Jed Morey

Ain’t Necessarily So

2012-04-11T16:50:22Z

Words from de Bible
Dey turns into libel
Ain’t necessarily so!

-with apologies to Ira Gershwin

Oft time the Good Book is used to evil ends. The Spanish Inquisition and the Salem Witchcraft Trials are iconic examples. Then there is the more insidious evil spread by False Prophets Jesus warned us about: those who “come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves.” -Mattthew 7:15

False Prophets have been spreading like locusts in grandiose displays of holier than thou. They preach with absolute moral certainty that brooks no differences with their agenda. Some, willfully and for pecuniary reasons, do their bible-beating so that folks “will betray and hate each other.” -Matthew 24:10. Others may not be so much in touch with their inner wolf as they raven self-serving passages from the Good Book while ignoring others. Still others may simply be regurgitating what they themselves have been spoon-fed.

However one feels about the Tim Tebow phenomenon, his psyche is infectious. Tebowing and eye-black billboarding of biblical passages like John 3:16 have evangelized millions that belief in Him means “ever lasting life.” Note, however, what scripture has not made it on to Tebow’s eye-black: “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on street corners to be seen by men.” -Matthew 6:5

Pro ball players and coaches regularly thank God for victory. Seldom, if ever, do we hear them ask for Divine guidance in the wake of defeat. Jeremy Lin kind of went there as he announced his knee was going under the knife. While his coach grudgingly felt Jeremy could tough it out, Lin mused that, “He has a plan.” Coach couldn’t argue with that Big Commissioner in the sky.

A number of Founding Fathers who were, reputedly, Deists did not subscribe to the premise that everything happens for a reason, according to Divine plan. Ours is a set-and-forget world, one spec of many in a universe produced by Creation or the Big Bang, as secular science would have it. God does not micromanage. He does not intercede to safely land a prop plane with a 60yrs-old in cardiac arrest then retreat when Timothy McVey blows up toddlers. A cauldron of randomness, chaos and chance mix in a chain reaction that sometimes produces a semblance of order even when that order is terrifying.

Religion addresses a human yearning to fathom our place in an unfathomable universe and to immortalize our earthly mortality. Not a few feel that it is all so much whistling as we go by the graveyard. But even non-believers may be inclined to hedge their bets. On being caught, late in life, reading the bible, WC Fields, a renowned atheist, explained in his inimitable twang that he was, “just looking for loopholes, looking for loopholes!”

A couple of years back I was invited by a Mormon neighbor for whom I have considerable respect to listen to a missionary appeal ministered by Elder Elliot and Elder Joseph, both 21. My knowledge of Mormonism was pretty sketchy so I was intrigued to hear that the Book of Mormon, as received by Joseph Smith, had, ostensibly, been inscribed on thin tablet-shaped gold plates and delivered by an angel. Like the tablets etched with Ten Commandments by the Lord then shattered in a fury by Moses, no tangible evidence remains for posterity of the gold plates, though Eight Witnesses attested to their existence.

In addition to my wife and I, high holy day Episcopals, the group being missioned to included a Fundamentalist Christian and a medium of some Protestant persuasion. The Fundamentalist, being of ‘my-way-or-the-highway’ faith, declared that those not embracing Jesus, according to select criteria, would not gain entry into the Kingdom of Heaven. Figuring that the All-Knowing would know who had been naughty or nice, regardless of religious affiliation on earth, I asked, “What then might be the eternal fate of Gandhi, a Hindu who led his people from privation into freedom.

“We don’t know if Gandhi had a death-bed conversion,” the Fundamentalist responded evasively. As it so happens, the Mormons have been magnanimously providing visas to Heaven by posthumous proxy baptism for non-Mormons like Anne Frank. Relatives of Holocaust victims who are, after all the Chosen People, have not been placated by the proposition that this may be a sort of insurance policy, just in case Divine Rights have been exclusively bestowed on some other religious order.

Focus on the Family’s highly charged socio-politicizing has included the Tim Tebow “miracle baby” commercial in Super Bowl XLIV. After the Janet Jackson ‘wardrobe malfunction’ during Super Bowl XXXVIII, I wrote Focus complaining that every other commercial was for a sex drug like Viagra. How was I supposed to explain the chronically repeated (wink, wink) ’48hrs erection’ to my 8yrs-old daughter or expect her to ‘just say no’ to sex as a teen with non-stop TV images of lusting adults? Focus has declined to focus on Big Pharma, perhaps because Pharma must have gotten Big thanks to Him. Focus has not felt comparably constrained in going after environmentalists who they deem vanguards of the Godless World Order (see www.ResistingtheGreenDragon.com).

Patrick, “Give Me Liberty of Give Me Death,” Henry introduced a bill in 1784 calling for state support for “teachers of the Christian religion.” It was resoundingly rejected and instead the Founding Fathers bequeathed us the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” As they seek to conflate their church and state while shilling for ideological agendas and vested economic interests, maybe it’s time to categorize False Prophets as For-Profits and tax them accordingly. The country could use the revenues.

Main Photo: Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse – Albrecht Dürer

Putting the “Fun” in Fundamentalism

2012-04-05T17:22:22Z

The “my-perverted-form-of-Christianity-is-crazier-than-yours” show will be coming to New York soon when the GOP candidates come-a-barnstorming through our blue state. I have already received a lovely letter from Willard Romney asking for my support as if things aren’t bad enough with Tebow-mania sweeping the region.

My pitiful Jets. Sigh. That’s for another day.

Recently, my wife and I were fortunate to procure tickets to The Book of Mormon on Broadway. As one would imagine, it was delightfully wicked and painfully funny. (Unless, of course, you’re a Mormon, in which case I wouldn’t recommend it.) But its brilliance isn’t necessarily its provocative humor as much as its ability to bring the audience from uproarious laughter to dead silence within seconds. For all of its entertaining vulgarity, this Broadway show is a cautionary tale against the evils of forcing a belief system down the throats of others. If nothing else, it will leave you wondering how this particular sect became so powerful and accepted as to produce the odds-on favorite for the GOP nomination.

On the same side of the bizarro-spectrum is the new breed of Christian fundamentalist personified by Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator. In addition to the many things I find loathsome about him and other sanctimonious politicians is their annoying habit of twisting the words of the Constitution and, in particular, the Founding Fathers.

The rise of the conservative Christian fundamentalist clutching the Bible in one hand and the Constitution in the other is one of the more intellectually insulting developments of our time. The Founding Fathers were undoubtedly brilliant. But many of their flaws such as their racism and infidelity have been whitewashed over time, explained away as unfortunate characteristics of the era instead of the morally reprehensible traits they have always been. By claiming ownership of their ideas and intentions, the conservative fundamentalist movement has completely distorted the spirit of the Constitution. In everything they did the Founding Fathers—many of them downright heathens if ever there were any—took great pains to eradicate the role of God in governance. After all, these were men who knew and understood that America was settled by people fleeing, not seeking, religious persecution.

One needs to look no further than the Constitution itself to discover that our form of government was intended to be an entirely secular affair. Moreover, The Federalist Papers, which offers the greatest insight into the intentions set forth by the most scholarly of the Founding Fathers, explicitly denounced religious influence over government. In his portion of the introduction, James Madison credits the “zeal for different opinions concerning religion,” among other things, with having, “divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good.” The majority of the writings proffered by our forefathers echo this sentiment. While freedom of religion among citizens was indeed a critical aspect of their collective philosophy, so too was freedom from religion.

This doesn’t mean they weren’t men of faith. In fact, my guess is that if they heard Rick Santorum profess that JFK’s insistence upon separation of church and state made him want to throw up, the Founding Fathers would likely vomit themselves. After a good laugh at Santorum’s expense and a few hits of opium, Benjamin Franklin would take off with one of his several prostitute paramours, Jefferson would go back to chasing Sally Hemmings around her slave quarters, Washington would return to bidding on a few more colored people, Hamilton would resume paying hush money to the husband of his 20-something-year-old mistress, Adams would continue attempting to imprison reporters under the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Aaron Burr would get back to his target practice.

These guys would have fit in perfectly today with the likes of former Nevada Sen. John Ensign and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who both called for President Clinton’s impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal while simultaneously carrying on extra-marital affairs of their own— the former with the wife of his best friend.

But enough about those God-fearing noblemen; let’s get on to the oft-abused phrases that seemingly comprise the bulk of Middle America’s knowledge of American history.

For those who insist on God as part of the original intent in America, allow me to disabuse you of the most commonly mistaken beliefs. To begin, there are no references to God in the Constitution. Period. Furthermore, the phrase “under God” was not part of the original Pledge of Allegiance, which was written by a socialist, by the by; it was formally adopted by Congress in 1954 as a reaction to the rise of secular Communism. I’ve also heard the argument the president serves the Almighty first and foremost because the Oath of Office closes with the phrase: “so help me God.” This is true, but you should know that it was ad-libbed by George Washington, not originally written as such. And finally, “In God We Trust” is neither from the Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence. It’s on our money. How very Christian of us.American history is fascinating and the work of our Founding Fathers is legendary and enduring, but it’s important to get it right. So too is it important to understand the origins of the modern Christian fundamentalist movement. In a nutshell:

A couple of babbling prophets roamed the country in the 1800s and early 1900s selling a new shiny brand of Jesus with little attention paid to them. Then, in the 1920s, Bruce Barton, best known as one of the “B’s” in the BBD&O ad agency, published The Man Nobody Knows. It was a self-help book about Corporate Jesus that spread like wildfire, and the fundamentalist movement latched on immediately with the thought that if you’re successful in this life, then Jesus must love you. Of course, the flip side of that coin is that if you’re poor through no fault of your own, it must be because Jesus hates you. Fundamentalists don’t like that side of the story much, though.

That’s right; the babbling nomadic Christian fundamentalists who evangelized throughout the United States were universally recognized as the crazy people they were until they got a makeover by the Don Draper of the 1920’s. The result: Rick Santorum. And the people who believed Jesus buried golden tablets (that no one ever actually saw) in the three days between dying on the cross and rising again only to later tell an angel named Moroni to let Joseph Smith know that the plates were buried in his back yard…in Rochester…New York…? I give you, Mitt Romney.

These are the GOP frontrunners that shall walk among us next month in a primary that looks like it actually might matter. And since I have maintained my Republican registration, I get to weigh in on this contest. Any thoughts on which one I should pull the lever, er, fill in the bubble for? Can I just go all the way and write in “Tim Tebow?” What the hell, right? Oops! There I go again.

From Watergate to Occupy Wall Street

2012-03-22T02:49:01Z

This column appears in the March 22nd, 2012 edition of the Long Island Press

“It’s a mess.” This was the sentiment offered by Bob Woodward at a Hofstra University luncheon on Tuesday when asked to describe the current political environment. After his flight was delayed by fog in New York for the better part of the morning, Woodward was late in joining the other half of the famous Woodward and Bernstein duo at the podium in the University Club. The hour prior to his arrival was the Carl Bernstein show as he regaled the packed room of attendees with stories of their travails in journalism during a road show marking the 40th anniversary of the Watergate affair.

The luncheon was part of a series of high-profile political events Hofstra is hosting for the student body, as well as the greater Long Island community, culminating in the second presidential debate to be held there this fall. For his part, Bernstein was also chagrined at the state of politics today and his anecdotes were didactic in this regard. He broke through the haze of mythology that over time has shrouded the Watergate story and boiled it down to the simple premise that no one is above the law and the entire system of democracy must function properly in order for this notion to be upheld. It was the latter sentiment that hung in the air like the fog that had held Woodward at bay on the tarmac for hours.

Time has benefitted both men by allowing them to evaluate Watergate through the backward lens of history. Stepping away from their youthful selves (they were in their late twenties when they broke the story that catapulted them to the top of their newspaper careers), they even reevaluated some of their own beliefs such as the pardoning of Richard Nixon by his VP/successor Gerald Ford, a move that arguably cost him the election to Jimmy Carter. Bernstein recalled telephoning Woodward early that morning in 1974, saying “the son of a bitch pardoned the son of a bitch.” What he once viewed as ignominious Bernstein now considers magnanimous as Ford believed this was the best way to heal the nation from its “long nightmare,” no matter the consequences to his presidency.

Subtle reflections and anecdotes aside, the afternoon offered a glimpse into the thoughts of two devout Washington insiders who have witnessed a sea change in American politics. To be clear, these are not two old curmudgeons touting the “things ain’t what they used to be” line. They deftly fielded questions about new media and the surge of information as well as our ability to process the constant onslaught of news and commentary today. And while they were genuinely hopeful that their efforts four decades ago could be replicated by today’s reporters, they were less sanguine about whether the political climate existed to allow journalism to flourish and find its natural audience.

The men who brought down one of the most toxic administrations in American history were lamenting the toxic state of today’s political environment. That’s pretty terrible.

Bernstein spoke eloquently about the support their reporting received from The Washington Post but was careful to point out that the entire democratic machine had to function properly at every stage of the investigation in order to yield the historic results that it did. From the judicial system that forced President Nixon to hand over his personal tapes to the legislative branch that carried the articles of impeachment against the president, to the protection afforded the journalists in shielding their sources, democracy in all of its glory won the day. But Bernstein argued that it was the people who ultimately played the most critical role in judging the Nixon presidency as even staunch supporters of Nixon and the Republican Party were open enough to review the facts before them and draw their own conclusions.

Ultimately, partisanship among the elected and the electorate was cast aside for the greater good.

Bernstein went on to argue that money has corrupted the political system beyond recognition. He excoriated the Citizen’s United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which allows unlimited contributions from corporations and wealthy individuals in campaigns. Furthermore, he believes the glut and immediacy of information has had the unintended consequence of allowing people to reinforce existing beliefs rather than exposing them to new ideas or multiple sides of a story.
The rancor that exists in Washington is a reflection of this phenomenon, and it has created a vicious cycle of partisanship with politicians pandering to the most extreme elements of our society. It’s mob rule. As to how the system could be fixed, no solutions were offered by either man. Perhaps this is because there are none.

The system is broken and I believe it to be irreparable. And that’s okay. Sometimes it’s easier to build anew than to salvage a diseased and crumbling infrastructure. I’m not being pessimistic here, either. To the contrary, I’m fairly optimistic about our chances because I believe the foundation and principles that have guided us to this point are strong enough to endure the collapse and rebirth of a functioning and more equitable system no matter how painful the process may be. This hope derives from the fact that the older generations are the ones who are fixed in their ways and reinforce their existing belief systems no matter how dangerous or antiquated they are. And quite frankly, the answer to this is rather simple math: They have far less time left on the planet than we do.

It’s true that they have hoarded the world’s money and resources and polluted the Earth. It’s also true that they have left those in my generation and younger to foot the bill for their greed and consumption. They have “engineered” our food and contaminated our water and established a culture of pharmaceutical addiction. They’ve started wars around the globe in the pursuit of oil by blaming bogeymen while selling themselves as false prophets.

Now they have a credibility problem because we no longer believe. And as sure as these are the truths they bequeath to us, so too is the truth that they will all soon be dead. Even the good ones like Woodward and Bernstein cannot escape the inevitable. We can take solace, however, that although we must someday lose them, so too will we rid ourselves of people like the Koch Brothers. Death is funny that way; forever indiscriminate.

The youth of today, such as those in the Occupy movement, are wide awake and watching. Six months ago I didn’t believe this to be the case, but it’s real. So to you, Mr. Bernstein, I offer my thanks and some comfort as you and your venerable collaborator enter the winter of your lives. Your wisdom and work have better prepared us for the long, difficult task ahead.

Peter King Video Surfaces

2012-03-15T13:25:08Z

Petey’s Big Adventure
This column is featured in the March 15, 2012 edition of the Long Island Press.

Earlier this week House Rep. Pete King (R-Seaford) uploaded a video of a ride-along with U.S. Marshals performing raids in the Bronx and Brooklyn. In the video King can be seen wearing a police jacket and following marshals who’ve starred in the reality television show Manhunters up the stairs and into a suspect’s apartment. After the bust King is heard joking with them, saying, “I got him,” then listening to an official describe kicking a suspect down a ladder during the raid.

That’s our Pete. Tough on crime. The only problem is that the filming of Petey’s Big Adventure is technically against the law.

The video began circulating on the Web after a story first appeared on the political website Talking Points Memo. According to the story, King’s people took the video down from YouTube, then reposted an edited version later in the day. TPM reports differences between the versions saying, “Clips of an officer kicking in a door, a joke about how King ‘got’ a suspect and an officer describing to King how he kicked someone, perhaps the suspect, off a ladder were cut out.” The edited version was also later taken down.

Considering how many laws and rights we’ve thrown out the window over the last decade, this incident will likely die out in short order. And since the marshals are going after law-breaking reprobates, few will care about the violation of federal protocol. What bothers me is how ridiculous he looks on the video. Not only does King represent Long Island, but he’s also the chair of the House Homeland Security Committee. Instead of looking official or important, he looks like a 7-year-old about to take his first ride through Safety Town in Eisenhower Park.

Wearing a police jacket (illegal) when you’re not a cop while taping a bust inside a person’s home (illegal) and filming yourself joking about it (legal but stupid) is just about the last thing we need this guy doing as the head of the Homeland Security committee.

But judging by the plurality of his victories, Long Islanders love Rep. Pete King. Some people can’t seem to get enough of him. The “take no prisoners” attitude exhibited by LI’s full-time congressman and part-time pugilist whips his dedicated base into a frenzy. He is always on hand to offer commentary on global situations—particularly when it comes to military affairs or law enforcement issues.

King never backs down from conflict; if anything, he seems to invite it. He doesn’t duck reporters or shrink from controversy and has even shown a willingness to publicly battle his own party when he disagrees with its leadership.

These are sentiments that are uttered by King’s proponents and detractors alike. But while many find these qualities appealing, I consider them to be dangerous. Not because these aren’t admirable traits in a person, but because of his position in Congress. Peter King is incapable of nuance and separating his emotion from policy-making and is forever insulting various ethnic groups, sometimes entire nations. Moreover, when he speaks he insults the intelligence community by displaying a remarkable lack of, well, intelligence.

A bigger problem is that King’s bellicose nature and incapacity for subtlety makes him walking fodder for terrorists. He routinely offers bulletin board material that stokes anti-American sentiment like some loudmouth running back pumping up the opposition. Meanwhile, our servicemen and women are cracking under pressure and displaying personal anguish in horrific ways. Recent incidents reported or caught on video of soldiers burning Qorans and urinating on dead Taliban fighters—and the most recent tragedy in Afghanistan when a U.S. soldier reportedly executed 16 unarmed villagers—are overshadowing the positive work being done by our military.

Our mission in Afghanistan was supposed to be to disrupt terrorist cells, not take over the entire country and leave our men and women there to languish in an undefined, unethical and unwinnable war. This was sold as a homeland security mission, not an occupation. This is why watching the head of the House Homeland Security Committee gleefully lumber along behind U.S. Marshals on a raid while a staffer films it for YouTube is so utterly juvenile and ridiculous. Instead of monkey-fucking around in the Bronx living out some sort of unfulfilled cop-fetish-fantasy, I wish this guy would focus on getting our most precious possessions out of Afghanistan.

Meeting The Media

2012-03-08T04:08:18Z

The Huntington Chamber of Commerce held a “Meet the Media” breakfast where Long Island and metro-area journalists talked about the year’s biggest story, the least reported story, and how to get a press release seen as a story. This was interesting. What got me, though, was when they wrestled with what they must do to be relevant themselves. This is what I’d encourage:

Important Over Popular. I realize advertisers probably put undue emphasis on social media, but please let’s not have the peanut gallery dictate what’s covered. I have Facebook, LinkedIn, and friends who forward things inspiring, appalling or fun to argue with. I dig Digg. I even have Twitter followers, though I’ve yet to tweet. We cherry pick and pontificate, yielding finely niched popularity contests, personal statements, and less than civil, questionably educated debate. Should journalists participate? Sure. It’s a good place to connect and study people. This isn’t journalism, though. It’s the public square.

One local newspaperman pointed this out to his fellows, and I hope others will agree: You are the journalists. You are trained to uncover truth, draw attention, and provide context. Be savvy, but don’t pander to lowest common denominators or outspoken niches. Rise above, shine a light, and lift rocks where no one has looked. Wield your critical thinking skills, access to information, experience and judgment. Connect the dots, break it all down and serve up what you think people need to know. The masses will follow.

Good News and Bad News. We count on journalists to administer bad news. However, many otherwise intelligent people willfully ignore the media because time with it leaves the impression that the world is fully corrupted and likely a lost cause. Why? Editors know train wrecks sell.

One journalist made a point about this that was sharpened by the silence that struck before people realized his example was hypothetical: Were it revealed that the homeless girl from Brentwood stole her Intel-Semi-Finalist Winning Project from some kid in Jericho that would draw huge response. If that happened, journalists should burst our collective bubble. Thank God, it hasn’t.

Fortunately, the journalist’s point was dual. His example also showed the value and occasional front-page caliber of good news. Despite the lack of a gallows draw, everyone knew exactly who he was talking about. It was Samantha Garvey who, in the face of disheartening adversity, had the support and initiative to succeed. It is the best thing I’ve read in a while. Following the story as it brightened, I purchased a “real” newspaper to hug. It was at least as important as ever-impending doom and gloom. Samantha moved people to reach further and open wider. Some found faith in humanity, which can be hard to come by. Others found faith in themselves. Some stepped up to help that girl and her family, generating stories of their own.

Headlines and Detail. It’s true. Few can afford to pay attention. Even those with a capacity to focus have lots to keep track of. I don’t just read local media. I like regional stuff, and world stuff, and diverse trade stuff. I’m an existentialist egghead seeking to cover all perspectives. Sometimes you’ll even catch me reading tabloids and pondering overexposed life. Mostly, I’m striving to reconcile competing worldviews in search of my own piece of truth. That’s a lot of news. I have a full life to live around that. Often I’m limited to headlines and first paragraphs, grateful for whoever invented the inverted pyramid.

This doesn’t mean I only want one paragraph. Rather, it makes me even more reliant on journalists who get the full scoop. Those who at least link source material come across as open, educated, and respectful of intelligence. Maybe you don’t see too many stats showing people clicking through long articles, but I suspect those who do use them fully, and cite the heck out of them to others. These diehards are your experts, teachers, advocates and students. They include a critical minority that leads thought, and gets things done. A journalist who can fill a few pages well has probably also got a better grasp on what those first paragraphs should say.

If paper’s too expensive for that many words, fine, and even poets like me don’t want journalists wasting space with flowery nothings. Arrange front pages to facilitate skimming and conserve words elegantly, but please don’t cut to fit shrinking attention spans. We’re dumbed down to the bone already, thanks. Give us substance.

Bottom line? I hope journalists have faith that their best judgment merits attention. It’s not elitist to expect people to have minds worth stretching. We don’t need news based on what we already think we know, what the average blowhard’s willing to compute, or what will freeze attention in shocked stares. Yes, there are liars, thieves, fools and fouler things. We shouldn’t whitewash that, or minimize the media’s watchdog role. However, striving heroes and successes need spotlights too, preferably in a balance that mirrors reality. We must be warned, but also educated and inspired.

It’s unfortunate that news seems to be weighted on scales used for entertainment more than those used for academic contribution. Yes, great teachers employ both – and journalists ARE the ultimate continuing education machine — but shouldn’t we lean just a little bit more toward the latter? I think so.

President Jesus Christ

2012-03-08T02:41:59Z

Tim Pawlenty must be ready to hang himself. With Rick Santoruminejad defying the polls and pundits at every turn and stymieing Super PAC’s and Romneybots, surely this field would have been accepting of another milquetoast social conservative candidate like Pawlenty. Alas, this is now the Romney/Santorum show as the GOP accepts that its fate is linked to the enthusiasm of the evangelical Christian voter.

When then-Sen. Barack Obama proclaimed that “there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America” at the 2004 Democratic Convention, he couldn’t have been more wrong. But it sure sounded great. The 2012 GOP primary season has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are indeed two very distinct Americas. Having grown up as a Republican in a blue state, I can honestly say that the only thing I share in common with Republicans in red states is contiguous land because our idea of what constitutes democratic principles couldn’t be further apart.

The New Millennium has ushered in a resounding victory for democracy and with it the greatest placebo ever absorbed into the global body politic. Citizens of the world have bought into the hype that the American Dream is now available anywhere on the globe and is as attainable as a fake diamond necklace on a late-night infomercial.

For my money, it is the inimitable H.L. Mencken who best captured the folly of American democracy as the means to prosperity nearly a century ago saying, “Of all those ancient promises there is none more comforting than the one to the effect that the lowly shall inherit the earth. It is at the bottom of the dominant religious system of the modern world, and it is at the bottom of the dominant political system. Democracy gives it a certain appearance of objective and demonstrable truth.”

Even Mencken would be impressed by the effectiveness of today’s political hucksters who peddle faux versions of democracy. Modern-day snake oil salesmen dressed in suits adorned with flag pins on their lapels preach the gospel of the American Dream with the zeal of born-again evangelists. Their wide-eyed followers devour their every word believing that they too might someday reach the Promised Land.

Gone are the days of dreaming of white picket fences and a pension; this is the era of winning lottery tickets and gaining salvation through instant affluence. The most troubling phenomenon is the gospel of Jesus Christ as capitalist that has somehow tethered itself to our new collective interpretation of democracy. This mixing of religious and ideological metaphors has seeped into the consciousness of American politics and given life to a bizarre fundamentalist ideology that has inculcated the public with the notion that financial success is the product of divine right. According to this newly adopted testament of faith, Jesus Christ is a champion of corporate rights and free markets who offers his disciples unfettered VIP access to the pearly gates of the hereafter.

“All these forms of happiness, of course, are illusory. They don’t last,” warned Mencken. “The Democrat, leaping into the air to flap his wings and praise God, is forever coming down with a thump. The seeds of his disaster lie in his own stupidity; he can never get rid of the naïve delusion — so beautifully Christian! — that happiness is something to be got by taking it away from the other fellow.” It is the idea that only the uncompromising person in the self-righteous pursuit of wealth emerges triumphant in a life that has separated humans from their humanity. Community, environment and the welfare of others have been subjugated by a new dogma that places faith over reason, prosperity over compassion.

Capitalism and Christianity, mutually exclusive by design, are no longer distinct from one another under the all-encompassing umbrella of democracy. And who could argue? We credit democracy with ushering in the most technologically innovative century in recorded history. There have also been real victories along the way. America as it was originally conceived was a place where inalienable rights were intended exclusively for white, male property owners. But the system was intuitive and flexible enough to allow its citizens to battle one another and hammer out universal suffrage and civil rights. It is also our right to freely and openly criticize the government and protest perceived injustices. No system works perfectly for all of its inhabitants but liberties such as these that we often take for granted are glorious enough to make America’s democratic system enviable by most standards.

I am an insider, an avowed critic of the hand that feeds me. I’m not writing in exile or from behind a prison wall, but that is not to say we aren’t metaphorically imprisoned by the image we project of ourselves. Much of what we believe to be true about democracy is belied by our very real actions and circumstances.

Americans are trapped by the conviction that we live in a free society despite having the highest incarceration rate per capita of any nation in the world. We see ourselves as the purveyors of peace and democracy, having defeated the Communist menace and dethroned dictators, yet no other nation in modern times has initiated unprovoked foreign wars more than we have or dropped a nuclear bomb (twice) on its enemies. We believe in the theory of fair competition and the ability to achieve success through hard work and discipline but we exist within a system that discourages competitiveness and has consolidated 40 percent of the nation’s wealth into the hands of 1 percent of the population.

Our state of denial has caused us to drift far from the nation we believe ourselves to be while holding tightly to an image of the nation we wish to be. And whoever prevails on the GOP ticket will have no choice but to continue touting the conservative agenda and wooing the evangelical vote. I am a Republican living in a blue state; an American capitalist who was born in socialist Canada. I have Mohawk and Dutch roots. In short, I’m a walking contradiction. But I’m far from confused because this I know: Jesus Christ isn’t on the ballot and fundamentalism is the opposite of freedom.

Top Photo: Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum
Bottom Photo: H.L. Mencken

That 70′s Show

2012-03-03T03:07:37Z

He was a relative unknown when he campaigned for president of an America  that was worn down from foreign intervention, a sick economy and  Republican rule. His outsider status brought with him a new brand of  hope that the media devoured allowing his star to rise quickly and shine  brightly. Upon taking the presidency, however, the beleaguered economy  stubbornly refused to show signs of life, energy prices rose to  troubling levels and the Middle East began to spin wildly out of  control. Things were so bad he even had to step in and bail out an American car company with government funds.

After only three years, it was all over but for the counting. His star  faded quickly as the once-media darling became anathema to an  increasingly conservative American public that spent the last year of  his term looking for a new “Mr. Right” in every sense.

Such was the fate of Jimmy Carter, who never had a shot at re-election;  and a good argument can be made that Barack Obama will suffer the same  fate under nearly identical circumstances.

There is so much involved in the making and unmaking of a president that  it’s unfair to boil a career down to only a few factors. But in Jimmy  Carter’s case I believe it is fair to say that three primary issues were  the undoing of his presidency: the hostage crisis in Iran, stagflation  and fuel prices at the pump.

Iran wasn’t a military crisis as much as it was an embarrassment to the United States, though talk of a nuclear Iran was percolating even then.  Prior meddling in the Middle East came back to haunt us in a situation  we couldn’t control, with Carter ill-equipped to handle the predicament  of Americans held hostage in Tehran. Rising oil prices—the result of the  Iranian revolution in 1979 and the panic that ensued in the trading  markets—brought about a second shortage within a decade and with it  hysteria and inflation. This upward pressure from fuel prices in an  already inflationary environment spurred the Federal Reserve to begin  chasing inflation with high interest rates.

In his book Currency Wars, James Rickards addresses the impact of  American monetary policy on the global economy and cites the “50 percent  decline in the purchasing power of the dollar from 1977 to 1981.” He  goes on to depict “a world gone mad,” noting that, “A new term,  ’stagflation,’ was used to describe the unprecedented combination of  high inflation and stagnation happening in the United States.”  Most people recall the moment when interest rates reached as high as 20  percent during this period and point to it as the height of insanity  during the Carter years. In actuality then-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker  under Ronald Reagan did this as a one-time shock to the system. It was  done in conjunction with vigorous tax cuts to spark consumer spending, a  tightening of the monetary policy to strengthen the dollar and the  latent effect of increased oil production, both domestic and abroad.  With the exception of the tax cuts, these policies and factors would  likely have occurred anyway as Volcker was a Carter appointee and it was  Carter who loosened the valve on domestic oil production. Furthermore,  Reagan would go on to reverse many of these initial tax cuts in a way  that would make conservatives and Tea Party activists blush today.  Either way, Jimmy Carter was a victim of pitiful economic circumstances  that will forever be his legacy in the White House.

Rickards draws some comparisons between the ’70s and today, most notably  deriding Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s actions of Quantitative  Easing, a fancy name for printing money—the same currency devaluation  scheme employed by Nixon—calling them “runaway fiscal and monetary  policies, which were flooding the world with dollars and causing global  inflation in food and energy prices.”

This is an interesting point to hang on for a bit. There is no shortage  of theories as to why Americans are finding themselves staring  helplessly at rising gas prices, but few of them are real. In fact, much  of the prevailing wisdom offered by television pundits is false. It’s  not Obama’s refusal to “drill baby drill” or increased demand from  China. It’s not Libya or Iran, either. It’s the abundance of liquidity  in the markets matched with the ability of investment banks, hedge funds  and oil companies to trade energy futures on commodities exchanges  without any limits or transparency. And this is the result of 30 years of deregulation beginning with Carter and continuing through Obama.

Before the commodities exchanges were deregulated there were few safe  places to “park” excess capital during volatile periods. Today these  exchanges are the perfect shelters for investors with excess liquidity  because many of them are allowed to stand on all sides of the  transaction. An investor such as an investment bank or an oil company  can be the buyer, seller, broker and manufacturer, and can therefore more easily predict the future behavior of pricing by both forecasting  the future price of a commodity it owns while moving the market with  enormous capital infusions. It’s more than the ultimate hedge. It’s a  scam.

With a crisis brewing in Iran, the markets and pundits are once again in  a tizzy, and consumers are bracing for the worst. This brings us to what  might be the nail in Barack Obama’s coffin: inflation.  When fuel prices rise, even for a brief period, it shows up within  months in our food and other consumables. It’s a necessary evil in the  production of nearly everything we consume on the planet, which is why  it’s so utterly dangerous to leave the process of trading energy futures  unregulated. Oil doesn’t have to reach $200 per barrel to destroy any  hope of economic recovery and, worse, force mass starvation around the  globe.

If the price is sustained at $100-plus per barrel without relief  while we continue to suppress interest rates and flood the market with  the dollar, Bernanke and Co. will have difficulty stemming the natural  tide of inflation as it works its way around the globe in the things we  buy and the food we eat.  Bernanke’s announcement that the Fed will continue to artificially  suppress interest rates through 2014 and the government’s steadfast  refusal to implement any reasonable regulation in the markets is a  self-fulfilling prophecy as investors continue to seek safe harbor for  their funds in the only market they have any ability to control. This  will prevent any crash in oil prices that would naturally occur, as we  witnessed in 2008 when oil hit $147 per barrel then plummeted shortly  thereafter.

Further fracture in relations with Iran and high oil prices  will also crush any hopes the European Union has of recovery. And with  the determined stance that austerity is the EU’s chosen path to  prosperity, the United States faces the additional problem of having its  No. 1 consumer of U.S. exports absolutely cash-strapped and constricting  even further.  Barack Obama’s re-election hopes are really a matter of timing more than  anything because the conclusions above are simply common sense and  arithmetic.

Any chance he had to calm this gathering storm has already  passed, leaving him at the mercy of the global markets, which are  teetering on a gigantic bubble. His oratory and confidence are outgunned  by a conservative media machine pouring on the pressure by falsely  blaming his energy policy for high oil prices and stoking the fire with  Iran, thus creating all the necessary traps for his demise. Even if he  were able to truly force real change in the oversight of the financial  markets, it would spook Wall Street and could incite panic. And any  attempt to quiet the saber-rattling between Washington and Tehran would  make him appear weak compared to a bloodthirsty slate of GOP opponents.

Obama’s only option is to pray the storm doesn’t touch down between now  and Nov. 6. If it does, instead of occupying the White House in January,  he’ll be building houses with Jimmy Carter, while Mitt Romney tries to  figure out where to park all of Anne’s Cadillacs.

Ides of Ramadan

2012-02-25T14:18:20Z

Coming Soon to a Theater of War Near You!

In his day job, he thinks the unthinkable

in terms of nuclear conflict.

She focuses on nuclear forensics so that,

when the unthinkable occurs, it can be sourced.

It’s not a matter of if…. It’s a matter of when.

INT PAN: Pews in National Cathedral, Washington, DC, last Saturday in May.

WIDE SHOT FROM FIFTH PEW: Retired Archbishop Desmond Tutu, sporting a Cee Lo Green-sized cross, presides over nuptials of handsome young couple.

CUT TO SIXTH PEW, POV PARTIALLY BLOCKED: Sam Elliot, looking all Foggy Bottom in his chargé d’affaire seersucker suit, whispers to Ryan Gosling, in conventional, slim black Armani: “Here we are close enough to the wedding party to seem like we’re invited guests – Rule #43, Wedding Crashers.”

CUT TO AERIAL SHOT: Conga-line of stretch limos heads SE on Massachusetts Ave in the direction of DuPont Circle. It’s high noon, balmy & sunny.

ZOOM TO HIGH-ANGLE: Just before the Iraqi Embassy, motorcyclist drives slowly down meridian, passenger appearing to touch limos as they pass and then take a quick left up 35th St.

CUT TO WIDE SHOT EXT: Limos arriving at beaux arts mansion housing Cosmos Club.

CUT TO SHOULDER-MOUNTED POV PANS: Elliot leads Gosling on head-spinning tour of Who’s Who wedding reception, starting in the patio garden where chic geeks are hanging with DC artistes and water polo teammates from the bride’s college days. Maroon 5 is covering “99 Luftballons.”

CLOSE-UP: Karl Lagerfield of the equine pony-tail, egret-white against black suit, blackout shades and SS-issue black leather gloves holds court über alle surrounded by Capitol Movement dance troupe peacocking for a runway assignment from the great fashion designer. To the side, water polo players are trolling for modeling tips from the groom’s brother, former #1 in Lagerfield’s stable back in the designer’s Brokeback Mountain stage. Instead, they hear of his goal to be another Donald Trump.

CUT TO BIRD’S EYE: Groom, glancing furtively around, places envelope on wedding cake. The hyper-ambitious millennial groom is not quite super-model material but has been mistaken for Jude Law’s younger brother on more than one occasion. His quant skills have persuaded his moderately wealthy, newly minted father-in-law that footing the bill for a reception at DC’s venerable Cosmos Club provides value-added for attracting Beltway investors. In actuality, it is the exotically beautiful bride with the look of Gisele Bundchen’s younger sister who has persuaded daddy, but Judebro is never loath to take credit.

Judebro and Giselsis are comers in the firmament of geopolitical influence, his status affirmed by the recent publication of “Time to Attack Iran” in Foreign Affairs. In his day job, he thinks the unthinkable in terms of nuclear conflict. She focuses on nuclear forensics so that, when the unthinkable occurs, it can be sourced. It’s not a matter of whether nukes will be used, but when. Proliferation think tankers feed off this self-fulfilling prophecy. To answer how 20-something novices are positioned to weigh in on Prometheus Unbound, look to powerful patrons that make Washington the land of opportunistic oracles.

Think tanking is but one driver of conflict with Iran that has not seen the light in Gosling’s Manichaean world view. The indie media mini-mogul is consumed with an octopus of global oil manipulation—Morgan Stanley—who, by his reckoning, would foment armed conflict to profit from wild upward spirals of world crude prices.

ELLIOT: “Traders, as Trading Places reminds us, Gosling, are but bookies who profit whether the price goes up or down. Note that even a comprehensive command of applied chaos theory catches on the interconnections of string theory.”

CUT TO UPSTAIRS BALL-ROOM: Older, decidedly less hip crowd. Martina McBride is countrifying “Wooden Ships.”

GOSLING: “Who’s that wagging his finger at the balding, bearded guy and his bevy of boobalaheads?

ELLIOT: “That’s Valerie Plame’s hubby, going all Sean Penn on the self-styled Darth Vader of neo-cons who suckered Bush into featuring Saddam’s (non) purchase of yellow cake uranium in the 2003 State of the Union. And that blonde bombshell over there…”

PAN TO: Threesome clustered around bombshell.

ELLIOT: “Valerie Plame, if that really is her name.”

GOSLING: “So that’s the outed CIA op? Think I’d rather go under cover with Naomi Watts.”

CUT TO CLOSE UP: Bombshell Plame is disarming a DOE physicist, resembling Renee Zellweger with a dust-mop do, a world-weary defense analyst—picture Gary Oldman going DIA with LeCarré’s Smiley—and Judebro’s PhD thesis advisor from UC Berkeley who could be Dr. House’s alter-ego.

PLAME: “There have been at least 25 incidents of lost or stolen nuclear explosive material we know of.”

ZELLWEGER: “That’s why the personal dosimeter card I designed can be so critical in an event.”

PLAME: “Though Cold War arsenals have been reduced from 70,000 to 23,000, there remains enough highly enriched uranium to build more than 100,000 weapons. Counter-proliferation was my beat; there’s no graver threat than nuclear terrorism. We must go for Global Zero nukes!”

HOUSE: “Well, Ms. Plame, some why nots are offered in Judebro’s thesis, ‘The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Customer,” in which he provides solid, quantified data of what incentivizes weak nuclear states to transfer nuclear technology.”

OLDMAN: “From the mouth of babes. Wait till a black swan crosses his theories.”

MUTED BLAST: Emanating, seemingly, from front of club. Ballroom populace rush to windows.

AERIAL POV: Smoke rising from left rear panel of one of the limos.

OLDMAN: “Looks like a sticky bomb.”

BUMPY HAND-HELD CAM: Plame bolts downstairs and outside to smoking limo; pulls NeutronRAE II personal radiation detector from holster strapped to thigh.

PLAME: “It’s reading for weapons-grade plutonium. The area needs to be evacuated.”

GISELSIS: “Ms. Plame, you should take a look at this card from atop the wedding cake.”

CLOSE-UP: Card reads: “BEWARE IDES OF RAMADAN – anniversary 67 of Hiroshima.

FADE TO BLACK: Soundtrack: Tom Lehrer’s “Who’s Next?”

The Grammy’s, Lin-Sanity, Jon Stewart (and Iran)

2012-02-17T02:26:18Z

This column first appeared in the February 16th, 2012 edition of the Long Island Press.

Over the past couple of weeks my frequent collaborator, Dorian Dale, and I have set the burgeoning conflict between Iran and the United States in our sights, determined to bring this potential disaster further forward in our nation’s collective consciousness. But while Whitney Houston’s body is in search of an arena large enough to hold her mourners, talk of the next Great War generates barely enough interest to fill a teacup.

Therefore, I have decided to shamelessly sprinkle gratuitous pop-culture references throughout this column in order to reach a larger audience. (References are bolded for navigational ease.)

Iran is the slow moving accident you can’t take your eyes off of. It’s LIN-sanity. For that matter, so is the global economy, the crisis in the Eurozone and the price of oil. Let’s add in the GOP primary season for good measure to bring this tainted stew to a boiling point because the decision-making process in America this year will be guided by partisan politics rather than practical policies.

New Yorkers would be wise to look up from their smartphones for a moment to see what’s really happening. Not only is New York home to the United Nations and ethnic communities from around the globe, it bears visible scars of terrorism. Many of its residents’ livelihoods are directly or indirectly tied to the world financial district, and don’t forget that The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is also taped in the city. Moreover, conventional wisdom (if there is such a thing) has it that should the wheels come off the Obama train, our current governor will be a top Democratic contender to challenge whichever GOP dipshit is lucky enough to hoodwink America into voting for him.

One way for Obama to lose the upcoming election is if oil prices continue to get out of hand. As it is, we are already experiencing higher-than-normal pricing during the winter months. Analysts are already warning that if the trend continues and conflict with Iran steers toward the inevitable, oil could hit $200 per barrel this year, translating into approximately $6 at the pump. If this were to happen, Barack Obama’s chances at re-election would be slimmer than Adrien Brody.

Many in the media have dismissed the likelihood of confrontations between the U.S. and Iran as “saber rattling,” but there have been some very real world occurrences that are beyond rhetoric. The attempted bombing of the Israeli embassy in Bangkok this week by an Iranian man and successful assassinations of nuclear engineers within Iran over the past few months have heightened tensions between Israel and Iran. For its part, the United States is positioning itself to defend against the threatened closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a key “choke point” for oil tankers in the Middle East. Along the way, the United States rescued Iranian fishing vessels twice in one week—events that garnered brief, but small international attention as opposed to George Clooney’s performance in “The Descendants,” which has received international acclaim and Oscar nominations.

While the world does its familiar dance of deadly brinksmanship, consider for a moment the case of Morgan Stanley. Never has one company had so much to say about, or perhaps to gain, from the pressing issues at hand. Morgan Stanley embodies the intersection of finance, politics, oil and war more than any other corporation on Earth. If ever there was an example of the “corporatization” of America, this is it. I’m reviving my frequent criticism of Morgan Stanley so we may, in the words of Belgian-born artist Gotye, “Walk the plank with our eyes wide open.”

First off, trying to drill down into Morgan’s structure is like jumping down the rabbit hole in search of Johnny Depp. The list of Morgan Stanley subsidiaries is a 25-page, single-spaced document with 207 corporations registered on the Cayman Islands alone. What most people, and even some savvy investors, don’t realize is that among them you will find a host of companies directly related to or involved in the oil industry.

Take, for example, Heidmar, a global oil shipping company with 120 vessels. Or TransMontaigne, which controls a third of the oil terminal business in the United States. Both are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Morgan Stanley. Furthermore, Morgan owns $1.2 billion in shares of ExxonMobil and $900 million in shares of Chevron. Oh, and many of the oil futures contracts are traded on the Intercontinental Exchange in Atlanta, which was founded by Jay-Z. No, jk, lmfao. It was founded by Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and BP.

Piece this together and you will quickly understand that there are two things of critical importance to Morgan Stanley where the oil business is concerned: price and volatility. When you add to the equation that the leading energy analysts in the world who predict the future price and volatility of oil are from… you get the point.

To borrow from the Occupy Wall Street movement—This is what democracy doesn’t look like.

Now let’s get our conspiracy freak on for a moment and take a look at whom Morgan Stanley is backing for president of the United States. No, it’s not Steven Colbert. Morgan is steadfastly behind Willard “I support military action in Iran” Romney. In fact, it is Romney’s third top contributor in the 2012 election cycle behind only Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, two companies that also know a little bit about gaming the financial markets.

Allow me to go one step further. Conflict in the Strait of Hormuz would be the best thing to happen to Morgan’s oil interests, as they deal mostly in the Western Hemisphere and would benefit greatly from their own prognostications of skyrocketing oil prices. Because the United States is officially now a net-exporter of oil, the American petroleum business and those financial companies that profit from it would experience a boom like never before.

The very thought of gas and oil prices going even higher sends chills down the spine, especially here in New York where we rely so heavily on home-heating oil and transportation in our daily lives. But don’t worry, New Yorkers, we’re in good hands there, too: Morgan Stanley owns the majority stockpile of home-heating oil reserves in the Northeast. Charlie Sheen can only dream of “winning” as much as Morgan Stanley.

All photos from the Associated Press.

Ayatollyah So!

2012-02-09T19:56:38Z

“For lust of knowing what should not be known, We take the Golden Road to Samarkind.”

-James Elroy Flecker’s play Hassan

There was a mysterious blast at a manufacturing facility outside Teheran last November. This past week the Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs told the annual Herzliya security conference that the Iranians were setting up to produce a missile with a 10,000 kilometer range that could hit the United States. U.S. analysts were quick to point out that known Iranian missiles have but a maximum range of 1,200 miles—enough to reach Israel…. Go to the video tape to watch a “concerned” President Bush in the fall of ’02: “Iraq has a growing fleet (of UAVs) that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas…for missions targeting the United States.”

Not for the last time will we be misled by rhetorical mushroom clouds into the fog of war with its Rumsfeldian “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns.” In the lifted lyrics of John “Beach Boy” McCain, do we “Bomb, bomb, bomb…bomb, bomb Iran”?

In The Partition of Palestine, Kermit Roosevelt (Teddy’s grandson) asked, “Will the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine jeopardize the position of the United States in the Middle East?” He thought it would in 1948; moreover, it would “ease the path of Soviet infiltration.” A comparable rationale was offered when, as Our CIA Man in Teheran, Kermit spearheaded TPAJAX, which ousted the country’s elected prime minister after he proposed nationalizing its oil, a sovereign assertion that would’ve placed Iran, in our estimation, “behind the Iron Curtain.”

Gamal Abdel Nasser, the Bollywood handsome head of Egypt, made a parallel move three years later in 1956, by nationalizing the Suez Canal. Wielding Israel Defense Forces as the tip of their spear, England and France sought to regain the Canal and oust Nasser. While the U.S. applied economic pressure on the Brits and French behind the scenes, it was newly installed Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev who got Third World cred for threatening to use nuclear weapons in support of Egypt. Nuclear brinkmanship didn’t work so well when Khrushchev went eyeball-to-eyeball with the U.S. over Cuba in ’62…and blinked.

Two more clashes with Egypt brought Israel and their most potent Middle East adversary to the Camp David peace accords in ’79. It would usher in more than three decades of peaceful coexistence with Egypt even as the Shah was falling to the cursed Ayatollahs. Twenty-six years of fealty and cut-rate oil out of the Shah’s regime was a darned good return on the paltry five-figure amount Kermit Roosevelt claimed in expenses. For all the scorn heaped on Jimmy Carter, Camp David remains the most sustained contribution to Israel’s security.

Israeli intelligence didn’t anticipate the Arab Spring spreading to Egypt and, once it did, Prime Minister Netanyahu beseeched the U.S. to stand by Mubarek. Subsequent election of the Muslim Brotherhood on Israel’s passive southern front combines with the five-year old Hamas electoral victory on their western flank to make Likudniks very nervous. Netanyahu’s neo-con alter-ego, Newt Gingrinch, has weighed in: “I think we may, in fact, be having an anti-Christian spring. I think people should take this pretty soberly.”

Rosy neo-con visions of sugar plum oil fields and Jeffersonian democracy fairies transforming the Middle East have blurred beyond recognition over the past decade. So, it’s a good time to change the subject and refocus. And where better to draw a bead on than that spinning Axle of Evil—Iran? Ever ready to play Mad Mullah to Zealous Zionists, Supreme Ayatollah Khamenei has trash-talked, yet again, about removing the “cancer” that is Israel. “So far,” Khamenei boasted to the “Islamic Awakening and Youth Conference” in Teheran last week, “the Iranian nation has kicked them in the mouth at every stage.”

One bold “Awakening” attendee held up a pesky sign—“Syria?”—to remind everyone that growing numbers of Syrians will never awaken again, thanks to the brutal crackdown of Iran’s close ally, Bashar “The Butcher” al-Assad. The fall of Assad would blow a huge strategic hole in Iran’s hegemony. Add to that equation the Persian Spring, which was quickly quelled by Khamenei/Ahmadinejad in a forceful flash-freeze. Deep-seeded discomfort with the Arab Spring is one response Israelis and Iranians share in common.

Given the rough neighborhood Israelis live in, how far off is Armageddon if the mullahs get the bomb? The specter of nuclear Iran was raised in 1992 by Israel’s then Prime Minister Peres as well as current P.M., Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu who predicted back then that Iran was three to five years away from getting the bomb. Before the Shah was toppled in 1979, one intelligence report had him setting up “a clandestine nuclear weapons development program.” A looming Iranian bomb has been sighted more frequently than the Loch Ness monster and Bigfoot.

Recently retired Mossad director Meir Dagan, reflecting substantive differences in the Israeli intelligence and defense community, said that an attack on Iran would be “a stupid idea…. The regional challenge that Israel would face would be impossible.” With last year’s exodus of Dagan along with the chief of general staff and the Shin Bet director, “there is no one to stop Bibi and (Defense Minister) Barak.” Lest one dismiss the long-serving Dagan as a weak sister, heed the words of former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon: “Dagan’s specialty is separating an Arab from his head.”

As oil hovers around the $100/bbl mark, traders have currently dismissed the saber rattling as so much bluster. But with 40 percent of world oil transported through Iran’s Strait of Hormuz, conflict would drive the current price up anywhere from 25-75 percent sending a gallon soaring close to $6. Add these sobering facts: Iran has 25 percent more people than Iraq and Afghanistan combined, and land mass nearly four times that of its neighbor, Iraq.

In the guestimate of the current Israeli chief of staff, the Iranians possess enough fissionable material to package four nukes at some point. The Israeli nuclear arsenal is approximately two orders of magnitude greater, an order of magnitude lower than the usual Israeli eye-for-an-eyelash ratio. The South Koreans have reconciled themselves to a nuclear North whose Martian leadership makes the mullahs look like hippies. Moreover, since Nagasaki, no nuclear nation, no matter how extreme, has been reckless enough to use a bomb. That restraint won’t prevail forever.

Can the Likudniks constrain themselves, resigned to sanctions of the economic and targeted variety? Mysterious explosions, the Stuxnet virus and elimination of a half-dozen nuclear scientists have markedly crimped Iran’s weaponization. Soon the capacity of the Iranian central bank will be SWIFT-moated, severing their capacity for secure electronic financial exchange. “Iran’s economy has always been sick, but now it seems worse than ever,” said a Teheran bank employee about the prospects of more sanctions. Nonetheless, pre-emptive strikes like the ones Israel executed against Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007 remain mighty tempting.

As we mull all this over, return to my formative yesteryears, when mullahs were mere whirling dervishes, and consider the following Sufi tale, the Persian variation of Aesop’s Fables:

Two clever young men sought to puncture the reputed wisdom of the Mullah Nasruddin.

“You will hide a chicken behind your back,” one clever fellow instructed his clever friend, “and we will ask the Mullah whether the chicken is alive or dead. If he says ‘alive’, you will break its neck. If he says dead, we will produce the living chicken.”

They came upon Mullah Nasruddin and put him to the test.

Nasruddin scratched his head, offered an indulgent smile and responded, “It’s in your hands! It’s in your hands!”

Main Photo: Richard Williams illustration from the Mullah Nasruddin series
Photo: M-Star oil tanker damaged in an explosion in the Strait of Hormuz 7-28-10