United With Our Friends in India

The series of terrorist attacks in Mumbai yesterday are shocking and disturbing on many levels. Our hearts and sympathy go to the victims, their families and to the peace loving people of India.

I have had the great fortune of visiting India on several occasions over the last dozen years. To the first time visitor, India may cause sensory overload as all of our five senses are continuously stimulated by the unfamiliar. However, once one acclimates to the new stimulus, he will discover that India is a warm, inviting and magnificent place. Whether in India as a tourist, to visit friends or on business, I have developed a deep appreciation and affection for the country, its people and their culture.

Professionally, India is a rapidly emerging country with a deep well of educated, hardworking and ambitious people. Over the last dozen years, India developed into one of our most important economic partners. This trend will accelerate and continue in the future.

Strategically, it is an understatement to say that India is "the world's largest democracy." While true, India is not just another democracy. It is strategically located, sharing borders with China and Pakistan and close to many other threats including Iran and Afghanistan. Like Israel, every day India demonstrates to the world that it is possible for a democracy with progressive values, the rule of law, individual civil liberties, freedom of the press and religion to not only exist but also thrive in a part of the world where many do not feel it is possible. It is our common set of values that is the basis of the bond between our nations. Politically we will not always see eye to eye, friends sometimes disagree. However, India is among our most important strategic allies and friends in the world.

However, it is my personal bond with India that makes these attacks really hit home. When I visit Mumbai, I stay with the family of one of my closest and dearest friends, and I truly feel at home. Our families have grown close over the years and it is through this relationship that I developed a strong personal bond with India. Participating in his wedding was one of the most joyous and wonderful experiences I have known.

I have been to many of the places in Mumbai that were attacked yesterday. My friend goes to these places frequently as they are important locations for having meetings and conducting business. This morning, I received an email from him letting me know that all in his family are well. Yesterday, his parents were watching a movie at a theater near the Oberoi hotel. They spent the night at a nearby friend's place because they could not make it home.

Their experience in some ways is not too dissimilar from the experiences of New Yorkers on 9/11. The terrorists deliberately, brutally and mercilessly targeted innocent civilians and sought to murder as many people as possible. In this goal they were successful. The size and scope of the attacks required well developed detailed plans. Developing and executing these plans required patience, resources, frequent communication and practiced coordination. As on 9/11, the terrorists attacked locations that were more than just easy targets. They were important symbols of India. Attacking them was meant to send an unmistakable message that there are people who will stop at nothing to destroy our common values and way of life. We should never forget this valuable lesson.

Today, we in America are united with our friends in India. We mourn for their loss as if it were our own. But, today is also Thanksgiving. I am thankful that my friend and his family are all well. I am thankful that I live in a free society. I am thankful for all the men and women who have served and serve today in our armed forces who sacrifice so much on our behalf.

Thanksgiving is the Greatest Day of the Year!

Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday of all. Here are a few reasons why:

1. Thanksgiving brings families together

2. Thanksgiving brings friends together

3. Thanksgiving has real meaning

4. Thanksgiving is a national holiday for all Americans of all faiths or of no faith

5. Thanksgiving is historic

6. Thanksgiving is still not commercial

7. Watching football games on TV

8. Our tradition of a 'semi-touch' football game in the town park

9. An extra-long weekend

10. Thanksgiving meal may just be my favorite of the year...I can't wait!

Please let me wish a happy Thanksgiving to all of you and your families.
-Elad

Obama's Appointment Decisions are Cause for Cautious Optimism

Thus far, President-elect Obama has demonstrated good judgment by bringing onto his team a group of experienced and well-respected leaders to head executive branch departments and serve in other advisory capacities. He is to be commended for several of his selections, including most of all, for asking Robert Gates to continue as Secretary of Defense for at least the first year of the new administration.

The continued service of Secretary Gates is important for national security as well as political considerations.

From the national security perspective, Secretary Gates has demonstrated an able hand to lead the Department of Defense while we are fighting in two theaters of operation. Following the turbulent Rumsfeld years, under Gates' stewardship, General Petreaus was able to successfully implement the surge strategy which reduced violence in Iraq and established the environment through which long-term victory may yet emerge. As the situation in Iraq eases, we are shifting resources to Afghanistan, and hopefully we will see improvement there as well. Changing leadership in this critical juncture in the war effort may risk our recent advancements. This risk is further magnified as the economy overshadows the war effort as the issue most attracting our attention.

Politically, the Gates decision demonstrates that President-elect Obama may govern 'from the center' as we desperately need him to do. It is a significant olive branch to the Republican Party, and while the leftist side of the Democratic Party may not approve, let us hope that it is indicative of more to come.

Obama's selections of Gates, Clinton and Geithner have drawn analogies to Lincoln's appointments of his rivals, including Seward, Chase and Bates, to critical cabinet positions. Some, and it goes without-saying, the mainstream media, have extended the analogy and bestowed upon Obama the reverence due our greatest President of all, Abraham Lincoln.

This Lincoln-like adoration is not yet due. It has to be earned. If Obama delivers on the lofty expectations that many have of him, then we should praise him and his achievements. However, let us wait before we do so. We should judge his actions and their results, not a dream. Comparing Obama to Lincoln, when he has yet to be inaugurated, is insulting to our collective intelligence and is more befitting behavior of members of a cult.

A Post-Mortem for the Republican Party

I am not a card-carrying member of either party. I am a true independent. That said, I believe the Republican Party blew it. In 2002, the Republicans had so much momentum that they were swept into office overwhelmingly. It seemed that they had been given a mandate to govern that would last a generation. The Democrats were toast.

Then, the Republicans got to governing and they forgot many of the principles that they were supposed to advocate:

1. Reduce the size of government - instead they expanded it dramatically (Department of Homeland Security)

2. Reduce entitlements - instead they expanded old ones and created entire new ones. (Prescription drugs)

3. Run government more efficiently - instead they created layers of added bureaucracy. (no child left behind)

4. Run government more competently - instead they brought cronies with no legitimate credentials and experience into positions of importance (can you say Attorney General Gonzalez? FEMA director Michael Brown?)

5. Keep government off the backs of ordinary people - instead they drove government intervention deeper into our daily lives (can you say Terry Schaivo, Gay Marriage, Abortion)

6. Reduce the deficits - instead they spent like drunken sailors and created the largest deficits on record.

7. Run the government more ethically - instead we got scandals like Tom Delay

It is not that I am a Democrat; I am not. But, I cannot blame people for feeling betrayed and let down with the Republicans.

About the only thing that the Republicans remained true to their word was being strong on national security. And, on national security, the war was longer and more difficult (as all wars are) than Americans were led to believe it would be. It took a few extra years, and for the President to fire Rumsfeld and bring in Petreaus to finally get things right. So, while the war certainly did not help, I do not believe it hurt the Republicans in the end.

It really came down to the perception that the Republicans got drunk with power and used it selfishly, rather than in the interest of the country.

It is a testament to John McCain, the man, that the election was as close as it was. I believe that it could have been even closer, possibly resulting in a McCain victory had John McCain, the candidate, run a half-way effective campaign.

So, the Republican party is at a crossroads. It needs to figure out what it stands for and whom shall it include under its tent.

On the other hand, the Democrats now have unchecked control of both houses of Congress and the White House...they may get drunk on power the same way the Republicans just did.

Warm Wishes for Our New President

E Pluribus Unum. This nation just experienced a wondrous event, the rise to the highest seat of government of a man that to most of us was an unknown figure only recently. The characteristics that make Barack Obama unique among the men who have been our Presidents are well known. It is not an exaggeration to say that what transpired in America in the last election in all likelihood could not happen anywhere else. And, while Barack Obama may turn out to be a great President, it is true that our great nation will never cease to amaze us. We are truly a light unto the world, a shining city on the hill.

And, we are optimistic. We have no choice but to be optimistic, as it is in our DNA. Barack Obama is our President now and we will support him, regardless of whether we voted for him or not. The country needs to be united as we face many challenges.

We know that as President, Obama will have a lot of unrestrained forces, Nancy Pelosi in the House and Harry Reid in the Senate, pulling him to the ideological far left.

It will take a strong man to stay in the middle. If he does, he can achieve great things, and will go down in history.

If he does not, he will be tossed out the way the Republicans were tossed out when they tried to take the country too far to the right.

Let us hope he rises to the task ahead.

May God Bless America.

United on Iran?

To the leaders of the following organizations:

The National Coalition to Stop Iran Now,
The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations,
United Jewish Communities,
UJA-Federation of New York,
The Jewish Council for Public Affairs,
The Jewish Community Relations Council of New York,

I am writing to express my sincere displeasure at your short-sighted decision to withdraw your invitation to Gov Palin to speak at the rally protesting Ahmadinejad in New York.

Regardless of whether one supports one political party or the other, it is vital for the security of both the United States and Israel that we are united in facing the threat to our national security that Iran poses.

Gov Palin is the vice-presidential nominee for one of the two dominant political parties in the US, and therefore a 50-50 probability exists that she will be the next American Vice President. Her presentation would have sent a strong signal to Iran, and it is important to have her speak. Additionally, it would also be appropriate for candidates from the Democratic Party to speak as well. We should encourage all the candidates and other leaders to do everything possible on Iran. On this issue, we cannot be divided.

However, your decision to withdraw your invitation to Palin speaks volumes. The answer that the decision was made to ‘depoliticize’ the event is no more than a convenient, shallow and misguided excuse. Rather than depoliticizing the event, you in fact introduced and magnified its political significance.

These are dark days when we allow partisan politics to supersede unity in facing the largest security threat to the peace and stability of the free world.

Ahmadinejad can only be laughing aloud as he witnesses our self-destructive behavior while Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons.

I would urge you to reconsider and, if not, urge Americans of all political affiliations to withdraw their financial support for your organizations until such time that you are replaced with truly non-politically partisan leaders.

Elad Yoran
New York, NY

China, Oil and Islamic Radicalism

Gordon Chang's piece in the Wall Street Journal on January 3rd is to be commended. Though its last sentence is perhaps its most important, "Now, the challenge for the U. S. is to recognize that Chinese attitudes have turned a corner, and to craft new policies in response." While this sentence is simple and true on the surface, it also may imply other things. And, if interpreted the wrong way, it may lead to a direct danger to the US.

The general theme that China is becoming more assertive globally is not controversial. According to Chang, China is certainly heading and will continue to trend in that direction.

Throughout history, many military confrontations stemmed from economic, diplomatic and or political issues. Why did Japan attack a number of targets in south east asia? because they needed access to oil and metal. Being economically dependent did not square with Japan's political sense of self, and explicit denial of economic resources led to their military confrontation. It was not the only reason, but the proximate one. The question one has to ask is, "Is a resurgent and more confrontational China merely the 'Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere' in a different guise?" If history does not repeat itself, it sure does rhyme - is this an echo of the 1930s Japan?

However, whether China's assertiveness ever translates into military aggression or continues to manifest itself through direct competition with the US in matters economic, diplomatic, and political is an entirely different matter, at least under current circumstances.

Peaceful economic/diplomatic/political competition is not something that we can stop. Nor is it something of which we should be fearful. We will need to respond to it in kind and raise the bar for them as well. To the extent that we can build bridges to China so that things evolve into "co-opetition" rather than zero-sum competition the better.

And, we should always hold our values sacrosanct and not compromise them. Advocating political, religious, economic freedoms, as well as individual civil liberties and freedom of the press should be a bedrock foundation of our policies.

All that said, China is a long-term threat. Despite their despicable lack of any of the values described above, it, in my opinion, is not a direct threat to us today. Nor, is it likely to be so in the next 20 years. The most direct threat from China over the next two decades is likely to be competition for increasingly scarce (and expensive) resources. At the top of that list is oil. I'll come back to this point later.

However, Islamic radicalism is a clear and present danger. The threat is unrelenting and genocidal. It threatens our very survival and our way of life. Therefore, the right question regarding China should be, "Can we 'craft new policies' without taking our eye off the ball of Islamic radicalism?"

The threat posed by Islamic radicalism is multi-dimensional. If we are talking about nation-states, then Iran and elements within Pakistan are at the top of the threat list followed closely by Syria and even "allies" like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Radical Islamic organizations such as Al Qaeda, Hezballah, Hamas, and other similar organizations pose grave transnational threats. The situation in Iraq, while improving, is still tenuous and far from its desired end state. And these are just the most obvious dangers. The Islamic world is vast and spans dozens of countries globally and Islamic radicals populate virtually every country around the world. While some of these threats may be bogeymen acting on behalf of masters a world away, it clear that the threat is complex.

The present threat requires a multi-dimensional approach that includes political, economic, diplomatic, cultural and, of course where needed, military components. It requires us to recruit and lead other nations in a concerted and consistent decades-long effort. It will require the attention and resources of this great land supported by the attention and resources of our friends.

One other thing is clear; the approach we take will lead to difficult choices and discomforting partnerships. Where and how will we decide it is sufficiently valuable to apply the age old cliche "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" to exploit fissures and drive toward a greater goal. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, among others do not want a resurgent and nuclear armed Iran. Is their fear of Iran sufficient to force them to make compromises that they otherwise would not make? Can we in turn marshal their fear to help achieve the greater goal?

As we navigate these shifting sands, we need to make certain that we do not build a structure that will collapse when the wind changes direction and the sand shifts the other way. As with China above, in all our initiatives, we must not lose touch with our American values that are the bedrock foundation of our policies.

A winning strategy also demands that we quit using useless and misleading language like, "We are in a war on terror." We are at war with Islamic, expansionist, jihadist fundamentalism. If we cannot name our enemy we are not going to prevail.

Our unwavering focus must be on this current threat. Therefore, unless the threat environment changes, any "new policies" regarding China should be carefully crafted with two things in mind. First, take a long-term incremental view, as China poses a minimal present danger and we do not want to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. Second, it must not divert any resources or attention awayfrom the real present danger of radical Islam.

Ultimately, our greatest weapon against both radical Islam and the emerging threat from China is to end our dependency on oil. Oil dependency is our Achilles' heel. Ending it will, in a single shot, solve several of the gravest threats we face. And, it will make the global warming crowd happy. As we immerse ourselves in the 2008 campaign, look for new alliances to emerge.

(Thanks to Mary Ann Davidson for her help with this piece!)

The Other Real Lessons of World War Two

The President delivered a strong speech yesterday to the Veterans of Foreign Wars Convention. His main point that winning the war against Islamic radicalism is essential to America and to free societies everywhere. Here he is spot on.

However, the thing that is getting all the attention is that the President made several comparisons to World War Two and Vietnam. It is true that we can and should draw important lessons from these experiences. But, we need to dig a bit deeper, look through these imperfect analogies and be able to talk about politically incorrect things in order to draw other, perhaps more relevant lessons.


Lesson One - Japan was defeated completely and unconditionally before any ‘reforms’ were capable of being accepted by the Japanese population.

In this struggle with radical Islam, we are fighting against a much larger, more dispersed, ambiguous enemy. Iraq and Afghanistan are but two fronts in a much larger struggle.

The Islamists have not been defeated completely and unconditionally. Finally, under Gen Petraeus, we are fighting a more aggressive battle that is taking the fight to the enemy. However, let’s set proper expectations, despite the surge, we are still fighting a politically correct war in which we are afraid to inflict or take casualties. Jack Jacobs, adjunct prof at USMA and CMH recipient, often makes the point that the surefire way to take the most casualties in the long run and not win the war is to fight without being willing to take or inflict casualties. Maybe we have no choice, but if so, then we should manage our expectations for results.


Lesson Two - Japan's aggression was not religiously based. A friend put it nicely, "Japan's aggression was driven by a sense of their own manifest destiny (Greater East Asia Co-Properity Sphere), but they did not have a religious basis for it. Nor did their religion, per se, have a construct of 'Convert Or Die'. Their goal was not to win converts to Shinto-ism, it was to create Japan as a world power. It was not religiously fueled expansionism."

There are many analogies that can be drawn between Shinto-ism and Islam. It is true that they both perceived themselves to be superior to others and that they viewed others as inferior, sometimes less than human. However, the Japanese experience is dramatically different from the Islamic experience and the Shinto religion in pre-war Japan is very different from Islam. (I am not making light of Japanese atrocities during this period in history. The killing in Nanking and elsewhere are great examples of the compassionless brutality of war-time Japan. These experiences are among the darkest chapters in human history, along with the holocaust, the killing fields and others.) All I am saying is that we can draw direct lessons for the current situation by saying that, “as a result of the war, the Japanese looked at their religion differently or became more tolerant people, and that the same thing will happen with Islam”. A monotheistic Islam is very different than the “religious” adoration that the Japanese had for the emperor.


Lesson Three - Radical Islam is different. Despite countless attempts (some peaceful and some terribly violent)over nearly 1,500 years, to the best of my knowledge, there has not been a population of Moslems that have converted from Islam to another religion. If I am wrong, please let me know. Most every college and university in the Middle East over the last 200 years was founded and run by Christian missionaries. At first the missionaries tried to proseltyze and convert the Moslems. Then, after years of failure, they changed strategies and thought that if they teach modern things (science, medicine, law, engineering, agriculture, literature, etc.) that the population would gradually accept their presence and that some ‘enlightened’ people would convert to Christianity…none did. (Please see "Power, Faith and Fantasy" by Michael Oren)

Before the war, Japan had a small, but not inconsequential, Christian population. These were people who had responded to the missionaries' work. At that time, Japan was also a society struggling to find balance between tradition and modernity. Logic would tell us that in today's Islamic world, there would be also be some similarly measurable parts of the population that was responsive to the missionaries. But there really is not and never has been. Why?

Maybe there are enough characteristics of Islamic societies that make them different. While I am not an expert, I do not think that Shinto-ism had the same zeal for conquest as Islam and did not invoke an “afterlife” as a principal motivating force driven by commandments from G-d that have been unwavering for centuries.


Lesson Four - Politically Correctness will lead to failure. We will never make the type of progress that we are hoping for until we are able to talk openly about the role of Islam in the current struggle. We need to shine the light of day on tenets of Islam that are incompatible with modern life such as its treatment of women and people of other religious persuations. We will only be able to devise a strategy if we can talk about things. Said the other way, it is impossible to devise a winning strategy without being able even to identify aloud an important root cause of much of the problem.

The President’s analogy is perhaps closest in saying that if we leave, things will go from bad to much worse for the civilian population in Iraq. That is probably true. I do not know anyone who thinks that things will somehow miraculously get better if we were to withdraw. Doing so is naive and just plain stupid. Maybe this is reason enough to stay and then hope that somehow their society will not always be on the brink of disintegrating into nothingness.

Ultimately, it will be the Moslems themselves who have to fight to win this war and propel their faith and way of life from the dark ages to the 21st century. As long as they’re not doing it openly in large numbers, we will not achieve the kind of future that the President is talking about. “Democracy” alone will not be sufficient. The vision of an Iraq (or any other Islamic country) emerging as a peaceful, tolerant, society where women are equal members of the community, where ethnic and religious minorities are able to practice their faiths peacefully without discrimination, is a fantasy. The example of Japan has too many holes to be more than a soundbite.

They Don't Make 'em Like They Used To

COL Lew Zickel, West Point class of 1949 and author of the book of which I am lucky to be a part of died on Sunday night.

After seeing my mother on mother's day, I stopped by to say good-bye to Lew. His wife Yael, in accordance with his wishes, took him off the oxygen and other support equipment and we knew that he didn’t have much time. I was there with him from about 6:00 to 8:30, when I felt that I should give his family some time alone. Yael called me Monday morning to say that Lew passed at 8:45, 15 minutes after I left.

Lew was a great and humble man. He served two years as an infantryman in combat in Korea. At last, when he saw the Korean peninsula fading in the distance, he said to himself, "Zickel, a million Chinese soldiers didn’t kill you in two years...you got lucky, and everyday here on out is a gift." And, to the best of my knowledge he lived his life in full appreciation of this gift.

He served on active duty, achieving the rank of "bird" Colonel. After retiring for the service, Lew had a second full career as a civilian engineer. Not only was he a master builder, his added specialty was engineering forensics. He had a soft spot in his heart for everyone, except that is for engineers that took short cuts, built substandard structures and hurt people as a result. When he talked about them, I realized how Lew had survived in Korea for two years...I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of one of his scoldings.

His true loves are easy to identify - his family and West Point.

Lew was truly a family man. It was obvious not just in the way that he felt and talked about them, but in the way that they talked and acted around him.

Lew built more than a dozen buildings and other structures on the hallowed ground of West Point. His legacy there will go on forever.

I perhaps more than most "non-Zickels" felt these items in Lew because much in Lew's family's experience was similar to my family's experience. Maybe I latched onto him because some things in him were so familiar to me.

Lew and Yael, both divorced and with children from prior marriages, wed and built a family together, an inclusive one. I've heard stories describing how Lew raised Yael's children as if they were his own, and that in his eyes there were no differences. When my stepfather, Len, married my mother he raised my brothers Amit, Dov and me as if we were his own. And, I never knew or felt any other feeling but the deepest love and respect for him for it. I know how Yael's children and grandchildren feel about Lew. I know that their loss will be as profound as my loss when Len died. Sometimes Lew and I would talk about family life and I knew that he was cut from a similar cloth as Len.

Both Lew and Len were children of the depression. Lew was raised in industrial northern New Jersey and Len in industrial Allentown, PA. Both served in the Korean War, Lew in the Army and Len in the Navy. Both of their second wives were Israeli-sabra women (there has to be something there!). Both took in and raised and loved another man's children as their own. Both loved the military. Len served fewer years, but he was proudest when talking about being an officer in the United States Navy. Both loved this great land and believed that the United States was the greatest place on God's green earth. Both were involved in their communities; Lew through his engineering and Len as a community doctor. Both were loved by their communities and everyone around them.

Both Lew and Len worked until the very end. Len went to work to care for patients all his life, first in private practice, then as a doctor at West Point, and ultimately as a doctor in the Veteran's Administration. Len went to work until the day he went into the hospital never to come home again. Lew continued to write to complete his manuscript and to dedicate every drop of energy to his other great love, West Point and the West Point Jewish Chapel, until the very end.

I don’t know...maybe people were raised in a different way back then. Maybe the times were simpler. But, they sure don’t make them like they used to any more. Character mattered. Integrity mattered. Dedication mattered. Loyalty matterd. But, so did love, compassion and humilty. Lew had it all.

Maybe now you know why I latched on to Lew and loved him. I miss him.

Ensuring Tolerance and American Values in NYC Public Schools

Here's a copy of a letter that I sent to Joel Klein, Chancellor of the NYC Public School System. If he replies, I'll be glad to post it.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

April 25, 2007


Chancellor Klein,

I am writing to you in response to a matter that was brought to my attention recently, the proposed opening of the Khalil Gibran International Academy.

I agree with the need for creating additional Arabic speakers across different dimensions of society. It is disturbing that our military and intelligence community do not have enough Arabic speaking people to do their jobs as effectively as possible. Just as in the cold war we needed Russian linguists, so do we now need Arabic linguists. This need is not limited to the military or intelligence community and it spans many other important dimensions of American society. However, I am deeply concerned that such a school comes with some meaningful risk and that these risks have to be analyzed, discussed openly and addressed before such a school should be opened.

First, let me provide a bit of background on me and my family.

I am a first generation American, born in New York City. At 18, I volunteered to serve in the armed forces of our nation because I saw it as my way to give back to this great land that had given my family so much opportunity. Senator Moynihan of New York nominated me, and I entered West Point upon graduating from high school. After West Point, I served as an officer of the United States Army, in a wide range of places domestically and abroad. One such place was Mogadishu, Somalia, where we worked under severe and dangerous conditions to provide humanitarian assistance to a native Moslem population. Since leaving the Army, I attended graduate school and have been involved in a variety of initiatives in the security industry for almost 15 years. Others in my family have served in the US military as well and I even have a brother that is studying Arabic in college.

Clearly, the notion of training more people to speak Arabic is something that I support because I think that our nation needs more Arabic speaking people. However, as mentioned earlier, there are many questions that need to be answered before a school like Khalil is opened. Here are just a few:

What controls will be in place to monitor the content of what is taught and the manner of how it is taught? We want our public schools to teach American values and civics.

How do we keep religious ideology from permeating class discussions, study material, homework assignments and more? As you know, tenets of Islam make it very difficult (if not outright impossible) to separate ‘church and state’ and school books in all Arab countries (without a single exception) are filled with blatant anti-American, anti-Western, anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli rhetoric.

How will we ensure that important lessons are not cast aside for political correctness or expediency? As you may well know, it has been announced that schools in the UK will no longer teach the Holocaust in history class for fear of offending Moslem students. It is disturbing that anyone would be offended by learning about one of the darkest moments in human history. Moreover, it is especially ironic in that Moslems had nothing to do with the Holocaust. However, it is indicative of the depth of the anti-Semitic ideology of even the “moderates”. Such action by UK schools is shocking and terrifying in its implications.

Will there be special curricula in place for students that are different from students at other NYC public schools? If so, who will determine it? Who will review and monitor it?

Will there be non-Moslem teachers? If the focus is Arabic-language, it seems reasonable that teachers of Jewish, Christian and other faiths should be not just allowed, but required at this school for obvious reasons.

Will non-Moslem students be enrolled? Will we take an “integration” approach to ensure that children of Christian, Jewish and other faiths be given the opportunity to study Arabic? A diverse staff, faculty and student population will help prevent radical ideologies from developing and becoming accepted.

As you can well imagine, these questions are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many others, some quite sensitive, that need to be discussed and answered aloud. These discussions should happen publicly and with the full participation of designated staff, faculty, administration and parents.

Failure to do so would be a great disservice to our city and our nation.

I would welcome a response and be happy to discuss the matter with you.

All the best,
Elad

Global Warming and Islamic-Nukes

I tend to believe the vast majority of scientists that assert that global warming is a man-made phenomenon. But, that is not the point I want to discuss.

The important point to me is that because of concerns about global warming, we may may finally have enough people interested in doing something that needed to be done a long time ago, namely finding alternative affordable sources of energy. Finding alternative energy sources is critical to our national security, and to me, national security imperatives are paramount.

I think that the threat of nuclear terrorism is real. We have no reason not to take Ahmadinejad seriously when he claims to want to "wipe Israel off the map." I believe that he is not just willing but eager to make a trade-off of many millions of his own citizens' lives that would be killed in the retaliation that followed in order to kill fewer millions of Americans or Israelis.

Detering Iran once they have a nuke will be almost impossible, let's not be naive and think otherwise. Therefore, we should do everything in our power to stop them from acquiring or developing one.

Hopefully, we can do so without military force. Economic sanctions are one approach. Isolating Iran dimplomatically is another. A naval blockade of Iran would be a third. However, perhaps the strongest weapon we have in the long run is to take away their only source of revenue, oil. If the option is still available, we should do so not temporarily through a blockade, but permanently by eliminating our need for it and causing the price of oil to plummet.

By solving our oil addiction, we cut off funds to Middle-Eastern countries with theological, genocidal, totalitarian governments. In turn, their ability to fund terrorists disappears and with it their nuclear threat to the free world. We have no choice. We must develop alternate energy sources. Not doing so is akin to digging our own graves.

Too many people do not seem to appreciate the magnitude of the threat. Perhaps to them, questions of an existential nature are not their cup of tea and they would rather watch news about Anna Nicole Smith than learn they may be vaporized by an Islamic-nuke one day in the not-too-distant future. But, some of these same people are motivated by global warming. So, if that is what it takes, so be it.

I am glad that many people are motivated by global warming. We need all the help we can get.
Then, hopefully, we will be around to enjoy living in an environmentally sound world.

History Repeating Itself

The world is turning on its head…some things happening today would be laughable if not true. They would have been unimaginable only a few years ago.

Here’s a sad thought on the human condition…
It’s every generation’s belief that they are progressing beyond the point of their parents’ generation’s accomplishments; that things slowly but surely get better over time. Science and human understanding evolve in only one direction, forward.

And, for much of my life, I believed it. Humanity is more enlightened, understanding, diverse, and tolerant than it has ever been. Surely, I believed, that our generation is intelligent enough to learn from and avoid the mistakes of previous, less enlightened generations. The old adage is wrong I beleived; history does not necessarily have to repeat itself.

But, I’ve learned that this trend of human progress is not self-fulfilling. There is no ‘virtuous spiral’ of human evolution, just as there is no perpetual motion machine.

Unfortunately, we are not wiser for the experiences of past generations. If we are not careful, if we do not wake up, this generation may find itself in the tragic position of many other previous generations, repeating the tragedies of the past, yet again.