The Lesson of Ft. Hood -- PTS

Before all is said and done, Diana West, who has spent her adult life studying and coming to grips with the many issues concerning the Middle East and the West, will have much to say about the significance of the Ft. Hood massacre.  What she will probably say is this tragic episode was predictable and is just another chapter in the clash of two irreconcilable civilizations.  Ms West has argued for many years that this clash between civilizations is inevitable, because it represents irreconcilable views of the value of individual life in civil society, and in general of the purpose of life here on earth.  She has written extensively about the gradual and relentless insinuation of Muslims into the economic and cultural life of European countries and Great Britain cautioning that individual assimilation into these societies is not occurring and what's more cannot for many reasons.  Paramount among these reasons is the Western concept of the separation of church and state, an issue that was resolved in the West over two hundred years ago. Most Muslims, no matter where they live, believe in Sharia Law, such as we see in Iran today.  Religious leaders dictate the terms and conditions of civil life, there is no toleration of dissent, freedom of choice, speech, or other individual freedoms valued in the West.  Fatwas, edicts from the Mullahs, determine customs, and proscribe how individuals are to lead their lives.  There is no room for compromise between these two opposite constructs for society.  There are, in this view, no moderate or liberal practicing Muslims with whom we in the West can identify or make common cause.  We will forever see eruptions like the Ft. Hood massacre as a consequence of the intolerance of Sharia law as the unifying force in the Muslim world.  An AP report describing the horror at Ft. Hood which appeared in the Minneapolis newspaper is here.

Where does the debt lead us? -- PTS

Robert Samuelson, a well-known and respected economist as far as I know, writes about the government debt here, in an article in this week's Newsweek Magazine.  The bottom line of his argument: because we are in unchartered waters, along with Japan and other Western industrialized countries, there's no way of knowing the consequences of this pileup of debt until we face a crises that provokes a sudden loss of confidence.  Samuelson doesn't say what this crises might be but presumably it would be the inability to continue selling debt in the amount required to keep financing budget shortfalls.  He does suggest that when the crises occurs the solution will be to default on the existing debt with consequences to be determined since we and other responsible countries have never done this before.  These are interesting times.