The Politics of Deceit,Intolerance,Prejudice and Blatant Stupidity

The Objective of this Blog

2009-06-01T05:36:00.000-07:00

This is my first attempt to communicate with a large number
of people via the internet I am certain that you will enjoy
this journey into my mind. As it is too complex to be explained
away in simple terms, suffice it to say that hardly a day goes
by that I don’t fall upon some tidbit of idiocy, hypocrisy,
tarnished notion, misplaced directive, or act of stupidity.
Most, fall in the realm of ‘well-do- gooders’ who have their
own simplified version of the universe and hold it out as an
umbrella for all of us to stand under. The problem is that
when you stand to close, you run the risk of being drawn into
narrow mindedness and intolerance, often masquerading as truth.

There is no end to the amount of exposition and the infinite number
of topics that I intend to broach. I will often switch back and forth
between the pseudo intellectual and the ignorant sidewinder,both,
up to their heads in crap, but determined to find an audience.

I view my purpose much as the Sunday drunk longs for his 40 oz.
before the stores open; the need is there, but nary a drop of
satisfaction can be found. Perhaps you may even view this indulgence
in terms of the expression “all dressed up and nowhere to go.”

Alas, I am dressed up and I do have somewhere to go. I also have
something to do and that is too reach out to the hundreds, thousands
of our kind who long for a bit of sophistication in life.

I do not subscribe to the notion that the vast number of us are
inherently naive, therefore it becomes impossible to educate on any
mass scale and that any effort to do so would be met with a resistance
comparable to swallowing a cucumber.

While we are certainly prone to dim-witted behavior from time to time,
the average person would certainly object to being classified or grouped
into this type of category. For certain, it’s not pleasant and this is
the exact reason a sounding board from both ends would benefit us all.

Many of our actions and behaviors toward others may not be conscious
acts of malice or a willful aim to disparage an individual or group;
nevertheless, the result is often the same as if the exercise were
deliberate.

If we allow ourselves to categorically ignore that which we know to be
wrong and do nothing about it, then we are complicit in creating an
unsavory environment, whether intentional or not. At the opposite extreme,
any good that comes from such ‘lack of action’ may have unintended
consequences to which we cannot lay claim.

We are not pawns in the conduct of our lives and the way we coexist
with our neighbor. We do have choices. Conscious or unconscious acts
influence our world and the way we view it. Choices allow us to chose
freely and the freedom to act without coercion carries a responsibility:
thoughtful and considerate deliberation on points of agreement as well as
dissension.

This is the very essence of what this sight hopes to achieve. So if
you find some of my opinions annoying, tell me so. If I hit the mark,
give me a pat on the back. If I’m way off course or completely out of
line, I want the feedback on that also. I’m here to offer opinion on
various topics, but I’m also here to learn. I want that to be a life
long process and I promise I won’t cower or pull back from my stated
viewpoint in the face of opposition; yet, that very dissonance may
be a pivotal point to reexamine my position on issues.

I don’t know and I can’t say how I’ll react as this site engages more
and more interaction. For now, let’s just get on to the first topic
at hand.

Mexican Drug Wars

2009-06-01T03:21:00.000-07:00

The Mexican Drug War is an armed conflict taking place between rival drug cartels and government forces in Mexico. The crackdown has resulted in the arrest of some high-level figures in the drug trade, but as cartels are dismantled or left without leaders, violent power struggles erupt over who will take their place.

In December of 2006, Mexico's new President Felipe Calderón declared war on the drug cartels, reversing earlier government passiveness. Since then, the government has made some gains, but at a heavy price - gun battles, assasinations, kidnappings, fights between rival cartels, and reprisals have resulted in over 9,500 deaths since December 2006 - over 5,300 killed last year alone.

With U.S. forces fighting two wars abroad, the nation's top military officer made an important visit last week to forestall a third. He went to Mexico. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made the trip to confer with Mexican leaders about the Merida Initiative, a three-year plan signed into law.

The plan called for flooding the U.S.-Mexican border region with $1.4 billion in U.S. assistance for law-enforcement training and equipment, as well as technical advice and training to bolster Mexico’s judicial system.

The concern is very real. Mexican drug cartels already control about 90 percent of the cocaine trade across the United States and most of the market for marijuana, methamphetamine and heroin, with operations in 230 cities, according to the U.S. Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center. They have essentially supplanted the Colombian and Dominican criminal groups that terrorized major U.S. cities through the 1980s and ’90s, the agency said.

Mexico is the main supply route for cocaine and other illegal drugs entering the United States and Canada. Colombia being the main cocaine producer.Historically, Colombian cartels have dominated cocaine trafficking.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, Colombia’s Pablo Escobar was the main exporter of cocaine and dealt with organized criminal networks all over the world. When enforcement efforts intensified in South Florida and the Caribbean, the Colombian organizations formed partnerships with the Mexico-based traffickers to get cocaine through Mexico into the United States

At first, the Mexican gangs were paid in cash for their transportation services, but in the late 1980s, the Mexican transport organizations and the Colombian drug traffickers settled on a payment-in-product arrangement. Transporters from Mexico usually were given 35 to 50 % of each cocaine shipment. This arrangement meant that organizations from Mexico became involved in the distribution, as well as the transportation of cocaine, and became formidable traffickers in their own right. Currently, the Sinaloa federation and the Gulf cartel have taken over trafficking cocaine from Colombia to the worldwide markets

The fighting between rival drug cartels began in earnest after the 1989 arrest of Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo who ran the cocaine business in Mexico.The Mexican cartels commonly use assault rifles, military-style semiautomatic rifles, hand grenades, and a variety of other military weapons.

Mexican cartels are the predominant smugglers and wholesale distributors of South American cocaine and Mexico-produced marijuana, methamphetamine and heroin. Mexico's cartels have existed for some time, but have become increasingly powerful in recent years with the demise of the Medellín and Cali cartels in Colombia. Closure of the cocaine trafficking route through Florida also pushed cocaine traffic to Mexico, increasing the role of Mexican cartels in cocaine trafficking. The Mexican cartels are expanding their control over the distribution of these drugs in areas controlled by Colombian and Dominican criminal groups, and now believed to include most of the U.S.A.[

The East Coast of the United States (mainly New York and New Jersey have seen little dominance of the Mexican drug cartels. No longer just middlemen for Colombian producers, they are now powerful organized-crime syndicates that dominate the drug trade in the Americas. According to the FBI, Mexican cartels focus only on wholesale distribution, leaving retail sales of illicit drugs to street gangs. The Mexican cartels reportedly work with multiple gangs and claim not to take sides in U.S. gang conflicts.

Mexican cartels control large swaths of Mexican territory and dozens of municipalities, and they exercise increasing influence in Mexican electoral politics.[The cartels are waging violent turf battle over control of key smuggling corridors from Nuevo Laredo, to San Diego. Mexican cartels employ hitmen and groups of enforcers, known as sicarios. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reports that the Mexican drug cartels operating today along the border are far more sophisticated and dangerous than any other organized criminal group in U.S. law enforcement history.

The cartels utilize grenade launchers, automatic weapons, body armor and sometimes, Kevlar helmets.

There was a lull in the fighting during the late 1990s but the violence has steadily worsened since 2000. Former president Vicente Fox sent small numbers of troops to Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, on the US-Mexico border to fight the cartels with little success. It is estimated that about 110 people died in Nuevo Laredo alone during the January-August 2005 period as a result of the fighting between the Gulf and Sinaloa cartels.

In 2005 there was a surge in violence as a drug cartel tried to establish itself in Michoacán. Although violence between drug cartels has been occurring long before the war began, the government held a generally passive stance regarding cartel violence in the 1990s and early 2000s. That changed on December 11, 2006, when newly elected President Felipe Calderón sent 6,500 federal troops to the state of Michoacán to put an end to drug violence there. This action is regarded as the first major retaliation made against the cartel violence, and is generally viewed as the starting point of the war between the government and the drug cartels. As time progressed, Calderón continued to escalate his anti-drug campaign, in which there are now about 45,000 troops involved in addition of state and federal police forces.

In April 2008, General Sergio Aponte, the man in charge of the anti-drug campaign in the state of Baja California, made a number of allegations of corruption against the police forces in the region. Among his allegations, Aponte stated that he believed Baja California's anti-kidnapping squad was actually a kidnapping team working in conjunction with organized crime, and that bribed police units were being used as bodyguards for drug traffickers. These accusations of corruption suggested that the progress against drug cartels in Mexico have been hindered by bribery, intimidation and corruption.

On April 26, 2008, a major battle took place between members of the Tijuana and Sinaloa cartels in the city of Tijuana, Baja California, that left 17 people dead.] The battle also brings about concern about the violence spilling into the United States, as Tijuana and a number of other border cities become hotspots for violence in the war.

In March 2009, President Calderón called in an additional 5000 Mexican Army troops to Ciudad Juárez. The United States Department of Homeland Security has also said that it is considering using the National Guard as a last resort to counter the threat of drug violence in Mexico from spilling over the border into the US. The governors of Arizona and Texas have asked the federal government to send additional National Guard troops to help those already there supporting local law enforcement efforts against drug trafficking.

Christian Hypocrisy

2009-04-19T11:23:00.000-07:00

I was livid today, when in church, our minister mentioned that a lesbian couple had been asked to leave three different churches.Now, I'm not naive, I know that this has gone on in the past, but within the recent past, come on, I thought we had finally made it thorough the discriminatory phase in Christianity. How naive and how wrong I was.

Chritianity's ranks are fading, not because people don't believe in a higher power but increasingly don't believe that the higher power should be used to persecute others; those that by virtue of belief or lifestyle don't fall into rank.

We have a divided house on Christianity and that house is falling, slowly imploding from within because of intolerance and antiquated dogma that alienates rather than enjoin. I see too many so called Christians walking a road which slouches toward inhumanity rather than advance a common humanity.

Christian hypocrisy is borne of a singular fixation on the dated, the antiquated, "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" type mentality. That mentality is
the product of a rigid interpretation of biblical scripture and an adherence to fundamentalist moral codes.

Somewhere in this mix, God has been left out. What we get in the narrowly constructed concepts of Christian morality is a fix on mortal weakness and certainly not the vested conduct of "love thy neighbor."

How dare Christians use the cause of righteous indignation to persecute others and then throw it back on a higher power. What we believe at this stage and to what degree we've advanced is the direct result of our inclination to love, to move over when others are different, to move beyond the self imposed exile of ignorance, to father the words of forgiveness and to marry the likes of a kind heart with that of an open hand.

When power is truly returned to Christianity, the morning becomes a light, a beacon, and the night is none to be feared.The shadows where we hide with our wrong open to the rays of the sun and there is room for all to be blessed.

Quick Notes: Religion: Common Sense and the Peril of Christianity

2009-04-09T07:23:00.000-07:00

The number of people who call themselves Christians is slipping dramatically. Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council attempted to to justify the "ebb and flow" of this phenomena by citing past statistics; however, there is something more serious than this in the statistics. I refer to it as the "common sense" factor.

That is, many who are losing faith see religion being used as a tool to oppress groups of people. This oppression is at odds with the tenets of religious dogma and too often finds its interpretation in the hands of those who use religious scripture to hold on to outdated modes of thinking, prejudice against certain lifestyles, and a general willingness to pass moral judgment in terms of their parochial views.

Take the catholic church which vehemently objects to condoms; their exist an epidemic of aids in Africa, and condom use would go a long way in ameliorating this scourge.It's certainly not the only answer, but it certainly could help. I believe its irresponsible for the Pope and prelates of the Catholic church to be in denial about this problem.

I don''t care what your opinions are regarding birth control, this is a no brainer and once again the Catholic church is stuck in the middle ages, inflexible and struggling with diminishing ranks. They don't get it.They don't want to get it and so they hold on to these antiquated concepts. It's about birth control and the Catholic Church rejects birth control. This is plain out stupid!

Then there is the issue of rejecting Priests and the aspect of inclusivenesss within the Episcopal church, when it comes to gays. Splinter groups seek to disrupt an inclusive message by once again using religious doctrine against certain groups, choosing to narrowly define and interpret such doctrine to the exclusion of some.

Point being, religion is slipping further from mainstream America because of its treatment.If we see a higher power, Creator, God or whatever you conceive it to be, it derives from energy and energy is never stagnant; therefore, The Creator, a higher power or God is ever unfolding.

To use ancient biblical scripture or implication through prophetic writings as to the true nature of God's intention, in a way that minimizes the value of each person, be they different from you, is wrong. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this at face value, but it does take a willingness to accept others of differing views and lifestyles, to put religion in its proper perspective and to stop using it as a weapon against dissent. This is really about common sense and Religion needs a big dose of it.

As for me, I'll keep believing and try to transform my words into actions. Nobody likes an ignorant Christian!

Gop Muckraking: Jackals at the Watering Hole

2009-04-02T15:00:00.000-07:00

GOP Muckraking: Jackals at the Watering Hole

Mired in an ideology to which fewer and fewer Americans adhere, lost in a proverbial fight to win the hearts of the disenfranchised, the Republican party is clearly mired in a situation of its own making.. Without a clear leader and devoid of new ideas, it seeks proxy on outdated modes of thinking and exist mainly as an obstructionist conduit for parochial, mean spirited and narrow minded thinking. The "GOP" must change if they are to survive as a party.

This guy is an "idealist".

Think there's nothing novel about this? Well, yeah, you may be right, but rarely have we seen the likes of so much muckraking and trifling exercises into the ridiculous, that currently exist on the lunatic fringe of this party. The right wing of the party seems now entrenched in obstructionist behavior for the sake of it.

The lady in the following video is rather kind in her assessment of "Republicans". I must admit, I have a lifelong friend from a small town in Kansas who is a Republican and he fits this spirit of kindness. I know many Republicans and possibly untold acquaintances who espouse a conservative philosophy; many are kind, but simply have more intractable views on public policy. They often view the world from a narrow lens, preferring to judge others on the merit of their own achievements. I see this as an essential, but not sole, difference between Republicans and Democrats. The former is more geared toward self interests, the latter, more willing to empathize with the underdog. :

Barack Obama won the election and Republican leadership seems incapable of understanding that fact, but determined to undermine it. Soft catering nuances of conciliatory rhetoric don't jibe with the fact that the GOP leaders are determined to stall or undo many of the changes that President Obama is now putting into place. They don't have an alternate plan for many of his proposals, but they do have a collective face of "outrage" be it any proposal set forth by his new administration.

Barack Obama, although of mixed race, is characterized as a "Black Man", therefore his momentous victory will go down in the annals of history most likely as a victory for Black people, albeit he was overwhelmingly elected by all all segments of our society.

Hillary Clinton, a white woman, brilliant in her like pursuit of the Presidency, was defeated in the last stretch leading up to the election.

To counteract such overwhelming talent by Democrats, Republicans sought out at the last minute, a relative unknown in the likes of Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska, also a white woman. I believe, as many do, that they put her on the ticket to draw sympathy votes from female voters and to give fodder to those with leanings toward Barack, but doubted his viabilty as a potential president owing to his race. At the time, this seemed a tacit admission of how deeply racism remains entrenched within our culture; however, borne of a young and diverse constituency, one such hurdle has been overcome.

Racism remains, and unfortunately the "Grand Old Party" is still the "Sasquatch" of this history, but they are not alone.

After the election and a Republican loss of the Presidency, they took it one step further by electing Michael Steele a black man as head of the Republican National Committee. One could invoke the issue of timing, and give the GOP credit for their inclusion, but I don't believe it for a second. Now, Michael Steele seems to be on a self-destruct countdown with his contrary statements in opposition to GOP ideology.

You may note that there is no clear GOP ideology, except that which promotes a party platform, which, at the core is always drawn to monied interests. The perennial favorite is "lowering taxes" and to hell with social programs. This type of thinking has always been the bulwark and nexus of a narrowly defined GOP,who often find themselves slipping into dysplasia at the suggestion of helping others. They are clever at hiding their self-interests;however, beneath the veneer of party rhetoric, lies the jackal at the watering hole, waiting his/her turn.

The GOP can always show you how helping people with money will also help the underdog, in this case, the impoverished. What a crock....! We see what monied interests have done for this country. Can you say class warfare?

This is one deceitful group, of which many in party leadership are nothing more than "Jackals", conniving to draw victory away from the Democrats, ready to resort to any act, as long as it curries favor with the public. We're talking about the same public, of which many were party to the GOP defeat.

From the moment of Barack's election, the GOP started touting its potential presidential candidates for 2012, often invoking the image of Sarah Palin, Eric Cantor, Bobby Gendel, who may be less of a contender after a disastrous Republican response to the President's speech to a joint session of congress. What was that about? I've heard children speak better than that before audiences.

The talent drain has definitely waned over the years for the GOP. Obviously, this idiocy compounded in the presence of man who spent the vast majority of his reign destroying the reputation of this country, disavowing basic liberties of its citizens, using presidential perogative to break laws and cover up torture of enemy combatants. There are so many other reprehensible categories, that each would probably be telling in itself.

So the Muckraking goes on by the "GOP". No novel ideas, just stalled rhetoric to a right wing constituency who would be better served beating their swords into plowshares and contributing something useful. Better yet, let them go hide under a rock.

Muckraking or just stuck in the mud while you muckrak?

This next perspective seems a bit extreme, but I can see the point. I would call this extreme perspective more of a "sociopathic" disposition.

Fountains at Bellagio

2009-03-25T03:45:00.001-07:00

Bellagio Fountains from michael john on Vimeo.

Quick Notes " Bad Diets" ,"Prostitution Obsession","Juvenile Republican Behavior"

2009-03-04T05:02:00.000-08:00

Why is it that the most expensive foods are those that are best for you. I see a widening disparity between the types of foods which are offered and available to those of greater economic means, as opposed to low income families.

I can readily buy the foods that I need, but it seems some of the healhiest foods are the most expensive and therefore beyond the budgets of most families.This is aside from our economic crisis. I'm referring to the conditions which exist now and before the economic collapse.

I go into a grocery store and it appalls me to see what lower economic families tend to put in grocery carts when they shop. Most foods are heavily laden with fats, carbs and sweets. It used to be a running joke that people in a certain area of our city could live on potato chips and Pepsi. naturally this stereotype is prevalent because many low income people tend to buy these sugary, carb and fat laden products, since they're filling and they cost less; however, in most cases they're the worst foods that you could possibly utilize for nutritional needs of your body.

With childhood obesity running rampant, I see it as a generation problem. Often obese children will have obese parents. Then those kids will eventually pass on those bad habits to their children and so the cycle continues.

The food industry is in large part responsible for some of this as their pricing often puts nutritional foods beyond the economic range of lower income families, thus they buy filling as opposed to the more nutritional foods.

With this in mind, if more expensive foods were made available, we would still have to change eating habits, which in some cases have been nurtured over several generations. Entire cultures can be predisposed to bad eating habits-eating foods heavy in fat, carbs and sugar.

I'm a diabetic. If I want a diabetic product, it usually cost a great deal more than a like product for non-diabetics. So I usually buy the regular product and then try and limit the amount of that product that I eat.

If I buy foods heavy in fat, carbs and sugar, I do have the choice to spread their consumption out and the frequency with which I consume them. Lower income families don't have this luxury. They have to fill bellies and what they buy is often consumed on a regular basis.

Chips don't stay in the cupboard where they are eaten at intervals. Ice cream is consumed fairly quickly, candy is abundant, kool-Aid, which requires lots of sugar and sugary sodas are everywhere and consumed on a daily basis. These foods are cheap and filling, but they do nothing for our nutritional needs.

So, is the food industry complicit in bad diets? You bet they are.

Prostitution Obsession

Now, I hear that the cops throughout the US are attempting to infiltrate Craigs List Postings to deliberately snare those individuals who arrange sexual hook ups in exchange for cash. This is yet another ridiculous waste of time and efforts and in my mind a greater perversion and misuse of public funds than the act of Prostitution.

We all know that the seeming act of prostitution is as old as Society and it will continue.Yet based upon a conditioned morality which politicians have fostered, drawn form the age old religious doctrine condemning prostitution and a public which has been long duped into believing that "prostitution somehow deteriorates the family", we yet continue in our quest to interfere with the choices of some.

The underlying cause behind Prostitution definitely has its roots in biblical and therefore religious parable. We blindly accept this excuse and add any additional societal condemnation to further pursue this act. It seems somewhat hypocritical to accept the ageless role of religion in this condemnation when religion has no business in the conduct of secular government.

Yet, we know all about his duplicity when it comes to politicians and public sentiment. They throw this notion under the bus and move forward in the knowledge that the enforcement of Prostitution laws can be furthered based around public dislike alone. Funny, outside of male politicians, when was the last time you heard a male citizen getting all fired up over pornography and prostitution?

Prosecution often takes the form of persecution in our society, and this is what exactly is happening with the cops and their attempts to infiltrate Craigs List. That organization should fight all attempts by the government or any judicial agency to interfere with a the rights of grown folks.It's simply none of their business. We need to stop legislating morality for others and deal with the problems at hand in this country, of which there are many.

Republican Behavior-An Elephant Mired in "Muck"

Sine the election of Barack Obama, the Republican party seems to have become encumbered under the weight of their own obsession to hinder and obstruct the plans of our new President.

They offer no substantive ideas or alternate theories outside of the ageless party rhetoric of cutting taxes, espouse that they have been left out on consultations by the president, which is ridiculous and furthermore an outright lie; then generally have the headset of obstructing a large part of his agenda in the hopes that his policies fail and that they will be in a good position to recapture lost offices in the 2010 elections.

Do they really believe that the memory of the American people is that short, that after 8 years of a regime which flaunted the law. presided over an economic policy which has brought the country and the world to a point of disaster and left the new President to recover a tainted image around the world-do they honestly believe that the American people are going to put them back in office that soon?

I have problems with many views of the right-wing base and the Republican party, which are traditionally the rabble-rousers. Yes, I would like them to hide under a rock and only show their faces in time to pay taxes, but indeed, keep their opinions and therefore their shortsighted and parochial opinions to themselves. Hell,I wouldn't care if they formed a new union of states. they do nothing but hinder progress under the cloak of religious zealotry and moralistic chicanery, inbred with distortions.

The Right wing of the GOP which seems to speak for the entire party is pure hell for our country. They are selfish at every avenue of change, save that which deregulates and benefits the rich. Where is their rock to crawl under? They are a persistent threat to changing the status quo. Let them linger in the dark for a long time. Who cares? They're of no use to progressive minds in this country.

"Afghanistan",Pakistan and Terrorism: :Alqaeda on the Move

2009-02-23T12:51:00.000-08:00

Al Qaeda was founded in 1988 by Osama bin Laden to consolidate the international network he established during the Afghan war. Its goals were the advancement of Islamic revolutions throughout the Muslim world and repelling foreign intervention in the Middle East.

Bin Laden, son of a billionaire Saudi businessman, became involved in the fight against the Soviet Union’s invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, which lasted from 1979 to 1988 and ended with a Soviet defeat at the hands of international militias of Muslim fighters backed by the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and with Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood leader, Abdullah Azzam.

Bin Laden ran one of seven main militias involved in the fighting. They established military training bases in Afghanistan and founded Maktab Al Khidamat, or Services Office, a support network that provided recruits and money through worldwide centers, including in the U.S.

Bin Laden and Azzam had different visions for what to do with the network
they had established. Bin Laden decided to found Al Qaeda, based on personal affiliations created during the fighting in Afghanistan as well as on his own international network, reputation and access to large sums of money. The following year his associate Azzam was assassinated.

After the war ended, the Afghan-Arabs, as the mostly non-Afghan volunteers who fought the Soviets came to be known, either returned to their countries of origin or joined conflicts in Somalia, the Balkans and Chechnya. This benefited Al Qaeda’s global reach and later helped cultivate the second and third generations of Al Qaeda terrorists.

The origins of Al-Qaeda can be traced to the Soviet War in Afghanistan. The United States viewed the Soviet support of the Afghan Marxists against the Afghan "mujahedeen"( holy warriors) as a sign of Soviet aggression and expansionist policy. The CIA launched Operation Cyclone, channeling funds through Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence agency to the "mujahedeen".

A large number of Arab "mujahedeen" had joined the jihad against the Afghan Marxists. This was facilitated by organisations such as the Maktab-al-Khidamat, who were funded by wealthy Saudis and who were then approached by Osama Bin Laden, offering his services. Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab-al-Khidamat organisation.

The Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, however Mohammed Najibullah’s communist Afghan government remained in power for a further three years before being overrun by "mujahedeen". Mujahedeen leaders struggled to agree on a method of administration. Alliances were in constant flux and fighting for territory left the country devastated.

Some mujahedeen decided to extend their struggle to other parts of the world, a number of organisations were created to deal with these aspirations. One of these organisations was Al-Qaeda which was formed by Osama Bin Laden.

After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, the Saudis allowed the US to use bases in Saudi Arabia against Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war.The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 threatened Saudi Arabia, as some of its most valuable oil-fields were dangerously close to Iraqi forces.

In addition, there were fears that Saddam Hussein’s call to pan Arab/Islamism might rally internal dissent. Bin Laden offered the services of his mujahedeen to King Fahd to protect Saudi Arabia. However, King Fahd chose instead the offer of US support and allowed them to deploy forces on Saudi territory.

The deployment angered Bin Laden, as he believed the presence of foreign troops near the sacred sites of Mecca and Medina profaned sacred soil. Following the first Gulf War, Al Qaeda shifted its focus to fighting the growing U.S. presence in the Middle East, particularly in Saudi Arabia, home to Islam’s most sacred shrines.

Al Qaeda vociferously opposed the stationing of U.S. troops on what it considered the holiest of Islamic lands and waged an extended campaign of terrorism against the Saudi rulers, whom Bin Laden deemed to be false Muslims. The ultimate goal of this campaign was to depose the Saudi royal family and install an Islamic regime on the Arabian peninsula.

Osama was denounced by the Saudi government. The Saudi regime subsequently deported Bin Laden in 1992 and revoked his citizenship in 1994 and he was forced to go into exile in Sudan.

From 1992 to 1994, Al-Qaeda were based in Sudan, arriving at the invitation of the Islamist theoretician Hassan al Turabi following an Islamist coup. Bin Laden assisted the Sudanese government, purchased and created various business enterprises and established Al-Qaeda training camps.

After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, a new force began to emerge named the Taliban. The Taliban was constituted of children of the war, many who were orphans and many who had been educated in the rapidly expanding network of Islamic schools called madrassas. The infighting and lawlessness that dogged Afghanistan gave the well disciplined and well organized Taliban the opportunity to gradually expand their control, eventually capturing the capital, Kabul, in September 1996.

By then, Osama had taken his followers(AL Quaeda) to Sudan. Eventually. the Sudanese authorities forced Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda to leave Sudan, some say under pressure from the United States; whereupon, the Taliban invited them back into Afghanistan and In 1996, Al-Qaeda announced a jihad to expel foreign troops from what they felt were Islamic lands. Bin Laden issued a fatwa, which amounted to a public declaration of war on the US and any of its allies.

Today, we have a larger problem with Pakistan which is offering refuge for Al Qaeda within its borders. The history of Al Qaeda, however brief, is one of a terrorist organization on the move and looking for a target. In this case that target would be the "infidels" occupying Arab lands.

Why is the US in Afghanistan?

2009-02-19T04:30:00.000-08:00

Afghanistan is a primal country, bound by ancient tradition. theocratical rule, poverty,illiteracy and harsh terrain. Make no mistake about it, the puppet government of President Karsai, is just that. Some are now calling him the mayor of kabul as his influence wanes beyond the city and vast areas of the country are breeding grounds for lawlessness, corruption and terrorists.

Evidence seems to suggest that pre 911, President Bush had already determined to occupy this country, so the rhetoric about destroying the Taliban was in part true, but only because of oil.

YouTube - USA - Afghanistan - What Americans Never Hear

So why do we attempt to change tribal. if not savage behavior in the name of protecting Americans from terrorists? What may have evolved to this stage, began as yet another indefensible occupation of a country, because of oil.

Now, I'm sure, given a thinktank, the pooled resources of journalists, experts on the region and politicians with a jingoistic notion on the necessity of an American presence in this beleagured primitve society, someone, has a broader perspective.I don't get it and that's' why I write these opinions, to become educated, hoping someone will give me some feedback.

Maybe I'm missing out on something. I wish someone would please help me understand this.I think I'm reasonably intelligent and can follow a clue or pattern of convincing argument, but I'm at a loss to see why American soldiers are dying in the name of a primal culture.

Yes, Afghanistan, given its geography,simplistic notion of God versus the infidel mentality, and its overall exclusion of secular rights is a virtual breeding ground for terrorist activity.So do we think we think we can control the Taliban, issue in a secular government?

Our new President,"Barack Obama" with all his gifts of leadership,
has yet to definethe long term obejective of US Troops in this war-torn region. I don't think any leadership in the US today wants to admit that both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars cannot be won.

Valentines Day (For Women Only): A Double Standard?

2009-02-09T03:48:00.000-08:00

Valentines day is nothing more than an floral industry driven day where we exercise that God given right to paternalistic behavior toward women. There are very few, if any, national commercials geared toward gifts to men. They rely solely on sapping males well being on that day, through commercials and the like that imply a male's obligation to buy his favorite female a gift. The diamond commercials are everywhere, but none of them suggest a diamond, or anything for the man in your life.

Once again, another platform for a double standard in America. If women are equal, why aren't they subject to the same relentless efforts to extract money from them, as are males on Valentines Day and on Sweetest Day?

I'm sure if I brought this subject up in mixed company, there would be a mixture of emotions, but for the most part, there would be that uncomfortable feeling, when the realization of this double standard surfaced. We don't like to think about or acknowledge the double standard working thorough this holiday. Sadly, I've not even heard mention of any movement individually or collectively by women, in opposition to the double standard.

Happy Valentines Day for Women!

Banks, NSF Fees, NSF Loans, Overdraft Fees:Legal Consumer Fraud at its Worst

2009-01-31T14:23:00.000-08:00

Recently, I awoke to an unwelcome surprise. Perusing my checking checking account online was my usual routine. I was flabbergasted to find that my checking account was $700.00 overdrawn. This happened over a weekend in which the Friday preceding that weekend, I made a sizable deposit to clear any charges coming through on the following Monday morning.

How could I be overdrawn when ample funds were cleared on Friday night to covered any charge?

I tried relentlessly to construct a series of events that could have caused this, but to no avail. After speaking with several banking representatives, each giving their own customized evaluation of what had taken place, I was yet confused.

I had eight Non-Sufficient Fund charges totaling $ 272.000, taken
from my account. Why? I had asked myself as I continue to do so. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the terminology, NSF Fees, Overdraft Fees and NSF Loans are terms that mean the same. The later NSF loans refers to the schemes whereby banks "loan" or advance money into your account to cover checks, withdrawals or electronic charges which come through your account. They then charge you a hefty fee for doing so. National City bank, which is my Financial Institution currently charges an outrageous loan-sharking rate of $ 34 per overdraft.

Research into what transpired is becoming clearer as evidence of “check and charge manipulation” on the part of banks becomes increasingly clearer. More and more people are witnessing drastic increases in these so-called NSF Loans and manipulation of charges so that larger checks are paid first and the smaller electronic charges, last.

If you try to get an answer from a bank representative on the order in which charges are processed, you run up against a stone wall, or in some cases, they don't even try to hide their schemes to "overdraft" you account. Of course, they don't call it that, but by letting you know that it's written in the fine print that you signed when you opened the account, you have little recourse. Some of them even put in the contract that they have the right to change the terms and conditions of an agreement without notice.

In my case, on the date that these NSF charges were accessed, I was able on two separate occasions to take a sizable amount from the ATM machine at my bank and to issue a check to a friend who went directly into the bank and cashed it. When I asked how this could happen, if my account was in the negative and with a receipt in hand denoting my balance, I was taken on a merry-go-round of explanations, all of which made no sense and convinced me that the dirty little secret of” manipulating charges on customer checking accounts for NSF fees, is real.

Last year, financial institutions generated $17.5 billion in fees from overdraft loans according to a study conducted by the nonprofit Center for Responsible Lending. Also, in 2006, 60 percent of all bank fee income was generated by overdraft loan fees. This amounted to a 15% percent increase over 2004..

Almost half of all overdrafts (46%) are triggered by debit cards at the ATM or the point of sale. These overdrafts could easily be prevented with a warning or denial. Most debit point-of-sale overdrafts are small, averaging less than half this $34 fee, meaning that these overdraft loans cost nearly $2 for every dollar advanced to cover the shortfall.

Past records by federal regulators indicate that in 2001, this practice began and financial institutions began systematically dictating the order in which your transactions are processed electronically. As I believe and as many others do, this is done to maximize the amount of overdrafts on an account. Today this practice is standard operating procedure.

If you think that I had problems obtaining an explanation on how I could have obtained 8 overdrafts and still manage to take money out of the bank and issue a check that was cashed, all leaving a positive balance and still end up with eight bounced transactions, what about the explanation to the Feds who began an investigation into the banking industry this past year and their overdraft charges?

It turns out that FDIC regulators were unable to obtain clear information on overdraft programs at 33 percent of all financial institutions that were investigated throughout the country. Their investigation further revealed that the processing methods in place at banks and credit unions make it hard if not impossible for the customer to pinpoint how these overdraft or NSF fees are generated.

The latest methods involve intentional manipulation to customers accounts, which itself is a type of underlying deception. Payments are not processed in the order in which they are received, but by various methods of holding, batching and otherwise “manipulating” the way transactions clear. In doing so, the financial institutions are able to generate more overdraft fees( ie-Clearing charges checks from highest to lowest).

Some banks and credit unions are posting charges against a checking account quickly while intentionally delaying deposits, lowering account balances by configuring debits to clear high-dollar items first and failing to warn customers during debit card or ATM transactions that they are about to overdraw their account.

In my case 3 larger charges were cleared and a host of smaller charges, some below $ 5.00, were assessed NSF fees. When I tried to obtain information on which charges cleared first, I was given a run around and several different explanations to the same question.

Here’s an example of how it works, based upon reports by the FDIC:
Say you have $ 96.00 left in your checking account. Now, at some point you have four transactions come through $ 32.00, 43.00,, 13.00, and 11.00 respectively and these are followed by a $ 100.00 transaction. Many banks will clear the $100.00 transaction first, but still charge an NSF fee( known as "NSF Loans"). They will then clear and charge NSF Fees(Loans) on the remaining four transactions. This way, they collect NSF fees(loans) or “overdraft” fees on five separate transactions instead of one.

Even if you have overdraft protection, the banks will still charge you a fee for it to kick in and in most case put it in larger increments than what you need. This has the effect of then shifting your available overdraft credit to a lesser amount, just as though you had a credit card charge come through.

They use larger increments to deposit into your account so they can reduce your overall available overdraft credit and you owe more, just as you would on any credit card.

They even charge fees for people who have a secured overdraft deposit. These are funds which you have already deposited into a savings account linked to your checking account, to cover any overdraft. Each time that they put these funds into your account, they charge you a fee, thereby slowly whittling away at your money in your overdraft account.

The FDIC has found the larger banks are implementing software programs to batch transactions and assess overdraft fees. Even smaller banks are in Kohoots, often contracting to outside companies to design and implement overdraft programs for them. Many of these companies are then guaranteed a portion of the profits from these overdraft fees, with commissions as high as 10 to 20 percent of the additional fees which are generated via these programs.

So, now we also have to question the ethics of any company that designs programs willingly, while knowing that their design has the objective of manipulating deposits and charges which come through a financial institution's customer account.

Currently, legislation is under way to reign in this practice. The Overdraft Protection Act would require that banks more accurately represent the nature of their programs. It would also restrict a bank’s ability to cover overdrafts unless specifically approved by the customer at point of sale. If it is passed, it would amend existing federal regulations, including the US Expedited Funds Availability Act by forbidding computerized manipulation of customer transactions.

For an assessment of how much APR these fees or “loans” as they are called is costing you take a look at this example. Does this bring to mind “legalized Loansharking”?

The have and have Nots: Why we often forget.

2008-11-28T06:31:00.000-08:00

While I was enjoying a wonderful Thanksgiving dinner at a friends home, a conversation ensued that reminded me of the everyday patterns we adopt, often without malice, but symptomatic of neglect. We become comfortable with our lifestyles and those within that circle, often at the temporary expense of our humanity.

The conversation moved to a discussion about the price of Fish per pound at a local gourmet market. My friend who is among this circle of upper middle class professionals, and with no harm intended, just as a point of conversation, mentioned that he was shocked at the extreme pricing of fish at this market. He indicated that the $ 20.00 per pound range was definitely surprising to him.

His statement brought a totally opposite surprise to several members of our circle. They thought it unusual that he was surprised at this cost per pound. The indication was, that they were very used to this type of pricing and it didn't cause the slightest degree of consternation.

When he mentioned that he was used to paying 2-3 dollars a pound
for fish,another friend,just as a point of conversation and more of
a motherly type indicated that even she would never buy fish at such
a low price per pound.

The conversation was also carried on in regard to the freshness of the fish,
with that being an essential to this group of people.

Now, I do believe that this was just a nice conversation, but it got me thinking" Most of the working poor or even the middle class would be more in line with the 2-3 dollar range per pound for fish, although this may be somewhat low. Freshness, for most people is a secondary issue and at most a luxury. To this group it was ordinary. One friend remarked that she always payed around $ 20.00 per pound for her salmon.

Not once did I believe that this group was looking down at people of lessor means or lessor incomes. It does however show how comfortable we become in our own circles speaking about issues that are common to us, but may not exist in commonality with the populace as a whole.

This was just a casual conversation over a good dinner and yet it brought
to light the realization of the 'differences' that exist when groups belong
to different economic strata. They weren't being mean or narrow-minded,
they were simply pointing out facts about their lifestyle in regard to this
issue. That lifestyle exist in the income strata that excludes many people
in our society.

We all get into patterns of thinking where we take for granted our way of
life and it becomes part of us. This in part, is one reason we've come to
loggerheads in this country over economic issues. I'm wondering if our
patterns of thinking become subliminal, according to our lifestyle. We t
hen move into the mode of non-intentional directive or a laizzez-faire
attitude, that with no malice intended,nevertheless forms the backbone
of our thinking.

If too much of this becomes subliminal and common, at what point do we lose a part of our humanity. We could all use a lesson in thinking outside the box.

Attractive fathers do not pass their looks on to sons - Telegraph

2008-10-30T05:35:00.000-07:00

I found this News Topic very Interesting

Attractive fathers do not pass their looks on to sons - Telegraph

Our Financial Crisis: What Hindsight Shows Us

2008-10-19T02:29:00.000-07:00

Blinded by greed and fostered by fiscal irresponsibility, Americans find themselves mired in an economic meltdowns, the likes of which we have not seen since the Great Depression. That meltdown has now spread globally and the question begs for an answer-Why did it happen?

Its simple, and stated in the first sentence: greed and fiscal irresponsibility.

Several years back, My partner and began to be concerned about the state of the housing market. Our business takes us to the suburbs and everywhere, houses that formerly sold in the $ 100,00 range were not being priced in the $ 200,000 range,$ 200.000 homes were selling at $ 300,000 and so on. There was no end.

Homes sales were appreciating at astonomical rates and people with modest incomes were taking possession of over appreciated homes in record numbers. The essential problem was this: many of these people could not afford these over-valued homes and were the victims of the sub-prime schemes, their own basic ignorance of their financial strength, and to some degree, greed.

Yes, even the basic American has taken leave of senses in the desire to own more home than we can afford and to live above our means. Somewhere, someone put the idea in our heads that everyone has the right to own a home, even without the necesssary financial liquidity to pay the monthly mortgage.

Looking back, I'm very fortunate to have resisted the impulse to buy on inflated values of these homes. For that reason, I continue to rent and that has been a luxury that has served us well in the downside of an impulse driven industry. I knew in my heart that real estate was greatly appreciated and that such appreciation was a recent phenonmenon and subesequently geared by greed.

Americans were using their homes as ATM machines, using up vital equity for things such as Credit Card payoffs and unnecessary additions to their homes, much it based upon the deceitful advice of realtors and their own short sighted views on the potential worth of their homes as an investment.

Growing up, neighborhoods were fostered by homes where families stayed from generation to generation. You bought a home to stay in it, raise a family, perhaps even more than one generation. Along the way, and in our pursuit of fast capital we lost sight of that security afforded by that kind of stability. Opting for the transient life, we gave up that ideal, moving form home to home, buying and selling constantly, until the typical neighborhood of my youth was no more.

Our homes, our former staples of lasting security became disposable commodities, sold at will with the aim of financial enrichment each time we posited on another doorfront. We began moving and relocating at rapid pace and before long the transient nature of this so-called economic windfall began to catch up with us. It did, and now look where we are.

It's not just the frequent buying of selling of over-valued homes
and real estate that hovers over us like a dark cloud, we also owe our
current dismal situation, to our lifestyles. We live above our means and use credit cards as the panacea to achieve our short term objectives. At our peril, we have ignored the consequences of this fiscal irresponsibility and the burdensome load of unending debt weighs down on us on a daily basis. This burden is stressful and destabilizing.

The lack of available credit has a trickle down effect. Responsible credit is not available for the consumer, who in turn can't spend wisely, businesses can't pay bills and their employees, banks won't loan or extend credit to each other, mutual funds which are backed by commercial paper(Money) become devalued and the list goes on.

Now, we can do something about this. It involves reevaluating why we spend, where we spend and what we spend. Is our spending practical, impulse or emotion based? Do we spend out of need or simply want?

With this analysis on our spending habits we have to confront an essential that has got us into this mess-our desire to ever increase our wealth under shaky and unpredictable short term schemes. For too long few have reaped the rewards of enrichment at the expense of others. This has to stop across the board.

We have to control our greed and the constant preoccupation to aggrandize our wealth at all costs, often at the expense of the less fortunate. Real Estate has been a prime componnent in this mess. The family home should be a staple of security and equity should not be used as a variable to gamble upon.

Until the home is once again the anchor in the financial picture, the housing mess will go on. Until we stop looking for the pot of gold at every end of the spectrum and until we take a look at the sensible approach to long term security and not short term gain, we won't solve the problem.

SendOutCards

2008-10-09T08:50:00.000-07:00

SendOutCards

Americans and their Love of Heroes

2008-08-26T05:36:00.000-07:00

I can't speak for other countries, but Americans have a love affair with
"redemption". We lionize sports heroes who regularly ingest or inject banned substances, watch while they lie to Congress, watch while they get inducted into the sports hall of fame, pay outrageous amounts to go watch their team mates also play while under the influence, watch them brawl, act like children and get in trouble with the law, many of which are doing the same thing, and then in turn sluff it off as though its to be expected.

We elect and reelect corrupt politicians and shady office holders whom we know to be ethically challenged, deeply flawed and often rotten at the core, and then we wonder why the system seems broken. The question is, Do we care? I don't think so. Here's why.

We are willing to build up our promising heroes, and likewise willing to tear them down, but we won't let them stay down, just long enough to vet our collective anger. Then we reinstate them into our good graces, give them another chance, often before they've learned a lesson from their previous choices. In short, we condone bad behavior as though it were an expected ritual, a type of rite of passage. Then the same behavior often occurs again. This time we take it with indignation, perhaps an affront to our choice, which was of course, to forgive and forget.

The problem with this approach is that very few lessons are learned by these people because they know, what we don't realize. We have lionized them and given them value far beyond their bad behavior. So they go on with that behavior, hide it, don't talk about it, and don't learn from it. They do this because we're more than willing to let them. They realize their entertainment value to us and for that we are willing to pay a hefty price for their redemption. They know this, we don't.

The bad behavior that so often characterizes our heroes is related to our willingness to accept it. That we do, to the point where the behavior is no longer an isolated event, but becomes a game plan. In the overall scheme of the individual's play book, they will play, deceitfully adhering to bad behavior while their adoring fans, the public, only find out when its too late. They know this. We obviously don't or we simply don't care. Which is it?

What we fail to recognize is the underlying culture that breeds deceitful behavior and the shallow circumstances under which it can be excused away. We use any justification possible to feel good about our choices, even in the face of overwhleming evidence to the contrary. And once again, we let them go on with their wrong.

We just touch the surface of these people, just enough to stroke their egos, but never challenge them to expose the real side. Too often, our heroes are fragile. Too much introspection and they come undone, often at tremendous costs. Although we idolize people in all walks of life, entertainers, celebrities, and politicians seem to be the focal point of aberrant behavior; They are definitely in the spotlight more, but fallen heroes are replete in every industry and in every lifestyle, witness Enron.
George Bush is a another examaple.

We knew this man was in his own special way, corrupt from the start. We knew his oil background and a laundry list of items that were questionable from the start. We ignored it because we needed a "hero" in the deepest American sense and we got what we asked for and then we went back and did it again. Once more, we didn't care to investigate or delve too closely into the undelying culture which breeds this type of deceit. Or maybe we just didn't care?

We take at face value, the traffic of deceit and watch it unfold in varying degrees until the evil implicit in its advance becomes whole, and the pie is ruined. We are never willing to admit that these acts are of themselves the product of a culture that tolerates them.

We continually elect and reelect corrupt politicians, promote incompetent people to positions of high authority. name crooks to head sensitive departments, and the list goes on. Who indeed represents the fool? They or us? I would gander that these so-called heroes have the last laugh, and rightfully so.

Americans need to engage in more critical thinking. That thinking requires that we stop taking every thing at face value and start delving deeper into the psyche of those, we desire to lionize. It could save us lot of time in the future, not to mention the loss of face to a global world that until recently, admired us.

The Jewish Classification: Are they a "race" or a "religion"

2008-08-19T06:44:00.000-07:00

I have always been confused about the classification of Jews. Does being Jewish mean that you're a member of a "race, or is being Jewish simply a "religious" affiliation.

The definition of ethnicity and race add to the dilemma.

Much of it is owing to conflicting views of Jews as a "race" of people or a people bound by a common religious doctrine and codified under the term
"Jewish". This intermingling and common usage of the term "Jewish" is indeed confusing.

As I was writing this post, I had to change my explanations several times because of the "gray" area that does exist when examining the use of the word "Jew". Are we talking about a "race" of people or a "religion?" That distinction through history and common usage has become blurred. I'm not certain that it has ever been clear as is pointed out in the many contrasting views on the state of being "Jewish".

Here are some viewpoints as taken from various sources and hence assimilated into this post.

2) Being Jewish is not a race because Jews do not share one common ancestry or biological distinction. People of many different races have become Jewish people over the years.

Note: This is both true and untrue. owing to intermingling. mixing and conversion, Modern day Jews might not be classified as a race in today's parlance. They do have different physical characteristics, but so do Blacks, whites, Latinos etc. A better indicator might be a common ancestral origin. : however, with so much mixing and conversions to judaism during modern times, the "ancestral origin" factor in the race definition, could only apply to the original descendants of Abraham. (hebrews). Here is a very short, good and concise genealogy on this subject.

3)Being Jewish is not a nationality

Being Jewish is not a nationality because Jews have been dispersed throughout the world for almost two thousand years. People of many different nationalities are Jewish. Being Jewish is like being a citizen of a religious movement. Jews are a people of shared destiny and purpose and open to conversion to their beliefs, regardless of birthright.

4)Being Jewish means you are a part of a religious movement. However, the great majority of Jews become a part of the religious movement through birth and not due to their beliefs or actions. In this way, being Jewish is indeed like being a citizen of a religious movement.

A Jewish identity is automatically bestowed on the babies of Jewish mothers (according to Orthodox and Conservative Judaism) and of Jewish mothers or fathers (according to Reform Judaism). This Jewish identity stays with them throughout life even if they don't actively practice Judaism.

If a person is not born Jewish, he/she can undergo the process of conversion to become a Jew. A person who was not born Jewish or has not gone through the conversion process is not considered a Jew even if he or she believes in Judaism and observes Jewish practices. The conversion process is very meaningful because it is the only way for a non-Jew to become Jewish.

Another viewpoint actually defines being Jewish as a religion and a race, This one was presented by a Rabbi.

5)The Jews are both a race and religion.

While a Christian is defined as one who follows the teachings of Jesus, a Jew is defined as one born from a Jewish mother or converted according to Jewish Law. That being said - a person remains a member of the Jewish nation for the rest of their life regardless of what religious practices that person chooses to follow/reject. And yes, as a nation we have our own culture, foods, land, and even diseases.

Now, this viewpoint is a cross between the previous two; however, it doesn’t address the question as to Jews being a race since there are different types of Jews ie-Ethopian Jews

it is a religion in that Judaism is a belief system with ritual and practice, and an underlying philosophy aimed at a connection to the divine and an adherence to divine command, but it is a race in that membership in the system (even without belief!) is passed through a genetic connection -- you cannot choose not to be Jewish if you are born into it. However, because Judaism recognizes conversion, the religion cannot be purely racial (you cannot convert to another race). Therefore, it is easiest to say that it is a religion with racial/genetic components.

This viewpoint addresses the diversity of Jews and signals that being jewish is not a race because: “If the mother is a Jew, her child is a Jew. It is a religion that follows the mother. However, it is not a race or an ethnic group, because Jews come from several different ethnic groups.

Jewish” refers to the religion of Judaism in which the ancient Hebrews practiced and of which are its modern day descendants, save those that are Jewish through conversion, which one must undergo to officially practice the religion of “judaism” or in common terms refer to themselves as being jewish( ie-Whoppi Goldberg)

Now this Israeli American whose father is a Rabbi might have a problem with the
so-called “conversion of which i speak: He states,
“Jew can mean ethnic group, religion, or culture. No Jew says that the Jews are a race, we're Caucasian , but we're of the Jewish ethnic group. You can convert to my religion, but the Orthodox Jews will not recognize you as a true Jew. The Blacks who convert to Judaism are confused. You have to be born into it.

Another Viewpoint:

Jews are semitic people who are related to all the other semitic people of the mid east. You can say some Jews are Caucasian and some are not. But the original Jews were not white. Hundreds of years ago many east europeans converted to Judiasm in East Europe. Judiaism is not a race, but people have treated them as if they are a race.

Another Viewpoint:

“The Jew that you see today is truly a Khazar(white jew)of europe meaning a convert. Look at Ethiopain jews when they were discovered; the books that they had were very old.” Authors’Note: Khazars were Mongoloid looking-a turkic people.This wouldn’t qualify them as being white.

“Askenazi Jews are mostly European in origin while the sephardic/Mizrahi Jews are middle Eastern and African.”

Although there are only approximately 10 million Jews in the world, today the religion is split up considerably. All Jews come under the strands of Ashkenazi (Eastern European) and Sephardi (Spanish) referring to their origin, however these only change customs and traditions. There are two divisions within Judaism that significantly differ: Orthodoxy and Reform Judaism, from which has stemmed Liberal, Conservative and other different types. There is also a division under the Orthodox label with ultra-orthodox and Hasidic Jews.

Why are there Arabs in Africa? Genocide in the Sudan!

2008-08-09T17:43:00.000-07:00

Many of you may be unaware that there are Arabs in Africa. Yes Arabs! Unfortunately some of these Arabs have taken to genocide against Native Black Africans, as exist in the Sudan, backed by the President of Sudan,(although he denies it) and funded by China through its delivery of weapons that are being used to kill in Darfur( the Sudan). The Chinese are also after oil and a way to move millions of their citizens to the African Continent( say "overpopulation"); however, that's another topic.

Briefly, so that we can understand the present state of the Sudan, its Arab Africans and their uprising against Native Africans, we need to know why there are Arabs in Africa in the first place.

Geographic Connections

The Arabs of the Middle East have very old connections to the African continent, and indeed more than half the Arab world exists in Africa. As a result of this (in terms of area, and possibly population ) from Egypt, Sudan, and Eritrea in the east to Mauritania in the west, much of the North African population are Berbers (a separate, native ethnic group speaking an Afro-Asiatic language) or Arabized Berbers.

The Islamic world covers even more area,( Nigeria in the west and many other West African nations). So this intermingling of peoples on the African continent, along with the spread of Islam, has resulted in large populations of African Arabs covering a vast area of Africa.

Present-day Sudan is home to millions of Arabs, with 40% of the population identifying themselves under the ethnic group of 'Arabs' even though the option of 'Afro-Arabs' is also available. Note that Afro-Arabs within the Middle East itself are for the most part descendants of African slaves who were brought there during the Arab slave-trade.

East Africa is home to a significant Afro-Arab population, especially along the Swahili coast, such as in Zanzibar, Mombasa, Lamu, Malindi, the Comoros, Bagamoyo, and Ujiji.[5][6]

The Darfur region of Sudan

The Darfur conflict is among Arab and non-Arab speaking black Africans of many ethnicities in Sudan.

Northern Arabs, including Northern Sudan, identify with Islam, the Arabic and Bedouin philosophy. Southern Sudanese align with other non Arab nations in both ideology and religion. As told by Makau Mutua in the July 14, 2004 edition of The Christian Science Monitor: ”The blacks in the south either hew to their ancestral traditional African religions or have converted to Christianity.” Durfar is the exact opposite of the genocide of Bosnian Muslims by Serbian Christians. Sudanese Muslims, the Janjaweed, are perpetrating genocide on African traditionalists and Christians.

Please watch this video:

Black Arabs in Sudan have more in common with their Asian Brothers in Indonesia than their neighbors to the south. Black Africans in Sudan have more in common with their white brothers in Europe and North America than with their neighbors to the north. What the West needs to understand is that the color of the skin has absolutely nothing to do with the conflict in Darfur.

In order to understand Darfur, we need to put the conflict in terms of its historic context, something the media has neglected in it's coverage. Darfur is but one example of Arab racism toward non-Arabs within the broader "Arab world." The Darfur genocide, might be viewed not only as a case of an Islamic jihad, but also as a case of Arab racism and should be seen as parallel to Saddam Hussein's genocide against Kurds and the Algerian government's repression of the Kaybles.

The acts being committed against Black Darfurians are primarily based upon classical "jihad" and anti-African racism.

However, there is also a political/economic element that has added further fuel to the fire. Khartoum has used this element to further encourage the Jangjaweed militias to murder and pillage. The ilk of the Janjaweed and other nomadic Arab tribes have always been given preferential treatment by Khartoum over settled Black African Darfurian farmers. This is why government positions were attacked by Darfurians in the West. The Janjaweed militia are therefore not only motivated by Islam, and racial hatred, but are in a prime position for a power grab over some of the sparse arable sections of the West.

Nonetheless, the concept of "Jihad" (Holy War) should be viewed as a strong undercurrent behind the governments support for the Janjaweed in Darfur.

"Jihad" is likely a more strong policy consideration of the Bashir( President of Sudan-An Arab) regime. The Islamic government of Sudan was never prepared to recognize the self-determination of any other people in Sudan. This is the common thread that Islamic states have shared throughout history in terms of ethnic and religious minorities: the non-recognition of their self-determination. Self-determination does not have to mean secession or statehood, but does necessitate some level of autonomy.

The self-determination of religious and ethnic minorities is an anathema to the Islamic state. This is an essential concept of Islam. Non-Muslims are "dhimmi". Thus it is of no surprise to see Muslim violence against non-Muslim's in Muslim countries, whether it be in Sudan or in Iraq.

The Arab role In the African Slave Trade and Sudan's importance.

Along ancient Saharan trade routes, 1,300 years of shared history that have mingled the faiths, cultures and skin tones of Arabs and Africans have left another, more vicious legacy: Arab-African slavery that has endured as long as the two peoples have been together, leaving black Africans fighting perceptions of themselves as lesser beings and of Arabs as the civilizing, conquering force.

A "Genocide" Confined to Sudan.

Today, the old roles are playing out at their most extreme in Sudan's Darfur region, with murderous results: Arab horseman clutching AK-47s raze non-Arab African villages and drive off and kill the villagers, in what rights groups call an ethnic-cleansing campaign backed by Sudan's Arab-led government.

In Sudan, this racism is the spark setting fire to Darfur. Up to 80,000 black African villagers are believed to have died, many slain by Arab Janjaweed nomads competing with them for a fertile zone shrinking under desertification and by a minority Arab government accustomed to keeping power by killing opponents.

With power and land at issue, Sudan's central government "is stoking racial and ethnic animus more than it ever has in Darfur's history," said Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College in Massachusetts and one of the leading academic experts on Sudan. "It's the animating feature of the war ... on African tribal groups," Reeves said.

In southern Sudan, the common word for non-Arab Africans today among the Arab elite remains "abid," or slave. In Darfur, in Western Sudan, non-Arab Africans often are referred to as "zurga," which translates as "black," but is thought of more as a slur, Reeves said.

It's important to note that only in Sudan are the African-Arab differences spilling out in blood. Across the Sahara and its edges, the Sahel, most of the coexistence is peaceful, linked by shared cultures and by Islam.

Sudan has long been one of the anchors of the Arab-African slave trade. Its appetite for slaves remains such that a rebel group in neighboring Uganda that calls itself the Lord's Resistance Army is alleged to trade African children to the Sudanese for an automatic weapon each.

A Difference: Traditional American Concepts of "Racism" versus "Racism" against Black Africans as practiced in Sudan(Darfur).

Most Americans are used to the term "racism" as directed against people with darker skin tones, mainly "Blacks', although certainly not limited. Asians and Hispanic cultures occasionally suffer this injustice. This is "racism" mainly in terms of skin color, where the predominating aspect is skin tone, followed by a host of stereotypes and disparaging attributes that follow.

Now this point could be argued, but that's not the issue here. American forms of racism are directly and implicitly founded and derive from differences in skin color. Color is the dominant villain and a darker color, as with most cultures, almost always guarantees victimization, where racism is practiced.

Most of us don't undertstand the full parimeters of race, by definition. This link will clarify it.

In Darfur and elsewhere, intermarriage between Arab and non-Arab Africans over the centuries has become so common that physical differences have ebbed or disappeared. The skin of the Arab Janjaweed militiamen is as dark as the African villagers they hunt.

"Many generations of intermarriage have ensured there's not really a physiological difference, Often, however, the Janjaweed "clings to the notion of Arab racial identity. It's racism where there is no racial difference."

Slavery-An Ancient Institution

When Americans hear the term "slavery," often images of southern plantations come to mind. People tend to forget that the African slave trade was widespread. The African slave trade depleted the home continent's population and blended African cultures with others worldwide, after which, much of the original culture was lost.

Experts estimate that over four and a half centuries, about 25 million Africans were systematically enslaved. About half of those people were kidnapped from their West African homes, hauled across the Atlantic Ocean, and sold to European settlers throughout the Americas. In addition to the southern United States, slave destinations included ports and plantations in the Caribbean and Brazil. A similar slave trade, conducted by Arab and African traders over roughly the same period, captured about 12 million from the continent's east coast and shipped them to the Arab world.

Slavery is nothing new to humankind. Enslaving others in servitude has been part of human culture—at one place or another—for milennia. But, unlike others, this era of slavery was the most widespread and culturally devastating. Some experts argue that by removing what may have been half of the continent's population, the depletion resulted in the slower social and economic growth still affecting many African countries today.

So how did such large-scale trade using people as a commodity come about?

Between 800 and 1500 A.D., advances in ship design and navigation techniques fueled European exploration in and around Africa. Portuguese, Spanish, English, and Dutch mariners established regular trade routes. Africa's metals (especially gold), feathers, and ivory were highly desirable to buyers in Europe and Asia. During that time, some African rulers customarily kept and sold human slaves, who were also African. At some point, those local slaves became accepted as international commodities.

Rants and Raves(Tidbits) You be the Judge

2008-08-05T15:09:00.000-07:00

I think I can classify this under the part about Common Sense or the lack thereof...

I keep seeing these commercial with from Vets for freedom talking about how well the surge has worked and then people saying " so stay there till the job's done."
ow they've even put us on notice that they don't want us there!

Bullshit...! Let snot stay there one more moment than necessary. They don't want us there, which was recently revealed. We went there under false pretenses, to which Mr. Cheney and Mr, Bush have not been held accountable' perhaps an indictment by the world tribunal for "war crimes" would do just that...

People that want us to stay there are only interested in two things
1) That America not lose a war and lose face- heh...I've got news, the loss of face is well documented, the lost of the war is still a mystery. (Oh...Oh... we still don't have the oil)...yet, but latest news says the big oil companies are still trying to nab it!

2)The appearance that leaving Iraq means that the men and women who have died during this invasion and problematic occupation would have given their life in vain..

Well I know this sounds callous, but yeah...I think that's right, and guess who was the architect of their deaths?

Staying in Iraq to honor the memory of fallen comrades, while invoking jingoistic emotion, is flawed reasoning. It's plain and simple. Sometimes soldiers do die in vain when they have corrupt and unresponsive leaders. We have the full house here in America.

When we leave Iraq, they'll fall back to killing each other as usual, such is the curse of fundamentalist ideology, just around the bend, down the road, detoured but not deterred.

2) Did you hear about the 12 year old girl who was given a car for three months of perfect school attendance. Ever wonder why kids are so needy for immediate gratification? What kind of a statement does that make to a generation that thrives on praise and requires accolades for the smallest achievement.

3) What about the guy who fetched the apple core that Tiger Woods was eating and preserved it, not touching it, by putting it in a baggy. last I heard, it was being auctioned on e-bay for thousands. Can we say....can we truly say...."dah? " We are true blue fools of a larger nature." Only in America!

White and Black males-Can They be Friends?

2008-08-04T02:41:00.000-07:00

This topic is more narrowly focused than the larger topic of "male on male friendships" in general. I'm asking a question for a targeted group "black and white males." Another post will explore the larger issue of male to male friendships, and gay to straight males and their viability within our culture. Note: Because the issue is applicable to both sites, this post can also be found at www.theconflictedmale.com

When I first approached this topic, I began by going on a hunt for research relating specifically to "Black and White Males-Can they be Friends? I soon found all kinds of variations on this topic, many of them sexual, but none dealing specifically with the question.

Many off shots of the term did generalize about connections between white and black males such as articles by varied authors and a book by Dr. Keith Boykin dealing with "black men on the "down low", the movie, "White men Can't Jump", the "National Association of White and Black Men Together" and all kinds of derivations, relating to their co-existence together. None of it answered the question, "Black and White Males-Can They be Friends".

Some of it went into cultural differences, the sources of conflict between white and black males and various assundry viewpoints and analysis on specific differences, perceived or real. None of my research brought up the exact connection I was looking for. It may be out there, but I couldn't find any non-sexual content that delved into the topic. Perhaps its not racy enough. Perhaps my combination of keywords and phrases was insufficient to carry the topic. Maybe the topic is too complex to be narrowed down to specifics.

With that in mind, I'll give you my opinion. Black and White males can be friends if both are willing to throw aside cultural differences and greet each other in the raw. So what does this mean? It means simply that there is no magic to black and white males having meaningful and lasting friendships. As a larger extinction on this topic, it would follow that black and white males have the capacity to show affection toward each other.

Being bi-racial, this issue seems trivial to me, but even today, I witness limited relations between white and black males, save those in which both groups are forced by circumstance to co-exist in a work, educational or social setting; however, living close to a university community, I do see a higher degree of camaraderie between black and white males than exist in the larger demographics of the populace.

In order for white and black males to form lasting bonds and become true friends, both, must work against a history of mistrust which is the framework of separation between the races, in general. Together, they have to embrace commonalities which exist within the gender and not differences which exist in the larger scheme of racial polarity.

If I estimate your value as my friend based solely upon your race, and the inherent baggage from either side, then I'm drawing from a history replete with distrust on both sides. That said, it becomes impossible to move beyond that point if I'm unwilling to see you in a different light. When I begin to see you as a friend and not a white or black friend, simply a friend, then the whole situation changes. Hope exist in that moment and the bonds of friendship are no longer as remote.

This may appear to be a simple generalization in the larger scheme of race relations, between white and black males, but I don't find it that complex. As with any topic, it's possible to break it down into so many academic variables that the simple response seems trite, but the answer doesn't require rocket science. It's simply a question posed to get all of us to think about it. Some questions do have fairly simple answers. I believe this is one of them.

The Chinese In Africa: Another Potential Colonizer?

2008-07-30T04:24:00.000-07:00

China is actively seeking to colonize the whole of Africa: Through an aggressive plan which puts hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars into the hands of Africa's leaders, many of them corrupt( read Mugabe, the Sudan),the Chinese are supplying arms for the genocide movement in Darfar, supplanting local economies with Chinese production, recolonizing Chinese Workers to Africa and gradually establishing a new homeland for millions of Chinese citizens.

A staggering 750.000 Chinese have settled into Africa over the last decade. One source estimates that the Chinese will need to send some 300 million Chinese to Africa to solve problems with over population and pollution.

A few years back, the Chinese government reckoned that economic success could not continue unless the country proved able to increase its international political standing, mainly because of the need to secure raw materials supply contracts to feed to its rapidly expanding industrial sector. Unfortunately, relations with the big Asian players (India, Japan and Russia) were and remain tense: historic rivalries and territorial claims mean that the country is still deeply mistrusted by them.

Given this, starting from around 2005 China decided to focus on Africa, tightening relations with those countries that are shunned by the international community:

China isn't doing all of this out of the kindness of its heart. In fact, most might say that China is seeking new markets for its export-driven economy—now the world's fourth largest. In addition, China wants unimpeded—even exclusive—access to Africa's abundant natural resources, especially sources of energy. And don't forget: as a rising power, China is also keen on gathering political influence in Africa.

Arguably, nothing is driving China into Africa more than its quest to satisfy its insatiable appetite for oil and gas. For the past decade, the Chinese economy has expanded annually at near double-digit rates, requiring an enormous influx of natural resources, especially energy.

China is now the world's second largest energy consumer, leading Beijing to Africa's door in an effort—like the U.S.—to find new sources of energy and reduce its reliance on volatile Middle Eastern sources of oil and natural gas. Today, Africa provides China with 30 percent of its energy imports, meeting 5 percent of China's energy needs and rivaling the Middle East as a source of Chinese energy.

Beijing is building ties with African energy suppliers through investment, aid, high-level visits, and a strict policy of "noninterference in internal affairs" that some African governments, under international scrutiny, find comforting. The People's Republic of China has invested billions in resource development and infrastructure—and written off billions more in debt—to help build friendly relationships with oil-rich African countries. For instance:

Some points to consider:

* China has $3 billion invested in Nigerian oil, now the world's eighth largest oil exporter.
* Beijing has at least $3 billion invested in the Sudanese energy sector, for a total of $10 billion since the 1990s.
* In Angola, another African energy giant, a $2 billion credit line for much-needed infrastructure projects secured Chinese access to highly coveted offshore oil fields. Today, Angola is China's biggest oil supplier, outpacing China's previous largest supplier, Saudi Arabia.

China also sees Africa as a potential market for its goods. China–Africa trade soared to $56 billion last year, an increase of 40 percent over 2005, bringing critical revenue to some of the world's poorest nations. The Chinese economy is still export-driven, and Beijing must continue to find and develop new markets to ensure that its economy continues to grow and draw foreign direct investment.

Today, there are over 800 Chinese companies operating in nearly all African nations. There are stories that in some cases, market penetration and influence are more important than profits for Chinese companies operating in Africa.

Beijing has also written off at least $1 billion in African debt, and more write-offs are expected. The World Bank believes that the Chinese import–export bank has loans valued at nearly $13 billion in infrastructure projects in Africa alone. As a matter of fact, the African Development Bank has chosen to hold its annual summit in Shanghai this spring in recognition of China's increasingly pivotal role in the region.

One of the places that China is seeking political influence at the expense of others is Africa. Think about it: With over 50 nations, the countries of Africa represent more than one-quarter of the United Nations General Assembly—a significant voting bloc.

Friendly relations with African nations can bring favorable results for Chinese efforts at the United Nations or U.N. agencies such as the World Trade Organization. They can even reduce the number of states that diplomatically recognize Taiwan: There are five countries in Africa that still recognize Taiwan. For example, in recent years, African states have been pivotal in preventing Taiwan from joining the World Health Organization and in tabling a condemnation of Chinese human rights practices at the U.N.'s Commission on Human Rights.

Today, there are over 800 Chinese companies operating in nearly all African nations. Market penetration and influence may be on equal footing profits for Chinese companies operating in Africa. That remains to be seen, but China is a devious regime, without bounds, and with one objective, to expand beyond its overcrowded frontiers.

Not everyone is optimistic or impressed by China's presence in Africa. Many Africans themselves are skeptical, viewing the Chinese presence with a mixture of anticipation and dread. As China continues to court Africa, how it views the people of Africa, will be a telling story to Beijing's future prominence or its perceived role as another imperalistic colonizer. One thing is clear, Africans don't want to go down that road again, but will their leaders make the right choice?

"Quick Notes": Ethanol and Rising Food Costs and the " Pickens Plan"

2008-07-22T00:01:00.000-07:00

This is one of my frequent points of interest that I put under the "Common Sense" category, although, clearly the sense of it is not that common and not that well explained to the American consumer.

"The recent spike in food costs is all related to energy. Corn based Ethanol incentives are behind the rising costs of food. Why? Corn is an ingredient at some point at every stage of production. A huge percentage of of foods, including dairy cows, chickens, cattle and all livestock eat corn feeds. In addition processed foods often include corn syrup."

This over emphasis on Ethanol as an energy alternative, while well intentioned, has obvious repercussions. We do indeed need to move away from the stranglehold of foreign oil. It permeates every faction of our society. Here's T Boone Pickens Plan to break the hold of foreign oil. Notice no mention is made of "Ethanol.

Young Black Males: What Has Gone Wrong?

2008-07-13T04:51:00.000-07:00

A certain percentage of Black Males have drifted far from Mainstream America, marginalized themselves of their own doing, skirted their responsibilities as fathers, become willing participants in crime, taken to higher incarceration rates in prison as opposed to getting a college education and in general become problems for society. If this continues, the emasculation of the black male will become reality. Witness an Atlanta Judge and his comdemnation.(The Cultural Strategist, blog Archive, April 24,2008)

I am a black male, okay biracial. I'm writing this article in the
hope and in part from the recent remarks brought to the forefront
by Barack Obama, that the black community needs to stop operating
with blinders on, open up their eyes and address "pipe dream mentality",
where sports is seen as the only way to succeed, while ignoring education.
Black America doesn't like to air its dirty laundry. Both Barack Obama and Bill Cosby have tred on uncomfortable ground in speeches that highlight problems with black males within our society; in specifics, the preoccupation with sports such as Basketball as the only means to achieve. Both Cosby and Obama's delivery is caustic but timely.

Barack likewise tuned into the misleading and detrimental effects of "rap" on black males, and its contribution to the sloven, carefree attitude of many young males, yes, even some young white males. Obama also spoke of the undo influence of Basketball, and in this context as well as my opinion, any popular sport, seeded in the black community and inordinately idiolized.

Sports and Rap compose the pipe dream construct as a way to escape poverty. Jesse Jackson didn't like Barack's comments and made it known through some nasty remarks of his own. Unfortunately, these remarks were picked up by a microphone that Jackson assumed to be off.

But the issue here is not about white males, they have their own set of problems. They also have much higher rates of matriculation through college and influence within our society. Now, before we go there, which is another topic, and we can point to past injustice all we want, but the issue is real- a sizable percentage of young black males lack the wherewithal, fortitude and drive to succeed in our society.

How many times can you walk down the street, go into a store, go anywhere for that matter, and you see Black Males behaving in a embarrassing manner? When you see them, how often do they appear to be "scowling," angry at the world? Unfortunately, this is more of the norm than exception. As bitter a pill this is to digest, it is present reality and effectively acts as a shackle about the necks of young and middle age black males.

The very actions of these males in trying to somehow make themselves seem 'unigue' or 'exotic', now make them prisoners of their own device.

I live in a neighborhood which borders the hood. Every day, and it never ceases to amaze me, how many aimless young black males are walking the street with no direction and with no sense of pride and self-esteem. If this continues we will most likely have two generations of black males lost to what I call "attitudinal suicide."

The black community cannot let this happen.We need to step up to the plate when we see wrong: when we see the elderly treated with disrespect by black males, when we see young blacks watching the school bus as it goes by them, when we see them congregating in gang" like groups, when we see them dress like old time sharecroppers, sloven by choice not by economics, when we hear disrespect toward women in rap lyrics and when street talk or Ebonics takes precedence over speaking the English language properly. These are just some of a multitude of actions that threaten the black community and the world community at large.

We are here as one, separate cultures, yet bound to a common humanity. That humanity must flow from every dimension of our civility toward each other. We need to address that which is 'poison' to our ranks, because the metastasizing effect of ignorance and neglect has long range implications for the race, for the nation and for the world.

Original Poetry: "The Laylords of Summer"

2008-07-10T11:34:00.000-07:00

They sit on the banks where a mighty river once flowed
and cry the tears of so many wrongs. Their bodies are
tanned, darkened to bronze, like taffy that flows in luxurious
waves. They stretch their already knowing forms to receive
the cool mist that rises.

They must extend further this year,
The end of a great satisfaction is near.

They relax in the felled patterns of lazy summer
wearing. Clothed, in the nonessentials, they lay beside
the other’s dream and speak of unkept treaties that
ravage the splendor where they once banked,
and speak in hushed tones that catch the air and fall on
silent ears.

They have seen the mighty river flow,
The mighty Colorado.

For a brief reminder, they imagine that the river rises:
that they can feel the flush of foam as it spews into the
treacherous ravines, leaving them awe inspired: so much
desired of the times when caution would move them back
up the banks. Now, they challenge what little is left of its
might.

If they return next season the river will be too low,
Destiny plays folly on their plans, takes bounty
on the dreams that flow.

Dark feet rub toes together to catch whatever it is,
before it is no more. They rush the moments of
simple pleasure: each outdoing the other in their
remembering. They touch, feel the ephemeral
wash that has caught them daydreaming.
They stretch for more.

This will be the last of the summers haunt,
beneath the towering wings that cover them
and pull together the shade. The last of something
that man has destroyed, that nature made.

Each holds back the tear that glazes from knowing
eyes. They put together their memories,
and signal,
their last goodbyes.

An Eagle Scout Lament:Boy Scouts of America: Shame and Intolerance

2008-07-07T04:40:00.000-07:00

I come from a very successful troop, both in its approach to Scouting, its matriculation of Eagle Scouts and the parental and financial commitment to our troop. We were Troop 916 of the Buckeye Council. Stark County, Ohio

Our Scoutmaster was a beefy male in his 30's who embodied the concept of tough yet compassionate discipline, possibly owing from his blue collar upbringing. He could be jovial and serious, disciplined yet playful, intelligent yet down to earth and most of all, we had a lot of fun. We were made up of steelworkers kids, doctors kids, and the mix in between. We were indeed varied and racially diverse.

Much of the fun and camaraderie that we had when we were off the serious tract would not be allowed in today's paranoid society> You see, we all wrestled with each other, sometimes gleefully rolling around in prolonged matches of spirit and exuberance. We laughed, boy did we laugh and there was nothing wrong with our play, then.

Today, that might be another matter. While not involved in the physical act of wrestling with us, since we were kids and our scoutmaster was a hirsute adult male, he did have a habit of pinning us down, tickling us until we couldn't stand it anymore and running the rough stubble of his beard over our faces. We hated that one, but it was all done in the spirit of commaraderie. Today, I relish that an adult could be so playful, clowning, like the little boy inside the man.

Now, he would be hauled off, locked up and charged under any number of statutes which have their base in the fear of child molestation, but much deeper, in the fear of open male to male expressions of friendship and affection. Although, it would be denied as a cause, the reality lives in the present.

So then, was I surprised to learn a while back that the Boy Scouts of America had taken to interpreting morality, based upon a heterosexual code of conduct. Put simply, Gay scouts were no longer welcome, and the implication was that the lifestyle itself was somehow in conflict with the Scout Oath. Don't confuse this with the twelve points below, these points aren't the problem.

There are twelve points which form the Scout Law > they are as follows:
A Scout is,
1)Trustworthy 2)Loyal 3)Helpful 4)Friendly 5)Courteous 6)Kind 7)Obedient
8)Cheerful 9)Thrifty 10)Brave 11)Clean and 10) Reverent.

Now, here's the Scout Oath or Promise, Guess where the problem rest.

"On my honor, I will do my best, to do my duty to God and my country. To obey the Scout Law. To help other people at all times. To keep myself physically strong, Mentally Awake and Morally Straight."

Got a clue? Yep, you got it. It's that "Morally Straight" part that gets the gay scouts in trouble. I don't even know if they're interpreting the word "straight" literally, as in "heterosexual". or merely the concept of being "morally straight" as inconsistent with a gay lifestyle.

During my passage through the ranks of Cub Scouts and through the ranks of Boy Scouts, finally culminating as an Eagle Scout, I never once encountered any openly gay talk or hostile talk, It just wasn't done. There probably were gay scouts, but that issue as well as the lifestyle was closeted. Perhaps, because it was assumed that all Scouts would assume their rightful place and carry out their duties, all,
within the framework of a heterosexual upbringing.

Now, in recent years they seem to have cared enough about it, to have opened a Pandora's box of hostility and resentment against Gay Scouts. What a ridiculous waste of time, as is any venture into this area. Being Gay simply has nothing to do with fulfilling the Scout oath. I find it deplorable that supposedly well meaning, concerned adults have seen fit to crucify those that are different.

For a well placed collection of views on this type of intolerance and a history of the Scout movement, please visit this site.