Some Thoughts on the Upcoming Election

I really need to SAY something. Also, I need to DO something. This is just the beginning of my doing my part to help get rid of tRUMP. Read on!

If you feel you cannot vote for Biden, you can at least vote for someone not named tRUMP! Therefore check the box for Biden! This is my attempt to sound like tRUMP himself.

Not voting at all or voting for someone who has no chance of winning, is as good as a vote to continue supporting the direction in which the U.S.A. has been heading.

During the convention, it was good to finally hear people tell it like it is regarding tRUMP as president! I did not detect ANYTHING ERRONEOUS in last night's convention speeches.

The convention was not about politics, it was not about "platforms" promised and then not fulfilled after elected, it was about people, a government for "We The People."

Some things for which I am thankful to tRUMP are his transparency in lying, manipulation, gaslighting, ability to "spin"; and being antisemitic, misogynistic, racist, homophobic, and anti-immigrant; finding all kinds of loopholes to make the government take on his "face" and his being greedy, self-serving, mean, inarticulate, ignorant. Thank you tRUMP for showing us how evil a person can be!

It is absolutely beyond me to think that anyone could still vote for tRUMP knowing what he has shown us, said to us, and by his actions (usually against us).

Fake news is always a good excuse, but when you watch the man, listen to the man, see what the man is doing to our institutions and our country and our people ... HOW CAN YOU STILL SAY YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR HIM?

This is so much bigger than tRUMP. This is so much bigger than Democrats vs Republicans. This is about human decency. This is about the basic definition and love of humankind. This is about the future of our nation!

How can anyone who considers themselves a Christian, or any religious label for that matter, vote for tRUMP? If you're feeling disenfranchised with any aspect of our government, a vote for tRUMP will make things worse and should make you feel even worse.

Show me who has NOT suffered as a result of tRUMP's time in office, except those who are not only very rich but very greedy about being rich at the expense of the rest of us.

Not all cops are bad, not all politicians are bad, not all Blacks are bad, not all Whites are bad, not all men or women are bad, not all entitled people are bad. Yes, some are and they bring us all down with their actions and power-seeking. What has tRUMP's administration done to solve problems? What tRUMP has done is actively sought to divide us by exaggerating "good vs bad" and by bringing down all of our American Institutions without providing any better alternatives.

Money and wealth is not a bad thing as long as one does not take advantage of others to get it. And hopefully once one has money and wealth, they continue to be compassionate and generous in their sharing it with others. Not just giving it away but doing things for others that matter!

Honestly, I NEED to begin a series of UNFRIENDING family and friends on Facebook, who still feel that tRUMP has been good for the country and will give him their vote in November! I cannot let those people be part of my life when our belief systems are so different. I cannot let them make me less than I am by continuing to let them be part of my life! 

LGBTQ

I have grown up. Again! When I was a young man, I would look at a change in or new understanding about myself and say, “My, I was so naive! I will never let that happen again.” Ends up, my life, which is now in its 70’s, has been a series of “being naïve again!” Maybe that is not so bad as it shows I am continuing to grow and become.

My recent visit to San Francisco, Gay capital of the USA to attend the Frameline 40 Film Festival where I experienced my documentary ALZHEIMER’S: A Love Story screen in front of a warm, accepting audience of 1,300 gay and gay friendly people; viewing over 25 films (shorts and longs) dealing with gay issues, and meeting a wide variety of people; has brought a new sense to my homosexuality.

I have been Gay all my life. In looking back, the signs were there since my earliest memories. I "came out" at the age of 18, meaning had my first sexual experience, and began to understand why I was different than most other boys. I had known it for a long time but didn’t understand why.

I probably did not fully accept with confidence that I was Gay until I was 40 years old when I informed my mother that I no longer was going to lie to family and friends about my sexual preferences or my male lover. Everyone knew anyways but just weren't acknowledging it.

During the first fifty years of my life, the 1950's through the 2000's, society's attitudes towards Gay people, men and women, were quite different then they are today. Life for gays was closeted and characterized by the expression, "The love that dare not speak its name." Older role models did not exist. Most Gay activites and socialization was underground.

Things today, while not perfect, are amazingly different with same sex marriage legal at the national level, wider acceptance of homosexuality by more people, greater visibility of Gays in the political, entertainment, and sports worlds, and perhaps more understanding in religions arenas.

This scenario brings me to the discussion of some current realizations I have had as mentioned in the first paragraph.

Most of my younger life I liked other younger men and found older Gay men disgusting. Now I am an older gay man! I now understand that while age affects how beautiful a person's body might be, it does not affect the beauty of a person's soul. While I look pleasant enough, my physical beauty is gone, my sexual needs not as easily met as when I was in my twenty’s. A little late, now that I am in my 70’s, but I can accept this. I wish I had been a little more “generous” to older men when I was young.

As a young man; Drag Queens, Transsexuals, Transvestites, Leather Men, Butch and Lipstick Lesbians, and probably a few others were embarrassing to me. I wanted Gay men and women, including myself, to be well-behaved, normal, milk-toast, etc.

I thought that if only these extremely visible groups would calm down, gays like me in general would be accepted into society or at least go un-noticed. This was based on little or no knowledge of who the people in these groups were emotionally, physically, or belief system wise. I had few if any friends in these groups and knew little of who they really were. This belief was pretty common, I think, among many gay men of that time.

After Stonewall, during what is known as the Gay Liberation Era, there was a huge spit between Gay men and Gay woman who wanted to be known as "Lesbians" not "Gay Women." At the time I thought this was foolish. I understand this now and give the Lesbian community credit for being among the first groups (including the early suffragettes) to fight for equality for women in general. The battle continues.

Until then, and somewhat still now, men were the dominant sex; making most important decisions, holding most important roles in business, government, religion and making decisions about who and what women could be. During Gay Liberation, the Lesbian women said, "Hell no! We are in charge of ourselves and will make decisions about ourselves ... men will not be in charge of us and we do not want to be dumped into the group with them known as “Gay!”

My next awareness was that seemingly "outrageous" expressions of self by Drag Queens, Transgender People, Leather Men, and Butch Dykes turn out to be honest outward expressions of how these people see themselves, how they want to live their lives, and part of their fight for equal rights and protection under the law. I now understand and accept that. I now have a wider range of friends in my social groups.

Slowly society is becoming educated and more accepting of these groups. Just because I am not part of these groups does not and should not mean that they are wrong, or bad, ... or embarrassing. I have become more accepting myself in this area.

The initials GLBTQ reflect a long, successful journey! In the beginning it was "being Gay." Then it got to being Gay and Lesbian. Slowly Bi-Sexual was included. Over time T for Transgender was added and is becoming a lot more visible today.

Q seems to have two groups to identify. One is buying back the word QUEER but with confidence and self-love and remembering the resolution of the Rainbow Flag that we will never go back into the closet again.

The other is Questioning, which means that sometimes people, whether young or old, must figure out who they are, who they want to be, and how they want to express themselves and their sexuality. Being open to possibilities that enable one to question fixed societal beliefs is necessary. Some groups are playing around with "I" for Inquisitive to replace Questioning. GLBTQI

Some say that we should not have to categorize or label any of us, gay or straight, and that is the problem. Ellen DeGeneres, who usually avoids discussing political issues on her TV show, did talk about why we still needed to address marriage between two men or two women as “Gay Marriage.” We do not need to describe “Straight Marriage?”

In the beginning I had trouble referring to my life partner Gregory as “my husband.” Based on my early coming out, and societal norms of the day, if he was my “husband” that must mean I was the “wife!” And that was not true. With the passage of time, and laws, and common usage it feels OK to me to talk about two husbands, or two wives, two mommies or daddies. I have been able to leave the old thinking behind.

I believe that through flexible, open labeling we are able to gain a larger understanding of who we are and that we will all be better able to accept that "we are all one" deserving the respect and privileges of being human. Stereotyping no, but understanding our life through categorizing and labeling is how we make sense out of complicated issues.

The world is so torn by strife among ethnicities, races, religious beliefs, political affiliations, etc. Human rights including those of the GLBTQI community are part of this strife.

We all speak to the need to DO SOMETHING in a world that looks the other way when innocent black people are killed for little or no reason; when innocent police officers are ambushed; when innocent people are blown up to support other's political beliefs; when just to make a statement - theater audiences, college students, and children at school can be mowed down by assault weapons; when a Gay boy can be tied to a fence, tortured, and left to die; or when a woman or transgender woman can be raped and brutally beaten.

The Orlando massacre of 50 Gays and Lesbians and friends brought yet another and seemingly greater out roar about the need to stop the needless slaughter of people and the need for improved gun control and back checks.

It was billed as the worse mass murder in U.S. history and this was quickly followed by lists of hundreds of Native Americans who were killed by our government for fighting for their own beliefs and for freedom to continue their way of living which certainly pre-dates our own.

Society is slowly realizing that something must be done. But in a world that seems to have always contained violence and war, what will it take to change this and how long will it take? With each new occurrence we hope that this time something will be done but when?

Perhaps everyone needs to wave the RAINBOW flag to signify never again. Never again. Never again.

Mid-Term Elections 2014

Nice “going down in flames” with friends yesterday. At Danny & David's, the  pizzas were delicious and it was fun to be with friends watching the election results roll in. We were disappointed for the most part because we were routing for the Democrats and mostly that was not to be.

“Going down in flames” isn’t really true. Have you noticed that while people get all worked up about how political elections unfold, for the most part there seems to be very little difference in our day to day lives. 

The "morale" of the country may be better or worse depending on who wins an election, which probably helps the economy etc but for the most part things stay the same or if the change, it is improvement and degeneration slowly over time almost unnoticeably. 

Over time life in the United States gets harder or easier, perhaps as an outcome of who is in office, but for the most part, in looking back, it seems pretty much the same year in and year out. Election in and election out. 

There are some big negative exceptions which probably have less to do with the outcome of any one election: 911, 2008 Recession, etc

There are some big positive exceptions which are probably having grass roots finally take hold, like woman’s right to vote, repealing prohibition, progress (some) for Black Americans, Roe vs Wade (still shaky,) election of the first black president, Marriage Equality, etc. Rather than those kinds of changes take place over longer periods of time rather than any one political cycle!

Somehow I feel like a little old lady living in the rural, back woods of China going about my day to day survival/life; fetching water, growing crops, mending clothing, etc; as the various Communist Regimes come and go!

Elections 2010

Since everyone else wrote about the recent elections, I thought I would try my hand at it.


First of all, besides being disappointed in the results of my fellow voters, I am very happy that the internet, newspaper, radio, and TV manipulation of the truth is over. I got really tired of the abundance of non-commital, spin, "give 'em what they want to hear," manipulative rubbish.


I wish that I had a pen and paper with me every time I heard another pronouncement that really didn't say anything. Here are a few that I do remember:


Bob Smith wants to protect your wallet!
I am tight with the dollar, my own and yours!
When you have dug yourself into a hole, stop digging.
Do you want another two years of runaway government?
Obama's plans are not working! He hasn't kept his promises.
Tom Jones wants to make a difference!


In listening to most of what the candidates were saying (Democrats as well as Republican and now "Tea Drinkers") I have decided that there is very little integrity left (if there ever was) in the political arena. It is easier to manipulate, circumnavigate, or downright lie than tell the truth. No one will remember once the candidate gets into office.


I wonder if the "truth" can really be offered, and if one did speak with integrity and truth would people be willing to understand that no one answer will satisfy every voter, no one problem can be solved overnight, no one person can be responsible for making it better? At what point can honesty prevail and not greed, selfishness, ignorance?


I still believe in Barak Obama. I trust his decisions more than I ever trusted that Republican President's. I feel Obama is doing the best he can given what he was handed and given the slow process of change in any political system.


Not there is talk of Sarah Palin running for President in 2012? On one hand why does "Hell in a Hand Bag" come to mind. On the other hand, I think it would be very interesting to let the electorate vote her into office if only to see what would happen.

PM NETANYAHU’S SPEECH AT THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Every now and then I read something that I find quite moving and want to share it here.

While I am a Jew and probably biased and while know that there is usually two sides to any story, I somehow have to believe the ideas expressed in this speech.

September 24, 2009  THERE WAS ALMOST NO COVERAGE IN THE U.S.  Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people. The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942 , after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie? A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler's deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie? This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father's two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie? Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency? A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong. History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others. This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially. It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet. What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet. I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances - by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise. But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction. The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom? Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism? Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world? The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side? Ladies and Gentlemen, The jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted. For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing - absolutely nothing - from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one. In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza . It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent. Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians - Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers. That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel , by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas. We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way. Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel . A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot. By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice. Delegates of the United Nations, Will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat. If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel , this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Here's why. When Israel left Gaza , many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy? What self-defense? The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us -my people, my country - of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty! Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists? We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace. Ladies and Gentlemen, All of Israel wants peace. Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel , will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples - a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it. We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel . This is the land of our forefathers. Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem . We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland. As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity. But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel . That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza , another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv. We want peace. I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them. Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them. Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong." I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time. In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come. ###

September 11, 2001: Flags and Rainbows

At various times through the years of my adult life it has been easy or difficult, fashionable or unfashionable, political or non-political to fly the American Flag. Sometimes we are proud of our country and what it stands for. Other times we are not so proud or closer to ashamed of what our country's leaders and/or citizens do or say.

Maybe this waxing and waning of pride of country is OK. Throughout history nationalism in its extreme has lead to trouble. Maybe a healthy outlook and the ability to say what one thinks about one's country is where the balance should be and what makes the U.S.A. a great nation. We know that in many parts of the world the "citizens" do not have that right, freedom, ability … call it what you will … to do so. 

"The negative results of nationalism cannot be denied. It can cause division in societies when one nationality classes itself as superior to another. This also generates racism, and can often lead to violent and bloody conflicts. On the personal level, individuals may be persecuted because other individuals or groups believe their nationality to be inferior, or that it poses a threat."

"Nationalism is a powerful tool, as it takes its strength from the sentiments of belonging that most individuals possess. This has led to its use by politicians as a way of gaining popular support through uniting a people under a common cause. It is a vague concept, and can be shaped by the bearer to mean almost anything, and most people are vulnerable to it in some form or other. Because of this, it can be a very dangerous weapon in certain hands." (What is Nationalism? Katy Hughes. 2008.)

Popular or unpopular, today is a day to fly our flag in memory of those who died unnecessarily and those who gave their lives to help others. We need to think of those people still living who were affected by the deaths. The need here is to focus on the lives and love of these people, not the hate of their perpetrators. We need to revisit 9/11 and the World Trade Towers  by celebrating the lives of those who died, not by stoking the fires of hatred against others. 

We need to give a lot of thought to the differences among the peoples of the world and weight carefully the influences of the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion. We need to work to make sure that the two can coexist. With the September 2010 threats of burning the Koran, the continuing fear of and threats against those who practice the Muslim faith, the Ground Zero and Muslim Mosque controversy, with some of our fellow countrymen and politicians using these differences to sow hatred and gain power, we cannot let one freedom be used to put down the other freedom, both must coexist. That must be our goal. 

We need to find a balance between freedom of speech and freedom of religion and the promise of the biblical Noah, "Never again!" Either way, today is a day to fly our flag.