The American Dilemma and How We Can Fix It

Posts tagged ‘Israel’


In the Midwest about twenty-five years ago, just about the time that common sense began its long sabbatical from which it has yet to return, a case came to court which involved a chicken farmer and a chicken thief.  The case was brought against the farmer by the crook.

The farmer had noticed that his chickens were diminishing in number, several at a time.  As he examined the coop he saw no evidence that a fox might be getting in among them as there were no feathers or mutilated chicken parts lying around.  So he concluded correctly that the thief was a human.

In order to preserve his flock and his livelihood, he set up a deterrent – a loaded shotgun inside the barn that would be activated if a person opened the door without disabling this trap.  He also posted a large sign warning whoever the thief was that they were in danger of being shot if the door was opened.

Several nights went by and suddenly the farmer was awakened to the sound of the shotgun being discharged within the coop.  In addition to the blast, he heard the chickens shrieking and went down to find the thief had been disabled by a blast from the gun.  The farmer called the local sheriff’s office and the thief was taken away.  The chicken farmer thought that he had successfully resolved the issue.  He was incorrect.

Several weeks went by and the farmer found that the thief had hired an attorney who had, on his behalf, filed a law suit against the farmer for “reckless endangerment.”  When the case came to trial, both sides made their arguments.  The farmer explained that he was simply trying to protect his family and his living.  He further pointed out that he had posted a sign, warning of the consequences of attempting to steal his chickens.  But, as it turned out, the thief was illiterate and had no idea what the sign said.  The court ruled in the thief’s favor – awarding him a judgment that was so large that the farmer had no way to pay it other than by signing the deed to his farm over to the crook.  Justice was done.

The way in which world opinion is developing regarding the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza reminds me of this sad miscarriage of justice.

Before the thief showed up at his farm, the chicken farmer had not deployed his shotgun.  Before Israel began bombing Hamas weapons arsenals, Hamas was regularly lobbing rockets into Israel.

Before Israel began destroying the tunnels that were intended to provide a means to carry out terrorism within Israel, Hamas had to build those tunnels – with concrete and other supplies that had been supplied by humanitarian and government agencies.  That concrete was supposed to be used to build schools.

Before a thousand or so Palestinian civilians were killed in the conflict, Israel implemented a defense system, “The Iron Dome” to defend itself against the three thousand or so rockets that were launched against it by Hamas.  Who knows if that system had proven to be ineffective, how many innocent Israeli citizens would have perished.

The “outrage” that much of Europe and now the United States has expressed towards the way in which Israel has conducted its self-defense, revolves around the children who have died.  The Israeli argument is that Hamas intentionally hides its assault weapons in places where there are children, specifically for the purpose of being able to wage a public relations campaign to supplement its inefficient military campaign.  The counter argument is that Israel is “indiscriminately” bombing schools and hospitals without regard to civilian casualties.

What is Hamas (and Islam’s) view of the sacredness of the life of children (or anyone else)?  The following Wikipedia, incomplete as it is, will give you an introduction to how children in Palestine are regularly recruited and exploited to become suicide bombers:

The problem with relying on information from Wikipedia is that it is a compilation of anonymous sources.  It is difficult to know whether any of the authors (or editors) have a personal agenda they want to advance.  But there are countless articles about suicide child bombers available to the reader who wants to do an internet search.  This practice is not restricted to Hamas or Hezbollah in Palestine but is a tactic that the Taliban in Afghanistan also used.

But even if we were to dismiss this as fabrication, what is Islam’s view of the value of children generally?  An interesting article appeared in “The Huffington Post” recently regarding the abuse of children and forcing them to labor:

If you examine the map and the countries which are listed as “extreme” examples of utilizing child labor, seven out of the ten are countries in which Islam is the state religion.  Between the way in which Islam treats its children, not to mention its women, it is clear that human life holds a very low level of importance within that creed.

The current conflict, like those which preceded it, have all been instigated by militancy on the part of the Palestinians.  It is hard for me to understand the criticism of Israel by the Europeans, other than to say that they have now allowed such a large minority of Islamic residents within their countries that they are deferring the inevitable conflict which will come to pass as these people make more and greater demands to have their way of life “accommodated” by the majority within those countries.  France, Germany and the UK, among others, will have to face that conflict when it erupts – and now would be better than later.  But all of them have adopted a Clement Atlee state of mind.  At the moment, they believe they have that luxury.  Israel correctly has no such opinion – realizing that they are the lone small expression of democracy in a very ruthless neighborhood.

Through a miscarriage of justice, the chicken farmer lost his property and his livelihood.  Irrespective of world opinion, Israel must continue undeterred in its fight for survival.  And it would to the benefit of the rest of the western world to realize that the jihadi who are today threatening Jerusalem and Tel Aviv have no plan to stop there.  As one American convert to jihadist Islam recently proclaimed in a You Tube video, “I’ll see you in New York.”


With all the news that has assaulted us in the last ten days, I’ve made at least eight different attempts at putting up a post.  But the sensory overload of all the noise in the news left each of those pieces unfinished as something new always seemed to distract me.  I have no doubt I will get back to them at some point in the near future.

The inspiration for this post is the furor raging over the President’s lack of decision over the atrocities the Assad regime is perpetrating in Syria – and a commercial that sums up the administration’s paralysis.  Specifically, it was an IHOP commercial which promoted their new line of waffles.  I can’t think of no better analogy for how the President has mishandled this entire affair.

Let’s be honest and admit that the situation in the Middle East is profoundly complicated and has been for thousands of years.  Not only are there ethnic issues but conjoined with those are religious ones as well.  That’s a combination that allows for an environment of conflagration and that is exactly what has unfolded for centuries.

I question whether the most seasoned and informed diplomats would be able to find a workable solution that would lead to a peaceful solution.  Many have certainly tried.

Let’s further agree that Assad is a ruthless and heartless ruler.  The testimony to that statement is that he has killed one hundred thousand of his people in the past two and one half years.  The recent alleged murder of an additional fifteen hundred or so people including hundreds of children seems to pale in comparison to his former activities, notwithstanding the use of chemical agents, presumably sarin gas, to dispatch those to their deaths.

It is hard for me to understand the genesis for the President’s outrage against the use of chemical weapons.  They are horrible and they have been banned and condemned by the international community for eighty years.  The Geneva Convention strictly prohibits their use.  Of course, the Geneva Convention also outlaws the killing of civilians and Assad and his opponents have disregarded that at least 100,000 times in two and one half years – most of which occurred under the watch of then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – now la dauphine assumptive of the Democratic Party as a presidential candidate in 2016.

Where is the outrage which came from this administration over the machete and gun murders that have killed an estimated 500,000 Congolese in yet another ongoing and seemingly never-ending civil war?  And how can we believe in the sincerity of an administration which has repeatedly denied the growing body of irrefutable evidence in scandal after scandal?

For rational people, war should be the absolute last step a nation should take – and then only after every other option has been considered and abandoned.  It should be undertaken only after a thorough evaluation of all the best evidence and weighing the different possible scenarios and their potential outcomes.  It should be considered by a thoughtful and moral President in consultation with other thoughtful and moral advisors.  Sadly, we do not have such a person in the White House and those advisors with whom he has surrounded himself are, in many cases, equally suspect.

Speaking of waffling, I find myself in the unusual position of flipping between the view that President Obama has an agenda to destroy America and the other that he is merely the most incompetent fool whom we have ever elected.  Frankly, there is a lot of evidence to support either viewpoint.  The one perception which is missing is that he has the nation’s best interests at heart and has merely made a few very substantial missteps despite his best intentions.  I see no evidence for that third scenario.

Perhaps it is the time in which we live which swept this very small man into office, replete with his tool bag of deception, deceit, no moral standards and nothing to commend him other than an appeal to the lowest, most carnal desires of a fawning plebiscite.  There are many in that electorate who will mindlessly defend their standard bearer, the facts not withstanding, because he serves and feeds their immediate lusts.  He is, truly, their man – and they are his.

For those of us who think outside the box and, despite the common fanfare broadcast by most of our nation’s media, come to rational conclusions, perhaps the greatest legacy of this president will be that he might have brought us to that cathartic moment when all around us is crumbling and it will awaken enough of us who believe in the vision and promise of the old America to take action to restore the nation and purge the sycophants who are leeching our society of its greatness.

Based on President Obama’s IHOP waffle “strategy,” it concerns me that we have placed in charge a man who, through executive order, would be able to order martial law should a true (or manufactured) national emergency exist.  And with an administration that has consistently sought to curtail civil liberties in its intrusion into our privacy and rights to defend ourselves in weapon ownership, one can’t help wonder whether this entire Syrian operation is merely a trial balloon to see how we would react should such an event occur.  Or, even more frighteningly, should the proposed minimal strike against Syria proceed, might this not provoke some response either here in America or against our allies in Jordan, Europe or Israel?

For nearly five years, we in America have had first hand evidence of an administration, headed by a puerile man, see how far and how fast he could bring down a once great and moral nation.  Now the world has a first hand opportunity to witness what we have had to live through.

That is perhaps the greatest transparency this administration has demonstrated during its term in office – and it has not made this revelation of its own volition.


In “Dreams From My Father” President Obama discusses extensively his father’s anti-colonial spirit and motivations.  Were this simply a documentary about his father and not a blueprint for the President’s own view of the world, the book might have been better titled, “Dreams Of My Father.”  I can only presume that the President, a person with several college degrees, made a conscious choice in entitling his work.

It will come as no secret that the most fundamental goal of most extreme Islamic cadres is this – the complete and utter destruction of Israel.  Those are not my words but theirs.

Corollary to that is the undermining of those governments it sees as supporting the continuance of the Israeli state – notably the United States and the United Kingdom ( but pretty much any western, non-Islamic country may be included in the list).

The United States is an obvious choice for their anger as this country has been a stalwart in supporting the tiny Israeli state militarily and philosophically, at least until the current Administration took office.  And Great Britain, who accepted the responsibility of providing a safe environment for the Jews who chose to immigrate to Palestine by the mandate of the League of Nations, is also an obvious target for their anger.

Americans have a very limited and often incorrect view of Islam.  They view most Muslims as nomadic Arabs, riding around the desert on camels and brandishing scimitars.  The fact is that while the most holy places of Islam, Mecca and Medina are in Saudi Arabia, most of the world’s Muslims are not Arabic.  This confusion is added to by the fact that all prayers and services in Islam, wherever they are conducted, are offered in the Arabic language – a requirement the Prophet Muhammad set out in the Koran and in various hadiths (sayings attributed to him).

If we were to look at the Muslim perspective in terms of today’s software technology, Islam would be God’s Revelation 3.0; Christianity 2.0; Judaism 1.0.  Islam is, of course, God’s ultimate revelation.  There is no religion 4.0 waiting in the wings to be unveiled.  We have seen that whether it is for religious or secular reasons, whenever anyone or any group believes itself in possession of “ultimate truth” there are no boundaries that may not be breeched in their attempt to “purify” the world according to their sense of righteousness and correctness.

As examples we have the ruthlessness of Joshua (famous for the battle of Jericho), we have the Inquisition, we have Hitler and Stalin, and today we have radical, fundamentalist Islam.  All are outgrowths of the same mentality – they believed that they and they alone were right – and would brook no interference from any who would stand in their way.

To return to the title of this post, why would radical Islam want to see an Obama victory?  Perhaps it is because they feel that of the two candidates, he would be less decisive in supporting the State of Israel than Governor Romney, thus allowing them to pursue their goal of annihilating the country and its people.

What support can I offer for this speculative theory?

First, the greatest and longest lasting colonial empire of all time had to be the British Empire on which, at one time, the sun never set.  Consider how Obama’s anti-colonial father, once a subject of that very empire in his native Kenya must have viewed these intruders in his land.  And if he passed those views along to his son, would that not explain why our relationship with our closest ally has become strained under the Obama Administration.

Second, consider the remarks that were made recently by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  He has been warning that Iran is extremely close to developing sufficient enriched uranium to make an atomic device.  In recent days he did everything but endorse Mitt Romney for President of the United States.  It is clear that he feels that his country has a greater chance of surviving a potential new holocaust under a Romney presidency than under one at which Obama is at the helm.

In a curious way, the views of radical Islam and of President Obama dovetail.  If we are to believe that the President shares his father’s views on colonialism, then it is not a far reach to see why radical Islam is comfortable with him because they also have an anti-colonial viewpoint – seeing the State of Israel as a colony created through the aegis of the Western powers – a colony of which they believe they are the rightful owners, endowed in that status by Allah.

The State Department initially categorized the attack on the the U. S. embassy in Libya as a spontaneous, unorganized reaction to the You Tube video which demeaned the Prophet Muhammad.  After several days of reviewing the events around this tragedy, the State Department changed its view and determined that the attack was anything but disorganized but was as well co-ordinated and planned as the events that took place on 9/11/01 here at home.

Why this attack at this particular time?  It is not hard to conjecture that with what has been widely advertised as a hotly contested and close Presidential race, it was to give support to incumbent Obama.  People have a tendency to stay with the same horse in a crisis, thinking that at least that horse knows the race course, even if he’s lagging behind the field.  Ask those who voted President Bush into a second term because of the then ongoing war in Iraq how well that theory worked for them.

There is no question in my mind that Mitt Romney is a lightweight in international affairs.  There is also no question in my mind that President Obama hasn’t bulked up very much on the subject either in his four years in office.  And lastly, there is no question in my mind that one of the brightest politicians on the planet, Prime Minister Netanyahu, who is perhaps in the best position to know, has thrown his support in favor of a Romney presidency.

That suggests that Israel’s arch-enemy, radical Islam would prefer President Obama for a second term and will do it’s best to see that he is re-elected, by whatever means they have at their disposal.

Tag Cloud