VIEWS FROM SWITZERLAND

Brief thoughts on bin Laden's death

2011-05-02T13:11:00.000-07:00

While it seems many Americans are rejoicing over the death of Osama bin Laden, I am sitting on my sofa here with a different reaction. As a pacifist in most all scenarios, I do have to say that on the whole Osama bin Laden’s death is an exception where I think violence is necessary. We all know what he did and we all know what he was capable of. Assassinating bin Laden was the only way to keep the world safer. But this doesn’t make me want to rejoice. In fact, I find it saddening. Here’s why:

1) Bin Laden’s victims aren’t coming back to life

I was brought up just 30 miles outside of New York City. Living in Switzerland at the time of 9/11, I like most Americans was saddened by what took place on that tragic Tuesday morning. I will never forget where I was and the emotions I felt as I watched so many helpless people jump out of buildings to their death. Bin Laden is now dead and while it may bring some sort of temporary satisfaction in that the guy got what he deserved, the reality is that victims aren’t coming back to life. And contrary to most wars when an enemy surrenders signalling the end of the confict, in the case of bin Laden, Al Qaida is still alive and even more dangerous than it was on April 30th. The terror threat warnings increases around the world demonstrate this.

2) The reaction of Americans

Obama, like his predecessor Bush, seems to be playing on Americans’ emotions and using 9/11 related events to his political advantage. It is a smart ploy – it worked for Bush and Obama delivered a riveting speech calling for unity and playing on Americans patriotism. Towards the end of his speech he said:

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11. I know that it has, at times, frayed. Yet today's achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

These words, and the tone throughout his speech, created just the effect that would be ideal for a President struggling with his ratings and already into a re-election campaign. It worked. We saw many Americans join together in celebration. Thousands at a baseball game, the White House and Ground Zero, among other places, joined together in unison, chanting “USA” and singing “God Bless America”. As a devout Christian commited to living my life for Jesus Christ, I can’t help but wonder why it is that we have to sing of God’s greatness to our land through the death of another human being? The fact that we killed bin Laden doesn’t make us great, and it doesn’t mean God is “blessing” us. I am also disturbed that it takes a death to bring “unity”. I believe it is a reflection of a violent culture that looks at wars and assassinations as some sort of cops and robbers game in which the good guys win and the bad guys lose. If only it were so simple. Unfortunately the celebration of bin Laden’s death is more a blatant example of ignorance than anything else.

What FoxNews viewers can learn by going to Petra, Jordan

2011-01-06T13:35:00.000-08:00

Her voice was full of concern. She reported the story with great suspense. So much seemed to be at stake. Meghan Kelly of FoxNews had the formidable of task of breaking some earth shattering news to the American public and viewers. It was indeed true - some 12 year old girl was kicked off her pee wee co-ed hockey team. Was it because of her gender or her lack of talent? Meghan was determined to get to the bottom of the story. So, despite a terrible connection via Skype, she brought in the girl’s mother for an exclusive interview. This entire reportage lasted some 10 minutes.

Watching this with my wife, I was originally tempted to flip the channel immediately. Then I thought it would be interesting to watch the show and takes some notes about this “news”. Here are some of the other stories I viewed and jotted down:

The crops are beginning to freeze in Florida causing concern for some farmers there
On Fox Spotlight, we had the opportunity to learn about the livelihood of golf ball divers. These are guys who dive into water hazards at golf courses and gather golf balls at different courses. The report noted the “danger” of the job due to the creatures that could attacks these guys.
A breaking news story reported on how a ski lift fell to the ground in Maine.
A “debate” about whether Barack Obama should have praised the Eagles’ owner for giving Michael Vick a second chance. Some guy from the NAACP and an animal rights activist were then put up to debate and talk over each other while Ms. Kelly added her “analysis”
A couple from Alabama were interviewed about their flight from Montgomery to New York City. There flight was two hours delayed due to the blizzard that just hit the northeast US. Fortunately, we were able to learn from these good folks in Alabama that they were still ready for some fun in the big city.

Not one word in the course of this one hour report was dedicated to the two wars the United States is currently engaged in. Nor was there a second dedicated to the situation in the Middle East or the humanitarian crises that are plaguing Africa and many other parts of the world. In fact, there was only one story with any sort of global slant - a terror threat story (FoxNews seem to like the stories which really trigger fear).

I have always been a critic of FoxNews not because it was too conservative per se, but rather because of its lack of “real” news - and particularly international news. This concern of mine was further reinforced as we started watching Fox News with Meghan Kelly. As viewers of BBC and CNN International know, the above list are not news stories (CNN in the US is also very domestic focused). You don’t learn about the world by getting the most trivial of updates and sensationalized gossip reported by a lady who rather than presenting the news, is interjecting her opinion throughout. And putting two nut cases representing the extremes of an issue and getting them to yell and scream over each other might work for the Jerry Springer show, but not for what I believe is “news“.

My wife and I both commented on how sad it is that so many people are learning about the world by watching such crap. Fox News is supposedly the most watched news channel in the US, which I think perfectly explains the fear in which many Americans live coupled with a bewildering ignorance of life outside the US’ borders. (Of course this is a generalization and there are exceptions, but unfortunately the fact that just 28 percent of Americans possess a US passport and that Americans geographical literacy lags behind many other countries would support this claim).

We live in a globalized society. FoxNews viewers need to realize this. The “World in 60 Seconds” which features on some FoxNews programming doesn’t suffice. Please turn the channel to real news - either BBC or CNN International (sorry, left-leaning MSNBC doesn’t make the cut with its own version of the Jerry Springerization of news offered from a liberal perspective). Otherwise, read a good book about the world, pick up an international magazine (such as The Economist) and/or go out of your way to engage with people from other cultures. And while you are at, perhaps consider a trip to Petra, Jordan to see first-hand the value of learning from other cultures.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade brought the city of Petra, Jordan to the homes of millions of people around the world. My wife and I had the pleasure of discovering the splendor of this ancient city last week in person. Crossing the border into Jordan from Eilat, Israel, we took a two-hour bus ride through the desert to discover the hundreds of ancient tombs in Petra. The city’s most famous image is that of Khazneh, translated into English as The Treasury. The only place that could somewhat compare from my travels is the Grand Canyon.

As the Petra tour pamphlet noted, the city was founded by the Nabateans some 2200 years ago. Prior to coming to what is now Jordan, they lived in northwestern Arabia and were influenced by major foreign cultures. They became undisputed masters of the region’s trade routes, levying tools, protecting caravans laden with Arabian frankincense and myrrh, Indian spices and silks, and African ivory and animal hides. The brochure stated: “The Nabateans were clever and practical people, they never believed in national exclusiveness, were open to outside cultural influences, absorbed them and then added to them their own native touch so that the final outcome of this interaction was a wonderful melting pot.” Seeing this in person, one can really see all these influences come together to form something truly majestic.

The Nabateans certainly weren’t influenced by its own version of FoxNews in its time. Had it been, such a splendour that is attracting thousands of tourists a day some 22 centuries later would have never been constructed. The Nabateans created a world wonder thanks in part to the fact that they were immersed with and learning from other cultures.

Sure, the average news viewer might not be tasked to build a city. But one can only wonder how much potential FoxNews viewers are wasting as they absorb nationalistic trivialities on a regular basis.

Merry Christmas from Israel

2010-12-23T11:39:00.000-08:00

Did you ever have a pen pal? This was the metaphor I was discussing with my wife after visiting "Peter's primacy" the place where Christ appeared to Peter after the resurrection.

Why this metaphor? For myself, and many Christians, we view the Bible, including the Gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John which provide first-hand eye-witness accounts of Christ's life - as one of the means in which God communicates to us today some 2,000 years after Christ ascended into the heavens. Throughout my life, I have read the gospel messages - God's letters to us. For myself as a Christian, this helps form part of the personal relationship I have with God. Visiting Israel and seeing places such as the Mount of Beatitudes (the location where Christ delivered the famous "Blessed be" statements), Nazareth (his hometown) and Cana (the location of Christ's first miracle - changing the water to wine at a wedding) is in a way like seeing this pen pal's life up close and personal.

In Capernaum, I saw the remains where Christ lived (see picture on the left) - it was not the palace typically associated with other great kings. Just appeared to be the remnants of a small little room. The places along Galilee where Christ healed people were nothing extraordinary on the outside - just small little fishing villages. I sat on the stones on the beach where Christ appeared before his disciples after resurrecting from the dead. Re-reading the Gospels and these actual accounts from different authors where these events actually took place brings the experience into greater life. Much of the surroundings in the cities are obviously completely different today - I can only wonder what Christ thinks about having a McDonalds down the road! But this beach, the Sea of Galilee itself, the mountains in the background - these were the very things that the disciples and Christ saw 2,000 years ago.

Our visit to Cana and Nazareth today was also moving, especially considering the Christmas season is upon us. Nazareth has the largest Arab population within sovereign Israel and is a city bustling with noise and activity. The Church of the Annunciation - the place where Mary received news from an angel that she would be the mother of the Son of God - was completely opposite to the hustle and bustle from outside the city. The peace I felt upon entering was indescribable. In addition, visiting the Catholic Cana Wedding Church and being guided (unplanned) by an Arab Christian groundskeeper (John) was a highlight of our trip. He had such a genuine joy in explaining the significance of Christ's first miracle. As many do when visiting Cana, my wife and I decided to renew our wedding vows at the very location of this first miracle. Taking part in this short ceremony with the priest and our new friend John was truly moving.

With Christmas quickly approaching - and with it all the things that I can't stand about it (greed and consumerism in the forms of excessive Christmas shopping - all subjects for another blog), I would encourage everyone to read (or re-read) the gospel messages.

If are too sophisticated for religion - you think it is impossible that these events could have happened and that all religions lead to division - then I encourage in the name of "open-mindedness" to give the gospel messages a chance. Consider that these are not myths (mythical writing didn't even exist 2,000 years ago - again a subject for another blog). Compare this message to your own belief systems and that of other religions. At the very least, you can have a new understanding of another religion. (Personally, I have seen the value of doing this for religions I don't adhere to per se. For example, while in a visit to Katzrin, a Jewish village in the Golan Heights, my wife and I visited an old synagogue and learned about the Talmud. Later in the day, we visited the fascinating village of Tsfat, the place where Jewish mysticism (Kabbala) is assumed to have started. I enjoyed speaking with a Jewish guy to better understand why their faith doesn't accept Christ. This conversation was not intended to "convert" him, but to rather learn about the roots of his faith. Hearing part of his perspective - that Jewish people couldn't have possibly accepted the son of a Jewish carpenter as being equivalent to a Rabbi - only further reinforced the beauty of the Christian gospel message to me. And it was certainly a unique experience entering a Mosque earlier today!) In the best case scenario, by reading the gospel messages just maybe you will have the opportunity to have a true spiritual experience - personally encountering a "pen pal" who loves and cares about you and can give you a new perspective on life that surpasses all of our personal and professional highs and lows. It has been remarkable to be here in Israel to see so many people from around the world touched by this very message.

If you already have an understanding of Christs message, then I would encourage you to take time out of your busy schedules, particularly during this holiday season, to re-read these letters from your "pen-pal" - a pen friend who is much more than that.

Merry Christmas from Israel.

Views from Israel - images of tension

2010-12-21T09:09:00.000-08:00

Views from Switzerland is temporarily transferring to views from Israel. Sorry if you were looking for my typical cynical, dry sense of homour for inspiration - this entry is a bit more of a personal reflection of my trip to Isreal still in progress.

My wife and I have just completed full day # 4 of our trip to the Holy Land - with about two more weeks to go. It has been amazing thus far - we have been writing our thoughts in our journals, but I also thought it would be interested to write a blog. The purpose of our trip has been multi-fold: seeing a new part of the world we have never been to; learning about the roots of the Christian faith - spending time at the very places where Christ spent his time; discovering more about other religions; and understanding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be but a few of the reasons (not to mention spending time in beautiful weather!).

I would like to describe some interesting images that have sparked long conversations between my wife and I. These include:

A plane ride in which many traditional Jews went into a wild frenzy over the fact our flight was delayed due to heavy snow in Geneva which would make them late for the start of Sabbath. They burst into jubilant celebration when they learned the flight would take off and land just before 4:00 pm enabling them to get home before sun down.
Upon picking up our rental car in Tel Aviv and then driving about two hours north to Tiberias (along the Sea of Galilee) we acclimated ourselves to seeing all signs in Hebrew and Arabaic - two beautiful languages from two interesting people groups who seems to have so much in common - yet so much division as well (English is listed third).
Driving through the Golan Heights (which are absolultely stunning) and seeing miles of fenced in pastures with big yellow signs warning of land mines. What a travesty that so much beautiful land is being wasted because of the numerous land mines - one further vivid illustration to me why every country should sign an agreement ending the use of land mines (shame on the US, China and Russia, among others).
Seeing guns in peoples pockets on the street of Tiberias. This is not necessarily referring to police and military service men and women - but also every day civilians wearing jeans sporting a visible hand gun by their side. One such guy was sitting next to us in a Messianic church service in Tiberias on our first day. And no, this did not go over well with the Mrs. :)
Noticing a bomb shelter location clearly indicated in our hotel.

For clarification, Israel is safe, which may seem a bit contradictory given the above images and some of the daily news headlines, but it is indeed true. In fact, many US cities have a higher homicide rate per capita in comparison to Israel (including deaths from terroristic acts). That said, there is a profound sense of tension which permeates the area, which one could of course assume from watching the news and reading history. This sense of tension is even more poignant upon being here in person. It is just impossible to not somehow be confronted with it (for us this has occured by observing people, talking with locals about where to visit or planning how to drive from Tiberias to Jerusalem while avoiding/getting through the West Bank, among other examples). I am writing this up on the Mount of Beatitudes, where Jesus declared his famous "Blessed be" statements. He later talked about how we are love our enemies. How wonderful it would be if that message were able to permeate this beautiful land.

A professor where I work who I greatly respect is always talking about the value of travelling - of seeing different cultures, meeting new people and going outside your comfort zones. I am trying to put this into practice to the best of my ability here - discovering new places, meeting and talking to as many people as possible, etc. There is nothing like a free education. I have read about the Israeli - Palestinian conflict for many years. Certainly by no means an expert, I do have views based on these readings. But being here in Israel put things in a different perspective. It is just so fascinating meeting with Arabs and Jews alike here in the "Holy Land" to interact with them and see how they live on a daily basis. It is our hope that these next two weeks will continue to be an a source of rich learning and that we will have a greater understanding for some of these images above.

In conclusion, I wanted to relay some words of wisdom from Hanna - our young waitress at a lovely restaurant located on a Jewish kibbutz in the city of Ein Gev, a quaint little village located on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Many of us in western countries love to complain about all facets of life - I would certainly be among those (see the land mine reference above for proof). When discussing with us the security situation, Hanna with great pride informed us that "we have had a peaceful situation for the last four years". She seemed quite proud of this, and then went out of her way to inform us about the highlights of places we should visit along the Golan Heights. Whether the "peace" (albeit relative as conflicts are happening all the time) will last is always an open question. Hanna's optimism, which surely represents many others in the region - Arab and Jew alike - should be applauded. We are looking forward to meeting more people like Hanna, and all sorts of other interesting people, throughout the rest of our trip.

Parenting advice from a childless man (top 10)

2010-08-07T02:23:00.000-07:00

What is the difference between a child born at 6 pounds 3 ounces as opposed to a child born at 6 pounds 8 ounces? I guess you could say the answer is five ounces, but for me the answer is I don’t care.

This is just one bit of advice in my top ten bits of “Parenting advice from a childless man”. I am 33 - recently married - and we are on the permanent three to five year plan when it comes to bringing offspring into this troubled world. By American standards, 33 and childless is a bit bizarre. By Europeans standards, I am just on target to have my 0.3 children by the time I hit 54.

That said, I feel that as childless man, I notice former “normal” people start doing strange things. And I feel that parents, perhaps after all those sleepless nights of tending to a screaming kid, need an outsiders’ perspective on how to rear your children. So here it is - the top 10 pieces of advice:

10. It seems there are so many good parents who think their value as a mother/father is determined by how many toys they buy their kids. I have witnessed kids who get the greatest joy out of playing with toilet paper and other ordinary household (or apartment-hold for us peasants who still haven’t mortgaged away our lives) objects. So for the sake of helping you financially-strained parents, here is a bit of advice: keep 2 of the toys that your kids’ possess and throw away the other 400. Sell them all at a garage sale to all the parents who haven’t been enlightened by this blog. Thanks.

9. I speak a few foreign languages - all with very distinct Jersey accents. I love languages - there is something fascinating about them. That said, I just can’t get my head around this whole notion of baby talk. Your kid doesn’t understand it, and often times, neither do you. Not that I am an “expert” in this field, but maybe your kid would learn to speak better if you actually talked normal to him/her. Thanks.

8. I love when a screaming kid disturbs a heartfelt church sermon (or some other public ceremony), especially when there is a nursery just downstairs. The parents can’t learn anything because they are trying to get their kid to shut up. Everyone around is annoyed. Which begs the question - why not put them in the nursery? Thanks.

7. Please don’t tell us how much your child weighs upon being “welcomed into this world”. Frankly, I came into this world and don’t know how much I weighed as a newborn. It hasn’t affected me one bit. I am really normal ….. Also, think about it, when someone dies, do we announce his/her weight in his obituary? Imagine - “Johnny Alfred Hutchinson died at 99 today. He weighted 356 pounds and 6 ounces. He was a good chap.” So therefore, I am afraid to inform you, that I don’t care how much your kid weighs upon being born unless it is more than 20 pounds or less than 2. Thanks.

6. I wonder why in a “birth announcement” we scream out “It’s a boy!!”. Or even better: “It’s a girl!!”. It seems like that the odds are 50 - 50 that is one or the other. Please only announce the sex of your child in a birth announcement in such dramatic fashion if it is a half boy, half girl. Thanks.

5. When I was growing up many decades ago, my parents would get Christmas cards from many friends and family. The images were often of Santa Claus, Christmas cookies or Baby Jesus in a manger. It seemed to fit with the holiday season. Nowadays, many seem to think the holiday season is best portrayed by putting their kids in some picture, going to Walmart and buying numerous cards and then sending them to everyone they know. I don’t have my masters or PhD, am just a simple guy, but am wondering what the correlation is between parents showing off their beautiful kids on a Christmas card, often times without text, and the birth of Jesus Christ? Thanks.

4. Ah, everyone is a winner in this day and age. If someone fails out of school, as long as he/she tried, then they are “champions” in our eyes, right? And thanks to all you good parents out there who clap and cheer when your child does nothing particularly interesting, we are raising a whole bunch of “winners” even if their biggest life achievement is tying their shoe. So parenting advice #4 - please stop congratulating your child and overpraising him/her for doing nothing special. It will make society better. There will be many more people like me who take time out of their busy schedules to help their friends with such advice. Thanks.

3. Your kid is not as “advanced” as you think. You tell us that little Johnny is the best “counter” in his nursery school or that sweet Susie is writing her name more legibly than anyone else in the class. The only problem is, the other parents in the nursery school are all saying the same thing about their kids. Upon hearing about how special your kid is, we usually say something awkward that allows you to feel that your kid is the best. In all likelihood, your kid is probably just average. Please don’t put us in awkward social situations by telling us how great your kid is. Thanks.

2. Marketers love to pull on your heart strings. Marketers tell you to buy some ridiculously expensive baby carriage with every contraption imaginable because it will give your child a better life. The fact is that the marketers don’t care all that much about your kid’s happiness or safety. They really just want your money. Please remember that next time you are tempted to buy a baby stroller that costs 5 grand because it is “thoughtfully designed for your child”. Thanks.

1. Please don’t tell me I will understand all of this only when I am a parent and no longer a childless man. Thanks.

A different perspective on the health care debate

2009-08-06T14:31:00.000-07:00

Americans are vehemently debating the pros and cons of socialized medicine. The debate is getting nasty as individuals on both side of the issue voice their opinion. I would like to offer a different perspective.

Everyone should just stop this debate and instead focus on a different issue. According to the Economist (and surely many other reports and research studies could support this), medical costs of obesity surpass $200 billion a year in the United States. Obese are more prone to heart disease, diabetes, bone disorders and cancer, notes the Economist article, and the medical costs of an obese person are $700 more than a thin person.

Shockingly, the obesity of Americans stood at 15 percent in 1980. In 2009, in our developed technological times, that number has skyrocketed to 33 percent. How it can it be? So, with the goal of saving the American economy billions in health costs, I offer Barack Obama the following practical advice:

10) Levy a 100 percent tax on all soda.
9) Implement a 150 percent tax on all fast food joints. The average cost of a Bic Mac should be no less than 15 bucks after tax.
8) Ban drive thrus. What a great benefit it would be if individuals actually had to get out of the car to buy their junk food or go get money from the bank.
7) Ban golf carts on the golf course. Self explanatory.
6) Somehow make exercise mandatory. Set up bike paths all across America. Give everyone a free gym membership. Tax those that disobey these measures to pay for the gym membership costs. Perhaps with this silly idea you had to send more troops to Afghanistan, you can also make those that disobey these measures spend time in boot camp so that they are in solidarity with the troops.
5) Ban all you can eat buffets and make restaurants reduce the portions on the plate by 50 percent.
4) Undergo an immediate investigation into the food industry’s labeling practice. Doesn’t it seem that 75 percent of all products in a supermarket state “Reduced Fat” or “Fat Free”? What was the percentage of food products that stated “Fat Free” on the shelves in 1980? Surely it was significantly less. Which begs the question - is someone lying in writing “Fat Free” on these products?
3) Ban television remote controls. Imagine the exercise that would go into people’s daily lives if they actually had to walk over to their televisions to turn the channel as opposed to sitting on their LazY Boys and clicking away? Don’t think there were many remote controls on televisions back in 1980 …… In addition, limit video game use. President Bush had the ability to listen in on our phone calls by wiretapping. Surely you can set up something to monitor how much time our children are playing video games, instead of playing outside. Perhaps there will be some resistance due to privacy. Say something along the lines of that "it is a national security issue". It worked for Bush..... And you are a smoother talker than he was .....
2) Using your presidential powers, pass through a law that would punish any person seen driving to go to a location less than 500 yards in distance (mail box, neighbours home, etc). First offense would be a hefty fine. Second offense would be forced military service in that war in Afghanistan that you made worse by sending in more troops (we can go into the details of that another time……)
1) Using your presidential powers, pass through a law that would call for immediate public execution of any individual who is seen driving their car from one end of the shopping mall to the other in order to save steps on walking in between stores.

Of course for all these measures, make exceptions for those with genuine, legitimate disabilities or sicknesses.

So President Obama, enjoy the savings accumulated from adopting these measures. And you are welcome for the advice.

And now a message to my fellow Americans: after these recommendations are put into law, then we can all debate socialized medicine. In the meantime, it is my pleasure to bring consensus to this acrimonious debate. Thank you very much.

3 points on the economic crisis: We deserve it, bailouts suck and shame on capitalistic snobs

2009-03-07T05:40:00.000-08:00

I don’t claim to be an economist, nor do I have a sophisticated understanding of how financial markets work. That said, I have a few points / questions on the financial crisis.

I. We deserve it

I don’t mean to sound nasty and unsympathetic as most all people are suffering to varying degrees as a result of the economic meltdown. But the fact of the matter is we have all been too selfish. Governments, companies and individuals in many parts of the world have gotten in over their heads.

Individuals have gotten mesmerized in “keeping up with the Joneses”. The American dream of owning a house has become an ingrained unalienable right that many citizens feel they warrant and deserve. And once many do move into homes they can’t afford, they build additions as quickly their neighbours’ homes increase in size and buy automobiles as fast as their friends do. The consequences have been lethal (watch a presentation from IMD Professor of Finance Arturo Bris explaining the correlation between the sub-prime and the financial crisis). Nothing better exhibits the “keeping up with the Jones” syndrome than seeing numerous wealthy people and celebrities (including Ed McMahon, Jose Canseco and Evander Holyfield) foreclose on their homes.

Should we not re-think the notion of rewarding a credit history? I recall a few years back being admonished by a close family relative for not establishing a credit history. I didn’t have a credit card at the time and I didn’t have debt such as car payments, mortgages, college loans etc. “You will have such a difficult time getting a loan if you don’t establish a credit history,” he informed me. In essence, I needed to live beyond my means in order to be rewarded with a loan in the future. Something is wrong with that picture. The "I need a house" mentality is the US drug, but many people in numerous parts of the world have been living beyond their means in other ways as well.

Business is just as guilty in trying to “keep up with the industry leaders” and have exasperated the situation with irresponsible ethical behaviour. Meanwhile, governments such as the US have put their countries in trillions of dollars in the red as a result of foolish and unnecessary spending (anyone prefer a mulligan on supporting the Iraq war knowing now what it costs economically - which of course would have been just one of many reasons to voice opposition).

II. Bailouts suck

The US car industry has been operating in an archaic fashion for years, so why give them money to survive with an unsustainable model? Nicholas Sarkozy wants to bailout the French newspaper industry. And of course that wouldn’t create a conflict of interest? None of the bailouts irk me more than bailing out those who took on unwise home mortgages in the US. I would think it would be far more advantageous if we learn our lesson and start anew by living within our means. What’s wrong if somebody who foolishly bought a home they couldn’t afford instead has to rent an apartment? These bailouts address the symptoms, not the roots of the problem.

But if we do continue in this universal bailout mentality, then I want my piece of the pie too. When will the government bail me out for my depleting stock portfolio? If everyone else is getting money for their losses and poor decisions, why can’t I have some cash to make up for a lot of red and negative symbols accumulated over the last year as the result of unwise investments?

III. Shame on capitalistic snobs

Those capitalistic die-hards who have looked down on anything remotely socialistic and communist are being humbled. The US and EU unemployment rates stand at over 8.0 percent, while communist China’s stands at just over 4 percent. China is the U.S. government's largest foreign creditor and surely no one capital influences the US economy more then Beijing. China's owns nearly $1 out of every $10 in U.S. public debt. Each week the Economist publishes countries’ trade, exchange rates, budget balances and interest rates. The most recent edition publishes the US at -820.6 billion in trade balance, while China is at +314.8 billion. What would Joseph McCarthy be saying now?

Numerous commentators have pointed out that while Europe dominated the 19th century and US the 20, China is surely to be the leaders of the 21st century. Numerous articles in the likes of the Financial Times allude to the fact that China will play a pivotal role in helping the world recover from our economic doldrums.

I am not necessarily advocating socialism or communism - all systems are flawed and surely China and other communist states have their issues. Point number 3 is more a reprimand of the “enlightened” capitalists who fail to notice the flaws of their own system as well.

The Reason for God despite Christianity's PR Pitfalls and the Christian Right

2008-11-03T13:40:00.000-08:00

It seems now more than ever, religion dominates mainstream discourse. Surely talk of "God" through various mediums is more prevalent in societies around the world now than in generations past, thanks in large part to technological advances. Religious passion and fervour, regardless of in which direction it is being expressed, is portrayed in the media and debated and discussed in the open as never before.

However, as a self-professing Christian, I can't help but notice how talk of the God of Christianity has gone way off the beaten track. In one way, it seems that as talk of religion and God is more open, the farther we are getting from the core message. In this blog, I would like to point out the flaws of the "moralistic right" and offer an alternative of the true meaning of Christianity as described by Dr Tim Keller in his book "The Reason for God, Belief in the Age of Skepticism".

Christianity's PR Pitfalls and the Moralistic Right

As a Public Relations professional and aficionado, I find it fascinating to see how words and actions influence behaviour and opinion. "It's not what you say, it's what they hear" is something we PR professionals keep in mind. It is also important to stay "on message". Unfortunately, it seems something has gone wrong in the communication of the Christian faith. The very words "Jesus Christ" - perhaps the two most powerful words out there - conjure up many emotions and perceptions. And probably it is safe to assume they are aren't positive for those of you non-believers reading this blog. Why is that? Why does saying "Jesus Christ" stir up so many bitter emotions for non-believers? David Kinnaman, President of the Barna Group, a respected research organisation in the United States, recently completed years of research into how 16 -29 year olds who are outside the Christian faith, perceive Christians. The most common perceptions were:

· Anti - homosexual
· Judgemental
· Hypocritical
· Too focused on getting converts
· Sheltered
· Too political

Some people may be turned off to Christianity simpy because they have studied religions and the world around them, and for some reason, find belief in Christ as the means to salvation as uncredible and thus their impressions of Christianity are negative. So be it. But another reason is that Christians are delivering the wrong message by "selling" a moralistic version of Christianity and "getting in bed" with politicians. Too much of the message conveyed is what "some" Christians are against, as opposed to what Christianity stands for. The anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, pro-Israel and pro Iraq war platform taken by some within the church only stir negative connotations. To my knowledge, Christ made little reference to such issues in the Bible. Make no mistake - Christians have every right, just like people from any other faith or belief, to have their own opinions about the aforementioned issues based on their own respective moral compasses. However, the church needs to re-focus on the true message (described in the second subhead) and avoid association with hot-button issues as being the core. This applies both for conservatives (i.e. the Christian right) and the left (i.e the Jeremiah Wrights and Jesse Jacksons of the world). Christians need to keep in mind that there are over 38,000 church denominations (according to Wikipedia). While it is essential to avoid the pitfalls of "open-minded moral relativism", it is also important to recognize that there are over 38,000 different interpertations of what God revealed in the Holy Book. Countries in Europe face a different type of dilemma: the churches' association with the government. Church taxes for all citizens in many places on the continent and the power of the Vatican/Pope in part explain why the birthplace for Calvinism and Protestantism is now the cradle for atheism. Re-focus is necessary, and I believe that the book "The Reason for God, Belief in the Age of Skepticism" by Dr Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, is a guideline for Christians and provides intellectually sounds answers for searching non-believers.

The Reason for God

Using literature, philosophy and real-life conversions from interactions with New York City skeptics, Keller explains with great respect how faith in a Christian God is a soundly rationale belief held by thoughtful people of intellectual integrity with a deep compassion for those who truly want to know the truth. In Part 1 one of the book, he talks about the leap of faith it takes NOT to believe. In the second part, he describes the reasons for faith. Chapters "The True Story of the Cross" and the "Reality of the Resurrection" are particularly poignant and truly describe what Christ is about, not what He is against.

Keller provides thoughful responses to the most troubling of questions that both believers and non-believers struggle with:

- Why does God allow suffering in the world? (listen)
- How could a loving God send people to Hell? (listen)
- Why isn’t Christianity more inclusive? (listen)
- How can one religion be right and the others wrong? (Listen)

Any of my attempts to briefly analyze the questions above would do little justice to the fine work of Dr Keller. Therefore, go to http://thereasonforgod.com/ to learn more. You can also listen to a talk he held at Google's headquarters. The message he lays out is in my opinion the core message of the Christian faith and, at a personal level, has helped shape my outlook on life. Regardless of what one believes, the book is well worth a read and the issues Keller raises are well worth contemplating.

Is it all Religion's Fault?

2008-08-19T14:55:00.000-07:00

Did you ever notice that every time there is a global altercation in which the countries evoke religious justification for military action, calls emerge that advocate for an elimination of religion?

The US invasion of Iraq, Israel and Palestine, the rise of Islamic jihad, Buddhist monks in Tibet and Darfur are just some of the global conflicts in the world in which traditional religion seems to be at the forefront of the confrontation. The argument can be taken even to unarmed conflicts such as the tensions that exist between neighbors of different faiths living in free, democratic western societies.

Richard Dawkins, author of the God Delusion, points out some of divisiveness of religion in his documentary "Root of All Evil."

Here are among his comments:

- “The Afghan Taliban and the American Taliban [Christian fundamentalism in the United States] are good examples of what happens when people take their scriptures literally and seriously.”
- "Militant faith is back on the market."
- "Religious faith is divisive and dangerous."
- "Religions irrational roots nourish intolerance to the point of murder."

It is true that religion does play a role in political strife. Religion informs theirs followers that they have the truth. Therefore, those that do have the truth have a sense of superiority vis-à-vis those that don't adhere to their views.

However, Dawkins and others who point to religion as the reasoning for the world gone bad miss one key point. There premise does not answer the question about conflicts that occur in which traditional religion is not at the forefront of the debate.

In the conflict between Russia and Georgia, there is no known or obvious "traditional religious agenda" for the violent actions of either party. Consequently, the chorus that normally sings of religion's destructiveness has been rightfully silent.

Dawkins also don't account for the bloodiest century on record - the 20th - in which traditional "non religious" leaders / groups ravaged legions of people. Dawkins argument doesn't hold when examining the barbaric actions of atheist Joseph Stalin or the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. In addition, Dawkins fails to mention that religious men / groups have been agents for peace in the world. Let's not forget that Martin Luther King and Desmond Tutu both brought about reconciliation among oppressed African-Americans and South Africans respectively thanks to their Christian worldviews. Mahatma Gandhi, inspired by Hinduism, helped take down the greatest empire at that time through peaceful, non-violent means. Elie Wiesel, a Jewish concentration camp survivor, has been a voice for peace despite his people's suffering at the hands of Nazi violence.

All that said, I still do agree in principle with Dawkins, however just with a twist. While Stalin did not kill in the name of the Jesus of Nazareth or Allah, he still was motivated by his own worldview: an intellectual perspective on the world or universe. Every person, even agnostics and atheists such as Richard Dawkins, hold a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, also known as a religion.

Religion has become the scapegoat for all the world problems, when in actuality the onus should be put on the individuals who carry out heinous acts. All mankind use their set of beliefs (AKA - religion) as a basis for their actions. Rather than bashing religion, it would be far more productive for people to define their reason for existence, understand their ultimate destiny and have a fundamental knowledge as to what determines right and wrong behaviour. I hope that the time will come when people realise how the attack on all religions is simply a crutch to avoid answering the most important question we all have to face: which worldview/religion is able to bring all people together, serve as a means for peace in the world and is most true and accurate?

John McCain’s Fading Memory

2008-08-18T13:55:00.000-07:00

I sincerely respect my elders, just don’t think they should be President of the United States. I wouldn’t vote for George Washington or Abraham Lincoln if either of them were starting their Presidency at the age of 72. Ronald Reagan, who began his second term at the age of 73 (just years before he tragically was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease), was known for dozing off during high-level cabinet meetings. Our elders should be enjoying their retirement, not running to hold the most demanding, pressure-filled job in the world.

Over the years, 71-year old John McCain is one of the few Republicans whom I have respected and would consider voting for. However, McCain’s memory seems to be fading, or he is just becoming disillusioned in his thinking in attempt to woo neocons based on some of his rhetoric surrounding the Georgia / Russian conflict.

McCain recently refered to the Czech Republic as Czechoslavakia. I wanted to think that this was a simple verbal slip-up, but after his recent talk about the Georgia / Russia conflict, I am beginning to wonder if this is all part of McCain’s fading memory and/or further example of his longing to return to Soviet / US conflicts from decades past.

Addressing the strife in Georgia, he said - and this is a direct quote - that “In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.”

Apparently McCain has forgotten that he has been a leading supporter of the most egregious example of a sovereign nation invading another sovereign nation in the 21st century. It was just five years ago that the United States, using a false pre-tense for war, marched their way into Baghdad. Did McCain forget about this already? I didn’t think five years was so long ago, especially since the United States is currently paying the consequence for this decision each and every day. Perhaps Russia’s invasion into Georgia will allow McCain to sense what the rest of the world did just a few years ago as a dominant nation, using a false pre-tense (the Russians claiming their aggression was a peacekeeping effort) invaded a weak sovereign nation in a conflict also marred with oil implications.

I am concerned about McCain’s excessive bellicose talk in regards to Russia, such as calling for the country to be removed from the G8 and keeping them out of the World Trade Organization. McCain stated he speaks on behalf of ALL Americans in that “we are all Georgians.” As an American, please count me out of that group. I think it is our country’s role, as the lone superpower on the planet, to be a broker for peaceful reconciliation and not get involved in another complicated global altercation by choosing sides through provocative rhetoric. Having just finished reading “Russian Diary”, the last published book from the pen of award-winning Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya before her mysterious murder, I certainly realise the democratic problems facing Russia. I just don’t think it is the role of an American President - or aspiring President - to use such language. Such words only fan the flames and lead to greater anger and resentment from the parties involved. I would just like to chalk up McCain’s language to an elderly man forgetting some things about history and diplomacy - language that we hopefully won't hear from him as President of the United States in 2009.

May the gas prices keep rising

2008-06-02T11:58:00.000-07:00

Gas prices have skyrocketed and I am one of the few who are thrilled about it. That's right, I have no problem if people pay 4.00 dollars a gallon if living in the States. And I have no qualms watching it rise to 5 dollars either.

Before I delve into my logic, I should preface this by stating that I do not wish that people suffer. But I do think that it is necessary to look at gas prices vis-a-vis the government and the show-off SUV mentality that so often prevails.

Before going any further, I would like to ask a multiple choice question in reference to the picture above.

The picture of this metro station is in :

a) Detroit

b) Pyongyang

If you choose option "A", the capital of US automative industry, then you are incorrect. Actually, Detroit, a major US city, doesn't have any underground metro service. If you selected "B", Pyongyang, then you are correct. The Pyongyang metro is the deepest built and cheapest in the world. That's the same Pyongyang in North Korea, which is known for economic hardship, famine and malnourishment of its people. It is the place where many would risk their lives for the opportunity to flee in search of a better life abroad.

For starters, I don't remotely want to suggest living in Pyongyang is better than living in Detroit. I just found it rather ironic that a major city, which happens to be the auto capital of the world's number one superpower, doesn't have a metro system, while a city in one of the poorest, deprived and backward places on the planet does.

Which takes me back to my opening paragraphs. How much more expensive does gas need to be before Americans starting thinking seriously about alternative means of transportation? There are more and more Americans are traveling via public transport where it exists, using their bikes and carpooling. Great, congratulations. But there should be a public outcry demanding that the government do more in terms of public transportation.

I find it mind boggling that in a major US election year and given the price of fuel, there has been hardly a peep about funding more public transportation. Clinton and Obama had a mindless debate back in the Pennsylvania primary about the summertime break from the federal gasoline tax. This debate, used by Hillary as a way of showing her appreciation for the working class people, was a fruitless discussion considering that Congress wouldn't be able to feasibly do anything about this anyway due to timing (and that the idea is counter-productive in itself). Outside of New Mexico governor Bill Richardson raising the issue back in one of the earlier debates, there hasn't been any talk about more government funding for public transport. Mind-boggling. What about government pressure on the autmotive industry in metro-less Detroit to increase car mile standards ten-fold? Is there any excuse given the technology that exists, the price of fuel and its implications on US foreign policy considering the country's addiction to oil why the US government can't immediately implement legislation to improve car fuel standards to a minimum 30 mpg?

Society as a whole needs a new approach. Hopefully as gas prices continue to soar, this message will hit home. The people driving their gas-guzzling SUVs and mini-vans should not just feel the pain at the pump. Society as a whole should look down on such behaviour. Driving a gas guzzler should not be deemed by society as a symbol of social status, but rather as wreckless and environmentally hazardous behaviour. I was overjoyed to hear that the value of SUVs are taking a dive. SUV sales have plummeted 32.8 percent while pickups dipped 19.9 percent according to a CNN report. According to Kelley Blue Book, the SUV market has dropped and SUV's have depreciated between three to five thousand dollars in just the past six months. Great, and may the trend only continue.

What will it take for their to be an all out public transport / automotive revolution? If gas goes to 6 dollars a gallon, will that change how society and the federal government look at public transport? There should be no excuse anymore.

And there's something Detroit can learn from Pyongyang.

A Lesson for the “Open-minded” - Don’t Follow Charles Barkley’s Example

2008-03-12T13:26:00.000-07:00

The closed mindedness of the “open-minded” was on display in a recent interview between former NBA basketball star and aspiring Alabama governor Charles Barkley and CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer.

“I don't like the way the Republicans are taking this country,” Barkley said. “Every time I hear the word conservative it makes me sick to my stomach because they’re really just fake Christians, as I call them. That’s all they are.”

When Blitzer followed up on the comment, Barkley stated: “Well, I think they want to be judge and jury. Like, I’m for gay marriage. It’s none of my business if gay people want to get married. I’m pro-choice. And I think these Christians, first of all, they’re not supposed to judge other people. But they’re the most hypocritical judge of people we have in the country. And it bugs the hell out of me. They act like they’re Christians. They’re not forgiving at all.”

So basically, Barkley is judging all conservative Christian Republicans and admonishing them to not judge. This is Hypocrisy with a capital “H”. And this bugs the hell out of me, to steal Sir Charles’ terminology. And it goes to further show the narrow-mindedness of such “open-minded” people.

I do not claim to be a “conservative” or a “Republican” but I do profess the Christian faith. Regardless of where one stands on abortion or gay marriage or which party one is affiliated with, everyone is allowed to have their own beliefs based on their moral belief system. This, in my opinion, is how an open-minded person should believe, think and act. The fact that one may have a different view than Charles Barkley doesn’t make one judgmental. What is judgmental and close minded is Charles Barkley’s stereotypes. The undertone of the comments from Barkley (and others who agree with such rhetoric) is that he is open minded and enlightened for his beliefs.

Well, newsflash - this is bigoted, offensive and is reason for a public apology. But then again, maybe I am just a judgmental, fake Christian for stating this......

Obama, Paul would get this Skeptic's vote

2008-01-14T12:53:00.000-08:00

Like many others, I get a tremendous amount of joy in following the US Presidential campaigns. Admittedly, it is a more or less a waste of time as campaigns have been and most likely will continue to be a popularity contest. Whoever can make the most false campaign promises, appear to be like a nice person and lure in the most corrupt companies to raise exorbitant funds to foot the bill for the popularity contest wins. We all know that politicians are liars who will do and say anything to get votes. But maybe there is a side to campaigns where we actually hope that what they say actually turns out to be remotely true.
And perhaps that is the reason that I am hoping Barack Obama will end my skepticism. I have never heard a politician speak with such hope, clarity and unity in my 30 years of existence. For me, any candidate who simply blasts the other party without reason because he/she can’t stand on his/her own merits is the ultimate turn off. Maybe I am naïve, but I actually believe in Obama’s message of hope and unity. As a free-thinking independent, I long to see a person in the White House who doesn’t think red vs. white, but rather united. The man may be inexperienced, but he seems to have convictions and principles. And for my money, the most important issue in 2008 is the war in Iraq and re-building America’s image abroad. It is nauseating to think about all the candidates who on both sides of the aisle supported the Bush war in Iraq. Barack Obama is the only serious contender who had the foreknowledge to recognize what the war would do. He said back in 2003(paraphrased) that the war would lead to a long-term occupation and a damaging of America’s image abroad. On both accounts, he was exactly, 100 percent on the money. An African American who does not use his race for gain would be key to bridging the gap between blacks and whites. With his knowledge of Islam, yet a converted Christian, Obama in my view is the perfect candidate to restore America’s image abroad while also engaging Arab countries to modernize and reject extremism.
Hillary Clinton is the exact opposite. Divisive and controlling, I would give up my vote for the rest of my life before checking her name off on election day. What is even more sickening to me than a Republican who supported the Iraq War is a democrat who did the same and then when things turn out horrific, not own up to the mistake of her vote. Hillary's incessant blaming of Bush for the war is maddening. She is just as responsible for having gone along with it. Her “crying” episode the day before the New Hampshire primary almost had me in tears of joy. It seemed so desperate, especially as she attempted to use her “emotion” in an interview to portray her love and passion for the country. The fact that many voters were moved by this speech demonstrates the IQ level and gullibility of many……
John Edwards is a phony like no other. The populist of the middle class prides himself on being for the average man. He has centered his campaign around using two phrases: mill and middle class. Mill describes his humble beginnings. Middle class is the economic class he is trying to defend. Such rhetoric means nothing when you simply consider the fact that Edwards, who is worth almost 30 million in assets, paid 400 dollars for a hair cut.
On the Republican side, I am most impressed by the candidate who has no chance of winning: Ron Paul. A true anti-war candidate who clearly is a free-thinker by going against his party and public opinion back in 2003 in the run-up to the Iraq War, Paul has also demonstrated to me a solid understanding of economic policy coupled with conservative views on social issues, which he does not exploit to manipulate the Christian vote, unlike others such as Mike Huckabee. I personally am a practicing Christian and therefore would never slander another believer. But I do question the way in which Huckabee could be using his faith to win votes (for example, standing in front of a cross for a speech). He has also demonstrated a lack of knowledge in foreign affairs. I would question his ability to unite a country and world.
Mitt Romney comes across as arrogant and I disagree with many of his economic and immigration policies. His sudden shift to the pro-life side also raises alarm. However, the man seems to be one sharp guy.
John McCain is another of the respectable candidates. I question how a 70 year old can lead a country. But I do think he has principles, even though I don’t agree with his sometimes hawkish approach to foreign policy.
Rudy Giuliani is the biggest joke on the Republican side. Anyone who exploits American tragedies for his own political gain deserves nothing more than the one sentence written here.
One of the things I frequently think about is how many of these candidates who hold public office as senators or governors actually are fulfilling their campaign promises that they ran on probably just a few years ago. What is Hillary Clinton doing as Senator of New York while she is spending every ounce of her time and energy on her campaign? The same can be asked of many of the other candidates.
And by the way, is any candidate ever going to speak about the importance of investing in public transport as a means of reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil and thus international conflict? Please, someone make this a key point to their campaign…..

The Common Mistakes of the US Military and US Basketball Team

2007-11-24T10:58:00.000-08:00

There is much in common with the way US Basketball team and US military approach their opponents.

US basketball teams bring multi-million dollar, talented, pampered superstars to international competitions, expecting their very presence to dominate the opposition. The US military enter conflicts with a similar mindset. With a military budget larger than the next 14 biggest spenders combined, there is an expectation that just showing up will take down dictators and terrorist organizations and create democracy and new revenue streams, mainly through oil.

There is one thing both forget – you have to know and respect the opposition. Both the US basketball team and government have failed to do so in recent encounters. Both have been thoroughly embarrassed.

It all started in 2002 for the US Basketball team. With a team of NBA all-stars, the best players in the world were supposed to ease to victory on their home soil during the FIBA 2002 World Championship. Instead, they finished in fifth place. In 2004, the US finished third in the Olympics and then another third at the 2006 FIBA World Championship in Japan. After being stunned by Greece in the semi-finals, legendary head coach Mike Krzyzewski innocuously referred to the Greek players by the number on their jersey rather than their actual name. He even admitted to not knowing much about “number 4”, who is Theo Papaloukas, not an international household name but one of Europe’s best all-around players. It was mind-boggling that a coach with Krzyzewski’s pedigree had simply not done his homework prior to the encounter.

The current US administration, and to a large degree the American public, are guilty of the same mistake with the Iraq War (not to mention countless other international conflicts). “Shock and Awe” – fighter jets were supposed to just arrive in the Iraqi desert and unite a democratic Iraq so that US citizens can continue their oil-gorging lives thanks in part to Iraqi resources. As history has proven, there was clearly a lack of historical context in Iraq. The US administration had not done its homework. Dick Cheney’s infamous “we will be greeted as liberators” comment is the most obvious example of this mistake in thinking. Clearly, the American people who supported this military conflict did not have any grasp on the historical ethnic dilemmas between Kurds, Shia and Sunnis.

It is my hope that history won’t repeat itself in Iran. Neo-cons use the term military conflict with haphazard ease. A sizeable minority would support such a military altercation in Iran, yet another Arab, oil rich country.

But have these people done their homework about the history of Iran? Have they seen how America’s own selfish interests in the country back in 1953 set the course for the Islamic revolution? The United States played a significant role in creating the current mess in Iran when the CIA overthrew the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh, a popular figure in Iran for nationalizing Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Following the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh (for which the US later apologized), the autocratic Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was installed as the leader of Iran, with the support of the US. This set the stage for the Islamic revolution.

This blog is not intended to be a history lesson of Iran. Instead, it is a plea to gain a historical context of a situation before arbitrarily declaring support for armed conflict. By doing so, hopefully more and more people will learn a valuable lesson from history – that military conflict almost always leads to greater disaster.

Let Them In - Open The Doors

2007-11-08T13:08:00.001-08:00

There are a plethora of hot-button issues on the plate for the 2008 US Presidential Election.

As an undecided voter, I want to see a candidate come out and risk public execution by declaring an opening of the borders. That’s right – let all those poor Mexicans into the United States.

Why haven’t any of our socialistic thinking friends in the Democratic Party adopted such a stance? Don’t they care about the fact that there over 2500 migrant injuries per year according to Doctors Without Borders*? Don’t they have a heart for the people that were simply born into poverty and are looking for a better life for their families? Liberals looked on in shock at apartheid unfold in South Africa. Why can’t they feel the same degree of indignation when they see global apartheid witnessed first-hand all over the world? In the same way, such generous liberals should realize that much of the money that we contribute towards developing nations does not go into the hands of the poor but potentially winds up smuggled, in Swiss bank accounts or supporting some rich politicians’ personal mansion. I haven’t heard of one example of how an immigrant sent money back to his country and it went a politicians' sludge fund – it always ends up back in the hands of the family in need. That’s what I call a positive form of humanitarian aid.
Why can’t any big-thinking rich Republican candidate see the positive economic ramifications of allowing immigrants in the country? No they say, it will take away our jobs. But why can’t they instead see immigrants coming to the United States to contribute to the economy by purchasing good and services and pay taxes? By all appearances, it seems as though Russian born and Google co-founder Sergey Brin has done is share of contributing to the economy. Google has created just a few jobs - over 15,000 worldwide, not to mention creating a tool that all of use in our every day lives (in fact I used it a number of times to write this blog). I think it is safe to say that Brin has been paying some of his billions towards American taxes. Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang (Taiwanese-American) and Ebay founder Pierre Omidyar (French born to Iranian father) are two of many other examples. They were educated you might say – not some poor person. Have you ever heard of the email service hotmail? There founder, Sabeer Bhatia, came to the United States from India with 200 dollars in his pocket back in 1988.*

We like to think that us civilized people from industrialized nations work at a significantly higher standard than immigrants. Correct me if I am wrong, but I never heard of an American, rich or poor, risk his/her life and cross a border, travels thousands of miles (often times without a family) to work on some construction site. If an immigrant had enough work ethic to come into a country in order to provide a brighter future for his/her offspring, I think it is safe to say that you will get a good day’s work from that same person.

Then are those that state that immigrants will take our jobs. How many of us are competing for jobs as waiters and waitresses? Anybody out there want to clean the streets? How about the toilets? In 1960, 4 in 10 did not have a high school degree. Now that number is just 1 in 10*. Just decades ago, a university education was considered something special. Now it is the norm, even for typical poorer families. I haven’t heard of many university grads lining up at the local McDonalds seeking employment as a cleaner. Fact is, immigrants fill a void. Someone has to clean up, mow the grass, build a house, etc. In the same way, as our population ages and families are having less children then ever before, someone has to take care of senior citizens.

And what about you on the Christian right. You oppose abortion, yet you say that allowing immigrants in the country would take our jobs away. Just as a potential human being that had been aborted would not take away our jobs, neither would an immigrant.

What is so ironic about this discussion is that in general we have no problems buying Nike sneakers which are manufactured in China. Therefore, we Americans can go immigrate in a poorer country and reap the benefits. But it doesn’t work the other way around.

Why haven’t Americans, all of whom are immigrants in our own right, warmed to the idea of opening our borders? Why can’t we realize that we are all immigrants? Did not the United States enjoy economical success at the outset of the 20th century when a wave of immigrants reached the statue of liberty? Isn’t China, with its billion plus strong population, an economic force?

Is it not ironic that an Austrian-born governor in California states with the heaviest of accents that the borders should be closed? What about Barack Obama – where would he be without a country that opened its borders to him? He wouldn’t be running for President, that is for sure. One can only wonder how many other star politicians and innovative business men we are leaving trapped in poverty behind border controls.

While the above is written using the United States as an example, it is important to note that the same issues and stereotypes apply to those from rich European countries.

*The opinions in this blog are influenced by Philippe Legrain, author of Immigrants, Your Country Needs Them. The * facts come from his book. More information at www.philippelegrain.com.

God’s Secular Warriors

2007-11-04T12:24:00.000-08:00

Christiane Amanpour of CNN just finished a brilliant series on “God’s Warriors”. In my opinion, Amanpour is one of the best journalists in the business and she did a fantastic job of portraying the mindset of radical Muslims, Jews and evangelical Christians. It certainly is well worth watching and truly an educational stimulating television viewing experience.

My only comment is why didn’t Amanpour take the series one step further by dedicating a program to God’s Secular Warriors? Here, I am talking about the “open-minded” non-religious who could never fathom the possibility of one true higher power. Well you say, they are non-religious therefore do not possess the same degree of spiritual extremism and fervor of radical Muslims, Jews and Christians. This is where I beg to differ.

There is no doubt that Christians, Jews and Muslims are passionate and intense about their faith. But so are secularists. True, secularists would not carry out a terrorist attack in the name of God. Nor do they necessarily attend a house of worship each Sunday. But they would fight in the same way for their key principles

Amanpour showed how God’s Christian Warriors would take to the streets to protest abortion and gay marriage. She could have just as easily portrayed “secularists” who favour abortion rights and gay marriage protesting in the streets with the same degree of animation. In God’s Jewish Warriors, Amanpour gave viewers a first-hand glimpse of the fervour in which Jews would die in order to preserve their Holy Land. There is little doubt that if secularists felt that their land, whether it be ordained from God or heritage, was taken, there would be intense aggression. Secularists don’t kill in the name of God. But take away their pluralism and you can be sure there would be intense backlash.

In my generalization, secularists are those that are “saved” by their open-mindedness. Secularists all encompassing enlightened belief of “to each their own” often times brings them a certain degree of sophistication vis-à-vis those who are so “old fashioned” and believe in one higher calling.

Often times secularists own religion is contradicted. Mention to a secularist that one’s religion, whether it be Christianity, Judaism or Islam, is the lone means to eternity, and you could hear rather strong opposition and questions such as how can you be sure your faith is correct? Or there are so many religions – you need to be open to them all, no? Such theories go against the true meaning of pluralism. One that is truly open to all religions therefore must accept that there are those who are monotheistic. In the same way, how can a pluralist be so certain this his/her decision to accept all Gods is the right “religion”. The problem is that many do not view pluralism/secularism as a religion, hence the reason why we would never see a program from CNN called God’s Secular Warriors.

The dictionary defines religion as: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Does not secularism, and even atheism fit into this definition? And are not secularists just as likely to fight for their beliefs as Christians, Jews and Muslims? Everyone has a view of right and wrong, their reason for being on this earth and a set of norms that guide living. And everyone, to a certain extent, is willing to live and die for it. What other choice do we have? All four religions (since I have established pluralism as a religion they are now lumped in with the aforementioned three faiths) have in common a knowledge that we all were born and we all will die. What we believe in between the time span will ultimately determine our fate and how we live on earth.
While evangelical Christians, Hindus, Muslims and Jews have little incommon, they do all adhere to this point. Hopefully soon too will secularists.

The Difference Between Brandon Pollock And Jerry Falwell

2007-09-28T08:59:00.001-07:00

Most readers of this blog will be able to identify the name Jerry Falwell, the recently deceased televangelist, Liberty University President and political activist.

With the exception of a small flock in Florida, the name Brandon Pollock is unknown.

Both Falwell and Pollock seem to have many similarities - both followed their calling by God to lead evangelical Christian congregations. Both seemed to uphold “Christian virtues”. The two shepherds of the church both would identify homosexuality as a sin.

Yet the two men's reaction to sin are quite different.

Falwell had the uncanny ability to grab news headlines for his political activity and remarks against “sinners”. He once said that, “AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals, it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”

More famously, Falwell informed a grieving world that homosexuals, along with abortionists and other secularists, were to blame for the September 11th attacks.

Meanwhile, Brandon Pollock voiced a different message than Falwell when a small number of gay protestors arrived in front of his church to protest the meeting of a conservative, family based organisation that was taking place inside the building.

Pollock, a father of six, asked to have a microphone to address the protestors that had rallied against his church and the conservative organisation.

He went on to utter three words that every individual enjoys hearing: We love you.

He then proclaimed what I believe is the essence of the Christian faith:

“There is much we agree on. If you agree that Jesus Christ is the son of God, we agree with you. .... I am a sinner saved by grace. The truth be known, I am the chief of sinners. So, understand, this is the fellowship of encouragement. We welcome you for coming out today.”*

Pollock invited the protestors to a church service on Sunday. He also provided water and opened the church doors for the protestors to use the building's restrooms.

Contrary to Falwell, Pollock didn’t make headlines on CNN or in the New York Times.

But he did make headlines in my blog (not in the mainstream media yet) because I believe there are some remarkable truths to take from his words (for the whole story, go to http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/7857.article). Pollock's words is welcomed in a society that so often views the church (rightfully or wrongfully) as anything but loving.

Falwell did his share of humanitarian work and I nor anyone else can judge his heart (if I did, I would be contradicting the premise of this blog – that judging in the name of God is dangerous and counterproductive to the meaning of the gospel message).

However, Falwell’s rhetoric did little to show the homosexual community of Christ’s grace. Even worse, Falwell’s language, along with that of some of his contemporary peers, painted a false image of the evangelical church among mainstream society.

Why didn’t Falwell blame us sinners who think bad thoughts about our neighbours and who get jealous and envious of our brothers and sisters for America’s most traumatic day in the 21st century?

If he wanted to use sexual sin, why couldn’t Falwell point to all the heterosexual men and women who simply lust at the sight of the opposite sex walking past them at work as the reasoning behind God’s allowing 9/11?

I am not gay, so I am not sure how I would have responded to the message of Falwell in comparison to Pollock.

But I am a sinner, just like everyone else in the world. For me personally, the message from Pollock resonates deeper.

It is encouraging to know and be reminded that I am saved by Christ’s grace. That message sounds a lot more encouraging that being informed of my impending judgment for sinful behavior.

Not only is this message more uplifting. It also, in my opinion, is a more accurate representation of the gospel message.

*Quotes attributed to: http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/7857.article

It Makes Me Sicko To Think About Returning To The US

2007-09-22T05:35:00.000-07:00

Watch Michael Moore’s film Sicko as I did this past week and you will understand why I am so happy to live in Europe.

Along with showing the corrupt health care system in the US, the film also goes on to show that in general, average, middle class, western Europeans live a higher quality of live than those in the US, something which I totally agree with and experience first hand having been on the Old Continent for five years.

I have far fewer bills and concerns than an average American. College tuition for my kids (even though I don’t have kids), health insurance and car insurance are all things I do not need to worry about (I mention car insurance because as Europe has a superior public transport system to the US, I do not have to worry about having, maintaining and insuring a car. By the way, can someone explain to me why many poor eastern European countries have a better public transport system than in the US?) While I do enjoy putting in a hard day’s work, I also am grateful for my four weeks of holiday per year that I am granted here in Switzerland, not to mention numerous other public holidays.

Back to Sicko, sure there are typical exaggerations from Big Mike (and it seems with each documentary he gets bigger and bigger. I guess MM can’t make fun of fat Americans since he is one). Having been to Cuba twice, I have to say that MM’s portrayal of Castro's land as a wonderful haven for medical care is simply not true. In the film, he states he wants the same care as average Cubans, nothing more, nothing less. When I was in Cuba, I recall going to a pharmacy in the touristic city of Matanzas to buy cough drops. The pharmacy had a sign which said “Foreigners Only”. You see, this particular pharmacy had the “good” medicine for the tourists who bring in the money. So much for “communist equality”, which is reason for another entry all together. In addition, Moore depicted France as a happy, go-lucky place where people work 35 hours a week, have 5 weeks of holiday and government employees come to your home to do the wash of its ailing citizens. Moore neglected to inform that as a result of the liberal employee right laws in France, 8.7 percent of the population work a 0 hour work week. This figure is dramatically lower just a few years ago when the French unemployment rate was approaching 15 percent, thanks in part to Sarkozy’s new economic reforms that are more pro-business.

But still, I can see through such hyperbole to realise that MM is right on by stating that the US needs to new health care system. It is appalling that the CEOs of health insurance providers are making millions of dollars at the expense of the care of citizens. More than anything, every person, regardless of their country, should have a mindset to take care of their fellow human beings. It amazes me that in general, the Republican party in the US which prides itself on being a part of the Christian right is most resistant to such a system of socialised medicine. Does not the Bible teach “love your neighbour as yourself” and care for the sick and poor?

The Armless Guitar Player

2007-06-13T13:52:00.000-07:00

written by Kevin Anselmo for Global Heroes

AMERICAN HERO – TONY MELENDEZ

BIOGRAPHICAL BOX:

NAME: Tony Melendez

DATE OF BIRTH: January 9, 1962

PLACE OF BIRTH: Rivas, Nicaragua

BEST MOMENT IN LIFE: The day I married my wife Lynn.

FAVORITE BOOK: I don't really have a favorite. I don't read a lot of books because it is hard for me to hold books and turn pages. I do a lot more reading in general on the Internet now. It is easier for me.

FAVORITE FILM: Raiders of the Lost Ark

For most people, playing the guitar is difficult. For Tony Melendez it comes naturally even though he doesn't have arms to play the instrument. Melendez has recorded seven albums, performed hundreds of concerts and played for the Pope six times using his own unique style. So how does someone play the guitar without arms? For Melendez, it’s all in the toes. With the guitar lying upright on the ground, Melendez sits in a chair, his toes strumming the chords to play the music.

"The main thing is tuning," he said. "I just had to listen and try to find the sound that correlates with each chord. I play all by ear."Melendez was born without arms as a result of his mother’s prescribed use of the drug thalidomide. The drug was first synthesized in Germany in 1954 as an antihistamine and was given to pregnant women in the early part of the 1960’s as a way alleviating the pain of morning sickness. By the time it was banned in 1962, over 5,000 children had been born with severe handicaps. Melendez and his family moved from Nicaragua to the Los Angeles, California area in the United States for his medical reasons. As a young child, Melendez was always confident in himself, despite his handicap. This is best evidenced by his actions at the age of 10, when he disposed of the prosthetic arms he had been using."I did go through some difficult stages when I was young,” Melendez said. “I complained to my mother that other kids would not play with me because of my situation, but that is probably a stage that most kids go through. For the most part, I always accepted who I was. People think that I really suffered growing up, but actually it was never like that." While most people would consider not having arms a drawback in life, Melendez looks at this as a positive. "For me, not having arms has been a blessing. It has opened many doors. Someone that plays the guitar with their toes is more unique." Melendez doesn’t use the standard keynotes, but instead he has his own style of tuning. Amazingly, after two months of practicing this technique as a teenager without formal training, he was able to play simple songs. Two years later he reached a much higher level.“I have asked for help, but people wouldn’t know what to tell me so I basically had to learn for myself,” Melendez explained. A devout Catholic, Melendez had an opportunity he never would have dreamed of in his life when he played for the Pope on September 15, 1987 in Los Angeles for the first of an eventual six times. Following his song "Never Be the Same", the emotional Pope approached Melendez, gave him a kiss and told him he was, ‘The Gift of Hope’. Two years later, Melendez recorded his first album entitled Never Be the Same. The release of his first Spanish album "El Muro Se Cayo and the Walls Came Tumbling Down" came in 1991 and allowed Melendez the opportunity to sing directly to the people from his native country in Nicaragua. Despite moving at an early age, Nicaragua is still a special place for him as he visits there an average of two times a year to see his extended family. He has performed several different concerts in Nicaragua, but he refers to a 1997 concert at the renowned Ruben Theater in the capital city of Managua in the presence of notable government officials as a particular highlight.

"The place was packed out and there was so much excitement," he said. "It was a very special experience. One that I will not forget." Along with seven albums, Melendez has written a book, made various television appearances and was awarded by then-President Ronald Reagan with Special Commendation as a Positive Role Model.

Melendez, his wife Lynn, and their two children currently live in Branson, Missouri, location of Melendez’s variety show "A Gift of Hope", which he performs six months a year. The other six months he spends traveling across the world performing concerts. Playing in front of the Pope helped open the door for him to travel in 27 different countries. Melendez’s appearance and music provide the message, speaking louder and stronger than any words. "I have had people come to me crying after concerts and I cannot even speak with these people because I don’t know their language,” he said. “That is the beauty of music. It crosses over barriers."In addition, Melendez speaks around the world about the dangers of drug abuse and gives presentations on the importance of self-esteem, disability awareness, cultural awareness and family support. "I just try to motivate. I am honest and up-front and I also am not afraid to share my faith and emphasize the importance of family. I try to give the message of hope."