Yesterday The Jewish Press posted that story of Lassana Bathily, a French Muslim employee at the HyperChacher supermarket in Paris, who saved the lives of 15 Jewish people in the store by hiding them in the freezer. He also had the presence of mind to shut the freezer off.
United for Israel also posted the story, but had a few more details.The article describes the scene, but I felt that it was too graphic to post here. Please follow the link to read the entire story.
On Wednesday, CBN News reported that France was ending its super tax on millionaires.
The article reports:
Socialist President Francois Hollande proposed a tax of up to 75 percent on people earning above 1 million euros a year, equal to about $1.2 million a year in the United States.
One critic of the super-tax said it makes France “Cuba without the sun.”
Many wealthy French citizens fled the country to avoid paying the super tax, including actor Gerard Depardieu, who became a Russian citizen.
Because millionaires left the country or found tax shelters, the excessive tax did not generate nearly the amount of money that politicians predicted it would.
What is at play here is the Laffer Curve.
On April 15, 2012, Forbes Magazine posted a graph of the Laffer Curve:
Contrary to what you may have heard, people are not stupid. If it becomes obvious that the harder they work the more will be taken from them, they will not work as hard. There is a point where excessive taxation does not reap positive rewards. Congress needs to remember this. It didn’t work in France, and it won’t work in America.
On Thursday, MSN News reported that the European Union human rights court has ordered France to pay thousands of euros to Somali pirates for violating their rights.
The article reports:
The Somali pirates were apprehended on the high seas by the French army on two separate occasions in 2008 and taken back to France for trial.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) said that French authorities should have brought the pirates before a judge “without delay” when they arrived on French territory after being held at sea. The EU’s top human rights court said French authorities were wrong to keep the pirates in custody for an additional 48 hours before bringing them before a judge.
“Nothing justifies such an additional delay,” the court said in its verdict, adding that it constituted a “violation of their rights to freedom and security”.
France was ordered to pay between €5,000 and €2,000 ($6,100 and $2,500) to each pirate for “moral damages”, plus amounts varying from €3,000 to €9,000 ($3,700 and $11,200) to cover legal costs.
They are pirates. They earn a living by attacking ships, stealing and kidnapping and killing innocent people. They gave up their rights to freedom and security when they chose piracy as a profession. Would the court have ruled this way if any of its members had any personal knowledge or experience with Somali pirates?
D Day is something we read about in our history books. I am not sure (until “Saving Private Ryan” was released) that any civilian understood how difficult and awful that invasion was. As we remember those events today, we need to understand that victory on D Day was not a given. We owe our freedom in America to those who stormed the beaches that day. There was a letter written by General Eisenhower in case it failed. This is what the free republic website says about that letter:
On the afternoon of July 11, 1944, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower came across a forgotten note tucked inside his wallet. He called in his naval aide, Capt. Harry C. Butcher, who, taking the paper, read:
“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that Bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”
It was dated, in Ike’s hand, July 5. Butcher knew it had to have been — and was — written June 5, when “Bravery and devotion” might yet fail the Allies on Normandy’s beaches.
That July afternoon was D plus 35. On June 6, D-Day, the largest armada in history had crossed the English Channel, landing nine divisions of sea and airborne troops in a sweeping assault upon Nazi-occupied France that put the Allies on the road to victory.
Eisenhower penned such notes on the eves of other amphibious operations, secretly tearing each one up afterward. “I told him I wanted it,” Butcher would later recall. Ike gave in, reluctantly.
The sheet of beige paper — at 41/2 by 7 inches, it looks as if it came from a notepad — is brittle and fragile, like many of the once strapping young men who advanced through surf and bullets, each carrying 75 pounds of equipment. The paper doesn’t carry the letterhead of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force, which Eisenhower was. It’s cheaply made. The four sentences on it are written in pencil, and were composed on a portable table.
Archivists at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Library & Museum in Abilene, Kan., call it the “In Case of Failure” message. It’s safeguarded in an acid-free folder in the security vault there, a veteran, too, of dark days when freedom hung in the balance.
The gift of freedom is not free. If you see a member of the military today, say thank you.
Max Boot posted an article at Commentary Magazine today about the recent events in the Ukraine.
The article states:
The agreement reached between President Viktor Yanukovych and Ukrainian opposition leaders is about as good as the anti-government forces can possibly hope to get.
Mr. Boot points out that the foreign ministers of Poland, France, and Germany, all of whom are in Kiev, all signed the agreement. The Russian delegate refused to sign it.
The article reminds of the risk the protestors will take if they refuse to sign the agreement:
Yet, many protesters in the streets are not prepared to accept what is largely a victory. Many of them refuse to disperse from Independence Square until Yanukovych resigns. Their position is understandable but misguided. As Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski reportedly told demonstrators: “If you don’t support this [deal] you’ll have martial law, you’ll have the army. You will all be dead.”
Sikorski should know what he is talking about, having spent a good part of his life as a refugee from Poland, which saw the imposition of martial law in 1981.
If the people in the streets of Kiev are willing to accept the agreement, they will avoid an all-out war and the imposition of martial law. I believe that if they sign this agreement, the countries whose delegates also signed it will make sure that the current leadership of the Ukraine and the Russians abide by the agreement.
France 24 reported today that Dubai has pardoned Marte Dalelv and will allow her to fly home to Norway. Marte Dalelv was sentenced to jail for 16 months in prison after a co-worker spiked her drink and raped her. Yes, you read that right.
When you hear people say that Sharia Law is compatible with American democracy, remember that Ms. Dalelv’s story does not represent an isolated incident.
According to a U.K. Mail article updated yesterday:
Gali (Australian Alicia Gali, 27) was working at hotel chain Starwood when her drink was spiked in the staff bar.
She awoke to find that three colleagues had raped her, but when she went to a hospital for help, they turned her over to the police and she was charged with illicit sex outside marriage.
Under UAE law, rapists can only be convicted if either the perpetrator confesses or if four adult Muslim males witness the crime.
Under the Sharia-influenced laws, sex before marriage is completely forbidden and an unmarried couple holding hands in public can be jailed.
Foreigners jailed in Dubai are deported immediately after completing their sentences.
This is an example of Sharia Law. This is one of many reasons some states in America have done a preemptive strike against Sharia by outlawing its use in their courts.
On June 6, 1944, allied troops landed on the beaches of France and began a march that preserved the freedom of Europe and America. In the process of preserving that freedom they learned how inhumane man could be to his fellow man.
There was no guarantee that the D-Day invasion would be successful, but in those days it was acceptable to ask God for favor. The Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library website preserves the prayer that President Roosevelt shared with the American people that day:
Franklin Roosevelt’s D-Day Prayer
June 6, 1944
My fellow Americans: Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.
And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:
Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.
Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.
They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.
They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest-until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men’s souls will be shaken with the violences of war.
For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.
Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.
And for us at home — fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas — whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them–help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.
Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.
Give us strength, too — strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.
And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.
And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.
With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.
Thy will be done, Almighty God.
Yesterday Fox News posted a story that provided some perspective on the current sequestration debate.
The article reports:
The sequester is expected to take a $85 billion bite out of the fiscal 2013 budget, though only half of that impact is expected to be felt this year.
But lawmakers say the government already has $45 billion in unspent money which could be used to offset the shortfall.
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. introduced legislation on Tuesday that would require the director of the White House budget office to rescind funds that haven’t yet been obligated.
The article further reports:
Republican Sen. Tom Coburn has also identified several programs at the Pentagon he’d set aside, including a video called “grill sergeants” in which the instructors show their favorite recipes; money for a plan to send a space ship to another solar system; funds to find advancements in beef jerky from France; and $6 billion on questionable research, including what lessons about democracy and decision-making could be learned — from fish.
I have enough input into my decisions–I have no plans to consult my local fish.
Please follow the link above to see some of the places where money is available and government spending can be cut. The upside of this discussion is that it will bring attention to government waste. Hopefully we can learn from our past overspending and cut our spending in order to reduce the credit card bill we are handing our children.
Reuters is reporting today that France’s Constitutional Council has rejected French President Francois Hollande’s planned 75 percent tax on people with an annual income above 1 million euros ($1.32 million). The tax was due to take effect in 2013.
The article reports:
Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said the government would redraft the upper tax rate proposal to answer the Council’s concerns and resubmit it in a new budget law, meaning Saturday’s decision could only amount to a temporary political blow.
While the tax plan was largely symbolic and would only have affected a few thousand people, it has infuriated high earners in France, prompting some such as actor Gerard Depardieu to flee abroad. The message it sent also shocked entrepreneurs and foreign investors, who accuse Hollande of being anti-business.
The article explains, “The Constitutional Council is a politically independent body that rules on whether laws, elections and referenda are constitutional.”
Raising taxes does not mean increased revenue. The Laffer Curve (google it for more information) shows the relationship between the rate at which people are taxed and the amount of revenue collected. In July, I posted an article (rightwinggranny.com) about the consequences of raising taxes on millionaires in Maryland.
The article at rightwinggranny.com explained the results of that tax increase:
Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley pushed through a millionaires tax that went into effect in 2007 and expired in 2010. Yesterday CNBC reported that during that time Maryland lost approximately $1.7 billion in lost tax revenues. The tax imposed a rate of 6.25 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year. Approximately 31,000 residents left the state during the time the tax was in effect.
People who make the kind of money we are talking about have the brains (or the accountants) and the mobility to avoid confiscatory taxation. Increasing taxes on millionaires simply sends them in search of new and better tax shelters for their wealth.
There is a worldwide spending problem. That is what we need to face, and that is what we need to deal with. Even if you confiscated all the money in the world from the ‘wealthy,’ you would still have countries operating with budget deficits. How many times when you or your spouse have received a significant raise has the money just seemed to disappear and you were left wondering how you survived on your previous salary? The other thing to remember is that in the United States, a budget cut is not a budget cut–it simply means slowing the rate of increase. Thus, if your department budget was $100 this year and expected to be $120 next year, if you increased your budget to $110 next year, that would be considered a budget ‘cut.’ That is why spending in Washington never actually decreases.
Taxing ‘the rich’ doesn’t work–decreasing spending does. It’s time we held Congress’ feet to the fire on that fact.
The problem with arithmetic is that if you always use the same numbers you always get the same answers. You can’t change the answer (solution) without changing the numbers. It’s just too rigid! Unfortunately, America is about to fall victim to the rigidness of arithmetic. It won’t be obvious until after it happens, but it is coming.
John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article yesterday about the arithmetic involved in solving America’s financial problems. He points out that what is happening in America is also happening around the world.
The article states:
American voters accepted Obama’s claim that no change is necessary, that $16 trillion of debt is nothing to worry about. In France, voters put socialists into office, vowing not to give an inch on government benefits, ever. In Spain, Greece, and elsewhere around the world, politicians promise their constituents that nothing has to change, more money can be found somewhere. They are all lying.
The article cites an article by Janet Daley that appeared in the U.K. Telegraph on Saturday. The opening paragraph of the article asks:
Was 2012 the year when the democratic world lost its grip on reality? Must we assume now that no party that speaks the truth about the economic future has a chance of winning power in a national election? With the results of presidential contests in the United States and France as evidence, this would seem to be the only possible conclusion. Any political leader prepared to deceive the electorate into believing that government spending, and the vast system of services that it provides, can go on as before – or that they will be able to resume as soon as this momentary emergency is over – was propelled into office virtually by acclamation.
After France raised the taxes on millionaires, the millionaires began leaving the country. As California continues to raise its taxes on ‘the rich,’ the exodus of the wealthy from that state continues. After Maryland raised taxes on millionaires, the number of millionaires in the state declined, and state tax revenue declined. There is a lesson here, and America needs to learn it.
The article in the Telegraph points out:
Barack Obama knows that a tax rise of those proportions in the US would be politically suicidal, so he proposes a much more modest increase – an income tax rate of around 40 per cent on the highest earners sounds very modest indeed to British ears. But that is precisely the problem. If a tax rise is modest enough to be politically acceptable to much of the electorate, it will not produce anything like enough to finance the universal American entitlement programmes, social security and Medicare, into a future with an ageing population. There is no way that “taxing the rich” – that irresistibly glib Left-wing solution to everything – can make present and projected levels of government spending affordable. That is why Britain and almost all the countries of the EU have redefined the word “rich” to mean those who are earning scarcely twice the average wage, and pulled more and more middle-income people into high tax bands. Not only are there vastly more of them but they are far more likely to stand still and be fleeced, because they do not have the mobility of the truly rich.
As the debate on the fiscal cliff continues, we need to keep our perspective on exactly what is going on.
France 24 posted an article today stating that France will close 20 embassies across the Muslim world on Friday after French weekly Charlie Hebdo published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed naked. Now wait a minute. I’m really not into naked pictures of Mohammed, but what is going on here? Did anyone notice that there were no riots after the movie “The Last Temptation of Christ” was released? That movie was certainly as obnoxious to Christians as naked cartoons of Mohammed would be to Muslims.There were some peaceful protests, as allowed by American law, but no one was killed.
At some point you have to ask, “Is the problem the film, pictures, cartoon, or whatever the current medium is, or is the problem with the protesters?” There is nothing wrong with gathering in a group carrying signs expressing your opinion–killing people, however, is another matter. I recently heard an interview where someone who had spent considerable time in Iran talked about students who were called and told to be at a specific place for a spontaneous protest. I don’t even have a problem with that (provided they are peaceful protests). I wonder if part of the reason that protests seem to get out of hand in Muslim countries is that the right of protest is not universally guaranteed–protests are organized by the government or groups opposing the government and seem to be designed to get out of hand. A spontaneous protest in a Muslim country is generally not allowed.
Over the years, Muslim leaders have mastered the art of propaganda. They have painted Israel as an apartheid state when Arabs in Israel have more freedom in Israel than they do in Muslim countries. The protests we are seeing are a part of that propaganda war. The protests are designed to make the western countries open to a concept found in Sharia Law–disrespecting Mohammed is punishable by death. The theory is that as violent protests follow any perceived slight to Mohammed or the Koran, the west will be intimidated into curtailing free speech in western countries. This is the beginning of the path to Sharia Law.
As western countries, we need to learn to condemn the people who commit violence–regardless of the perceived cause. Bad behavior needs to have consequences. Otherwise we will continue to see more of it.
A website called American Rhetoric posted the remarks of President Ronald Reagan on the 40th Anniversary of D-Day:
We’re here to mark that day in history when the Allied armies joined in battle to reclaim this continent to liberty. For four long years, much of Europe had been under a terrible shadow. Free nations had fallen, Jews cried out in the camps, millions cried out for liberation. Europe was enslaved and the world prayed for its rescue. Here, in Normandy, the rescue began. Here, the Allies stood and fought against tyranny, in a giant undertaking unparalleled in human history.
We stand on a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of France. The air is soft, but forty years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men, and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June, 1944, two hundred and twenty-five Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs.
Their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion: to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. The Allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here, and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the Allied advance.
The Rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers at the edge of the cliffs, shooting down at them with machine guns and throwing grenades. And the American Rangers began to climb. They shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. When one Ranger fell, another would take his place. When one rope was cut, a Ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. They climbed, shot back, and held their footing. Soon, one by one, the Rangers pulled themselves over the top, and in seizing the firm land at the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of Europe. Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After two days of fighting, only ninety could still bear arms.
And behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the Ranger daggers that were thrust into the top of these cliffs. And before me are the men who put them there. These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. And these are the heroes who helped end a war. Gentlemen, I look at you and I think of the words of Stephen Spender’s poem. You are men who in your “lives fought for life and left the vivid air signed with your honor.”
I think I know what you may be thinking right now — thinking “we were just part of a bigger effort; everyone was brave that day.” Well everyone was. Do you remember the story of Bill Millin of the 51st Highlanders? Forty years ago today, British troops were pinned down near a bridge, waiting desperately for help. Suddenly, they heard the sound of bagpipes, and some thought they were dreaming. Well, they weren’t. They looked up and saw Bill Millin with his bagpipes, leading the reinforcements and ignoring the smack of the bullets into the ground around him.
Lord Lovat was with him — Lord Lovat of Scotland, who calmly announced when he got to the bridge, “Sorry, I’m a few minutes late,” as if he’d been delayed by a traffic jam, when in truth he’d just come from the bloody fighting on Sword Beach, which he and his men had just taken.
There was the impossible valor of the Poles, who threw themselves between the enemy and the rest of Europe as the invasion took hold; and the unsurpassed courage of the Canadians who had already seen the horrors of war on this coast. They knew what awaited them there, but they would not be deterred. And once they hit Juno Beach, they never looked back.
All of these men were part of a roll call of honor with names that spoke of a pride as bright as the colors they bore; The Royal Winnipeg Rifles, Poland’s 24th Lancers, the Royal Scots’ Fusiliers, the Screaming Eagles, the Yeomen of England’s armored divisions, the forces of Free France, the Coast Guard’s “Matchbox Fleet,” and you, the American Rangers.
Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here. You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet you risked everything here. Why? Why did you do it? What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief. It was loyalty and love.
The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead, or on the next. It was the deep knowledge — and pray God we have not lost it — that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.
You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.
The Americans who fought here that morning knew word of the invasion was spreading through the darkness back home. They fought — or felt in their hearts, though they couldn’t know in fact, that in Georgia they were filling the churches at 4:00 am. In Kansas they were kneeling on their porches and praying. And in Philadelphia they were ringing the Liberty Bell.
Something else helped the men of D-day; their rock-hard belief that Providence would have a great hand in the events that would unfold here; that God was an ally in this great cause. And so, the night before the invasion, when Colonel Wolverton asked his parachute troops to kneel with him in prayer, he told them: “Do not bow your heads, but look up so you can see God and ask His blessing in what we’re about to do.” Also, that night, General Matthew Ridgway on his cot, listening in the darkness for the promise God made to Joshua: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”
These are the things that impelled them; these are the things that shaped the unity of the Allies.
When the war was over, there were lives to be rebuilt and governments to be returned to the people. There were nations to be reborn. Above all, there was a new peace to be assured. These were huge and daunting tasks. But the Allies summoned strength from the faith, belief, loyalty, and love of those who fell here. They rebuilt a new Europe together. There was first a great reconciliation among those who had been enemies, all of whom had suffered so greatly. The United States did its part, creating the Marshall Plan to help rebuild our allies and our former enemies. The Marshall Plan led to the Atlantic alliance — a great alliance that serves to this day as our shield for freedom, for prosperity, and for peace.
In spite of our great efforts and successes, not all that followed the end of the war was happy or planned. Some liberated countries were lost. The great sadness of this loss echoes down to our own time in the streets of Warsaw, Prague, and East Berlin. The Soviet troops that came to the center of this continent did not leave when peace came. They’re still there, uninvited, unwanted, unyielding, almost forty years after the war. Because of this, allied forces still stand on this continent. Today, as forty years ago, our armies are here for only one purpose: to protect and defend democracy. The only territories we hold are memorials like this one and graveyards where our heroes rest.
We in America have learned bitter lessons from two world wars. It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We’ve learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent. But we try always to be prepared for peace, prepared to deter aggression, prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms, and yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation we would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so, together, we can lessen the risks of war, now and forever.
It’s fitting to remember here the great losses also suffered by the Russian people during World War II. Twenty million perished, a terrible price that testifies to all the world the necessity of ending war. I tell you from my heart that we in the United States do not want war. We want to wipe from the face of the earth the terrible weapons that man now has in his hands. And I tell you, we are ready to seize that beachhead. We look for some sign from the Soviet Union that they are willing to move forward, that they share our desire and love for peace, and that they will give up the ways of conquest. There must be a changing there that will allow us to turn our hope into action.
We will pray forever that someday that changing will come. But for now, particularly today, it is good and fitting to renew our commitment to each other, to our freedom, and to the alliance that protects it.
We’re bound today by what bound us 40 years ago, the same loyalties, traditions, and beliefs. We’re bound by reality. The strength of America’s allies is vital to the United States, and the American security guarantee is essential to the continued freedom of Europe’s democracies. We were with you then; we’re with you now. Your hopes are our hopes, and your destiny is our destiny.
Here, in this place where the West held together, let us make a vow to our dead. Let us show them by our actions that we understand what they died for. Let our actions say to them the words for which Matthew Ridgway listened: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”
Strengthened by their courage and heartened by their value [valor] and borne by their memory, let us continue to stand for the ideals for which they lived and died.
Thank you very much, and God bless you all.
I miss President Reagan.
June 6, 1944, was D-Day. It was the day the allied forces stormed the beaches of France to bring freedom to Europe. Every year since 1993, Charles M. Schultz observed the anniversary of D-Day in his comic strip PEANUTS. Why? Below is a picture from one of the comic strips.
A few years ago, when I visited the Charles M. Schultz Museum in Santa Rosa, California, I found out the answer. Charles Schultz was in the army during World War II and was one of the soldiers training for the D-Day landing. Because of an illness at home, he was sent home before his unit shipped overseas. He was later attached to another unit. The unit he was originally with landed on the beaches of France and took heavy losses. That is why Snoopy is with General Eisenhower every year on June 6.
My father was one of the men who landed on the beaches of France on that day. I can’t imagine the things that he saw or had to do. I will always be grateful for the courage of all of our military and their willingness to do the things that keep us free.
Yahoo News reported yesterday that a federal judge has cleared to way for the cross in the Mojave Desert to be restored.
The article reports:
A federal judge approved the lawsuit settlement on Monday, permitting the park service to turn over a remote hilltop area known as Sunrise Rock to a Veteran of Foreign Wars post in Barstow and the Veterans Home of California-Barstow.
The park will give up the acre of land in exchange for five acres of donated property elsewhere in the 1.6 million acre preserve in Southern California.
The swap, which could be completed by the end of the year, will permit veterans to restore a cross to the site and end a controversy that became tangled in the thorny issues of patriotism and religion and made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003.
Think about this for a minute. France has graveyards of American soldiers marked with crosses to honor those who died. What has happened to America?
The article reports the history of the cross in the Mojave:
Wanda Sandoz said a wooden cross was first erected on Sunrise Rock in 1934 by a World War I veteran, Riley Bembry. He and other shell-shocked vets had gone out to the desert to recover and would hold barbeques and barn dances near the site, she said.
Her husband knew Bembry and promised the dying vet that he would look after the cross, Wanda Sandoz said. He kept the promise for decades.
“We love the cross,” she said. “It’s in a beautiful spot. … My husband is not a veteran but he feels like this is something he can do for our country.”
The wooden cross was eventually replaced with one made of steel pipes. However, the site became part of the national preserve in 1994 and that meant the cross was then on public land.
The settlement involves a lawsuit filed in 2001 by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a retired park service employee who argued that the Christian religious symbol was unconstitutionally located on government land. Federal courts ordered the removal of the cross.
Does this mean that whenever you see a cross by the side of the highway to mark the spot where someone was killed, you should sue someone to have it removed? I am sorry that the ACLU chose to be offended by this cross, but there is nothing in the Constitution that protects Americans from being offended. The cross as a symbol to honor those who sacrificed their lives for America is a tradition more than a religious item. It’s time for everyone to just relax.
The person who shot four people outside a Jewish school in Toulouse, France, on Monday morning has been surrounded by French police and is expected to surrender shortly. Who is this man?
The Jerusalem Post reports:
French school shooting suspect Mohamed Merah was jailed for bombings in Afghanistan in 2007, but escaped months later in a mass prison break organized by Taliban insurgents, a top Afghan prison official said on Wednesday.
Mr. Merah is a French citizen of Algerian origin. He escaped from Sarposa Prison in June 2008 when the Taliban attacked the prison and freed 1,000 prisoners, including 400 Taliban insurgents.
At what point do we begin to honestly examine the institutionalized anti-Semitism that is inherent in Islam? Is Islam being used as an excuse to kill Jews and people from western countries, or is that idea an important part of Islam? I think we need to answer both of those questions. Somehow the idea that it’s ok to murder innocent people just because they practice a different religion has to be declared invalid by the civilized world. That should be the job of the United Nations, but I am not holding my breath.
Image via Wikipedia
Today the North County Times posted a very thoughtful editorial by Susan Estrich. The editorial deals with her recent trip to France that included Normandy. She talks about the driver who drove her out to Normandy. He commented that he felt France had been wise to stay out of the war. He felt that it was unfair that Marshal Petain was prosecuted for treason after the war because he made peace with Hitler. When asked about the Jews, the driver said he didn’t know.
Ms. Estrich reminds us:
There were many righteous men and women in France who tried to save their Jewish countrymen and -women. Clearly, that did not include my driver’s family. Nor the Vichy government. All told, 76,000 Jews were sent to concentration camps in France. Refugees were among the first to be rounded up. Pity those who thought they would find refuge from Hitler in France. They were as much in the dark as I was. They paid with their lives. All but 2,500 of those sent to the camps in France died.
Ms. Estrich then points out that because it was January, most of the places she wanted to visit near Normandy were closed, but the American cemetery and the small museum next to it were open. She then comments on the beauty of Omaha Beach, reminding us that it was not beautiful on June 6, 1944.
She tells us:
Omaha Beach is quiet. Even on a rainy day, it is beautiful. But it was not beautiful on D-Day. The ocean was dyed red with the blood of brave Americans who waded from their boats into enemy fire —- kids who gave their lives to save each other, to liberate the French, to defeat evil.
On that day, as the tape in the museum says, they carried the fate of the free world —- “the entire free world” —- on their young shoulders.
They saved the world.
My father was one of the people who landed on the shores of France on June 6, 1944. He was one of the lucky ones who landed on Utah Beach instead of Normandy Beach. He was one of the lucky ones who came home safely. His generation paid a tremendous price so that Europe and America would remain free.
Ms. Estrich concludes:
My friend Annie was the one who told me to go to Normandy. She is the child of survivors, born in Munich after the war. She said that standing in that cemetery, she was overcome with pride to be an immigrant to this country.
For all our problems, we are still the luckiest people on the face of the globe. And one of the reasons for that is because of those young soldiers who gave their lives for our freedom —- and for the freedom of people like my driver and his family. He may not know enough to appreciate that. But I do. God bless America.
Sometimes it is good to reflect on the challenges and accomplishments of the American past. I feel that some day in the future we may be called to meet similar challenges. I hope we are still up to the task.
Image via Wikipedia
Most of the mainstream American press has not yet covered this story. It will be interesting to see if they do. YNet News posted a story yesterday about a microphone left on after the G20 meeting that picked up a conversation between President Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy. The article reported:
The conversation apparently began with President Obama criticizing Sarkozy for not having warned him that France would be voting in favor of the Palestinian membership bid in UNESCO despite Washington’s strong objection to the move.
The conversation then drifted to Netanyahu, at which time Sarkozy declared: “I cannot stand him. He is a liar.” According to the report, Obama replied: “You’re fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day!”
There goes the Jewish vote!
I don’t know much about Netanyahu. I know that he loves Israel and is doing his best to preserve it. I know that he lost his brother in the Entebbe Raid to free Israeli hostages. I know that he was treated very badly when he visited the White House in March 2010. I don’t know what President Obama has against Israel, but he obviously is not a supporter of the country.
Image via Wikipedia
The U.K. Telegraph is reporting today that France has banned tomato ketchup from its elementary schools. This has nothing to do with the ingredients of ketchup–it’s an effort to protect the French culinary culture.
The article reports:
“We have to ensure that children become familiar with French recipes so that they can hand them down to the following generation,” he (Christophe Hebert, chairman of the National Association of Directors of Collective Restaurants) explained this week. “We have to stop children from being able to serve those sauces. Children have a tendency to use them to mask the taste of whatever they are eating.” Which, if meals in French schools are anything like those on which we were brought up, is surely the point.
On the surface, this is a bit much, but I actually understand it. A child’s eating habits and taste are developed when they are young. If you want a child to grow up appreciating the complexity of French cooking, taking the ketchup off of the table is a really good idea. Most children, given the opportunity, will pour ketchup on anything on their plate that isn’t moving. Taking the ketchup off the table will give French children a chance to appreciate the fantastic heritage of French cooking. This isn’t the nanny state intervening for health reasons–this is a country attempting to preserve an invaluable heritage.
