A US-Mexican wallPresident Bush is looking to have Congress approve a border wall aimed at keeping illegal immigrants from slipping across the US-Mexican border. The Mexican gov't says that this wall is a sign of racism and xenophobia. They can hide behind that all they want, but here is the reason why they do not support the wall:
Mexico has a population of 106 000 000, many of whom are uneducated and poor. These are the people who choose to move to the United States by crossing the border. As a result, Mexico gets rid of these poor and uneducated people, meaning they are not a burden. But if there is a wall, then it is kind of hard for these people to leave.
But they can not say this as it is not politically correct.
EUROPE TURNING RIGHT?
After the September 11th 2001 attacks, Europe was awakened to a problem: the presence of radical Islamists in Europe. Since that date, right-wing anti-immigrant parties have gained popularity in Europe.
-In many western European nations, right-wing parties have been gaining in popularity. Some to the extent that they help to form coalition governments. Here is why:
1)The Muslim extremists are so loud that they draw a lot of media attention
2)In areas where there are immigrant neighbourhoods, there is a lot more crime
3)The fertility rate of the ethnic European population has dropped below the replacement level, while the fertility rate of the Muslims is higher
4)Countries such as Germany (especially the eastern part), France and Italy have high unemployment rates
5)While a few British Mulims were preaching murder on the street, the police did not arrest any of these people. However, a white British man was sentenced to prison time after telling Muslim immigrants to go home
6)The murder of Dutch filmaker Theo van Gough
7)The riots in Paris
8)The Madrid and London transit bombings
Anti-immigrant parties take these and then use them to promote their cause: "The current political party will not take care of crime, so if you elect us, we will." "Vote for us and you will not be treated as second class citizens in your own country." These are just a few of their promises (which are simple solutions to complex problems). When people from Africa, South East Asia and the Middle East were broght in for labour in the 60's and 70's, these problems were not foreseen. When problems started to arise, the social-democrat goverments did not take any action. Now that the problem has become known, people turn to these anti-immigrant groups to do something because tradtional parties will not.
Already some countries have decided to limit entry into their country by foreign nationals. This includes the tolerant Dutch. More and more people are being turned away from entering the Netherlands as immigrants or as refugees. These parties use the fear tactic quite effectively and it is getting some of their members elected into office.
Is Iraq the next Vietnam?
Recently President Bush compared the growing Insurgency in Iraq to the Tet Offensive in 1968.
In January of 1968, the Tet (Vietnamese lunar new year) Offensive was launched. All over South Vietnam, communist forces attacked US and ARVN military bases as well as many provincial and regional capitals. Communist forces also penetrated the US Embassy and the Presidential Palace in Saigon.
Here is something to consider: Tet was a military victory for the Americans. In less than three months they had recaptured all lost cities and bases. The communist forces lost more than 58 000 men, the same amount of men that America lost during its total time in Vietnam. The Viet Cong ceased to exist as a major fighting force.
However, it was a public relations victory for the communists. They knew that 1968 was an election year and the President Johnson required public support for the war. Americans were shocked by the bloody footage they saw on t.v. that many began to oppose the war. Johnson then announced that he would not seek the Democratic nomination for the 1968 Presidential election. Seven years later, the communist forces captured Saigon and re-united Vietnam as a communist country.
Now let us look at Iraq. In a matter of days, Americans go to the polls for the midterm congressional elections. The war in Iraq is becoming very unpopular with the American public and the Iraqi insurgents know this. What Bush is saying is that the current spike in violence is an attempt to turn voters against the war, thus they will vote for people who want to withdraw troops from Iraq. If that happens, then the insurgents win. See the similarities between 2006 and 1968? I normally do not say this, but Bush does make a good point.
In America, the Christian Right has become a very powerful lobby group. They provide large sums of money for politicians and they mobilise their voters to vote for the people that the leaders of this movement deem fit for office. With the legalization of abortion in 1973 and with the current debate about same sex marriage, this group has taken the responsibility to restore morality in America.
Now, that being the case, here are some things to think about:
1) The Christian Coalition has resorted to blackmail and extortion to get what it wants (like Malcolm X said: By any means necessary)
2) During the recent war between Hezbollah and Israel, they were only concerned with the Israeli victims of the war. While that is not a bad thing, what about the innocent Lebanese who suffered?
3) During the American Revolution, these people were the ones who wanted freedon of religion, now they want to take it away and have everyone follow their religion
4) The leaders are wealthy, but at the same time many Americans live in poverty. Is asking them to sacrifice money to help the less fortunate in America asking too much?
5) They condemn Castro and Chavez, but have supported brutal Right-wing dictators such as the Somoza's in Nicaragua and Charles Taylor in Liberia
6) They preached the Gospel to the Contra guerillas in Nicaragua, but ignored the fact that the Contras were murderers, theives and rapists
7) Their way is the only way, the world is black and white to them. Only their interpretation of the Bible is right
8) The all powerful $$$$$. Many of the leaders have been involved in shaky business dealings
9) When was the world ever moral?
10)They call Islam evil when Christianity has had a very violent hisotry as well. Did you know that while 'Christian' Europe was persecuting Jews, Jews and Muslims coexisted peacefully in the Muslim World.
11) They support Israel, but they seem to forget that there are many Jews who do not support Israel or Zionism
12) Ariel Sharon (a war criminal) suffered a stroke because God was angry at him for evacuating settlements in the Gaza Strip. The US should kill Hugo Chavez. Hurricane Katrina was God's wrath on the people of New Orleans, apparently their was going to be a Gay pride parade there. I do not think I need to comment on this, the adsurdity is pretty obvious
13) They did not support Jesse Jackson or Martin Luther King because these two civil rights leaders, as white evangelical protestants claimed, were politisizing Christianity. Yet, today the white evangelical protestants are politisizing Christianity
14) When was western society ever 'Under God'? When it endorsed slavery? When Chinese railway workers were exploited? When native North Americans were killed and had their land taken from them? When racial groups were kept separate? When Japanese were stripped of their possessions and placed in interment camps? When America supported terrorist groups such as the Contras? When America supported military dictators such as the Somoza's, Batista and Pinochet? When a blind eye was turned to the abuse of women and children? When children were exploited for labour?
15) They are brainwashers-they favour banning certain books (i.e. Harry Potter) and oppose the teaching of anything that goes against the Bible. Oh, then there is Camp Jesus
16) 1st Amendment of US Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion
If I am missing anything, please let me know.
Free vote on same sex marriageThree years after same sex marriage was approved by Parliament, the issue is back before the Federal government. As promised, Prime Minister Stephen Harper will hold a free vote on the issue. This means that each Member of Parliament will be able to vote however they wish. Both supporters and opponents of same sex marriage are on the hill trying to rally support for their view.
The main fear of opponents is that religious institutes will be forced to perform same sex marriages. Hello, where have they been? When the issue was put before the Supreme Court, they ruled that religious institutions would have the right to refuse to marry a same sex couple.
How exactly is the institute of marriage under attack? Or better yet, what does that mean?
The GOP (Republican Party) has been hijacked Religious zealots and neo-conservatives have taken over the Republican Party and the traditionalists are having to look elsewhere.
This movement can be traced back to the American Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and it was Honest Abe who freed the slaves. In response, the racist south began voting Democrat. Then one-hundred years later came L.B. Johnson, a Democrat from Texas. After Kennedy was killed, Johnson took over as President and then won the 1964 election. Struck by the Civil Rights movement in the south, Johnson began to pass legislation, approved by congress, that established racial equality. He also managed to have congress approve Thurogood Marshall as the first black member of the Supreme Court. Well down in the Bible Belt, the evangelicals were not happy. They became more angry with the legalization of abortion in 1973 by the Supreme Court. Now the mobilisation began. They believed that America was loosing its moral ways and that it had to be saved from itself.
In the 1980's, the Evangelical right supported Ronald Reagan and his conservative ways; especially his desire to strike down the abortion law. Then they supported Bush I in 1988 and 1992. However, after Clinton won thw 1992 Presidential election, the neo-conservative movement began to completely take over the Republican Party. There are 3 groups that combined to form this political movement. First is the neo-conservatives. These are rich guys who believe that America has a moral calling to spread freedom and capitalism around the world, although it is probably more about money than freedom. The second is the Christian Coalition, a movement of evangelical Christian fundamentalists whose aim is to preserve the moral fibre of America. Lastly is the Zionists, those fundamentalist Christians and Jews (this does imply that all Jewish people are pro-Israel and fundamentalist) who support Israel and its 'right' to expand. With their support, the Republicans regained control of congress for the first time in 40 years in 1994, as well as the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2004. They have an agenda, as well as the votes and the money to back it up.
These people have an agenda that includes expanding American influenece and establishing laws that preserve their version of morality in America. Kids should be forced to give the Pledge of Allegiance and recite the Lord's Prayer in school, homosexuality should be illegal and people should support Israel. Basically they wish to tell you how you should live your lives and what you should believe. If you go against them, then you go against God; it is their way or the wrong way.
Now traditional supporters of the Republican Party have had to go elsewhere as their beliefs are not the beliefs of the party they once supported. If they stood up in a Republican convention and talked about how they believed that the government needs to stay out of people's personal affairs and that America should change its forerign policy, they would be jeered of the stage by unimpressed evangelicals.
A once proud party has now found itself taken over by people who will end up running the party right into the ground.
