The Christmas story is an archetype. As such, it outlines profundities in human consciousness. One such profundity is, of course, the duality of the human mind: male, female; true God, false god; and finally, Jew and non-Jew. The Christmas story, in its innocence and simplicity, proves the falseness of many minds, and the redemption of others. Indeed, as the aged prophet Simon later told young Mary, "Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel...that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed." (Luke 2:34,35.)
The anonymity of poverty sometimes provides the most sure protection on earth.
When Jesus was born, no one seemed to know about it. Shepherds, the very lowest end of the social scale, were given absolute, spectacular revelation. (Luke 2:8-18). Yet no one of consequence would take what they said seriously. It was a tale of the hills, of the ignorant and superstitious. It was folklore from its first telling, guarded by the disdain of the mainstream. It would never leave the hills.
The unique and weird appearance of the Persians (Magi) in Jerusalem, inquiring for the "King of the Jews," to pay homage, was also irrelevant, but worse. It aroused suspicion. It was a positive offense to the captal. Insurrection was rife in Judea, and the Roman presence was intense therefore. That this caravan of foreigners would come a thousand miles to adore whom they believed a newborn king of the Jewish nation was a remarkable, outrageous event. (Matthew 2:1-12). It was unwelcome, worrisome, and a dangerous event. It was apparently played down in the media for security purposes.
The Magi were the world's specialists in the supernatural. They were international. They studied all 'power,' and created a central warehouse of collected knowledge of the occult. These represent the most educated men in the world of that time. And these came to Jerusalem, to bow before a newborn infant king! The globalist spooks alone recognized, from afar, from really far, the entrance of the Almighty into the world. In those least likely to have it, was found the most perfect faith.
The sincerity of the search is the key to success.
So in the shepherds we have the uneducated, lowest caste in the world, and in the Magi, the very highest, most educated, and wealthiest. Neither were held in esteem by the culture of Israel, particularly that which had developed in the first century. (Evidently the truth is not to be found in the mainstream things, but in the edges.) The lowest end of Jewish society, and the highest end of the Gentile world, from these came belief.
On this very point, the Israel's unawareness of this child's birth, many Christians want hold the Jewish leaders responsible, with acute blame. Christians often condemn the Jews for for a stubborn stupor, a stolid indifference, and a reprehensible unbelief. But Christians may be completely misunderstanding the providence of God in this thing.
The Roman authorities attempted to assassinate the new king as soon as his the birth was known (Matthew 2:16-18). How would the Jewish nation have fared, had the birth of Jesus been a point of national celebration?
Mary, apparently an orphan child herself, was chosen as the mother of Jesus, not some socially secure, established matron of a recognized family. Mary and Joseph couldn't even register in the local hotel. They were there to be taxed, but who knows whether or not that even happened? Joseph and his little family had to leave the country just days after the child's birth. No one knew who they were, or where they were.
To make a long and bloody story short, St. Paul says that the unbelief of the Jews was part of the plan of God in bringing mercy to the Gentiles (Romans 11:30). Not being accepted as part of the Jewish national identity, Christ was offered to the world. "The time of the Gentiles" began with the Christian dispensation. Therefore, to judge the Jews faulty in this thing is entirely inappropriate. Rather, the Gentile attitude toward the Jews should be one of quiet and humble reverence, lest the Gentile find himself at fault for his Christian idolatry.
Not that the talents and energies of the Jews should ever allow them to live anonymity, but the Gentile should reserve a certain and clear divinity in the purpose of the Jews in the world. The Divine Incarnation occurred so very uniquely. It wasn't completely quiet, for two fringe and opposite segments of humanity knew: the isolated herdsmen and the imperial occultists. It was just the mainstream that was out of the loop of truth. And that was for a very special reason, safety. The unblief of the Jews provided the principal layer of anonymity. Let not the Gentile condemn the Jew for divine assignment in providence. It is blasphemy.
Demonizing the enemy, even if he is a demon, is not a good tactic. Demonizing him strengthens him.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has certainly demonized himself and his religion as he proclaims Islam the enemy of Jews. That says a lot about his tactics. For no apparent reason pertaining to Iran, the Iranian leader has eschewed Israel, and willfully cast himself, his country, and his religion in a universally execrable role. A great showman he has become, claiming to be in the Divine Light on the world stage.
Ahmadinejad at the United Nations, Sept. 15, 2005
His personal commitment to the recesses of Iranian Islam, and his waiting for the 12th Imam, the mehdi (savior), all seem spolitically irrelevant. It seems to make him wrecklessly indifferent to real politics. Yet, this is simple religion. It requires a clearly defined enemy, and dramatic condemnation of that enemy. This is the only guide.
Such a lock-brain predicament can happen to anyone. It happened to Puritan ministers and their congregations in Salem, Massachusetts, once upon a time. And it was primarily an attack on women, no less. We know this historical episode as The Salem Witch Hunts and the trials of 1692. Nineteen people were hung. Hysteria, modern sociologists call it. Nothing to do with the supernatural at all. Group think, it was. A community fear gone out of control.
From the Salem Witch Trials.
Perhaps the same kind of thing is true for the Twelvers, the Iranian Muslims who, like Ahmadinejad, are focused on the Medhi, and consider all else evil and lost. While the old Puritans fell into hysteria unpremeditated, the Muslims intentionally whip up hysteria. It is definitely planned and programmed. And most of the world doesn't realize it, but there is intense superstition in the Middle East. The people are prone to it. It is particularly strong among the Arabs, but also, and anciently, in Iran. What we call "magic" came from Iran, from the Magi, a tribe of the Medes absorbed into the Persians by the time of Cyrus (538 BCE). It was of course Magi who came to pay their respects to the wielder of all power, thought he lay as an infant in an animal feeding trough. (Matthew 2: 1-12.) Interesting, how that those devoted to the supernatural were among the very few in the world that recognized the most supernatural event of all time. But that's a different story.
For now, there is no need for the rest of the world to demonize Ahmadinejad. This will only strengthen him, and confirm his position in his own mind. This will validate his stance. Instead, he must be understood simply for what he is, as a man. He is a man preoccupied with religion. He recognizes an intense emotional experience as preeminent. He is not a political leader, and perhaps not capable of the kind of rationale such a position requires. He is therefore a most useful tool in the hands of the real architects of evil: the mullahs. Ahmadinejad is humble, self-effacing, and simply has his mind on other things besides real politics.
Following his lead into religious fervor and emotion only seduces the rationale of the rest of the world, and tempts other leaders to indulge in the most intense hatred and loathing of Ahmadinejad and of Iran. This is what can lead to war. Our best hope is that, if Iran really is building nuclear bombs with which to destory Israel, the leaders of Israel will destroy those threats before they are actuated. The world is dependent on Israel to do this.
My late mother said this a few years ago: "The world depends on Israel. There's nothing left in the world but Israel. That Israeli airforce is all we have. "
She was in her eighties, slowly creeping out of her room, on her walker, making her way to the kitchen where I was preparing breakfast for her. She said these things more than one occasion, always in the morning, as if they were the first thoughts on her mind.
One of Osoma Bin Laden's nieces, Wafah Dufour, as been posing for Gentleman's Quarterly (GQ) magazine lately. Is this the measure of freedom for oppressed Islamic women? It this what they must do to declare their liberty, to manifest their complete independence? Another kind of slavery, perhaps, but at least a lot more pleasurable for the ego.
Wafah Dufour, niece of Osama bin Laden, poses in an undated publicity
photo released on December 22, 2005, taken during a photo session for the
January 2006 issue of GQ Magazine. Jeff Riedel/GQ Magazine/Handout/Reuters
And it get's worse. More in GQ Magazine: "It isn't easy being the sexy Bin Laden."
Wafah is an aspiring model and pop singer. With her kind of family ties, she's has to have guaranteed success. Not because of special talent or beauty, but as a token of the triumph of Western "values." Right? The western "secular" world can rejoice to no end that a niece of the most notorious, evil man since Adolf Hitler has espoused the deep cultural values of the enemy. The daughter of a half-brother of Osoma Bin Ladin is the perfect display of all that is superior to Islam. Right?
Skin pictures, pop music, and who knows what else? That's the mark of freedom. That's what America stands for. That's what all the Islamic women of the world really want. Right?
Well, the divorced wife of Bin Laden's brother Yeslam, Carmen Bin Ladin, also broke free from Islam, and from Middle Eastern life. In her book, Inside the Kingdom (2004), Carmen testifies to the deep psychological oppression of women in Arab, Islamic life. Of course, Carmen is Iranian. (Her father is Swiss, and her mother is Iranian.) She responded to the whole quest for freedom with a bit more class, I should say. She has been on many national and international TV programs, but I haven't seen her posing in 'girly' pictures. She was already a mature woman when she broke free.
I'd hate to think the public display of sexuality is a motivating factor in the progress of breaking the chains of Islam. I'll be very disappointed if religion is really only about sexual repression. I'll hang my head in shame if skin pictures are what the war against Islam is all about, and if nudish women turn the tide in favor of freedom.
And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
And the nations of the saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it. Rev. 21: 23,24.
Truly, in that New Jerusalem are met the resolution of all hopes and fears known in man. While it is not always possible to have a unified understanding of all the sacred scriptures, there are from simple expressions therein a grand sense the eternity we all long for.
There are no energy problems in this new city. Thus, there are no political problems either. Doesn't that really cover it all?
Today, we have all our different religions, our different races, and our different nations. We find already people willing to cross borders, to become a citizen of a nation far from their country of origin. We find people willing to embrace a religion which is not that of their birth. We explore one another. We are more and more aware of each other. Some people even find great happiness in intermarriage in the most dramatic social dimensions. This bespeaks all sorts of hopes, desires, and even frustrations. Man is a most curious creature.
An Iraqi woman sings a religious hymn during a traditional Christmas
day mass at Our Lady of Flower Roman Catholic church in central Baghdad
December 25, 2005. Yet another sombre Christmas is rolling by for Iraq's
roughly 600,000 Christians, who enjoyed relative freedom under Saddam,
but now live in fear of attacks from increasingly powerful Islamist groups
and militias. Since Saddam's downfall, churches have been bombed, Christian
-run liquor stores attacked and many more in the small community killed or
kidnapped. REUTERS/Thaier al-Sudani
And we know we'll never get the story straight from the media about what's actually going on in the world. The media is simply incapable of understanding it in the first place, let alone reporting it. The media is but a human thing. We should look to our own hearts, and search for the truth ourselves, always.
And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. And I will be found of you, saith the Lord. Jeremiah 29: 13,14.
It has to be possible. And professed athiests like Michael Newdow certainly are not helpful, even if Time Magazine wants to recognize him as Person of the Week. We've already recognized that the media is not even designed to convey truth, certainly never in its entirety. Wrong thinking is given great attention and validation in media. It seems to be the theory that only outrage and controversy qualify for at least the theoretical status of "objectivity."
One simply cannot follow the crowd in this matter of realizing the truth, or of understanding trends, or of ever truly seeking the Lord. The Lord is surely a lover of people, of large numbers of people, and especially of having them all come together to enjoy Him. But, it seems also true that only those who have prepared themselves, personally, can be in that number that finally walk through the gates, that make up His jewels, that follow Him whithersoever He goeth. That kind of crowd the earth has scarcely known. Only in extremely rare moments, the Jewish people have apparently experienced that human unity, and even then it was almost immediately challenged by dissenting parties withint Israel.
So, somehow, in this life, now, while we still have energy shortages, and political strife over the management of our resources, we must demonstrate at least the semblence, the suggestion, the effort of equity, and only then can we envision the future time, the New Jerusalem, in which racial and national differences are but the varieties of that same Light, gloriously beaming through the prism of Divine Grace.
If heaven cannot be conceived as advantageous, who can understand how to desire it? Without such a desirable vision, life is an endless struggle over resources, and a ubiquitous, solipsistic narcissism is abject. The human mind ends up fascinated with its own intellectual defecations. The mind becomes an autolytic, feeding on itself. It is like a parasite, feeding on the accomplishments of others. That's atheism, in a nutshell.
Better to look for the larger view, the bigger picture. Humanity needs hope, not analysis. In a world were Muslims mass murder other Muslims as a service to Allah, there is most definitely a need to reconsider the larger picture. Yes, Christians have murdered Christians. Jews have murdered Jews. No people is innocent. You can't make a stake in the world without being challenged, from without and from within. You can't well survive without fighting for your stakes. Therefore, the effort should be to learn the most efficient ways of holding on to your claims, or perhaps first understanding what your claims are, and why you make them. We should make the effort to know what we really want, what we want to claim.
The Jews have been doing this longer than any other people on earth, apparently. I should think it a very wise move to search the scritpures, patiently and faithfully, and personally, and to seek to know the that God who alone hath immortality. (1 Timothy 6:16.) I don't think the fatal struggles over our differences and our resources here will ever end. Death is the king, here. Immortality is the answer.
"The hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight." Phillips Brooks, 1867.
The little town of Bethlehem, in Judea.
What are they? In all human generations, what are those perpetual concerns? The fear of pain, sorrow, and death? And what are the hopes? Happiness, joy, and everlasting life?
How is it that the Collective Unconcious of the human race should constellate in a single event? How could all human feeling and experience gather in one place, at one time, in one night?
In a hovel. In an animal shelter.
In a newborn baby, born to a non-descript couple, the mother but a girl, the father a common laborer.
How quaint. How utterly inauspicious. How quiet, and completely inaudacious.
"How silently, how silently the wondrous gift is given!" Surely, Mr. Brooks. And how easily overlooked.
Follow the star. It may lead to something personally divine.
How shall we regard such a story? What sort of walls in us would resist the natural appeal? What layers of human feeling and experience are pilled up high in us to keep such a story out in the cold, with the animals in the stable? Just how typical is this? How is it that humanity should reject our own, so casually? What is it that is so offensive about life?
Death, fear, pain, and sorrow? Are we simply unable to hope for something different, something more? Indeed, has not humanity always suffered the same way, in disappointment, disillusion, and ever-impending dispair? Do we not always face the same challenges to our peace?
Then we do meet in Bethlehem after all. We are already there, in fact, in Caesar's census of the soul. We've been there. We're marked. We're part of it.
Of course, that the Almighty were to share with us our discontent, our disquietude, our sense of abject injustice; that He should care at all to join us in our sorrow, in our irresistable and often stupid hopes; that His presence in our flesh would lend us His honor, that brings us our only sense of true significance. That's all. That is what divine love alone can do. We can't produce it, or manipulate it. The honors we earn from each other are at last unsatisfying. And divine love is not earned. Yet, it alone makes us count. It makes each of us important, and responsible. That could be why we resist. It's more than most of us care to handle. We don't want to put ourselves in the arms of God, like He put Himself in ours.
Sometimes it takes a woman to handle love that closely. Mary, Mary, Blessed art thou among women. Indeed.
"The handmaid of the Lord," she humbly dubbed herself. Luke 1:38
Only an innocent young girl could handle it, apparently. Not some seasoned mother, with years of experience. Such a mother would have fainted at the thought. Such glory is rather for the naive, the innocent, and the believer.
So let's all go to Bethlehem, then, "and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us!"
Commentators are now saying that Ahmadinejad's anti-Semitic remarks about Israel are simply a political strategy. They were made not really to be taken as a prelude to any military action, but simply to stir up passions of 'revolutionary fervor,' as if Ahmadinejad is really only trying to re-live the emotional highs of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran.
In this approach, commentators are apparently trying to diffuse the world 'fervor' against Iran for advocating such hatred toward Jews and toward Israel. The commentators are concerned about the ill effects such a reaction could bring upon Iran.
Ahmadinejad is eloquent and full of joy, subjectively. This is the danger. "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaks in southeastern Iranian city of Zahedan, on Wednesday Dec. 14, 2005. Ahmadinejad, said Wednesday the Holocaust is a 'myth' that Europeans have used to create a Jewish state in the heart of the Islamic world. Speaking to thousands of people in the southeastern city of Zahedan, Ahmadinejad said that if Europeans insist the Holocaust did happen, then it was they who were responsible and they should pay the price." AP Photo/ISNA/Saman Aqvami. This of course is wholly mistaken. The Jews created Israel, not Europe, and certainly not the United States.
The concern over world reaction against Iran is certainly appropriate, but it may not be entirely accurate. What the world does not understand, and what these commentators should be explicating to all, is the fact that the 'fervor' spoken of in Iran is not simply 'fervor.' It is hard core religious experience. It is the emotional equivalent to the charismatic, Pentecostal, "born again" fervor found in Western Christianity. Sociologically speaking, that is how it functions in Iran. No, it certainly does not have the same effect on the human character, but, socioligically, it is similar.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is deep into this Islamic "Pentecostalilsm." It is a movement within Islam, and those in it feel it is the cutting edge of Islam. As noted before, Ahmadinejad is a "Twelver." He believes in the appearance of the 12th Imam, the Medhi ("savior") who will change the world and make all things right. Yes, this belief is in the context of unspeakable evils within Iran, inennarable injustice, violence, and fraud, but, that is in fact the very cause of the 'fervor' of religious hope and expectation. Hopelessness births the most intense forms of hope, and often violence. Ahmadinejad is "apocalyptic." He does not expect there to be peace in the world any time before the Medhi appears. He behaves therefore in an apparently careless, irresponsibile manner toward politics and world affairs. The greatest intensity of irresponsibility is achieved when one makes internationally publicized declarations of condemnation toward Jews and toward Israel.
I would also distinguish this from anti-Semitism, indeed. It is not true anti-Semitism. It is only words, words used by a man who has his mind on deeply subjective emotional experience among the people of Iran. While I would agree with the critics that Ahmadinejad is "the real enemy of Iran," I do not wholly agree with their reasons. I should say, their identifications of what is happening are not accurate, and therefore they imply incorrect solutions.
One needs to understand the function of religious emotion, and sociology. Religious 'fervor' often blossoms in regions of social depression. I.M.Lewis brilliantly portrays the mechanisms in this sort of thing in his classic work, Ecstatic Religion: An Anthropological Study of Spirit Possession and Shamanism (1971). It is akin to a psychological self-validation. One might consider Adlerian psychologist Donald Lombardi's Search for Significance (1975) as well. Though Lombardi addresses 'deviance,' it is also appropriate to compare extraordinary experience with 'deviance' from psychological norms.
Iran is too grand a phenomenon to be assessed lightly, or incompletely. Political terms will not suffice. There is much more to the story. Unless the whole story is understood, premature and inaccurate analysis will only make it worse.
BadEagle.com predicted Schwarzenegger would win the California gubernatorial race the day he announced that he would run. Schwarzenegger is a strongman, in more than just physical ways.
Gov. Schwarzenegger, standing tall.
And now Awnold stands out even more strongly. He surpised many people when he stood for justice in the case of "Tookie" Williams. The terminator stood aside, and let the law stand as it was written, and let the judgment of the courts stand as they were made. People were holding vigils, protests, and virtual campaigns to spare Tookie, the convicted murderer of four people. Awnold stood his ground.
And now his home town in Austria has stood up against him. The liberals and "girly men" of the world are uniting against the strongman. Austria abhors the death penalty, and condemns Schwarzeneggar for failing to spare a murderer.
But there's more. Schwarzenegger recently commented, in Israel, that Austria had committed terrible crimes against the Jews. "I was born in Austria, which is a beautiful country ... but a place where intolerance and ignorance led to terrible atrocities," Schwarzenegger told a gathering of Israel's top politicians and American Jewish leaders. "Because of that, I want to do whatever I can to promote tolerance around the world." Those comments pushed many Austrians over the top.
So Awnold said, "Remove my name" from the stadium in his home town, Graz, and not to use his name for any promotions. The strongman returned the "ring of honor" the city had awarded him in 1999.
The mayor of Graz, Siegried Nagl, has pleaded with Schwarzenegger not to sever ties with the city because of the current political backlash. "I hope that very soon we'll hear you say, 'I'll be back,'" Nagl told the actor-turned-politician, one of Austria's most famous sons.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is waxing presidential, in a very real way. He is standing for what he believes is right, regardless of the polls, even the polls of his home town, even the polls of California. It's true that an elected official is obliged to represent the people, not dictate to them. However, if the world "leader" means anything, there are times when the people simply don't have all the information they need to make decisions. The leader has the responsibility to make the right decisions. (This is what President Bush believes he is doing.) And there are times when the people are completely manipulated by aggressive protesters funded by complex financial networks, and by very warped media bias. A true "leader" must stand for the truth. That's the most important responsibility.
If there is interminable debate over what the truth is, then the leader is obligated to at least stand for what he believes is right. Schwarzenegger stands tall in this regard, in the same manner as President George Bush.
Good people always admire character. Why good people may disagree on what should be stood for, character itself is something good people value, and generally follow.
Ideally, "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn." Proverbs 29:2. But in this day and age, the people who set the pace for protesting think they are the righteous ones. They lament and 'mourn' the state of things, indeed, but, in a politically "free" society, unlike the ancient days, everyone's free not only to make their own standards of righteousness, but also to malign a leader they want removed. In such a complex circumstance, people often follow the wrong leader, indeed. Lost people tend to elect lost leaders, and then we have the blind leading the blind.
We simply have to live with the fall-out of freedom, or, the side effects of political "elections." Lots of liars are on the loose. They are free to lie and malign, in the name of righteousness. That is the real price of political, social freedom. It takes a strongman to endure such an environment, to surive, and to end up well thought of. Social opinons about different leaders change according to trends and history. Some leaders themselves change. In such moral, ethical uncertainty, at least in political life, one must exercise caustion, to say the least.
The media is having another frenzy over the National Security Agency, "spying" on Americans, and President Bush's authorization of the whole thing. The headlines, the descriptions, and the blatant innuendoes clearly betray the apparently ineludible hypocrisy of the press.
President George Bush
An ignorant sort of redundancy is produced in the frenzy to dramatize and condemn the White House. The Washington Post calls it "Secretive Eavesdropping." Is there another kind of eavesdropping? The Associate Press calls it "Secret Spying." Surely, a editorial oversight. And then there is the search for a term to identify Bush's role. The BBC says Bush "backed" it, "authorized" it, the ChristianScienceMonitor says he "allowed" it; the AP says he "defends" it, and the Washington Post says he "approved" it. The BBC says he "admits" it.
So, he dunnit, basically. It's Bush! It's President Bush! He's guilty! He did it! The cry is gone out through the land, etc., etc. This is really a kind of sensationalism that belongs in yellow news. But now that personality, hairdo and entertainment have become the norm in American media, we can expect nothing more.
The worst of it, however, is the matter of whom is being spied upon. "Americans," the reports say. This is the outrage. (A flaming San Francisco outlet calls them "innocent" Americans, just to drive the point.) This is the point of offense, as if privacy is somehow robbed from Americans. An invation of privacy, approved by the president. That's the story. That's the scoop.
It's such a story that the Democrats are falling all over themselves to take advantage of it. Harry "The Hack" Reid is calling for a Congressional investigation. The "I" word, again. This is the last tactic the Democrats in Congress seem to wield. Nothing else works for them.
But let's examine how "American" these so-called Americans being "spied" on really are. We find they are neither true Americans, nor are they particularly innocent. They are generally Middle Easterners (Pakastanis and Arabs) with links, remote and direct, to terrorist organizations. That some of them may happen to have achieved, by fraud or otherwise, American "citizenship" means very little. They have been known to fight American soldiers in the Middle East. Also, many are not citizens, but resident aliens, "green card" or other temporary visa status. Just because they happen to be on American soil doesn't justify Harry "The Hack" Reid's accusation of "domestic" spying. What? We can't keep an eye on an enemy now because he's on American soil? He's in a haven, an untouchable zone--our own country? We can watch him only if he's in a foreign country? Now that's a new dimensions of national insecurity, another ground-breaking Democrat application of "freedom and equality."
But this present kind of NSA intelligence has been going on since 9-11. It needs no justification, not if true Americans are interested in protecting America. What privacy do we have anyway? Banks and the IRS already know all there is to know about us. What's all the shooting about on this NSA matter?
In 2004, Condoleeza Rice gave a telling testimony to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks. She said that the terrorists have been at war with America for years, but only after 9-11 did American go to war with them. Some uninformed Americans may fear the continual erosion of freedoms as this war is conducted, but, until America is willing to repatriate Muslims, particularly Arab and Pakistani Muslims, and to watch the Southeast Asian and Mexican population more carefully, there is no alternative but "spy" on anyone suspected of treasonist, terrorist activities on American soil.
Now, about spying: what do news reporters in Washington do, daily? And they get paid well for it, over and under the table. Are we not still recovering from the false "Plamegate" affair, and now the NYT has just published abroad a security measure of the US government which can only make our enemies more careful, and therefore more successful.
I say reporters are spies, especially the ones who hang around Washington and pay for scoop, or get paid off to take it. I say editors and publishers are no different from the NSA or presidents. Moreover, they are accountable to no one, yet they think they hold the government accountable. They influence attitude toward the government. Who influences attitude toward the media? Media personnel act as thought they are immune in their irresponsibility. Its is their divine role.
Oh, well, it's free country, eh? The NOGW.com site claims that there is no Al-qaeda. It's a code name for a US government/CIA covert operation.
The President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says that a divine light encircled him as he spoke at the United Nations, September 14, 2005. His assertion is recorded in a piece of British-made news for the Islamic Republic. While there is no visible evidence on camera, and the testimony of only one friend of the president's, Ahmadinejad afterward told revered clerics in the Jam Karan Mosque in Qom (75 miles south of Iran). Qom hosts the Shrine of Hazrat Fatima Masoumeh, sister of Imam Reza (789-816 AD). Ahmadinejad says that he felt the aura surrounding him. He also says that during his nearly 30 minute speech, not a single eye blinked. The leaders of the world were rapt.
Ahmadinejad believe in the coming of the 12th Imam, the "mehdi," the Savior. No, it isn't Jesus, but Ahmadinejad is practicing a kind of apocalyptic politics that closely resembles that of many evangelican Christians. Ahmadinejad's critics (if they dare) say that he is transforming Iranian politics into this religious, apocalyptic expectation. He shows no concern about the turmoil in the world, his role in it, or the role he is leading Iran into. His focus is on the "spiritual."
An Iranian friend and I, in front of the mosque at the shrine of Omar Kayyam, in Neyshabur, Iran.
When I was in Iran, I witnessed a strange sense of that "aura" myself. When I was visiting the shrine of Omar Kayyam, in Neyshabur (eastern Iran), my host and I, together with his son and a friend of his son's, went into the mosque. It was my first entrance into any mosque, I must say. It was spacious and quiet. My host wanted to pray. I and the two teen-aged boys went aside into a corner. The boys started talking about soccer, which certainly surprised me. I said, "Should we be talking?" They said, "It's okay." They continued, quietly.
I noticed the father, standing, with his head elevated, looking up. After some time, he was finished. He came over to us. There was a look of quiet glory in his face. It was unmistakable. That kind of smile and energy in the eyes comes only over a person who really believes. My host, Dr. H., had spoken to the supreme being. He believed he had. And, around him, it felt as though he had. It was unusual. I've never forgotten it. I knew he was praying for me. That was very clear.
So I don't doubt that one of Ahmadinejad's company saw something, or that Ahmadinejad himself felt something. I don't need the statement that no one blinked. I don't believe the people were rapt. I believe Ahmadinejad was rapt.
But by what? By whom? At what is to come of this kind of influence?
Much of the mechanisms of Islam, psycho-sociologically, seem to me to be very similar to those of medieval Europe. Shrines, pilgrimages, and many prayers. When large groups of people really believe something, there is a tremedous Collective Conscious engendered. I don't think it is hysteria, necessarily. I think it is a very powerful group consciousness. I am concerned, however, that the preoccupation with spiritual things proves less than prudent in modern political affairs--especially when the Ahmadinejad is talking about annihilating Israel and is allegedly creating nuclear bombs. I am concerned that an apocalyptic approach to legislation and policy may produce irresponsibility, and may contribute to the demise of peace, or the reasonable efforts thereunto.
I freely grant to anyone whatever personal solice and glory he may derive from his beliefs. I do not, however, encourage an abandon in religious things. Divine light should always lighten our path, not blind our steps therein, so that we threaten the existence of others. Something is deeply amiss in such 'illumination,' surely.
Has Iran has forgotten Persia? Has Iran has forgotten Zoroaster, and his warnings about the Lie? Human behavior seems always suspect. Those that are unusually self-assured often seem even moreso. Those who are quick with cruelty are obviously not enlightened. Emotion can overwhelm, and seemingly justify anything; but the affairs of the world have a way of bringing all things back down to earth, sooner or later. One does not escape the Apocalypse. One surives it. One does not float away. One crawls away, on bloody knees.
The European Union has for some time condemned America's death penalty as "barbaric." This is a most curious gesture. This malignment is being made by statesmen and commoners alike, the world over. It appears to be an 'offical' opinion. The execution of convicted murderer Stanley "Tookie" Williams as been made an occasion to renew the public outcry against the death penalty. Even Britain's Tony Blair has renewed his assent to the same outcry. Fine stance from the country most famous for judicial hangings.
Strange, too, that France, who practically invented the guillotine, makes such a strong outcry against the 'barbarity' of the death penalty.
Place du Carrousel from 21th August 1792
to 7th May 1793 with interruptions.
We could go down the list of every European nation that is now vehemently condemning the American death penalty (in a self-indulgent chorus of anti-Americanism occasioned by any kind of incident), and demonstrate the ghastly, torturous machinations of death peculiar to each culture represented. We could then remind them each that America after all is Europe's heir, particularly England's. Does Europe feel it has risen above the very cause of the American Revolution, and now is morally superior to America?
What is "barbaric" about lethal injection? It is in fact the most compassionate form of capital punishment ever invented in the history of the world. Most people, innocent or guilty, old or young, never die in such painless luxury. What's "barbaric" about removing the rues and throes? What's "barbaric" about skipping the agony?
This is just another case of "we're better than you, America!" This is the liberal trend coming through again, from the world, and from liberal America. This disposition would always advocate anything that would degrade, denigrate, denounce, and destroy America. It is an endless, borderless campaign. No American achievement is worthy, and ever imagined failure is eternal. A great pastime, condemning America. How dignified it makes the weak feel, to assert mere words against the mightiest nation in the world. It is a quick fix of some kind. Instant and superior righteousness. Condeming America is like a drug, which gives some moral 'high' to those who otherwise cannot achieve a sense of self-worth.
I do disagree with Michael Savage, however. Liberalism is not a mental disorder. It is a moral manoeuver. It appears to behave much like a drug, rather than a disease. And given the disposition of self-righteousness, which finds a sense of justice in removing consequences from the guilty, it would appear American society is seriously addicted to the liberalism.
Britain has an organization called Reprieve, which calls the dealth penalty a violation of human rights. This is one of the clearest revelations of the ideology. It is evident that the theorists of the ideology consider themselves above the Almighty. Either that or that consider human nature and human society to have advanced beyond the basic requirements of social life. Capital punishment is present in all Biblical references. The whole human race stands under the "penalty" of death. A society without it would have to be Edenic.
Death by public execution is certainly sad. For a person to be put to death, without a fight for his life, but instead in some helpless subjugation, is indeed ominous. Confusing emotions are evokes. We feel pity. It is hard to maintain rage, or even anger, however justified, when the "victim" of death has no chance. This is our natural reaction: heartbreak. But this is emotion, not justice. Law and justice are our only hope of objectivity, really. Otherwise we are slaves to emotional reactions of rage or pity. There are murderers out there. Social execution of such persons is not in fact murder. This is the one human incident in which society trumps the individual--the individual who has defecated on society, who has murdered members of society. Society is what preserves individuals. Individuals who set themselves against the group risk the judgment of the group.
It is true, in social 'public' execution, we feel we are standing on holy ground. We all sense eternity, when death comes so surely, so calculated, and so public. We fear. We feel as though God is invoked, and before Him, who shall stand?
But, among ourselves, we determine who shall stand. The death penalty is not an eternal judgment, but a social one. Eternity is in God's hands. Our societies are in our hands. We have evidently been given that power. It remains for us to look after ourselves on that score.
Unnur Birna Vilhjalmsdottir, Miss Iceland, was just crowned Miss World 2005 in Sanya, a southern China beach resort. However, she doesn't look completely Icelandic, at least not like the stereotypical image of the most Nordic of the Norsemen. The contour of her face is quixotic, and her coloring seems less than indigenous to Iceland. What is to be implied by such phenomenon? To what race or ethnicity shall we render the praise? Shall her beauty be called generic?
Unnur Birna Vilhjalmsdottir, Miss World 2005
In these days of internationalism and multiculturalism, a clear and present anti-stereotype impetus is evident in the most sensitive of environments: the female beauty pageant. Any girl from any country can end up representing any other country. She can immigrate, she can be the daughter of immgrants, and the aggressively liberal "beauty" industry, ever loathe to imply supreme beauty is not in every ethnicity, will quickly acknowledge the foreign girl as representative of the nation in which she happens to abide. It simply makes no difference any more.
An Iranian girl, Ramona Ramiri was Canada's Miss World 2005; another Iranian girl, Shahrivar Shermine, was Miss Germany 2004. A Turkish girl, Asli Bayram, (part time belly dancer) is Miss Germany 2005. The list of foreign national transplants and second generation immigrants is burgeoning with every pageant.
Looking more closely now at Unnur Birna Vilhjalmsdottir, we find that, in all the reports in English, there is no mention of her father. Her mother was Unnur Steinsson, herself Miss Iceland in 1983. Only one small photograph is available of her, and she apparently also has dark hair. (Interestingly, there is a Maria Kirsten Stiensson in Iceland today who, among other things, is a belly-dancer, and who also looks a bit other than indigenous. Whatever shall we do?) Many reports refer to Miss Iceland 2005 as simply Unnur Birna, leaving off her last name altogether.
Unner Birna as Miss World 2005, and as herself, a young (21) student.
So, we have to be somewhat suspect. I for one prefer the time-honored stereotypes. Multiculturalism robs all nations of their individuality, and leaves the admirers in some non-descript aesthetic mode. It is frustrating and disappointing to not know which ethnicity or nation to give credit. Beauty has become a bastard thing.
Can a space alien enter a pageant now? Since origins don't matter anymore, let's have a Miss Galaxy contest. I want to see Miss Nebulous, Miss Nova, and Miss Milky Way.
The heritage Islam leaves the world today is suspicion and mistrust. The Arab Muslim mass-murderers have cursed the world anew. Life will never be the same. Every Muslim is, unfortunately, suspect. Every aberrant behavior, of anyone, is suspect. Death stalks the world. For this, we acknowledge Islam. Such a horrid image will never be removed in our times. Muslims the world over do not have power to change this looming spector. They certainly have not thus far. (Only the brave Iraqis, fighting and dying daily for democracy are contributing to a better image.)
Flames erupt behind other buildings from the burning Buncefield Oil Terminal, in Hemel
Hempstead, England, Sunday Dec. 11, 2005. A series of explosions at one of Britain's largest
oil depots shook an area north of London early Sunday, shattering windows and sending
billowing clouds of smoke and flames high into the sky. Police said the blasts appeared
to be accidental. AP Photo/Will Baxter
One of the largest oil depositories in England just went up in flames, early this morning, just 25 miles north of London. The Buncefield oil depot, serving most of southern England, suffered enormous explosions just after 6:00 am this morning. The town of Hemel Hempstead is the host.
Since July 7, (2005), when Islamicists murdered 56 people on the London subway, the British people have been worried. The Muslims murderers have threatened to attack oil refineries and depots, as everyone knows.
The AP wire says, "The oil depot is near Luton Airport and some residents reported hearing an aircraft flying low overhead shortly before the first explosion at around 6 a.m. But police said there was nothing to suggest a plane was involved." Reuters reports, "'All indications at this stage are that this was an accident. However clearly we will keep an open mind,' Hertfordshire Chief Constable Frank Whiteley told a news conference."
Some say that to suspect everyone and everything is to give into the "terrorists." Thus, while such level heads talk, the Muslim murderers plan their next attacks.
The move into Iraq may eventually change all this, and we can hope for the best. But, Islam is certainly not limited to Baghdad. Muslim murderers are at work the world over. With countries like Iran, (I should say, the Islamic Republic of Iran and it's leadership, not the people at all), and Syria funding all the mass-murders possible, world-Islam will always be suspect of harboring the worst of humanity.
Unlimited deception, the abuse of all human trust in any form and circumstance, and the heartless, murderous nature of the Islamicists have contaminated the peace of all society, everywhere. This is the cold, hard reality we must acknowledge. We ignore it at our peril. How many murderous attacks will it take to evoke the proper attitude and reaction to Islam and Muslims living in Western countries? How many true and confirmed "accidents" will it take to clear the Muslim name, and to pressure the major oil companies of the world to reform their careless greed and to update their facilities?
Rigoberto Alpizar (44), a Costa Rican-born Home Depot employee, who apparently had some form of mental illness, was desperate to get off the airplane which he had just boarded, and in the frantic confusion he caused, he was 'mistaken' for a terrorist and shot to death by federal air marshalls.
Rigoberto Alpizar
This copy of an undated family photo shows Rigoberto Alpizar,
a passenger who claimed to have a bomb in his backpack who was
shot and killed by a federal air marshal Wednesday, Dec. 7, 2005,
after he bolted frantically from an American Airlines jetliner
that was boarding for take off at Miami International Airport.
No bomb was found. AP Photo/Courtesy the family
It happened in Miami, and the man's wife Anne Buechner was on board with him. It was from her that the cry of mental illness first came. The liberal press has stormed the idea that the shooting was inappropriate, unnecessary, and represents a failure of the security system. The implication is that the federal marshalls over-reacted, and that an innocent man was killed. This is what we would expect from the liberal press. Better risk the lives of everyone on the plane than to control one passenger who was freaking out. Better sacrifice the many for the few. This is a liberal mantra, and it bespeaks the same attitude that preaches the destruction of American values in the name of "minority" rights.
The Washington Post takes an aggressive defense of Alpizar as a wonderful, peaceful man, wholly unfitting the "terrorist" image.
"The image of Alpizar as a potential terrorist threat didn't seem to square with neighbor and family accounts of the Home Depot Inc. employee who lived with his wife on a small street teeming with children in a quiet Orlando suburb. Several neighbors said Alpizar and his wife, Anne Buechner, were friendly and involved in occasional block parties." A lovely "citizen," indeed. How cruelly prejudiced and evil of the federal marshalls to shoot him dead, as if they knew the man! as if they knew what a fine family man and neighbor he was!
The LA Times asks, "Does the price of safeguarding air travel include the possibility that innocent Americans will die?" Why, no one but the federal marshalls heard Alpizar make a bomb threat.
Defending America is simply wrong, in the liberal way of thinking. Why, 9-11 was America's fault, and defending America is the wrong response.
What Anne Buechner should have done was to inform the authorities of what was happening--the first indication of Alpizar's disquietude. If Rigoberto Alpizar was having a panic attack while waiting to board the plane, as reports say, then this should have been made known.
How often did Alpizar fly? How well did Anne Buechner really know him. Note she did not take his name, nor did her brother's wife Jeanne Jentsch take his name, (Steve) Buechner. How clear are we on who's who here? How long had Anne been "married" to Alpizar, and what kind of experience did she have in dealing with his illness. Apparently not much. This incident is a vortex of liberalism and inexperience, not on the part of federal marshalls, but on the part of the Buechners.
The immediate cause of this tragedy is her lack of experience or knowledge in dealing with the illness, and particularly in communication in a public situation. Of course, the pressure was great, they were getting on a plane. The lessen: don't fly if you're unable to in peace. She should have been more cognizant of the pressures of air travel on the mentally ill. The fault is really hers, not the federal marshals'.
The the liberal media will pound this story as an evil committed by American security. The ACLU will no doubt chime in, if it hasn't already. The rights of an American "citizen" have been brutally abused. American government is murderous, etc., etc. But it is abundantly clear that the inadequacy, sad and tragic as it proved to be, is on the part of Anne Buechner, and perhaps also on the part of other airline employees at the ticket desks. Perhaps they are the ones who need more "training," not the federal marshalls.
Today, a terrible airplane crash in Tehran killed more than 115 people, including a flight crew of 10, all 84 passengers (Iranian journalists), and 21 people in the apartment building hit by the plane, and 90 people were injured. The military transport plane, a C-130 (made by Lockheed), developed engine problems and intended to return to the Mehrabad Airport soon after it had taken off. The C-130, a four-engine turboprop, crashed in the Azari suburb of Tehran, site of the Towhid apartment complex that is home to air force personnel and near Tehran's Mehrabad airport.
The city of Tehran is intensely crowded, and overbuilt, and the structures are old, and poorly put together in many cases. Tehran has a population of 7.15 million, making it the 21st largest city in the world. It is miraculous that such an airplane crash did not kill many more peoople.
The Lockheed C-130 Hercules is a huge cargo/troop transport plane, over 97 ft. long, with a wingspan of over 132 ft. It went into production in 1956. It is believed that the C-130 in the Tehran crash may have been an old model, in use since the 1970's. It can carry 31,249 pounds of fuel. The Iranian plane was flying from Tehran to Bandar Abbas, in southern Iran, which is some 600 miles from Tehran. We can assume a good deal of fuel was carried by the plane.
Consider the simple apartment building into which the C-130 crashed. The building, though damaged, in still standing.
A video grab shows smoke rising from a building in Tehran following a plane crash,
December 6, 2005. An Iranian military plane carrying at least 94 people crashed into a
densely populated district of Tehran on Tuesday, setting fire to an apartment block housing
about 250 residents, a local government official said. REUTERS/Reuters television
Rescue workers are seen on top of a building in which an Iranian military transport
plane crashed in Tehran on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2005. An Iranian military transport
plane crashed into a 10-story apartment building in the suburbs of the capital Tehran
on Tuesday, killing at least 119 people, according to state media and the city's mayor.
AP Photo/Hasan Sarbakhshian
The rescue scene at the plane AFP/Getty Images/Majid
"Both the main and reserve fuel tanks were full which is why the plane went up in flames as soon as it hit the building," Iran's fire brigade chief Ahmad Ziaie told state television.
So what's wrong with this picture?
New York's World Trade Center towers were crashed into by American Airline passenger jets, with about 24,000 gallons of full each. A gallon of fuel weighs 8 pounds. So, taking a single tower and single jet, thats a Boeing 767, (159 ft. long), with 192,000 pounds of fuel. The jet crashed into a building 1,368 ft. high, (110 stories), and the building crumbles to the ground.
A huge C-130, with 31,000 pounds of fuel, crashes into a small, ten-story apartment building, and the building is left standing. It wasn't a direct hit? How exculpatory.
Somethine is deeply wrong here. An old Iranian turbo prop crashes into an old, poorly constructed apartment building, and the building remains quite in tact.
It is definitely time now to reexamine the nature of of the WTC demolition. Just like it has always been a major concern as to the destruction of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City (April 19, 1995), this Tehran crash shouts out to the world that the true story of the World Trade Center attacks, as well as the OKC bombing has simply not been told.
The TWC towers of NYC; The impact, September 11, 2001.
The aftermath. Complete destruction.
The Chinese film Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon (2000) was the first film that made young Chinese actress Zhang Ziyi known to the Western audiences. This creative masterpiece indeed brought Chinese folklore alive to the West in a way unprecedented. However, Ziyi is in another film, Memoirs of a Geisha (2005), which is an American made film with American writers and directors. This film will make her even more well known.
Zhang Ziyi as Jen Yu in Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon
However, it is important to point out that this American made film has a Chinese national playing the part of a uniquely Japanese cultural part, that of a famous kind a prostitute, a Geisha. This is certainly some kind of favoritism on the part of Hollywood. Whatever director Rob Marshall has said regarding the propriety of artistic talent versus racial authenticity, the overwhelming message is an insult to the Japanese. It says at least two things: 1) there are no Japanese actresses that could play the part; 2) all "gooks" look alike, and no one can tell the difference anyway; 3) it is important to promote all things Chinese, to help undermind America, and Hollywood must do its faithful Communist "equalizing" duty.
Zhang Ziyi as Sayuri Nitta in Memoirs of a Geisha
The first implication is a perfect lie. Japan is teaming with actresses, any number of whom could play the part.
Oriental people do not look at alike at all. The Japanese are as different from the Chinese as the French are from the Romanians. The attitude that all Orientals are alike is the position of ignorant, racist white people, of which comprise Hollywood and the entertainment industry. Surprised? Why, because Hollywood has tried to present the American Negro as the most sexually desirable creature in the world? That's supposed to mean there is no racial prejudice in the self-righteous socialists of tinsel town?
Putting a Chinese girl in the part of a specifically, traditionally, and famously Japanese role is like putting a German Jew in the role of a Nazi scientist experiementing on Jews. Or, like putting a Negro in the role of Andrew Jackson, or Robert E Lee.
Indeed. Japan was indescribably brutal to the Chinese, historically. But it is not justice to give a major Japanese movie role to a Chinese girl. It is racial prejudice of the most obvious and demeaning kind. Japan should boycott Memoirs of a Geisha. And so should everyone else who respects race and culture.
There are no excuses in this case.
Sometimes, there are excuses. When History Channel made the recent episode, Comanche Warriors, they used professional bands of Sioux actors, up in South Dakota. There are reinactment movie sets up there all prepared. There are numerous bands of Indian actors with prepared regalia for different tribes. They also ride horses. History Channel did not take the time to drum up any Comanche actors or horsemen. Yes, we Comanches could and did object, but, we offered no alternative. The Sioux control the Indian reinactment industry. Other tribes are not prepared to provide the same circumstances for movie makers, regardless of budgets provided.
So, Sioux Indians played the part of Comanches. All Injuns look alike, right? What difference does it make to the white world?
But, the fact is, the Sioux have dominated the movie Indian business from nearly the beginning. Sitting Bull and other great Northern Plains chiefs travelled and were widely photographed. They came to dominate the visual Indian image. As a little kid in Beijing to draw a picture of an American Indian, and he'll draw a man with a head dress, buckskin fringes on his shirt sleeves and pants, riding a horse. That's northern plains.
Ask a kid in Oklahoma to draw a Chinaman and a Japanese man, and chances are he won't know where to begin. I believe we can thank Hollywood for that permanent bit of cultural ambiguity. In the racially, politically enlightened world of today, however, you might think there would be a difference in Hollywood's attitude. But there clearly isn't. Socialists are the most racist people of all.
On November 29: Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman reported with enthusiasm the great progress in Iraq, after he returned from a trip there.
November 30: President Bush reaffirmed his wonderful vision for freedom and democracy in the world, and how Iraq fit into that vision.
November 30: The Associate Press runs a story accusing the Pentagon of planting positive news stories in Iraqi newspapers.
December 1: Democratic Senator John Murtha declared that the US troops in Iraq were "broken, worn out," and "living hand to mouth."
December 1, MSNBC (Chris Matthews/David Schuster) et al. make hysterical reports about the LA story, accusing the US of using "propaganda."
December 2: Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace says the progress reports in Iraq have been confused, due to the military itself not taking more news responsibility.
December 2: BadEagle Assessment
Pentagon Propaganda? Dec. 1: Reports have surfaced that
the Pentagon paid millions of dollars to place pro-U.S. pro-
paganda in Iraqi newspapers. Will this revelation hurt Amer-
ica's standing in the middle east? NBC News' Jim Miklaszewski
and Andrea Mitchell report the latest on this developing story.
Lieberman has actaully been to Iraq--four times. He has seen with his own eyes the obvious, visible improvements. His report is a special gift, not to the Republicans, but to the lost, anti-American Democrats who are destroying their own party.
President Bush is a man with great vision and determination. This takes positive energy and 'guts' in the face of constant harrassment and antagonism irresponsibily heaped in the country's face, daily, by liberals, Leftists, and other anti-Americans hiding out in the Democrat Party.
Murtha denounces the army as weak, incompetent, and basically losers. This is like shouting to a football team in the third quarter, "You're finished. You've lost. Time to quite. Give up." This Murtha says, without looking at the score. It is Murtha who is broken and worn out. He's apparenlty forgotten what it's like to be a soldier. And he's certainly not living hand to mouth himself now.
The Leftist LA Times article didn't even use the word propaganda, and instead simply stated that the articles the Pentagon was pushing were written by soldiers in the fray in Iraq.
MSNBC hystericist Chris Matthews calls this propaganda? As if it's false? As if it is image tampering, to allow American soliders on the ground to tell of their experience?
Marine Corps Gen. Pace says implies that the military indeed needs to take more responsibilty in control the true image of its own operations. The main stream media does more disservice to all than it should ever have the opportunity to do.
Marine Corps General Peter Pace
This is clearly a word game. There are people who are determined to weaken and destroy everything America stands for. There are others who really don't care, but just want to say whatever they can to advance their own political importance. The mainstream media is their ready servant, always. And bad news always sells. (They make it sell.) There are others who are overtly and ideologically anti-American, and have focused their energy in hatred of President Bush, and hatred of the military, and hatred of democracy, really.
It is crystal clear. Compare Iraq to Iran. Iran is approach the status of a serious nuclear threat in the Middle East, and has threatened the existence of Israel. Democrat leaders do everything in their power to appease Iran, and to delay any serious action. They consult the world opinion first, like Senator John Kerry, who in his debate with Bush (2004) said he would apply the global test before taking action. Bush, on the other hand, took immediate action against Iraq, after 9/11. We no longer have to worry about Iraq becoming a nuclear threat the the Middle East, or anywhere else. With the enthusiastic support of the Iraqi people, we have nearly succeeded in creating an independent democracy there.
These two examples clearly demonstrate the difference between two ideologies: parasitical, reactionary policy on the part of confused Democrat "leaders," and creative initiative on the part of Republican leaders, principly President Bush. It takes positive action to accomplish something worth while. The Democrat "leaders" have so focused their energy on condemning Bush and the Republicans, and everything this adminstration has attempted to accomplish, that the Democrat "leaders" have offered no alternatives, and have created for themselves the image of dangerous and destructive negativism. This is not only a great hindrance to progress in the world and America, but it is destroying any hopes of the Democrat Party ever becoming a positive influence again.
Connecticut Democrat Senator
Joseph Lieberman
It is weakness, basically. Ideological weakness. People like Joe Liberman, and Zell Miller, and no doubt many others waiting in the wings, must surely be recognized as the true leaders of the party, and without them, Democrats are headed for the archives of American history. They will have left a very negative image, and probably will have become a reference in some arcane academic research paper on political party implosion.