Goodbye Barry - Welcome Home AMERICA!

Monday, November 22, 2010

Islam - The "Make-It-Up-As-You-Go-Along" Religion

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a travel warning to Muslim airline passengers on U.S. aircraft in response to the Transportation Safety Administration’s "enhanced pat down" policy that went into effect in late October.

CAIR said Muslims who object to full-body scans for religious reasons should know their rights if they are required to undergo a pat-down, including asking for the procedure to be done in a private place. In addition, CAIR offered a “special recommendation” for Muslim women who wear a hijab, telling them they should tell the TSA officer that they may be searched only around the head and neck. (And the Muslim woman should then be escorted to the nearest jail for violating established security procedures)

In the “special recommendations for Muslim women who wear hijab,” it states: “Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.” (And then the Muslim woman should be shown to the street-side exit from the airport.)

It also states: “Instead of the pat-down, you can always request to pat down your own scarf, including head and neck area, and have the officers per form a chemical swipe of your hands.” (REQUEST DENIED!! There is no constitutional guarantee of a "right to fly"; comply, stay home, or return to your Sandbox of Origin.)

The new TSA pat-downs involving “head-to-toe” screening techniques follow recent airliner bombing attempts. Passengers who reject a full-body scan or who are selected for secondary screening may be searched using the enhanced pat-down.

“Pat downs are one important tool to help TSA detect hidden and dangerous items such as explosives,” a TSA statement issued on Oct. 28 stated. “Passengers should continue to expect an unpredictable mix of security layers that include explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams, among others.” (And we don't do "profiling" because of what? Oh, yeah... it might hurt somebody's feelings - instead of killing a couple of hundred innocent bystanders.)

Posted on its Web site under “TSA’s Head-to-Toe Screening Policies,” the agency said how people are dressed may lead to closer inspection, including baggy or loose clothing. Those policies also include individuals being searched by a “professional” of the same sex. “It is TSA's policy that passengers should be screened by an officer of the same gender in a professional, respectful manner,” the policy reads.

In February, the Figh Council of North America, a group of Islamic scholars, issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners violate Islamic law. (Another fatwa? Islam definitely seems to be a "make-it-up-as-you-go-along" religion... I'd bet money that nowhere in the Qu'ran is the term "full-body scanner" seen. Is there something in the USA that inconveniences a Muslim? If so, they can go Figh themselves, and issue a fatwa incorporating that inconvenience into their religious "rulings".)

“It is a violation of clear Islamic teaching that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,” the ruling states. “Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of the faith. The Qu’ran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.” (If they are clothed, they have met the requirement "to cover their private parts." It's not their fault technology have circumvented their efforts. But, it IS the fault of the Muslims that such security precautions are necessary. If you can't live under the laws of the United States... GO BACK TO YOUR SANDBOX OF ORIGIN, and STAY THERE!)

CAIR endorsed the fatwa, according to a Feb. 21 article in the Detroit Free Press. (I don't CARE about CAIR and their fatwas - assimilate and live by the laws of your host country... or return to camel country!)

Sunday, November 14, 2010

If I Ran The United States, How Would I Attempt To Modify It?

Suppose you awakened one morning to discover that you had been appointed imperial leader of the United States while you slept. What would you do with that ultimate human power? Would you rule or would you govern? Would you dictate or negotiate? Would you desire to be reasonably benevolent, or would you rule with an iron hand? Would you have personal advisers or boot-licking lackeys? If you chose to have advisers, would you actually listen to their advice and carefully consider it, or would they simply be "window dressing"?

The world of politics is treacherously labyrinthine, as evidenced by the almost annual coups d'├ętat (the sudden, illegal deposition of a government) somewhere on this planet. For centuries a ruler's worst enemies were his closest relatives (it was a matter of "succession to the throne")! Second place on the "enemies list" seems to have been held by the general(s) in charge of a ruler's military forces, and Julius Caesar was stabbed twenty-three times - unto death - from dagger wounds inflicted by members of his own Senate.

Today, total strangers are also assassins of leaders. In 1950 an attempt was made on President Harry Truman's life by two Puerto Rican nationalists. Lee Harvey Oswald, with no known relationship to President John F. Kennedy, took that President's life. A lone Turk attempted to assassinate Pope John Paul II. The Pope was shot and severely wounded as he entered St. Peter's Square in the Vatican. The would-be assassin, Mehmet Ali Agca, was a member of a Turkish terrorist organization known as the Gray Wolves. The list goes on and on, showing perhaps hundreds of attempts we have never heard of.

Politics and large scale leadership positions can be a very dangerous place for those who have the strength of their convictions, but a safe-haven for the cowards of the world. Someone once said that "The United States of America has the best politicians money can buy", and money apparently does buy them. Who - enjoying good mental health - would spend millions of dollars running for an office that only pays in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars? An altruist? If you can show me an altruist in national politics, I'll show you a nun in a brothel!

If I became the Grand Poo-bah of the USA, there would definitely be some changes made. Let's begin with the most hotly debated issue affecting primarily the southwestern United States - "Immigration Reform": We have federal laws in-place forbidding entry into our country without the proper authorization, but the feds choose not to enthusiastically enforce those laws. Illegal immigrants have demonstrated their disregard for our laws simply by their unauthorized presence within our borders. Our government, disregarding the will of the people, has chosen to reward the illegal aliens by allowing them to not only remain in the country, but to provide them with benefits that average American citizens are denied. What's wrong with this picture?

In my world here's what undocumented visitors to our country would get... NOTHING!

1. It would be a violation of the law for illegal aliens to be given bank loans and, if they were given, the loan officer, the bank manager and the president of the bank issuing such loan would be arrested and prosecuted.
2. Housing would not be available to anybody unable to prove citizenship or government authorization. Anyone providing housing in violation of that law would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
3. Medical care - for anything other than life saving procedures - would not be available to illegal aliens. Hospitals would be required to report anyone without documentation - who requested a life saving procedure - to Homeland Security/I.C.E. Division. Failure to do so would make the offending medical personnel subject to arrest and prosecution.
4. Illegals would not be eligible for welfare, unemployment insurance or Social Security benefits. Any agent of a municipal, county, state or federal agency permitting illegal aliens to apply for such benefits would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
5. Any child born to an illegal immigrant would not receive automatic citizenship status upon birth. The child is determined to be as illegal as the parent(s) inasmuch as it was transported into the USA in violation of our immigration laws.
6. There would be no amnesty for reasons other than political persecution, and even then amnesty would be on a case-by-case basis. There would be no automatic amnesty.
7. Border enforcement would be the responsibility of the "National Guard". What is the purpose of a "National Guard" if not to guard the nation? The Governor of each state has the right and responsibility to activate that state's National Guard in times of emergency. What's the emergency? A subtle, silent "invasion" of our country - primarily across our southern borders.
(The presence of a foreigner in Mexico without proper authorization is classified as a felony. The penalty for the first offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 2 years. The penalty for the second offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 10 years. The Mexican government seems to take its sovereignty much more seriously than the US government takes ours.)

My second objective would be the elimination of Obamacare - the mandatory national health care program. The people don't want it... but the left-wing, bleeding-heart, Marxist, liberal-"progressives" in charge do. It's just another way for the government to increase citizen dependency upon the "Nanny State".

1. The government does not have the Constitutional authority to require citizens to buy a non-competitive government product or service, nor do they have the authority to monopolize any industry by legislating its competitors out of business. On the other hand, the current administration doesn't seem to be aware that we even have that pesky document call the Constitution.

2.Healthcare for all U.S. citizens is desirable, but those of us who have our own health insurance should not be forced to purchase that demanded by the government. Again, life-saving procedures should be available to all, regardless of their ability to pay. Colds, sprains and other sources of discomfort not being seen as "life-threatening" should not be treated on the public dime. Deal with it - as responsible people have for centuries.

3. No single "class" of people (i.e. - illegal residents) should be free from any taxation imposed upon the majority of citizens. Nor should our elected officials be free from the same healthcare system that would be forced upon the general population.

4. Healthcare should be available nationwide, and at reasonable rates in a competitive environment. Competitors should not be restricted to providing coverage only in a particular state or region as they are now.

Next I'll tackle "Outsourcing". This is probably the single greatest source of unemployment in the United States. Outsourcing is the practice of establishing production facilities and/or subcontracting the production of U.S. goods and services to a foreign nation. Why are manufacturers turning to outsourcing more and more? Quite simply it saves them money. How? Because the countries that are benefiting from outsourced American jobs do not have to engage in collective bargaining with the AFL-CIO and the SEIU. Labor Unions are responsible for the recent collapse of two-thirds of the U.S. automotive industry. Automotive assembly line workers in the U.S. (who may not even have a high school diploma) are making (as opposed to "earning") - on the average - approximately 60% more in their pay and benefits package (negotiated by the UAW, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO) than a tenured college professor. At the same time, we still produce an inferior automobile compared to Japan and much of Europe. Why? Because the union contracts make it almost impossible for Ford, GM and Chrysler to fire anybody. The attitude has become one of - just show up for work even if you don't do anything of quality... or anything period, since they can't fire you without facing potential work stoppages from your union brethren. How would I rectify this situation?

1. Eliminate labor unions. (I can hear almost the screams of outrage from the brotherhoods now!) I can understand why they love their union-supported "job". Union members are at the very top of the labor pay scale - stopping just short of junior corporate executives. In closed-shop states (union membership required in order to work) the cost of living is based upon union-scale wages, which is fine for the workers of that state. However, the increased cost of that which they produce, and consume, is felt nation-wide.

2. Collective bargaining between the employees and the corporation/company for which they work would be allowed in order to establish a fair wage and benefit package for the workers. There will be no outside involvement other than independent arbitrators

3. Any American corporation outsourcing jobs outside the 50 United States and its Trust Territories would be required to do the following:

a. Pay normal import taxes upon any product produced either by their overseas corporation, or any foreign subcontractor.

b. Pay complete unemployment compensation, including medical insurance, for each American job or product outsourced to a foreign location.

c. Any American business entity establishing its headquarters overseas will be treated as a foreign corporation and subject to all tariffs imposed upon a foreign corporation, plus be subject to a tax equal to the cost of providing American workers - equal to the total number of foreign employees of that corporation - with unemployment insurance, including medical benefits.

And THAT'S just for openers!


(and if you don't... CONGRATULATIONS!)