Much that defines our age is not constructed of boulders but is composed as a mosaic. These pebbles we overlook because the detail obscures the whole. This ad hoc column presents some of these missed details that might deserve attention.
 
1. Serbia has voted. A relative moderate won the presidency against a radical extremist. Europe talks of a reward. It is EU membership. The question arises, who is not a future candidate? When will “Myanmar” be allowed to join?

2. My grandson is to enter the school that prepares for a college-track secondary education. The consensus in his community is that their public school, having been captured by educationalists, is a mess. Unless, of course is you regard “feel-good” a substitute for education. And this in a country that used to be dedicated to excellence and not to loafing! The private alternative costs around $18,000. Add to this the taxes that pay for public education. One realizes that, sadly, the voucher plan, originally an American issue, is becoming a general concern.

3. Regarding the ongoing debate in the West about immigration.
(1) There is a good case for accepting those who bring skills that contribute to the hosting society.
(2) A case can be made that a moral obligation exists to take in some of those who need help even if they cannot contribute much.
(3) Can a sound case be made to accept people who vow to hate their host?

4. The movie Charlie Wilson’s War cannot be shown in Russia. You see, it is anti Russian. Just imagine banning and anti-American film in the USA. The difference between the two cases is their similarity: in both instances the film would be made in Hollywood.

5. Good news! Putin tells that all is well. The power of the “oligarchs” is broken. He skipped a reassuring detail. The oligarchs are not coming back. Believe it: the state has expropriated them. Putin has become the state long ago.

6. The EU’s military missions. Europe is too irresolute to fight for its interests because selfishness is a “no-no”. At the same time the EU is incapable to fight for moral reasons. For long the morality of convenience reassured us that it is our right to be freed from the obligation to sacrifice much for anything.

7. Gates, the US Secretary of Defense, tried to drum up more vigor for the NATO’s role in Afghanistan. Apologetically he explained the attitude of the allies with their “confusion” regarding a mission in that far-away place. Experience-backed realism makes one suspect that the confusion would be equally great if the mission would be in Holland or Poland. Meanwhile Europe wants to reduce burden sharing. One hand might wash the other: Nato’s restraint will enable the Democrats to drop the region. For Europe, “no mission” will mean no “burden” to share.

8. A bold conjecture. On February 13, 2008 a man got stabbed. As he struck, the attacker called the victim a “Jew”. Somehow it is assumed that the assault might have had an anti-Semitic component. By the way, the tanned attacker had an accent. So far guesses regarding his possible background are officially missing.

9. What do you think? Assume that someone who is described as a foreigner commits a crime. Should one
(a) move against him because he is a foreigner,
(b) should he be forgiven because he is an alien, or
(c ) should he be treated like everyone else?
One more thing: how come that this is a sensitive question?

10. Remember the cursed past? That was when majorities deprived minorities of their rights. Today we have achieved justice by having it the other way around. Only that now few dare to call it what it is.

11. Russia and the Ukraine have just negotiated. If Kiev joins NATO, Russia’s missile forces will target the Ukraine. One wonders whether this has been done in the case of other new members. (Actually: no.) If not, we might be led to think that Moscow nurtures a special claim to what used to be parts of its empire.

12. Putin has announced that Russia will respond to “any arms race”. Given the threats made to the Czechs and the Poles if they allow the stationing of a dozen missiles to down rockets rogue states might launch, the Leader is consistent. Apparently any arms race also includes disputes between the Mullahs and the West.

13. A Russian TV crew has re-tracked the US trip taken by the humorists, Ilf and Petrow, in the 20s. The open society produced two surprises. Nowhere was the crew asked for a “government permission to film”. Furthermore, none of the friendly natives inquired about life in Russia.

14. The EU Council desires to send election-watchers to Russia. A controversy arose. Russia’s rulers want the inspectors to adjust to the customs of their hosts. Going along means that the watchers will serve as the cheering observers of a show.

15. Sharia laws for Moslem immigrants. The idea that your rights depend on who you are has been discarded when we overcame the middle ages. Raising the issue five years ago would still have met ridicule. Today the suggestion is a normal news item. We seem to be falling. How will we land?

16. Regarding the above item, the answer is “probably on our head”. Archbishop Williams supplies a broken umbrella to cushion our descent. He thinks (by accident correctly) that many of England’s Moslem inhabitants relate negatively to British laws (they accepted by settling there). His solution is to rely on the Sharia to get more order. One wonders, what happens in disputes between Brits and Moslems? Will the choice of the rules be an option like in a multiple choice exam? What about the English who – God forbid! – relate negatively to the Sharia?

17. Put kindly, the reaction to the Bishop’s suggestion was devastating. This made the defender of the faith backpedal. We are left confused. Did Williams not mean what he said when he said it, and does he mean what he says now, about what he had stated before?

18. Archbishop R. Williams‘ position raises issues.
(1) Why should the process that facilitated Europe‘s rise by privatizing religion, be reversed?
(2) One might argue that integration presupposes acceptance by the majority. Should this be extended to include accepting a now alien and previously consciously rejected system?
If so, why should this be required, since not the English have recruited their immigrants but that it was these Moslems who asked to come. Why? Because the system whose protection they requested has worked so well. Analogously, is it my right to attend a AA meeting and demand a double martini?

19. Some tag the anti-Islamists as racists. This disregards that Islamism is an international movement. It is above nations and races. Therefore, if this is racism then an anti-Communist was anti-Russian.

20. The Lesser Kennedy has sort of proclaimed Barack Obama to be a Kennedy by courtesy. This might help Obama to succeed. But if he fails the newly abused Kennedy-mythos will sink with him.

21. A shortage of milk products developed in Venezuela. In Soviet manner the official explanation invokes the “hidden hand” of the enemy. We are delighted to note that the Cows must have joined the opposition to Bolivarian Socialism. Wait for the ideologically unreliable Bulls to join the stampede. Once this happens there will be less bull coming from that direction and, furthermore, Chavez’ speeches will lose their hither flavor.