I know it sounds like a doomsday pronouncement, but our policies (such as they are) in Middle East have proven to be completely ineffective and the region is unravelling. It is not surprising. If anyone is surprised at what is happening in Afghanistan and what has already happened in Iraq, then they have not been following our policies or non-policies in that region. The writing was on the all when White House announced that all U.S. troops will be gone from Afghanistan by next year and when we also pulled out all our combat troops from Iraq. You may have notice that I did not include Syria in this. That is because Syria is lost!
The latest news from Afghanistan is that Kunduz has been taken over by Taliban and the Afghan National Army (ANA) is unable to retake the place. Reinforcements are unable to reach the city because the road leading to the city is blocked by Taliban! My question is, why isn't the ANA fighting the Taliban blocking the highway? Besides, whatever happened to all of those helicopters that we gave to the ANA? Can't they airlift the troops to Kunduz? Apparently not, apparently the ANA is not trained well enough to execute such an air lift/ air assault operation and it is not capable of removing (knocking out) the Taliban that are blocking the highway.
All of our billions upon billions of dollars worth of equipment and training that we showered upon the ANA was for naught. "Experts" in Washington are saying that it will take another two years to a whole generation to get the ANA up to speed! Give me a break! We've been at this for over a decade now and still no viable army? In the meantime, we are conducting air strikes, dropping tons of bombs that are apparently not doing any good. Why are we wasting all that money? The simple answer to all this is that without U.S. ground troops, the Taliban will retake the country just as ISIS will take over Iraq. No amount of "shock and awe" air war by us will solve the problem without American boots on the ground. Why? Because neither the Afghan nor Iraqi government is capable of fielding a viable army to fight the Taliban and ISIS. The governments in both countries are corrupt, run by corrupt officials, and that extends down to the armed forces.
Washington "experts" keep saying not to make comparisons with Vietnam. Why not? Vietnam-ization brought about the same results that "Afghan-ization" and "Iraq-ization" has thus far! You can't expect a corrupt government to carry out "our" plan and fight the war. Those corrupt Afghan and Iraqi officials are only interested in lining their pockets, just as it happened in Vietnam!
Syria is a different story. We never really got involved directly until fairly recently when we started air strikes on known ISIS locations. As far as ground war is concerned, we really have done zilch! Supposedly we trained about 50 or so "good guys" to fight ISIS....that's fewer fighter than ISIS recruits in a week, possibly a day! Now White House is in a tizzy because Russians have started bombing indiscriminately towns that are supposedly under "good guys" control. Russia is in this for one thing only, to support Al-Assad's regime and to beef up their own standing in the Middle East! To that end they have accomplished their goal when they sent troops and planes and established two bases around Damascus. Russia will essentially carry out the war as Al-Assad did on his own. Now he has an ally with more planes and bombs, and ground troops!
It appears now that if we counter Russia's strikes, then we will be engaging Russian planes and troops. Do we want to do that? Are we ready to go to war with Russia?
Putin is nothing but a former KGB thug who thinks and acts exactly as most former Soviet leaders. He has "figured out" our current leadership in the White House and knows that he can push to the limit without any consequences. Oh, there will be other "sanctions" such as the ones we imposed after his Ukrainian adventure, but nothing more serious. Our leaders in Washington have to realize who they are dealing with! They are not dealing with someone interested in negotiating any sort of a settlement or agreement, unless it is in Russia's favor!
Putin does not fear our current leadership, and unfortunately, fear and strength are the only things that he understands. Putin would not risk an all out war with us, because he knows he cannot win. But he knows also that he can chip away and twist our nose and get away with it. Our leaders have to realize that they are dealing with someone who has an almost a pathological hatred for the United States, for our system. He blames all of Russia's current problems on the U.S., and like all his predecessors with the exception of Gorbachev, he is very heavy handed. There is no finesse with Putin! The only way to deal with Putin is to respond in kind. If he bombs "our" allies territory, we bomb Al-Assad's military strongholds. He shoots down our plane, we shoot down his. I know it sounds simplistic and crude, but that is what he understands, that is what the Soviets always understood. However, it is highly unlikely that we would counter his actions in such manner, so, in the end he will get his way. That is why I said earlier that Syria is lost, and is now a Russian foothold in the Middle East.
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
Immigrants in America
The latest announcement made by the Pew Research Center is that by mid century, around 2065, the largest immigrant group in America will be Asian. When I heard that on CNN, it caught me by surprise. I have closely followed the immigration patterns to the U.S. by various ethnic and national groups since the 1980s. I had direct access to all the statistics and actual numbers all through the 1980s and 1990s while I was still working for the State Department. What I saw then was that although Asian immigration into the U.S. was large, it was surpassed significantly by the Hispanic immigration, especially from Mexico. Additionally, and more importantly, the illegal immigrant population of Hispanics far outnumbered any other group, so much so that a Harvard study in 2000 declared that by mid century the majority population in the U.S. would be Hispanic. This claim was repeated not too long ago, both by an academic study and our own census bureau. Then how is it that the Pew is now saying that the Asians would be the largest immigrant group by mid 2000?
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Hispanic immigrants make up 47% of all immigrants in the U.S. That figure is supposed to drop to 31% by mid century. However, the total Hispanic immigrant population will increase by 24% by that time, while Asian immigrant population will increase by 14%. Now these figures are based strictly on "legal" immigrants, those who enter the U.S. with proper immigrant visas. These numbers do not include the "illegal" immigrants, those who cross the border and live in the U.S. without proper documentation. Naturally, the "illegals" are not going to identify themselves with census takers, so the U.S. Census Bureau has no idea how many "illegals" are in this country and those figures are not included. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the former Immigration and Naturalization Service and Border Patrol, is the only one that can take a stab at guessing the numbers for "illegals" in this country. DHS claims that there are roughly 11 million "illegals" in the U.S. I am not sure how they arrived at those figures since those numbers were much higher before! Perhaps they caught all those "illegals" and deported them? I remember hearing numbers around 15 to 20 million being bandied around back in 2000! Now they seem to have shrunk in half.
Whatever the case may be, it is obvious that the "illegals" are not included in the Pew study so you can't really accept their findings as being accurate. They are only accurate if you discount the millions of "illegals." But then again, I have some issues with their calculations. If today's Hispanic immigration numbers stand at 47% of total number of immigrants to the U.S. and it will increase by 24% by mid century, how then could the total numbers be down to 31%? That makes no sense. Asian immigration numbers are to increase by 14% by mid century. How could Asian immigrant numbers become greater than Hispanic? It is mathematically not possible! Is this some sort of new math? I can't figure this out.
What the Pew study purports without explaining the details is that Asians will comprise the largest number of "foreign born" or those who have been in the U.S. less than five years, immigrant group in America. That, they explain, is due mainly because of the large number of Chinese graduate students in America and Indians who are hired for high-tech jobs. However, technically and legally speaking, students and skilled technical workers brought in on special visas are not immigrants! The students are to return to their country after finishing their studies when their "F" visas expire, and the skilled hi-tech workers must also leave after the allowed period of stay according to their "H" visa. So, both the Chinese graduate students and the Indian hi-tech hires are not immigrants! Of course some of the students and hi-tech hires stay on by getting jobs and immigrant visas, but a majority of them return to their home country. They are, for all practical purposes, like the visitors or tourists, so they are not immigrants. But for some reason, the Pew study uses these figures to make their findings.
What I find interesting is that nowhere in this study is there any mention of the "illegals" and their impact on the immigrant population in America. It is as if an attempt is made to lessen the illegal alien or "undocumented immigrant" crises in America by shifting attention to a newly created situation, a new "Asian Invasion," although not as menacing as before. After all, these are highly educated Asians who will definitely be an asset to our society! I can't help but feel that there is a "liberal media" and pro "undocumented immigrant" group involvement in the process with a generous helping from our government! After all, how long has it been since there was anything in the news about the problems on our southern border? Those problems are still very much there and they haven't gone away or gotten less, as some would like us to believe.
By mid century, the population of America will be around 320 million of which only 46% will be made up of non-Hispanic whites. In 1965 84% of the U.S. population was non-Hispanic white, and it is currently at around 62%. The African-American population went from around 11% to 15% and is expected to be around 17% by mid century. Asian-Americans made up less than 1% in 1965 and are currently somewhere around 3% and will increase to about 5% by mid century. That leaves Hispanics at around 32%, but when you add the "illegals" to that number, it should bump up the figure somewhat. Still not a majority according to those figures, but a significant number.
You can play around with statistics and bend and twist them to your liking, everyone knows that. Corporations and governments have played with figures before the first illegal crossed the border, but one thing is evident from these latest "findings." No matter how you twist and bend the numbers, the Hispanic population in America will be much larger in the years to come, Chinese graduate students and Indian hi-tech hires notwithstanding! My granddaughter Claudia started college this year. My advice to her was to take Spanish regardless of what she chose for her major!
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Hispanic immigrants make up 47% of all immigrants in the U.S. That figure is supposed to drop to 31% by mid century. However, the total Hispanic immigrant population will increase by 24% by that time, while Asian immigrant population will increase by 14%. Now these figures are based strictly on "legal" immigrants, those who enter the U.S. with proper immigrant visas. These numbers do not include the "illegal" immigrants, those who cross the border and live in the U.S. without proper documentation. Naturally, the "illegals" are not going to identify themselves with census takers, so the U.S. Census Bureau has no idea how many "illegals" are in this country and those figures are not included. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the former Immigration and Naturalization Service and Border Patrol, is the only one that can take a stab at guessing the numbers for "illegals" in this country. DHS claims that there are roughly 11 million "illegals" in the U.S. I am not sure how they arrived at those figures since those numbers were much higher before! Perhaps they caught all those "illegals" and deported them? I remember hearing numbers around 15 to 20 million being bandied around back in 2000! Now they seem to have shrunk in half.
Whatever the case may be, it is obvious that the "illegals" are not included in the Pew study so you can't really accept their findings as being accurate. They are only accurate if you discount the millions of "illegals." But then again, I have some issues with their calculations. If today's Hispanic immigration numbers stand at 47% of total number of immigrants to the U.S. and it will increase by 24% by mid century, how then could the total numbers be down to 31%? That makes no sense. Asian immigration numbers are to increase by 14% by mid century. How could Asian immigrant numbers become greater than Hispanic? It is mathematically not possible! Is this some sort of new math? I can't figure this out.
What the Pew study purports without explaining the details is that Asians will comprise the largest number of "foreign born" or those who have been in the U.S. less than five years, immigrant group in America. That, they explain, is due mainly because of the large number of Chinese graduate students in America and Indians who are hired for high-tech jobs. However, technically and legally speaking, students and skilled technical workers brought in on special visas are not immigrants! The students are to return to their country after finishing their studies when their "F" visas expire, and the skilled hi-tech workers must also leave after the allowed period of stay according to their "H" visa. So, both the Chinese graduate students and the Indian hi-tech hires are not immigrants! Of course some of the students and hi-tech hires stay on by getting jobs and immigrant visas, but a majority of them return to their home country. They are, for all practical purposes, like the visitors or tourists, so they are not immigrants. But for some reason, the Pew study uses these figures to make their findings.
What I find interesting is that nowhere in this study is there any mention of the "illegals" and their impact on the immigrant population in America. It is as if an attempt is made to lessen the illegal alien or "undocumented immigrant" crises in America by shifting attention to a newly created situation, a new "Asian Invasion," although not as menacing as before. After all, these are highly educated Asians who will definitely be an asset to our society! I can't help but feel that there is a "liberal media" and pro "undocumented immigrant" group involvement in the process with a generous helping from our government! After all, how long has it been since there was anything in the news about the problems on our southern border? Those problems are still very much there and they haven't gone away or gotten less, as some would like us to believe.
By mid century, the population of America will be around 320 million of which only 46% will be made up of non-Hispanic whites. In 1965 84% of the U.S. population was non-Hispanic white, and it is currently at around 62%. The African-American population went from around 11% to 15% and is expected to be around 17% by mid century. Asian-Americans made up less than 1% in 1965 and are currently somewhere around 3% and will increase to about 5% by mid century. That leaves Hispanics at around 32%, but when you add the "illegals" to that number, it should bump up the figure somewhat. Still not a majority according to those figures, but a significant number.
You can play around with statistics and bend and twist them to your liking, everyone knows that. Corporations and governments have played with figures before the first illegal crossed the border, but one thing is evident from these latest "findings." No matter how you twist and bend the numbers, the Hispanic population in America will be much larger in the years to come, Chinese graduate students and Indian hi-tech hires notwithstanding! My granddaughter Claudia started college this year. My advice to her was to take Spanish regardless of what she chose for her major!
Friday, September 25, 2015
More Encounters with Mexico's Corruption
During my three year assignment to Mexico, I got to see quite a bit of the country, areas normally not seen by casual tourists or even some residents. I can't lay claim to have seen all of Mexico or even most of it, but I did get to visit many parts of it. Most of my travels throughout Mexico was on behalf of the U.S. government, as part of my job, and quite a bit of it was on my own, during my many hunting trips.
One of the places that I liked to go to was not far from Tijuana, just southeast of Tecate which is not far from the California border. It was actually a little hamlet in the high desert that is called El Hongo (mushroom). The village of El Hongo takes its name from a large rock formation at the entrance to the village that looks exactly like a mushroom! Once we reached the village of El Hongo, my friends and I would go a bit further then turn left off the paved road and follow a rough dirt road that cut through some very pretty ranch country, cattle and horses. But before we reached our favorite site, we would go by a huge castle-like structure, a huge compound, in the middle of an isolated valley that we could see from the dirt road. The compound was new and it had a good, smooth oil and gravel road leading to it. The compound was surrounded by about a 20 foot solid concrete wall with watch-towers (gun turrets!) at four corners. Inside the compound, it appeared that there was a huge, luxurious ranch style house with a swimming pool and other buildings and a manicured garden with lawn and trees. You could see all of that from the road because the road was above the valley floor and the compound.
When I first saw this impressive looking compound I remarked to my Mexican companions that it must belong to some rich rancher. They looked at each other uneasily before answering me. Yes, they said, it belonged to a rich man, but not a rancher. According to them, it belonged to one of the lieutenants of the Arellano Felix Cartel, a narcotraficante! Although we were looking at the compound at a distance, they all seemed nervous and did not want to dally around but quickly pass by the location. So, for the next three years during the hunting season we would pass by that place at least three or four times each season, on the way to our favorite location for quail hunting.
During my final season in Mexico, in fact during my very last hunt at that location, we ran smack into an armed Mexican Army patrol. The lieutenant in charge of the patrol had us detained at gun point while the soldiers collected all of our shotguns, then proceeded to examine our IDs. My Mexican companions were extremely nervous, while I was a bit annoyed. It seemed that it didn't matter that I showed them my diplomatic ID, the lieutenant simply glanced at it and continued with his questioning of our group. I was more afraid for my dog Logan, who was a friendly dog but a big dog. Mexican soldiers seemed to be afraid of him and kept waiving their submachineguns and assault rifles at him if he came near. He just wanted to be friendly, but I had to hold him tight on a leash!
I had lived and worked in half a dozen other countries prior to Mexico and had been to at least a dozen other countries. In all countries, including the old communist bloc countries, the diplomatic status was honored and I was never detained or searched. Mexico was the only exception. Quite often while traveling on the roads of Mexico I was stopped by numerous Mexican Army patrols, roadblocks, and they would unceremoniously search my vehicle despite the fact that it had diplomatic plates and I showed them my ID. This was in direct violation of the international diplomatic convention and agreement between countries. You can rest assured that if American police or military stopped a Mexican diplomat's vehicle in the U.S. without cause and searched it, there would have been newspaper headlines, protests from Mexican government. CNN would have reported the incident with great relish, explaining how heavy-handed and insensitive we were about international agreements and diplomatic convention. But, our government does nothing about such cases when Mexicans ignore diplomatic convention!
It is amazing how we kow-tow to Mexico, take their unwanted millions, allow our citizens and diplomats to be bullied in Mexico but extend all rights to their illegals in our country! We know how corrupt their government is, and just about 90% of all drug traffic comes through and from Mexico, yet, we look the other way and pretend that everything is fine!
No doubt the lieutenant was either looking for a pay off or was going to perhaps run my Mexican friends into jail or something. I was furious, but I held my tongue and instead pulled out the business card of the Commanding General of the segunda zona militar. Ironically, when I visited the general, besides presenting me with a Mexican Army parachute badge, he gave me his business card and said to show it to any soldiers if they gave me a hard time. I never once did that, hoping that perhaps there was at least one Mexican soldier that would recognize and honor a diplomatic ID. But in three years and numerous encounters, it never happened. This time I decided to use his card. I shoved it at the tienente and said that the general would not be happy to learn that he was hassling his friend. It was amazing, the lieutenant upon seeing the card, clicked his heels like a good Prussian officer and bowed to me returning the card. His whole demeanor and language changed. Instead of using the gruff, rough language as he did, he changed immediately to extremely polite formal language. He apologized repeatedly for detaining us and gathered his patrol and left.
My Mexican friends found it amusing, but they weren't laughing. They said that the lieutenant and his patrol were typical Mexican Army soldiers and that they were probably assigned to "protect" the narcotraficante that owned the elaborate compound down the road. They told me that it was a normal practice in the area that the high ranking cartel members received protection from the army. The army also helped protect drug shipments that went across the border. That compound, I learned earlier, was the staging point for drug shipments across that part of the border. Daily, several pickup trucks would arrive with loads of drugs, then transferred to other trucks and sent across the border on foot, carried by "mules" on their backs!
One of the places that I liked to go to was not far from Tijuana, just southeast of Tecate which is not far from the California border. It was actually a little hamlet in the high desert that is called El Hongo (mushroom). The village of El Hongo takes its name from a large rock formation at the entrance to the village that looks exactly like a mushroom! Once we reached the village of El Hongo, my friends and I would go a bit further then turn left off the paved road and follow a rough dirt road that cut through some very pretty ranch country, cattle and horses. But before we reached our favorite site, we would go by a huge castle-like structure, a huge compound, in the middle of an isolated valley that we could see from the dirt road. The compound was new and it had a good, smooth oil and gravel road leading to it. The compound was surrounded by about a 20 foot solid concrete wall with watch-towers (gun turrets!) at four corners. Inside the compound, it appeared that there was a huge, luxurious ranch style house with a swimming pool and other buildings and a manicured garden with lawn and trees. You could see all of that from the road because the road was above the valley floor and the compound.
When I first saw this impressive looking compound I remarked to my Mexican companions that it must belong to some rich rancher. They looked at each other uneasily before answering me. Yes, they said, it belonged to a rich man, but not a rancher. According to them, it belonged to one of the lieutenants of the Arellano Felix Cartel, a narcotraficante! Although we were looking at the compound at a distance, they all seemed nervous and did not want to dally around but quickly pass by the location. So, for the next three years during the hunting season we would pass by that place at least three or four times each season, on the way to our favorite location for quail hunting.
During my final season in Mexico, in fact during my very last hunt at that location, we ran smack into an armed Mexican Army patrol. The lieutenant in charge of the patrol had us detained at gun point while the soldiers collected all of our shotguns, then proceeded to examine our IDs. My Mexican companions were extremely nervous, while I was a bit annoyed. It seemed that it didn't matter that I showed them my diplomatic ID, the lieutenant simply glanced at it and continued with his questioning of our group. I was more afraid for my dog Logan, who was a friendly dog but a big dog. Mexican soldiers seemed to be afraid of him and kept waiving their submachineguns and assault rifles at him if he came near. He just wanted to be friendly, but I had to hold him tight on a leash!
I had lived and worked in half a dozen other countries prior to Mexico and had been to at least a dozen other countries. In all countries, including the old communist bloc countries, the diplomatic status was honored and I was never detained or searched. Mexico was the only exception. Quite often while traveling on the roads of Mexico I was stopped by numerous Mexican Army patrols, roadblocks, and they would unceremoniously search my vehicle despite the fact that it had diplomatic plates and I showed them my ID. This was in direct violation of the international diplomatic convention and agreement between countries. You can rest assured that if American police or military stopped a Mexican diplomat's vehicle in the U.S. without cause and searched it, there would have been newspaper headlines, protests from Mexican government. CNN would have reported the incident with great relish, explaining how heavy-handed and insensitive we were about international agreements and diplomatic convention. But, our government does nothing about such cases when Mexicans ignore diplomatic convention!
It is amazing how we kow-tow to Mexico, take their unwanted millions, allow our citizens and diplomats to be bullied in Mexico but extend all rights to their illegals in our country! We know how corrupt their government is, and just about 90% of all drug traffic comes through and from Mexico, yet, we look the other way and pretend that everything is fine!
No doubt the lieutenant was either looking for a pay off or was going to perhaps run my Mexican friends into jail or something. I was furious, but I held my tongue and instead pulled out the business card of the Commanding General of the segunda zona militar. Ironically, when I visited the general, besides presenting me with a Mexican Army parachute badge, he gave me his business card and said to show it to any soldiers if they gave me a hard time. I never once did that, hoping that perhaps there was at least one Mexican soldier that would recognize and honor a diplomatic ID. But in three years and numerous encounters, it never happened. This time I decided to use his card. I shoved it at the tienente and said that the general would not be happy to learn that he was hassling his friend. It was amazing, the lieutenant upon seeing the card, clicked his heels like a good Prussian officer and bowed to me returning the card. His whole demeanor and language changed. Instead of using the gruff, rough language as he did, he changed immediately to extremely polite formal language. He apologized repeatedly for detaining us and gathered his patrol and left.
My Mexican friends found it amusing, but they weren't laughing. They said that the lieutenant and his patrol were typical Mexican Army soldiers and that they were probably assigned to "protect" the narcotraficante that owned the elaborate compound down the road. They told me that it was a normal practice in the area that the high ranking cartel members received protection from the army. The army also helped protect drug shipments that went across the border. That compound, I learned earlier, was the staging point for drug shipments across that part of the border. Daily, several pickup trucks would arrive with loads of drugs, then transferred to other trucks and sent across the border on foot, carried by "mules" on their backs!
Monday, September 21, 2015
Mexico's Corruption
The Latin American Drug Cartels first hit the newspaper and TV news headlines in America in the 1970s. It was generally known that drugs were coming in from points south, mostly from Colombia. It wasn't until the late 1970s, around 1977 that names were given to Colombian Drug Cartels, the Medellin Cartel being the most notorious, led by Pablo Escobar. Cali Cartel also gained notoriety at the same time and Colombia became the center of cocaine production and export.
Just about all of the drugs coming out of Colombia flowed into the United States by way of Panama and Mexico. Both of these locations became important transit points for drug trafficking and slimy characters like Manuel Noriega in Panama, became not only rich, but politically powerful from their involvement in the drug trade. However, by 1990, Noriega was ousted when we launched the Operation Just Cause and captured and imprisoned the Panamanian strongman. It wasn't long after that Pablo Escobar died and the Medellin Cartel began to crumble. By mid 1990's, the Medellin Cartel was no more and Cali Cartel was falling apart as well. Yet, the drugs continued to flow into the United States unabated! Apparently someone else had taken over for the Colombians and that someone else were the Mexican Cartels.
The Mexican Cartels which were just intermediaries, handling the onward shipment of drugs before the fall of the Colombians, were now the ones who were paying the growers in Colombia and handling the whole process from start to finish. The Mexicans began with their cartel in Guadalajara and moved westward with Juarez Cartel on to the Michoacan and Tijuana Cartel. All Mexican Cartels were just as violent and ruthless as the Colombians, if not more so, if it was possible!
So, when I was assigned to Tijuana in 1997 out of Cairo, I spent a considerable amount of time getting briefed about drug activity in my area, i.e., Baja California Norte and Baja California Sur. Having served previously both in Ecuador and Paraguay in South America, I was already quite familiar with drug trafficking problem and all the key players in the business. So it was not a surprise for me to learn just how violent and ruthless the drug traffickers were in my area, run by the Arellano Felix Cartel. There were shootings and killings taking place almost daily, according to the reports that I read and the briefings I got from DEA, Tijuana and other larger cities in Baja were like the old wild west!
Upon arrival in Tijuana I started with my courtesy calls on various officials in the area, a standard Foreign Service practice. Because I was a "guest" in their country and city, I had to initiate the contact. I first paid a call on the Governor of Baja California, a gracious gentleman with old world courtly manners. He assured me that everything was under control and that the drug traffickers were not a problem and that common street gangs were responsible for violence. My visit with the Mayor of Tijuana also proved to be somewhat fruitless, a pleasant social chit chat. He also told me that all the talk about the violent drug cartel activities were greatly exaggerated. He said that being a native son of Tijuana, he was well aware that Tijuana always attracted undesirables who caused problems. He even hinted that most problems were caused by folks from across the border!
My final courtesy call was on the Commanding General of the Segunda Zona Militar (Second Military Zone) located in Tijuana. The Segunda Zona Militar covers the Mexican states of Baja California and Sonora and is commanded by a Major General. Mexico is divided into twelve military regions which in turn are split into military zones or zonas militares. Ostensibly, each region is commanded by a Lieutenant General, a three star, and each zone is commanded by a Major General, a two star, or a Brigadier General, a one star, depending on the size of the zone. Obviously, the second zone, the segunda zona was large enough to call for a two star.
The Major General in command of the segunda zona was a short stocky gentleman in his early fifties. According to his biography, he was a product of the Mexican Military Academy and was considered a rising star. He had served with the Mexican Airborne Brigade and later commanded a Special Forces battalion. The job as a Commanding General of the segunda zona was a plum assignment that many Mexican generals sought and rarely received! Although, according to Mexican law the military is subservient to the civilian officials, I knew that the military had much more power than, for instance, our military. The Commanding General of the segunda zona had more power than the Governor of Baja! That's just how things are in Latin America!
The Commanding General met me, wearing a field uniform, fatigues as U.S. Army used to call, almost a dead ringer for our Vietnam era fatigues! His name tape above the right pocket and the Mexican army tape above the left pocket were of "subdued" type, just like ours. The only things that were different were the parachute badge that he had above the left pocket and the Major General insignias on his collar.
After the initial handshaking and small talk, he called his adjutant who came into the room and placed a small item on his desk. The general at this point, with great pomp and ceremony, announced that he was presenting me with the Mexican parachute badge as a token of friendship and cooperation between us. He then told me (showing off, letting me know that he had his intel!) that he knew that I was a U.S. Army veteran and that I had served with the Special Forces. He said that he too was a former Special Forces and that we were brothers in arms. I thanked him for his gift (I could have bought a Mexican parachute badge at any Army/Navy store for $5 if I wanted!) and we made some more small talk. Then he suddenly announced that he had been approached by the drug cartel and offered a million dollars a year to be their man, but he had refused! He said that it was more important for him to be a good, honorable soldier, and serve his patria (country) loyally!
I had heard that he was in the pocket of the drug cartel. The DEA had suspected his involvement for some time but had no proof. Hearing his declaration about turning down the drug cartel offer, made me suspect that perhaps he was involved after all. When I returned to my office, I immediately launched into checking on the "honest" general. It took some time, for I had to get information from local sources. But eventually, within the next few months, I learned that he was indeed being paid by the cartel to leave them alone and in fact facilitate the flow of drugs across the border. He was not being paid a million dollars as he claimed he was offered, he was paid two million a year, a million every six months!
The problem in Mexico, as I learned in my three years there, is the endemic corruption within the official community. It is a given that minor police officials are paid off by drug cartels, but it was a real eye opener to learn how many of the officials in higher places were making a fortune getting paid by the drug cartels, and it is still going on and will continue! A Mexican friend told me that there was a popular saying in that country. It goes, "para ser millionario, primero tiene que ser el presidente del pais!" ("to become a millionaire, you have to first become the president of the country!"). How sad but true! Until the widespread corruption is eliminated in Mexico, the drugs and the illegal migrants will continue to flow into the United States!
Just about all of the drugs coming out of Colombia flowed into the United States by way of Panama and Mexico. Both of these locations became important transit points for drug trafficking and slimy characters like Manuel Noriega in Panama, became not only rich, but politically powerful from their involvement in the drug trade. However, by 1990, Noriega was ousted when we launched the Operation Just Cause and captured and imprisoned the Panamanian strongman. It wasn't long after that Pablo Escobar died and the Medellin Cartel began to crumble. By mid 1990's, the Medellin Cartel was no more and Cali Cartel was falling apart as well. Yet, the drugs continued to flow into the United States unabated! Apparently someone else had taken over for the Colombians and that someone else were the Mexican Cartels.
The Mexican Cartels which were just intermediaries, handling the onward shipment of drugs before the fall of the Colombians, were now the ones who were paying the growers in Colombia and handling the whole process from start to finish. The Mexicans began with their cartel in Guadalajara and moved westward with Juarez Cartel on to the Michoacan and Tijuana Cartel. All Mexican Cartels were just as violent and ruthless as the Colombians, if not more so, if it was possible!
So, when I was assigned to Tijuana in 1997 out of Cairo, I spent a considerable amount of time getting briefed about drug activity in my area, i.e., Baja California Norte and Baja California Sur. Having served previously both in Ecuador and Paraguay in South America, I was already quite familiar with drug trafficking problem and all the key players in the business. So it was not a surprise for me to learn just how violent and ruthless the drug traffickers were in my area, run by the Arellano Felix Cartel. There were shootings and killings taking place almost daily, according to the reports that I read and the briefings I got from DEA, Tijuana and other larger cities in Baja were like the old wild west!
Upon arrival in Tijuana I started with my courtesy calls on various officials in the area, a standard Foreign Service practice. Because I was a "guest" in their country and city, I had to initiate the contact. I first paid a call on the Governor of Baja California, a gracious gentleman with old world courtly manners. He assured me that everything was under control and that the drug traffickers were not a problem and that common street gangs were responsible for violence. My visit with the Mayor of Tijuana also proved to be somewhat fruitless, a pleasant social chit chat. He also told me that all the talk about the violent drug cartel activities were greatly exaggerated. He said that being a native son of Tijuana, he was well aware that Tijuana always attracted undesirables who caused problems. He even hinted that most problems were caused by folks from across the border!
My final courtesy call was on the Commanding General of the Segunda Zona Militar (Second Military Zone) located in Tijuana. The Segunda Zona Militar covers the Mexican states of Baja California and Sonora and is commanded by a Major General. Mexico is divided into twelve military regions which in turn are split into military zones or zonas militares. Ostensibly, each region is commanded by a Lieutenant General, a three star, and each zone is commanded by a Major General, a two star, or a Brigadier General, a one star, depending on the size of the zone. Obviously, the second zone, the segunda zona was large enough to call for a two star.
The Major General in command of the segunda zona was a short stocky gentleman in his early fifties. According to his biography, he was a product of the Mexican Military Academy and was considered a rising star. He had served with the Mexican Airborne Brigade and later commanded a Special Forces battalion. The job as a Commanding General of the segunda zona was a plum assignment that many Mexican generals sought and rarely received! Although, according to Mexican law the military is subservient to the civilian officials, I knew that the military had much more power than, for instance, our military. The Commanding General of the segunda zona had more power than the Governor of Baja! That's just how things are in Latin America!
The Commanding General met me, wearing a field uniform, fatigues as U.S. Army used to call, almost a dead ringer for our Vietnam era fatigues! His name tape above the right pocket and the Mexican army tape above the left pocket were of "subdued" type, just like ours. The only things that were different were the parachute badge that he had above the left pocket and the Major General insignias on his collar.
After the initial handshaking and small talk, he called his adjutant who came into the room and placed a small item on his desk. The general at this point, with great pomp and ceremony, announced that he was presenting me with the Mexican parachute badge as a token of friendship and cooperation between us. He then told me (showing off, letting me know that he had his intel!) that he knew that I was a U.S. Army veteran and that I had served with the Special Forces. He said that he too was a former Special Forces and that we were brothers in arms. I thanked him for his gift (I could have bought a Mexican parachute badge at any Army/Navy store for $5 if I wanted!) and we made some more small talk. Then he suddenly announced that he had been approached by the drug cartel and offered a million dollars a year to be their man, but he had refused! He said that it was more important for him to be a good, honorable soldier, and serve his patria (country) loyally!
I had heard that he was in the pocket of the drug cartel. The DEA had suspected his involvement for some time but had no proof. Hearing his declaration about turning down the drug cartel offer, made me suspect that perhaps he was involved after all. When I returned to my office, I immediately launched into checking on the "honest" general. It took some time, for I had to get information from local sources. But eventually, within the next few months, I learned that he was indeed being paid by the cartel to leave them alone and in fact facilitate the flow of drugs across the border. He was not being paid a million dollars as he claimed he was offered, he was paid two million a year, a million every six months!
The problem in Mexico, as I learned in my three years there, is the endemic corruption within the official community. It is a given that minor police officials are paid off by drug cartels, but it was a real eye opener to learn how many of the officials in higher places were making a fortune getting paid by the drug cartels, and it is still going on and will continue! A Mexican friend told me that there was a popular saying in that country. It goes, "para ser millionario, primero tiene que ser el presidente del pais!" ("to become a millionaire, you have to first become the president of the country!"). How sad but true! Until the widespread corruption is eliminated in Mexico, the drugs and the illegal migrants will continue to flow into the United States!
Wednesday, September 16, 2015
The Waffen SS
The Nazi Waffen SS has been written about and shown in movies and television shows more than enough times that most Americans are familiar as to who or what they were. Just in case anyone may need a refresher on the subject, the Waffen SS, which literally means in German "armed" SS or armed Schutzstaffel, began life as the bodyguards for the Nazi party under the organization and leadership of the notorious Heinrich Himmler. However, it soon grew to a much bigger organization and by the time World War Two was launched by Hitler, the Waffen SS had regular Panzer and infantry divisions fighting alongside the regular army, the German Wermacht. However, they were never a part of the army and were answerable only to Himmler, not the regular army generals!
The SS had a very nasty reputation even among Germans. The regular army, Wermacht, did not like them and considered them in the same category as the hated Gestapo! The SS wore a distinctive black uniform rather than the standard gray or dark green worn by the Wermacht. They also had the distinctive stylized letters SS as collar insignia which was commonly referred to as the "lightning bolts." The German component of the SS also wore the "death's head" or the skull and cross bones insignia. All in all, not a nice bunch and not to be confused with the regular army and professional soldiers of the Wermacht! The infamous concentration or death camps where those horrible extermination of Jews took place were all manned and guarded by the SS! In short, those terrible war criminals such as Joseph Mengele were all members of the SS. Mengele may have been a medical doctor, but he was an SS doctor!
As I said in the beginning, the American public has seen and read enough about the SS to be familiar, to at least know that they were not nice people! However, despite all the movies and TV shows and books, what most people are unaware of is that the vast majority of SS troops were not German! Most certainly Joseph Mengele, Adolph Eichman, and other notorious SS figures were German, however, there were many others that were captured and tried as war criminals that were not German. Despite all the talk about "super race" and superiority of German people, etc., the Nazis were not above recruiting and using none Germans, even those that they considered "sub-human" such as the Russians, and non-Caucasian ethnic minorities, people of "color," to fill the ranks of the SS! Roughly 70% of the SS was made up of none Germans! The Nazis tried to convince everyone that it was a smaller number, more like 60%, but still, even in trying to doctor the numbers, the majority came out as none German.
At the height of World War Two, the SS was represented by more than 24 different countries and nationalities. At its peak, Germany had 38 SS Divisions of which more than 25 Divisions were entirely composed of none Germans, except for the very top leadership! That's an awful lot of foreigners in Germany's supposed elite forces! An average army division consists of about 10,000 men, some a bit more, some a bit less. So, using that figure as average, there were at least 250,000 or quarter of a million SS soldiers that were none German! That's an awful lot of soldiers, about like what the Pentagon is planning on having in our Army in the near future, and larger than our entire Marine Corps!
Hungary, for example (incidentally, Hungary was Germany's ally) provided four SS Divisions and one SS Battalion, the 61st, 63rd, 32nd, and 25th SS Divisions and the 25th SS Battalion. The 25th Waffen SS Grenadier Division, known as the Hunyadi 1st Hungarian, was considered to be elite even among SS! All in all, there were about 40,000 Hungarians serving in the Waffen SS. Other countries that had significant representation in the SS and had independent SS Divisions were: Estonia, Latvia, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Ukraine, Rumania, Albania, Spain, France, and even countries such as Azerbaijan, to name a few! Balkan regions was well represented, just about all Balkan countries provided troops for the SS. Azerbaijan had the largest contingent, some 70,000 served in the SS! Believe it or not, there were members from the UK, Ireland, India even! These were not large numbers, UK had something like sixty in all, not enough to form an independent unit, but nevertheless, there were volunteers from POW camps that represented UK. Even U.S. had four volunteers from POW camps.
So, the idea that all of those nasty SS types were blond and blue eyed Germans is but a myth. Turns out that vast majority of SS were none German, some were not even European, with the largest single group of 70,000 being Muslim, from Azerbaijan! Quite a different story from what Hollywood script writers like to present!
After the war the allies made a concerted effort to not divulge the facts about the make up of SS. Frankly, it would have caused problems in many European countries if the general population found out that so many of their countrymen fought for the bad guys! As for UK, despite the very small numbers, still, it would have been an embarrassment had the numbers been released. The same applies to Soviet Union. We were "allies" with Soviet Union and did not want to embarrass them and Stalin definitely did not want his people to know that there were so many "traitors." An entire Cossack Division defected to the Nazis and became an SS Cossack Division! They were all very strong anti communists and agreed to fight only on the eastern front against the communists, not against the Western Allies. When the war ended they surrendered to the U.S. troops. We promised not to turn them over to the Soviets, but after some pressure from Stalin, we shipped them off to Soviet Union where they were promptly all executed. Ukraine also had a very large contingent that volunteered for the SS to fight the Soviets. Perhaps Putin is trying to pay back after all these years!
So, history does not always give an accurate account of what took place. As I mentioned in some of my earlier blogs, the victors always shape history in their favor. It would not have been good PR to divulge the fact that so many of the "allies" actually volunteered and fought on the German side, not only as just soldiers, but as soldiers of the dreaded, and hated SS!
The SS had a very nasty reputation even among Germans. The regular army, Wermacht, did not like them and considered them in the same category as the hated Gestapo! The SS wore a distinctive black uniform rather than the standard gray or dark green worn by the Wermacht. They also had the distinctive stylized letters SS as collar insignia which was commonly referred to as the "lightning bolts." The German component of the SS also wore the "death's head" or the skull and cross bones insignia. All in all, not a nice bunch and not to be confused with the regular army and professional soldiers of the Wermacht! The infamous concentration or death camps where those horrible extermination of Jews took place were all manned and guarded by the SS! In short, those terrible war criminals such as Joseph Mengele were all members of the SS. Mengele may have been a medical doctor, but he was an SS doctor!
As I said in the beginning, the American public has seen and read enough about the SS to be familiar, to at least know that they were not nice people! However, despite all the movies and TV shows and books, what most people are unaware of is that the vast majority of SS troops were not German! Most certainly Joseph Mengele, Adolph Eichman, and other notorious SS figures were German, however, there were many others that were captured and tried as war criminals that were not German. Despite all the talk about "super race" and superiority of German people, etc., the Nazis were not above recruiting and using none Germans, even those that they considered "sub-human" such as the Russians, and non-Caucasian ethnic minorities, people of "color," to fill the ranks of the SS! Roughly 70% of the SS was made up of none Germans! The Nazis tried to convince everyone that it was a smaller number, more like 60%, but still, even in trying to doctor the numbers, the majority came out as none German.
At the height of World War Two, the SS was represented by more than 24 different countries and nationalities. At its peak, Germany had 38 SS Divisions of which more than 25 Divisions were entirely composed of none Germans, except for the very top leadership! That's an awful lot of foreigners in Germany's supposed elite forces! An average army division consists of about 10,000 men, some a bit more, some a bit less. So, using that figure as average, there were at least 250,000 or quarter of a million SS soldiers that were none German! That's an awful lot of soldiers, about like what the Pentagon is planning on having in our Army in the near future, and larger than our entire Marine Corps!
Hungary, for example (incidentally, Hungary was Germany's ally) provided four SS Divisions and one SS Battalion, the 61st, 63rd, 32nd, and 25th SS Divisions and the 25th SS Battalion. The 25th Waffen SS Grenadier Division, known as the Hunyadi 1st Hungarian, was considered to be elite even among SS! All in all, there were about 40,000 Hungarians serving in the Waffen SS. Other countries that had significant representation in the SS and had independent SS Divisions were: Estonia, Latvia, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Ukraine, Rumania, Albania, Spain, France, and even countries such as Azerbaijan, to name a few! Balkan regions was well represented, just about all Balkan countries provided troops for the SS. Azerbaijan had the largest contingent, some 70,000 served in the SS! Believe it or not, there were members from the UK, Ireland, India even! These were not large numbers, UK had something like sixty in all, not enough to form an independent unit, but nevertheless, there were volunteers from POW camps that represented UK. Even U.S. had four volunteers from POW camps.
So, the idea that all of those nasty SS types were blond and blue eyed Germans is but a myth. Turns out that vast majority of SS were none German, some were not even European, with the largest single group of 70,000 being Muslim, from Azerbaijan! Quite a different story from what Hollywood script writers like to present!
After the war the allies made a concerted effort to not divulge the facts about the make up of SS. Frankly, it would have caused problems in many European countries if the general population found out that so many of their countrymen fought for the bad guys! As for UK, despite the very small numbers, still, it would have been an embarrassment had the numbers been released. The same applies to Soviet Union. We were "allies" with Soviet Union and did not want to embarrass them and Stalin definitely did not want his people to know that there were so many "traitors." An entire Cossack Division defected to the Nazis and became an SS Cossack Division! They were all very strong anti communists and agreed to fight only on the eastern front against the communists, not against the Western Allies. When the war ended they surrendered to the U.S. troops. We promised not to turn them over to the Soviets, but after some pressure from Stalin, we shipped them off to Soviet Union where they were promptly all executed. Ukraine also had a very large contingent that volunteered for the SS to fight the Soviets. Perhaps Putin is trying to pay back after all these years!
So, history does not always give an accurate account of what took place. As I mentioned in some of my earlier blogs, the victors always shape history in their favor. It would not have been good PR to divulge the fact that so many of the "allies" actually volunteered and fought on the German side, not only as just soldiers, but as soldiers of the dreaded, and hated SS!
Saturday, September 12, 2015
Syrian Refugee Problem
Rarely do I agree with our policies in the Middle East. However, I do agree with the recent announcement by the White House that U.S. will take only 10,000 Syrian refugees. This offer by the U.S. quite naturally was met with criticism from European countries as well as our own liberal news media. Everyone is pointing to the fact that European countries (actually only some!) are taking twice that number of refugees. Quite naturally, those heart wrenching news footages of refugees being herded like animals in Hungary has brought out some deep emotions from viewers. Some have gone on record (on TV) making an offer to take in a refugee family. The feeling, no doubt is that if individual families are willing to do this, why can't our government be more generous in its offer to take in refugees.
Let's set aside our emotions and look at the entire picture, beginning with how this whole mess started. In the spring of 2011, some Arab countries primarily in North Africa, rose up against oppressive regimes. In the Middle East, it was in Syria. This phenomena is referred to as the "Arab Spring," a name that was coined by the news media. Governments toppled and changed in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya. Mubarak, the long time Egyptian dictator was gone and Tunisian government had to change. In Libya, our long time foe and one of the terrorist supporters in the region, Colonel Gaddafi, was overthrown and killed along with his two sons. However, in Syria, the attempt to oust Bashar Al-Assad failed. It failed mainly because the rebels did not get outside support. In Libya, both U.S. and UK as well as France provided air support for the rebels and established a no-fly zone, but in Syria, no one helped the rebels. That was one of our foreign policy failings, since now we have to deal with ISIS that is operating in Syria as well as Iraq.
The problem in Syria was a European problem. We urged Europe, i.e., NATO countries to help the rebels. Had the European countries thrown their support for rebels, we would have also, as part of NATO, been involved. However, with our commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, we could ill afford to go into Syria on our own, as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan initially, or so our government thought. However, the Europeans haggled and argued, but refused to intervene on behalf of the rebels. We warned them that this would become a major problem for them unless they stepped-in, but they refused. At that point, since the Europeans were just talking and sitting on their hands, we should have done something, especially since Al-Assad crossed the "thin red line" on a number of occasions. We should have at least done more than what we did, which was nothing. Result? ISIS grew stronger and Putin became bolder and sent arms to Syria. But that is all water under the bridge now. The problem is global, yes, but it is still primarily European! We cannot be policemen everywhere, Europe has to do its share!
The liberal press that is accusing the U.S. for not doing enough apparently hasn't done its homework. If you look at the figures of amount a aide that has been provided for the Syrian refugees, the U.S. leads head and shoulders above everyone. We have so far spent almost 3 billion dollars in helping the Syrian refugees. UK is the next closest donor with around 800 million dollars and Germany at around 600 million dollars. Yes folks, all that money that we gave so far all came from American tax payers, you and me! So now the Europeans are accusing us of not doing enough?
Have any of those European countries offered to take our illegal aliens? Not hardly!
It is said that there are over 4 million displaced Syrian refugees scattered about, the largest numbers are in neighboring countries like Turkey and Lebanon. Europe is facing close to 800,000 Syrian refugees who wish to settle primarily in UK, Germany and France. So, UK offers to take 20,000 and France and Germany 24,000 each. Hungary, which is a transit country for the refugees will not take any, and one other neighboring country announced that it would take a few thousand, but only those that are Christian! Ironically, this harkens back to some 40 years earlier and the Vietnamese refugee (boat people) problem. At that time, having been involved for a period with the resettlement of Vietnamese refugees, I am very much aware of the kind of response we got from European countries when we asked for help. Only France was willing to take Vietnamese refugees. Other European countries said that it was our problem, that we were the ones who created the situation with our war! Some who said that they would take Vietnamese only if they spoke their language and were professionals! Yes, they were very helpful, and now they are crying foul because we offered to take only 10,000 instead of the whole lot! Our press, of course, doesn't care and will criticize whatever we do, and apparently does not do research and homework.
What Europe is facing is a drop in the bucket compared to the problem we have with illegal aliens. Yet, has any European country stepped up and offered to take our illegal aliens. I would have thought Spain would have been the logical candidate to take illegal Hispanics, but Spain has been quite mum about the whole thing. In the 1980s we were facing an onslaught of about 130,000 illegals annually. That number increased to 450,000 a year in the 1990s. Since the new century, we have been getting between 700,000 to 850,000 illegals per year! Our "official" number of illegals residing within our borders is somewhere around 10 million. In reality, it is more like 12 to 20 million! All you have to do is do simple math and add up the numbers! With those kind of numbers, many scholars predict that by mid 2000s, the majority of our population will be Hispanic because of the illegal alien influx. Already there are states that have a majority population that is Hispanic. I believe that at this rate it will take less time than mid century to turn this country into Hispanic majority. Europe, on the other hand, will probably become majority Muslim!
Let's set aside our emotions and look at the entire picture, beginning with how this whole mess started. In the spring of 2011, some Arab countries primarily in North Africa, rose up against oppressive regimes. In the Middle East, it was in Syria. This phenomena is referred to as the "Arab Spring," a name that was coined by the news media. Governments toppled and changed in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya. Mubarak, the long time Egyptian dictator was gone and Tunisian government had to change. In Libya, our long time foe and one of the terrorist supporters in the region, Colonel Gaddafi, was overthrown and killed along with his two sons. However, in Syria, the attempt to oust Bashar Al-Assad failed. It failed mainly because the rebels did not get outside support. In Libya, both U.S. and UK as well as France provided air support for the rebels and established a no-fly zone, but in Syria, no one helped the rebels. That was one of our foreign policy failings, since now we have to deal with ISIS that is operating in Syria as well as Iraq.
The problem in Syria was a European problem. We urged Europe, i.e., NATO countries to help the rebels. Had the European countries thrown their support for rebels, we would have also, as part of NATO, been involved. However, with our commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, we could ill afford to go into Syria on our own, as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan initially, or so our government thought. However, the Europeans haggled and argued, but refused to intervene on behalf of the rebels. We warned them that this would become a major problem for them unless they stepped-in, but they refused. At that point, since the Europeans were just talking and sitting on their hands, we should have done something, especially since Al-Assad crossed the "thin red line" on a number of occasions. We should have at least done more than what we did, which was nothing. Result? ISIS grew stronger and Putin became bolder and sent arms to Syria. But that is all water under the bridge now. The problem is global, yes, but it is still primarily European! We cannot be policemen everywhere, Europe has to do its share!
The liberal press that is accusing the U.S. for not doing enough apparently hasn't done its homework. If you look at the figures of amount a aide that has been provided for the Syrian refugees, the U.S. leads head and shoulders above everyone. We have so far spent almost 3 billion dollars in helping the Syrian refugees. UK is the next closest donor with around 800 million dollars and Germany at around 600 million dollars. Yes folks, all that money that we gave so far all came from American tax payers, you and me! So now the Europeans are accusing us of not doing enough?
Have any of those European countries offered to take our illegal aliens? Not hardly!
It is said that there are over 4 million displaced Syrian refugees scattered about, the largest numbers are in neighboring countries like Turkey and Lebanon. Europe is facing close to 800,000 Syrian refugees who wish to settle primarily in UK, Germany and France. So, UK offers to take 20,000 and France and Germany 24,000 each. Hungary, which is a transit country for the refugees will not take any, and one other neighboring country announced that it would take a few thousand, but only those that are Christian! Ironically, this harkens back to some 40 years earlier and the Vietnamese refugee (boat people) problem. At that time, having been involved for a period with the resettlement of Vietnamese refugees, I am very much aware of the kind of response we got from European countries when we asked for help. Only France was willing to take Vietnamese refugees. Other European countries said that it was our problem, that we were the ones who created the situation with our war! Some who said that they would take Vietnamese only if they spoke their language and were professionals! Yes, they were very helpful, and now they are crying foul because we offered to take only 10,000 instead of the whole lot! Our press, of course, doesn't care and will criticize whatever we do, and apparently does not do research and homework.
What Europe is facing is a drop in the bucket compared to the problem we have with illegal aliens. Yet, has any European country stepped up and offered to take our illegal aliens. I would have thought Spain would have been the logical candidate to take illegal Hispanics, but Spain has been quite mum about the whole thing. In the 1980s we were facing an onslaught of about 130,000 illegals annually. That number increased to 450,000 a year in the 1990s. Since the new century, we have been getting between 700,000 to 850,000 illegals per year! Our "official" number of illegals residing within our borders is somewhere around 10 million. In reality, it is more like 12 to 20 million! All you have to do is do simple math and add up the numbers! With those kind of numbers, many scholars predict that by mid 2000s, the majority of our population will be Hispanic because of the illegal alien influx. Already there are states that have a majority population that is Hispanic. I believe that at this rate it will take less time than mid century to turn this country into Hispanic majority. Europe, on the other hand, will probably become majority Muslim!
Thursday, September 10, 2015
Iran and the "Nuclear Deal"
Well, as I feared, it appears that the so-called Iran Nuclear Deal will pass and Obama will hold a celebration dinner, perhaps at the next Iftar, and invite Iranian leaders, who knows. At any rate it seems he will establish some sort of a legacy, not quite like Jimmy Carter and the Camp David Accords, but something that at least his administration will claim is of equal importance, and reams of paperwork will go into Obama Presidential Library that will be set up.
What is most amazing about this so-called deal that "prevented war," is that the rhetoric coming out of Iran is even more belligerent and ominous now than it was before the deal! While the proponents of the deal are performing a celebratory jig, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei is spewing out some very disturbing verbiage, such as, "Israel won't last the next 25 years," and "We will not negotiate with the Great Satan (the U.S, with whom they just made this terrific deal!) and will not allow it into Iran!" He can't even address us by our proper name!
Let's take a quick look at this "great deal" that we struck with Iran, at three major points:
1. Can Iran make nuclear weapons under this new agreement? Theoretically, no, but only if they don't cheat. But who says they won't cheat? There are no guarantees.
2. When will the sanctions be lifted allowing Iran to benefit the harvest of billions in cash and oil revenue? Some have already been lifted, and the bulk within a year or so.
3. Can we inspect any facility any time? No. We must first secure permission with Iran to allow the IAEA to inspect. We must then give them at least a 24 hour notice and in case of new facilities, they have a right to deny our request! (some deal, huh?) Oh, and in some of their more sensitive facilities, they are allowed to "self inspect." In other words, their technicians will gather material which will be presented to the IAEA for inspection!
I have never been one for "party line" voting. On crucial issues, I believe crossing the party line should be the norm for our politicians, unfortunately, such is not the case. It appears that everyone is sticking to their party line and all Democrats are voting for the "deal." I am disappointed, even presidential hopefuls are sticking to the party line, the only exception being Hillary Clinton who is now scrambling to survive after her email fiasco and is making noises such as, "I do not trust Iranians." An interesting comment coming from a former Secretary of State. Apparently the current Secretary of State does not share her feelings and does "trust" the Iranians.
Neither the White House nor the Secretary of State have been able to give a satisfactory response to points numbers 2 and 3. When questions are posed in that category, they are usually deftly swept aside with some general response. On point number one, both the White House and the Secretary of State respond by saying that if or should Iran cheat, we have the capability to "militarily" neutralize the problem. OK, fine and dandy, we have the stealth bombers and smart bombs to do the job, but why give the Iranians the opportunity to beef up their defenses so our job will be much more difficult, should we be forced to use a military option? The money that they receive from lifted sanctions allow them to buy defensive hardware that could cost American lives. They have already signed a contract to buy a sophisticated anti missile system from Russia, and I am sure there is much more to come. At the same time, if they cheat, and there is a good chance that they will, they will be that much closer to developing a nuclear weapon.
I know, we are not supposed to compare apples to oranges, and according to what we're told, North Korea is a completely different story. Really? I don't think so. We struck a "good deal" with North Korea and guess what, they cheated and now have nuclear weapons! Perhaps because North Koreans are godless communists they are much more prone to cheating and Iranians being devout Muslims will not cheat. If you believe that, which apparently our government does, than we are indeed in deep trouble. Our government and politicians have always been viewed as somewhat naïve by our adversaries, and that trend seems to be continuing.
If you listen to the words of Ayatollah Khamenei, you get the impression that he and his countrymen have no respect for or fear of the United States. After all, if you refer to a country as the "Great Satan," don't even call it by its proper name, it should give you an idea as to what they think of America. Never mind that the general population professes to "love" the American people, they just don't like our government, etc. The bottom line is, there is no love lost, and no respect!
Putin has demonstrated the same distain for our government. He first found that our hard line talk, the so-called threat to do something if you cross the "thin red line" amounted to nothing. He quietly watched how we reacted or didn't act when the Syrian crisis first unfolded. The "thin red line" was crossed multiple times since that first announcement by Obama and to this date nothing has been done. So, he grabs Crimea from Ukraine....nothing happens. He encourages separatists in Ukraine to wage war to gain territory, and nothing happens. The so-called separatists are actually Russian Special Forces, the Spetznaz, but never mind, they claim they are separatists. Next, as soon as we ink the deal with Iran, he signs a contract to deliver a sophisticated anti missile defense system to Iran. We protest and send a couple hundred tanks to Europe, that must have really scared him. The latest Putin saga is the shipment of tank landing crafts and Russian troops to Syria! Oh well, their definition of the "thin red line" is obviously different from that of the White House.
In the meantime, to counter the growing ISIS threat, we have partnered with Turkey, both for use of their territory to launch our aircraft and for Turkish military to engage ISIS. Of course the Turks have no love of Kurds and are paranoid that the Kurds might gain autonomy and a huge chunk of real estate and establish an independent state of Kurdistan. The Turks are fighting and killing Kurds. Up until now, the Kurds have been the only ones we could trust to fight ISIS and they were the only ones who seem to have some success. Now, it seems, the Kurds have been set aside, sort of. That's a nice way of saying they were sold down the river! This would be akin to us dumping the Montagnards and the Nungs and putting all our marbles in the Vietnamese basket. Oh wait, we did that, didn't we?
Ah, the poor Kurds....they are the Montagnards and the Nungs of the Middle East. The Nungs survived by melting into local Chinese populations and joining the opium army in the Golden Triangle. The Montagnards? Some of them are still fighting, others are retreating further and further into the hills. The Kurds, unlike the Montagnards, are much more organized and better suited to survive in the modern world. They will survive despite what the Turks might do to them, but that won't endear us to them! We betrayed them after the first Gulf War when we left them to be slaughtered by Saddam Hussein. We betrayed them again in Iraqi Freedom (second Gulf War) when we abruptly pulled our support and left them in the hands of the incompetent, and Kurd hating Maliki. Now, we are leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turks. Interesting foreign policy that we are employing in the Middle East, and we wonder why it is such a mess.
What is most amazing about this so-called deal that "prevented war," is that the rhetoric coming out of Iran is even more belligerent and ominous now than it was before the deal! While the proponents of the deal are performing a celebratory jig, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei is spewing out some very disturbing verbiage, such as, "Israel won't last the next 25 years," and "We will not negotiate with the Great Satan (the U.S, with whom they just made this terrific deal!) and will not allow it into Iran!" He can't even address us by our proper name!
Let's take a quick look at this "great deal" that we struck with Iran, at three major points:
1. Can Iran make nuclear weapons under this new agreement? Theoretically, no, but only if they don't cheat. But who says they won't cheat? There are no guarantees.
2. When will the sanctions be lifted allowing Iran to benefit the harvest of billions in cash and oil revenue? Some have already been lifted, and the bulk within a year or so.
3. Can we inspect any facility any time? No. We must first secure permission with Iran to allow the IAEA to inspect. We must then give them at least a 24 hour notice and in case of new facilities, they have a right to deny our request! (some deal, huh?) Oh, and in some of their more sensitive facilities, they are allowed to "self inspect." In other words, their technicians will gather material which will be presented to the IAEA for inspection!
I have never been one for "party line" voting. On crucial issues, I believe crossing the party line should be the norm for our politicians, unfortunately, such is not the case. It appears that everyone is sticking to their party line and all Democrats are voting for the "deal." I am disappointed, even presidential hopefuls are sticking to the party line, the only exception being Hillary Clinton who is now scrambling to survive after her email fiasco and is making noises such as, "I do not trust Iranians." An interesting comment coming from a former Secretary of State. Apparently the current Secretary of State does not share her feelings and does "trust" the Iranians.
Neither the White House nor the Secretary of State have been able to give a satisfactory response to points numbers 2 and 3. When questions are posed in that category, they are usually deftly swept aside with some general response. On point number one, both the White House and the Secretary of State respond by saying that if or should Iran cheat, we have the capability to "militarily" neutralize the problem. OK, fine and dandy, we have the stealth bombers and smart bombs to do the job, but why give the Iranians the opportunity to beef up their defenses so our job will be much more difficult, should we be forced to use a military option? The money that they receive from lifted sanctions allow them to buy defensive hardware that could cost American lives. They have already signed a contract to buy a sophisticated anti missile system from Russia, and I am sure there is much more to come. At the same time, if they cheat, and there is a good chance that they will, they will be that much closer to developing a nuclear weapon.
I know, we are not supposed to compare apples to oranges, and according to what we're told, North Korea is a completely different story. Really? I don't think so. We struck a "good deal" with North Korea and guess what, they cheated and now have nuclear weapons! Perhaps because North Koreans are godless communists they are much more prone to cheating and Iranians being devout Muslims will not cheat. If you believe that, which apparently our government does, than we are indeed in deep trouble. Our government and politicians have always been viewed as somewhat naïve by our adversaries, and that trend seems to be continuing.
If you listen to the words of Ayatollah Khamenei, you get the impression that he and his countrymen have no respect for or fear of the United States. After all, if you refer to a country as the "Great Satan," don't even call it by its proper name, it should give you an idea as to what they think of America. Never mind that the general population professes to "love" the American people, they just don't like our government, etc. The bottom line is, there is no love lost, and no respect!
Putin has demonstrated the same distain for our government. He first found that our hard line talk, the so-called threat to do something if you cross the "thin red line" amounted to nothing. He quietly watched how we reacted or didn't act when the Syrian crisis first unfolded. The "thin red line" was crossed multiple times since that first announcement by Obama and to this date nothing has been done. So, he grabs Crimea from Ukraine....nothing happens. He encourages separatists in Ukraine to wage war to gain territory, and nothing happens. The so-called separatists are actually Russian Special Forces, the Spetznaz, but never mind, they claim they are separatists. Next, as soon as we ink the deal with Iran, he signs a contract to deliver a sophisticated anti missile defense system to Iran. We protest and send a couple hundred tanks to Europe, that must have really scared him. The latest Putin saga is the shipment of tank landing crafts and Russian troops to Syria! Oh well, their definition of the "thin red line" is obviously different from that of the White House.
In the meantime, to counter the growing ISIS threat, we have partnered with Turkey, both for use of their territory to launch our aircraft and for Turkish military to engage ISIS. Of course the Turks have no love of Kurds and are paranoid that the Kurds might gain autonomy and a huge chunk of real estate and establish an independent state of Kurdistan. The Turks are fighting and killing Kurds. Up until now, the Kurds have been the only ones we could trust to fight ISIS and they were the only ones who seem to have some success. Now, it seems, the Kurds have been set aside, sort of. That's a nice way of saying they were sold down the river! This would be akin to us dumping the Montagnards and the Nungs and putting all our marbles in the Vietnamese basket. Oh wait, we did that, didn't we?
Ah, the poor Kurds....they are the Montagnards and the Nungs of the Middle East. The Nungs survived by melting into local Chinese populations and joining the opium army in the Golden Triangle. The Montagnards? Some of them are still fighting, others are retreating further and further into the hills. The Kurds, unlike the Montagnards, are much more organized and better suited to survive in the modern world. They will survive despite what the Turks might do to them, but that won't endear us to them! We betrayed them after the first Gulf War when we left them to be slaughtered by Saddam Hussein. We betrayed them again in Iraqi Freedom (second Gulf War) when we abruptly pulled our support and left them in the hands of the incompetent, and Kurd hating Maliki. Now, we are leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turks. Interesting foreign policy that we are employing in the Middle East, and we wonder why it is such a mess.
Monday, September 7, 2015
Popular Songs from Asia in America
In general, popular songs from other parts of the world do not do well in America. For one thing, since the end of World War Two, American pop culture has dominated the world scene among the young. Just look at the popularity of jeans, which until the 1960s were strictly an American wardrobe! Pop music (modern popular music like Rock and Roll), an American invention is now a standard everywhere with younger people. Every country has its own rock musicians, but only on rare occasions a popular song from another country will capture the interest of young Americans. Usually, songs from English speaking countries, Canada, UK and Australia are the ones that most often find their way into America. Even before the Beatles made a big splash here and subsequently all over the world, British pop artists would appear on our hit charts from time to time. Other European countries, most notably Germany, France, Italy, and some others periodically break into our pop charts. But Asian pop music has almost never made it in America, although interestingly enough, some songs do catch the fancy of American artists and are recorded on our shores.
In one of the earlier blogs I mentioned that Shirley Yamaguchi had recorded China Nights (shina no yoru) which became mildly popular in America back in 1940s. However, the domination of American popular culture and music made it very difficult for Asian pop music to break into American scene. Even in Asia, Americans tend to listen to American music and more or less ignore the local pop music. Such was and is the case for Americans living in Japan and Korea where FEN provides a steady diet of pop music from the states. On Okinawa, back in the day, there was even KSBK, a private commercial radio station that played American hit songs constantly. It is very doubtful if any of the American teenagers and G.I.s stationed in Japan and on Okinawa paid any attention or listened to local pop songs. However, as early as back in 1955, there were both Japanese and Chinese songs recorded in the states with English lyrics that made the hit charts.
In 1940s a popular Chinese song caught the ear of English and American listeners. The song called Meigui, Meigui, Wo Ai Ni (in Mandarin, "Rose, Rose, I Love You") became very popular at first with expats, but came across the ocean to gain some popularity in America and Europe. It was recorded in America by Frankie Laine and was called Rose, Rose, I Love You in 1955 and made our hit charts. In England and Europe it was recorded by different artists and called either Shanghai Rose or China Rose in different years. It was last recorded by Petula Clark in the 1960s. Also in 1955, Eartha Kitt recorded Sho-jo-ji, the "always hungry raccoon," a Japanese child's nursery rhyme that dates back to the 19th Century! Eartha Kitt's Sho-jo-ji made the charts at the same time as Disney's Mickey Mouse Club, the "Mouseketeers" sang this Japanese song with English lyrics.
It was almost a decade later, in 1963 that a Japanese pop hit became a number one hit in America. The song, Ue O Muite Aruku (literally translated "I Walk Looking Up") by the popular Japanese singer Kyu Sakamoto, a love song, became a hit as Sukiyaki! It is amazing that in America the title of the song was changed to a name of a "beef stew," hardly a romantic name and demonstrating incredible cultural ignorance. Yet, the young people who listened to it, ignored the improbable name, and liked the song despite its title. It was a huge hit and stayed on top of the pop charts for several weeks. Both the original song writers and Kyu Sakamoto were quite surprised by its reception in America and overall popularity around the world.
Even before Kyu Sakamoto's big hit, periodically, some Asian pop tune would appear briefly, disguised under a different (English) name, but none seem to catch on. Sometimes an adventurous disk jockey would try to promote a particular song. Usually the song was heard on a vacation in Asia or was brought over by a friend who had heard it in Asia. But, like I said earlier, they don't seem to be able to gain any sort of foothold. The latest Asian import was, of course, the Gangnam Style by the South Korean Psy. Gangnam Style caught the fancy of American youth as much for its frenetic dance movements as for its music. But, some Korean pop songs did get through, re-made in America! Korean popular music today, known as K-pop is probably the most popular of all Asian pop music in America, and in Asia itself it is extremely popular. But as long as American pop culture dominates the world youth scene as it has for more than half a century, songs from other countries will have a hard time breaking in.
In one of the earlier blogs I mentioned that Shirley Yamaguchi had recorded China Nights (shina no yoru) which became mildly popular in America back in 1940s. However, the domination of American popular culture and music made it very difficult for Asian pop music to break into American scene. Even in Asia, Americans tend to listen to American music and more or less ignore the local pop music. Such was and is the case for Americans living in Japan and Korea where FEN provides a steady diet of pop music from the states. On Okinawa, back in the day, there was even KSBK, a private commercial radio station that played American hit songs constantly. It is very doubtful if any of the American teenagers and G.I.s stationed in Japan and on Okinawa paid any attention or listened to local pop songs. However, as early as back in 1955, there were both Japanese and Chinese songs recorded in the states with English lyrics that made the hit charts.
In 1940s a popular Chinese song caught the ear of English and American listeners. The song called Meigui, Meigui, Wo Ai Ni (in Mandarin, "Rose, Rose, I Love You") became very popular at first with expats, but came across the ocean to gain some popularity in America and Europe. It was recorded in America by Frankie Laine and was called Rose, Rose, I Love You in 1955 and made our hit charts. In England and Europe it was recorded by different artists and called either Shanghai Rose or China Rose in different years. It was last recorded by Petula Clark in the 1960s. Also in 1955, Eartha Kitt recorded Sho-jo-ji, the "always hungry raccoon," a Japanese child's nursery rhyme that dates back to the 19th Century! Eartha Kitt's Sho-jo-ji made the charts at the same time as Disney's Mickey Mouse Club, the "Mouseketeers" sang this Japanese song with English lyrics.
It was almost a decade later, in 1963 that a Japanese pop hit became a number one hit in America. The song, Ue O Muite Aruku (literally translated "I Walk Looking Up") by the popular Japanese singer Kyu Sakamoto, a love song, became a hit as Sukiyaki! It is amazing that in America the title of the song was changed to a name of a "beef stew," hardly a romantic name and demonstrating incredible cultural ignorance. Yet, the young people who listened to it, ignored the improbable name, and liked the song despite its title. It was a huge hit and stayed on top of the pop charts for several weeks. Both the original song writers and Kyu Sakamoto were quite surprised by its reception in America and overall popularity around the world.
Even before Kyu Sakamoto's big hit, periodically, some Asian pop tune would appear briefly, disguised under a different (English) name, but none seem to catch on. Sometimes an adventurous disk jockey would try to promote a particular song. Usually the song was heard on a vacation in Asia or was brought over by a friend who had heard it in Asia. But, like I said earlier, they don't seem to be able to gain any sort of foothold. The latest Asian import was, of course, the Gangnam Style by the South Korean Psy. Gangnam Style caught the fancy of American youth as much for its frenetic dance movements as for its music. But, some Korean pop songs did get through, re-made in America! Korean popular music today, known as K-pop is probably the most popular of all Asian pop music in America, and in Asia itself it is extremely popular. But as long as American pop culture dominates the world youth scene as it has for more than half a century, songs from other countries will have a hard time breaking in.
Friday, September 4, 2015
Refugee Crisis in Eastern Europe and the News Media
By now everyone has seen the news footage of those unfortunate souls, the refugees from the Middle East who are trying to reach the "promise land" in Western Europe. It is interesting to see that our news media is staying completely neutral and not being critical of the handling of the situation by the Greeks on their outlying islands and the Hungarians on the European mainland. Had the same scenes played out on our southern border, you can just imagine the uproar from the liberal camp and how the news media would cover it. In the same token, the very same Europeans that have accused us of racist policies and unfair practices on our border are stringing barb wire and building fences and deploying police and troops to stop the refugees!
I would be very interested in hearing our European critics' explanation of their brutal handling of their "illegal alien" refugee problem. We do not leave our "undocumented immigrants" (translated, illegal aliens) on sidewalks and streets to sleep! We do not "pretend" to allow them to go on to their final destination, only to confine them on trains for the purpose of putting them in detention centers. Shades of Nazi tactics. Yes, we are terrible in our handling of our "undocumented immigrants." We feed them, provide them with bed and shelter, and when we deport them, we are accused of inhumane treatment and fascist, racist practices.
Although the refugee problem in Europe numbers in the thousands, it is still just a drop in the bucket compared to what we experience daily on our southern border! Ironically, the refugees in Europe are treated most harshly in what could be called, "transit" countries. They are not interested in staying in Hungary or Greece, they are all headed for the big three Western European countries, France, Germany, and UK. Yet, they are facing such obstacles from countries that they are just transiting! The refugees in Europe are indeed refugees, not illegal immigrants as the ones found here in America. Vast majority of the refugees in Europe are from Syria and some from Iraq, fleeing horrible, life threatening situations. Many of them would be killed either by ISIS or the Syrian government if they returned. Our illegal immigrants are economic refugees. They come here to seek better jobs. Although some from Central America claim that they are political refugees, most are simply looking for better work.
Strange, don't you think, how our own news media is so critical of our handling of the illegal alien situation here, but keeping mum on fascist tactics used in Europe! Oh sure, the coverage is there, especially heart wrenching scenes such as the body of the little boy that washed ashore. But notice how no accusing finger is pointed at local governments or how the situation is handled other than to say that the Greeks and the Hungarians are overwhelmed. Well, our Border Patrol and border states have been overwhelmed for nearly a half a century now, but still, the media accuses them of using harsh tactics and "racial profiling!" I am a bit confused on that part. Since just about all of the illegal border crossers are Hispanic, how do you not use "racial profiling" to try and apprehend the illegals?
Our news media is very selective on who and how they criticize or pick on a particular person or organization. The news media is supposed to be objective, but ours is very liberal and it is not objective! There is a definite trend to try and present a negative picture of the conservative side, as much as possible. Look at what is going on now. Liberal candidates with all sorts of baggage, including on going investigations are still given a pass by the media and no attempt is made to go after them. That is how Bill Clinton was able to survive the Monica Lewinsky scandal and impeachment! The news media left him alone, didn't go after him! On the other hand, when a conservative candidate makes one misstep in the use of a word or particular term, the news media is all over them.
I don't know how many of you saw the recent interview conducted by an NBC anchor with Jeb Bush, but it was pitifully obvious how the interviewer was trying to tie Jeb to what the media considers failed policies of his brother George W. A question was asked of Jeb if he thought there would be ISIS today if we had not gone into Iraq in 2003. The sad part about that question is that the NBC anchor obviously did not do his homework. ISIS or ISIL has been in existence since before our invasion of Iraq in 2003, four year earlier! It was founded by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in 1999 and was initially called Jama 'At Al-Tawahid Wal-Jihad before it changed its name to ISIS/ISIL. Someone like the news anchor for NBC should have known, but never mind, he just wanted to come up with something negative about the Bush family.
I hate to be so negative about our news media, but because they are not truly objective like they claim they are, it is hard to believe what they report. Unfortunately they wield tremendous influence in our society and have become the "king makers." The media has shown the ability to sway public opinion. There are many, perhaps the majority of our society, that are very much influenced by the media, by what they hear and see on television. So it is not a stretch to say that it is possible that our next president will be elected by the media!
I would be very interested in hearing our European critics' explanation of their brutal handling of their "illegal alien" refugee problem. We do not leave our "undocumented immigrants" (translated, illegal aliens) on sidewalks and streets to sleep! We do not "pretend" to allow them to go on to their final destination, only to confine them on trains for the purpose of putting them in detention centers. Shades of Nazi tactics. Yes, we are terrible in our handling of our "undocumented immigrants." We feed them, provide them with bed and shelter, and when we deport them, we are accused of inhumane treatment and fascist, racist practices.
Although the refugee problem in Europe numbers in the thousands, it is still just a drop in the bucket compared to what we experience daily on our southern border! Ironically, the refugees in Europe are treated most harshly in what could be called, "transit" countries. They are not interested in staying in Hungary or Greece, they are all headed for the big three Western European countries, France, Germany, and UK. Yet, they are facing such obstacles from countries that they are just transiting! The refugees in Europe are indeed refugees, not illegal immigrants as the ones found here in America. Vast majority of the refugees in Europe are from Syria and some from Iraq, fleeing horrible, life threatening situations. Many of them would be killed either by ISIS or the Syrian government if they returned. Our illegal immigrants are economic refugees. They come here to seek better jobs. Although some from Central America claim that they are political refugees, most are simply looking for better work.
Strange, don't you think, how our own news media is so critical of our handling of the illegal alien situation here, but keeping mum on fascist tactics used in Europe! Oh sure, the coverage is there, especially heart wrenching scenes such as the body of the little boy that washed ashore. But notice how no accusing finger is pointed at local governments or how the situation is handled other than to say that the Greeks and the Hungarians are overwhelmed. Well, our Border Patrol and border states have been overwhelmed for nearly a half a century now, but still, the media accuses them of using harsh tactics and "racial profiling!" I am a bit confused on that part. Since just about all of the illegal border crossers are Hispanic, how do you not use "racial profiling" to try and apprehend the illegals?
Our news media is very selective on who and how they criticize or pick on a particular person or organization. The news media is supposed to be objective, but ours is very liberal and it is not objective! There is a definite trend to try and present a negative picture of the conservative side, as much as possible. Look at what is going on now. Liberal candidates with all sorts of baggage, including on going investigations are still given a pass by the media and no attempt is made to go after them. That is how Bill Clinton was able to survive the Monica Lewinsky scandal and impeachment! The news media left him alone, didn't go after him! On the other hand, when a conservative candidate makes one misstep in the use of a word or particular term, the news media is all over them.
I don't know how many of you saw the recent interview conducted by an NBC anchor with Jeb Bush, but it was pitifully obvious how the interviewer was trying to tie Jeb to what the media considers failed policies of his brother George W. A question was asked of Jeb if he thought there would be ISIS today if we had not gone into Iraq in 2003. The sad part about that question is that the NBC anchor obviously did not do his homework. ISIS or ISIL has been in existence since before our invasion of Iraq in 2003, four year earlier! It was founded by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi in 1999 and was initially called Jama 'At Al-Tawahid Wal-Jihad before it changed its name to ISIS/ISIL. Someone like the news anchor for NBC should have known, but never mind, he just wanted to come up with something negative about the Bush family.
I hate to be so negative about our news media, but because they are not truly objective like they claim they are, it is hard to believe what they report. Unfortunately they wield tremendous influence in our society and have become the "king makers." The media has shown the ability to sway public opinion. There are many, perhaps the majority of our society, that are very much influenced by the media, by what they hear and see on television. So it is not a stretch to say that it is possible that our next president will be elected by the media!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)