While I was away from blogging the Middle East exploded.

IRAN PLAYS A PRIMARY PART:

Iran controls and finances Hezbollah in Lebanon, and controls Syria, as well as Hamas in Gaza under the Palestinian Authority. This is a given.

Iran’s maniacal leader Ahmadinejad has declared the Holocaust to be a fiction, and will settle for nothing less than the annihilation of Israel. He has declared these things time and again to the world.

The Bush Administration should not put pressure on Israel to withdraw troops or to stop fighting back.

Each act of Israeli withdrawal has only escalated actions and attacks against Israel proper. Rockets keep coming out of Gaza. The new rockets have a much longer reach — possibly to Haifa and now Tel Aviv.

What other nation in this entire world would the United Nations have the nerve to ask: “Do not defend yourself?”

Only Israel.

THE MIDDLE EAST MAKES ITS SECOND MISTAKE:

The United States determined not to fight back though it was systematically attacked, throughout various spots in the world, under the Clinton Administration. Unfortunately we first recently under-responded during the Iranian Hostage Crisis under Carter. We continued to under-respond when over 250 soldiers were killed in Lebanon under the Reagan Administration and the response was: get out. The die was cast.

We were a Paper Tiger.

Somalia then did nothing but reinforce the Paper Tiger effect. Down a few helos and kill some soldiers? Response: get out.

1993: World Trade Center bombing? Response? Little.

USS Cole? Response? Dead sailors.

Lockerbie: global response? Little.

The United States became a more taste-tempting target. Then the various Middle Eastern factions, al-Qaeda primarily, decided that it would be a good idea to coordinate the 9/11 attacks thinking there would be, as history indicated, little response.

They did not account for President George W. Bush, the son.

Now, with Israel, they did not account for new Israeli PM Ehud Olmert; they were counting on another Sharon-like response similar to his acquiescence regarding Gaza.

Think what you will of Sharon; I am of a firm and unrelenting opinion regarding Sharon. It was time for him to step aside. I am sorry that this “asideness” had to take the form of a medical intervention; but it was necessary nevertheless.

GAZA, ISRAEL AND THE PALESTINIANS:

This is once again very simple, actually. One has but to do the Logical Extension (as I call it) and recall just a bit of history — and apply a smattering of logic as well.

When your most vile enemy, one who has sworn to eradicate you from the face of the entire earth, demands concessions, do not allocate them land directly adjacent your own sovereign soil. Give them land some 2 to 3,000 miles away. In the desert. With little access to transportation or infrastructure.

When you provide them with land directly adjacent your most hallowed religious grounds and that which directly abuts your civilized nation, there could theoretically be something of a minor problem.

And, of course, what about similar Middle Eastern nations allocating lands for the “lost peoples of Palestine?” Huh. I haven’t seen one nation making any such offering for its brethren.

PULLING OUT ALL THE STOPS NOW:

Enough with the couching of terms and phrases.

Hezbollah and Hamas wanted an “incident.” And they got it in spades. They represent doomed cultures with no technological bent whatsoever — cultures that know nothing about Building and everything about Destruction and the Cult of Victimization.

Bush and the international community are simply WRONG with their “suggestions” that Israel “hang back” when attacked from either Lebanon or Gaza.

Allow me to please provide you with a relevant analogy:

Maryland has decided to go rogue. It has seceded from the Union. In response, it has decided to launch missiles from the center of Maryland against Washington DC.

Would Washington respond militarily?

In the meantime, Canada has decided to throw missiles, likewise, at Washington, DC. These missiles are issuing forth from Canada proper, sovereign Canadian soil, but the Canadian government is saying that whatever faction is responsible, is not representative of the Canadian government and thusly the overarching country of Canada should not be held militarily responsible for American deaths resulting from these missile attacks.

How would the United States respond to both scenarios?

And moreover, how would you want or demand your country to respond?

_____________________________

I thought so.

Let’s lighten the hell up on Israel, shall we, and support them with every breath?

BZ

(Thanks, Terri!)

1. Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow. Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much leave me alone.
2. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a broken fan belt and leaky tire.
3. It is always darkest before dawn. So if you’re going to steal your neighbor’s newspaper, that’s the time to do it.
4. Don’t be irreplaceable. If you can’t be replaced, you can’t be promoted.
5. Always remember that you’re unique- Just like everyone else.
6. Never test the depth of the water with both feet.
7. If you think nobody cares if you’re alive, try missing a couple of car payments.
8. Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away and you have their shoes.
9. If at first you don’t succeed, skydiving is not for you.
10. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day.
11. If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably worth it.
12. If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.
13. Some days you’re the bug; some days you’re the windshield.
14. Everyone seems normal until you get to know them.
15. The quickest way to double your money is to fold it in half and put it back in your pocket.!
16. A closed mouth gathers no foot.
17. Duct tape is like ‘The Force’. It has a light side and a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
18. There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works.
19. Generally speaking, you aren’t learning much when your lips are moving.
20. Experience is something you don’t get until just after you need it.
21. Never miss a good chance to shut up.
22. Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

BZ

I shall be gone for the rest of the week to school, so please excuse my absence, despite my being a “Lowly Insect” in the TTLB Ecosystem.

With any amount of luck I shall return on Sunday, having survived a Southwest 737 flight to San Diego and back.

Please visit all of my standard “Usual Suspects.”

And tell those you love how you feel about them.

Life is fleeting.

BZ

I have steadfastly avoided this topic but I feel I must “come out” now. I shall either alienate my standard readers or cement those. This is nothing if not confusing for me and for you.

I am an agnostic. I am not an atheist. I am not indicating there is no God; I have simply not felt what so many of you feel or have felt; I am not denying God. I am simply indicating that, for me, God has not taken me up and provided me with a clear path. Some days I wake up and wonder what is wrong with me. Some days I wake up and think I am free. Some days I wake up and feel I am completely lost. Some days I wake up and wonder what is wrong with me that I cannot feel a compulsion, a need, a drive, to find a greater spiritual level.

But on the other hand, I believe, that does not diminish those who feel their spiritual drives. I envy you, in truth. I wish I could feel something here but I have not yet been overtaken. In the meantime I realize that I must, in terms of religion, “fish or cut bait” so to speak.

And I have clearly come down on the side of Christianity.

I look at history and I look at the history of my country specifically, and I examine material in the public domain and have decided that I either resolve to support Christianity or Judaism or I leave myself exposed to the evil in the world.

These are the two predominant religions in the country I inhabit.

And I have also examined the basic tenets of these religions and have determined that their core foundations are such that I can support them. How can one not support the inherent GOOD that exists in western religions? How can one not support the clear, common sense, day-by-day tenets of the Ten Commandments, for example?

Clearly, there are those who cannot. I can. And I do. I just lack. . .

I wish I knew.

There is a Basic Good in religion such that I can and will support it on so many western levels.

Which is why I post about this in a positive fashion:

SAN DIEGO — In the best legal news that defenders of the cross atop Mt. Soledad have received in years, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday delayed its removal until legal appeals in the state and federal courts are resolved.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, acting on a petition filed by the city, also suggested that the high court might hear the case when the appeals are completed. He added that the court might be influenced by the fact that Congress has passed legislation permitting the cross to be designated a national war memorial.

One point I simply do not understand:

Given the innate goodness of religion, why would persons want to eliminate the symbols of religion, historic and otherwise, that serve to cement and preserve not BAD thoughts, but GOOD thoughts?

I am not incapable of sorting good from bad. I have already determined: Islam bad. Christianity good.

I have no problem in differentiating this difference.

When I say “God bless America” or “God bless you,” I mean it. I just wish I could feel smited with a euphoria or a drive that so many others feel. I can only but feel diminished. I’m not necessarily closed; I am simply not struck.

That the Mt. Soledad cross will stay for now? That can only be a good thing.

It is a matter of survival.

And this from an agnostic. Something I’ll wager you may have suspected all along.

Okay.

Hit me.

BZ

Mexico dodged a bullet on July 2nd and, in so doing, the United States dodged one as well.

Mexico’s new President-elect, Felipe Calderón, 42, a Harvard graduate (conservative, former energy minister, backed by business) beat Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the hugely-Leftist former mayor of Mexico City.

The entire business now seems to encompass a North American trend, as evidenced by George Bush, Paul Martin and now Calderón — of a close conservative win against liberal opponents and those elections subsequently to be or actually challenged in courts of law.

Surely, the minions of Obrador are flapping their gums about lawsuits though they shall likely fall completely on their faces.

In the meantime, with Calderón, there now exists a possibility to forge a link on any number of levels with Mexico and perhaps even acquire some forward movement inside our southern neighbor which may mitigate the necessity for Mexican nationals to feel compelled to violate our border and our laws.

Meaning: solidify Mexico, help to makes its economy and its government strong, fresh and clean, and you help Mexicans stay in and focus on their own nation.

In the fight against illegal immigrants, Calderón could be the ally that Fox never was.

Calderón won the vote recount on July 6th — a recount demanded by opponent Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador who then, predictably, vowed to take the fight to the courts when he didn’t win. After all, he learned from the best: GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., PETITIONERS v.ALBERT GORE, Jr., et al. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT. This process could, like any other legal machination, take literally weeks to sift out.

Calderon, who pledges to stick with President Vicente Fox’s pro-business policies, took 35.88 percent of the vote to Lopez Obrador’s 35.31 percent, after electoral authorities completed the recount. Calderon, 43, led Lopez Obrador by about 1 percentage point in a preliminary tally released the day after the July 2 election.

Despite the clear love of he and his policies by the wondrous Berserkeley resident Cindy Sheehan and some others, it would not do the United States nor Mexico well to have another Hugo Chavez of Venezuela sitting in Mexico City.

Obrador, if he ultimately “wins,” could well be another Chavez.

An interesting viewpoint from within Venezuela itself about the fabulous Mr. Chavez:

Belafonte and Sheehan love Chávez, not Venezuela
By Gustavo Coronel
July 9, 2006 As a senior Venezuelan I have seen my country and my people living in much better times than today. Therefore, I feel sad when I listen to the likes of Cindy Sheehan and Harry Belafonte speak of their love for Hugo Chávez. On the July 5 edition of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, guest host and MSNBC White House correspondent Norah O’Donnell interviewed Cindy Sheehan. Sheehan said that “Hugo Chávez in not anti-American” and that she’d rather live under Chávez than Bush. Sheehan cites the aid of Chávez to New Orleans’ Katrina victims and the oil subsidies to the U.S. “poor” as examples of Chávez humanity. She was in Venezuela back in January where she kissed Chávez and appeared totally under his spell. In her enthusiasm, she mentioned on Hardball that Chávez had already been elected eight times. In fact, he was elected in 1999 and re-elected two years later (comfortably running against his partner in the failed 1992 coup d’état, Francisco Arias Cárdenas, now Ambassador to the U.N.) and survived a controversial presidential recall referendum in 2004, validated by Jimmy Carter but denounced as fraudulent by millions of Venezuelans. >>

This is just a hint of an insight into a life with Mexico should Obrador prevail.

It is not a situation we would enjoy at all.

A new chance has been handed us; I recommend we take full advantage of the situation now.

BZ