eisely

When my son was 6, he sprung this question on me:

Son: "Dad, I think I'm old enough to know now. Is there a Santa Claus?"

Not being the world's fastest thinker, I stalled for time.

Me: "OK, I agree that you're old enough. But before I tell you, I have a question for you. You see, the truth is a dangerous gift. Once you know something, you can't un-know it. Once you know the truth about Santa Claus, you will never again understand and elate to him as you do now. So my question is: Are you sure you want to know?"

Brief pause.

Son: "Yes. I want to know."

Me: "OK, I'll tell you: Yes, there IS a Santa Claus."

Son: "Really?"

Me: "Yes, really, but he's not an old man with a beard in a red suit. That's just what we tell kids. You see, kids are too young to understand the true nature of Santa Claus, so we explain it to them in a way that they can understand. The truth about Santa Claus is that he's not a person at all; he's an idea. Think of all those presents Santa gave you over the years. I actually bought those myself. I watched you open them. And did it bother me that you didn't thank me? Of course not! In fact it gave me

great pleasure. You see, Santa Claus is THE IDEA OF GIVING FOR THE SAKE OF GIVING, without thought of thanks or acknowledgement. When I saw that woman

collapse on the subway last week and called for help, I knew that she'd never know that it was me who summoned the ambulance. I was being Santa Claus when I did that."

Son: "Oh."

Me: "So now that you know, you're part of it. You have to be Santa Claus too now. That means you can never tell a young kid the secret, and you have to help us select Santa presents for them, and most important, you have to look for opportunities to help people. Got it?"

Son: "Sure, Dad!"

Sorry to disappoint you NJCubScouter. There are serious issues worthy of rational discussion involved in this. My outburst reflects my lack of patience with and contempt for the ACLU, regardless of the merits of their case.

This from the Stars & Stripes, European edition.

_________________________________

Boy Scout troops in Europe have little trouble finding new sponsors

By Ben Murray, Stars and Stripes

European edition, Thursday, December 9, 2004

KAISERSLAUTERN, Germany Boy Scouts of America leaders in Europe say they are having little trouble finding new, private sponsors for their troops after a legal settlement ordered military units to sever official ties with the scouting program.

Scout masters and regional leaders said veterans organizations such as the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and local unit booster clubs have stepped in as troop sponsors, Dan Adams, executive director of the BSAs Transatlantic Council, said Wednesday.

Weve got an incredible amount of support from the military structure here, said Adams.

In November, the Department of Defense told units not to sponsor Boy Scout or Cub Scout troops to comply with a legal settlement. The DOD settled with the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the direct government sponsorship of the Scouts because of the organizations requirement that troop members recite an oath of duty to God.

In Europe, military units charter 80 percent of scout troops, Adams said. More than 400 scout troops worldwide are affected by the restriction. About 200 of them are in the Transatlantic Councils region, which spans from Europe into North Africa and Turkey.

A DOD policy letter restricting government sponsorships of troops was sent just weeks before some European troops were scheduled to complete their annual re-chartering process, but Scout leaders adapted quickly.

Ramstein Air Base, Germanys Troop 12 Scoutmaster Andrew Turnbull said it took just two days for the groups committee to replace the 435th Air Base Wings Construction and Training Squadron as its sponsor last week. A squadron booster club took over Troop 12s charter, he said.

Turnbull said the administrative changes will have little effect on individual troops, who simply will continue their activities under their new sponsors.

Chartering organizations for European Scout troops serve mainly in a symbolic role, helping the group coordinate events and reserve meeting facilities, but taking little part in day-to-day scouting activities, Turnbull said.

Most kids wouldnt know how [the charter process] functions, Turnbull said. To them, its kind of transparent.

Scouts can still use military facilities for their functions and meetings, leaders said. Servicemembers also are still allowed to volunteer with the Scouts in their free time, the DOD policy letter said.

Its just a matter of changing the paperwork, and everything will be fine, said Bob Schmidt, senior executive for the Scouts Charlemagne District, which covers territory from the Netherlands to Morocco.

When all is said and done, itll have no real effect on us, Schmidt said.

Many troops are following the path of Ramsteins Troop 12 to find new sponsors.

Pat Hanlon, Horizon District commissioner and registrar for the BSAs Transatlantic Council, said, if a private organization cant be found, Scouts parents can create their own chartering group. Hanlon and Schmidt, however, said scout troops in their districts have reported little problem finding new sponsors.

I think its not going too badly, said Meg Barrett, a Cub Scout committee chairperson for Pack 44 in Stuttgart, Germany. Her troop and others in the Stuttgart area already have made headway in securing a new sponsorship, she said.

Ian Nicholls, scoutmaster for Troop 232 out of Ramstein, said his group has yet to find a new sponsor. But he didnt think his program is threatened.

Well survive, [though] this is probably going to be the roughest ride we've had in a while, he said.

All of the above is excellent advice. I think any troop is well advised to have participation expectations for scouts in POR. It is not fair to the other scouts to have an absentee patrol leader. We experience this competition for the time of the scouts frequently and people just have to make choices. Being "active" is more than just being registered and filling a slot in name only.

Doesn't this, to a certain extent, describe what commissioners are already supposed to be doing?

Cub Scouts Mark Hanukkah With U.S. Troops

Mon Dec 6, 7:56 AM ET U.S. National - AP

By BOBBY ROSS JR., Associated Press Writer

If not for Cub Scouts in Houston, Army Spc. Joseph Lowit would find it next-to-impossible to celebrate Hanukkah. As part of a service project, Pack 1190 from Congregation Emanu El prepared care packages with Hanukkah candles, menorahs and dreidels giving Lowit and 150 other soldiers in Iraq (news - web sites), Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Kuwait a way to mark the holiday.

"Thanks to them I can, and I am very grateful," wrote Lowit, a 26-year-old infantryman from Miami who is the only Jewish soldier on his base in Iraq.

Hanukkah, which starts at sundown Tuesday, commemorates how Jews reclaimed the defiled Jerusalem Temple from a Syrian despot in 165 B.C., and how one-day's worth of ritual oil that the Jews found miraculously burned for eight days.

The holiday is celebrated by the lighting of a menorah for eight nights.

"Hanukkah is perhaps easier than other Jewish holidays to observe in the field," said Army Capt. Shmuel Felzenberg, a Jewish chaplain who plans Hanukkah parties in Baghdad and Camp Anaconda, 50 miles north of Baghdad. "Although having the customary latkes (potato pancakes) and fresh sufganiyot (jelly doughnuts) may be far from easy, the basic menorah lighting observance is relatively easy to facilitate."

The boys of Pack 1190 talked about what it might be like to be a Jewish soldier at Hanukkah, and decided to make greeting cards and assemble goodie bags for troops.

"I thought it was a worthy cause because ... it was giving greetings to people without any family to celebrate," said 8-year-old Jordan Todes, who crafted many of the cards from construction paper.

Two Scout musicians Jarrett Taxman on guitar and Mitchell Chaiet on the cello played classical tunes outside a Houston bagel shop to raise money for Hanukkah supplies and toiletry items such as razors for the soldiers' care packages.

"There's some Jewish troops in Iraq that are maybe the only ones in their unit," said Jarrett, 11. "It's really hard to celebrate if you're the only one. I'm just really glad I could help."

Jewish soldiers represent roughly 1 percent of the U.S. force, making them a "relatively isolated group," said Army Lt. Col. Mitchell S. Ackerson, the senior Jewish chaplain in Iraq until returning home earlier this year.

"You don't have 50 guys in a unit who are Jewish," Ackerson said. "You'll get two or three if you're lucky."

In Lowit's case, being the only Jewish soldier "can be very difficult ... but you manage and my comrades make me feel at home and try to learn and ask questions," he wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

Lowit, who helps patrol Iraqi towns, said the Scouts' concern for fellow soldiers made him smile. He has even become "pen pals" with one of the youngsters.

"I love kids and to know that Pack 1190 supports us was great," wrote Lowit, who has a 4-year-old daughter. "It really touched my heart."

I have never been to Gettysburg with scouts, but I have been to Gettysburg. You may be wondering what the "electric map" that was mentioned in earlier posts is all about. This is a private commercial enterprise that illustrates the ebb and flow of the battle with a large relief map and electric lights. It sounds tacky, but it really is the best way to learn about the course of the action. I have no idea what the current fee is, but this is a "must see" item at Gettysburg.

Those of you who are regular readers of the Wall Street Journal will have seen this already. The editorial comment below is pasted from Friday's paper. At least one national media organization recognizes what is going on.

_______________________

Bashing the Boy Scouts

One group whose First Amendment rights the ACLU opposes.

Friday, November 26, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST

Legal historians may someday explain how the once-great American Civil Liberties Union came to see the Boy Scouts as public enemy number one. In the meantime, the ACLU keeps on bringing its absurd First Amendment challenges against the Scouts. The Defense Department is the latest defendant to throw in the towel.

The issue this time is the status of Scout troops on military bases. Most troops have institutional sponsors, and the military has traditionally performed this function for troops on bases, especially overseas where other options aren't readily available. The ACLU claims this is religious discrimination because the Boy Scouts require members to believe in God.

That argument received a boost last week when the Defense Department agreed to issue an all-points reminder that official sponsorship of Boy Scout troops is against departmental rules. The edict is unlikely to have much practical effect, since most troops can continue under private sponsorship. But the PR effect is immense. Defense admitted no guilt--a subtlety that went mostly unnoticed in the media rush to report the ACLU's "victory."

If all this weren't silly enough, another part of the ACLU lawsuit uses the same church-state argument to object to the famous Boy Scout Jamboree, held since 1981 at Fort A.P. Hill in Virginia. This time the military is willing to fight the charges, which eventually will be decided by a federal court in Illinois. The Scouts receive no direct financial support from the Army for the Jamboree--though the ACLU contends there are indirect costs involved.

But so what? The military earns a lot of public goodwill and A.P. Hill's soldiers learn a thing or two in helping to put up a temporary city and police 35,000 energetic teenage males. The Army even comes out ahead financially. The Scouts expect to spend $29 million on next year's Jamboree--and that's on top of the $12 million or more that they've already put into the base's permanent infrastructure. The military and other civilian groups make use of those facilities when the Scouts aren't there, which is all but nine days every four years.

Ever since the Supreme Court upheld the Scouts' First Amendment right to bar Scoutmasters who are openly gay, the ACLU has looked for softer targets. The suit against the military is one of a series aimed at getting communities to deny access to public facilities. The original lawsuit also challenged the city of Chicago's sponsorship of troops in public schools, another venue where sponsors aren't always easy to find. The city settled.

In Connecticut the ACLU has succeeded in getting the state to remove the Scouts from the list of charitable institutions to which public employees may make voluntary contributions. And earlier this year it settled a suit against the city of San Diego, which agreed to evict the Scouts from a public park they have been using since 1918. The Scouts countersued, lost, and the case is now on appeal before the Ninth Circuit.

The question no one seems to be asking is, who's better off as a result of these lawsuits? Surely not the 3.2 million Boy Scouts, whose venerable organization is part of the web of voluntary associations once considered the bedrock of American life. If anything, the purpose of the ACLU attacks is to paint Scouts as religious bigots. Other losers are communities themselves, which are forced to sever ties to an organization that helps to build character in young men.

It's been 20 years since the ACLU brought its first suit against the Scouts. If there's one thing we've learned by now, it's that the ACLU offensive says more about the degraded status of the civil liberties group than it does about the Boy Scouts.

Looks like Santa came early for you Merlyn, or is that too religious a reference for you?

And the ACLU wonders why it has become the object of such scorn in some parts of the country...

Blaze,

There is a very good syllabus for troop committee training called "Troop Committee Challenge". You ought to see if it is being offered anywhere near you. It really is very helpful.

Since there is very little new under the sun, I suspect others have tried this.

We are a fairly large troop. Average membership is between 50 and 60 boys. I have not been very active with the troop these last two years, but continue to do some outings and attend committee meetings. It became apparent that a lot of parents were at sea on a variety of issues. Since I was not involved in the activities of the troop meetings, I have been leading breakout sessions for parents. This serves two purposes. It gets the parents and their conversations into a separate room, and thus not disturb the boys. Second, it has become a great vehicle for informing parents about various aspects of the program and getting feedback from them.

These sessions focus on a very narrow topic and last about 45 minutes. For example, one session focused on patch placement on uniforms and merit badge sashes. So far the parents who have participated have been very enthusiastic and appreciative. The leadership is also getting valuable feedback, as I mentioned. Those of us who have been involved in the program for many years tend to take for granted that everybody knows what is going on and how to get their questions answered.

Has anybody else tried anything like this?

I am not being careless with the truth and I don't want this to get ugly.

The Swift Boat Vets are not liars. Have you read their book "Unfit for Command"? Have you visited their web site? Or are you merely repeating the pro Kerry spin as echoed by the main stream media?

Why should Kerry be granted total credibility on the issues surrounding his time in Viet Nam and his activities after returning, compared to over 200 people who served in the same unit and POWs who returned from the Hanoi Hilton? What makes Kerry's version of these events so special? These people had no interest in going public with their complaints. Kerry had every interest in trying to shut them up. Based on interest alone, Kerry's claims deserve thoughtful scrutiny based on all the available evidence. Kerry still has not executed form DD180 (?) the form that lifts all restrictions to his personnel records. George Bush did that concerning his records. Kerry's claim that he has released all records is simply a lie.

Referring to Kerry's 1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, this took place after he secretly met with representatives of the North Vietnames and Viet Cong in Paris in 1970. He did at that time in 1971, or shortly thereafter, acknowledge these meetings, but why the earlier secrecy? He was still a naval reserve officer at that time. Interestingly, Section 3 of the 14th amendment probably precludes Kerry from holding his current office, much less that of President. Look it up.

The problem with Kerry's claims in 1971 is that he claimed that the US military committed war crimes on a daily basis as a matter of policy and with the knowledge of all officers at all levels of command. This directly slandered those with whom he served in the navy, his superior officers, and all other veterans of that conflict, including me. No one pretends that no crimes were ever committed. We have Lt. Calley and his superiors to thank for that. The fact that the North Vietnamese used flame throwers against a defenseless village called Dak Son to make an example was a crime that does not excuse Lt. Calley, but was never explored by the critics of the US military at that time. To them it was only the US that was capable of war crimes. But I digress....

If Kerry had not continued the slanders in the puff piece biography released earlier this year, and made his Viet Nam service the centerpiece of his qualifications for president at his convention, the Swift Boat Vets might have taken a pass on the whole thing. I think we should grant them no less good faith in their complaints about Kerry than is granted to Kerry's claims. They had nothing to gain and a great deal to lose by their public opposition to Kerry.

I could write more, but this is enough for now.

When my oldest son first became a boy scout in Southern California, the troop he joined had two chartered organizations, both protestant churches. It is both possible and legal. One of those churches subsequently lost interest.

If you are trying to broaden your membership base, particularly when your current CO cannot provide a meeting place, there is nothing wrong with this idea. You can retain your old ties at the same time as you build new ties.

Go for it. You are to be applauded for trying to bring scouting into areas where it is not offered.

One lesson is that a guy like Kerry cannot achieve early political success by slandering his brothers in arms and expect to walk away from that and into the presidency without being called out by those he slandered.

I am not sure that you are correct that parents cannot even witness an Eagle BOR. I was under the impression that parents can observe any scouting activity if they choose to do so.

Some of you may recall a controversy about a year ago about an Eagle Scout who claimed that he had been an atheist throughout his scouting career. In his instance the Eagle BOR was conducted at the troop level. This was somewhere in the state of Washington. As I recall his Eagle was not revoked, even though his mother was apparently involved in pushing him through the unit Eagle BOR.

While all the Eagle BORs I have seen have been at the district level, I am not aware of any prohibition against the unit doing Eagle BORs. In some more sparsely populated or inaccessible parts of the country, staffing a BOR out of the boy's unit may be the only feasible way to do it.

I don't know, but I suspect that this rulemaking is normal follow on activity to the Helms rider on equal access that was proposed as an amendment to other legislation as a direct response to certain school districts in Florida kicking BSA units out of its facilities.

I can easily believe that it took two years for the Education Department to draft up rules. I deal with the IRS on a variety of issues and it routinely takes the IRS years to propose rules and typically more years to finalize them. Sheer inefficiency is a better explanation for the timing of this release.

There are some very broad and serious principles involved here and BSA is not the only organization affected. There have been cases involving student organizations at the college level, supported by compulsory student "activity fees" (aka taxes), where students attempting to organize groups based on religious belief have been discriminated against, denied official recognition, etc.

It is amusing and ironic that the same mind set that promotes and exalts "cultural diversity" in schools and curricula generally, is unwilling to accept that diversity includes religious belief.

In other words, you can be different as long as you agree with me on everything that I say matters.

Go to link

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041020/481/phn10610201232

Managing volunteers is much more difficult than managing employees. You need to ask this fellow to make himself available and point out that the function and troop are suffering. Express your appreciation for his past contributions, but if he is unwilling or unable to do the job right by showing up, you have ample grounds for forcing a change. Recharter time is an excellent time to do this.

The adequacy of the headcount of the armed services for the tasks before them is a legitimate issue. I for one think that the active duty services should be increased. However, a renewed conscription is not necessary and not the way to get there.

This whole business of the fairness of the way the burden of military service is borne is, in my mind, a completely phony issue. Minorities are not over represented in the MOS's most likely to get shot at. The military is a great way up the social ladder for a lot of folks with otherwise limited prospects.

Forcing people to serve against their will is a form of discriminatory tax that should be used only as a last resort. I remember a quote from Milton Friedman in a debate about ending the draft back in the 70's. I think General Westmoreland was on the other side of the debate advocating a continued draft. Westmoreland posed the question, "Do you want to be defended by an army of mercenaries?"

Friedman retorted, "Would you rather be defended by an army of slaves?"

Mercenaries is of course a harsh term. While some people who serve may be motivated primarily by pay and benefits, I think most of the volunteers are more motivated by a sense of duty and patriotism.

Adults are subsidized for outings and summer camp by the scouts who are participating. Adults usually pay for their own food if they are eating as a separate patrol on an outing. For some outings drivers may receive gas reimbursement or a flat amount of money. All of these amounts are built into the budgets for the activities involved.

Our troop also pays all fees for district and council level training.

I don't know the details. I found four articles and posted the most recent. I don't think any final decision has been made. Perhaps some forum participant from that part of the country can provide some more information.

This sort of discrimination against the Boy Scouts is becoming a very old story.

____________________

Conn. city may deny permit to Boy Scouts

By Associated Press | September 21, 2004

NORWALK, Conn. -- City officials are considering denying a permit for the Boy Scouts to use a beach for a recruitment drive based on the parent organization's policy of barring homosexual members.

Mayor Alex Knopp has asked the law department to determine whether there is legal precedent to deny a Boy Scouts troop use of Shady Beach. He made his request after members of the Common Council's parks committee told scoutmaster Greta DeAngelis last week that they would vote against issuing her a permit for a three-hour campfire and recruitment program on Oct. 24. The mayor declined to comment until he has more information.

The controversy about Boy Scouts of America membership arose a few years ago after the organization expelled James Dale, an Eagle Scout and assistant scoutmaster in New Jersey for 10 years, because he is gay. Dale sued and won reinstatement but the Scouts took their case to the US Supreme Court and, in 2000, prevailed.

Although DeAngelis said her Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts troops do not discriminate, Norwalk Parks Committee members Kenneth Baker and Peter Wien argued that the local Scouts are required to follow the national policy.

Lena Fergason, legislative and regulations specialist for the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, said she is unaware of any other Connecticut municipalities that have denied the Scouts use of public land.

Lou Salute, a Boy Scouts executive with the Connecticut Yankee Council, said DeAngelis only wants the same access to public facilities given to other organizations. "To deny the Boy Scouts access would constitute discrimination against us," Salute said.

In 2000, the Connecticut State Employee Campaign Committee removed the Boy Scouts from its list of charities that workers contribute to through a payroll deduction plan. The move came after the state's human rights commission found that including the Boy Scouts on the list violated the state's antidiscrimination laws because of the Scouts' policy that bars homosexuals from their organization.

Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

So what would be an appropriate first aid treatment for these conditions?

I've wondered about this myself. I would expect that the proper spelling is "two".

Most close order drill commands have a cadence of their own. There is the preparatory command and the execution command. In the case of "order arms" the people already are at "present arms" and know that the next command can only be to return to attention. The word "order" tells them what to do and "arms" tells them when to do it.

So my speculation is that the "two" is the execution for dropping the salute, but what is the first part of the command?