2008 Olympic Protests

Hooray for the 1st Amendment!!!

Even those that are not citizens of this country have learned the value of the freedom of speech. Even the China visa carriers, who are now following the torch as an expression of support for the communistic oppression their government imposes upon them don’t realize their presence along the parade route is an expression of freedom they don’t enjoy in their ‘homeland’ in the case where their opinion differs with that of the Chinese government.

If China has a problem with the rest of the world’s disapproval of their treatment to the workers in their factories, well then they ought to listen when the entire world shares in that disapproval.

China should listen as the world disagrees with their violence against the peaceful monks in Tibet.

China wants to be a player with the majors of the world. If they want to be known as a legitimate player, not some cheap imitator, they need to realize the world changed and are smarter than the bland, heavy handed ‘brainwashing’ propaganda being sent across the pond posing as intelligent explanation of human rights violations.

Currently, their propaganda deifies those who choose to voice disapproval of the treatment of the citizens of the country of Tibet (yes, I know, but it’s fun to antagonize). Gatherings, protests, etc. I’m not the biggest fan of trying to squash the torch, but if no-one gets hurt, it gets the attention of the world.
With that said, China tries to condemn the protests as out of place and inappropriate to the season of the Olympic Games and the Olympic ‘spirit’. Hypocrisy at best!

The 1st Amendment and the spirit of the 1st Amendment (in other countries) in this case is providing an open forum for the World to share in a single voice that China has some growing up to do. And if that voice happens to coincide with the Olympic Games, well, the timing couldn’t be better. But let’s make sure no one gets hurt.

Illegal Immigration: Life Lesson in the Making

I’ve recently observed a proposal that in exchange for U.S. citizenship, illegal aliens be given the opportunity to earn citizenship through a short stint in the armed services. I have to admit, at first thought I am perplexed. I’m not of the mind that service in the Army should be utilized as a sentence (for troubled youth) or domestic admission for citizenship. On the other hand, if those who so disparately value a life in the U.S. that they brave the searing sun over 100 miles for a job, then I would be willing to give them this opportunity in order to earn what they demonstrate is valuable to them.

If given the opportunity, would they even share the thought that they hold that much value for life in the U.S. Or, would they continue to balk at any thought where citizenship would come at a cost.

Defenders voice that illegal aliens “pay taxes”. Well the truth is they do and they don’t. They pay taxes on the products that they buy. Great, that’s appreciated, but to be perfectly honest, there is no way around it. You can’t go to McDonalds and decline to pay the tax. But like the border, they pursue any means by which they can escape income tax, which every law abiding U.S. citizen must pay. When U.S. citizens do not pay the appropriate income tax, they then experience the force of the law upon them to encourage them to become compliant.

Nobody is asking that the illegal be forced to follow anything rules or processes that any other U.S. citizen doesn’t already do. But they are asking (even demanding) every freedom that U.S. citizens enjoy but continue to try to circumvent what those costs are.

In the end, I have the opinion that I am for such alternatives to U.S. citizenship for illegal aliens. However, I already fear for the headline which would read: “Army Generals Racist: Consistently send Hispanic Citizenship Enlistees to the front lines.” I think I read something similar in a history book somewhere. Might have had something to do with the Vietnam War and African American soldiers.
History repeats itself when we (earth inhabitants) fail to learn the appropriate Life Lesson, until we get it right.

Prove It — Part 2

Listening to the knee-jerk comments from all sides of the isle of last weeks elections, there are plenty more tidbits to call out.
I found it funny listening to comments from both winners and losers from the races.

“We ran a good race” — said:

– the challenger for the Republican Wisconsin congressional seat of Paul R. Nelson throughing morality accusations
– the new Democratic House Representative Chris Carney after running ads slamming the “family values” of Rep. Don Sherwood

What planet were these people on during the campaign? Didn’t those guys “approve” of those messages? This was a disgusting campaign year.

As soon as the election is won, everyone likes to pretend they took the high road from the beginning and will continue on that road by saying:

“We need to come together and unite” — said the DNC chairman (Dean) who also said “I hate Republicans and everything they stand for“

Prove It!

Adding to the mix is the free press. Free press is great and one of the greatest gifts any nation has to offer. Though it can be abused. If nobody else is going to call out the media for being The Media, it will have to happen here. Calling the media suckers for a good smear campaign to lead the next day with seems appropriate enough. But the following quote would be more “PC”.

“When the news is bad, the ads tend to be negative,” said Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford professor who studies political advertising. “And the more negative the ad, the more likely it is to get free media coverage. So there’s a big incentive to go to the extremes.”

Simple Dichotomy or Time Bomb

9/11 brought either awoke the sleeping giant, or the world finally saw the elephant standing in the middle in the room. Depends on your perspective.

Islamists/Muslims (pardon the naivety at being un-uninformed) around the world have been being characterized into two group of either Islamic fascist or self characterized as “misunderstood lovers of piece”.

The previous generalization whether true or proclaimed as truth persists, THE truth will not be validated while the question continues to be asked, “How can anyone claim an organization as peaceful when so much violence is spoken, delivered, preached and condoned?”

I wonder how much of the killing could be stopped if those delivering those actions could realize that it doesn’t take violence to make a point. While violence is usually the first thought considered when exploring ways to make a statement, violence only resolves to draw a hard line between those who you would want to hear your message. The message is then ignored rather to respond to the action and the words are lost in translation.

Peaceful means to draw attention to yourself and your message are exponentially effective when a perception of concern for humanity is center stage.

– Robert Redeker is only the latest in a lengthening list of Europeans who have been subjected to death threats from Muslims outraged by criticism of their faith and prophet. British writer Salman Rushdie survived the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1989 fatwa only by adopting a quasi-clandestine existence. Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was gunned down on the street two years ago in Amsterdam for insulting Islam. His co-filmmaker, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, frustrated at living under constant police protection, resigned earlier this year from the Dutch parliament and moved to the United States – TIME Online (James Graff)

My $.02 is that Muslims are new to the idea of freedom of speech and don’t know how to handle it. From my admittedly small understanding of their history and culture, violence is part of the law/culture in Middle Eastern Regions. Do they still chop off hands for stealing, do they still execute by beheading with a sword, do they stone for immoral acts? Is it a fundamental issue with the men there to release/relinquish their stronghold over women that violence continues to remain the ONLY perceived solution?

I see it in similar light as the struggle (understated) in the U.S. to recognize the rights of African Americans in the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and still today. As some didn’t know how to handle (accept) the rights/freedoms of African Americans, some Muslims don’t know how to handle the rights of others (freedom of speech/press/religion and freedoms in general).

What I will suggest (for free) is, just for shock value… try something new. Try NOT sawing off someones head on live TV. Try NOT remotely detonating roadside bomb and killing civilian journalists. Try NOT targeting people you perceive to be against you because of a different religion.

Show me the peace. Help me to not be confused (resistant, guarded, etc) about your religious believes. If you are “misunderstood” the best way to have me on your side is to show me it’s going to be worth that chance. I can’t give you a chance when the only fruits of your labors are violence and hatred.

Show me the peace. Regardless of who started the fight first… be the first to end it.