Salvation Army loses skirmish

When I was a young lad in the Flyin' Corps (with Wilber and Orville), the Salvation Army ran the USO in Orlando FL.

I used to frequent the USO and, although blatantly Jewish, the Army's staff welcomed me, "no questions asked."

Because of that, and the fact that the Salvation Army had a reputation for helping ANYBODY regardless of any race, religion, etc. attributes, over the years I have supported the Army in one way or another.

But no more.

We - my Spouse and I - are moving back to Florida where the temperature and humidity are the same - 95 or higher - where the Palmetto bugs are the size of a B-52s and fly as fast, and where there are no signs warning "Bridge freezes before roadway."

We bought the new house complete with furniture - everything but a dining room.

Since we have everything, including a dining room, we decided to donate some of our furniture to charity.

The local Jewish outlet was too slow - it lists what you offer and distributes the list to various Jewish organizations that may be willing to accept it. If the specific organization wants the item(s) it will "get back" to the donor.

Not having the time, my Spouse called the Salvation Army.

Spouse: "How much notice do you need to come collect furniture?"

Army: "24 hours."

Spouse calls the Army on Thursday and asks for pick up Friday. (The movers are coming Monday to pack and Tuesday to load the truck.)

Army: "Sorry, we can't come Friday. We can come Tuesday. Between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m."

Remember, Tuesday the movers are coming; lots of boxes means lots of traffic through the limited doorways.

Tuesday the movers arrive at 9 a.m. as scheduled. (The Spouse is impressed.)

Tuesday the Army collectors arrive around 10 a.m.

Army: "We can't take this table; it's scratched."

Army: "We can't take this king size bed; we're not allowed to take the frame apart."

One of the mover's loaders took time out, loosened four thumb screws, and disassembled the frame into two parts - TWO PARTS !

Army: "Why can't the movers help us load the (donated) goods?"

Spouse: "Because you are not paying them to move the (donated) goods to your truck !"

So, for the record, what did the Army collect?

• King size bed - relatively new mattress, box springs, head board, frame; very good condition
• Dresser with mirror; very good condition (no scratches; remember, it has to be "scratch free" before the Army will accept it)
• Washer and dryer; very good condition
• Leather chair; very good condition

and a few other odds and ends, all in at least "good" condition - all "saleable."

This is the second time we have moved and given the Army what remained behind.

When we relocated from Florida to Virginia, the Spouse called the Army to collect some furniture.

Basically the same story.

Promise to arrive is broken.

Collectors are incompetent. (No one insists that they be professional movers, but at least don't be shirkers!).

In military terms, the Army is SNAFU.

I still respect the Army for what it does for flood victims and for folks in the military, but I doubt I ever again will donate anything but loose change to the red kettle; I'm certain the Spouse will never again invite the Salvation Army to collect no-longer-needed furniture.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail dot com

Dealing with pirates

What's the difference between dealing with today's pirates and running the nazi blockade during World War 2?

Not much.

What did the U.S. and Canada do then to safely move ships across the North Atlantic?

Escort ships and armed merchantmen.

Pirates have become a scourge off Africa and in the Far East (China would do well to keep her warships closer to home).

With one exception, pirates approach merchant ships with impunity. The exception are ships flying the Mogen David (Israeli flag). They learned that crews are armed and prepared to defend their ships and cargoes.

I've heard whines that "the area's too wide to protect all the ships in transit."

Is it larger than the North Atlantic? No.

Granted, trying to send aid to a ship already under attack might be impossible, but let's return to the days of ship convoys.

During World War 2, nazi submarines took a heavy toll, but the protective shield provided by allied navy ships assured that most of the supplies would get through and that the nazi sailors would often pay with their lives.

To the best of my knowledge, the pirates - wherever they be - lack submarines. Their most sophisticated weapons, again, "to the best of my knowledge," are fast boats and shoulder-launched rockets.

Having worked for a ship company (Zim), I know that an idle ship is costing its owner serious money; on the other hand, having a ship high jacked by petty pirates is more expensive.

I am suggesting that merchant vessels assemble in safe waters, then - under warship escort, traverse the pirate infested waters. I am not suggesting every civilian sailor be armed.

Hopefully we learned our lesson from the USS Cole disaster and now if a ship - merchantman or combat - is approached by a "suspicious" craft, the approaching craft will be warned away before coming within pirate missile range or, failing that, be sunk at a distance.

Pirates are no different that land-mobile terrorists and should be treated similarly.

If other navies want to assist the US Navy, well and good. If not, let our operations be unilateral.

To paraphrase Shamai's counterpart, "Where there is no country, let us be the country" that does what is right and honorable.

Let the pirates keep the (US) Marines' hymn in mind as they contemplate attacks on our ships: From the shores of Tripoli to the Halls of Montezuma ...

Let our politicians remember those same words and give the Navy and Marines on the spot carte blanc to do what needs to be done.

If not Semper Fi then Semper Paratus !

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Government in action

Some students at University of Maryland want to show a triple-X rated film on campus, ostensibly for its educational value.

A state legislator wants to penalize the university by withholding fund if the film is shown.

A teenage girl in northern Virginia is suspended for popping a birth control pill on school grounds on school time.

in the first case, the turnout for the film will be far greater thanks to the legislator's action. Before it was a low-profile issue.

Now it's Freedom of Speech.

I'm not "into" porn, but I am "into" free speech - providing no one is yelling FIRE! in a crowded theatre and providing there is a dialogue versus just shouting someone down because that person's opinion is unlike yours.

I think punishing the university, where freedom of speech is supposed to be sacred, is wrong.

I think making a "big deal" of the event is stupid; it just provides free advertising.

---

The school district that send the teenager home has a rule that all students know about that basically states: the only drugs that can be taken on campus during school hours are those prescribed by a physician.

Birth control pills, I gather, should be taken at "about" the same time every day.

I don't know what happens if a dose is missed - that's a "girl thing" - but I cannot understand why the pill HAD to be taken at school.

Flaunting her (physical) "maturity?" Showing how she threatened her mother with pregnancy to get a promiscuity pill? (No, I know there are legitimate reasons for The Pill and other birth control methods and that not all women who take The Pill are promiscuous.)

Either way, if the girl paid any attention to the school's rules she must have known her action would result in a negative - for her, anyway - reaction from the administration.

Naturally the mother, unembarrassed by her daughter's promiscuity, took umbrage at the administration's action and wrote to a local newspaper. (That's something to consider. In this electronic media age, why did she go to a newspaper rather than a tv station? Maybe she knows that tv people read newspapers so they can get the news they air later in the day. Truth in writing: I am an old newspaper reporter and editor, of course, reader.)

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Who is Barak Obama?

I'm beginning to wonder: Who IS Barak Obama?

I know he lives in the White House; that's not the question.

It's how he is presiding that gives me pause.

Pressuring executives of private companies to resign or be fired is at best questionable.

On one hand, I have to agree that some of these managers who drove their companies to Washington DC with tin cup in hand deserve to be forced out. Still, even "public" companies are private - that is, not government owned.

I'll agree that if an organization gets federal funds, especially in the amounts currently being handed out, the government - us - SHOULD have a say in the organization's management. We, the citizens, are suddenly shareholders.

So, on the one hand, I can understand the government's - our - concern to toss out bad management.

And I know that elsewhere, government and private organizations are very much in bed with each other. This, however, is the US and government-commercial liaisons have always been looked at with a jaundiced eye; anyone remember the "military-industrial complex" on the Eisenhower era?

Still, the "camel has its nose in the tent" and I'm fearful that, sans strict controls, the tail (government) soon will be wagging the dog.

I am more disturbed by Obama's decision that North Korea violated some law by launching a ballistic missile.

I believe the North Korean leadership is as "crazy" as some in the middle east and that perhaps the launch was as much to provoke a stupid response on "our side" as it was to test a missile.

But North Korea, for all its leadership's madness, IS a sovereign nation, just like the U.S. or France, England, China, or any of the 100-plus other nations flying their flags around the world.

If North Korea were Hamas - a terrorist organization that ruthlessly rules in Gaza - it would be understandable that "civilized" nations would be concerned.

South Korea need not be concerned by North Korea's launch; the missile was long-range; if North Korea wants to target the southern part of the peninsula it could use some of the short-range missiles finding their way into Moslem hands in middle east.

Is North Korea a threat to the U.S.? Not really. The U.S. - and Canada - have anti-missile defenses that should be far superior to the North Korean weaponry - in other words, it is highly unlikely a missile launched in North Korea would arrive any where in the U.S. - Alaska and Hawaii included.

More disturbing than missiles are North Korean - and Iranian - nuclear programs. Both governments make promises to allow inspections or to disband programs then - after being paid off by the likes of Uncle Sam - renege on the promises. Rather like the Nazis.

I consider myself to be a fiscal conservative and social liberal, but I never considered myself a libertine.

I still don't.

I think my concerns with the Obama administration go back to a threat I perceive to individual and corporate freedoms.

I do not object to regulations to govern transactions; we have proven greed overrides decency so regulations are needed. On the other hand, who regulates the regulators? Our government is not known to be a paragon of virtue.

The Obama direction, frankly, scares me. Despite the rhetoric of "listening rather than telling," I think we will become the world's bully. Perhaps with a velvet glove - vs. the Bush ineptness - but a bully none-the-less. Will our neighbors tolerate it? Doubtful.

Should we continue to tolerate the Obama administration's take-over of American business?

It makes me nervous.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com