NewDixieNotes

History Unfolding...I hope not...

2009-10-24T08:02:00.000-06:00

David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College . He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser's latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.
********************************************************
Dr. David Kaiser
History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

David Kaiser
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States

Teddy's Legacy:

2009-08-26T04:42:00.003-06:00

For you younger folks out there, who did not live through this event, this reporting explains why Teddy never made it beyond his senate seat.

Senator Edward Kennedy, who has died after a long battle with a brain tumor, was always expected to follow his elder brothers Jack and Robert - both assassinated in the 1960s - to the highest level of political life. But then came the Chappaquiddick incident, a scandal from which he never was able to recover.

"As long as I am in public life, the incident will be raised," he once admitted, and he couldn't have been more right.

The precise details of what happened on the night of July 18, 1969, have now gone to the grave with the 77-year-old senator. What is known for certain is this:

Kennedy, already a senator at 37, attended a party on Martha's Vineyard, the holiday island off the coast of Massachusetts where Barack Obama and his family are currently spending their summer holiday. The party was held on Chappaquiddick Island, which is linked to the eastern tip of the main island by the narrow Dike Bridge.

The party was being held for the so-called 'Boiler Room Girls', a group of young women who had worked on his brother Robert Kennedy's presidential campaign before he was shot in June the previous year.

Lat that night, after leaving the party with a 28-year-old woman, Mary Jo Kopechne, Kennedy drove his black Oldsmobile sedan off the Dike Bridge. The car was not found until the next morning, July 19, when it was spotted overturned and submerged in the water beside the bridge, with Kopechne's body inside.

A short while after the discovery, Kennedy walked into the Edgartown police station on Martha's Vineyard and said that he had been the driver of the car.

The scandal erupted because Kennedy, who had a reputation for drinking, did not immediately report the accident. It got worse when it became clear that Kennedy had extricated himself from the submerged car and swum to safety - but was unable to prevent Kopechne drowning.

Rumors abounded that Kennedy and Kopechne were involved in a sexual act when the car went off the bridge. But while the young senator pleaded guilty on July 25 to leaving the scene of an accident, he denied driving under the influence of drink or any 'immoral conduct'.

In a national broadcast following the court hearing, he said: "I regard as indefensible the fact that I did not report the accident to the police immediately."

The following January, an inquest into Kopechne's death was held at Edgartown under Judge James A Boyle. At the request of Kennedy's lawyers, the inquest was conducted in private.

The inquest report was held back until a grand jury had convened on Martha's Vineyard in April the same year. When the grand jury decided against issuing any indictment, Judge Boyle released his report, in which he concluded that some aspects of Kennedy's version of what happened on July 18-19 were not true, and that "negligent driving appears to have contributed to the death of Mary Jo Kopechne".

Kennedy stated that Judge Boyle's conclusions were "not justified".

Nationally, however, public doubts about his behavior that night never went away. His only attempt to run for the White House was a miserable failure when he lost to the incumbent Jimmy Carter in the 1980 presidential primaries.

…..from The First Post

2008-12-18T05:04:00.002-06:00

"Back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now we are trusting the economy of our country to a bunch of people who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling booze? "

And how serendipitous is this? That old whore Barney Frank, who not only began the crash, but is now in charge of making it worse, actually did run a whorehouse out of his Capitol Hill townhouse. It's all too rich for me.

This is why the Nigerians don't stop.....

2008-12-16T05:30:00.003-06:00

Woman out $400K to 'Nigerian scam' con artists
YouNews™

Story Published: Nov 11, 2008 at 2:01 PM PST

Story Updated: Nov 21, 2008 at 4:30 AM PST
By Anna Song KATU News and KATU.com Web Staff
Video

SWEET HOME, Ore. – Janella Spears doesn’t think she’s a sucker or an easy mark.

Besides her work as a registered nurse, Spears – no relation to the well-known pop star – also teaches CPR and is a reverend who has married many couples. She also communicates with lightning-fast sign language with her hearing-impaired husband.

So how did this otherwise lucid, intelligent woman end up sending nearly half a million dollars to a bunch of con artists running what has to be one of the best-known Internet scams in the world?

Spears fell victim to the "Nigerian scam," which is familiar to almost anyone who has ever had an e-mail account.

The e-mail pitch is familiar to most people by now: a long-lost relative or desperate government official in a war-torn country needs to shuffle some funds around, say $10 million or $20 million, and if you could just help them out for a bit, you get to keep 10 (or 20 or 30) percent for your trouble.

All you need to do is send X-amount of dollars to pay some fees and all that cash will suddenly land in your checking account, putting you on Easy Street. By the way, please send the funds though an untraceable wire service.

By this time, not many people will fall for such an outrageous pitch, and the scam is very well-known. But it persists, and for a reason: every now and then, it works.

For Spears, it started, as it almost always does, with an e-mail. It promised $20 million and in this case, the money was supposedly left behind by her grandfather (J.B. Spears), with whom the family had lost contact over the years.

"So that's what got me to believe it," she said.

Spears didn't know how the sender knew J.B. Spears' name and her relation to him, but her curiosity was piqued.

It turned out to be a lot of money up front, but it started with just $100.

The scammers ran Spears through the whole program. They said President Bush and FBI Director "Robert Muller" (their spelling) were in on the deal and needed her help.

They sent official-looking documents and certificates from the Bank of Nigeria and even from the United Nations. Her payment was "guaranteed."

Then the amount she would get jumped up to $26.6 million – if she would just send $8,300. Spears sent the money.

More promises and teases of multi-millions followed, with each one dependent on her sending yet more money. Most of the missives were rife with misspellings.

When Spears began to doubt the scam, she got letters from the President of Nigeria, FBI Director Mueller, and President Bush. Terrorists could get the money if she did not help, Bush’s letter said. Spears continued to send funds. All the letters were fake, of course.

She wiped out her husband’s retirement account, mortgaged the house and took a lien out on the family car. Both were already paid for.

For more than two years, Spears sent tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Everyone she knew, including law enforcement officials, her family and bank officials, told her to stop, that it was all a scam. She persisted.

Spears said she kept sending money because the scammers kept telling her that the next payment would be the last one, that the big money was inbound. Spears said she became obsessed with getting paid.

An undercover investigator who worked on the case said greed helped blind Spears to the reality of the situation, which he called the worst example of the scam he’s ever seen.

He also said he has seen people become obsessed with the scam before. They are so desperate to recoup their losses with the big payout, they descend into a vicious cycle of sending money in hopes the false promises will turn out to be real.

Now, Spears has gone public with her story as a warning to others not to fall victim.

She hopes her story will warn others to listen to reason and avoid going down the dark tunnel of obsession that ended up costing her so much.

Spears said it would take her at least three to four years to dig out of the debt she ran up in pursuit of the non-existent pot of Nigerian gold.

My comments: the total ended up to be $400,000. The only reason she stopped, the Oregon Department of Justice accidentally stumbled onto the scam in progress. They were investigating another fraud case when they noticed somebody sending $144,000 to Nigeria in three weeks. They threatened to charge her with a crime if she didn't stop. She went, "Okay." That finally did the trick and now some guy in Nigeria is sitting on almost half a million dollars just from her. So what is it that we're supposed to learn from this, I guess? That greed is good? Greed blinded her. It's what caused her to dump almost her entire savings out the window. Greed. It's unbelievable.

Writing on the wall?

2008-12-07T14:29:00.002-06:00

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But,under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation,without knowing how it happened.”
....... Norman Thomas, U.S. SocialistParty
presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

Worried about forthcoming gun control? So were these guys:

2008-12-03T05:49:00.003-06:00

Robert Heinlein:
Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor and the contrary opinion are wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.

Robert Heinlein:
An armed society is a polite society.

Robert Heinlein:
"Reason is poor propaganda when opposed by the yammering, unceasing lies of shrewd and evil and self-serving men."

Mahatma Gandhi:
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." (Autobiography, by M.K. Gandhi, p.446)

George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm and 1984, himself a socialist:
"That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."

George Orwell:
People sleep peaceablyin their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

THOMAS JEFFERSON:
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable that I wish it always to be kept alive.

Patrick Henry, 1775:
"It is in vain, Sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace! But there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the North will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that Gentlemen want? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times):
"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate.

Just thought this was funny...but maybe not so much...

2008-11-30T05:02:00.002-06:00

UPS versus FexEx

2008-11-10T07:28:00.001-06:00

UPS wins! Perhaps they were on the cellphone?

Islamic Finance 101

2008-11-07T09:05:00.001-06:00

*YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK*
U.S. Treasury teaches 'Islamic Finance 101'
Advisers, scholars to promote controversial Shariah funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 05, 2008
10:45 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

U.S. Department of the Treasury

The Treasury Department has announced it will teach "Islamic finance" to U.S. banking regulatory agencies, Congress and other parts of the executive branch today at 10 a.m. in Washington, D.C. – but critics say it is opening a door to American funding of Islamic extremism.

*'Islamic Finance 101'*

According to its announcement, the "Islamic Finance 101" forum is "designed to help inform the policy community about Islamic financial services, which are an increasingly important part of the global financial industry."

The Treasury Department has collaborated with Harvard University's Islamic Finance Project to coordinate the event. The department says it expects about 100 people will attend the seminar.

Some speakers include Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Neel Kashkari, senior adviser to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Jr.; Harvard Business School professor Samuel Hayes; Mahmoud El-Gamal, chair of Islamic economics, finance and management at Rice University and Islamic finance adviser to the Treasury Department; Sarah Bell of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Yusuf Talal DeLorenzo, Shariah adviser and Islamic scholar; Michael McMillan, chair of the Islamic Legal Forum at the American Bar Association and professor of Islamic finance; and Rushdi Siddiqui, global director for the Dow Jones Islamic Market Indexes and vigorous advocate for Islamic finance.

Islamic finance is a system of banking consistent with the principles of Shariah, or Islamic law. It is becoming increasingly popular, having reached $800 billion by mid-2007 and growing at more than 15 percent each year. Wall Street now features an Islamic mutual fund and an Islamic index. However, critics claim anti-American terrorists are often financially supported through U.S. investments – creating a system by which the nation funds its own enemy.

*Aiding the enemy*

In his essay, "Financial Jihad: What Americans Need to Know <http://www.stopshariahnow.org/f/FINANCIAL_JIHAD.pdf>," Vice President Christopher Holton of the Center for Security Policy <http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/> writes, "America is losing the financial war on terror because Wall Street is embracing a subversive enemy ideology on one hand and providing corporate life support to state sponsors of terrorism on the other hand."

Holton refers to Islamic finance, or "Shariah-Compliant Finance" as a "modern-day Trojan horse" infiltrating the U.S. He said it poses a threat to the U.S. because it seeks to legitimize Shariah – a man-made medieval doctrine that regulates every aspect of life for Muslims – and could ultimately change American life and laws.

Shariah-compliant finance is becoming a major movement, because American banks and investors are seeking wealth from oil profits in the Middle East. Some advocates claim Islamic finance is socially responsible because it bans investors from funding companies that sell or promote products such as alcohol, tobacco, pornography, gambling and even pork.

However, Islamic financial institutions also require all industry participants to adhere to tenets of Shariah law. According to Nasser Suleiman's "Corporate Governance in Islamic Banking, "First and foremost, an Islamic organization must serve God. It must develop a distinctive corporate culture, the main purpose of which is to create a collective morality and spirituality which, when combined with the production of goods and services, sustains growth and the advancement of the Islamic way of life."

Three nations that rule 100 percent by Shariah law – Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan – hold some of the most horrific human rights records in the world, Holton said.

"This strongly suggests that Americans should strenuously resist anything associated with Shariah."

*Tenets of Shariah*

In his essay, "Islamic Finance or Financing Islamism <http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/modules/newsmanager/center%20publication%20pdfs/islamic%20finance%20or%20financing%20islamism.pdf>," Alex Alexiev outlined the following tenets of Shariah taken from "The Reliance of the Traveler: The Classic Manual of Sacred Law":

* A woman is eligible for only half of the inheritance of a man
* A virgin may be married against her will by her father or grandfather
* A woman may not leave the house without her husband's permission
* A Muslim man may marry four women, including Christians and Jews;
a Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim
* Beating an insubordinate wife is permissible
* Female sexual mutilation is obligatory
* Adultery [or the perception of adultery] is punished by death by
stoning
* Offensive, military jihad against non-Muslims is a religious
obligation
* Apostasy from Islam is punishable by death without trial
* Lying to infidels in time of jihad is permissible

*'Useful idiots'*

Alexiev writes that many Islamic financial institutions claim Shariah-Compliant Finance "derives its Islamic character from the strict observance of the ostensible Quranic prohibition of lending at interest, the imperative of almsgiving (zakat), avoidance of excessive uncertainty (gharar) and certain practices and products considered unlawful (haram) to Muslims …" However, he said, "[E]ven a casual examination of the reality of Islamic finance today reveals it to be a bogus concept practiced by deceptive ploys and disingenuous means by practitioners that are or should be aware of that, but remain predictably silent."

Shariah finance institutions that have funded militant Islamism for more than 30 years. Alexiev cites Islamic Development Bank's hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Hamas in support of suicide bombing. Bank Al-Taqwa and other banks and charities run by Saudi billionaires have funded al-Qaida activities.

Additionally, Shariah law mandates that Muslims donate 2.5 percent of their annual incomes to charities – including jihadists. When 400 banks regularly contribute to such charities, potential financial sums can be virtually limitless.

If Western banks endorse Shariah, they will "end up becoming what Lenin called useful idiots or worse to the Islamists," Alexiev writes. "And it is a very thin line between that and outright complicity in the Islamist agenda."

Sharia Compliant Financing Forum
/US Treasury to Host /

Concerning the global financial problem the “West” is looking for answers. Our very own U.S. Treasury Dept is holding a forum */this week/* regarding the introduction of Sharia or Islamic banking to the United States prior to the meeting on Nov 15th!
You need to verse yourself on Sharia banking <http://community.icontact.com/p/wwwelshaddaiministriesus/newsletters/twiceamonth/posts/feasts-of-the-lord-in-prophecy-newsletter-issue-9-november-5-2008/link?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bankersonline.com%2Fvendor_guru%2Fedcomm%2Fedcomm_mkt_100107.html>now. I am not trying to scare anyone or bring fear. As watchmen and watchwomen we need to see what is coming to warn others and to get them to repent and come to God. Our trust is in God alone and not in our finances. Be strong and of a good courage knowing the time is short. This is a time to pray and fast as never before.
Please read the profiles of the speakers <http://community.icontact.com/p/wwwelshaddaiministriesus/newsletters/twiceamonth/posts/feasts-of-the-lord-in-prophecy-newsletter-issue-9-november-5-2008/link?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saneworks.us%2Fuploads%2Fnews%2Fapplications%2F7.pdf>(page 4-7 of linked resource) at this event. Notice how it is directed toward the policy makers as if we have no choice? Encourage people to sign up for the newsletter and I will try to be more diligent in getting them out.

2008-11-04T18:22:00.000-06:00

Commentary
Obama and Ahmadinejad
Amir Taheri 10.26.08, 1:33 PM ET

Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?

The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.

According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."

In a curious coincidence Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition.

Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama's rise as another sign of the West's decline and the triumph of Islam. Obama's promise to seek unconditional talks with the Islamic Republic is cited as a sign that the U.S. is ready to admit defeat. Obama's position could mean abandoning three resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council setting conditions that Iran should meet to avoid sanctions. Seeking unconditional talks with the Khomeinists also means an admission of moral equivalence between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic. It would imply an end to the description by the U.S. of the regime as a "systematic violator of human rights."

Obama has abandoned claims by all U.S. administrations in the past 30 years that Iran is "a state sponsor of terrorism." Instead, he uses the term "violent groups" to describe Iran-financed outfits such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

Obama has also promised to attend a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference within the first 100 days of his presidency. Such a move would please the mullahs, who have always demanded that Islam be treated differently, and that Muslim nations act as a bloc in dealings with Infidel nations.

Obama's election would boost President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's chances of winning a second term next June. Ahmadinejad's entourage claim that his "steadfastness in resisting the American Great Satan" was a factor in helping Obama defeat "hardliners" such as Hillary Clinton and, later, it hopes, John McCain.

"President Ahmadinejad has taught Americans a lesson," says Hassan Abbasi, a "strategic adviser" to the Iranian president. "This is why they are now choosing someone who understands Iran's power." The Iranian leader's entourage also point out that Obama copied his campaign slogan "Yes, We Can" from Ahmadinejad's "We Can," used four years ago.

A number of Khomeinist officials have indicated their preference for Obama over McCain, who is regarded as an "enemy of Islam." A Foreign Ministry spokesman says Iran does not wish to dictate the choice of the Americans but finds Obama "a better choice for everyone." Ali Larijani, Speaker of the Islamic Majlis, Iran's ersatz parliament, has gone further by saying the Islamic Republic "prefers to see Barack Obama in the White House" next year.

Tehran's penchant for Obama, reflected in the official media, increased when the Illinois senator chose Joseph Biden as his vice-presidential running mate. Biden was an early supporter of the Khomeinist revolution in 1978-1979 and, for the past 30 years, has been a consistent advocate of recognizing the Islamic Republic as a regional power. He has close ties with Khomeinist lobbyists in the U.S. and has always voted against sanctions on Iran.

Ahmadinejad has described the U.S. as a "sunset" (ofuli) power as opposed to Islam, which he says is a "sunrise" (toluee) power. Last summer, he inaugurated an international conference called World Without America--attended by anti-Americans from all over the world, including the U.S.

Seen from Tehran, Obama's election would demoralize the U.S. armed forces by casting doubt on their victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, if not actually transforming them into defeat. American retreat from the Middle East under Obama would enable the Islamic Republic to pursue hegemony of the region. Tehran is especially interested in dominating Iraq, thus consolidating a new position that extends its power to the Mediterranean through Syria and Lebanon.

During the World Without America conference, several speakers speculated that Obama would show "understanding of Muslim grievances" with regard to Palestine. Ahmadinejad hopes to persuade a future President Obama to adopt the "Iranian solution for Palestine," which aims at creating a single state in which Jews would quickly become a minority.

Judging by anecdotal evidence and the buzz among Iranian bloggers, while the ruling Khomeinists favor Obama, the mass of Iranians regard (and dislike) the Democrat candidate as an appeaser of the mullahs. Iran, along with Israel, is the only country in the Middle East where the United States remains popular. An Obama presidency, perceived as friendly to the oppressive regime in Tehran, may change that.

Amir Taheri is the author of 10 books on Iran, the Middle East and Islam. His new book The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution will be published by Encounter Books in November.

TattooU...?

2008-11-01T04:37:00.002-06:00

Cover up tattoos, some employees told

By Oren Dorell, USA TODAY

Cities and school districts across the country are forcing their employees to cover up tattoos if they want to keep their jobs.

The edicts have been issued to maintain a good image, say the communities, and they have been applied to teachers, janitors, firefighters and others.

"We didn't want to offend some people in the community," says Capt. Armando Hogan, spokesman for the Los Angeles City Fire Department, where employees were ordered last spring to cover all tattoos while on duty. "I have been on drills and on scene where someone has said, 'I wouldn't want that person working on me,' and we've had to educate the individual who made the comment."

Among the cities:

• Bountiful, Utah, decided in August that new employees must not show any tattoos.

• The Pasco County School Board in Florida has ordered employees to hide "offensive" tattoos.

• In Missouri, the Joplin School Board will vote on a no-visible-tattoo policy this year.

The orders to cover up have been growing as tattoos become more popular, especially tattoos on the face, neck, hands and fingers. Some workers feel the policy is unfair.

"We don't allow discrimination based on skin color, yet we came up with a policy that discriminated against people with color on their skin," says Steve Tufts, president of the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City.

Joplin Schools Superintendent C.J. Huff says students are getting teaching degrees, getting tattoos, and then applying for jobs. "We're saying before you get a tattoo, you have to think about how big it is and where it's located before you think about getting a job in our school district," he says.

The rule in Bountiful was passed after applicants with hard-to-conceal tattoos showed up for interviews for jobs in the police, streets and sanitation departments. City Manager Tom Hardy says city leaders had to decide: "Either we're going to do nothing about it, or we're going to do something about it."

In each community, officials cite the exploding popularity of tattoos.

Bob Baxter, editor in chief of Skin & Ink magazine, agrees with the restrictive policies. Baxter says neck and face tattoos used to appear only on heavily tattooed people who ran out of space.

"What's happening (now) is that a lot of young people figure that the best way to show that 'I'm in the tattoo community' is to get tattoos in very conspicuous places," Baxter says. "I don't think it's a good idea. It's hard to get work."

Is this the best we can do?

2008-10-18T04:42:00.000-06:00

Where is Ralph Nader when we need him?

Another weak debate advertises the absence of an effective third force in American politics
You would not have had an inkling from the presidential candidates' third and final debate last night that Wednesday had been a day of fearful carnage on Wall Street, throwing into question the desperate efforts of the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve to stabilise the situation.
You would not have known that in a month the Dow Jones industrial index has lost 25 per cent of its value. You would not have known that in the considered estimation of many economists, the United States could well be entering a prolonged recession without much chance of recovery for many years.
There were, to be sure, dutiful references by both Obama and McCain to crisis, but mostly it was as though they were talking about a troublesome traffic accident a couple of blocks away. McCain flourished a proposal to bail out homeowners. Obama claimed that the bankers' bail-out bill for which they had both voted contained exactly such provisions.
Then the two retreated to mechanical reiteration of their tax plans, their health plans, their plans for energy independence, all of them topics interminably raked over in the earlier debates.
Three instant polls showed that the all-important independent voters thought Obama had had the best of it. After a spritely beginning, McCain soon looked puffy and tired. His little jabs at Obama sounded peevish rather than fierce. Obama somewhat unconvincingly assumed the role of genial sparring partner, plastering a smile across his face as McCain flailed away.
Given the political news yesterday, Obama could afford to smile. A poll conducted by the New York Times found the Democrat with commanding leads in crucial states. The margins are beginning to suggest a stampede to Obama and the Democrats.
The morning of the third presidential debate a friend of mine in Landrum, South Carolina conducted an informal survey of voter sentiment in this rural town in the heart of Dixie. He pulled over at a convenience store-cum-coffee shop, and walked in with a wad of McCain/Palin stickers. "Don't you bring those things in here," said the man behind the cash register.
My friend strolled among the regulars sipping their coffee, most of them retired, and could find no takers. "Not one, and these were people who voted 100 per cent for Bush in 2004. They're angry." Why? After a terrible summer of soaring gas prices and plunging stock portfolios "a lot of them have lost their retirement funds and health savings". He added that all the talk about Obama's links to terror, to Islam, to bombers, has also had the effect of intimidating elderly Republicans from even putting McCain-Palin signs in their yards. They fear Obama's Islamic bully boys will come knocking on their doors.
My friend's experience in Landrum came amid the inglorious tailspin of the disastrous strategy of trying to sink Obama by hanging former Weatherman Bill Ayers round his neck.
When Republican consultants like Mary Matalin and Steve Schmidt first pondered this tactic in the late summer, it must have seemed to them like a no-brainer.
In the final weeks of Campaign 2008, Barack Hussein Obama would be hit with accusations (actually first aired by Hillary Clinton last April) of being an alien radical with intimate ties to a man who had tried to blow up Congress and the Pentagon.
It might have worked, but for the fact which apparently escaped the notice of the McCain campaign – that Americans are entirely consumed by the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. There has been a total disconnect between the financial hurricane hitting America and some archaeology about a Sixties radical sitting with Obama on the board of a non-profit foundation.
Across the three debates Obama has been the default winner, if only because McCain has been irritable and repetitive, a cranky old geezer. But has the Democrat taken command, persuading his vast audiences that amid the loom of adversity and ruin for many Americans he is prepared to lead and has a plan? The answer here is surely no. He's got less inspiring as the weeks tick by.
This election has advertised not only McCain's political ineptness, but also the absence of an effective third force in American politics, at a moment when the credibility of both parties and of both major candidates is open to sweeping challenge. Voters are disgusted with the entire system and the
direction the country is taking. Disapproval of Bush and of the Democrats running Congress is at the same high level. Yet Obama and McCain share many positions, starting with the bail-out and continuing with endorsement of a belligerent foreign policy from Georgia to Iran, total fealty to Israel and a ramp-up of the doomed Afghan campaign.
Ralph Nader is a man for whom the economic crisis has come as total vindication of everything he has been proclaiming for decades: about the corruption of Wall Street, the ties between Wall Street and Congress, the economic sell-outs of the Clinton era, from free trade deals to the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Yet Nader has no party and so despite being on the ballot this year in over 40 states suffers from hugely diminished political purchase on everything from volunteers to finance to media presence, at a moment when his message could have resonated hugely with the furious and fearful electorate.
The political groups and coalitions that rallied to Nader in 2000 are all shadows of their former selves. Eight years of Bush have pushed the environmental and labour lobbies back into the Democratic Party, where their voices are inaudible and political influence scarcely visible to the naked eye.
Has Obama changed the political landscape? On September 23 he stated on NBC that the crisis and prospect of a huge bail-out required bipartisan action and meant he likely would have to delay expansive spending programmes outlined during his campaign for the White House. In addition, he said that his proposed economic stimulus program "is not necessarily something that we should have in this package".
Thus did he surrender power even before he gained it. As an instigator of beneficial change, the Clinton administration was over six months after election day 1992, when Clinton turned to Al Gore and said, "You mean my re-election hinges on the Federal Reserve and some fucking bond traders?" Gore nodded and Clinton promptly abandoned his economic plan to follow the dictates of Wall Street tycoons like Robert Rubin, now a top advisor to Obama. Assuming he wins, Obama beat the speed of Bill Clinton's 1993 collapse by almost seven months.
FIRST POSTED OCTOBER 16, 2008

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/45649,opinion,where-is-ralph-nader-when-we-need-him-asks-alexander-cockburn

I'm concerned also....

2008-10-02T07:55:00.001-06:00

'The mark of a profound person is the ability to foresee consequences before one acts'
This is an e-mail from B.Gen James Cash, USAF, who has written some very good articles on the subject. Here he recommends someone else's e-mail that impressed him, and scared him.

General Cash Wrote:
Occasionally, I receive an email that I agree with so totally I want to pass to everyone on my list. This is one of those emails. I have approval from the writer to forward the attached, and feel free to post it on your websites, or forward to friends. The election of Obama as President of the United States will mark the apex, and beginning downslide of this Republic. The only question is the rate at which the downfall will occur.

The writer of this essay is Jerry Molen. Jerry is a great friend and an Academy Award winning Hollywood Producer. He did Jurassic Park , Hook, Rainman, and many more class movies. He won he Academy Award for Schindler's List. Jerry is one of the very few clear thinking conservatives that I know from Hollywood . We need to get this out to as many as possible to include liberal Democrats.. We are about to make the Mother-of-All-Mistakes, because the Republican Party gave us no reliable alternative. In my opinion, if the conservative movement does not rally behind the only alternative left to us, this country will become a true Socialist State within the next two Presidential terms. Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the most grave situation this nation has faced in my lifetime.

Jim Cash B/G, USAF, Ret.
Jerry Molen wrote:
'Election woes defined by prose.....'

We just experienced an overhyped, positively outrageous primary election season that has left me cold and wondering where the heads of our citizens are hiding out. Must be someplace where the sun doesn't get to very often.

At one time in my life I was a determined, dedicated and ever loyal registered Democrat. Then something happened (Lyndon Baines Johnson) that turned my life around and gave me much pause as to the veracity of a party that dwelt on and fed off of the most unfortunate among us. Some of those unfortunates were in their positions in life by way of their own choosing and others were there by circumstance But always, always with a door open to them to reach for new heights, achieve new goals, change their lives for the better. And also, always ever present were the bottom feeders doing everything they could to take advantage of those who had not or have not seen the light of better days and times nor realizing they were in fact the masters of their own destiny. They had come to believe that they were dependent on those in power in Washington and that they would look out for them and take care of their every need. They are still waiting and expecting all those promised freebies.

Most people aren't even aware that the Democrats ruled Washington for over 40 years. It wasn't until 1994 when the so called Gingrich Revolution changed that for a short period of time. Nor do people realize that it was the Dem's that created the failed policies of the many entitlement programs that are falling apart right before our eyes. Please do not think I find the Republicans blameless in all this. They too, suffer from ego inflation and greed motivators built into the system. It's just that the past few months I've listened to the rantings and railings of the left in America calling for more giveaways and better ways to obtain the proverbial 'free lunch'.

I think that to sum up my feelings and why I am so set apart from those within the circles of political power and influence can be illustrated best by a quote by noted basketball legend and talk show co-host Charles Barkley:

'Poor people have been voting for Democrats for the last fifty years...and they are still poor'.

And now with the election results comes the promises of 'change'. 'Change we can believe in.' 'Change for the future'. When in fact if you really, I mean REALLY listen to what the new MESSIAH is asking for is not 'change of policy' or 'change for the better'. He is warning all of us that he wants our change all right, 'loose change', pocket change', social change and political change......So people wake up. For if you don't the change you get may not be the change you were expecting or the change you wanted.

To close my screed, I want to leave you with some JM predictions in the event the junior Senator from Illinois becomes President and especially if the House and Senate are veto proof.

1). Strict new gun laws will be enacted even though he promised he would not.
2). The phrase 'In God We Trust' will be removed from all currency.
3). He will back away from his pledge to Israel and leave them to the wolves of Islam.
4). Hillary Clinton will be named to the Supreme Court.
5). Tax rates will return to their highest levels in 30 years.
6). The capital gains tax will be at least double current levels.
7). Retired Army General Wesley Clark will be named Secretary of Defense.
8). The borders will be 'basically open' to all comers. Especially those from the Middle East and South America ..
9). Amnesty will be granted to all illegals now in the U.S regardless of status or even gang members (MS-13). and
10). The war in Iraq will be brought to an abrupt end and the results will be tragic and the consequences to our military will be devastating.

I realize that my predictions may not sit too well with some people and the best we could all hope for is that I am totally wrong. Any bets?

Jerry Molen

Today's Question:

2008-09-10T14:21:00.001-06:00

Q. What’s the difference between a community organizer and a pig?

A. A pig is useful.

Wackobama

2008-06-04T05:19:00.003-06:00

...thanks to Curmudgeonly and Skeptical

More info on old D.B.

2008-05-09T05:51:00.001-06:00

Heres a link to a Seattle paper with more coverage:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/356407_cooper26.html?source=mypi

D.B.Cooper alive and well?

2008-03-26T05:45:00.002-06:00

D.B. Cooper's parachute possibly found

By GENE JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 4 minutes ago

The FBI is analyzing a torn, tangled parachute found buried by children in southwest Washington to determine whether it might have been used by famed plane hijacker D.B. Cooper, the agency said.

Children playing outside their home near Amboy found the chute's fabric sticking up from the ground in an area where their father had been grading a road, agent Larry Carr said Tuesday. They pulled it out as far as they could, then cut the parachute's ropes with scissors.

The children had seen recent media coverage of the case — the FBI launched a publicity campaign last fall, hoping to generate tips to solve the 36-year-old mystery — and they urged their dad to call the agency.

"When we went to the public, the whole idea was that the public is going to bring the answers to us," Carr said. "This is exactly what we were hoping for."

A man identifying himself as Dan Cooper — later mistakenly but enduringly identified as D.B. Cooper — hijacked a Northwest Orient flight from Portland, Ore., to Seattle in November 1971, claiming he had a bomb.

When the plane landed at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, he released the passengers in exchange for $200,000 and asked to be flown to Mexico. He apparently parachuted from the plane's back stairs somewhere near the Oregon border.

Agents doubt he survived because conditions were poor and the terrain was rough, but few signs of his fate have been found.

Carr spoke with the children's father, whom he declined to identify, early this month and learned the chute was white, the same color as Cooper's.

And when Carr overlaid the family's address onto a map investigators made in the early days of the investigation, he learned another encouraging fact: They lived right in Cooper's most probable landing zone, between Green and Bald mountains.

Carr hopped in his car and drove down. He dug around the property for about 45 minutes, unsuccessfully looking for a harness or other remains from the parachute, but the children weren't home, and the father wasn't sure exactly where they found it.

There are no obvious markings on the parachute to indicate whether it's the type Cooper used, a Navy Backpack 6 with a 26-foot canopy, Carr said. He's hoping a member of the public who has expertise in the parachutes will come forward and confirm whether it's the right kind before the FBI bothers to excavate the property. Barring that, the agency could turn to scientific analysis of the fabric.

"We've got to be pretty darn sure we're not wasting time and money here," he said.

If it is Cooper's parachute, that will solve one mystery — where he apparently landed — but it will raise another, Carr said.

In 1980, a family on a picnic found $5,880 of Cooper's money in a bag on a Columbia River beach, near Vancouver. Some investigators believed it might have been washed down to the beach by the Washougal River. But if Cooper landed near Amboy and stashed the money bag there, there's no way it could have naturally reached the Washougal.

"If this is D.B. Cooper's parachute, the money could not have arrived at its discovery location by natural means," Carr said. "That whole theory is out the window.

(editor note: I've been fascinated by the D.B.Cooper saga since it first happened and wondered if he made it.....over the years, a new installment like the above appears...what if? )

Ole Ted and political deals....

2008-02-26T08:45:00.002-06:00

Mencken on the New Deal

2008-02-18T19:27:00.003-06:00

This alert came from a listener. He was reading "The Bad Boy of Baltimore" a biography of H.L. Mencken by Marion Elizabeth Rodgers. On page 409 of that book he finds the following"

"By the mid-1930's, thanks to the New Deal, all that self-reliance had changed, prompting Mencken to declare: 'There is no genuine justice in any scheme of feeding and coddling the loafer whose only ponderable energies are devoted wholly to reproduction. Nine-tenths of the rights he bellows for are really privileges and he does nothing to deserve them.' Despite the billions spent on an individual, 'he can be lifted transiently but always slips back again.' Thus, the New Deal had been 'the most stupendous digenetic enterprise ever undertaken by man.... We not only acquired a vast population of morons, we have inculcated all morons, old or young, with the doctrine that the decent and industrious people of the country are bound to support them for all time. The effects of that doctrine are bound to be disastrous soon or late.'

When someone asked, "And what, Mr. Mencken, would you do about the unemployed?" He looked up with a bland expression. "We could start by taking away their vote," he said, deadpan. Mencken was not surprised when the majority disagreed. "There can be nothing even remotely approaching a rational solution of the fundamental national problems until we face them in a realistic spirit," he later reflected, and that was impossible so long as educated Americans remained responsive "to the Roosevelt buncombe."

"Buncombe," by the way, means a county in North Carolina, a city in Illinois or another word for "nonsense."

(from boortz.com)

Just for the art of it....

2008-02-12T07:34:00.001-06:00

Sneaky little bastard Dept.

2008-02-01T09:38:00.001-06:00

Short story: Dwarves in suitcases rifling bus travelers' bags

From London's Telegraph comes this nominee for the Annals of Weird Crime:

Criminal gangs are using dwarves in a ruse to steal from the luggage holds of long-distance coaches, by hiding them inside suitcases, according to police.

The bizarre crime is on the rise in Sweden and officers say thieves have got away with thousands of pounds in cash, jewellery and other valuables in recent months. Gangs are said to sneak the dwarves into the luggage hold, hidden inside baggage. Then, once the journey has begun, the stowaways are free to rifle through the bags of other passengers without fear of being apprehended.

Before the coach arrives at its destination the dwarves take their loot back into their suitcase, zip themselves inside and wait to be collected by their partners in crime. ...

This sounds too weird to be true, but there are multiple sources with much the same story, including a Spiegel report that quotes a spokeswoman for the bus line. "We think it is a short, young person," Ingvar Ryggasjo, sales manager for Swebus, tells Spiegel. "We are taking extra security measures and are thinking of installing video surveillance cameras."

The Local, a Swedish publication, quotes a victim. "It is not known whether the thief in this case was a bantam adult or a child," The Local reports.

Posted by Michael Winter at 04:56 PM/ET, January 31, 2008 in Crime, Europe, Offbeat | Permalink

(
Afterthought: What if all the bags are piled on top of him and he can't get out)

And now from the Iowa Legislature......

2008-01-26T09:12:00.000-06:00

I guess we're just not a serious people anymore

Because we let the enemy denounce us and call for our deaths in our heartland

The Iowa Legislature started just over a week ago and some people were upset before the first issue was every addressed.

When the session began, a Muslim Imam began the prayer in the Iowa Legislature. This is where the controversy begins. The prayer asked for “victory over those who disbelieve,” and “protection from the great Satan” among other things.

Pastor Steve Smith of the Evangelical Free Church in Albert City is among those concerned about the Muslim prayer. Rev. Smith admits that he doesn’t know about all the levels of Muslim but knows that the Jihadists believe those in the U.S. are the great Satan.

No, I’m not saying all Muslims are our enemies, just the ones who want us dead.

But here’s the icing on the cake.

When asked about the prayer, Senator Steve Kettering replied in an e-mail that he had not heard the prayer, which did not take place in the Senate chambers.
“I cannot tell you what was said. I have received e-mail regarding this, but since it did not occur on the Senate side I do not have much information,” Kettering said. “ I should point out that the senate had a Catholic priest for their opening."

Oh, I get it, just having a Catholic Priest speak (*cough*Crusades*cough*) is completely the same thing as allowing a muslim to openly call for violent Jihad in the State House.

Scorpius
01/24 at 02:33 PM •
(20) Extra Credit • (0) pings • Pass it on...

...thanks to http://www.sondrak.com/index.php/

You ain't gonna like losing.

2007-11-14T15:46:00.000-06:00

One of the best points of view that I have heard on the current political situation concerning the war on terror.

"You ain't gonna like losing." Unfortunately, Author unknown

President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq . Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WW2. It is not.

Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.

Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not.

And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WW2 than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WW2 and worked together to win that war.

Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort.

Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military. Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining.

You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch even enlisted!

And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance and with prayers for our country and our troops!

Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.

A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.

There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.

No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.

It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorrah and the Land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would actually require some sacrifices.

We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one-third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause...Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits.

So...we either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the Mall.

.....Eva Tympalska, PLLC

/Or "Quack Science"

2007-10-28T09:00:00.000-06:00

DavidWarrenOnline
ESSAYS ON OUR TIMES

October 28, 2007

"Irrefutable science"

According to three doctors at the K.S. Hegde Medical Academy in Mangalore, India, writing in the journal Medical Hypotheses, giving up smoking can kill you. Arunachalam Kumar, Kasaragod Mallya, and Jairaj Kumar were “struck by the more than casual relationship between the appearance of lung cancer and an abrupt and recent cessation of the smoking habit in many, if not most, cases." In 182 of the 312 cases they had treated, an habitual smoker of at least a pack a day, for at least a quarter-century, had developed lung cancer shortly after he gave up smoking. They reasonably surmised, that a biological mechanism protects smokers against cancer, which is strengthened by years of determined smoking. But when the smoker quits, “a surge and spurt in re-activation of bodily healing and repair mechanisms of chronic smoke-damaged respiratory epithelia is induced and spurred by an abrupt discontinuation of habit,” and “goes awry, triggering uncontrolled cell division and tumour genesis." One immediately posits an evolutionary argument that could support this hypothesis. Man is the only animal who cooks his food, and thousands of generations of our ancestors, pent up in smoke-filled caves, could easily account for this biological mechanism. Since the findings of Kumar, Mallya, and Kumar coincide with my own medical hypothesis, based on my own anecdotal evidence, I hasten to embrace them. Several deceased friends and family, starting with my paternal grandfather, perished shortly after they quit smoking -- not only from lung cancer, but from other causes ranging from previously-undiagnosed heart disease to industrial accident. The same general principle would apply: that a body long accustomed to a (frankly addictive) substance, goes haywire when the substance is removed. Verily, in the good old days, people instinctively understood things like that, without the need for medical research. And it was inconceivable that, for instance, hospitals would prevent patients from smoking, who were already medically challenged on other fronts. More widely disseminated medical literature has documented other risks of non-smoking, that include neurotic depression, violent irritability, and obscene weight gain. But these tend to be discounted because they lead to death only indirectly. Likewise, indirect evidence for the dangers of not smoking comes from the 150th anniversary number of Atlantic magazine. P.J. O'Rourke points to (actual, serious) U.S. historical statistics showing that, in the period 1973-94, annual per capita consumption of cigarettes FELL from 4,148 to 2,493. In the same period, the incidence of lung and bronchial cancer ROSE from 42.5 to 57.1 cases per 100,000 population. In the past I have flagged U.N. statistics showing that life expectancy was nicely proportional to tobacco consumption, internationally -- so that e.g. Japan and South Korea were respectively first and second in BOTH life expectancy AND tobacco consumption. Whereas, the lowest tobacco consumption was in “basketcase” Third World countries, where we also found some of the shortest life expectancies. I think we could also find historical statistics showing that there is a reliable, worldwide relationship between rising tobacco consumption, and rising life expectancy, nation by nation, throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. As Al Gore likes to say, "the science is irrefutable." The weakness in that last statement being, that there is no such thing as irrefutable science. There is nothing in the whole history of science, including physiology and meteorology, that is not tentative. And while, in astronomy, I remain convinced that the earth revolves around the sun, I would not put all my money even on that proposition, but, given attractively long odds, reserve a penny bet on the sun going round the earth. If my reader is planning to give up smoking in the face of what I report, then courage to him, and I will not joke, “Go ahead, make my day.” I am not in the pay of the tobacco lobby -- on the contrary, I seem to be paying them -- and am in principle indifferent to what substances others decide to use or abuse. My dander rises only when they interfere with my own freedom, through the childish, petty, and essentially totalitarian public campaigns against harmless smokers -- buttressed by scientific claims weaker than the above. There is one more hypothesis with which I would like to leave my reader today. It is that the kind of quack “science” that was used to ban smoking has now mutated into the kind that is used to flog global warming. It should have been resisted then; it should certainly be resisted now.

David Warren

Denmark and the Muslim Experience...

2007-10-25T03:56:00.000-06:00

Subject: How Denmark Faces The Muslim Challenge!

By Susan MacAllen
In 1978-9 I was living and studying in Denmark.
But in 1978 - even in Copenhagen, one didn't see Muslim
immigrants. The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its new brand of socialist liberalism - one in development since the conservatives had lost power in 1929 - a system where no worker had to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count
upon the state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time. The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking, progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies. Denmark boasted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a superior educational
system and a history of humanitarianism.

Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies - it offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism. How could it
have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the streets - all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come back to bite?

By the 1990's the growing urban Muslim population was obvious - and its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious. Years of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves. As the Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the
decadence of Denmark's liberal way of life, the Danes - once so welcoming - began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.

The New York Post in 2002 ran an article by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard, in which they forecasted accurately that the growing immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they reported:

"Muslim immigrants..constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending."

"Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are Non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes."

"Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane."

"Forced marriages - promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death - are one problem."

"Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark's Muslim population grows large enough - a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim."

It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws. An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and the U.S.: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives. Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim Leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden - before
the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa - who as a teenager had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers - and I wonder what she would say today.

In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70 years - one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal
unfettered immigration. Today Denmark has the strictest immigration policies in Europe. ( Its effort to protect itself has been met with accusations of "racism" by liberal media across Europe - even as other Governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by years of
too-lax immigration.) If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark's history, culture, and a Danish language test. You must live in Denmark for 7 years before applying for citizenship. You must demonstrate an
intent to work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into Denmark, you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won't find it so easy anymore to move your friends and family to Denmark with you. You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen. Although your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and
language schools in Denmark, they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren't.

In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government's welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary. In other words, the welfare system as it existed was being exploited by immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. "We are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration. The calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now," he said.

A large thorn in the side of Denmark's imams is the Minister of Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj. She makes no bones about the new policy toward immigration, "The number of foreigners coming to the country makes a difference," Hvilshoj says, "There is an inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can
receive the foreigners that come." And on Muslim immigrants needing to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, "In my view, Denmark should be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to question
democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech."

Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone. Perhaps to test her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family
of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that the family's thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the
payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done in Denmark. The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape
unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time - in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.

Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have tightened. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living, humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a nation at civil war
with supporters of Sharia law. And meanwhile, Americans clamor for stricter immigration policies, and demand an end to state welfare programs that allow many immigrants to live on the public dole. As we in America look at the enclaves of Muslims amongst us, and see those who enter our shores too easily, dare live on our taxes, yet refuse to
embrace our culture, respect our traditions, participate in our legal system, obey our laws, speak our language, appreciate our history . . we would do well to look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own.