A short note on a small plot of land.

In an ideal world, the map of Israel (and its neighbors) would look something like the map above. Israel could be the orange shaded nation in the middle, while Palestine would be tha nation shaded in gray.  This is the "Two-State" solution that most people want and believe in.

With the effective annexation of the West Bank, successful negotiations could have taken place on Israel's terms, as it would control what land would have been given to Palestine for nationhood.  But this was, is, and probably not be what Israel wants to do.  Instead, it has placed illegal settlements in key sites in the West Bank, making it impossible for a practical two-state solution to be negotiated.

There is no way to say any one party to this inter-generational conflict is guilty or innocent. The forebears of today's Israelis were kicked out of the land by the Romans roughly 2,000 years ago.  The British promised this land to both Jews and Arabs at the end of World War 1, and the aftermath of World War 2 made it necessary for Jews to establish a home in their traditional homeland.

- - - - - -

Recently, the US abstained from a vote condemning Israel for its illegal settlements on the West Bank. Trump went wild, saying that Obama has betrayed our national interests.  But whose interests come first - USA's or Israel's?  The only reason that America doesn't abandon Israel is the political support Israel gets from American Jews and Christian Fundamentalists who want a place for the Messiah's second coming.  Both groups support Israel for religious reasons, and not for reasons that benefit America.

There is only one reason for America to support Israel, and that is a moral one. We should support democracies wherever they are found, and respect them even when they act in their interests, not ours.  But if we did that as a policy, we'd never have had the pissing match with Iran, we'd have never have used the CIA to overthrow Salvador Allende, and we'd insisted on an official "Two-China" policy.  Sadly, Israel is evolving into an Apartheid state, and none of the pro-Israel camp seems to care.  Soon, demographics being what they are, there will be more disenfranchised Arabs in the lands Israel controls, and no way to allow them a voice in their lives - as that would come out as "Death to Israel!"

Time is running out for a Two-State solution, and Israel's actions are only making matters worse for that solution.  Our Secretary of State has effectively said, that in a Single State solution, Israel could either be a Jewish state or a Democracy, but not both. Most people want the Two-State solution, but radicals are making this impossible.  Is helping the radical element a way to make peace?  I doubt it. 

- - - - - -

Today's GOP is filled with people who would usurp the power of the presidency and invite the Prime Minister of Israel to speak to Congress, bypassing the State Department.  It looks like they will give Israel everything it asks for - and then some. This is not a healthy development.  It'll be like a kid in a candy store, and mistakes of excess will likely be made. Slow moving initiatives with countries such as Iran will be scuttled.  Who knows what will happen then?

Every nation has a right to be secure in its borders.  And every people have a right to be treated fairly in the nations in which they live. The Israel-Palestine conflict will likely be with us for generations yet to come, as both sides are taking positions only meant to stir up people for the benefit of those other than themselves.  Religious zealots living in Israel have no desire to live in peace with their Muslim neighbors. The Arab side is no better, as Muslims have been taught for generations that the Infidel is their sworn enemy, and that the Infidel must be expelled from Muslim territory.

In a way, the Arab nations are right.  Solve the problem of Jerusalem and you'll solve the problem of the Middle-East.  Sadly, I don't see a huckster real estate promoter being up to the challenges this region will present him in the next four years....

Another year over, and a new one just begun.

As usual, no one knows what will happen at the beginning of the New Year. But we do know that the old year brought a lot of change. And this year was no different. There were many changes, and yet, the world remained much the same as it has always been - an orb where over 7 billion people repeatedly fight to make it through another day of life.

The New York Times Sunday Magazine has put out its usual memorial issue, where they commemorate the lives of those who have passed. And we are reminded of what we have lost, not knowing what we will gain in the years to come. There are many great people we have lost, some famous, and some who are not. But all have a commonality to them - they have made an impact on our lives.

We have seen the development of new enemies, as well as the neutralization of old ones. Who'd have thought that ISIS would be a major concern a couple of years ago? Who'd have thought that North Korea would attempt to threaten Americans if they watched a mediocre film that cast their leader as the focal point of bad humor? Who'd have thought that the USA would be working with Iran, and deescalating years of tension between the countries? And who'd have thought that the United States and Cuba would be normalizing political relations with each other?

Much of the news was controversial - not only because of its content, but for what it meant about the people being reported on. In the case of the Senate Report on Torture, we found that the CIA made a cascading series of moral mistakes after being charged with gaining information from GITMO prisoners, and then did whatever was in their political power to cover up their actions. Yes, the report was going to be political in nature - could anything coming out of Washington, DC not be political?  What saddens me most is that many Americans are so happy to use torture as a tool, forgetting that even our captives deserve to be treated as humans. in accordance with treaties signed by the United States.

But who could have foreseen the Pope chastising the Roman Curia? Of all 2014's events, this one seems the most amazing, as religious leaders have not sparked as much change as this Pope seems to have done. Without changing a letter of dogma, he has changed the focus of the message. Instead of rigid obedience and conformity, it is now one of forgiveness, tolerance and hope.

As they say, "the more things change, the more they stay the same." And this has been true about 2014. Hopefully, we'll see 2015 show more of the good side of humanity than 2014 did....

Questions arising from the report on the CIA Enhanced Interrogation program

The recent release of the Senate report on the activities of the CIA in the wake of 9-11 is very disturbing. But I'm disturbed for reasons tangentially related to the document itself - that people will excuse violations of law and human decency in the pursuit of vengeance and political cover.

It's been over 13 years since the Twin Towers and the Pentagon were attacked. Many people were in extreme fear, as mainland America had never suffered a terrorist attack of this scale, nor had it been in the front line of any major wars since 1865. I remember my downstairs neighbor having a sticker on his car announcing "Lake Afghanistan" - as if the way to eliminate our fears was to bomb this country off the face of the earth. Even I was caught up in this fear - and lost sight of what my core values were and should have been.

Shortly after the attacks, the CIA was charged with gathering information which the government could act on. And as the report shows, they were ramping up a mass scale intelligence gathering program without much knowledge of how to do so. In short, they were flying by the seats of their pants.

In most technology fields, we deal with a three legged stool: Cheap, Bug Free, On-Time - pick any two. We have to make trade offs to deliver products with an acceptable balance of these three factors. In intelligence gathering, they have another three legged stool: Quick Information, Large Amounts of Information, and Accurate Information. Torture can produce a lot of information quickly, but the quality leaves much to be desired - as both Israelis and Egyptians would tell you. Skilled interrogation (as used by the Israelis and other governments) produces a lot of accurate information, but it takes time. In short, there is a trade off that has to be made in intelligence gathering.

What I find interesting about the executive summary of the report just published is that we have learned how many records were preserved by the CIA, save the videotapes of the "enhanced interrogations." This is reminiscent of the detailed records kept by a major Central European power in the 1930's and 1940's. The key difference here, is that in the USA, our CIA acted to hide information from both elected branches of government. In fact, one of the documents mention that if Colin Powell (then Secretary of State) hears about this, he'd be livid. Even worse, the CIA kept information from the then President himself!  Only the Senate and House intelligence committees had knowledge of the activities in question.

Ronald Reagan's signing statement on the ratification of the UN Convention on Torture states:

The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called ‘universal jurisdiction.’ Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution.” 

Therefore, waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation activities" are likely to be considered torture by the treaties we've signed.  Where is the outrage that our House and Senate oversight committees looked the other way while our laws were being violated? Are we a government of law, or that of expediency? This is a very important question.

Shortly after the executive summary of the Senate report was issued, I had a conversation with a gentleman I see regularly. And he parroted the view of the Republican rebuttal, as well as saying that this report should never be made public. He feels that whatever we do to others can be justified in the name of protecting Americans - even if it means breaking laws, then covering up the lawbreaking. I feel that we are a nation of laws, and sometimes it means that we suffer so that the powers of government are kept in check.

The big questions here that bother me very much are: Can we afford to allow a government act illegally, and then cover things up in the name of protecting Americans? Where is the point where allowing a government to act illegally harms Americans more than protects them? I have serious concerns in regard to religious obedience to law, as I know that some problems can not be resolved within the rule of law. On the other hand, how much freedom can we afford to give a government agency which seems to have gone rogue in the performance of its duty? I only wish I had good answers....