PAST EDITORIALS II
Editorial 5/12/07 by Alan
"STICKER SHOCK AT THE PUMP!"
Well, it looks like we are in for another wild ride at the gas pumps as the summer season begins this year. Suddenly, Americans are getting sticker shock at the gas pumps. This time it may actually set new record highs for the consumer. The $3.00 per gallon price has always been the past mark each of us has feared. Now it seems that the scare will be the possibility of $4.00 per gallon! It is hard to understand when the oil companies are enjoying record profits! One day it is the high cost of crude oil; the next day it is the problem of refinery capacity. Is it price gouging by the oil companies or indications of a much larger, complex problem? Don’t worry because it is just a temporary surge and the prices will soon settle back down to a reasonable amount? We get angry but it does not effect our routine behavior and habits pertaining to our consumption. Maybe though we should take it as a signal of things to come and begin thinking of how we should adapt to the idea of high fuel costs for the future.
European consumers have long faced the problem of high gas prices. Fuel prices in Europe have long been the highest in the world. For example, the driver in Amsterdam pays an average of $7.50 per gallon. In England, the average price per gallon for our British cousins is about $6.50 per gallon. The biggest reason for the high gas prices in Europe is the taxes per gallon levied by the government–not the actual cost of the gas itself. Did you ever watch a foreign film or movie which takes place overseas? Everyone is driving around in "little" vehicles compared to what you see on American roadways. They are not doing it because they enjoy small cars. It is all about fuel economy. You do not see too many pickup trucks and SUVs parked in the driveways of the average home. The Europeans have been forced to adapt their lifestyles to decades of high fuel costs created by their own government by taxation. The primary concern in the purchase and operation of a vehicle is miles per gallon.
The lifestyle of most of us has been built around the car. The car allowed the creation of suburbs around our major cities. Commuting to work and shopping at the mall all revolves around the car. Good and effective public transportation systems in our major metropolitan areas vary greatly from city to city. It is difficult to get Americans away from the convenience of their personal vehicles over using the train, subway or bus service. We all have developed lifestyles which depend on our personal vehicles. The only factor which forces change is usually cost. When it costs too much, we make the necessary changes to adapt. However, when we are forced to change without preparation or warning, the changes can be very difficult. Is it smart to think now about preparing for future inevitable issues such as high gas and fuel costs? Or should we just wait until it hits us in the face and forces us to change the hard way?
High fuel costs do not just effect how much you pay at the gas pump. It effects almost everything. It impacts on our home heating, grocery costs and production of all goods and services. Airlines with increased fuel costs charge higher ticket prices. The Postal Service must raise postage fees to deliver mail. Long distance truckers find their costs doubled and pass it on to the consumer. There are very few things which we are accustomed to which are not effected by higher fuel costs. Our economy as a whole is directly effected by our dependence on oil, especially foreign oil. However, for decades we have had little reaction to the signals of a looming problem with such dependence. There is still no comprehensive, realistic national program on the issue of energy. There seems to be little incentive to develop and use alternative energy sources. There is a lot of rhetoric but little action. Sooner or later we will be forced to change. The question is why are we waiting for the inevitable to happen before we do make the changes?
Simply my thoughts for you to think about this week!
EDITORAL 5/12/07 by Kevin
Stop the War!
Now that I have your attention, I can get started on what I want to talk to you about this week. No, it has nothing to do with the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). It is not about casualties in
I am the first to admit that I have soured over the last several years on all of these “Hallmark card holidays.” Generally, these “special days”, when we celebrate something or someone, like mothers, fathers, birthdays, anniversaries, bosses, secretaries, administrative assistants, etc., I get kind of perturbed because of all the perceived requirements and materialistic spending which comes along with them. Look at Easter for example, it is suppose to be about the resurrection of Jesus from the grave but Hallmark and
However, mother’s day is a special day for me. I don’t feel the pain and anxiety of participation because it is coming from my heart and thoughts. I don’t have the feeling that I “must” do something just to keep peace with myself. There is no greater person in my life than my mother. She is the person that I can thank for bringing me into this world and the same person who was there to nurture and raise me during good times and bad. You know what, I honestly cannot think of any bad times growing up. Life was much simpler growing up in the 50’s and 60’s. My parents set certain expectations and I met each of them. I want to believe that I exceeded most of them, but only mom and dad can comment on that. My mom has always been very special. There are so many ways that she has expressed her love and concern about my well-being over the years. She has always been there when I needed support and advice. With my father’s death on February 4th of this year, my mom has had to assume a different role in life. She is now living on her own, in a physical sense, and does not have her loving husband of almost 60 years. But you know what. She is doing great. Why? Because she is a strong woman who just keeps moving forward in life. She accepts the cards which have been dealt, including her current bout with cancer, and is living life to the fullest. Her care for my father over the past several years makes her a true “hero” in my eyes. She was always there to take care of his personal (which were many) and medical needs (even more). She did all the little things to make dad comfortable right up to the end. Her nature would not allow her to do anything less for her husband or for us kids.
I hate to tell all of you this but my mother is the best and greatest in the world. Unfortunately, your special mom does come in second. Please make sure that you take a few minutes to thank your mother for all that she has done for you over the years. You don’t have to spend a lot of money to do this. In fact, my mom never wanted us kids to spend anything. You can simply call her to wish her a happy day; you could have made your own computer card; sent an email special greeting; sent flowers; take her to dinner; or just go by to spend some time. Spending time and share the thought of “I love you” is the greatest gift of all. If you don’t find the time or worse yet actually forget, well shame on you; please ask yourself what is going on in your life and examine where your priorities are. You might find selfishness somewhere in that mix.
I think you get the point of all this. If you don’t ask yourself why not. The bottom line is that mothers are very important people and do very important things. We all should be very thankful for them. I certainly am. If you don’t honor and love your mother, go and talk to a person who never had a mom to love or to be loved by a mother. Therein lays your ultimate answer. Don’t wait until it is too late to say “I love you” and I hope that it is not already.
For those mothers who worry about their sons and daughters fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, I do hope that they can connect with you on this special day. I know that there is mutual worry about safety and welfare. It is my hope that everyone will come home soon. Your sacrifice is very special for America.
Mom, I hope you are reading this now. I just want to say that I could not have had a better or more loving mother than you. You are a special person and I hope you have a happy mother’s day. The flowers that you receive are just a small token of the love that I feel for you. Thanks for all that you have meant to my life. I love you and hope to see you soon. PS…I will be on the radio this Tuesday evening and you best be listening or I am coming for the flowers! Editorial 5/19/07 by Alan
"THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS?"
Applause to Senator John McCain, Republican Senator from Arizona, who is running for the Republican Presidential nomination. This week during the Republican Debate in South Carolina he was the only candidate out of ten who had the moral courage to speak out about his personal convictions regardless of how it suited the audience.
During the debate, which was broadcast on Fox News, each candidate was asked how they would respond during a hypothetical terrorist threat regarding the handling and treatment of prisoners who may have vital information on a future attack against our country. The obvious crowd pleasing and vote getting answer would be the "macho" whatever it takes attitude. Most of the candidates, to include Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, did not disappoint the crowd. The use of whatever means necessary to include torture in the interrogation of prisoners would definitely be alright. The means would justify the ends. It appeared that the candidates were almost afraid to say different for fear of appearing weak on national security. Only Senator McCain personally objected to such measures as a means not suitable to American values and standards in the war on terrorism. Senator McCain knows from personal experience as a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War when he was held in captivity and subjected to years of torture by the North Vietnamese. He still suffers from the physical injuries endured during his captivity.
The new political catch phrase for torture appears to be "enhanced interrogation techniques". According to certain politicians, this country does not employ torture but will use as necessary "enhanced interrogation techniques"! Torture by any description is still torture! To use the term "enhance interrogation techniques" is an insult to all intelligent Americans and a blemish on the reputation and character of America throughout the world community. We endured and eventually won World War I and World War II without the use of torture or "enhanced interrogation techniques" against enemies much more formidable than the Islamic Terrorists. We fought the Korean War and Vietnam War without the use of torture or "enhanced interrogation techniques" against an insidious and cruel enemy. We are appalled by documentaries and historical accounts of the vicious and inhumane treatment of our soldiers and innocent civilians at the hands of the Japanese and Germans during World War II. We were the good guys and the values and standards of America sustained our troops during all periods of conflict throughout our history. Why would we now be willing to change those values and standards? There is no acceptable reason to do so regardless of the senseless rationale by certain political leaders who seem to want to appear tough and macho--all in the alleged interest of protecting American citizens.
During the presidential debate, Senator McCain aptly expressed his concern over the overzealous and misguided efforts of some government leaders and the need to remember who we are and what we stand for as a nation. He noted that it was ironic that issues like torture, personal sacrifice and war were always viewed with caution and concern by those who had served in the military versus those who had not served. In other words, no sacrifice is too great as long as someone else is doing the sacrificing! He further noted that the inhumane treatment of prisoners was never justified by our nation. He addressed the use of "waterboarding" as a interrogation technique developed during the Spanish Inquisition not worthy of adoption by us in misguided efforts to protect ourselves; and that the use of torture is ineffective and usually results in the prisoner eventually telling his captors exactly what he or she thinks they want to hear rather than the truth. Bravo to Senator McCain! He spoke his conscience regardless of potential voter reaction. He received no reaction from the audience unlike Governor Mitt Romney, who boldly stated that he not only did not want to close down the U.S. prisoner facility in Guantanamo, Cuba but would instead double the size to hold more prisoners. There they would not have access to lawyers and we are free to handle them as we see fit to include using "enhanced interrogation techniques". Romney’s remarks were met with loud applause. Rudy Giuliano responded that he would instruct the interrogators to "use any means possible, not torture, but any means possible to get the information". Again met with loud audience applause. I could not figure out the difference between torture, any means possible and enhanced interrogation techniques. It was an unsettling moment to me as I remembered an old saying "be careful what you wish for because you might actually get it"!
September 11th was definitely a day which America will never forget. It was a horrendous event which caught us all by surprise and alerted us all to the real and continuing threat of Islamic terrorism. However, the real threat to America may not be the terrorists–it may be ourselves. If we allow ourselves to change who we are than the terrorists will have already won! We need to insure that does not happen. We need to protect ourselves and our society from all threats. We need to do it with aggressive and effective efforts by our military, law enforcement and intelligence resources. We do not need to sacrifice our values as a people and as a country in such efforts.
Our democracy and open society does provide vulnerabilities to our enemies. It also provides the freedom and civil liberties we as citizens cherish as Americans. It is the exact same American pride which our enemies hate. However, it is that American pride which will sustain us today and tomorrow from those who wish to destroy our way of life. It is our way of life which makes us strong and resilient through good and bad times. We have the ability to strengthen our defenses and protect our citizens without sacrificing the very values and principles on which this country was founded and has flourished ever since. It is during times of adversity which tests the very foundations of any society. We will be tested. It is up to each of us to demand that our current and future leaders will meet the challenge while maintaining our character as a nation!
Just my thoughts to you this week to simply think about!
Editorial 5/19/07 by Kevin
Immigration Reform is Coming!
I don’t think that we will ever get away from neither fixing fences nor changing immigration legislation. It does appear that both the Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate are working hard to push through a bipartisan bill on the matter. There would appear to be a major overhaul of the immigration process on the horizon for our great country. Most Americans have no idea what is happening during this overhaul process because of their lack of interest in the topic and because of their busy lives. Everyone should be interested since this legislation will change the face of
Given the current discussions, the following points are key: (1) all illegals who crossed the border prior to 1 January 2007, would be offered a temporary resident permit while they await a new “Z Visa” that would allow them to live and work lawfully; (2) the head person of an illegal household would have eight years to return to their country of origin to apply for permanent legal residence for individual members of the family already living in the U.S.; (3) each “Z Visa” would be renewable indefinitely; and (4) these “Z Visas” can be renewed as long as each person can successfully pass a federal and state criminal background check (no arrests/convictions etc.), remains fully employed, and pays a $5000 fine and pays for routine administrative processing charges. Additionally, a separate and distinct program would handle the thousands of migrant workers who come into the country on a temporary basis. Each temporary work visa would be good for two years and could be renewed up to three times, as long as the worker departs the
Wow! Is that a mouthful? Do we really think that most Americans will understand that legal language? Good luck. Here is the bottom line –get used to having millions of “illegals” given permanent residence in the
Our country can do anything that it sets its mind to do. Both the president and congress has failed on this issue. I know that these illegals are seeking a better life for themselves and their families but you must still have a process for everyone to follow. Without rules, society becomes chaos. Illegals are criminals and must first be processed as such. Then there should be a plan for each of them to apply for legal status. The borders must be shut down and effective controls must be placed on them. If necessary, the military should be given the authority to control the borders, along with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE). A double fence with electronic surveillance should be installed across the southern border and if necessary, the northern border as well. Whatever it takes,
Let’s start with these simple concepts, and then we can get into the more complex policies of who stays and how they need to apply. I am tired of hearing the excuse that it is impossible to round up all of the illegals, when we don’t even make an attempt. There is no “fear of detection” for American companies that employ them. In fact, when small towns try to declare illegals as criminals, the ACLU is attacking the towns for their stance.
Enough is enough. This is an issue that all Americans need to pay attention to. The problem is here, now the concern is what we do about it. Wakeup
Editorial 5/26/07 by Alan
COMMUTING TO WORK
A few years ago I retired from a wonderful career of service in both the military and federal government. I enjoyed the many years, different places and countries, and all the opportunities which my career gave to me and my family. However, the one part I did not enjoy was the commute to work. I was thinking about it the other day and decided I would share some of my thoughts on what I call the "great American commuter". The sacrifice we make to work in the city but live in the suburbs.
During my work career, I found myself employed in various large metropolitan areas including Miami, Atlanta and Boston. Each place was different but similar in the dreaded commuting experience to and from the office. Living in the suburbs was always the plan in the interests of the family. However, it was not in the best interests of getting to and from the employer. I quickly became use to 45 - 60 minutes as the norm for commuting to and from work. The commuting ritual obviously added about two hours per day to my work schedule. Your normal eight hour work schedule automatically turns into ten hours a day not even counting overtime requirements.
The average American worker probably fits into the same routine I experienced for many years. The dreaded commute to work becomes crucial to where you plan to live as well as how and how long it will take you to get there. In the three metropolitan areas previously mentioned I found significant differences in the commuting options. Miami essentially offered no alternative to the personal automobile as it had little or no efficient public transportation system. Atlanta was a mixed bag depending on where you decided to reside. Any location north of the city offered no alternative but again the personal automobile. Other Atlanta area residential locations were not too bad for public transportation. The Boston area gave me the most options regardless of where I decided to live. The public transportation system consisted of a combination of trains, buses and subways which would take you essentially to any part of the city you desired from most of the suburbs north, south and west of the city. Each city allowed you to personally drive to work but differed grossly in what it would cost you to park your car once you got there. Atlanta was not bad to park; Miami was alright; but Boston was ridiculous. It was not the availability in question. It was the price. To park in Boston can easily cost you $25.00 - $30.00 per day. It is the same across the country with each city offering more or less alternatives to the commuter trying to get into work.
Recently I have been traveling into Boston on various personal and business trips from my residence located about 35 miles north of the city. I have driven in by car and also taken the train and subways. Each trip reminds me of the days when I would do this on a routine basis prior to my retirement. It made me think about how the commuting becomes just part of the day that people like me and you just endure in order to get to work. You do not even realize how miserable the commute is while you are doing it. However, after you have stopped the commuting and no longer have to do it is the time that you realize that you could never go back and start the routine again. It like not knowing any better while you are doing it. As long as you keep up the routine it is acceptable. Stop doing it for awhile and it is extremely difficult picturing yourself willing to again endure the two hour daily ritual of fighting crowds and traffic just getting to and from work. It reminds me of an old western cattle drive. However, the cows have been replaced by people. The herds (of people) move by signals–the train arrives, you herd on and take your seat; you then herd off and on in orderly fashion to the subway stops; and finally corral yourself with the other cattle into the office building elevators as it stops on each floor until your floor arrives.
Yes, my recent pleasure trips into Boston have reminded me that I could never go back to the daily routine again of the long commute from the suburbs to the city. I now chuckle to myself thinking of the snow storm days when all were released early from work only to find that everyone was trying to catch the same bus out of town. The pushing and shoving to get your place in line when the bus pulled up knowing only so many would get on while others would have to wait another hour for the next bus. The joys of the old commuting adventures for 30 years would now be left to the younger more ambitious replacements. That is alright because they are still young enough not to know any better. You should only be cynical as you age. The funny part is I know I would do it all over again. The best part, though, is I know that I do not have to do it all over again!
Just some silly thoughts from me to you this week! We have plenty of time in the coming weeks to talk about more serious issues. In the meantime, remember our veterans and their service and sacrifice to this great country as we celebrate Memorial Day!
Editorial 5/26/07 by Kevin
Is This Just Another Day?
Is it just another Memorial Day holiday? What is Memorial Day all about? I have a close friend who always says that it is usually a great time for discount sales at the shopping mall. Of course, he has never served in uniform, like I have. I guess that is why it is more meaningful to those Americans who have served their country or have had loved ones who have worn the uniform. Between Alan and I, we have a combined 56 years of U.S. Army service. But the true point of Memorial Day for me is that it is one day of the year when all Americans should take just a few moments to reflect on the sacrifices that our military personnel have made for this country since its birth. The unique memorials that are dedicated across the country and most notably in Washington, D.C., commemorate the ultimate sacrifice of lost lives as well those who served honorably alongside their comrades. I am still awestruck by the WWII, Korean, and Vietnam memorials each and everytime that I go to see them. A visit to them will stir inner emotions in all visitors, young and old. For those who served under arms in those hell holes, some will reflect on moments long gone, while others will share a tear for buddies lost.
For many who visit the memorials, especially teenagers, they will ask their parents about "what happened" in that war. Some parents will provide a sufficient response, but many will not be able to reply with a factual account. Why is that? They just forgot what they were taught in school and those wars were just to far away. To me, it is shameful and unacceptable. We should all know what Americans have died for over the years and for what reasons they are dying for today. Years from now there will be other memorials, one to honor those who served in Iraq and one for those who served in Afghanistan. There will be future conflicts for America where lives will be lost. We should never forget those brave souls who fight for our freedom to go to the mall or ball game on this Memorial Day. Ask yourself if yourself if you know how many soldiers have been killed and wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you don't know the answer, please take a moment on this Memorial Day to at least google it!
Editorial 6/2/07 by Alan
"SHOULD YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIE?"
This week, Dr. Jack Kervorkian, also known by some as Doctor Death, was released from prison. He had been sentenced to 10-25 years for second degree murder in Michigan pertaining to his assistance in a voluntary suicide of a severely ill man. Dr. Kervorkian, who is now 79 years old and terminally ill, will be best remembered for the national debate he created involving the "right to die" and "physician assisted suicide". Dr. Kervorkian, a medical physician specializing in pathology, claimed to have assisted 130 terminally ill patients to commit suicide.
What is the "right to die" debate all about? Essentially, it concerns who has the ability to determine when it is time to end your life? Is it you? Is it the government? Is it someone else? Interesting debate regarding me and you! My first instinct is that I will be the one who decides about me. What could possibly be wrong with that approach–I will decide about me? Not as simple as you may think. In most cases, you currently do not have the right to decide about you when it comes to ending your life. Only one state, Oregon, has passed a law legalizing the "right to die" with physician assisted suicide. Oregon’s law has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court after numerous challenges since it’s inception in 1977. 38 other states have laws expressly prohibiting physician assisted suicide. 7 states have adopted case law criminalizing assisted suicide under current homicide statutes. 4 states have no law pertaining to physician assisted suicide–neither sanctioning or prohibiting it. It is easy to see that in America there is no consensus on this issue of the "right to die".
In 1977, Oregon passed the state law "Death With Dignity", which allowed terminally ill persons to voluntarily end their life with the assistance of physicians. It was the first and only state in the country to do so. Since it’s inception, 292 people have ended their lives under this program. The Oregon law requires a person to meet the following criteria: (1) must make two oral requests to the attending physician separated by at least 15 days (2) must make a written request to the attending physician signed in the presence of at least two witnesses (3) the attending physician and one consulting physician must attest to the terminal diagnosis of less than 6 months to live and (4) must be a state resident of at least 18 years old. The Oregon law does not authorize euthanasia where a physician will administer lethal medication to the patient. The physician will only prescribe lethal medication which the patient must administer to himself. The physician is not allowed to administer the medicine to the patient. So the Oregon law seems to build in certain safeguards to preclude abuse and still allow people to decide their own fate. Under the Oregon law only the individual may make the decision–no one else including family members can make the decision for the individual.
Why is Oregon the only state in the country to pass such legislation? Is Oregon the only state on the right course or has it made a bad mistake giving it’s residents the "right to die"? 49 other states obviously do not agree. But whose decision is it to decide about your life? Is it the decision of the government or is it the decision of the person effected? Is it a question of morality and the value of every human life which must be respected and protected? We could go on forever with countless rhetorical questions based on personal and religious philosophical opinions. We could cite numerous public opinion polls on the issue which vary greatly on how the question is addressed. Most polls will cite 60% of Americans would agree that they would consider ending their life if suffering a terminal illness in great pain and discomfort. Most polls will also cite that 60% of Americans do not believe that physician assisted suicide is the same as murder.
Most polls will also cite a majority of Americans do not consider suicide as morally acceptable. When you substitute the word "suicide" with "end of life decision", the answers will be different. I really do not care what 60% of Americans think about my life. I really only care what I think about my life. I believe that you would agree with me if you find yourself in the unfortunate position of suffering from a terminal disease in uncontrollable pain and discomfort with no prognosis for any quality of life. If you find yourself in that position, do you really care what the government or other people think you should do? A person’s "right to die" should be a decision only one person can make–the person effected!
We seem to be more compassionate and respectful towards the life of an animal than we do regarding a human. No one will sit by and watch the family dog suffer with no promise of getting better. It is unfair to the dog to not painlessly put the animal to sleep. We appear to have a different standard when it comes to us. If my loved one is dying a slow death confined to a nursing home and enduring continuous pain and suffering, I would find it to be unconscionable to allow them to continue this way against their will. The key point is "against their will"! Today, unless you live in Oregon, that is exactly what will occur to your loved one as well as yourself in any hospital, nursing home or other healthcare institution in this country. You do not have the "right to die". Instead, your options will include passive euthanasia (the withholding of medications and treatments which would normally be provided) or non-aggressive euthanasia (the withholding of life support and resuscitation). You do not have the option of aggressive euthanasia (administration of lethal medications to cause death). I have a difficult time distinguishing the differences other than prolonging the inevitable and allowing the individual to continue living against his or her will. It is ok to allow a person to die but not directly cause the person to die. The differences puzzle me.
The morality of "right to die" will continue on with all kinds of justifications by opposing sides as to why it is morally wrong or morally right. It is so easy with this issue, as it is with many issues, to discuss and debate what should or should not happen regarding other people. But what happens when it is you. The perspective of the most righteous can suddenly change when instead of talking about what is best for other people they find themselves talking about what is best for them. The old saying "walk a mile in my shoes" before you judge is very appropriate in this matter. The essential issue in the "right to die" should be that only you should have the right to make the decision about yourself. Each person in any society will have different viewpoints, values and standards as to what is right and wrong based on their life experiences, religious beliefs, personal philosophy and other factors. The question is whether I have the right to impose my beliefs and values on you! So what are my feelings on this issue of the "right to die"? It doesn’t really matter does it? It only matters what the person effected thinks. Or at least it should!
Simply my thoughts this week for you to think about!
Editorial 6/2/07 by Kevin
Osama bin Laden is dead. The mystical leader of al Qaeda, who has been out of view for the past couple years, is surely no longer the head of this Islamic terrorist organization which orchestrated the “9/11” attacks on
How do I know this? Pure logic brings about my conclusion. Like any leader, visibility to the people you command is extremely important to future accomplishments. Growth and success of any organization is based upon the key element of solid leadership. The leader must frequently communicate his desires and goals to his followers; otherwise, the organization will eventually splinter into smaller, loosely controlled elements which will spurn new leaders to challenge for key roles.
Sporadic reports have been surfacing around the Middle East, especially in Pakistan, that bin Laden was seeking covert medical treatment for typhoid as well as chronic kidney failure. Given his notoriety in the region and with hundreds of special forces searching to locate his whereabouts, it would be literally impossible for bin Laden to ever consider going to a hospital. Additionally, it would be a huge security risk to bin laden’s personal safety to bring a team of outside medical personnel to his location. The risk of having a security breach through a disloyal follower would be worse than a natural death as the entire al Qaeda command structure could be destroyed.
We have seen or heard little from bin Laden since 2004, when a poor quality audio recording of his “supposed” voice broadcast words of encouragement to his followers. Since that time, if that was truly bin Laden on the tape, his deputy commander Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri has been the visible voice of the infamous organization.
There are good reasons why Dr. al-Zawahiri and al Qaeda would not want to announce the death of bin Laden. First, there is little to be gained from proclaiming his passing as this action would likely spirit a disorganized challenge for overall control of the organization. This event would be costly to the effectiveness of al Qaeda in future years and would not benefit the desires of Dr. al-Zawahiri, who wants to remain in charge. Secondly, al Qaeda would not want to have their leader proclaimed dead during the final months of the Bush administration. Like any group, there is pride and ego in the organization. There would be great pleasure and a silent victory to hold off such news until the inauguration of a new
Ultimately, even if bin Laden were still alive today, his ability to lead effectively would be highly questionable. His communications have been severely disrupted and if alive, he must think that any audio or video communication to his followers is an unacceptable security risk given the fact that there has been none. His health issues would also be worsened by constant movement of locations because of the security risk of staying to long in any one place. I doubt that this scenario is realistic which leads me back to the premise that he has died due to complications.
So with bin Laden now dead, what is next for al Qaeda and the loosely structured cells and groups that exist worldwide. Terrorism will continue without bin Laden and without Dr. al-Zawahiri. The greatest issue may be that emerging leaders will bring new ideas that would change the tactics from high impact terrorist events to less complex but highly effective events. For example, the exporting of human bombers, vehicle bombs, and simple IEDs on
Editorial 6/9/07 by Alan "TIME FOR A THIRD POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA?" Will the real Ronald Reagan please stand up? This seemed to be the plot of the Republican candidates for President as witnessed during the last televised debate. It was amazing how many times each candidate mentioned the philosophy and ideals of the former President Reagan in a thinly disguised motive to say "I am most like him". What was more amazing was how many times each candidate mentioned the name of George Bush. I think the name, philosophy and ideals of the current Republican President was never mentioned by name. It was clear that each presidential hopeful for the Republican party nomination would spend a lot of time during the campaign trying to convince voters that he was the true reincarnation of Ronald Reagan but had little to do with George Bush. There were ten current candidates soon to become eleven with the entrance of former Senator Fred Thompson into the race. Sooner or later because of money and voter support as evidenced during the initial primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in 2008 the field of candidates will narrow suddenly to two or three. The odds favor the continuance of Senator John McCain, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and Governor Mitt Romney in the long endurance race with former Senator Fred Thompson as a wild card. U.S. Representative Ron Paul of Texas is truly the only candidate thus far who keeps the debates interesting and exciting with very candid and different viewpoints. He, of course, has no chance of even being nominated so he can say what most people are thinking but afraid to say it. It is always good to have a straight man for every show and Ron Paul is definitely it for the Republicans. Stay tuned as the top three, McCain, Giuliani and Romney, attempt to separate themselves from each other as the best and only candidate for the Republican Party. On the other side of the road are a collection of Democratic presidential candidates who will be doing their best to get your attention and support. They too have had two televised debates. Not to be undone by the Republicans, the Democrats have included two straight men in the debates in the name of Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Senator Mike Gravel. Both apt to say things which annoy if not aggravate the major contenders. Similar to the Republicans, the current eight Democratic candidates will eventually shrink down to the top two or three contenders. My guess is the Democratic race will first leave only Senator John Edwards, Senator Barrack Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton in the race. Slowly Hillary Clinton will out spend and out last them all to receive the grand prize–Democratic nominee for President. However, there is a big wide card for the Democrats in the name of former Vice-President Al Gore. Never count out the ambition of a man like Al Gore regardless of how uninterested he seems to be right now. If the Democrats start to self-destruct and eat each other alive, the emergence of Al Gore will not be a surprise. What seems to be missing from the usual political circus is the third ring act. There is yet any announced serious third party candidate. There is no representation for the countless "independent" voters who often swing elections for either the Democrat and Republican parties. As we all know, any great circus has three rings of entertainers. What is definitely missing from the American political scene is the third act–a viable third political party. The key word is viable! A strong viable third political party which would contend with the Democrats and Republicans in elections for not only President, but also Senators, Representatives and Governors throughout the country. There is a large "independent" voter population in this country, which neither fully subscribes to either the Democrat or Republican party philosophy. Most political strategists will usually say that the hard core registered Democrats and Republicans vote straight party tickets in most elections. It is always the independents also known as "the undecided" which both parties try to win over during the campaigns. They can usually count on their registered base but must convince "the undecided" to actually win. Why has a third viable political party or candidate never emerged in our system. The answer is simple–money. Until there is true campaign finance reform there never will be a viable independent candidate for political office especially on the national scene. Until such time there will continue to be many potentially great candidates who will never enter the campaigns because of the inability to compete against the Democrat and Republican "machines". Until then we as the voters will have to be content with who is offered to us, which is not necessarily the "best and brightest"! Simply my thoughts to you to think about this week! Editorial 6/9/07 by Kevin "Some Rants and Raves" Well, here we are in the first real week of summer, at least from the way that I count it. My summer always begins after 1 June and ends on 1 September. No real rhyme or reason. I wonder what news events and social issues will confront us this summer. It has been exciting so far. Let’s kick around just a few thoughts that I have. The war in