There are three articles on three different issues that I'd like us to look at this time around.
Our first article touches on a topic that is becoming increasingly important in the world: should speech criticizing a religion, specifically Islam, be prohibited? This is significant because, under Islamic law, the punishment for speaking anything against Mohammed is death! This is also the penalty for leaving Islam, whether for another religion or simply to become unreligious. In typical Islamic fashion, Muslim leaders and governments of Islamic countries now push for "international laws" (a tricky concept in itself!) against speaking against a religion (by which they really mean Islam, since they themselves are CONSTANTLY publishing the most vicious defamatory materials against Jews and Judaism, for example). They do this under a "freedom of religion" rubric because it's a very appealing concept in the West. But what it REALLY means is a SERIOUS limit on freedom of speech.
Now, freedom of speech, like any other freedom, is NOT absolute. The classic example of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater comes to mind. But the essence of freedom of speech is the ability and right to speak out against ANY philosophy, religion, or political position. This is the very BASIS of democratic civilization as we know it. And this is exactly why the Islamists are so virulently opposed to it.
Our second article is important because once again outlines, in a clear fashion, the cost of NOT stopping Iran BEFORE it gets nuclear weapons. The new significant point here, though, is that the West, especially the United States, will eventually have to stop Iran somewhere at some point, and that the cost in lives and money would be FAR greater later on. Think of how much LESS loss of lives there would have been if the U.S., Britain, and France had stopped the Nazis earlier on. The holocaust would probably have been mostly, if not completely, prevented! And millions of OTHER civilian lives would also have been saved.
Our third article describes a phenomenon that is hardly surprising. But, first, a little background. The main inhabitants of the sparsely populated Golan Heights are Druze. Unlike the Druze in the rest of Israel, these people have generally NOT accepted Israeli citizenship (although it has been available to them for decades) and have preferred, instead, to maintain Syrian citizenship. This has actually been rather prudent on their part, since they have to face the danger that Israel might, at some point, give the Golan back to Syria, in which case they would then once again be in Syria, where Israeli citizenship would certainly NOT be an advantage! Also, they have many relatives in Syria, and the Alawite-controlled Syrian regime has favored various minorities (Alawites, Christians, and Druze) against the Muslim majority.
Now, however, as the article says, some of the Golan Druze, especially the younger ones who have spent their entire lives in Israel, are finding it hard to support the Assad regime in Syria and are beginning to realize how much better things are for EVERYBODY here in Israel. So they are beginning to apply for Israeli citizenship. This is a trend that we can only hope will continue and expand!
