Saturday, June 30, 2007

"Straight Thinking 101"

Jewish World Review once again provides me with my material. Walter Williams writes an article titled "Straight Thinking 101" which discusses economics, but can be applied to a wide variety of subject matter. I think he gets to the heart of a problem many of us have in our thinking, namely compassion vs. dispassion.

Dr. Williams begins by explaining the difference between positive statements and normative statements and why that is important:
Just about the most difficult lesson for first-year economics students, and sometimes graduate students, is that economic theory, and for that matter any scientific theory, is positive or non-normative. You might ask, "What's this business about positive and normative?" It's easy. Positive statements deal with what was, what is or what will be. Normative, or subjective, statements deal with what's good or bad, or what ought to be or should be. Confusing the two leads to considerable mischief.

The statement "Scientists cannot split the atom" is a positive statement. Why? If there's disagreement with the statement, there are facts to which we can appeal to settle the disagreement — just visit Stanford University's linear accelerator and watch atoms being split. The statement "Scientists shouldn't split the atom" is a normative statement. Why? There are no facts whatsoever to which we can appeal to settle any disagreement. One person's opinion on the matter is just as good as another's.

How about the statement "Gasoline prices are unreasonable"? If some think they're reasonable while others don't, the argument can go on forever without resolution because there are no facts to which we can appeal to settle the disagreement. However, there are facts that tend to back up the statement: Buyers of gasoline prefer lower prices while sellers prefer higher prices.
He then says:
Having explained the difference between positive and normative statements, I tell my students that in no way do I propose that they purge their vocabulary of normative statements. Normative statements are excellent tools for tricking others into doing what you want them to do. I simply caution that in the process of tricking others, there's no need to trick oneself into believing that one normative statement is better or more righteous than another.
With the difference between positive statements and normative statements, Dr. Williams addresses another oft misused word:
A related term that doesn't make much economic sense is the term "need." The implication of an absolute, crying, dying or urgent need is that one cannot do without the need in question. Students sometimes say they absolutely need a car or a cell phone. At that point I ask them, how in the world was it that Gen. George Washington could defeat Britain, the mightiest nation on earth, without a cell phone or a car?

The problem with the term "need" is that it suggests there are no substitutes for the item in question. Thus, people will pay any price for it; however, the law of demand says that at some price, people will take less of something, including none of it. In response, a student might say, "Diabetics can't do without insulin" or "People can't do without food." I say, "Yes, they can; diabetics have been doing without insulin for thousands of years." In some poor African countries, people do without food. Of course, the results of doing without insulin or food are indeed unpleasant, but the fact that the results are unpleasant doesn't require us to deny that non-consumption is a substitute for consumption. Again, I tell my students not to purge their vocabulary of crying, dying and urgent needs; just don't trick yourself while you're tricking others.

I think Dr. Williams' closing paragraph is extremely important for all to keep in mind:
You say, "Williams, it doesn't sound like economics is a very compassionate science." You're right, but neither is physics, chemistry or biology. However, if we wish to be compassionate with our fellow man, we must learn to engage in dispassionate analysis. In other words, thinking with our hearts, rather than our brains, is a surefire method to hurt those whom we wish to help.

There are times to think with the heart, usually on a personal level, and there are times to think with the brain, most often when formulating public policy.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, June 23, 2007


I just wrote an email to a friend and have decided to post some of the thoughts that the email stirred up in me.

I never meant for Scholar to be only a political blog. I want to write about many other subjects, too, without leaving politics out. But I also find myself discouraged by the negatives in the political arena. It seems like so many are headed Left toward policies that history tells us won't work. I know that not everyone is an extremist, but it sure seems like those in prominent positions of leadership are making some major mistakes and that they have plenty of supporters.

I also get discouraged that so many seem to speak out against patriotism, America, the military, and religion. Too many are in favor of abortion and socialism and peace at any cost. I'm for peace, but not at the cost of freedom and liberty. There are prices to pay for those good things. There are prices to pay for the bad things, too. I would rather pay for the good things.

I also am a Christian--a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints--and I believe in God and in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. I believe what They teach us through the scriptures. So I find myself wanting to be kind, tender-hearted, and forgiving, and yet I feel that God expects us to stand up strongly for what is right and true. If we have to fight for right, so be it. Surrender to wrong is not an option.

I feel strongly, too, that people are more important than plants and animals, and yet I believe that God expects us to treat His gifts to us (the earth and all her resources for one) with respect and to be good stewards of those things. I love and appreciate nature and its wonders. I do not believe, however, that it is necessary to trash capitalism and confiscate private property in order to be good stewards of nature.

I feel sad for the people of the earth who live under oppressive governments and who live in poverty. However, I believe they should stay in their countries and fight for freedom and rights rather than becoming jihadists or illegal immigrants. I believe that we should welcome immigrants from anywhere and everywhere who come here legally and who come here with the intent of becoming Americans. Multiculturalism and diversity are overrated and taken to extremes. People should be free to practice their religion as they see fit and to keep alive their language and culture--to a point. But if they wish to settle in the United States of America, they need to also embrace our language and culture. They need to obey our laws. They need to live up to our ideals. And they should not come here with the idea of living on welfare and social security and using our schools and hospitals and so forth without contributing by working and paying taxes and becoming Americans. It is to their own benefit to do things the right way.

I feel, too, that we Americans need to put a stop to government growth and the Nanny State. We need to stop the dumbing down of our public education. We need to stop letting the Leftists in academia indoctrinate our children with wrong ideas and radical views. We need to wake up and stop expecting things to be easy and non-competitive. Work is essential for us. Developing our talents and abilities and increasing our knowledge are essential for us. We can't do those things if we put the government in charge of our lives from cradle to grave. We can't do those things if we give up our freedoms and if we don't stand up for truth and right.

America has so much, not only for itself, but to offer the world. Let's not throw it away.

Labels: , , , ,


If you are like me, you don't always have an accurate picture in your mind of where the places are that you read about in the news. It's easy enough to get a world map, a United States map, and an atlas or two (world or national), but it's also easy to find some geography sites on the internet. Three that I've found are: Geography

Geography Network

Geography World

If you are in the market for a map or two, you could visit Maps which has all kinds of maps, atlases, globes, and travel guides. You can also find maps and such at local bookstores.

I find it helps me understand what is going on better if I can see a map and get an idea of the location. With the Middle East in the news so much, this is very useful to see how the countries are situated in relation to one another. Often, the geography sites such as the ones I listed above will give all kinds of information about a country--capitol, population, products, agriculture, etc. Needless to say, all this will help your kids with school as well as helping you know where things are happening.


Saturday, June 16, 2007

Natural History

Natural history is a fascinating topic in and of itself. When you can read essays and articles from many years ago, it increases in fascination--what has remained true and what has been found to be in error?

Online you can go to Natural History Magazine and read not only current articles here, but also articles from the early 20th century here. There are a couple of articles, for example, by Theodore Roosevelt. For some reason, I can't link to individual articles, but the link to articles from the early 20th century will bring up a page listing a number of them.

Some additional reading from the past is found at Bartleby. Here is a link to the "Scientific Papers" page, with articles by Michael Faraday and Lord Kelvin, among others. The "Voyages and Travels" page has writings from Herodotus to Sir Walter Raleigh. The nonfiction page offers writings from Charles Darwin, Theodore Roosevelt, and others on various topics, some on science and nature.

You can also seek out literary journals such as Isotope, put out by Utah State University, for literary science and nature writing. A click on the "Samples" button will take you to the archives where a few pieces are available for reading online. There are blogs, too, such as Science Musings by Chet Raymo.

Reading about science and nature is a pleasing way to spend a little time and to further your appreciation of the world around us. Check your local library for books, as well as doing searches online to find sources of reading material, current and past. Also, see my posts here at Writing Blog and here at By Study and Also by Faith, my other blogs, for more on this topic. Enjoy your exploring!

Labels: ,

Saturday, June 09, 2007

History: Looking Back to Look Forward

I am a great believer in studying history in order to learn what works and what doesn't. This applies to government, but also to one's personal life. One book on this topic that I've really enjoyed is The Lessons of History by Will and Ariel Durant (New York: Simon and Schuster ,1968). I have the audio book on CD and have enjoyed listening to not only the book itself, but also to excerpts from interviews with Will and Ariel Durant.

There are any number of books and websites that can give you insight into history and help you learn facts about what happened. Researching widely will give you a better perspective because it is difficult for even the best-intentioned historian to be totally free of bias. The very act of writing history involves sorting through events and people and deciding what to include and what to leave out. A variety of sources will give you a number of perspectives and help you learn enough to reach your own conclusions about what happened and why and how it influenced other events.

Some internet sources:

MacroHistory: Prehistory to the 21st Century
History Research Online
The History Channel

Some books:

America: The Last Best Hope by William J. Bennett (volume 1, volume 2)

Books from Regnery Publishing, including the Politically Incorrect Guides

There are, of course, many others, but these will give you some starting points. As you read and study, think about how the events of the past correspond to today's events and see what lessons you might be able to draw.

Labels: ,

Monday, June 04, 2007


I imagine that readers of this blog at least sometimes think I am being mean and selfish. "Mean-spirited" is, I believe, the popular word these days. I want to help others as much as anyone, but America simply cannot help everyone all the time.

Think of your personal life. You cannot spend all of your money and all of your time helping others. The well would soon run dry and you would be needing help yourself. You have to set priorities. It is necessary to provide for yourself first so that you do not become dependent on others. You have to provide food, clothing, shelter, education, and so forth for yourself and your family, then make decisions as to where you want your charity dollars and time to go. We all recognize the need to spend some time on ourselves in order to have something to give to others.

Think, too, of how you have to manage your money. You have to have a budget and stick to it. If you spend more than you have income, you go into debt and that curtails your ability to buy necessities and to give to charity. Why is running our country any different? Whether it is an individual, a family, a city, a state, or a nation, it is foolish to spend more than we have income.

What about security? You realize the need to keep your home and car locked and protected. This doesn't preclude you from giving someone a ride or inviting them over for a meal, but it does protect you and your assets so that you can continue to be generous.

Our country also needs to protect itself and budget its spending and take care of its own. If we do this, we then have the resources to help at least some others around the world. If we overspend and allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by immigrants coming in too many, too fast, our resources will be depleted and we will soon not be able to help anyone. In addition, if we do not set limits, it becomes more likely that terrorists of various kinds, or criminals fleeing justice, will enter our country and destroy it from within, again with the result that we can no longer help anyone, not even ourselves.

Common sense tells us that we have to set priorities and we have to set limits. We have to enforce laws that are already on the books. We also have to stand strongly against terrorism, not only for our own sakes, but for the sake of others around the world who would soon be oppressed if we did not fight back.

We also need to limit government. Somehow, we have lost our way and the federal government is taking over many functions that belong to the states or to individuals. Then the government needs more and more in taxes to fund all these programs--programs that we either don't need or that we could better provide at a local or state level with the money we would not have to send to the federal government in taxes. If we don't limit government, we lose the ability to make choices and decide for ourselves where our money and time should go.

Think about it.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, June 02, 2007

More Serious Situations are Being Ignored

You may notice a theme to today's three posts--that of Americans asleep at the wheel and other Americans not being informed about what is going on in America and in the world. It is time we woke up, but it is also time for the MSM to stop promoting their political agendas and start presenting factual reports of important news to the American people.

At The New Media Journal, there is an article by Dr. Paul Williams, PhD. The title of this piece is "Jihad Among Junipers and Mint Juleps" and provides yet more evidence of news not being reported and serious situations being ignored. The article reports on a visit to a compound in Virginia. Yes, that is our state of Virginia in the United States of America. Here are some excerpts, but I recommend reading it all.
The Islamic practice of taqiyya, meaning “deception” or “concealment,” has been refined into an art-form at a jihad training compound for African American converts near the small town of Red House in Charlotte County, Virginia.

The fifty-acre compound is easy to find since the main road leading to it has been named Sheikh Gilani Lane in honor of the guru and founder of a terrorist organization with close ties to Osama bin Laden. The Board of Supervisors of Charlotte Country are either oblivious to the threat of radical Islam on American soil or clandestine advocates of the great jihad.

At the end Sheikh Gilani Lane is a sign – barely visible through the overgrown brush – that reads, “The Muslims of the Americas.” The sign serves to make the place appear as an innocuous religious settlement, until one realizes that The Muslims of the Americas is, in reality, an outgrowth of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, an alleged sister agency to al-Qaeda.

What is taking place in the Red House complex? Is the complex amidst the rolling hills of southern Virginia a peaceful Islamic village where devout Muslims have gathered to retreat from the hustle and bustle of contemporary American life in order to pray, meditate, and to live in strict accordance with the traditions of their faith? Or is it something more sinister – something that should alarm every American who is concerned about the threat of radical Islam?

These factors are clear:

1) There is an underground bunker at the complex that may be used for paramilitary training and possibly to harbor deadly weapons for use in the great jihad against Christians and Jews. Twenty-four members of this Jamaat ul-Fuqra complex already have been arrested for trafficking in illegal firearms, including the ammunition for AK-47s.

2) Members of the compound have been sent to Pakistan and Afghanistan for specialized training in guerilla warfare – a fact confirmed by Thomas P. Gallagher, a Special Agent for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.

3) The Red House compound regularly receives visits from suspicious guests from Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.

4) The Red House cell of ul-Fuqra has metastasized so that similar Islamic compounds have popped up in neighboring Prince George and Campbell Counties. The 25 acre facility in Prince George County is situated on Mahareen Road, a name selected by the Muslim newcomers and duly approved by the local ordinance officials. Mahareen is the plural of the Arabic mahar, meaning “clever one.” The facility in Campbell County is considerably larger, occupying more than 100 acres. An additional compound reportedly has materialized in Bedford County near the city of Roanoke.

5) Several Virginia compounds appear to possess obstacle courses, and firing ranges.

6) Members of the compounds have been known to refer to themselves as “soldiers of Allah” and “Mohammad’s commandos.”

7) What happens in the Red House compound stays in the Red House compound. The members of the radical Islamic community rarely appear in the nearby town; conduct little business with local merchants; and stay to themselves.

Knowing the need for new recruits, Gilani turned to the penal system and focused his attention on converting incarcerated blacks to his radical Islamic doctrine. Imams and religious instructors were dispatched to local, state, and federal prison facilities to accomplish this objective. The results were mind-boggling. Thousands converted on a weekly basis, drawn to the offers of protection, special meals, and release from work detail for daily prayers and the entire month of Ramadan.

Gilani soon came to the realization that it would be financially advantageous to train new recruits for the holy war on American soil rather than to pay the freight of sending them to Pakistan, and the sites of his other training camps throughout the world. And so, Islamberg in Hancock, New York came into being. Soon other hamaats were established in such places as Hyattsville, Maryland; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulane Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. The Red House compound cropped up in 1993. Others are under construction, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania. How many hamaats are now in place throughout the United States is anyone’s guess. A low-ball figure is 38.

Before becoming a citizen of the Red House compound or any of the other Fuqra communities, the recruits – primarily inner city black men who became converts in prison – are compelled to sign an oath that reads: “I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah’s sake.” They are also obliged to contribute 70% of their welfare checks and other sources of income to Muslims of the Americas, Inc.

Even though Jamaat ul-Fuqra has been involved in bloody bombings and sundry criminal activities, recruited thousands of members from federal and state penal systems, and appears to be operating paramilitary facilities for militant Muslims, the terror organization remains to be placed on the official US Terror Watch List, and The Muslims of the Americas continue to operate, flourish, and expand as a legitimate nonprofit, tax-deductible charity.

Meanwhile, the hills of rural Virginia are alive with the sound of jihad.

But few, it seems, are listening.
Will we begin to listen?

Labels: , , ,

The Seriousness of Our Situation

At The New Media Journal is an article by Jeffrey Epstein titled "Failure is not an Option". All Americans should read this piece and think seriously about what it says.

One thing Mr. Epstein has to say is this:

America is currently engaged in a deadly war that has the potential to last for decades and cost millions of innocent lives. Most experts agree that a far more deadly attack is imminent – a catastrophic strike involving a combination of tactical nuclear and/or radiological “dirty” weapons. Yet, Washington refuses to take legitimate actions to secure our homeland – that is, to properly identify the enemy, seal our borders and inoculate a number of terrorist-front groups that freely operate on our soil; subversive organizations that seek our destruction, spread seeds of hatred, fundraise for the enemy, support international acts of terrorism, recruit thousands of disgruntled “home-growns” and prepare scores of their followers to perpetrate acts of violence.

Of greater concern is the administration’s failure to come clean with the American people regarding numerous terrorist hits that we have already suffered – attacks both leading up to and following 9/11.

For unknown reasons, Federal law enforcement agencies continue to misrepresent barbaric acts of violence as being anything other than Islamist-inspired – a reckless policy that, in the long run, will only cost more lives. There’s no legitimate reason to hide the truth from our citizenry while blood hemorrhages in various locations across America. An educated, vigilant society will only make our shopping malls, highways, houses of worship, college campuses and federal buildings safer to visit. Additionally, surviving family members deserve to know what really happened to their loves ones.

While in a holding pattern awaiting the unthinkable – news of simultaneous nuclear detonations occurring in major U.S Cities – our State Department is reaching out to those same terrorist-host nations that are conspiring to exterminate us. If that isn’t enough, the Department of Education is in the process of opening twenty Arabic-teaching schools for Muslim students across America, Kansas City International Airport recently installed foot baths to accommodate Muslim travelers and several federal agencies (including the FBI and TSA) have contracted with CAIR (a terror-friendly Islamic advocacy group) to provide sensitivity training to their field agents and employees.
Yet again we are either not hearing necessary news from the MSM, or they are reporting incidents separately, without regard to how they tie in to the big picture. If they at least report some of it, we have a chance to connect the dots ourselves, although the leftist/multicultural/diversity crowd will certainly try to shout down any such sensible efforts. Do they not realize that their freedom to shout down others is at stake?

Mr. Epstein has more. Give this more than a passing thought:
According to our nation’s leading counter-terrorism experts, it’s far later in the game than most folks realize, for the enemy has accomplished much in terms of their infiltration and entrenchment on our soil. These radical Islamist barbarians truly believe that America is their’s for the taking. They’re convinced that their imperialistic drive to conquer our nation is far stronger than our willingness to fight for what’s rightfully ours. Unfortunately, they’re probably right since just a scant few of us are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to resist these cretins at any cost.

Their victory would mean the end of the United States and the end of the free world as we know it. To them, it is not about politics, it is about religion, a radical religion where the law allows for beheadings, stoning and maiming; a radical religion that uses terror as its tool of choice to keep the masses in line.

There isn’t a better time to draw a line in the sand, take a stand and be heard.

Where the battle against the aggressive totalitarianism of Islamofascism is concerned, it is well past the time to act. If we allow politics to infiltrate the process of disseminating fact-based information – the truth – about the lethal foe we face we risk repeating the mistakes made in the waning days of Vietnam only this time the genocide may very well happen to us...on American soil.

Failure is not an option. To quote Winston Churchill:

“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
Our situation in the world is indeed serious and needs to be attended to. For a beginning, American citizens need to give more attention to what is happening here and throughout the rest of the world.

Labels: , , , , ,

Iran has Five American Hostages

Where is the coverage on the fact that the Iranians are detaining five Americans? I have heard nothing about this on the Mainstream Media (MSM).

At Jewish World Review Michael Ledeen writes a column, titled "The Invisible Crisis: What if Iran took Hostages and No One Noticed?", on the five Americans being held in Iran. Mr. Ledeen begins by writing:
Rarely have so many journalists, politicians and commentators so totally missed a headline. There are now five American hostages in Iran. Each case has been largely treated by itself, almost as if it were an oddity, something requiring a special explanation, instead of another piece in a luminously clear pattern whose meaning should be intuitively obvious to us all.

The five American hostages are:

Haleh Esfandiari, the director of the Middle East program at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington and the wife of the distinguished historian Shaul Bakash;

Parnaz Azima, a journalist for radio Farda, the Farsi-language component of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty;

Ali Shakeri, a founding board member at the University of California, Irvine’s Center for Citizen Peacebuilding;

Kian Tajbakhsh, a consultant working for George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

Robert A. Levinson, a former FBI officer reportedly investigating tobacco smuggling on behalf of a private client. He disappeared after he flew to Iran’s Kish Island in March.
How is it that this has been ignored? Ledeen goes on to say:
The two women — Esfandiari and Azima — were regular visitors to Iran, and both were visiting their mothers at the time of their arrests.

Iranian and Iranian-supported terrorists have been trying unsuccessfully to capture Americans in Iraq for some time (a hostage-taking operation failed last September, for example), but they found that the Americans fought back. They have now snatched unarmed Americans within Iranian borders. Several of them have been charged with espionage. Esfandiari has been accused of an additional crime: being married to a Jew. In the words of a website closely tied to President Ahmadinejad, Esfandiari is “married to Shaul Bakhash, a Jew, (and) is one of the leading figures in the international Zionist lobby planning the overthrow of the Iranian regime, including the Zionist regime’s plans to attack Iran.”

Actually, Esfandiari is one of the leading figures in the intellectual/scholarly opposition to the Bush administration, Azima works for an organization that has been a feckless voice of confusion and a frequent critic of American policy in the Middle East, and Tajbakhsh and Shakeri are advocates of dialogue with Iran. I don’t know anything about Levinson’s politics or religion.

Not that the actual views of the hostages have anything to do with their plight; they are hostages simply because they are Americans.
Why would Iran do this, you ask? Here's Ledeen's take on that:
The Americans were taken hostage for the same reasons the regime has routinely taken foreign hostages from the first year of its existence: to resolve internal power struggles, to demonstrate to the Iranian people the hopelessness of their condition by directly challenging the infidels to do anything about the humiliation of their countrymen, and to impose their will on a Western world the mullahs view as feckless and paralyzed. When the American embassy was overrun in the fall of 1979, Khomeini famously proclaimed that the Americans “can’t do a thing,” and today the regime is trying to show that neither the Americans nor the Brits (five more of whom were taken hostage in the past couple of days) can do anything to challenge the mullahcracy.
Ledeen goes into some detail and one of his points is this:
Message to the Iranian People
Two of the American hostages — Esfandiari and Tajbakhsh — have been charged with attempting to subvert the Islamic Republic and organize a “soft revolution” against the regime. At the same time, the mullahs have launched a new wave of political repression against students, teachers, women, intellectuals and, most recently, scientists. The information ministry, a.k.a. the secret intelligence service, recently declared that any Iranian who attended overseas conferences would automatically fall under suspicion of cooperating with foreign-espionage operations. All these measures are symptomatic of a regime that knows it is hated by most Iranians, and fears a popular uprising.

It is a basic tenet of the Iranians’ worldview that nothing of great significance will occur in the world without American support, which in practice means they are unlikely to launch a revolution until and unless they see signs of such support. It also means that the mullahs constantly seek to demonstrate that America is impotent, thus hoping to discourage potential challenges from below. What better way than to take American (and British) hostages, and show that the United States (and Her Majesty’s government) are powerless to do anything about it?
He finishes with this:
Messianic movements of the sort led by the Islamic Republic can inspire masses of people, but they are uniquely vulnerable, because any dramatic setback raises a frightening question: Has divine support suddenly been removed? It follows that we should strain to defeat them, primarily by supporting their own gravediggers, the people of Iran.

Alas, not even that celebrated warmonger, George W. Bush, has the will to support democratic revolution in Iran, or even to say the simple words “we want regime change in Tehran.” His secretary of State insists that we do not want regime change, but only a change in the behavior of the regime. Which is rather like saying that the best way to fight evil is by reading the Psalms. Instead of vigorously defending the Americans outrageously arrested and incarcerated in Iran, we opened a new round of negotiations with their captors, and the killers of our troops in Iraq, on Memorial Day. Yes, there are American warships in the Gulf, but no one in his right mind expects them to do anything other than show the flag.

But then, nobody even seems to have noticed the existence of a hostage crisis. Why would anyone expect the American government to do anything about it?
There is a lot going on in this world that the American public is uninformed about. Some is our fault for not keeping up with current events, of course, but some is because of the selective "reporting" practices of the MSM. I highly recommend reading all of Michael Ledeen's column.

Labels: , , , ,