Monday, May 31, 2010

Terrorists Ambush Israeli Inspectors

Wait a minute... that's not what the mainstream media has been saying. Well, you need to get your facts straight. Do your homework. Get the REAL story!

A fleet of ships left Turkey under the pretense of sending humanitarian aid to the people living in the impoverished Gaza Strip, but with the expressed purpose of breaching a blockade that Israel set up to protect its own country. The boats reached the blockade, and the Israelis inspected the vessels one by one, as they have many times in the past. Everything went peacefully until they came to the sixth boat. As they boarded the sixth vessel members of the Turkish crew attacked them with sticks and pipes, knives and bats. Unable to subdue the brutal assault with paintball guns and tear gas, the Israelis opened fire, killing nine.

That's one side of the story. The other side states that the Israelis were the first to fire, unprovoked, from both air and sea, before they even boarded the ships.

Who, if anyone, should we believe? Stories abound about the Turkish flotilla being full of "peace activists." What is a "peace activist?" If you play any part in a mission to bring weapons to people, are you innocent? If you knowingly board a ship that intends to breach the security of another nation, are you innocent? If a person knowingly and willingly puts himself in danger, does he or she not assume all responsibility for whatever happens?

The truth is, I have not heard or seen anything yet that proves the Israelis were in the wrong for doing what they did. And I have read both sides of the story. Even if they came up at dawn and conducted a surprise attack, even if it was in international waters, can they be blamed? With all the statements that had been coming from those who organized and operated the flotilla, could Israel be confident that the safety of its citizens would not be jeopardized if this flotilla arrived in Gaza un-inspected? Since the flotilla was being sent specifically to violate the blockade, was Israel not justified? Since the ship did not respond to repeated requests to stop and undergo routine inspection, was Israel not justified?

Yes, the people of Gaza are impoverished. It is not Israel's fault. The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the Gaza government. If they would settle down and get a life, and try to live and let live, their people could prosper. If they resolve to co-exist with Israel and show it with their actions, Israel would not need a blockade to inspect everything that comes into the country.

If your fellow citizens were in danger of their lives, would you not support a blockade, including the use of force if anyone tried to slip through without inspection? How about a convoy trying to enter your city, which was known to be associated with terrorists? Would you not want them to be searched? Why, we are by law even privileged to keep within a reasonable limit what goes on in our neighbor's yard! No, compared with the way Hamas has been treating Israel, I don't see that Israel did anything out of line.

"Shalom" to all.

Monday, May 10, 2010

Dismay Over Oil Spill Fueling Drive For Alternative Energy

While we are watching the massive and expanding oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico, and the blame game is starting in Washington, I want to ask a few questions: who is really responsible? Sure, BP seems to have been the corporation in charge of the actual drilling, and everybody else involved was simply working as subcontractors, but why did BP go there in the first place?

Now, before you get excited, I'm not shifting the blame to all the common people that consume oil. I want to take a good look at all the politicians and special interest groups that may have influenced or encouraged BP to go there. I need to ask some questions, and I don't know the answers to all these questions. I'd be happy to have some help in finding the real answers.

Why have oil companies turned to drilling offshore to the extent that they have, when we have enough oil reserves here on the mainland to satisfy our nation's demand for many, many years? Has nobody considered the possibility of something like this happening? Did they really think the benefits outweighed the risks?

Look, I know that drilling for oil on land has its impact on the environment, and I understand taking precautions against further endangering species that may already be threatened with extinction, but is that really worse than oil in the ocean and oil on the beaches? Why have the environmentalists been so adamant about no more drilling in the great reserves that lie along the Rockies and yet do so little about drilling in the ocean where something like this might happen and destroy nature on a much, much greater scale?

Like I said, I don't know all the answers, but here's a few things I do know. The environmentalist movement was started with a noble purpose. Those who founded it had wisdom and common sense. Their concerns and objectives were such as I myself share. But their organization was hijacked. Some of the same people that used to be leaders of the Communist Party are currently in charge of some of the most influential environmentalist groups.

Could it be that they are knowingly promoting policy that is destructive to our once great nation? The Communists have always hated us; always been jealous of us. We need to take a serious look at these questions and find out what's going on. Then, we need to be proactive about it -- do not tolerate more drilling offshore or in any foreign nation as long as we have so much right here in our own country. It is no less harmful to the environment to drill in any of these other places than it is to drill in our vast oilfields out west.

Ultimately we need to individually take a more active role in using alternative energy sources. Here is a video outlining some of the latest exciting advances in energy technology.

All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.