Obama Creates New Dance Step, the Jerusalem Two-Step

Jerusalem is and has been a hot spot of controversy and contention between Israel and the Arabic nations through the Palestinians for several years. Each side claims it, neither has been willing to back down, and Obama has stepped in it. Literally.

How many times can a Presidential candidate in the United States change his position on an issue? No one knows, yet, because Barack Obama is still in the running for the Presidency, and today has issued yet another reversal of position on a significant issue.

In early June, speaking before the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee, Obama stated that it was his belief that Jerusalem must remain an undivided city, and the capital of Israel:

Egypt must cut-off the smuggling of weapons in the Gaza. And Israel can also advance the cause of peace by taking appropriate steps consistent with it security to ease the freedom of movement for Palestinians and improve economic conditions in the West Bank and to refrain from building new settlements as it’s agreed to do with the Bush Administration at Annapolis. Now let me be clear; Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable; the Palestinians need a State--the Palestinians need a State that is contiguous and cohesive and that allows them to prosper, but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish State with secure, recognized, defensible borders. And Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.

This is an utterly fantastic and strong statement to be making in front of a group comprised of a large Jewish representation. Exactly the right thing to say to them in order to garner their trust and their favors, as well as catching a few votes for the General election cycle.

And yet it brings to mind and to bearing another Obama expression that I use when he says something and then tries to backpedal. "Just words, Senator?"

In the following month since the speech, the Arab world has expressed their absolute shock and dismay at Obama's speech before the AIPAC, which was broadcast live over several Middle Eastern news channels.

Palestinian and Arab hopes were dashed by a speech that U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama gave to a pro-Israeli lobby, in which he promised his full support to Israel and went further by adopting Israeli policy that sees Jerusalem as the "undivided capital" of the Jewish state.

After having discreetly vouched for Obama since the party race to the White House began last year, his speech – just hours after he won his party's backing on Wednesday – has prompted second thoughts about what changes the African-American could bring to Washington's Middle East foreign policy.

Millions of Arabs were able to watch the address to the powerful American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which was aired live on some Arab television networks, serving as a "rude awakening" that the United States, regardless of its leadership, would continue to favor Israel at the expense of Palestinian and Arab rights.

In other words, it's not enough that Obama has thrown American Muslims under the bus, he's also tossed the Palestinians and Arabs there along with them, and now he's throwing bricks at them from the platform of Jerusalem. Muslims living in Jerusalem, who had been closely following the Obama campaign and were holding out hope that he truly was the candidate of change, have changed their minds as well, with one shop keeper in eastern Jerusalem, Ayman abu Syrieh, stating, "We were looking at him differently, from Bush and the others. We thought he would bring real peace to the Middle East. I have to be honest with you, I am shocked now."

Not so fast with the dismay, Syrieh, because Barack Obama, the candidate of "change," has exhibited once again his definition of the meaning of the word "change" by changing his position on the subject of Jerusalem, stating that in his speech he used "poor phrasing."

"You know, the truth is that this was an example where we had some poor phrasing in the speech. And we immediately tried to correct the interpretation that was given," he said in an interview aired on Sunday on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria -- GPS."

"The point we were simply making was, is that we don't want barbed wire running through Jerusalem, similar to the way it was prior to the '67 war, that it is possible for us to create a Jerusalem that is cohesive and coherent," Obama said.

Just words?

Just words that were poorly phrased?

Not if one returns to the text of the speech and reads them, then watches footage of the speech at the time it was given, in which he proclaims himself as a "true friend of Israel," and pledging the unbreakable bond between the U.S. and Israel. Poorly phrased? His entire speech was a proclamation of his understanding and appreciation of Zionism, acknowledging the centuries that Israel spent without a homeland and the importance of American support of the security of Israel as a nation.

Just words?

Apparently Obama's concept of "change" applies to his position on any given issue whenever it is politically expedient to do so.

"Change you can believe in." You can believe there will be a change from Barack Obama whenever the political winds shift, evidently.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Killing your child in the name of "honor"

It seems to be a growing trend outside of the Middle East that has crossed over into Western culture with the migration of Islam. If your children disgrace you, kill them.

There is a line where culture and rule of law have to come to an agreement. The line exist because it has been determined that there are things that are not going to be permitted, regardless of the culture one has come from. In the United States, there are no laws that allow for family members to kill family members over matters of "honor," and arranged marriages are something that generally went by the wayside long ago. And yet we are seeing an incident involving both of these situations coming out of Georgia today as a Pakistani man, Chaudhry Rashid, has allegedly killed his daughter, Sandeela Kanwal, after she expressed the desire to be released from an arranged marriage to a man, who lives in Chicago, that she has not seen in months.

According to police, there was "friction between father and victim" in the weeks leading up to the killing. Rashid had not spoken to his daughter in more than two months.

Police said Rashid was so angered that his daughter planned to divorce her husband that he killed her after a heated argument at the family's home, FOX News affiliate MyFoxAtlanta reported.

Police who arrived at the scene said they found Rashid's two sons at the end of the driveway and their father sitting behind a car smoking a cigarette. Officers said that Rashid appeared "distraught and possibly mournful" and told police "my daughter is dead" when they arrived.

After entering the home, Kanwal's body was discovered in the doorway of a bedroom, cold to the touch, officials said.

All indications are that the girl was strangled to death, according to ligature markings on her throat and neck.

So many random thoughts run through the mind in these instances.

So many questions.

There are many times when parents are displeased or disappointed by the desires or actions of their children; there are many times when the inverse is true, as well, and children are disappointed by their parents. There is no excuse, however, in the case of divorce, or the expressed desire for a divorce, that justifies the murder of one's child for seeking to remove themselves from a situation that they find untenable.

Honor killings are carried out for a number of reasons. From refusal or trying to leave an arranged marriage to even finding ones self (female) the victim of a sexual assault, the results wind up being the same; a woman is killed at the hands of a man or men for bringing about "dishonor."

I'm curious how someone who has been the victim of a sexual assault is the one doing the dishonoring? That line of thinking seems to be inverted, in my way of thinking. And it would seem that the law is on my side in this matter.

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This is another one of those things in which a mountain is made of a mole hill in it's meaning. There is no "seperation of church and state" implied here other than that "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free expression thereof."

Law's prohibiting murder are not a prohibition of "the free expression thereof."

Western culture is at a crossroads, and many do not seem to realize the very nature of the situation at hand as it plays out daily in towns and communities across the area once referred to as Western Christendom. The foundations of nations and their cultures are being challenged by an influx of a mind-set that has not, in some instances, left the Middle Ages and progressed into modern time. One can not refer to ones self as being "progressive" in ones thinking when one is allowing a mindset that victimizes the victim.

The "honor killings" are a misnomer. There is no honor, nor is there valor, in the murder of one's child for seeking to leave a marriage.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

He's Man's Best Friend, Unless...

It's been an age old practice for man to employ the use of dogs as co-workers for certain tasks. Military and law enforcement agencies rely on K-9 units for special needs on a daily basis, to protect and serve. Why, suddenly, are there limits for that?

Over nearly two decades of combined military and emergency services, I've come in contact with a number of working dogs and their handlers, and always have found myself walking away highly impressed. It isn't every dog that can make it into the training program to be a working dog for either the military or emergency services. The dogs are always very well cared for, well behaved, and highly intelligent animals. And I have never seen, among this group, a dirty working dog, unless they had come in from sort of field operation.

Yet and still, according to Gar Swafford's article, Muslims Hate Dogs?, Muslims consider these animals as "spiritually unclean." Does this mean that they believe horses and camels are more spiritually clean than dogs? It's an interesting situation, but it's creating certain problems for K-9 units in the British law enforcement community.

POLICE sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at railway stations may no longer come into contact with Muslim passengers – after complaints that it is against the suspects’ religion.

A report for the Transport Department has raised the prospect that the animals should only touch passengers’ luggage because it is considered “more acceptable”.

In the Muslim faith, dogs are deemed to be spiritually “unclean”. But banning them from touching passengers would severely restrict their ability to do their job.

The report follows trials of station security measures in the wake of the 2005 London suicide bomb attacks. In one trial, some female Muslims said the use of a body scanner was also unacceptable because it was tantamount to being forced to strip.

If this is going to be the case, and law enforcement is going to have to start limiting their security methodology in order to be "politically correct" in dealing with the Muslim community, to what lengths will this ultimately go? If dogs can not be used to sniff bombs because they are "spiritually unclean," and scanning machines can't be used because it is the equivalent of "strip searching," what comes next? An insistence that any questioning of suspects be conducted only by a Muslim interrogator?

Law enforcement already has a hard enough job as it is today, given the number of laws limiting how they can conduct themselves when apprehending a suspect. Adding further limitations upon them, such as limiting the usage of dogs trained to sniff out explosive devices, only creates a situation in which terrorists have a ready made loophole built into the system for them to utilize to continue conducting a campaign of death and destruction.

Fortunately, British law enforcement officers are savvy enough to realize this, and have announced that they will continue to utilize the K-9 patrols, and that the handlers will be "culturally sensitive."

Once and Always, a Dog Loving American Fighting Man

.

Pending Film Release Prompts Dutch Terrorism Watch

[Update] 3/27/08- FITNA has been released, see full 15 minute film here.

What if you could take a look into the driving force of your enemy? What if you could take a glimpse into the motivating, driving factors that make your enemy hate you and want to destroy you? What if you could access that information, but chose to ignore it?

In 1925, there was a book published that, if given more credence and scrutiny, could have been used as an instrument to stop the greatest onset of crimes against humanity that the world has ever seen. Oddly enough, those who could have done something to stop the movement inspired by the book and it's author pretty much ignored it or had no idea of it's existence. In the years following the first publication of this book, and it's second publication a year later in 1926, the world saw the rise of one of the most brutal and oppressive regimes in our history on this planet. The book was called Mein Kampf; the author, Adolf Hitler.

Under the leadership of Hitler, Nazi Germany rose from the ashes of depression in the years following The Great War and became the single most powerful military industrial complex in Europe. The rest, as they say, is history.

But what if, as we step into the realm of infinite possibilities of things that could have happened, someone had taken Mein Kampf seriously from the outset and had made the right moves to stop the rise of Hitler and the National Socialist Party? What if, as we continue to ponder the possibilities of infinite parallels and things that could have been, someone had taken Stalin as a more credible threat and forestalled his rise to power through murder and subterfuge in the Soviet Union?

What if we had the information at our disposal today to stop a growing threat to civilization as it spreads across the face of our planet? What if we could take a look inside what motivates extremists to strap bomb vests to their bodies and detonate them in groups of innocent civilians? To drive vehicles laden with explosives through military checkpoints and the drivers kill themselves as they try to take out the soldiers at those checkpoints? What if we had this information, and ignored it?

Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders is going to release a film in the Netherlands that deals with these issues, by exploring the very passages of the Koran which incite the hatred and violence of extremist Muslim factions, in a film to be released this month. Needless to say, the world of Islam is less than eager for the film to be released, and the Netherlands are on high alert for acts of terrorism.

Less than a year ago, (National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Tjibbe) Joustra scaled down the threat level to "limited," saying Islamic terror networks in the Netherlands had crumbled in the face of tougher law enforcement and a lack of leadership.

Terrorists from Pakistan and Afghanistan were directing actions in Europe "and in some cases, sending their own attackers," said the coordinator. These attackers "are more professional than the homegrown variety and less visible to the intelligence and security services," he said.

This won't be the first film released by a Dutch film maker critical of Islam. In 2004 director Theo van Gogh was killed after release of his film "Submission," a fictionalization of the abuse and subjugation of women in Islam, prompting the films screenplay writer, Muslim critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali, to flee the country and live in the United States under 24 hour a day security.

It remains to be seen how the film will be received in the Western world. However, one need not peek into a crystal ball to foretell what the reaction of militant Islamic fundamentalist groups will be; hence the elevation of the threat warnings within the Netherlands.

Demonstrators in Afghanistan have burned the Dutch flag to protest Wilders' plan to release the 15-minute film, titled "Fitna." He says it will describe the Muslim holy book as "fascist" because it is used by extremists to incite violence and preaches oppression of women and homosexuals.

The Dutch government has said it is powerless to ban the film because of the country's constitutional right to freedom of expression.

Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende has said the government is worried about repercussions from the film and by threats to Dutch nationals abroad.

There are, of course, those who will denounce this comparative of the Koran to Mein Kampf. They will argue that the Koran is a holy book, and the fundamental documents of a religious movement, and that Mein Kampf was, at best, a sort of autobiography and outline of the ideas behind the rise of a Teutonic Empire, at worst a book of political theory. They are more than free to do so. I welcome them to try to make the arguments that the two books have not inspired similar responses from their target audiences. However, I would strongly suggest, and indeed hope, that those who wish to bring forth such arguments and rebuttals have first hand knowledge of the subject matter OF those two books. One need not play one of the three roles portrayed by Jack Nicholson in "Mars Attacks" to see the aliens announcing "We come in peace," all the while walking around with their ray guns and disintegrating any human in sight, to understand that what one says and what one does may not convey the same message.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

[UPDATED AND BUMPED] The British are Caving! The British are Caving!

Updates Below

There once was a time when it was said "The sun does not set on the British flag." At the height of the British Empire, the rule of the throne was felt, literally, around the world. The British Empire has gone into decline within our lifetime; what remains is now the British Commonwealth.

In his day, Alexander conquered the known world and had plans for extending his empire beyond the known reaches of the mapped world. His rule extended across Europe and into Asia and Africa. Still today there are cities to be found in several nations which bear the name Alexandria.

It has also been said that "All roads lead to Rome." Before Rome there were (in no particular order) Greece, Egypt, Persia, Babylon, and after the Byzantine and Holy Roman Empires. Those are just the empires that come to mind off the top of my head.

Let us not forget Hitler's dreams of a 1,000 year German empire he called the Third Reich.

There are a great many who think, and believe, that we are witnessing an attempt at a global Islamic empire. Last year's rally in Indonesia by a group of hard line Muslims called for a global caliphate.

More than 70,000 members of a hardline Muslim group held a rally in Indonesia that heard calls for a caliphate -- or Islamic rule -- to govern the world.

The supporters of the Hizbut Tahrir group filled up most of an 80,000-seat sports stadium in the capital Jakarta, waving flags as they heard fiery speeches saying it was "time for the caliphate to reign."

The meeting was held as part of "civic education" for Indonesian Muslims, said Muhammad Ismail Yusanto, a spokesman for Hizbut Tahrir.

The organisation advocates Islamic rule and is banned in several Middle Eastern countries.

And yet there are those who would say that those who think that there are Muslim extremist groups who are intent upon world domination are paranoid and don't know what they are talking about. One needs but to look across Europe to see the influx of Muslim immigrants into their countries and see the conflict of cultures that is already beginning to start. One can also look here at home in the U.S. and see that there are situations arising where one student was even suspended for the horrible offense of leaving his bagged lunch, a ham steak, on a table where a group of Muslim students were seated.

I'm sure those students were critically injured by the offending ham steak.

And now we have the Archbishop of Canterbury stating that the infusion of Sharia Law into the British legal system is "unavoidable."

Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.

For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

In other words, the rule of law in Great Britain is going to have to change to include Sharia law.

Does this mean that British legal officials will not charge fathers who kill their wives and daughters for not wearing traditional Muslim attire with murder? Will stoning become a common place event in the streets of London when people are caught in the act of adultery? Will Scotland Yard have a chopping block for the removal of limbs of those convicted of theft?

Will we see the Queen stepping down from the throne and donning a burkah?

I have to say this. Our founding fathers in the United States were wise to prohibit, in the Constitution, the establishment of a state sponsored religious body.

Read Debbie's commentary on this situation by clicking here.

[UPDATE]

Perhaps there is still hope for the Brit's, after all. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has denounced the Archbishop of Canterbury's suggestion that Sharia Law and Parliamentary Law can co-exist:

The Prime Minister rapidly distanced himself from Dr Williams's view. Gordon Brown's spokesman said: "Our general position is that sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breaches of English law, nor should the principles of sharia law be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes.

THERE'S that stiff upper lip!

[UPDATE 8FEB07]

Now the ruling body of the Church of England have begun to weigh in on this still developing situation, calling for the resignation of the Archbishop:

A senior Church of England clergyman called today for the resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, over his remarks supporting Sharia in England.

The call, from a long-standing member of the Church's governing body, the General Synod, demonstrated the strength of the backlash Dr Williams that faces from within his own Church — as well as from political and other faith leaders.

The senior Synod member, who insisted on remaining anonymous, told The Times: "A lot of people will now have lost confidence in him. I am just so shocked, and cannot believe a man of his intelligence could be so gullible. I can only assume that all the Muslims he meets are senior leaders of the community who tell him what a wonderful book the Koran is.

"There have been a lot of calls today for him to resign. I don't suppose he will take any notice, but yes, he should resign."

Personally, I have to agree. He SHOULD resign.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Israel Endures, and so does a Paladin...

I had started this piece as a reply to a discussion on Snooper's site. However, given my condition that spree refers to as "diarrhea of the mouth," I found it to be too long to put there, and decided to put it here instead.

Let me preface this piece by stating, for the record, that I am a Zionist. I have been a Zionist long before I truly knew what the term meant, or even that there was a term for it. As a child reared in a church upbringing, I can remember many of the stories and lessons of Sunday school teachings from very early in my life. I fell in love with the nation of Israel at a very young age, have spent my life as an advocate of modern Israel, once considered immigrating TO Israel to volunteer to be a member of her armed forces after having served my OWN country in OUR armed forces.

That being said, here is the piece that started out as a reply and wound up being a personal revelation:

The "holy wars" karen refers to are most likely the wars Israel fought in ancient times against such tribes as the Philistines, the Hittites, and the Canaanites (whom they defeated when they first began settling ancient Israel), among others. The Bible and tradition teaches that Israel was to destroy her enemies utterly and completely. There was a reason for this; from day one, Israel has been fighting for her very survival.

Is Israel indeed the chosen nation of God? Let's do a brief tracking through history, looking at things in a fairly non-specific manner.

Israel has survived, over the millenia, enslavement by the Egyptians, a division of the kingdom into the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea, captivity by the Babylonians, and the Romans, who dispersed the Jews from their homeland, from which they remained in exile until they were given leave, by Britain (who did little to nothing to help them, in actuality) to return TO the area known as Palestine in the late 1940's. In the time period between the Diaspora and the Return, the Holy Land has been ravaged by Arabic occupations and wars, the Crusades, which saw western Christendom establishing kingdoms and baronies of their own via mandate of the Church, the dispelling of Christendom by Islam, and finally occupation by the British Empire until the Jews returned, finally, home.

That's roughly six thousand years stuffed VERY tightly into a nutshell.

Six thousand years. The Babylonian Empire is gone. The British Empire is no more, they are now the British Commonwealth. The Roman Empire is gone, as is the Holy Roman Empire.

Israel has not only survived being spread among the nations of the Earth, she has returned to her home. She has survived.

Now, following this to it's logical conclusion, it would appear, indeed, that there IS something wondrous and special about Israel. Something that goes beyond the mere boundaries of a land. Israel is a people, a people set aside and chosen, a people protected BY the hand of a God who not only keeps and preserves them, but, as is shown clearly throughout the Bible, a God who chastises and punishes them when they are out of his will.

But you will notice that Israel survives, DESPITE so many attempts through history to eliminate this proud people from the face of the Earth.

Who then, are the infidels? I say to you that if there are infidels, if there are unbelievers, it would be those who are hell bent on the destruction of Israel. That would be radical jihadist fascist extremist Islam, at the top of the list. True "neo-Nazi's."

My mother's uncle fought under Patton during World War II. He was very quiet regarding most of his military service. He wouldn't discuss the war much at all, other than to talk about the French and Italian countryside and how beautiful the land was, and to say that MY generation would have to face the Nazi's again, because their message of hatred had spread beyond Europe into other parts of the world. Look to the Middle East, to Radical Extremist Islam, and their message.

Ossama bin Laden fancies himself, if one looks to both history and psychology, as being the Saladin of our lifetime. Saladin was an honorable man, a true warrior, a true leader. Saladin led his forces HIMSELF, in the open, and had no fear to meet his opponents face to face in meetings of truce, and on the open battlefield. Saladin would NEVER have dishonored himself by hiding in caves, in supporting acts of dishonor and cowardice of convincing others to blow themselves to hell in crowded places to kill innocents, pronouncing them martyrs to be rewarded in heaven.

I am a Zionist, yes, and have been all of my life, for as long as I can remember. The lessons of Israel's history, not just the religious messages, but the lessons of the people, the individuals, are as rich and meaningful today as they were when they were written so many millenia ago. Yes, there are lessons to be learned by studying other cultures, other religions, other societies, but Israel endures. Sampson, Gideon, David, and Solomon were my heroes long before Superman, Batman, Richard, Charlemagne, and even Saladin. I suppose there is no surprise, all these years after my initial teachings, that the great love of my life is a daughter of Zion. However, I also have questioned God for a number of years, at times questioning his very existence, let alone his divine will and purpose in my OWN life, my individual existence. Time has brought these questions; time, observation, experience, and situation. I'm in good company, I suppose, for I share that habit with the likes of David, Moses, and Jesus of Nazareth himself. I don't equate myself in ANY way with these men OTHER than that I do have questions which have yet to be answered. Perhaps there are no answers, not in the form in which we tend to think of them. I have maintained, after much reflection through the years and no small amount of studying Zen and practicing it's meditations when I was younger, that all true answers to such questions can ultimately be found within ones self.

A student asked me once, before one of my classes, when I was teaching, about my life before teaching. It took me a bit off guard, something that high school seniors are prone to attempt with their teachers, especially the ones who come back to their home towns to take interim positions after being away and out of contact with the "locals" for some time; I was an enigma to them. That I was known as having come into the teaching field later than most, having spent time as a soldier, a fireman, and a contractor, furthered the mystery about me in their minds even more, I'm sure. Most of their teachers, from the time they began kindergarten on through the years until their final year in school had been more "traditional," having gone from high school to college and then into their own classrooms to teach. I didn't fit into that mold. I weighed her question, which was honest and sincere in it's presentation, having been the subject of much discussion amongst my classes, and considered how best to answer her, and the others who had turned their attention to me awaiting my answer.

This is the basis of what my reply to her was:

I have lived my life largely on my own terms for as long as I have been able to do so. I have been and done everything I set out to do and to be, I have seen things of incredible beauty, I have seen things of absolute horror. I've been places and done things that I can never share with anyone, but those memories, those experiences, live within me every day of my life. I have seen life come into this world, I have seen life leave this world in the most horrible of manners. I have known the fear that comes with the closeness of death. I have saved lives, I have done otherwise at least once...

I have loved greatly and fully, and I have known the agony of love lost, and the rapture of love returned and the promise of tomorrow. I have known pain of the body, pain of the soul, and joy beyond measure.

At my lowest point, I had considered my life, and had asked myself, "Is there nothing more? Have I done all that there is to do?" I very nearly decided that I had, when three simple little words found me and shook me to my foundations, urging me to begin a climb out of my own personal hell back into the light. Those three little words were something special, precious, meant just for me, and they literally saved my life. With those words I began the most difficult assent of the soul that I have ever undertaken, and I continue it still, more confidently each day as I continue on this quest that I am meant to endure.

My students were silent when I finished, I know not what their thoughts were, or even if I had answered their question. Perhaps I left them wondering even more with my reply. I do know that it was the most honest answer that I could give.

Perhaps, in retrospect, I found an answer of my own as well. Perhaps my studies did more than instill me with a love and respect of a tiny little nation forged on the shores of the Mediterranean sea so long ago. Perhaps the chastising of a nation can equate to the trials of the soul of the individual, as well. Perhaps the will of God for me is to do exactly what Israel has done through the millenia; to endure. And endure I will, for I cling fast to that promise of tomorrow, and with each day the quest draws me closer to that for which my heart and soul long and yearn for.

Questing onward...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

What did you learn in school today, Sally?

I'm going to start this out with three quotes, three little statements, made by a historical figure not too long ago, historically speaking. While reading what follows the quotes, I want you to keep firmly in mind each quote, and at the end, I'll tell you who said them. No fair peeking ahead, either, it spoils the surprise...

"Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future."

"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think."

"Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction."

I think, personally, that that last one is the most poignant in regards to what we're going to discuss here today. As I've mentioned before, I was a teacher for a time, circumstances led me back down the path of communications contracting. I fit in well with my colleagues in education, that is to say, I fit in as well as any square peg ever fits into a round hole. Most of the people that I met were, suffice to say, quite liberal, many very left leaning, and mostly democrats. And I have to say, many of them were (are) very snobbish (read elitist)...

I'll let ya'll decide from here.

Banning Legos
And building a world where “all structures will be standard sizes.”

By John J. Miller

Perhaps you’ve heard about the schools that have banned tag. Or dodgeball. Or stories about pigs. If so, you won’t be surprised to hear that the Hilltop Children’s Center in Seattle has banned Legos.

A pair of teachers at the center, which provides afterschool activities for elementary-school kids, recently described their policy in a Rethinking Schools cover story called “Why We Banned Legos.”

It has something to do with “social justice learning.”

My vision of social justice for children of elementary-school age is as follows: If you’re tagged, you’re it; if the ball hits you, you’re out; and pig stories are fun, especially when told over microwaveable hot dogs.

But I try to keep an open mind, so I read the article on why Hilltop banned Legos.

As most aficionados know, Legos are made by a Danish company. The company name comes from the Danish phrase leg godt, which means play well. “Lego became a national treasure and one of the strongest brands in the toy industry,” wrote The Economist last year. “Its colorful bricks are sold in over 130 countries: everyone on earth has, on average, 52 of them.”

"NO, little Johnny, you can't build any more castles, because didn't you know that Knights and Chivarly are not sensitive concepts to people who don't believe in what Knights stand for?"

Here's one the dinosaur media isn't covering at all...

Hostage drill at NJ school features mock 'Christian terrorists'

The head of a national, Texas-based pro-family group says a recent hostage drill at a New Jersey high school, which portrayed conservative Christians as terrorists, is reflective of a dangerous philosophy that has become prevalent in many parts of America, where it is having negative effects on education.

A local paper reports that a drill at Burlington Township High School in New Jersey involved police portraying mock gunmen, described as "members of a right-wing fundamentalist group called the 'New Crusaders' who don't believe in the separation of church and state." The fake gunmen were said to have been "seeking justice because the daughter of one [member] had been expelled for praying before class."

Historian and constitutional expert David Barton is president of WallBuilders, a national pro-family organization that distributes historical, legal, and statistical information and helps citizens become active in their local schools and communities. He says the stereotyping used in the high school's drill is an accurate indicator of what is being taught in public schools in the Northeast region of the country.

Commentary on my thoughts on THAT one after THIS one, which in my mind, as a historian, is tantamount to heresy and sacrilege...

Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims
By LAURA CLARK

Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Government backed study has revealed.

It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.

There is also resistance to tackling the 11th century Crusades - where Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem - because lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

The findings have prompted claims that some schools are using history 'as a vehicle for promoting political correctness'.

Yes, by all means, let's not offend the Muslims. By the way, have you heard the one about the priest, the rabbi, and the Southern Baptist preacher...

Are our schools trying to instill liberal values on our children? Are they subtly brainwashing our children? Are they teaching them things that go against what the children's families believe? Here's one more, just in case those past three aren't enough evidence of what's going on in our schools today...

District gags 14-year-olds after 'gay' indoctrination
'Confidentiality' promise requires students 'not to tell their parents'

By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Officials at Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Ill., have ordered their 14-year-old freshman class into a "gay" indoctrination seminar, after having them sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents.

"This is unbelievable," said Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues for Concerned Women for America. "It's not enough that students at Deerfield High are being exposed to improper and offensive material relative to unhealthy and high-risk homosexual behavior, but they've essentially been told by teachers to lie to their parents about it."

In what CWA called a "shocking and brazen act of government abuse of parental rights," the school's officials required the 14-year-olds to attend a "Gay Straight Alliance Network" panel discussion led by "gay" and "lesbian" upperclassmen during a "freshman advisory" class which "secretively featured inappropriate discussions of a sexual nature in promotion of high-risk homosexual behaviors."

FIND OUT what your kids are being taught in school. There is NO LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT that a child under the age of eighteen can sign that will hold them to a non-disclosure agreement. Take the cue of the atheist, call your school board's hand on brainwashing our children. If it is a clear cut violation of your constitutional rights and your beliefs as Christians or Jews, or if you THINK it is, contact the ACLJ, NOT the ACLU. They are leading the fight in the courts to oppose the ACLU in their attempts to undermine the American structure.

Oh, and those three quotes at the beginning of this posting? Those were the words of a man who used hatred and mistrust as his tools to rise to power and become one of the most dangerous men who ever lived, one who was responsible for the deaths of millions. Some considered him to be a madman, I'm not so sure. The insane generally don't rise to lead their nation and to inspire a following that nearly conquers an entire continent, the driven do that.

Who said those things?

You know him as Adolf Hitler...

Nuff said? I think so.

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.