Being There

It has been duly noted that once again we seem to be on the wrong side of things. We’re supporting a rag-tag army of assorted leftists and Islamic radicals, and throwing Mubarak - a U.S. ally - under the bus (so to speak); that, for all our efforts to help lift the Egyptian people out of the tyranny of what essentially amounts to (we are told) U.S.-sponsored poverty, we are inadvertently abandoning them to another kind of tyranny - one of Islamic fundamentalism which would likely put Israel - another so-called U.S. ally - at risk, as well as the Suez Canal, a major shipping lane (primarily for oil) which is likely to affect even Europe - more U.S. ‘allies’ - adversely.

Nobody asks why the people of the Middle East are in perpetual poverty, despite untold billions pumped in by the West (for oil). Nobody asks why conditions for Muslims in India continue to be markedly worse than they are for Hindus (and others), despite government efforts to give them every possible advantage.

Perhaps we haven’t exactly thought it through all that well; perhaps we haven’t considered all the implications of embracing shariah and treating it on par with what our own sacred texts espouse. Perhaps we thought that by siding with a seemingly ‘popular’ movement all else would fall into place; and we would be loved as we’ve never been loved before.

Such miscalculations are easy to make. Carter miscalculated Iran and we’re still paying the price. They still hate us. But he meant well. At least, we think he did.

We’re also giving Obama the benefit of the doubt in the current situation. We seem to have forgotten his stance on the Iranian popular uprising a year or two ago. We seem to have forgotten his stance when Honduras went through its constitutional travail, as well as so much else that has been plaguing us domestically since this man assumed power. We’ve refused to connect the dots.

I still remember as a child, the seemingly endless wait at restaurants for the waitress to bring our food was made tolerable by the table mats I was given. The ‘connect-the-dots’ game was always a part of it. The game was relatively easy. The dots were always numbered; and I knew my numbers. I knew what order they came in. Yet, I would always hesitate to start, trying to predict before-hand what figure would ultimately emerge.

Today, connecting-the-dots seems to have become a lost art. While it’s true that the dots are no longer numbered, they are self-explanatory nonetheless. We have been reading the newspapers, after all. We can remember what has happened previously and in what order it happened. We have seen enough of it to know what is likely to happen next - and afterwards…

Still, we act like every day is a new day. All events are random and unexpected. Obama has been in office two years - and unpleasant things have happened and are continuing to happen. Where is all this ‘hope and change’ thing taking us?

While all our problems have been attributed to Obama’s inexperience (including, of course, his constant hectoring of Israel to mind its ways), a pattern seems to be emerging.

Heads of state are beginning to notice and draw conclusions. While we gnash our teeth, seemingly finding ourselves at the mercy of unrelated events, our enemies are beginning to take liberties. Our friends are beginning to distance themselves. Our economy is going to the dogs. Our ‘fixes’ only seem to be making things worse. And throughout it all, our government media tells us that all is hunky-dory; that we are doing just fine; and that the light at the other end of the tunnel is straight ahead (under the inspired leadership of Imam Obama).

Things are falling apart. Despite removing ‘mother’ and ‘father’ terminology from U.S. passport applications and replacing it with gender neutral verbiage (‘parent one’ and ‘parent two‘), junior Obama is finding that it still takes either Mom or Dad to drive the fambly (sic) sedan.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Circuses and Rights During Wartime

Interesting how Congress has been reduced to gimmicks. Interesting how appearances are used to overshadow fundamental differences that are said to exist between Republicans and Democrats. Perhaps the lesson here is that there really is no difference; that it’s all a part of the same dysfunctional, irrelevant stew - or worse. The only voice that matters is POTUS’. Without cut-out POTUS, no one would be there, dressed in finery, kissing and hugging; beaming and patting backs. It’s a carnival barker‘s paradise put on every year for the amusement of themselves, and so-called political pundits. “…and let’s all meet afterwards for drinks.”

The public remains the foil. All that will be said and done will be tailored to appeal to TV couch potatoes. Remind that last year’s theme was ‘focusing on jobs‘ (like a laser). What happened to all those jobs? Fool me once…

The most memorable of these presidential high-performances (in my lifetime, at least) was back when LBJ announced he won’t be running for a second full term. Now that was news! It sent shock waves throughout the nation. Dare we hope for anything of substance?
------------------------------------------------------------
Make no mistake about it, yesterday’s bombing of the airport in Moscow was an attack on all of us. We diminish what happened when we ask why? The fact is, we do not understand the motives of terrorists. In last night’s interview with Stephen F. Cohen the word ‘Islam’ was mentioned exactly once.

The word ‘terrorist’ explains nothing - no motive; no philosophical or historical underpinnings - only nihilism. Seeking explanations under such conditions inevitably brings us back to ourselves. We are at fault - the enduring mantra of narcissists.

There are infinite explanations for why this may be so. The most plausible both start with ‘p’: ‘poverty’ and ‘politics’. There are infinite reasons that argue against both. This whole terror thing has become a (war) dance. The terrorists lead; we follow. We screen ourselves before getting on an airplane. The terrorists change tactics. They target innocents waiting for loved ones to arrive. We increase security perimeters. The terrorist target public places. We put up cameras on street corners. They send mail bombs consisting of wires, then powders, then liquids…

There is no winning this. We must be persuaded to lead. We must fight fire with fire. We must do as they do. Only, we must be smarter about it. We must lead. It does us no good to chuckle about Mr. Putin’s embarrassment as he chuckles about ours. We’re all in this together. We must work together - not celebrate momentary relief that it wasn‘t us (this time).

This is war. All is fair in love and war. In war, conventional niceties go out the window. We must do what they do. We must blow up their stuff. We must not play footsies with nations who sponsor terrorism - as Putin continues to do wit Iran. We cannot continually appease and change the language to reflect a fiction.

We must begin to close their mosques, bar them from our shores and send home those who are already here. Sure, it’s unfair. Many good people will suffer inconvenience. But aren’t we inconvenienced by them. Never once have anyone of us heard anything even close to condemnation from their side. Their silence makes them accomplices. Change must come from within. Perhaps once they are back home, they will change things. Why is the onus always on us - to change?

Muslim countries routinely attack Christians and Jews. In some, Christians and Jews are prohibited from even being there. Fine. It’s their turf. I know many families who wont allow smoking or guns in their homes. It is their right.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Drifting

Just finished a delightful book, “The Village By The Sea” by Anita Desai. It tells of a family in rural India - the father is a drunk, the mother is sick and dying, their 13-year old daughter is running the household, her 12-year old brother runs off to Bombay; there are also two young (school-age) girls - life looks very bleak indeed for this unfortunate family.

However, things change. And when things can’t get much worse, they often get better. The trick to survival, the author tells us, is keeping the faith. As long as you have hands and fingers to work, there’s hope.

America has had it pretty good for a long time. There’s nothing here even close to approaching conditions that exist for many Indians even now. We are often told that poverty leads to crime; that religion is all that enforces the ‘goodness’ of man; and if not religion, it is the state that must be the final arbiter in any matter.

In Desai’s book, religion plays practically no role, and neither does the state. People are ‘good’ by nature, despite their faults.

We know where Obama stands on the issue of poverty. For him, the ultimate solution is always the state. It is a philosophy he shares with Hu Jintao, his current White House guest.

Americans are almost evenly divided on the issue. Many believe that rolling back the state will bring about untold disaster. Slightly more believe that the state itself is the cause of disaster.

It is likely that we will keep vacillating between the two extremes for some time to come. Meanwhile change is inevitable. This is another theme of “Village”. Change must not necessarily be bad. It can be neutral. When Obama answers a reporter’s question by saying that “China has a different political system than we do…” he is absolutely right. He was also speaking honestly when he said that he intends to transform America.

Americans should have been astute enough to ask what exactly he meant by that. Did he mean to ease America into the Chinese system, or the Islamic system; or did he envision himself as the author of a brand-new system that has never been tried before?

We are perplexed as we watch our president work. He seems to dismiss the American system entirely. To him it is a hated relic of the past. And yet, much of what he ends up doing is following along in our previous president’s footsteps - clearly without conviction.

Perhaps Obama is impatient. He cannot wait for the changes that will come naturally. He pouts and threatens perceived enemies. He pushes and prods. And yet, he is most popular when he’s on vacation.

As far as the public is concerned, Obama’s principle problem is that he has told us nothing. He hasn’t articulated his plan. We seem to be drifting. He tells us “we’re going there“, and we end up here. And then he tells us “here is there”. It’s not something that inspires much confidence.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Kyrgyzstan

Is it just random, roving gangs of jihadis, would-be dictators and assorted miscreants who are raising Cain in Kyrgyzstan? Or is the whole show being directed by legitimate and recognizable political entities? For example:

There are so-called Maoists operating in parts of north-eastern India, attacking government installations, derailing trains, killing policemen and so on...

India views the Maoists as a bother and often as an embarrassment. Some claim they have their roots in poverty stemming from inadequate access to government cheese. Their answer would be to develop the areas where Maoists operate and provide opportunity and services for the villagers so that they might be less eager to embrace violence.

At the same time, there has been a festering border dispute between India and China to which no solution is in sight. Add to this China’s stated ambition to see India broken up into autonomous states.

Is it therefore so impossible to believe that the Maoists are in fact China ops, sent there specifically to cause trouble; that it has nothing to do with poverty and insufficient attention from the Feds; that Indian villagers participating (do in fact) do so under duress?

There are proxy skirmishes going on all over the world. They are ugly and draw our attention. At the same time, they obscure the real players in the haze of immediate human brutality and suffering.

Even Chicago gangs need money and supplies. They need direction. The money is filtered through middlemen who almost always have high political connections. The CIA has been accused of funding such gangs all over the world (not under Obama, of course). Iran has Israel surrounded by ops. Russia has its players in place and (we can assume) China has theirs as well. I find it laughable that we break our heads over what North Korea does, when (if we were serious) all we’d have to do is force China’s hand.

I haven’t had time yet to examine what’s going on in Kyrgyzstan and learn who the players are. But you can bet it’s not spontaneous or ‘accidental’. Two or more of the big boys in the region are engaged in a bout of arm-wrestling. They are being very careful not to get their Armani suits dirty.