendous power of his powerful country, he will be sitting on Solomon’s throne. Will he find in judgment the benefit of cutting the coveted land in half? This Holy Land that gave birth to the Hebrew nations and the Jewish People was occupied by Jewish religionists for five thousand years and prayed to by the Jewish People in their Diasporas that they would return to the Land in the coming year. Will Obama convince the world’s nations that peace will be achieved only by giving to the Arab peoples another swath of the Holy Land similarly to Winston Churchill’s chopping off the major portion of the Jews’ ancient land to establish a Bedouin Kingdom of Trans-Jordan.
And if a comparison is made between what the two Peoples have done on their divided shares of territory, a sad conclusion must be reached that poverty, disease, lack of education, exploitation of the poor, primitiveness in all aspects of daily life have permeated the Muslim sections while the benefits of and to modernity and a better world emanate from the Jewish State.

So where is the benefit of a Two-State Solution to the Middle East conflict, the benefit of slicing the land in half? Jews cannot live in peace in the Muslim world. They must live in constant fear for their very lives. Arabs who are native to the Palestinian territories may live in peace in Israel and enjoy better health, a higher standard of living, education, and equality founded on acceptance of Israel’s right to exist. This would be the modern Judgment of Solomon.

Are you listening, Barack Obama?

A SMALL PICTURE OF THE FUTURE - DENMARK

By Susan MacAllen

In 1978-9 I was living and studying in Denmark.
But in 1978 - even in Copenhagen, one didn't see Muslim immigrants.


The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its new brand of socialist liberalism one in development since the conservatives had lost power in 1929 - a system where no worker had to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count upon the state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time.

The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking, progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies. Denmark boasted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a superior educational system and a history of humanitarianism.


Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies - it offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism.

How could it have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the streets -all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come back to bite?

By the 1990's the growing urban Muslim population was obvious - and its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious.

Years of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves. As the Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the decadence of Denmark 's liberal way of life, the Danes - once so welcoming - began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.

The New York Post in 2002 ran an article by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard, in which they forecasted accurately that the growing immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they reported:

'Muslim immigrants constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending.' 'Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes.

''Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population.

A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane. 'Forced marriages - promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death - are one problem'

'Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark's Muslim population grows large enough - a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim.'

It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws.

An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and the US: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden - before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa - who as a teenager had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers - and I wonder what she would say today.

In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70 years - one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal unfettered Immigration. Today Denmark has the strictest immigration policies in Europe. (Its effort to protect itself has been met with accusations of 'racism' by liberal media across Europe - even as other governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by years of too-lax immigration.)

If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark's history, culture, and a Danish language test.

You must live in Denmark for 7 years before applying for citizenship. You must demonstrate an intent to work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into Denmark, you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won't find it so easy any more to move your friends and family to Denmark with you.

You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen. Although your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and language schools in Denmark, they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren't.

In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government's welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary. In other words, the welfare system as it existed was being exploited by immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. 'We are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration.

The calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now,' he said.

A large thorn in the side of Denmark's imams is the Minister of Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj. She makes no bones about the new policy toward immigration, 'The number of foreigners coming to the country makes a difference,' Hvilshov says, 'There is an inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can receive the foreigners that come' And on Muslim immigrants needing to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, 'In my view, Denmark should be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to question democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech.'

Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone. Perhaps to test her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark , Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that the family's thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done in Denmark. The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time - in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.

Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have tightened. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living, humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a nation at civil war with supporters of Sharia law.

And meanwhile, Americans clamor for stricter immigration policies, and demand an end to state welfare programs that allow many immigrants to live on the public dole. As we in America look at the enclaves of Muslims and Illegal Hispanics amongst us, and see those who enter our shores too easily, dare live on our taxes, yet refuse to embrace our culture, respect our traditions, participate in our legal system, obey our laws, speak our language, appreciate our history. We would do well to look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own.

If you agree with this article, then please pass it on...

THE POWER OF PREJUDICE

Who ever thought that prejudice has power to change the world? It does. It is as powerful a mass human motivator as religion and belief, patriotism and nationalism, greed and need for wealth, exploration and exploitation for conquest and expansion, loyalty, obedience, and unquestioning respect for royalty and authority. They are all two-faced indoctrinated motivators of guiltless human behavior.

Prejudice, racism, and hatred of the “Other,” are taught to the young as a good, just as are religion and patriotism. The fruit of this education lies in the acceptance of heinous tasks as promotion of benefits for humanity. Crusading armies created and motivated to convert or kill accept their mission as holy. Rape, mayhem, and slaughter, destruction of whole societies, “spoils of war” and theft of land and property, are all accepted as the commission of beneficial acts for those who “belong” to the right and righteous nation, ethnicity, or religion.

This is not the world of early man. This is the world of the 21st century. Today is the time of the Pharaohs, the time of Torquemada and the Crusades and Nazi Germany. Today’s use of power is the same as the use of power throughout the history of Man. Wealth and weaponry clearly enable power to be exercised. Less clear is the harmful use of religion and patriotism to achieve the goal of wealth and power aggrandizement. And finally, it is most difficult to accept the teaching of prejudice as consciously or subconsciously intentional to achieve the same goal.

The destruction of Aztec and Mayan civilizations, the conquest of the natives of North America, the Nazi Holocaust and the Rape of Nanking, Cambodian torture and today’s slaughter in Darfur, along with large and small episodes of conquest and destruction of “Other” peoples and their societies through the centuries by warriors steeped in hatred.

Can we call this behavior primitive? Can we call it savagery? Can we call such behavior modern and civilized?

What People, what religious group has stated, “To save a single life is to save the whole world?” That People has been a primary target for destruction throughout its existence. It is today the single most abhorred People in the world. It is the People that has saved more lives and given life more meaning than any other group through the centuries of human existence. Yet it is powerless against the humongous power of the prejudice arrayed against it. It is the Jewish People.

To be or not to be, that is the question;
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing, end them. To die, to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to — 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life,
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch[1] and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.[2]
”