Two for One

This past week, two different news items caught my attention.

First, as a Floridian, I was obviously interested in what my idiot governor, Charlie Crist, did this past week. You may think you know the story but here is an interesting timeline. Two weeks ago, Governor Crist vetoed a popular Republican bill that would have tied teachers pay to student achievements (thanks Debbie for reminding me of this). If he had passed it then teachers were planning sit ins and sick outs and all kinds of disturbances to show their anger to {gasp} being held accountable but since he vetoed the bill then the happy teachers, well, just wait a moment. For the next thing Crist did was to lie to the world.

Everybody knows that he sat there and told reporters over and over and over again that he would not run as an Independent. That he was a Republican and would stay with his party. The only problem is that his party left him in droves to support Marco Rubio; with Crist as much as 20 points behind the popular newcomer. Now Charlie had two choices. He could have dropped out and thrown his support to Rubio. Then in the next two years build a base of moderates from both sides which would put him in a good position to compete for the other Senatorial seat. It might even place him in contention as a VP or perhaps Presidential candidate in 2012. But no, Charlie isn’t that farsighted or patient, for he actually announces that he is going to run as an Independent.

No apologies to Floridians for lying, no remorse for turning his back on his party. Instead he says this change is for the people of Florida. Yeah, right, the polls showing he had a chance of winning the senate seat if he ran as an Independent had nothing to do with his reversal of position. Now back to that veto… within hours of his announcement there was an ad by the teachers union backing Crist. So we know what his price was. The only problem is that Charlie has completely alienated Republicans and his boldfaced lying has even turned off Independents. He has destroyed his relationship with Republican leaders and Democrats don’t want him either. Obama may have hugged him but rumor has it that the White House won't take his calls. After what Crist has done, he will be lucky if he one day ends up as Superintendent of Schools. But Senator? I don’t think so.

The second news item that caught my attention is truly outrageous. On Thursday, Tehran’s police chief announced that they will start arresting suntanned women and even men this time in an effort, according to RadioVoice, to cleanse “social misbehavior by women, and men, who defy our Islamic values.” How ironic that also on Thursday Iran was appointed to the UN Commission on Women’s Rights. What does that say about the UN? And I shudder to think what will happen to women around the world now.

Unbelievably, the United States (ie. Obama) did not object to Iran becoming a part of the Commission on Women’s Rights. However the government does object to Rev. Franklin Graham’s remarks criticizing the Muslim religion for their treatment of women. You see, Graham has an issue with Muslim's doing little things like stoning women, the complete lack of basic rights or now even persecuting women with a suntan. Because of Graham’s remarks he was disinvited to a Pentagon prayer event and his invitation to speak at a May 6 National Prayer Day at Capital Hill might also be rescinded. How very wrong is this world? And why aren’t U.S. women standing with Graham in outrage of all of this?

(Hmmm. Here’s a last thought – what if we were to send Charlie Crist to visit Iran. Maybe the Tehran police would then arrest the
perpetually suntanned governor and get him out of Florida politics for good?)

Names do matter

After Nidal Malik Hasan killed and wounded our soldiers at Fort Hood, some woman being interviewed said with a straight face “I wish his last name was Smith.” And for me, that summarizes all this PC stupidity.

People just won’t admit the fact that a large group of radical Muslims want to incite terror and kill us. Liberals are so afraid of being politically incorrect that they simply refuse to face reality. Wake up America! It’s not ‘Smiths’ or ‘O’Brians’ or ‘Yamamoto’s’ who have issued jihads or holy wars against us. It’s people with Arabic names. It’s people who are Muslim’s. It’s people who hate our way of life and the very freedom for which we stand.

We need to recognize that we can no longer sit back and enjoy our freedoms. Our freedoms and way of life are being attacked. And not just with bullets. They are using our very own freedoms and courts to shelter and advance their malignant religious rules and laws. Already there are examples of how they are trying to corrupt our country with their extreme laws. At least some reporters are starting to investigate the murder of Muslim women who dared to be Americanized. Women who only wanted to dress like Americans, get an education, be more than the wife to a radical Muslim husband who believes he has the right to kill his wife without facing any penalties by his culture. In fact, why aren’t more women libbers taking up the cause of these Muslim women? They were sure quick to go after radical Mormons who illegally had multiple wives. Yet they are suspiciously quiet while radical Muslim men abuse their wives and daughters in the name of Allah and the Koran.

Perhaps a part of the problem is that we are a country of nice people. It is almost impossible for us to understand that radical Muslims could treat their women that cruelly. And then there is the little fact that millions of strangers want us dead. Liberals refuse to believe this. They think maybe if they could talk to them, sit down and listen to their leaders, perhaps even understand where they “are coming from” that they could then find some common bonds that will lead to understanding and acceptance. Wrong. Sure they will sit down and talk, their leaders might even make promises to be better in the future. And then at the earliest opportunity they will find a way to kill our soldiers and blow up innocent bystanders with their suicide bombers and ignore their promises.

When the world doesn’t act in a manner that Liberals approve of then Liberals end up turning issues inside out arguing that enemies are friends and friends are enemies? Words no longer mean what we were taught and they give nicer names to things that threaten them so as to feel better. They will insulate themselves by believing that they are superior to other Americans and that their greater intelligence allows them to see the “big picture” and understand the other side. They will always argue that a minority is at the mercy of the oppressive white man. Ironically, most Liberals won’t believe the stereo types of the "abused" minority but will quickly embrace any negative stereo type of the rest of us. And the scary part is that this group is who is running our country today.

Now we had a man of Arabic background, a Muslim, go on a shooting spree killing unarmed soldiers. I had hoped that perhaps our military hadn’t been quite as corrupted by political correctness such as our universities, media and local schools have been. This episode with Fort Hood demonstrates just how wrong I was. Political correctness, fear of upsetting a minority, worrying about playing fairly; it is this stupidity that allows a US soldier like Hasan to go so far as to communicate with al Qaeda and email with a radical imam. Not only was his outrageous conduct tolerated but this traitor was even promoted and sent to Fort Hood. Why did no one stop him? How many more unstable Muslims are there in our military? And better yet, does the FBI or military have what it takes to finally go after these men now?

What makes it doubly hard is that much of the hatred begins and ends in their temples. Radical Imams preach against the godless Americans, raise their children to despise us and our way of life, imprison their women into a life of servitude and encourage their young men that killing Americans is not only right but will give them eternal gratitude when they give their life for the cause. And these temples are not just found overseas. They are here in America, too.

Of course not every Muslim temple harbors radicals. But we need to stop the PC bullshit and admit that yes, some of them are our enemies. We need to be penetrating these temples, putting in taps and all that espionage stuff and letting the FBI do their job; rather than being persuaded by liberals and the ACLU start that we are being prejudicial and unfair to this religion. We need to recognize that there are cores of truth in stereo types. We need to take action if someone is showing questionable actions, such as this Hasan had without worrying that some ACLU lawyer will come after you.

And maybe the first step is to call things by their right names. When Nidal Malik Hasan began killing unarmed soldiers it was a terrorist attack; Hasan was literally creating terror and fear and not a “man made disaster” which is what our Homeland Security Secretary Janet Naplitano would have you call it. That’s right. A terrorist attack is supposed to be called a man made disaster. It would be laughable if it weren’t so, well, terrifying.

Doomed Iranian Students

In 1989 there were two revolutions – one in Tianamen Square which failed miserably and one in Eastern Europe that resulted in the demise of the Berlin Wall and the Communist regime in Russia. Why did one work and one failed? I have two theories about that. Based on my theories I predict that the newest Iranian revolution will be crushed perhaps even brutally with extreme force and imprisonment of the most radical revolutionaries.

History tells us that almost every revolution begins with the students. Young people who rebel against almost anything anyway band together to revolt against society, against the harsh rules, against the tyrannical regime ruling their country. But this revolt is almost always doomed if it remains a student rebellion, if no one else joins in to help them. So my first theory is that successful revolutions are dependent upon the involvement of the older generations. If the fathers of these students stand on the side lines, worrying about their sons and daughters, but not participating, then there is little hope for the success of the chanting students. On the other hand, if men and women of all ages participate, as they did in the American Revolution than it has a greater chance of success.

I was glued to the TV watching the Tianamen Square revolt. I had never seen anything like this and was thrilled that these students would rise up against the crushing Communist government ruled by ancient old men. I thought of course this would make a difference. This rebellion just had to initiate needed changes in China. But then the soldiers and tanks moved in. I had cried when these students built their own Statue of Liberty, a touching heartfelt salute to my country. Days later, I cried again when I watched the military destroy this symbol of their hope for democracy. This was as upsetting to me as when I watched that lone student standing against those tanks. As quickly as the students had assembled and built their tent city it was demolished and the students imprisoned or in hiding. I finally realized that real life is not like the political thrillers I read. The world could be hard and cruel and the good guy doesn’t necessarily win.

Shortly after this happened, we witnessed the collapse of the Berlin Wall and later, Communist reign in Russia. So why did this work whereas the Tianamen Square revolt didn’t? I know that history books are filled with the facts and figures regarding both rebellions. But in a nut shell my first theory is that the Chinese rebellion was primarily led by students. On the other hand, one of the key figures in the downfall of Russia was a Polish union leader, Lech Walesa. Walesa was no starry eyed student but an experienced determined man who led his union and then his country into a coupe against the Russian leaders. Middle class men and women worked hand in hand with the students to revolt against the Communist regime.

Perhaps this is giving too much credit to my country, yet I can’t help but believe that America’s reaction was also a determining factor in another country’s successful rebellion. President Reagan stood firm against communism, going so far as to call Russia, the “evil empire” and loudly proclaiming that “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. Wow. Between Reagan, Prime Minister Thatcher and the Pope there was constant pressure against Russia.

Compare Reagan’s emphatic statements and support of Walesa and all the rebels to the statements of President George H.W. Bush in 1989 about the China rebellion. In a memo declassified ten years later we read that Bush 41 said while he deplored the violence in China he “believes deeply that a solid relationship” between the countries was in the interest of world peace. Oh yeah, that is telling them.

Unlike his father, Bush 43 followed in the footsteps of Reagan by stating which countries were enemies to the US. He was never shy about using strong language when discussing Iran or North Korea. In return he was despised by these countries and I also believe he was actually feared. They saw him as a loose cannon, a wild cowboy who might shoot first and ask questions later. Yet I doubt if North Korea would have threatened to bomb Hawaii if Bush were still president. But more on this in a later blog.

OK, here we are today with a new revolution in Iran. Students are outraged at the recent election believing that it was rigged. They are probably correct but unfortunately based on my two theories this rebellion doesn’t stand a chance. As far as I can tell the revolt is still primarily driven by students. You simply don’t hear about older men participating in it. And now, the Guardian Council, Iran’s top electoral council, announced today that there was no fraud in the election. Yeah right. For those who disagree, the feared Revolutionary Guard is threatening to use violence to quash the rebellion.

As for American involvement, Obama’s tepid response is right up there with Bush 41’s lack of support. I sure miss Reagan who had no qualms about supporting groups that tried to replace despotic regimes with freedom and democracy. But Obama isn’t able to do that. Then again it is probably ludicrous to hope that Obama would support fledgling democracy abroad when our president isn’t able to support democracy in our own country.

So I believe that those Iranian students are doomed. Sooner or later the soldiers will silence this rebellion and the old leaders will continue to rule. I bet that Obama will then be one of the first to call and to set up a face to face meeting with the “re-elected” Iranian president Ahmadinejad before the blood of the students have even been scrubbed away from the streets.

A New Middle East Strategy?

Once again a US President is going to try to tackle the Middle East problem of Israel vs. everybody else in that region. Ever since Carter’s Nobel Prize winning yet spectacularly failing effort each President has felt compelled to bring about peace in the Mid-East. When will they realize it isn’t going to work? That no matter how often you get a photo of some high level Saudi or Egyptian or even Palestinian shaking hands with a high level Israeli they will then return to their countries and continue plotting the destruction of each other.

Let’s face it. These people have been fighting each other for centuries. And don’t let anyone tell you otherwise, this is all about religion. Sure the agnostics and atheists will again clamor for the end of religions yet you can’t help but wonder if maybe there really is something sacred about Jerusalem and the surrounding land. First it was told to the Jews that this was their holy land, promised to them by their God. Many centuries later a Jewish rabbi preached a new religion while he wandered throughout these same lands. Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Galilee and all the surrounding areas then became sacred lands to Christians. A few centuries later, Mohammed visited Jerusalem and from there he is said to have ascended into heaven and returned making Jerusalem a sacred site for Muslims. You have to admit that it is a little spooky that three of the largest Religions in the world. Judaism, Christianity and Muslims, each believe that this one small piece of dusty land is sacred. Unfortunately, although the Jews and Christians coexist peacefully with each other, the Muslims in the area would prefer to kill any non Muslim.

And now it is President Obama’s turn to try to bring about harmony between Israel and basically everybody else in the Middle East. But there are some very important differences this time. First, Iran is close to having nuclear weapons, if they don’t already have them. Again, religion is at the heart of the matter. Both Iran’s Ayatollah and President Ahmadinejad have repeatedly stated that Israel should be wiped off the map simply because their Muslim religion orders them to kill all Jews. So if somebody has repeatedly stated they wanted to kill you and are developing the weapons to do just that, wouldn’t you be more than a bit worried? And would you really blame the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, if he made plans to take offensive measures before it is too late and Iran has made good on their threat to wipe Israel off the map?

To make this dangerous situation even shakier we now have President Obama stepping into this mess. Unlike all previous Presidents, Obama is showing signs of favoring the Muslim countries and not Israel. Tomorrow the President is planning a major speech from Egypt which has Israel worried. And they probably should be concerned. According to the NY Times Global edition, the Saudi ambassador to the Arab League said “I think we should hear something positive from President Obama. I think he is going in the right way.”

If Obama does take a more pro Muslim stance and if I were Israel, I would seriously consider taking action now. What choice does Israel have? Does Obama believe that Israel, which has always been a friend of the US, will passively listen to a harsh lecture from our President? How could Israel not feel isolated as it is boxed in on all sides by nations who want to kill them and now to lose their staunchest ally? Should they simply sit and wait for Hezbollah or Iranian or Palestinian terrorists to make the first move? If Obama’s speech on Thursday is pro Muslim and anti Israel then this country, feeling it is now totally on its own, just might decide it has nothing to lose by taking action.

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe Obama’s speech tomorrow will show that this country will continue to be a staunch supporter of Israel. But all signs are showing that the US President will be true to his upbringing and align himself with the Muslim nations, not Israel. He may not bow this time but his words and speech will belie his attitude toward the Muslim nations and leaders. I just hope that unlike that bow, Obama will be careful of what he says and truly understands the consequences of his actions….

Crazy Idea or Chilling Reality?

Yesterday after listening to the news, I came up with this really crazy thought….

We know that there have been a lot of meetings and discussions between Chavez, Castro and Putin. In fact I googled on the three names and came up with over a million hits, including one from back in 2001 “Putin, Venezuela’s Chavez Plan Anti-American Alliance”. Fast forward to October 2008 and you have this opening sentence in a newspaper article “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who arrived in Russia with a short visit upon the invitation from Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, had his first meeting scheduled with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Chavez said hello to Putin from Fidel Castro.” The newspaper with this article? Pravda: http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/26-09-2008/106471-russia_venezuela-0. So for at least seven years, perhaps even longer, these three (with Castro’s brother stepping in to replace the ailing Castro) have been building this alliance.

Then it occurred to me to see where Venezuela is in South America. Unfortunately, I think I learned most of my geography while playing Risk in college and could only remember that Chavez’s country was somewhere in South America. After getting a map on-line I was extremely startled by this country’s location. Wow. This really isn’t good. To illustrate my concerns, I highlighted the three countries; Cuba, Russia and Venezuela in red for the old communist red. As Mexico is now very unstable and could fall I highlighted them in pink. Here is what my map looks like:

Everybody knows that Cuba is right off our southeastern coast, but who remembered just how close Venezuela was to Cuba and therefore from us? Now with Mexico possibly in play, how easy would it be for them to deploy troops at that border? If we can’t stop unarmed illiterate Mexicans, how could we possibly stop highly trained armed troops crashing across our unmanned empty borders? And will people some day remember with regret how they contemptuously dismissed Sarah Palin’s comment about seeing Russia from her home in Alaska? If I were playing Risk and was blue, I would be very worried about an invasion of some kind.

I realize that this is one of my crazier ideas. Then again, now would be the perfect time for a coordinated attack. America is weaker than we’ve ever been. Our economy is in shambles. We have no money. Our troops are spread out, with most of them in Iran and Afghanistan. The State Department is more concerned about Israel and the Hamas while Homeland Security is more worried about Islamic terrorists than with what is happening on our own border with Mexico. And of course, we have a very young, naïve and inexperienced President. What better time for our enemies to strike against America on American land?

Add into this crazy thought that up until 9-11, the idea of anyone attacking us never even came into our consciousness. A lot of men and women fought and died in WWII and WWI but it was all over seas, including Pearl Harbor, none of the destruction and death was on continent. As awful as 9-11 was, it was still a one shot attack; over and done with in a matter of minutes. Yes, men and women have since died because of it but again it was all over seas and not here. So we have no memories, nothing to guide us by if enemy troops flooded our boarders and immediately engaged in destroying out towns and killing our citizens. Sure we have nuclear weapons but would Obama ever use them much less deploy them in Texas? OK maybe he wouldn’t mind if he bombed TX but definitely not in Harry Reid’s Nevada!

Plus we might not be the only ones with nuclear weapons. Russia already has them and there has been a lot of talk in the lately that Iran will have them in the near future in spite of potential UN sanctions. The Wall Street Journal even has an article this month entitled “How Europe’s Companies Are Feeding Iran’s Bomb”: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123379548035950207.html?mod=googlenews_wsj.

There was another article from September 2008 with the chilling title of “Putin and Chavez in Nuclear Talks”. Great. That’s all we need is for Chavez to have the bomb (take another look at that map!). It also said that Russia has loaned $1 billion to Venezuela to buy arms. And then there was this picture along with these paragraphs:

“Earlier this month, in deployments not seen since the Cold War, Russia sent two long-range bombers to Venezuela for exercises and has dispatched a flotilla of warships from the Arctic base of Severomorsk to Venezuela near US waters.

Venezuela has bought Russian fighter jets, tanks and assault rifles and is planning to purchase anti-aircraft systems, armoured personnel carriers and more combat aircraft, Kommersant reported earlier, quoting Russian officials.”

Oh and the source of this article? Aljazeera. Getting worried yet? http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/09/200892518282265489.html

I’m beginning to think that we should be as worried about this as about our economy. I also found a lot of old articles talking about Chavez and Putin and their dealings with oil. If the rising and falling price of oil contributed to our current economic downfall then how much of this could be attributable to Putin and Chavez manipulating the sales of their barrels of oil? Fixing our economy is important but I sure hope Obama and Clinton are keeping their eyes on this. For if Putin and Chavez purposely sabotaged our economy then what might be their next step? Then again, maybe I am sounding like a conspiracy theorist now. But what if there really is a conspiracy?