An excellent blog. he has been writing since the start - hopeful, sad, realistic, angry, depressed, demoralized, resilient, and hopeful - all describe the stages this man has lived through. Better than reading stuff from newspapers that clearly show they have no sense of history or purpose and cannot fathom Bush winning at anything in their narrowly constructed paradigm.
Iraq The Model
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Monday, July 23, 2007
Who is more serious about security
As simplistic as it may at first appear, the argument or question is valid. First we must consider what the bill, proposed and bantered about in the Congress - John Doe Bill, would do, according to Democrats:
- protect innocent law abiding Muslim Americans (or anyone for that matter) from being discriminated against.
In return, they ask that we permit lawsuits against anyone and everyone regardless of facts and let the courts sort it out.
They are more concerned with ensuring no one is discriminated against than they are with protecting our security. The problem, while a noble ideal - to prevent discrimination - will never be erased by virtue of a lawsuit.
An example - Muslim A and Non Muslim. Non muslim doesn't like his neighbor and called the police and or Department of Homeland Security and or the FBI on his neighbor and says he is a terrorist. The FBI/DHS go and arrest the guy, take his computer, his files, his phone records - and then they find nothing. Democrats want Muslim A to be able to sue Non Muslim.
Same people - Non muslim doesn't like his neighbor and called the police and or Department of Homeland Security and or the FBI on his neighbor and says he is a terrorist and has been acting strange. The FBI/DHS go and talk to the guy and after talking to him, they arrest the guy, take his computer, his files, his phone records - and then they find he had links to al qaida. Democrats want Muslim A to be able to sue Non Muslim but in court, the facts would win out and Non Muslim would be exonerated. ONLY after sepnding $10,000 - $20,000 in attorneys fees, days/weeks of stress, public ridicule, labeled as a Islamophobe ... and when exonerated, the labels would never be rescinded - they would remain, he would remain a symbol of tattling. he may be free, no lawsuits, but he would be tens of thousands of dollars poorer and would lose whatever he had of his name and reputation.
That is what the Democrats want to occur with the John Doe bill.
If I suspect a person about to get on a plane - I will have to consider: is there enough evidence to convict, or am I simply suspicious. If I am just suspicious, I should cancel my ticket and take another flight. THAT in itself demonstrates what the left would call Islamophobia even if no one else knows about it. Yte that will occur more often than not. Or, I will have to decide whether I want to be sued. what facts are known, do I have funds for lawyers, am I willing to undergo public attack and ridicule for good faith. No, so let the guy get on the plane, I won't and if it blows up - the Democrats are complicit in the deaths of the people on the plane for foolishly catering to their consituency - lawyers, at the expense of our security.
- protect innocent law abiding Muslim Americans (or anyone for that matter) from being discriminated against.
In return, they ask that we permit lawsuits against anyone and everyone regardless of facts and let the courts sort it out.
They are more concerned with ensuring no one is discriminated against than they are with protecting our security. The problem, while a noble ideal - to prevent discrimination - will never be erased by virtue of a lawsuit.
An example - Muslim A and Non Muslim. Non muslim doesn't like his neighbor and called the police and or Department of Homeland Security and or the FBI on his neighbor and says he is a terrorist. The FBI/DHS go and arrest the guy, take his computer, his files, his phone records - and then they find nothing. Democrats want Muslim A to be able to sue Non Muslim.
Same people - Non muslim doesn't like his neighbor and called the police and or Department of Homeland Security and or the FBI on his neighbor and says he is a terrorist and has been acting strange. The FBI/DHS go and talk to the guy and after talking to him, they arrest the guy, take his computer, his files, his phone records - and then they find he had links to al qaida. Democrats want Muslim A to be able to sue Non Muslim but in court, the facts would win out and Non Muslim would be exonerated. ONLY after sepnding $10,000 - $20,000 in attorneys fees, days/weeks of stress, public ridicule, labeled as a Islamophobe ... and when exonerated, the labels would never be rescinded - they would remain, he would remain a symbol of tattling. he may be free, no lawsuits, but he would be tens of thousands of dollars poorer and would lose whatever he had of his name and reputation.
That is what the Democrats want to occur with the John Doe bill.
If I suspect a person about to get on a plane - I will have to consider: is there enough evidence to convict, or am I simply suspicious. If I am just suspicious, I should cancel my ticket and take another flight. THAT in itself demonstrates what the left would call Islamophobia even if no one else knows about it. Yte that will occur more often than not. Or, I will have to decide whether I want to be sued. what facts are known, do I have funds for lawyers, am I willing to undergo public attack and ridicule for good faith. No, so let the guy get on the plane, I won't and if it blows up - the Democrats are complicit in the deaths of the people on the plane for foolishly catering to their consituency - lawyers, at the expense of our security.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Food, Fuel, and Ice Cream
We have real problems, here on terra firma - real problems, right now. Hunger, malnutrition, poverty, disease. Forget what the future holds for as catastrophic as some in the UN paint the dire global warming scenario - starvation will come first before anyone has water problems.
Assume that the supply remains the same or increases by a small percent each year.
6 billion people need to be fed.
China has 12% arable land. Its population increases and its ability to feed its people decreases. It buys up large supplies of food otherwise used for other areas of the world.
Someone will suffer. Someone will die.
Farmers are converting their fields to cash crops - in this sense - cash crops being biofuel crops. Not wheat or grains ... they pay much less.
As the farmers do this, someone will suffer, someone will die.
Combine China and the farmers converting their fields ... and you have major problems today and tomorrow it will be dire straits for millions upon millions.
As more conversion occurs, costs will rise.
Food for the world
The result will be someone will suffer, millions will starve.
And those cows we eat - need feed and that feed is now much costlier
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article2080599.ece
The result will be millions starving, costs increasing by hundreds of millions world wide and the benefit - not much.
Build a nuclear power plant or four, cut back on use of petroleum by reducing plastics ... and you'll help the earth more than all the corn/fuel you produce and people won't starve and die and you'll be able to expend all your energy worrying about the glaciers melting and learning to swim.
It must be nice to have a clear conscience.
Assume that the supply remains the same or increases by a small percent each year.
6 billion people need to be fed.
China has 12% arable land. Its population increases and its ability to feed its people decreases. It buys up large supplies of food otherwise used for other areas of the world.
Someone will suffer. Someone will die.
Farmers are converting their fields to cash crops - in this sense - cash crops being biofuel crops. Not wheat or grains ... they pay much less.
As the farmers do this, someone will suffer, someone will die.
Combine China and the farmers converting their fields ... and you have major problems today and tomorrow it will be dire straits for millions upon millions.
As more conversion occurs, costs will rise.
Food for the world
The result will be someone will suffer, millions will starve.
And those cows we eat - need feed and that feed is now much costlier
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article2080599.ece
The result will be millions starving, costs increasing by hundreds of millions world wide and the benefit - not much.
Build a nuclear power plant or four, cut back on use of petroleum by reducing plastics ... and you'll help the earth more than all the corn/fuel you produce and people won't starve and die and you'll be able to expend all your energy worrying about the glaciers melting and learning to swim.
It must be nice to have a clear conscience.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Religion of Peace
Back in April, an article about al Qaeda's plans for the UK.
then
ABC News Brian Ross reported on June 18, 2007 that 'large teams of newly trained suicide bombers" were "being sent to the United States and Europe" after "an al Qaeda/Taliban training camp graduation cermony held June 9."
Then the events in London and Glasgow.
ABC news Brian Ross is again reporting that secret documents show the US fears a spectacular attack during the summer. These warnings are reminiscent of those in the summer of 2001.
Further warnings were for Germany and the Czech Republic, and Britain.
Of course, Mayor Livingston in London, tells us not all Muslims are bad. Only a fool would believe all Muslims are bad, but thank you Mr Livingston for letting us know how you feel. I am sure, when the attck occurs wherever it might be, you will be sure to tell us it wasn't all Muslims as if that will make much difference to 100,000 people. But, just in case - you will be able to tell us all how you feel, if you are alive that is after the practictioners of the religion of peace show you how peaceful they can be.
It is not a matter of toleration - we can all get along. it isn't a matter of acceptance - we (non Muslims) are very accepting. It is a matter of the majority of good and decent Muslims taking their religion back, because if they do not, it is immaterial whether they are good and decent for they will be indirectly complicit in this most heinous crime. I understand the complexity of this and how complicated the issues are but for the 100,000 or more, the complexity will not matter. And please Mr Livingston do not explain to us that we caused this by Iraqor Afghanistan. All one need do is look at Gaza to see the true intent of these practitioners of peace - they have slaughtered one another and are not finished yet.
Unfortunately, as these things go, by the time it gets to this stage, we will have to be very lucky or it is a matter of waiting it out and then responding.
then
ABC News Brian Ross reported on June 18, 2007 that 'large teams of newly trained suicide bombers" were "being sent to the United States and Europe" after "an al Qaeda/Taliban training camp graduation cermony held June 9."
Then the events in London and Glasgow.
ABC news Brian Ross is again reporting that secret documents show the US fears a spectacular attack during the summer. These warnings are reminiscent of those in the summer of 2001.
Further warnings were for Germany and the Czech Republic, and Britain.
Of course, Mayor Livingston in London, tells us not all Muslims are bad. Only a fool would believe all Muslims are bad, but thank you Mr Livingston for letting us know how you feel. I am sure, when the attck occurs wherever it might be, you will be sure to tell us it wasn't all Muslims as if that will make much difference to 100,000 people. But, just in case - you will be able to tell us all how you feel, if you are alive that is after the practictioners of the religion of peace show you how peaceful they can be.
It is not a matter of toleration - we can all get along. it isn't a matter of acceptance - we (non Muslims) are very accepting. It is a matter of the majority of good and decent Muslims taking their religion back, because if they do not, it is immaterial whether they are good and decent for they will be indirectly complicit in this most heinous crime. I understand the complexity of this and how complicated the issues are but for the 100,000 or more, the complexity will not matter. And please Mr Livingston do not explain to us that we caused this by Iraqor Afghanistan. All one need do is look at Gaza to see the true intent of these practitioners of peace - they have slaughtered one another and are not finished yet.
Unfortunately, as these things go, by the time it gets to this stage, we will have to be very lucky or it is a matter of waiting it out and then responding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments