Crazy or Just Plain Stupid?

The happenings in the U.S.A. are so depressing.

Case 1. A commercial pilot, someone sensitive to security issues at our airports, had next to no confidence in the TSA, so he puts some facts on YouTube. Well, you can't expect the TSA to tolerate that! Nope, they stripped him of his "right to carry" his government issued pistol and the documents he needs to do his job piloting planes.

This to a guy who deserves a medal.

Case 2. The federal government still doesn't realize that our borders, especially the one with Mexico, needs to be sealed. Options: a wall, electronic sensors, drones, a cleared zone between a fence and private, or park land, observation posts, motorized patrols These are just the ones that come to mind as I sit typing this item. (Don't overlook satellite monitoring of the border.)

*** I hope I don't have to explain that law enforcement has been virtually wiped out south of the border. I don't blame Mexicans for trying to get into the U.S. If I were Mexican, I would too. But how many immigrants can we absorb? Not only that, but if I were al Qaida and I wanted to get into the U.S. that border currently looks mighty inviting. ***

Case 3. International relations: Whether it's our relations with Russia, or with Islamic nations, or with African nations, or nations in many other parts of the world, Wikileaks is showing us just how silly this President has been time and time again.

Aasia Bibi: A Christian Martyr Under the Heel of Islam

Let me be clear, I'm Jewish. And, while I am most familiar with Jewish martyrs, I do recognize that the term "martyr" applies to a person of any faith who dies for that faith. Aasia Bibi is a Pakistani Catholic ordered to die for blasphemy towards Islam.

It seems that this poor mother worked in fields and brought water to farm workers; workers who were Muslims. They were needling her to drop her Christianity and become a Muslim. Finally, she replied that Christ had died for her sins and those of all humanity. What had Mohamed done?

And, words such as that, dear reader, define blasphemy under the official Pakistani criminal code. The Vatican (not an institution I'm overly fond of) attempted to intercede, but to no avail. I would further remind the reader that Pakistan is presumably an ally of the U.S., one on which we spend considerable amounts of taxpayer money.

I would further note, that this edict is supported not by some wacky, backwater mullah. It is the official edict of a nation with an atomic bomb.

If this lady is to suffer martyrdom, then at the very least we should be hearing the cries of anguish of the many moderate Muslims throughout the world decrying this barbaric interpretation of their noble faith. But, I hear nothing. There is only a vast silence. And, that silence tells us more about "moderate" Islam than the vast collection of books and pamphlets describing the lovely faith known as Islam.

Guiding Israel's Foreign Policy: Not Easy

As long as Israel could count on America's support in the Security Council of the U.N., it had little to fear. It's cause was just and its defenses relatively secure.

With Obama, this has all changed. Confidence in an American foreign policy that shows support for Israel's position strikes me as having been totally eroded by the Obama administration.

I read where Russia now seems to be warming up to Israel. Russia might well be interested in Israel's discovery of gas off its shores. Russia would like a role. Russia, I'm reading, is also interested in a role in Lebanon's potential gas fields off of Lebanon's shores.

In many respects, the Israel-Russia connection would appear to be logical on many fronts. The big problem is trust. Sure, Israel's culture is far more akin to that of Russia's than what can be seen in any of the Islamic lands. However, the democratic and humanitarian ties that used to bind Israel to America have been sorely frayed by Obama's lack of judgement regarding the Islamic nations that surround Israel.

Let's hope Israel can choose its path based on a careful evaluation of all relevant factors and not be forced into decisions by the ineptitude of the current occupant of the White House.

Wikileaks: The Saudi Spin

Today, I read the Saudi spin to Wikileaks in the NY Times' WEEK IN REVIEW. It came in a column penned by Chas Freeman, who had served as assistant secretary of defense from 1983 to 1994 and U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during he Persian Gulf war. The Freeman piece was titled "Why Iran Loves WikiLeaks."

I too fell in love. In my case, it was with the column by Freeman. First, it again shows how Saudi Arabia chooses to present its views; namely, through its special friends in the U.S. Let's not forget that after serving in the U.S. Senate, the late Sen. Wm Fulbright became a registered lobbyist for the Saudi government. Today, people find it easier to circumvent registration requirements despite essentially acting as lobbyists. Whether people are registered or not, speaking for the Saudis is rarely without handsome remuneration. The only downside is that you've got to be the kind of American who can hold his nose as he, or she, observes decapitating people who run afoul of Wahhabi stricture, observes the religiously condoned abuse of women, Saudi treatment of gays, and the hypocrisy endemic in Saudi society.

Saudi hypocrisy is not confined to its domestic culture, but extends to its diplomacy. Amb. Freeman so much as says this when he writes, "The Middle East (read 'Saudi Arabia') is a place where yes means maybe, maybe means no, no is never heard (except in Israel), and a plea for foreign solutions to regional problems is a cop-out, not a serious request for action, It is where hypocrisy first gained a bad name. WikiLeaks has hurt America without changing that."

Freeman is certainly worth whatever it is that the Saudis may be paying him, but when the Saudis refer to the Iranians as a snake and suggest that the snake be "decapitated" (an interesting choice of words in light the Saudi's preferred means of capital punishment) it becomes exceedingly difficult to put this off as a mere cop-out.

Now Under Attack: The Christmas Tree

I've been exposed to Christmas trees my whole life. It's a meaningful symbol to Christians, even though the tree's origins are most likely pagan.

It's never been a problem for Jews. Orthodox Jews simply disregard it. Conservative Jews accept it for what it is; namely, something that brings joy to many of their Christian neighbors. A Menorah isn't quite as colorful, or as glittery, as a decorated tree, but for most Jews it works. They will sometimes joke over Reform Jews who have been known to put up a tree in their homes and refer to such a tree as a "Hanuka bush".

In other words, Jew's attitude towards Christmas and the Christmas tree is largely, "Live and let live. " If it brings Christians joy and doesn't hurt anyone, what's the big deal?

But suddenly, we read about banks and schools being persuaded not to put up trees. Why suddenly do we experience this pressure not to put up a tree? Clearly, it's not a message from Christians. And, it's just as surely not a message from Jews. So what's happening? Are the atheists being offended? Maybe, but I doubt it. I suspect a new religious group is flexing their muscles. And who would that be? Any thoughts?

Wikileaks: A Silver Lining

Spilling America's confidential cables is a crime. The perpetrators should be punished severely and steps need be taken so that there will be no repeat of tons of confidential data being routed to Wikileaks or other parties who do not share America's interests or values.

Having said that, let me now say that these leaked documents have given the world a window to what's real. It has blown away a great deal of nonsense spouted by the likes of President Obama. In particular, it has put the lie to Obama's comments that the lack of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians has complicated his efforts to deal with Iran.

Thanks to Wikileaks the American public now knows that Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, and Jordan pray to Allah that someone will take out the Iranians. They don't care who it might be; the USA, Israel, ..... whoever. But, of course, the USA or Israel, working jointly, or separately, are probably the only ones who could pull it off. The likes and dislikes of the Palestinians are the very last thing they dwell on. That, at any rate is what we find in the honest reporting of American diplomates throughout the middle east.

It's actually not very different than when Israel took out Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor. The Arabs all booed Israel in public, but behind closed doors they were all dancing and popping champagne corks.

So why has Obama been playing the role of Hamlet, when a course of action lay so clearly before him? Who knows? I assume it's because being a community organizer was really very poor preparation for running things from the oval office.