On a wing and a prayer

As reported at Christianpost.com, il Papa is hard at work praying for peace in the Middle East. With specific intention for the persecuted Christians in Iraq, who are being ethnically cleansed by mad dog Islamists.

Pope Francis prayed for an end to Christian persecution in the Middle East on Sunday, one day after Christians were forced to flee the village of Mosul in Iraq following threats from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), a jihadist militant group.

While leading a moment of silence in St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican on Sunday, Francis said that Christians suffering persecution in the Middle East will be the subject of his “constant prayers.”

Good to know that Pope Francis is praying constantly. To no apparent effect, it would seem. The Christian population of Mosul, one of the oldest Christian communities in the world, appears to be approximately zero.

How to fight ISIS? Well, a few (hundred) well-placed drones would not be out of order. Might perhaps even get the jihadis’ attention, if we had an American president who might actually tell them to cut out their genocidal violence against Christians.

Getting back to the Pope, he seems convinced that prayer alone is sufficient, and, in what might pass muster among a middle school debate, informs us

“Violence isn’t overcome with violence. Violence is conquered with peace…”

Yes, Francis. Violence never settled anything. Like chattel slavery. Like Nazism. Like Fascism (or was that a little too close to home for those of you enjoying la dolce vita in Rome?

Look, I have a great regard for the Church of Rome, as well as the efficacy of prayer. But prayer is not enough to stop agents of evil such as ISIS. Violence is the only thing that might actually work, if we but have the will to defend Christians.

I’ll end with a question: does the Pope not control huge resources that might be brought to bear on this problem? And all he does is pontificate (sorry, couldn’t resist) about prayer. A sorry lack of spine on the part of Francis.

At the Southern Baptist Convention’s website, a pastor writes, “he question should be, ‘Are we welcoming the stranger?’” But there is, of course, more than a single question. The obvious companion question is, “how may we best stop the abandonment of these innocents by their parents?”

It is certain that many of these children come from poor, dangerous places. The same has been true throughout America’s history, and many of my fellow Baptists have been refugees from poverty and political and religious tyranny.

Keeping these children here won’t make those places less poor or safer. Encouraging them to come here, as Obama has done to a certain extent, does not help, and can only encourage more and more unaccompanied children to sneak across our border.

Such encouragement leads parents to abandon their children and ship them off on a dangerous journey to an unknown fate (on top of freight trains, for example). This should be stopped for humanitarian reasons alone.

The first steps are to secure the border and make it as clear as possible through actions, not mere words, that those who cross our border illegally are not welcome.

We will continue to deal with unaccompanied children who do get in with as much kindness as we can. But that does not change the imperatives of what must be done to retain our nation’s sovereignty and to keep families together in Central America.

Gaza Gay Pride Parade

It seems that Israel does not have many friends around the world just now. It is fashionable among the Left to bash Israel as some sort of colonial power, an “apartheid” state, etc. etc.

The BDS movement continues apace, with its intent being the demonization of Israel. It is no accident that some allegedly Christian churches have joined this unworthy effort. They have apparently forgotten, ignored, or simply denied Scripture that promised all of the land from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River to the Jews. Meaning, simply, that what the Left and its enablers consider a “European” power has somehow usurped the land and suppressed those poor, downtrodden peace-loving Palestinians.

Yes, the same Palestinians who are now controlled by the Islamist terrorist organization Hamas. Whose stated goal is hardly peace, but the destruction of Israel and the killing of all Jews they can get their hands on.

Israel is a liberal democracy, not perfect, mind you, but one in which Arabs are given full rights as citizens. And, as a liberal democracy, it tolerates things such as a gay pride parade. Things that would result in an immediate death sentence in many Islamic countries.

Islamists, such as those in control of the Palestinian rump state (good name, in several senses), would send death squads out to counter a show of gay pride. Their total intolerance is also demonstrated by their refusal to allow a single Jew to live in their territory. If one is both a homophobe and a rabid anti-Semite, this might make perfect sense. To those of us who are neither, Palestine shows itself as just another shithole unworthy of sympathy.

Fun with the Left

The Daily Beast is a must-read for those of us who would follow the latest in political correctness, multiculturalism, and, in general, turning a blind eye to liberal hypocrisy. Of course, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and again.

Today we learn of “Tea Partier Chris McDaniel’s Mississippi KKK Connection.” One can almost hear those sweet and sad sounds of Dixie being played at Jeff Davis’ funeral.

The basis for the scare headline? It boils down to this excerpt from the story (and it’s a story in the best use of the term to connote a work of fiction):

Tea Partier Chris McDaniel has taken $800 in donations from Carl Ford, a former lawyer for Sam Bowers, the imperial wizard of the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan…

Oh, the humanity. That nasty Kluxer Chris McDaniel is about to go night riding and lynching black people. Well, perhaps not. The scare headline, and the “facts” about it, put McDaniel a mere two steps away from taking money from someone who provided a legal defense to a now deceased Kluxer.

In fairness, the Beast also highlighted the somewhat closer connection between Hillary Clinton and a pedophile who raped a child. A pedophile who Hillary got off on a legal technicality. Do the Democrat’s have the perv vote sewn up yet? See, I can write scare headlines as well…

In the real world, that piece of human garbage was guilty of raping a child. Hillary got him off. And now, according to the Beast, she’s laughing about it.

That is today’s Left: taking a campaign contribution from someone who defended a Kluxer is bad bad bad; being the lawyer who gets a child rapist off on a technicality is a qualification to be our next president?

God spare us.


White Man’s Burden

Even when Rudyard Kipling’s poem was first published in 1899, it was with laden with a heavy sense of self-loathing by an Englishman: Who are we to be ordering about native peoples around the globe?

And yet, the first paragraph aptly describes the reality:

Take up the White Man’s burden, Send forth the best ye breed
Go bind your sons to exile, to serve your captives’ need;
To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild–
Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child.

As an American, I grew up too readily accepting the liberal premise that we white folk had no business subjugating the darker-hued. Also, as an American, I naturally favored our Revolution against England’s tyranny. After all, we’d learned the essentials of government and liberty from the English and Scottish Enlightenment. We were civilized and no longer needed to be ruled from afar.

Two centuries on, starting in the 1940s, Britain divested itself of its Empire. And, with the exception of the Anglosphere democracies (Australia, Canada, India, Ireland, New Zealand), post-colonial areas of the world in Africa and Asia are, to be blunt, festering sewers that lack prosperity and liberty. Places that were not quite civilized and truly needed adult supervision. And still do to this very day.

Three examples of what happens when the White Man leaves town? First, Sudan. Here’s a timeline of grief and misery since Britain granted it its Independence in 1956. After going on 60 years, they are back to being savages.

Then there are current events. Boko Haram in Nigeria, a long-festering sore on the largest nation in Africa has been in the Western news of late because of its long-standing practice of murder, rape, and selling hostage children into sex slavery. Yep, sure am glad they don’t have those Brutal Englishmen around anymore.

Finally, my greatest disappointment: Pakistan. From the Wall Street Journal, this lovely testament as to how little freedom exists there:

The 26-year-old Christian was convicted in March of insulting the Prophet Muhammad. He is one of four Pakistanis sentenced to death for the crime this year under the country’s draconian blasphemy laws, which increasingly target religious minorities in this predominantly Muslim country.

More people have been convicted under the laws in the past seven years than in the first two decades since death penalty for blasphemy was enacted by conservative dictator Zia-ul-Haq in 1986.

Is this inherent in the color of the skin of the former colonies’ populations? No, of course not. Consider India as a counterweight. Hardly perfect (which nation is?). But it does demonstrate that the Islamic-tribal culture of Pakistan overcame the English model for government and liberty, whereas the Hindi-tribal culture of India acclimated itself.

We in America have our problems. As do the Australians, Canadians, and most others (can’t think of what problems the placid Kiwis might have…). But the essential difference is that we resolve our problems under the rule of law, with freedom ensured by our institutions and enshrined in our founding documents.

Absent adult supervision, much of the former colonial world just does not seem up to this task.

Having it both ways

There is a great big double standard in our nation these days about diversity. Diversity, which is worshiped as a great and noble good of and by itself by our so-called progressives, is also used as a club against whites when it suits the Left.

The latest example? From a National Education Association worthy who bemoans the alleged lack of diversity among our nation’s teachers. From this Washington Times story, this is the (alleged) problem:

U.S. teachers are nowhere near as diverse as their students.

Almost half the students attending public schools are minorities, yet fewer than 1 in 5 of their teachers is nonwhite.

To which my reaction would be: who cares, so long as the teachers are actually teaching their students?

To think otherwise is to assume that minority students are so stupid and bigoted that they will simply not listen to any teacher who does not look just as they do. Which is apparently exactly what some in the NEA believe.

Actually, some in the NEA apparently believe two mutually exclusive things. As reported in the Washington Times,

Teachers are always pushing their students to excel, said Kevin Gilbert, coordinator of teacher leadership and special projects for the Clinton Public School District in Clinton, Mississippi.

It becomes easier for students to believe “when they can look and see someone who looks just like them, that they can relate to,” said Gilbert, a member of the NEA’s executive committee. “Nothing can help motivate our students more than to see success standing right in front of them.”

More than minority students would benefit from a more diverse teacher corps, said Ulrich Boser, the author of the center’s report.

“Even in a place like North Dakota, where the students aren’t particularly diverse relative to the rest of the country, it’s important for our social fabric, for our sense as a nation, that students are engaging with people who think, talk and act differently than them but can also be just as effective at raising student achievement in the classroom,” he said.

Huzzah! for our “social fabric.” Results don’t matter, apparently. And “social fabric” is a meaningless term, demonstrating too much formal education and not enough common sense. Let’s hire the best teachers and not spend any time worrying about the color of their skin.

Loud + Weak = War

TR Big StickWith this title in his article, Victor Davis Hanson captures perfectly Obama’s foreign policy.

Events around the world since Obama was elected have shown that our would-be enemies are bolder, our friends pushed away from us, and our military a target for cuts to the lowest levels since before World War II.

Teddy Roosevelt is famous for writing and saying what should be obvious to anyone who has ever had to face a bully: speak softly and carry a big stick. Carrying that big stick is not sufficient, of course. Your enemies need to know that you will use it if necessary.

Obama has the big stick of the still-paramount American military. But he lacks the sand to actually use it. And the world’s bullies, such as Vladimir Putin, know this very well.

Being weak is not just an embarrassment, although this is true enough. It encourages the Putins of this world, who don’t give a fuzzy white rat’s posterior about what the good people of this world may think of them. Who don’t care if an effeminate president and his poodle John Kerry bleat that Putin will be on “the wrong side of history.”

Nonsense on stilts. History, as they say, is written by the winners. Not the whiners. And, as VDH concludes,

Being weak is sometimes dangerous. Being loud, self-righteous, and weak is always very dangerous indeed.

Obama and the people he surrounds himself with are all three of these things. And the world is, as it has always been, a very dangerous place. No place for those better suited for faculty lounge debates.