At the movies: 'Straw Dogs' (1971)

In his column today, entitled “Israel Will Never Have Peace”, Bret Stephens (WSJ) makes the point by citing among other things UN resolution 194 which states that Palestinian “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date”. Clearly, this hasn’t happened. Why?

Has it not become clear that a majority of Palestinians that have been shut out would not live peaceably within a Jewish State? Let’s say that Switzerland had been created (for the Swiss) in some barren Alpine region. Would it have to build a fence to protect itself from its neighbors (Germany, Italy and France) who were intent on nothing less than genocide? Or would life go on peaceably, neighbor visiting neighbor and abiding by the relatively simple rules of good neighborly graces?

I’m reminded of Sam Peckinpah’s film, “Straw Dogs” (1971) I saw way back when it first came out. It was one of a handful of films I remember seeing with a pounding headache which progressed towards a crescendo throughout. A young couple had moved to what they both thought would be an idyllic place for them to live: a remote cabin near the village in Cornwall where she had grown up as a child. It turns out through a series of unfortunate incidents that the couple is targeted by townsfolk. Rotten Tomatoes says this: (The film) “expresses the belief that manhood requires rites of violence when a young couple's idyllic life is disrupted and forever changed when the violence and savagery they sought to escape suddenly engulfs them.” As all Peckinpah’s films, this one is violent alright. I sat tensed up from start to finish.

The reason for this (or any) violence was ignorance. Palestinians are fed hatred for Jews from birth. It’s there in their mothers’ milk. Reason plays no role in it. Israelis understand this. If they were to open their borders – as our border with Canada is essentially open – Palestinians would immediately stream in and wreck the place. At least, this is the assumption. And Palestinians have done nothing to show it to be otherwise.

The same way we don’t open the tiger cages in a zoo, Israel does not dare to open her borders. Unfortunately for Israel, the situation is reversed. It is Israel that lives in a cage. Of the estimated 7.6 million living in Israel, 20% are Arabs who also enjoy representation in the government. Their standard of living is markedly higher than that of most Arabs living outside of Israel.

The world has turned its back on Israel and decided to side with the tigers. Like David in “Straw Dogs”, it will be up to Israelis to protect themselves. Even if Israel should win – another myth those mildly sympathetic to Israel usually comfort themselves with – the resulting losses would be insurmountable all around.

The enmity between the Palestinians and Israel is a trigger. We have put our worst elements in charge of it. Once tripped, there is no turning back. Even if Netanyahu decides not to fight (or decides only to go through the motions of fighting) the world will never again be the same – no matter the outcome. Washington keeps mouthing off about its infantile ‘reset’ button. War in the ME would definitely qualify as ‘reset’.

At the end of the film, David (Dustin Hoffman) is driving the injured Niles (the village idiot) to town, when the latter turns and says, "I don't know my way home." David smiles and says, "That's okay. I don't either."

China Watch: INDIA'S REJECTION OF U.S. AIRCRAFT

by B.RAMAN

Chinese netizens interested in strategic issues have been showing interest in India's reported decision to go for European jet fighters for its Air Force in preference to the aircaft offered by U.S. companies. They see this as a possible reflection of India's unhappiness over the continuing U.S. restrictive policies relating to the transfer of high technology to India. Another point being made is that the U.S. support for India's permanent membership of the UN Security Council was as a quid pro quo for the Indian selection of the U.S. aircaft. Now that India has rejected the U.S. aircraft, will the U.S. still support India's permanent membership of the UNSC?

2. Annexed are some comments carried in the People's Forum section of the party-owned "People's Daily" online on the subject on May 1,2011. It is not clear whether these comments are of the "People's Daily" readers or have been lifted from non-Chinese sources. Normally, when the comments are lifted from non-Chinese sources, the sources are identified. In this case, no source has been identified for the post as a whole. ( 1-5-11)

(Bahukutumbi Raman is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate of the Chennai Centre For China Studies. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)

ANNEXURE
(Text of a post in the "People's Forum" section of the "People's Daily" online carried on May 1,2011)

India arms contract spurns U.S. fighters

India has shortlisted European jet fighters, in preference to U.S. and Russian rivals, in a hotly contested $11bn competition to supply the Indian air force with advanced combat aircraft.

At stake is a deal to equip India with 126 multi-role fighter jets in one of the world’s largest military contracts. The winning bid is expected to shape India’s air power for the next three decades and serve as the bedrock of a strategic partnership.

After trials, India selected France’s Dassault Rafale and the multinational Eurofighter Typhoon – both currently operating over Libya – to compete in the next stage of the competition, according to India’s defence ministry. A spokesman told the Financial Times that a final decision would be taken within a year.

The move will be a blow to the U.S. Washington strongly lobbied India to buy its aircraft as payback for the landmark Indian-U.S. civil nuclear deal in 2008. The agreement – brokered by Manmohan Singh, Indian premier, and then-U.S. president George W. Bush – brought India’s nuclear programme out of decades of global isolation.

Timothy Roemer, U.S. ambassador to Delhi, said the U.S. was “deeply disappointed” by the decision not to select U.S. defence companies. Earlier on Thursday, Mr. Roemer, a personal friend of Barack Obama, U.S. president, announced his resignation.

While Mr. Roemer said he was leaving India for personal reasons, as ambassador he had heavily promoted the U.S. bids. He said he had “accomplished all of the strategic objectives set forth two years ago” when he took the job.

Top Indian officials and politicians had indicated that they wished to buy U.S. military hardware to improve a fast-warming relationship between the two democracies in the wake of the transformative nuclear deal.

Are U.S. export policies to blame?

Defense contractors and industry experts are trying to come to grips with India’s decision to exclude The Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. from its $11 billion competition for a new fighter jet.

"India's decision was very surprising", says Tom Captain, vice chairman of global and U.S. aerospace and defense leader at Deloitte LLP. If the selection was based on technical merits, "it is difficult to explain how those two very capable aircraft were eliminated."

In the absence of factual information about how the selection was made, speculation is growing that restrictive U.S. export policies may have played a significant role in India’s evaluation of fighter jet candidates.

India is projected to spend $80 billion on new weapons and space systems over the next five years. It’s only a small fraction of what the United States spends, but the industry still regards it as a promising region where, once you get a foot in the door, opportunities could blossom.

Defense industry analyst Byron Callan contends that “technology transfer was a major consideration in this competition.”

Larry Christensen, an export controls attorney at Miller & Chevalier, in Washington, D.C., believes the Indian decision will have lasting implications for U.S. industry, even though, he says, he has not seen any proof that India’s choice was influenced by ITAR, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations that restrict exports of sensitive U.S. technology.

"The fact that an emerging power such as India would snub U.S. advanced weaponry offers further evidence that the current export control system — which dates back to the Cold War — has outlived its effectiveness", Christensen says. “The U.S. government cannot repeal the laws of economics,” he says. As the United States denies access to some of its best technology, it leaves a market void that, sooner or later, another country will fill. “When that happens, the U.S. export control policy of denial, or policy of heavy restrictions, become ineffective” for the purposes of barring potential enemies access to advanced weaponry."

It's a surprise for many analysts that U.S. fighters didn't win out. In recently years, America has been trying to court India by asserting its supportive stance over India's aspiration for a permenant UNSC seat. America arms makers are one of beneficiaries in the improved bilateral ties. They even got deals from India with big number without competing with rivals in public bidding. Some defense experts said the embarrassing result indicates that India's wariness toward America...
------------------------------------
My comment: Too many strings attached; U.S. economic and political stability questioned.

Bits: Around the World in 80 Days

If Mexico started shelling us from across the border, how long would we do nothing more than to hide in our cellars? This is the reality Israel has been facing for some time now. It knows that the shelling is designed to provoke a greater war in the region – a war (barring a Biblical miracle) she would lose.

Israel has essentially zero friends. Even if she were to defend herself successfully, she would be condemned by virtually all nations. Should she lay herself down in front of the lions and beg for mercy, there might be a chance – but you know how lions are.

At the moment – even with Obama’s empty rhetoric – Kaddafi has more street creds than Israel could ever hope to have. Kaddafi’s crime was to stand up against AQ and the Iranian axis. We jumped on the scaffold too soon. The axe hadn’t been sharpened yet and we looked foolish just holding sticks in our hands.

Kaddafi will fall – they all do – but it will be on his terms. In 50 years, all the kids will be wearing t-shirts with Kaddafi’s picture on it.

Kaddafi had long ago agreed to support and be a key member of Soros’ Open Society. In that he was one up on us. (We joined up much later.) He knew how to work it. He knows where the bones are buried, even if he never intended to swallow all of it.
-------------------------------------------------

Thaddeus gets it – up to a point. The reason it no longer matters if the president shows up for work or not; the reason it no longer matters if the parties tie themselves in knots over what essentially amount to non-issues; the reason our government has ceased to function in its service for the people of the United States is because our government is now elsewhere. It is elsewhere that the real decisions are now being made –while Washington remains a convenient diversion, a pointless, but seductive charade.

Look at the flourishes of the right hand and miss what the left hand is doing. If you really want to know what’s going on, look to Soros' Open Society, look to the UN, look to The Hague, look to NATO. Washington has long since surrendered its sword.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Dilma's Dilemma

Another teachable moment. Another glimpse into the mind of our president, Barack Hussein Obama. How he is handling Libya could have been foreseen long ago. Other commanders-in-chief have done as much at the mere drop of a hat. It’s not what happens there that should be of concern to us. Of far greater concern should be what we ourselves have become.

We have become a nation of lawless and corrupt governance. Our Constitution specifies that Congress must be consulted, and be made to approve any deployment of American troops overseas. Barack Hussein Obama is the first president to bypass this convention. Instead, he claims to derive his power from what he refers to as the ‘international community’ (UN). As such, he has further shredded the Constitution of the United States. At the same time, he is continuing to marginalize the role of Congress. So much for representative governance.

Again, all this could have been foreseen. Months back, I wrote that the deliberate chaos in the 111th Congress would serve to discredit the institution irreparably. Here we have it in black and white. What does this say about the sanctity of our vote? In a short two years we have devolved from a constitutional republic to a tyranny.

Our media does not appear to grasp the enormity of what has happened to us. Small wonder. The success or failure of any quasi-democratic setup depends on an educated public. Our schools have become mere cookie cutters. The level of understanding among recent graduates is astoundingly below par. It cuts across the board from math through English. “When NEWSWEEK recently asked 1,000 U.S. citizens to take America’s official citizenship test, 29 percent couldn’t name the vice president. Seventy-three percent couldn’t correctly say why we fought the Cold War. Forty-four percent were unable to define the Bill of Rights. And 6 percent couldn’t even circle Independence Day on a calendar.”

I understand that polls are often skewed to elicit certain answers; to show specific results, most likely ones that grab headlines and spur magazine sales; and, don’t forget, of course, to promote the urgency for more money for favored institutions (such as teachers unions) and in NEWSWEEK’s case, Democrats. In this particular survey, published this week, I suspect, the numbers are probably even worse. The teaching of civics and history has perhaps suffered most in recent years. It’s natural that these would be edged out by an ever greater emphasis on ideologically based solutions. Let’s face it, Marxism is now in vogue.

As our president travels splendidly throughout Brazil, burnishing his Marxist credentials, his unconstitutional behavior with regard to Libya goes almost unnoticed. Obviously, most Brazilians have not yet gotten the message that he is one of them as evidenced by the feisty street demonstrations against him. But Dilma knows why he’s come. She’ll let him grovel and beg for her validation. Still, she must weigh her ultimate approach to him against her own need for a demon. The U.S. has always served admirably in this regard.

Even if the new Brazilian president should withhold her favors, the trip should still be regarded as a success. When things go wrong in Libya, Obama can always say, “It wasn’t me. It’s all Hillary’s fault. I wasn’t even there.”

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Lions And Ducks And Bears

The Middle East is burning. Protests spreading in Libya; protests spreading in the Middle East and beyond. Once the cat is out of the bag, everything becomes unpredictable. In Libya, the prize is light crude. Many nations - especially in Europe - depend on it. Oil prices rising everywhere - affecting everything. Someone in Libya shouts, “Where is America? Where is the UN? This is a massacre! We need help. Now!”

They don’t ask for Chinese intervention. They don’t ask for Russia - or Europe. They ask for America. An automatic reflex.

“Sorry guys, you’re on your own. We’ve got our own insurrection to deal with. Wisconsin. And it’s spreading to other states.“

“But what about the oil? We’ll pay!”

“Sorry again, guys. We don’t need your oil. We’re ’green' now. Don’t you see? We’re green. Oil is a cancer. We’re trying to choke it off. We’ve got windmills, batteries, solar panels - and mercury light bulbs. Besides ….besides what?

“While we may have started all this mess with the likes of Google, Facebook and the unions, it’s out of our hands now.”

Kaddafi is toast. He burnt us once too often. No sympathy for that dictator. He’s fresh out of IOU’s - and so are we. The rest will fall in place after the dust has settled. Blame it on Israel.
---------------------------------------------------------------

In the center of the town, opposite the station, is the village green. There, right in the middle, is a pond. The family often goes there to feed the ducks after dinner with the bread that’s left over.

Dad says, “Look kids! They’re over there.” And the kids run over to where they are.

When the parents catch up with them, mother remarks, “My, how they’ve grown!”

Dad is unsure whom she’s referring to - the children or the ducks - and says nothing. When their bags are empty, the children are anxious to leave.

“Say good-bye to the ducks,” Mom says.

“They’re not ducks,” chime the children in unison.

“What are they then,” asks Mom.

“Bears,” say the children.

Mom and Dad laugh. They think it’s cute. From then on, the family refers to the ducks floating silently on the surface of their own reflections on the village pond as ‘bears‘.
----------------------------------------
Later that year, the county proposed a bear hunt to cull the sloth that’s become a nuisance to garbage cans and pets. There were so many people against it that the idea was scrapped.

Mom mentions it one evening to Dad. “They’ve banned duck hunting,” she says.

Dad looks up from his paper. He seems annoyed. He liked to go duck hunting with his friends - in season, of course. “What’s wrong with duck hunting?” he exclaims.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

When The Law Is Eric Holder

Exactly right, Corlyss! This is all part and parcel of the ‘politics of personal intimidation’. That’s why there are no ‘good’ Muslims around. They’re afraid they will be singled out; their neighbors and families harassed.

The emphasis has shifted away from polls and is now firmly entrenched in virtual power. It’s long been the case on the nation’s college campuses; in the media; in the arts; on the cocktail circuit. Never let your conservative sentiments slip. You’ll find yourself disgraced; ridiculed; excluded. I’ve noticed it myself, buried in my bunker as I am. “I’m no longer your friend,” says one. “You’re just plain crazy,” says another. “I think you should see about getting some help,” a third suggests.

A few years back, I thought I might be able to further my career by writing liberal stuff. I tried. I just couldn’t do it. Yet, there are some out there doing it and collecting salaries.

Loved the ‘Arcade Fire’ tune though. I think I’ll post it on my own blog later. Oh, I know they’re all lefties - but, then again, they couldn’t all be that mindless. Most are just putting on an act to stay alive.

With these latest tactics, it only takes a relatively few - enough to fill a camera angle. Everything else drops off the frame. After that, you can say anything you want and have it be everywhere. It’s like these watchdog groups that consist of three people and a fax machine - the ones that caution against treading on cryptobiotic soil. I guess now it’s even gone beyond that.

In India, computer usage is strictly monitored. When you go into a cyber café to check your e-mails, you’re required to sign in and show your ID or passport. “There’d been threats against the Chief Minister,” they say.

It’s about to happen here as well. The government will control the internet in the name of ‘National Security’ and only the ‘right’ people will have full access. It’ll only take one mishap traced to some loony tunes in some basement garage to initiate a crackdown and make it permanent.

The freedom to assemble was included in the United Nations’ ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ in 1948. The fact that it had to be an enumerated right in the first place meant that some countries viewed it as a threat and did not allow it.

Conventional wisdom had it that relatively small gatherings can never be a threat to the enormity of a state. They never envisioned virtual assemblies on Facebook.

Still, a treat is a threat. It might be overt or implied. It’s a matter for the law to handle. It gets a bit trickier when the law is Eric Holder.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

500 Million Pounds of Cheese a Year

Is it just me, or do Democrats invariably resort to disgraceful tactics? If so, should they even be allowed to govern. It does seem like Republicans have no antidote. Darrell Issa tries to make a start. From what I hear, he now faces a whole team of gumshoes trying to dig up dirt to discredit him. Additionally, his committee has now been subpoenaed relating to hearings held back in 2008 regarding Roger Clemens’ steroid use. Henry Waxman - not Issa - presided back then. The Dems must be terribly afraid of what Issa might find. They’ll try everything to block the investigations.

There’s dirt on all of us. It shouldn’t be hard to find dirt on Issa. If he happens to be a saint, they’ll just make something up. And the press will run with it. And even our guys will buy into it. Why? Because they’re dirty too - some of them. The rest are cowards (thank you, Joe). They thought the political gig was going to be a cake walk.

This is not a way to run a railroad. There’s real corruption here. This isn’t a way to run anything, much less a nation.

The Democrat party in this country is completely out of control. They’ll say and do anything. And they’ll do it in broad daylight. And the media spins it for them. And they come up smelling like roses every single time.

The folks are hip to it. And they’re disgusted by it; yet, at the same time they applaud like seals when Republicans stumble. Republicans are like the Jews - the pariah underdog; and I do mean ‘dog‘. Everybody will be applauding today - including the Jews - when the UN resolution against Israel passes without America’s objection. Everybody will know that it’s a farce, but - like with Bush in his heyday - we seem to get a kick out of beating piñatas to death and spilling their guts.

Sure, there will be some who will voice concern. But their concerns won’t be heard on the national media which is stuck in its own template. When a CBS reporter was beaten and raped in Cairo while the crowd shouted, “JEW!”, everybody tried to pretend it never happened, because it didn’t fit the template of the ’happy revolution’. Yesterday, Obama is said to have called her at the hospital where she’s been recovering. It must have pained him to have to do this - his people behaving so shamefully. Why couldn’t it have been Israelis or Tea Party members? Or a gang of right-wing talk show hosts?

Hypocrisy again; double standard again; spinning again. So tired of pointing it out (again)! Union thugs in Madison, and Hamas in Gaza using children as human shields - both lying through their teeth. Lawmakers running for the hills in cheesy Wisconsin; taxpayers bleeding red ink - it’s all grist for the ever-grinding mill just as long ‘Democrats' are turning the screws.

My humble message for Republicans: Fight them tooth and nail or roll over now! But spare us the drama.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Same As The Old Boss

With the illusion of American influence in world affairs rapidly fading, there are several players already making moves to fill in the gap. Of these, perhaps the most visible, is the UN. The UN, however, represents only a small shift away from U.S. (non)-policy. It is also strapped for cash, riddled with corruption, and highly politicized. It is either unable or unwilling to use force, depending instead on containment, negotiation and the paying of bribes. The UN takes no firm positions, tending instead to go along with the strong horse.

These are also the tendencies that have led to America’s downfall. There is no reason to expect the UN to succeed with the very same methods that have rendered America clownishly irrelelevant. Therefore, a UN high-profile presence in any of the world’s trouble spots will ultimately not make a significant difference.

Thus far the UN has been used primarily to reap money and concessions from America. It is fully in support of ‘global warming’ initiatives which are then used to put pressure on the United States to give more money and retract its claws. UN soldiers have been accused of plunder and rape. They have been accused of extortion. They have been uses as human shields. Though blind themselves, they have been used as seeing eye dogs. They are well recognized scofflaws to which any cop in New York can readily testify.

Where Israel is concerned, the UN’s bias against it has been legendary. The UN is heralded by New York’s liberal elites (including Jews) and Washington progressives as the 'be all and end all'. This is in part because of the UN’s appearance of civility. Members of the UN are well paid. They are given a lofty platform from which to opine; they tend to smile a lot; except when it is in their best interest to frown for a laugh line, usually at the expense of Israel.

If the people of the Cote D’Ivoire are depending on the UN to settle things, they’ve got a long wait. They’d do much better to look to themselves if their aim is to avoid another African genocide. I understand it’s in the blood over there. A volatile mix of religion - especially Islam - and politics practically guarantees chaos. This time the U.S. won’t ride to the rescue. Look at what’s just happened in Haiti, less than a thousand miles from our shores. We’ve engaged the services of not less than three living U.S. presidents (along with much fanfare) to help. The reason there has been no reporting on this is because all three have failed.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Transfer of Dominance

Like everything else, our administration’s announced suspension of its now obvious policy of forcing Israel into an ever-shrinking box can be seen in one of two ways. Supporters of Israel (and Israel itself) will say that Obama has learned his lesson and realized that the Palestinian side of the conflict has never had it as its goal to make peace, and has no intention of doing so no matter how many concessions Israel might make. The denouncers of Israel (and America) will claim that they have succeeded in forcing Obama out of the game.

Both positions contain an element of truth. The real question that needs be asked is: Why has Obama in effect given up, taken his toys and gone home? And why now?

Wikileaks may have played a part. Revelations so far have pretty much left Israel smelling like a rose. It could just be that our president has seen the writing on the wall. He could be thinking that something is about to happen over there and he wants to make sure he’s as far away from it as possible when it blows. In other words, he’s ducking.

There’s always the possibility of war, of course. Yet, short of outright hostilities, diplomatic efforts - now underway - involving nations beyond White House influence could also unmask Obama’s shameless dereliction of responsibility (and climb-down) with regard to one of America’s heretofore closest allies in the Middle East.

The UN is said to introduce a resolution which will unilaterally declare Palestine a state. It is likely to be overwhelmingly supported by its member nations. The American media will paint this development as a total surprise. The U.S. will abstain from voting, breaking with its previous policy. Instead, China will veto, and the transfer of global dominance will be complete.

Whatever happens will happen. Obama has decided he’ll have no part in it. His lack of leadership will once again be exposed, providing fresh impetus for unaligned nations to rally around a winner.

For further reading, google Caroline Glick’s latest assessment of the situation in today’s Jerusalem Post, particularly as it‘s being played out within our own hemisphere.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Back To Normal

All day long, the world’s eyes are on the president of the United States. He freezes up like a deer in the headlights. The problem is that he can conceive of only one enemy: the American people (whom he has over a barrel, to be sure). Give him that much.

Meanwhile, the Chinese are saying, “Dear Mr. Obama, what more do you want? Here, we’re giving you the little pervert on a silver platter. Grow a spine! Take charge of your country! Act like a frigging leader!”

Obama doesn’t budge. Obama freezes - like a deer in the headlights.

What will it take for the American president to act? A direct attack on the lower forty-eight? We can no longer be sure what he would do. We know now no ally is worth waking the American tiger at 3:55 in the morning. Israel is ripe for the picking; so is Taiwan. India - forget it…

What would Reagan do? Remember that missile he sent right to Kaddafi’s doorstep? I don’t remember the provocation. But it sure served to shut Kaddafi up for a good number of years - killed one of his kids (or wives), I can’t quite remember.

America! Please! Get your act together! Take out Il. You know where he lives. And, while you’re at it, take out Ahmadinejad, Chavez and the rest of the lunatics. Send them a love pat and quit fooling around with Americans’ jockeys. Do something useful for a change!

Osama is a phantom. Forget about him. He’ll whither and die on the memory vine once you decide to take a stand. Take out all the vermin you know exists. Sure, we’ll bitch and moan at the UN. So what? That’s what‘s expected of us.

Reign in all your human rights groups - you know, what's left of your supporters, the NGO’s, Hollywood, the Gorebots, etc. - the ones who know how to play the media so well. Get them to re-focus their narcissistic obsession. Get your women’s groups to condemn the Taliban with the same fervor with which they condemn your best and brightest. You’ll see how fast things change - back to normal.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Street Fighting Man

I too marched on Washington in my day, ostensibly to protest against the Vietnam war. We fell into one of three groups: professional agitators, self-righteous moralists, and those who just came out to raise a little hell. Though I would never have admitted it at the time, I was part of the latter, the biggest, group. Despite the civic display of tightly choreographed, helmeted phalanx; water cannon and tear gas, I felt perfectly safe for I knew that the government - unlike those of then communist nations - would take utmost care to see to it that nothing would happen to us. If we really had been asked to risk life and limb, I’m sure that 99% of us would have stayed away.

As it was, for most of us, it amounted to no more than a day trip - an afternoon of staged, pot-enhanced high drama - participatory theater under bright skies.

In Britain, the operative word is 'hooliganism'. Behavior after sports events had become so bad, young Britains have been barred from attending similar events in other countries. In Europe, we’ve seen self-respect eroding for a long time. This is fertile soil for agitprop. It is to demonstrate that the government is essentially powerless. The issue of university fees is just pretext. In France, the raising of the retirement age from 60 to 62 is just pretext - a reason to come out into the streets in feigned (Street Fighting Man) anger and protest and smash things and poke a stick in the eye of authority for the sake of ritual rebellion alone - to vent, to explode into violence primarily because of some sense of individual dislocation or inadequacy that often accompanies the transition from infantilism.

Don’t tell me these people have any higher purpose in mind; don’t tell me they have any profound agenda - most of them - in their frenzied, out of control, pointless, pathetic pantomime. People with legitimate grievances do not behave like that.

…and it’s coming to America. It’s orchestrated by the Left. It is to undermine the nation, to overwhelm it, score propaganda points and render it utterly impotent. It’s revolution for revolution’s sake; to topple the elite; erase standards; nullify morality - to be replaced by the finality of tyranny. It’s AQ; it’s Al Sharpton; it’s community organizing; it’s the UN; unions; Bill Ayers; Rev. Wright. It’s George Soros. It’s Barack Hussein Obama.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

A Cry From Hell

“Where did we come from?” I add, Where are we going? Both questions are entirely legitimate. Both require a modestly broader view to understand and formulate a response. Not only are we shutting the door on the physical universe, but we’re closing our eyes also to time (history). I’m not even talking ancient history. I’m talking just three years ago. Who would have thought then that we would have a Marxist Muslim president running the country (into the ground)? (Yes, I said it!!!) So when Mr. Doakes says he didn’t vote for Obama, I am compelled to ask, Who the hell did?!

Just yesterday I was sent a video of Muslims stoning a young girl to death. There were roughly a dozen young men eagerly participating. The rest were busy taking videos. It reminded me of the beating death of Abelino, the Ecuadorian dishwasher, in a wealthy suburban enclave on the Jersey side of New York City, which was also video taped. At the time I thought this the height of depravity.

I have since altered my view somewhat. The video that was sent me was so graphic, it literally turned my stomach. No human being on earth could have committed so serious a crime as to deserve the punishment that this (what looked like a) 14-year old was subjected to. And yet, no one decries it. No one condemns it. Abu Ghraib was the big story in the headlines day after day during the Bush presidency - American prison guards draping women’s underwear over accused terrorist’s heads. Then there was the relatively gentle art of waterboarding. And now there are tomes of restrictions our soldiers have to deal with about how to treat the enemy. It’s no wonder that so many of our own have been dying needlessly, snared by endless regulation demanding tea and sympathy - on the battlefield no less.

True gratuitous brutality is routinely ignored. Every adherent to the Muslim faith should be outraged and condemn the stoning of women in the name of their god. Yet, they are silent. In fact, they demand that all nations adopt shariah. Where are the women’s groups? Where are is Amnesty International? Where is our president? Where is every human being who still manages to maintain a shred of conscience to draw a line in the sand and say this cannot be tolerated in the 21st Century? Where is the UN?

Everyone participating in such a stoning should be hunted down and hauled off to The Hague for prosecution and punishment. Otherwise the phrase 'crimes against humanity' rings empty as a bell. But nothing of the sort ever happens. Instead, the men wearing the white hats are condemned to suffer death by a thousand cuts while the brutality of shariah advances even to desecrate the sacred cemetery of 3000 killed on 9/11.

Still, we watch as our enemy advances - and we say nothing. In fact we encourage his advance. We condemn ourselves instead of him. In another three years, we will look around and see the stain of slowly bled goats spreading on American soil, and we will ask ourselves, How has it come to this? We will read increasingly about honor killings, beheadings and shariah based banking, and we will ask again...

Now is the time to stop it. Just as Barack Hussein Obama should never have been elected senator.

I’ve altered my view of those who video tape such Islamic horrors as the stoning of women, the deliberate amputation of healthy limbs, and public execution in the market square. Rather than a gratuitous wallowing in blood, I now see it as a cry from hell - a warning. “This is how it is here,” they desperately try to tell us. “Please don’t let it happen there. Even if hell on earth is here, we can still maintain the hope that we can escape it. If the whole world should be consumed by this sort of savagery, there will be no where left to run; nothing to do but to strap on a suicide belt in the hope of saving as many as possible from the inhumanity of this, our most shameful experience."

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Parallels

I don’t know why we continue to take anything Biden says seriously. The man is (and has always been) perfectly comfortable in spouting gaffes and contradictions. Ironically, he represents the only window of transparency the current administration has to offer. From this episode alone, we learn Obama’s political strategy going forward: blame Republicans.

Will it work? No. Still, it amounts to a strategy. As long as Republicans exist they can expect to perform the role of catchall for every Democrat failure past, present and future.

It is now quite obvious to most that current policies have sent our nation into a tailspin. Why would Democrats continue - not only to pursue such policies, but - to actually double down on same? One way to look at it is that the Dems are truly misguided. They see what their policies have done but refuse to take note. Therefore they propose even more poison as a cure for a man who has already been poisoned. The truth of the matter is that Republicans have been unable to do anything to stop the Dems because they have lacked the votes. Neither have they spoken out against, and even that very softly. Democrats have pretty much had free run of the political barnyard.

What has evolved from a nagging suspicion to utter conviction for many, is that the deficit, joblessness, the growing racial divide among other (what are commonly regarded as negative) seemingly permanent features that have emerged since Obama took office, are all part of a deliberate plan to reduce America’s power and influence on the world stage. This effort has been long underway, spearheaded by prominent organizations such as the UN and by a coalition of countries that have previously been regarded as America‘s ‘enemies’. Now, many observers believe, it’s also happening from the inside.

The ‘change’ [as in the now (in)famous 'remaking of America'] as promised by Obama during the campaign has taken on an ominous tone. Few still believe that Barack Hussein Obama is merely inept. The evidence now overwhelmingly shows that he is exceedingly cunning and singularly committed to a vision that the American people want no part of.

Read Mary O’Grady’s article on Nicaragua in the Wall Street Journal this morning. Substitute ‘America’ for ‘Nicaragua’ and ‘Obama’ for ‘Ortega’ and you will discover astounding parallels. Republicans appear to be happy just watching the poll numbers. They might just find that a year from now it no longer matters.

Hollywood Always Has It End Well

The narrative in and around the Gulf is so compelling - so riveting - if it never had happened, we would have had to invent it. And so we did. Plenty of horror movies out there in which some threat is burgeoning and seemingly unstoppable. Then the hero rides to the rescue on his white horse… Hollywood always has it end well.

It occurs to me that in this particular oil spill saga there are no heroes – at least none that we can see (yet). It just keeps chugging along, getting worse every day. The means we have currently devised to mitigate the immediate problem – the loss of jobs; massive dislocation, and overall threat to the environment – seem inadequate. We’ve elected to sacrifice BP on the altar of public opinion and, along with it, even more jobs. The moratorium on drilling ups the ante as even more jobs are absurdly sacrificed to our pagan god, Gaia. In short, we seem to be fighting the loss of jobs with the loss of more jobs.

In the meantime, the spill spills on. There are signs that the media and our ADD president are on the verge of losing interest altogether. The World Cup and our rapidly approaching midterm elections are just too juicy to overlook. And then, of course, there was Michael Jackson’s death anniversary.

Odd to see no one coming to our aid. Besides affecting the lives and livelihoods of Gulf residents – not to mention wildlife – badly, the spill can also be classified as a global environmental emergency. Whenever there has been such an emergency abroad, the U.S. has usually been the first to arrive. We were always quick to offer humanitarian aid to the stricken whether we were invited or not. Earthquakes in Turkey and Haiti; tsunamis in East Asia; famine in Africa; etc. Often our considerable contribution had to be disguised - our sacks of emergency foodstuffs re-labeled - to look like it’s not coming from us but from some NGO (as not to offend the people filling their bellies with our own home-grown grains).

On May 3rd, 2008, Cyclone Nargis hit shore in Myanmar and devastated the densely populated, rice-farming delta of the Irrawaddy Division. It was the worst natural disaster in Burmese history. The ruling junta’s version of our Jones Act prohibited the country from accepting foreign aid – this, despite 200,000 dead or missing and millions displaced. We continued to beg and bribe officials and they eventually relented and allowed some of us in.

No such efforts are being made here. The nations of the vaunted ’global community’ seem to be just standing around, clucking their tongues and shaking their heads. Where are the Russians, the Chinese, the Venezuelans, Brazil? Where is the Middle East? Europe? Where is The Sierra Club? PETA? Nothing to say? Where is the UN to bash down our doors and fix this thing (which, as is becoming increasingly clear, we can’t handle ourselves).

“Yes, we can!” indeed! Since Obama has been in office, we haven’t been able to do anything, except to make things worse. Whether due to incompetence or by design, it doesn’t matter anymore. We’re going to hell in a hand basket. While the rest of the world just stands around watching.

I once saw an Indian film “Bandit Queen” (Shekhar Kapur) in which a woman was publicly beaten to within an inch of her life. The town’s people just stood around and watched. It sent a chill through my heart.

Could this be the legacy of Ameica's fall from grace: Nobody helping anyone? Every man out for himself?

Corruption Doubled, Tripled and Squared

I’m talking about corruption with all its bells and whistles – CORRUPTION on the highest order.

At first our currency/economy was based on gold. Then we got rid of gold and based our currency/economy on productivity (the talent, sweat and hard work of our population). Next, we based our currency/economy on credit (future productivity).

Note that each step expanded the universe of money significantly. Clearly, the gold supply is finite as there is only so much of it to go around. A calculation involving human productivity clearly increased the amount of what can be termed ‘distributable value’ or wealth. Adding to this a calculation involving future productivity (i.e. credit) had the effect of increasing it even more. Each step expanded the opportunity for individuals to generate untold riches, even as the basis for these (first gold, then productivity and, finally, credit) became more and more illusory and, at the same time, less and less stable.

The latest scam to increase the universe of money once again is ‘cap and trade’ which would essentially base our currency/economy on air. Step one was to declare CO2 a pollutant. Step two involves charging everyone emitting CO2 a fee for the unpardonable sin of breathing; and, thus, move vast amounts of money into the pockets of the people who were in on the hoax. Governments are in on it; academe is in on it; banks and investment firms (GS, Fannie and Freddie) are in on it; computer companies (Google) are in on it; media; education; unions – anyone who has been tireless in promoting the deal did so with the promise of a big pay-off to follow. Chicago was to be the center for trading in carbon credits. Already an exchange similar to the New York Stock Exchange is all set up there and ready to go.

When the University of East Anglia e-mails were released to the public the scam was exposed, it drove a stake in the heart of a world-wide fiction. The Left latched on to it big time for they rightly assumed it would put an end to capitalism. The one-worlders under the auspices of the UN latched on to it for they could now envision their dream - the dissolution of all borders - as being within reach. The religious wing, the environmentalists, viewed it as their ticket to a pristine world without man-made pollution.

Corruption equals the absence of principles. Any human endeavor lacking principles is bound to fail. The West has been in the process of shedding its principles for a long time. We have now reached the point from which there is no way forward. We have reached the wall. The attempt to tax air was the last straw. Still, those committed to what was obviously a hoax persist. They will now be tempted to apply force to get their way. We’re in for some rough sledding, folks.

Broken (Circle) Trust

I honestly don't know how it will shake out. I just know that something big is afoot. The Left in this country is on the march. Its aims are clear. Obama is the spokesman for the Left. We've sidled up to tyrants and autocrats under his reign; we've dissed and trashed former (like minded) allies. It's clear where Obama's sympathies lie. His actions so far have been consistent. The ones he has chosen to carry out his policies have backgrounds and beliefs consistent with his own. Every American president wants to establish a legacy. What legacy would you think Obama wants to establish?

Clearly, his eye is not on preserving America as she has been. Clearly, he has a much more encompassing vision. Obama sees himself as a world leader. He sees the world as being under the auspices of a single world body (like the United Nations). He sees himself as the leader of that august body. Yet he knows how despised America is in the UN and the world over. (This is not true, by the way; but Obama thinks it is just the same.) In order to ingratiate himself to our vocal enemies, he hopes to deliver the country that elected him president, toothless, broken and defeated. This, he thinks, will earn him a spot in the pantheon of socialist kings. (Ahmedinejad suffers under a similar delusion. Only, he's decidedly more sane than Obama. The Iranian (puppet) leader wants to earn kudos by taking out Israel - not his own country.)

People are only now waking up to the threat. (Clearly, it’s not a threat to socialists.) America is not, and has never been a socialist country. Americans will rise up and attempt to stem the red tide.

Like I said, I don’t know how it’ll shake out. Right now it’s a tug of war with the Left having a slight advantage. The American people know what’s at stake. Even if they are unable to articulate it, they can feel it in their gut.

My grandfather used to say, “Believe nothing of what you see and only half of what you hear.” It was his way of saying. “Go with the force.” Renaming the parties is simply in the interest of calling a spade a spade.

In the final analysis, it’s a matter of trust. We’ve pretty much been lied to all along. Washington is out for Washington no matter what they say. It’s just that the lies have become whoppers that can no longer be ignored. A ‘reality check’ is in order. It’s Washington, not America, that’s off on a fantasy ride.

I have a bridge I'd like to sell...

Everybody knows that our health care delivery system needs fixing. Too many people are forced to make medical decisions on the basis of whether or not they can remain economically viable. What we definitely don’t need, however, is a hugely inefficient government-run health care program that is twice as expensive as the one we presently have.

But, then, improving health care was never something that Obama had in mind in the first place. As I’ve stated previously, what the Left really wants is to destroy America’s flagship – the dollar. If it hasn’t been damaged enough already (under Bush), health care reform and/or ‘cap and trade’ – two huge pending tax-and-spend bills - would surely suffice to render our currency virtually worthless.

Like I said, we may be there already – only we don’t know it yet because too much ancillary stuff is still linked to the dollar, all of which is dropping at the same rate. Keep an eye on price of oil. A barrel of oil at $35 is still only a single barrel at $70. It is not double the amount. The only difference is, that at $70 a barrel, our money (in real terms) is worth half as much.

Most of the world is already screaming for a new base currency. This is music to our president’s considerable ears. Obama will become the first American president to chair the UN’s 15-member Security Council this month. This is where everything from ‘global warming’ to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is expected to be resolved. Then, I read this headline on Drudge yesterday morning: “UN wants new global currency to replace dollar...” Does anyone out there really think that Barrack Obama is going to the United Nations to defend the U.S. dollar? I have a nice bridge I’d like to sell to anyone who does.

Allow me to predict that he’ll endorse (in principle) the UN sponsored ‘global currency’ idea which will make us wards of the UN and subject to UN taxation. He will apologize; he will throw Israel under the bus. He will say all this and more to huge applause from the elite members of this august world body – and with barely a whimper from Congress and the American press. Nice work if you can get it!