Ted Turner shows the porgressive path to Bill O'Reilly

So Ted Turner showed up on Bill O'Reilly's show on Fox News. This might be something that you would expect lots of sparks from. But in fact it was quite civil and perhaps a bit mundane.



One of the things I love to hear is the constant call that Fox News is a far-right network. Given that Sean Hannity is far-right, the network and the bulk of the programs are not. And in this instance, as I have often found, Turner barely if ever watches the network he compares to the Nazi's.

It just cements the concept of most liberals/left-wing these days. You can say anything you want, just as long as it agrees with whatever they believe. Everything else is a horrible right-wing conspiracy to remove freedom and thought. Even if they have no clue what any other thought might comprise.

And Turner was honest that his real motivation was the fact that he knew that all the major media focuses to the left (or far-left depending on your level of honesty) and thus anything neutral or to the right would draw attention beyond anything his network or the others could match. Because try as hard as they do, the nation leans right even with massive media bias.

Of course Turner could not avoid his belief that America is an exploitative nation. Funny how he says that, yet he has no problem accumulating his wealth in and from this nation. Or has he been donating the bulk of his wealth to the Government to lower the deficit, save defaulted mortgage owners, and the poor in general? Has he somehow managed to make donations to programs and organizations of size without Forbes or anyone else noticing? In fact the answer, like with most wealthy liberals/progressives - including Warren Buffett and George Soros - is no.

And the best part is the most stupid statement that the educated and experienced Ted Turner makes.

"If we stop bombing people and sent doctors, scientists, and engineers around the world that we make a lot more progress and wouldn't have near as much terrorism in the world as we do." - minute 3:09 - 3:22

That is a stupid statement in every sense of it. First America has nothing to do with bombings in India based on the differences of religion in that nation and Pakistan. We have nothing to do with bombings in France, England, Southeast Asia and nearly 2/3 of the world. And virtually all of these places have been getting bombed for over 3 decades or more. That has nothing to do with us.

Israel is one place that an argument might be made. And of course Iraq and Afghanistan are clearly a result of our actions recently. Not that anyone could say any Middle East nation was peaceful and calm over the last 5 decades let alone the last 10.

But Turner makes a dumb argument because on top of these facts we spend more money on medical and agricultural aid to various nations than many nations make as GDP. Or has he forgotten the Peace Corps and the various debts owed to America from these nations we have helped. And then there is AIDS.

America has done more about AIDS in Africa than most every other nation combined. That is still far from what I think is adequate or within our abilities, but it is far from the implied thought of Turner that we do nothing. And our work in Darfur is horrendous. But that does not erase all the other good work we have done for many nations in Africa. Still we are losing the edge in helping African nations develop better technology to China, but that is a problem of a different sort than what Turner suggests.

Again this is left-wing polispeak to make things sound worse than they are. Like somehow denouncing our actions makes their even lesser actions look better. I've never known anyone to be motivated after hard work for a good cause by being told what they have done was useless and negligible, and then asked to do more.



In part 2 it gets personal. Hanoi Jane Fonda is in the picture. But first we see what "progressives" like Turner calls himself think. Turner admires Fidel Castro. I think there are a lot of people in Florida that would love to have him explain why.

The argument that Turner makes, and I have heard before is that Castro has done good things in his time so he is a good guy. He built hospitals and makes sure people have nationalized healthcare.

So the fact that Cuba is stuck in the 1950's in virtually every aspect doesn't matter to Turner. The fact that the people have no voice in their Government is meaningless. The fact that dissenters are (or at least were) routinely jailed, beaten and/or killed is ok. The fact that their economy is horrendous is all good. Because the people get free healthcare.

So taking that logic, a nation that builds schools, allows free elections, builds hospitals, creates clean water, improves electricity, invigorates an economy and makes the nation stable is a great nation. Wake up "progressives", I just described what America is doing in Iraq.

But I think Turner would stumble on that realization. He, and "progressives" as he described himself, don't want to see America like that. For whatever reason.

Perhaps the best part of this whole interview was when Ted Turner was asked about his inaction after the Viet Nam protests. He with Hanoi Jane protested the actions of America and supported (her moreso to traitorous levels) the North Vietnamese. When America left Viet Nam due to the political pressure, 3 million Vietnamese were slaughtered. And the "progressives" said nothing.

They in fact did what some say America did to Afghanistan after the Russians were defeated. They forgot about the whole thing. They could care less. If they did care they hid it well with their complete and utter silence for decades.

Hanoi Jane, and Ted Turner, had every opportunity to speak out nationally about the atrocities. They could have brought media attention to the situation at any point they desired. Even to this day they could say something. Yet all you will hear is more silence. How "progressive".

Now considering that track record I have to ask a simple question. If we follow the guidance of "progressives" like Turner, and far-left nuts like Hanoi Jane, and leave Iraq as we did Viet Nam, what would they do if things went bad in that nation? Their actions tell us they would turn a blind eye and deaf ear, which is the absolutely best environment for groups like Al Quida to grow in. And that means we would have future attacks on our soil within 5 - 15 years, en masse.

Can America afford to have "progressives" and the far-left say

"You got me. I really didn't think about it." - minute 3:06 - 3:10

as civilians are killed?

Senator McCain - Saddleback Civil Forum, 2 points

There is a lot of review and commentary on the Saddleback Civil Forum today. And I don’t doubt that we will see even more about it in commercials in the near future. But I have some further thoughts about the event as well.

I already mentioned that my first 2 questions from the event were about Senator Obama; and dealt specifically with his answers on Darfur, America’s aid to foreign nations, and taxes. I felt that he failed to provide serious answers to either question, and in fact raised more questions by the manner of his answer.

Before I continue to make other comments I will address how Senator McCain responded to those same questions.

In listening, and then reviewing the answer by Senator McCain on taxes I note that he too failed to give a proper response. While Senator Obama was very vague about how his policies might affect single Americans, and/or any business owner – whether the business is small or large – McCain was no less vague. He too avoided giving a significant defined number to qualify ‘rich’.

The way he avoided the answer makes it seem like neither candidate knows what is a rich person. McCain did emphasize his desire to not redistribute wealth, and to further ensure that the income that all Americans make will tend to stay in their pockets rather than go to the Government.

Still this was not a satisfactory answer.

As for his comments about Darfur, McCain stood head and shoulders above Obama. Where Senator Obama ignored the troubled region in the Sudan, John McCain directly addressed it. He noted the acknowledgement of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, that Darfur is a genocide and has been for years. He noted that we need to do more.

McCain could have made far more significant answers on this issue. He could have noted that Congress has failed to act, and that because of this inaction America is still funding the murder of children in Darfur – right now. He did not go nearly as far in addressing this as I would have preferred. But he went further than Senator Obama by miles.

I was very displeased with the responses by Senator Obama and McCain on these 2 issues. Neither was very direct or informative about their future plans. And these are questions I want to see addressed more fully in debates and as they clarify their full policy plans in the near future.

But overall, I have to give the edge to Senator McCain on these 2 issues. While neither was clear about taxes, the general issue seems more favorable from the McCain view than Senator Obama’s. And considering Obama’s complete dismissal of Darfur when asked about it, McCain shone brightly by comparison.

Senator Obama - 2 questions from Saddleback Civil Forum

So just a few quick thoughts about Senator Obama’s comments at the Saddleback Civil Forum.

There were 2 items that stood out in my mind. Darfur and taxes. I am passionate about both and have written a great deal on each subject. So his answers were very important to me.

In terms of taxes I noticed that when Obama was asked to directly quote a single amount that qualifies as rich he could not do so. He in fact avoided the answer. He responded with the answer that if you make $150,000 or less – depending where you live in America – AS A FAMILY then you are most likely middle-class. And he stated that basically if you are a family making $250,000 or more you are in the top 1% of the nation, again depending on where you live. He then promised that families making $150, 000 or less will receive a tax benefit from his tax plans, and those above it will pay more.

That answer is both insufficient and deceptive.

He did not address individuals. Does he mean that $75,000 and less is middle-class? Or under $150,000? Or are you rich? He did not make it clear.

And what if you are a business owner? He wants to increase business taxes; and roughly 60% of businesses in the nation are small-businesses owned by individuals and families. So does he count raising the business tax in his promise to lower taxes of those families as well?

So if we follow what he is saying, and has said, it is very possible that people other than just the ambiguous ‘rich’ will have their taxes increased as well. Which says nothing of the 94 votes he has made to date to increase taxes, including the most recent that would increase taxes of Americans making as little as $31,850.

On top of that is this bit of intuitive thought. America, from a federal tax basis, is not New York City, or Chicago, or Little Rock, or any other region. The IRS does not adjust our taxes based on where your income comes from. The IRS has fixed numbers on what is rich, middle-class, and poor. Any candidate that fails to answer this questions fails to give America a real chance to make a choice.

The other issue that caught my intention is Darfur. When Senator Obama was directly asked about what America should do about places like Darfur where perhaps 1 million men, women and children have died in the last 4+ years – and where America has done nothing (look up the history on HR 180 IH).

Senator Obama completely bypassed Darfur. He went directly to Georgia and other areas. Now I realize that Georgia is a hot topic these days. But this was an opportunity to address a genocide that America has blocked out. I mean a virtually complete major media blackout. And it was a credit to the Minister to bring up the issue as the media has not.

Senator Obama had a chance to go beyond the popular, and to make America aware that if we want to obligate ourselves to international issues, places with no oil and little strategic importance are as valuable as those that do. Simply because there are people, children, that are being murdered – and that is wrong.

Senator Obama failed on that question. That seriously pissed me off.

Now I will be looking forward to the responses of Senator McCain on these same issues.

Georgia and Darfur - America picking which children should die

Over a decade ago I was living in Georgia, or Gruzya [rough phonetic version of the Russian name], as the nation went through a similar difficult struggle. During my time there I came to learn of the people and their daily struggles, and appreciate their strong wills and big hearts.

I went to Gruzya back in 1991 as part of my work for an import-export company. I had been living in Moscow prior to that time. I was living in a hotel one block away from the President’s mansion, the President at the time being Zviad Gamsakhurdia. My purpose in the country was to create a casino, and to sell food, clothing, and other goods if possible. I say if possible because there was a huge unrest in the small nation – student protests of Gamsakhurdia were common and growing. So I tried to meet with both Gamsakhurdia and the rebels, to sell them each the foods and clothes the nation needed. Picking sides was not an option.

Not too long after my arrival full, complete civil war started. The rebels took down Gamsakhurdia in short order, only to have him go to the north and rally the people to “pick up swords and pitchforks and fight”, which they did.

When I left this nation it was a difficult day. I was smuggled into the last flight leaving for Moscow, in the area underneath the seats of the pilots of the plane. It’s an experience you may have seen in movies, but is nowhere near fun to actually living through.

I say all this for a couple of reasons. First is the fact that Georgians are notorious for their strong wills. Once they make a decision they are not known for changing their minds. They are known as fierce fighters, and in my opinion, they can be a bit crazy. I recall when they were firing RPG’s across the street at each other during the civil war; and on another occasion the telegraph office (which was also the main telephone bank for the capitol and largest city) was blown up to prevent the other side from making any calls – but also removing the ability of anyone to be in contact regardless of side in the conflict.

So if the Russian Army thinks this will be a quick fight they are out of their minds. Georgians will defend their homes to the last, and many are combat trained or experienced due to the not so distant civil war.

Another reason is the fact that a major pipeline for oil runs through Georgia. That means millons of dollars that can be used to improve roads, build the infrastructure of cities, and provide for the general well-being of the populace. That’s money Russia has always wanted.

If the pipeline is shutdown, crude oil prices will jump up. So far there has been no evidence, yet, or attacks on the pipeline but it’s still early in the fighting.

Russia has been relatively quietly rebuilding the old Soviet Union. Posturing has occurred with airspace infractions versus other nations (especially those in NATO), and constant arguments with the U.S. over military strenght have happened with increasing frequency in the past few years. Several of the former Soviet nations have commented on the aggressive stance that Russia has taken recently.

But lastly I want to note something else.

It is estimated that some 2,000 people have died in the past 3 days. Almost all of them are civillians and the numbers are growing. Coverage of the conflict has been non-stop on every major news media in the U.S. President Bush, Senator John McCain, and Senator Barack Obama have all made comments and asked for an end to the violence. The United Nations is getting involved, and Europe is cautious of every news report.

But over the last 4 year more than 250,000 men, women, and children have been murdered in a genocide. This is occuring right now in Darfur, Sudan. The major U.S. media as effectively blackedout the news. President Bush, Senator McCain, and Senator Obama have all had nothing to say about the attrocity. Europe hasn’t shrugged on the events. The United Nations has sent a paltry number of troops that have done nothing to quell the violence.

In fact China is a major source of funds for the Sudanese government, thus funding the genocide. Not to be outdone, America is also doing business with Sudan and also helping with the murder of innocents.

In fact the U.S. Congress has had legislation sitting for years that would prevent at least the Government, if not private business, from doing business with (and thus funding) the Sudan. HR 180 IH has been languishing, and every American politician seems not to care.

I enjoyed my time in Georgia. I got to know a few very good people. I lived there and lived the culture that can only happen when you are part of a culture – not just visiting. I was welcomed into homes as a guest from God – which is the translation of the word guest in their language. I lost a couple of dear friends in the civil war, I fear I may lose more in the current fighting.

Yet, I note the absurdly different manner in which the people of Georgia are being treated by the news media as opposed to Darfur. Darfur has lost roughly 1/16 the population of the entire nation of Georgia in 4 years and counting, and it does not get 1/2 nor 1/100th the attention that has been given in just 3 days.

How can we as Americans profess a desire to help those in need, and make demands of foreign governments when we at the same time ignore and willfully allow another foreign government to commit wholesale murder?

I have live in Georgia, and I do not wish the people any harm. I respect them and their culture. I want them to live in peace. But I want no less for a nation and a people that have suffered far longer and far more. Africa may not be located in the same area as Georgia and Russia, but a child is a child. No child should suffer a cruel death because of war, starvation, or the beliefs of a few.

Should we stand up and oppose the conflict in Georgia today? Yes. And we should equally, if not more strongly, stand up and say the same or similar things to Sudan.

Preparing for the TV One Heartland Presidential Forum Part 2 - 12.1.2007.1

Continued from Preparing for the TV One Heartland Presidential Forum Part 1...

What do I expect the debate to go over today? I think that most people are more concerned about education for their children, the economy continuing to be stable and prosperous – so they know they have job security, illegal immigrants – taking away jobs and receiving benefits funded by taxpayer money (including income taxes which illegals don’t pay). Not necessarily in that order.

Lower on the list are issues like race relations (the inequalities in the law enforcement and justice system that plague minorities as seen via Sean Bell, Megan Williams, Genarlow Wilson, and the Jena 6 as recent examples), anti-terrorism actions to keep us safe in this country (the Canadian border is still my biggest issue), and entitlement programs (like Welfare though not necessarily including Social Security). Again that is not a guarantee they are in that order of preference.

I base this on my conversations with people across this country. Friends, associates, clients, blog readers and authors, as well as polls found on my blogs and corporate website. That is what I think the real America wants to hear answers to. Yet pundits and candidates of both parties have given short shrift to these issues.

Think about it, other than one question in one debate, I don’t recall any candidate speaking about their plans to ensure our kids graduate high school, and are able to read. Yet in the African American community alone dropout rates exceed 50%. I recall one question, early in 2007, that dealt with AIDS and HIV, yet a recent announcement states that AIDS cases in kids 15-19 are up 20%, and those 20-24 are up 22% (according to 2005 numbers which are the most current known). The numbers for African American youth are appallingly higher.

That says nothing about youth pregnancy (in the Black community up an estimated 60+%). And what about other issues that are not as close to home as the abovementioned? Like the Child Soldier Act (which Congress seems determined to ignore) or HR 180 IH which deals with Darfur (now nearing its 5th year of genocide). No, but there has been plenty of talk about green energy (which most regular people don’t even think about as far as I’ve heard) which we could not resolve immediately even if there was an energy source that we could use effectively right now.

I hope that when these serious issues are asked by the regular people in the audience (hopefully not planted by the Clinton campaign which seems like a common practice for them based on recent revelations) there are full real answers.

But don’t be surprised if you only hear 30 second soundbites that sound motivating but answer nothing. I mean I’m not running for any office and this quick recap takes about 5 minutes to read in full. When was the last time any candidate actually took 5 minutes to explain 1 issue without going off on a tangent, blaming Congress or the President (or both), or sliding the discussion into a completely different direction altogether?

But we will see.

UN acts on Darfur, where is America's action - 7.31.2007.3

Finally we see the start of some action. Finally leadership has arisen and taken a stand. Sadly it was not the United States that has been the bold leader that our nation can be, and often is. Even so, I am happy to spread this news.

The United Nations has announced that it will be sending 26,000 peacekeeping troops to stop, or at least stem, the mass murder in Darfur that has claimed some 400,000 lives and left 2,500,000 homeless. I have been speaking about Darfur for a little while now, inspired by the words and actions of Mr. Don Cheadle.

Still the resolution has its flaws. Since the troops will be comprised of African Union and U.N. troops it will take months to organize and implement. Additionally there is no sanction component that can cause a dampening effect on the ruling government, slowing its efforts to commit genocide. This sanctioning is a needed component as is food aid for the area. It is an abysmal fact that the major industrialized nations of the world, including America, have sat on their collective asses in this matter.

As I mentioned previously HR 180 IH, has sat in Congress without action all year. In 2005 the members of the G8 summit sought to address the issue, and after few words that hold as much impact as the soundbites politicians use for most every situation these days, did nothing. So I have mixed emotions right now.

There is the start of actions to improve the lives of millions of Africans, a start but that is all. American businesses continue to support and by their inaction fund a genocide that has been on-going since 2003. Politicians have failed to act on resolutions presented to them. The news media has virtually ignored the situation. This is insulting.

I place myself along with the major media, up until recently. We can all do better and more. The stories on the vapid and imbecilic Paris Hilton can wait a bit. The comments on the rantings of Ms. Rosie O’Donnell will still be there later. BET will still provide the second-rate, debateably exploitative programming which can be protested against while they ignore their obligation to provide news and substance to the very target group the cable news channel is named for.

Fox News, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS et al. need to forget that this is happening in Africa and treat this matter like it was in Europe. I strongly feel that were this happening on a separate continent, with people of a different color, more would be done. Well it is happening and they are human beings and we can do more.

And politicians can take the simple amount of time it takes to act on HR 180 IH, Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007, forcing companies to admit if they are supporting the regime that is murdering women and children for no reason beyond the fact they exist. I dare even one politician to provide a reason that is logical that explains why this has not passed yet. To explain why this simple act has yet to be passed after 7 months seems inplausible to me. That only 151 Representaives have backed this is sad. How many lives will it take to move forward and act?

America is a great nation, I believe that without hesitation. We have helped and defended millions across the globe for decades. We stand for freedoms and rights that no other nation can claim to give so completely. Because of these reasons we cannot fail to act when the need is so dire.

This is what I think, what do you think?

A very important YouTube question, that no one answered Part 2 - 7.25.2007.2

Continued from A very important YouTube question, that no one answered Part 1...

We sent troops to Bosnia, though almost at the end of the conflict. We had a no-fly zone and sanctions for a year or 2 prior as I recall. That wasn’t working and we sent in troops. They were part of U.N. force s, but were predominantly ours, as usual from what I recall. And the number of troops was over 2,500 for us alone. That war, which had it’s own ethnic cleansing – genocidal mass murder really – lasted 3 years and had about 100,000 dead and lasted 3 years.

In the Sudan there has been fighting for 4 years and counting now. The U.S. has yet to figure out how to get economic sanctions going. There are states and mutual funds investing in the Sudan, effectively funding this war. For those liberals against war at all costs, you may be funding it right now. And the Congress can’t even bother to pass a law forcing companies to even tell you they are invested there. [For those that would want to blame this on President Bush, HR 180 IH was brought in by the Democratic led Congress, this year, and has been sitting around since January with no real action.]

I’ll say it again, 200,000 are dead. The killing is still going on. And Congress has been satisfied over the last 4 years to merely mention that we don’t like this. We haven’t divested money (which we finally did to South Africa after decades of Apartheid), put in a mostly useless no-fly zone, or anything of serious importance. They have investigated how officials that serve at the pleasure of the President were fired though. For the better part of this year they have wasted tens of thousands of dollars looking for a conspiracy – which has no basis in law – and read through some 40,000 pages of information. Meanwhile people are dying.

Try to equate this. Several people, whom the President can fire at will, without need of reason and completely legal, were fired. No law was broken. There has been a continual hunt for evidence of a conspiracy. To my knowledge, even if one did exist it still does not break the law and those fired remain fired. Yet no facts or actions have been found to suggest what is being searched for. So Congress decides it needs to search more, wasting our taxes and their time.

On the other side of the equation, in this example, roughly 33,000 people have been killed (estimates claim that the number could be 50% higher or more) and 410,000 have lost their homes and possessions in that same time. That’s more than most towns and many cities in this nation.

So why was Bosnia so much more important than Darfur? Neither country is truly significant in virtually any manner. Strategically, economically, militarily and so forth. Why was America willing to defend the innocent coif one nation; and are willing to allow the deaths of others now?

For those that disagree with war, or murder, or genocide I ask you how does it feel to know that you may be indirectly supporting these things.

In a nation as rich and powerful as we are. To see how little we are doing, and the things we are wasting our time with, is quite insulting.

This is what I think, what do you think?

A very important YouTube question, that no one answered - 7.25.2007.1

Some may recall that I recently raised the question of what is happening with HR 180 IH. You may not recall the name it has in the House of Representatives, but it’s also known as Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007. This is one item of several that are sitting in Congress waiting for some action to be taken by the nation. Not everyoe is aware of this but at least one person had his YouTube question presented to the Democratic candidtates in their recent debate.

Only 4 of the Democratic hopefuls were given the chance to respond. They were Governor Richardson, Sen. Biden, Senator Clinton, and Former Senator Gravel. In my opinion none were satifactory answers, though they were decent soundbites.

Former Senator Gravel only blamed the foreign policy of the nation. How that helps or resolves anything I have no idea.

Governor Richardson suggested economic sanctions and political pressure from European nations and China. Which is something, though that is exactly what HR 180 IH suggests, and it has been sitting in the House without any action since it was created. How can we ask ANY nation to do what we will not?

Senator Biden took a different tack. He compared the situation to Bosnia, and suggested a no-fly zone in addition to 2,500 American troops on the ground. I will get to the comparison in a moment, and the no-fly zone, but I cannot believe that in an area where over 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million are refugees a mere 2,500 American forces can stop the bloodshed. That is unrealistic and stupid in my opinion. It will take more than that, that’s obvious.

As for Senator Clinton, she got a bit of all the best answers and combined them, mostly. She agreed on the need for sanctions. She agreed on a no-fly zone. But she would not agree to place ANY troops on the ground.

Senators Dodd and Obama (as well as Biden and Clinton) co-sponsored Senate Resolution 559 (introduced on Sept. 7, 2006), which encouraged President Bush to work with NATO and the UN in establishing a no-fly zone.

Ok, first off a no-fly zone just does not work. Not in England (Germans during WWII), Viet-Nam, Bosnia, Iraq nor Darfur. It may add some difficulty but OBVIOUSLY things happening on the ground cannot be stopped by planes in the sky. Any suggestion that states this is the main involvement of the United States is doomed to kill innocent civilians. Let’s remember, overwhelmingly most of those that have died in the last several years are civilians. Stopping a plane flying overhead does not stop AK-47 and machete wielding troops from killing people.

Economic and political pressure is one option, but like a no-fly zone it does not stop anything. Cuba, North Korea, and Iraq have all had (or have) sanctions for years if not decades. Yet North Korea has nuclear weapons, Cuba still is a Communist dictatorship and we attacked Iraq. [Iraq may not be the best example, yet they still had a large army – one of the strongest in the region- and the abuse of Kurds and others was not abated by prior political pressure].

Face it, it takes troops. Just like it did in Bosnia.

Continued in Part 2...


**I want to thank Mary-Lea Cox for her writing on the YouTube question from the Presidential candidate debate**

HR 180 IH, what does that mean? - 6.28.2007.2

Here is something annoying. You have not heard a single Presidential candidate speak about this. I don’t recall any news media coverage of this. Were it not for the efforts of Mr. Don Cheadle, and several other prominent actors, and the humanitarian award he received I might not have heard about this. Not that there was any significant attention made about Mr. Cheadle getting the award or why.

The point is that the United States government has reacted pitifully in regard to Darfur. So far 3 sessions of Congress have been discussing this and still nothing has been done. And here is the proof. On January 4th Representative Lee introduced HR 180 IH. If you wonder what that means it’s the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 (Introduced in House). So far any attempt at accountability has gone out the window.

As of my writing this now, as Congress prepares to go on July 4th celebration seven months after introducing this bill the best thing that can be said is that it only took 3 months for a subcommittee meeting on this. In virtually seven months there has been no movement on this bill since March 20th. Perhaps if the members of Congress were in danger of losing loved ones there might be more action on the matter.

Now some of you may be saying, ‘Hold on, we don’t need to start another war.’ Others may be saying, ‘What is HR 180 IH?’

The answer to the first is that the bill doesn’t require the United States to put a single solider anywhere they aren’t already. The answer to the second is

“To require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan, to prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies, and for other purposes.”

Basically this bill cuts off money that goes to support what the 108th Congress

“declares that the atrocities unfolding in the Darfur region of Sudan, are genocide.”

That was almost 3 years ago to the day. How many have died since that time do you think? The GENOCIDE was unfolding according to Congress, it still exists, and we barely hear anything about it.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell told Congress there was a genocide, President Bush told the U.N. that there as a genocide, yet only 4 states have passed laws requiring that no company doing business with the Sudan can do business with their state. Odds are it’s not your state. I can guarantee that it’s not New York State, home of Wall Street, and where the big six brokerage houses invest millions of dollars in mutual funds that could be doing business with [thus supporting] the Sudan and genocide.

I bet that 99% of those reading this now, that have a pension or mutual fund, have no idea what that mutual fund is invested in. I would bet that 99.5% have no idea what businesses might be supporting the Sudan government. Yet I am sure that, of those over 30 [which is maybe 50% of my readers] everyone was for and supported the bans against South Africa and Apartheid back in 1986.

To my knowledge, virtually every member of Congress is old enough to have at least heard about the 1986 bans. They have no excuse.

Of the 24 colleges mentioned in this bill there is not one that I am aware of that is a Black college. That could be simply an oversite of Representative Lee, or that they are doing matters separate of this bill. But I recall that back in ’86, there was more than one black college that was invested in South Africa.

Perhaps Congress can sleep at night without doing more than speaking about this terrible situation. Perhaps they have more to do in preparing their particular candidate for the 2008 election, or raising funds for that candidate. Perhaps every candidate for President right now can’t spend any time to come up with a 30 second soundbite for Darfur, as there isn’t enough time after explaining the resolution to Iraq, taxes, terrorism, social security, and why they are so great and warm people. Each of those points explained in 30 second soundbites. Perhaps the moderators of the debates are too overwhelmed with questions on when America will be out of Iraq, that question can be and has been asked in each debate maybe 20 different ways, to find one on Darfur.

I know that I was too busy writing to 6 blogs, and growing my company to stop and get into this issue. But at some point you have to stop and say, I can do more.

Well here I am doing more. I’ve raised the bar. Now you know. What will you do? Will you get in touch with you Congressional representative and ask them what they did over the 4th of July while people died and a simple resolution sat on the congressional floor? Will you take a moment to read HR 180 IH, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Part 2 of reply on Rep. Virgil Goode's letter - 12.24.2006.2

Continued from Reply to comment on Rep. Goode's Letter - 12.24.2006.1 ...

While there may be slavery in the Sudan, I admit that I have no knowledge of it. Because of that lack of knowledge I cannot comment on whether that is racially or religiously or otherwise motivated. But there is slavery of many forms throughout the world today. White slavery in Asia is not motivated by religion, as one example, and is no less wrong. Religion does not make slavery wrong, the practice is wrong in and of itself. I think the same of Genocide.

The Koran, like most all major religious tomes, is not intolerant. The interpretation of the tome may be intolerant, as used by some groups. That is no different than fanatics of every religion, whether they are followers of Judaism, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Christianity or any other religion of any size. Fanatics are dangerous; justification of extreme views by a religious tome is dangerous. Muslims are not alone in this, but they are the most popular. Were the Mid-east not an oil rich area I’m not so sure that it would be as popular, and had the Twin Towers not been attacked the current national anger towards Muslims would not exist.

As for genocide, as I stated above it is wrong. But it is not something that America has strongly tried to prevent or act upon. America is not concerned with the genocides that have occurred or are occurring in Africa or Southeast Asia. Whether it is the Killing Fields or Darfur, what has America done? And what of the Genocide that America created? How long has it been before we even hinted that we did any wrong to the Native American Indians?

But given all that, Islam as a whole has not claimed a desire to kill all Americans. Rep. Ellison (which the letter by Rep. Goode directly attacks) is not trying to destroy America or citizens (of which he is a citizen from a family of citizens that go back to the time of slavery). A splinter group has claimed a desire to end the American way of life. I find this threat of little concern, as compared to other threats currently or previously made. The Communists of Russia sought the end of America and that was valid. North Korea continues to prepare for a war with America, that is valid. China dislikes the American way, that is a concern. Iran would love to see the demise of the American way of life, that is a concern. [Note that only one of the 3 current concerns I mention are headed by a Muslim religious government. Of the 3 it is also the Muslim run government that is the only one currently believed to be without nuclear weapons which is the major point of concern.] In each case it is not the religion of the people that is against America, it is the government of that nation.

To be continued...