Living in the New, Splintered America

For those of you who were old enough to worry about the “mighty” Soviet Union in the 70s and 80s, you all lost sleep about nothing. News broke about the story of an ex-KGB analyst turned professor Igor Panarin predicting that the United States will fall apart in 2010. If this is the best that a KGB analyst and current US-Russia relations expert can come up with, they never stood a chance against the US or against anybody, for that matter. And of course, this theory currently has a huge following in Russia, so we can kiss goodbye any fear of Putin being able to turn Russia back to the old Soviet glory.

I don’t want to undermine the wishful thinking of an old dog, but there are gaping holes in his understanding of America. The very map of how he says the United States are going to be split up illustrates that he fails to show even a layman's knowledge of our great nation. Let’s examine his theory and see how likely these are and what could be the consequences.

Read on...

Digg

Mumbai was not India's 9/11

I was coasting through the long weekend on Friday morning, going through the daily dose of reading with the muted TV on CNN when I noticed the word “Cricket” on the screen. This grabbed my attention since this sport is unheard of in this part of the world and I realized that CNN was breaking the news about a series of attacks in Mumbai at various locations and was showing a feed from a local Indian news channel.

As appalled as I was about these attacks, I was also surprised by the unprecedented level of coverage of the events by the news channels—fueled, no doubt, by the large number of Americans involved and the fact that most of their regular reporters were on vacation. Now that the reporters and analysts are back on air, they have gone on to suggest that this is the test that Al Qaeda has sent to Barack Obama, as predicted by Joe Biden. Also, I have heard some one mentioning that the terrorists went after the Americans in Mumbai because they could not get them here in America. All I have to say is: Sorry, it is not always about America. This was an attack against India and targeting American, British and Israeli citizens was just a ploy to garner worldwide attention and further the embarrassment of India.

Read On...

Digg

Blame Dubya First

The new mantra for liberals is "Blame Dubya First!". Combined with a low popularity of the president, it is extremely fashionable to blame the president for everything that goes wrong. Blame Bush for the dandruff and for the dog that chases you during your morning run. I just hit my thumb with a hammer and I swore : "Damn you Bush!"

However, with the pain long gone, let me inspect the rationality of blaming the President for the various problems, perceived or real, that the country is facing. I have chosen four areas: Iraq war, energy crisis, sagging economy and mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina.

I am not an ardent supporter of wars. Not even Iraq war. But to hold the President as the sole scapegoat for whatever shortcomings of the Iraq war is delusional. The Senate and the House, both Republicans and Democrats supported the war. The same people who are blaming Bush for the failures in Iraq were spineless to oppose it before it started. Now that it is fashionable to oppose war, majority of them are against it. Blaming Bush is the way they are refusing to own up their responsibility. Why were they afraid to oppose back then? Because the polls said that the majority of Americans wanted it. They did not have guts to take a moral stand when it was unpopular. Democrats were screaming for Bush to stop Saddam and his WMD. The same people would flip again if the war in Iraq suddenly becomes very popular with the American public. This morality of convenience also makes them forget about the achievements of the war. Back then there was no question about the need of liberating a country from a tyrant who was oppressing all opposition brutally. Now that Saddam is dead and gone, people are forgetting, conveniently, about the positive effects of the invasion. If there is a mess in Iraq, we have to deal with it and let the process complete itself. We cannot just cut and run.

Everybody is bashing bush for the high gas prices. They fail to recognize two things. One: the current high prices are the result of market forces that are beyond the control of the American president. The global supply of oil is almost constant and the consumption is getting higher by the day. This results in an imbalance in the supply-demand equilibrium and the market readjusts by the way of higher prices. This brings to account the second accusation. It is his energy policy that created this mess which could have been avoided. Highly unlikely. Energy policy cannot alter the way a nation consumes energy in a few years. If any flaw in the American energy policy was responsible for the crisis, then the flaw existed for decades. So the blame should be borne by the previous administrations, including Bush Sr, Clinton, Reagan and beyond. However, whether they could have predicted the changes in the global economy that results in the higher oil prices is yet another question. Blaming bush is escapism. Again, let's consider some of the short term measures that can ease the prices a bit. The White House has repeatedly asked/begged Congress to pass legislation that allow drilling in Alaska, which has more oil than Saudi Arabia; allow offshore drilling in the Gulf Coast and California and to allow more nuclear plants to be built. Answers to all of the above from the Democrats and many Republicans is a staunch NO! The technology has evolved so much in the past decade and anyone who is for protecting the environment should add limits/provisions to ensure that in the bill. A blind opposition to any of these is downright moronic.

The main factor behind the economic downturn is the mortgage crisis and the resulting credit crunch. These are the results of decades of indiscipline and over inflation of house prices. Everyone said the house prices will continue to rise perpetually. This led to widespread fiscal irresponsibility by home owners and the lenders. George W Bush did not force these folks to buy bigger houses than they could afford by lying about their income. He did not force the hordes of people to ignore the contracts while signing Adjustable Rate Mortgages and then again use any available inflated equity to buy Plasma TVs. There is only one policy that could have saved thousands from home-foreclosures. There is only one action that could have stopped the credit crunch from happening. It is called personal responsibility.

Another blame that George W Bush has borne singlehandedly is that he is behind everything evil that happened with the Hurricane Katrina. Bush did not create the hurricane. It is a natural phenomenon. He did not make it more severe. There have been far worse hurricanes in the past. He did not designed or built the levees that were broken. Again, the Office of the President of the United States of America has nothing to do with the Hurricane Contingency plans for the area. They are formulated by the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans. The plan was put in action by the state effectively. It gave plenty of warnings and asked for mandatory evacuation from the area. It is not Dubya's fault that one in five people in New Orleans refused to leave. They were amply warned. It is not his fault that there were many people in New Orleans who had no cars or were sick. I've never read anywhere that the duties of the president includes making sure that every citizen is healthy, owns a car and shows common sense. Well, some of these are failings, but you cannot blame Bush alone for that. He rushed all the help that he could as fast as he can. You cannot expect him to go down there and start airlifting people out of rooftops all by himself. The convoys of food and other stuff takes time to organize and to reach a flooded area.

I am not claiming that George W Bush is the finest president that America has ever seen. But he is not the monster that the liberals portray him to be. To counter their claims, these facts are out there to be seen by anyone who cares to look. But as I have read in the internet, "If the sun were to explode, the Liberals would spend their last few minutes blaming it on Bush."

Assault on the First Amendment rights of Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in Texas

Here is another blatant assault on the first amendment. The court has thrown out the State's abduction of (yes abduction) of over 460 children from Yearning for Zion, the compound of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS) community.

I am not writing this to support any evil doers. If there were any under-aged or forceful marriages, any statutory rapes or other abuse on minors, the culprits should be tried and punished. If any of the adults in the community have committed such crimes or knowingly aided them, they all should be prosecuted to the maximum extend as allowed by law. The right of religious freedom won't protect them and first amendment does not excuse such crimes.

However, the lawyers of Child Protective Services have finally admitted that 15 of the 31 "child" mothers placed in foster care were actually adults. One is 27. A 14-year-old removed as a child mother apparently has no children. The state had raided the ranch after a 16-year-old girl called an abuse hot line saying she had been beaten and raped by her 50-year-old husband, but that girl has not been found at the ranch during the raid. Police traced the calls to 33-year-old Colorado Springs woman named Rozita Swinton. Swinton had earlier been arrested for making a false report, and accused of posing as "Jennifer," 16, who called 911 to report that her father had locked her in a basement for days. She is also accused of posing as other aliases.

That being said, in this case the Texas government officials jumped into this mess with the best of intentions. They forgot or ignored the legal procedure while earnestly trying to save another child from molestation. This lead to flagrant errors in evidence and identities of the parties involved. Even now the authorities cannot clearly find the ages, names and relationships of the 'children' taken away from the ranch. DNA tests of hundreds of people are taking weeks to process when many children are away from their parents despite of the lack of proof of any wrong doing.

The court ruling says in its third paragraph that "Removing children from their homes and parents on an emergency basis before fully litigating the issue of whether the parents should continue to have custody of the children is an extreme measure. It is, unfortunately, sometimes necessary for the protection of the children involved. However, it is a step that the legislature has provided may be taken only when the circumstances indicate a danger to the physical health and welfare of the children, and the need for protection of the children is so urgent that immediate removal of the children from the home is necessary."

The court talks about the following facts that were undisputed by the Department of Child Protective Services. The only danger to the male children or the female children who had not reached puberty identified by the Department was the Department's assertion that the "pervasive belief system" of the FLDS community groomed the males to be perpetrators of sexual abuse later in life and taught the girls to submit to sexual abuse after reaching puberty;There was no evidence that the male children, or the female children who had not reached puberty, were victims of sexual or other physical abuse or in danger of being victims of sexual or other physical abuse. Also, there was no evidence that any of the female children other than the five identified as having become pregnant between the ages of fifteen and seventeen were victims or potential victims of sexual or other physical abuse. Additionally, the Department conceded at the hearing that teenage pregnancy, by itself, is not a reason to remove children from their home and parents, but took the position that immediate removal was necessary in this case because "there is a mind-set that even the young girls report that they will marry at whatever age, and that it's the highest blessing they can have to have children."

It may sound outrageous when you hear about girls are married by guys who are old enough to be their dad. But keep in mind, a horror story alone is not a legal basis for removing hundreds of children form their parents. The Texas Court of appeals, Third District, at Austin is clearly right in pointing out that a good intention would not substitute legal procedures for proving that a child is in imminent danger.

Canadian news with some spine

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=f6848b98-417b-4db9-ba63-0ebb7f4228a7&k=30619&p=1

I usually find the Canadian commentaries displaying a blatant deficiency of a backbone. But that is not the case with National Post and Lorne Gunter. I have found his opinion on the importance of Israel pretty insightful. He says that if [the Western World] gives up on Israel, [the jihadists] will simply take that as a sign they might be able to pressure us next to give up on Quebec, Mississauga, Michigan, Birmingham and the Paris suburbs.

Whatever maybe one's political belief, there is no question that Israel has managed to perfect certain techniques in dealing with terrorism. Whereas America has been under severe attack from the Jihadists only for the past one decade or so, Israel, throughout its existence of sixty years has been getting bombarded by all kinds of onslaughts imaginable. It has dealt with hostage situations and airline hijacking for ages and have been considered as the best in the world in counter-terrorism.

A big aspect of Israel is that it thrives under extreme threats. The Egyptian aerial assaults with its massive assembly of Soviet made aircraft had forced them to produce one of the best air force legions in combat scenarios. It is not a secret that the Israel had given American Soldiers training on the urban guerrilla warfare for the Baghdad streets.

Thus, we can see that Israel is useful in two ways, one as a strategic, unwavering partner in one of the most volatile regions in the world. Secondly, keeping in mind of the continuing war on terror, they could be extremely useful as a training partner or a real world lab to test the next-gen combat techniques in the long term.

Additionally, in an area of thriving dictatorships and blooming fanaticism, it could act as the beacon of freedom and democracy. Add to that the resilience and courage of Israeli people, it proves to the Western world and America that, even when the going gets tough, democracy and freedom is tough enough to get going. The unflinching strength that the country has shown in the past sixty years braving enemies from all around that have the sole agenda of erasing it from the world map is a sign of optimism and hope for the believers of liberty and democracy worldwide.