I have, previously, expressed the helplessness that comes from seeing what is happening to our country and not knowing what I, personally, can do about it. I think a lot of us have the same feelings. There really is nothing that one individual has within his ability that can influence the people who hold sway to stop the causes of ruin and apathy which are the ruin of our great nation.

I have, though, realized that we bloggers at Town Hall, even in our meager numbers, have one ability we can call upon that just might be able to negate the effect of the evil being done. What is it that we can do? Simple really. We can refuse to abide by these dictates being issued by various authorities that are so clearly designed to placate the enemies we face. I’m not saying, necessarily, that we break any laws, for, up to this point no laws have been made to that end. But there have been opinions published and guidelines submitted that, if allowed to become reality, would lead us straight and willingly to destruction.

Some bloggers, as we can easily see, have instinctively adopted this tactic as a natural reflex to the threat they have perceived. You can easily recognize these patriotic wordsmiths by their indignant, and fabulously vindictive railings against these who have chosen confrontation with us. You know who they are. We all comment as to our agreement with them and their patriotic stance.

To further describe the directives I am talking to, a case in point: A recent press release by the Dept. of Homeland Security stated that it would be to our advantage if government agencies would refrain from referring to Muslims, Islam, or Jihad, as being associated with terrorism or radical extreme philosophies. This was decided after enlisting the consultation of two radical, extremist Islamic groups infamous as being supporters and financial contributors to Al Quaeda, Hamas, the PLO, and various other Islamic terror organizations. There was a complete list of terms the Muslim advocacy groups considered disrespectful and insulting that they wanted the government of the USA and their citizens to quit using.

Another case relative to my point is the UN’s Council on Human Rights, the recent replacement for the UN Human Rights Commission, and their latest adoption of what they call an "Output Document of Norm". This is a statement issued by a council or committee when they do not have the support required to pass a resolution on the matter if voted on, but still insist on pushing their agenda down the world’s throat. The latest "Norm" was almost identical in content as the policy statement issued by the DHS I referred to above. It basically stated that the UN Council on Human Rights saw a benefit to the people of the world and their right to basic human liberties by their cessation of the use of inflammatory terminology being used in reference to or directed at Muslims or the religion of Islam. They went so far as to say that the right to freedom of expression and religion might have to be redefined in order to assure the right of Islam to not be discriminated against. They then gave the same list of terms to be avoided that was published by the DHS above.

Talk about audacity. Talk about human rights violations. The UN has, for its entire existance, has sought to rid the world of the United States and its most loyal ally Israel, and render the influence and power of these nations for the rights of all people of the world nonexistant, or, at the least, impotent. This subservience to the Muslim states and their crusade to enslave the world in the name of their god is abhorent and devoid of any semblence to protection of freedom or rights of the people of the world.

We can resist and make a real difference by following the example of Gunny, On The Right, sr8t talk, and other fearless bloggers here at TH and not comply or be intimidated by their shameless and evil demands. We can endeavor to convince others to likewise refuse to comply with these directives, or whatever they are. And we shan’t be timid in our defiance either. Instead, we need to blog this subject into shame by posting a defiant blog everytime we see a new attempt to steal our freedoms. We need to insure that all of those we contact and network with are both aware and resistant to the ideals of and the insistance on compliance to these cowardly surrenderings to the evil of Islamofascists and the Muslim terrorists who allow its influence to decay their humanity.

This is something anyone can do. It doesn’t take a great deal of time or energy, and it is relatively free of the threat of any real reprisals. What it does require is a modicam of patriotism and a sense of desire to help keep ourselves free of tyranny. It also, by definition, requires the use of terms such as Islamofascism, Muslim terrorists, Islamic Jihad extremists, Jihadi murderers, etc., (be creative) whenever we address those we know of being the enemy. This is no comparison to the sacrifices our armed forces are making, and it definitely will not be seen by anyone as being of tremendous effect. But it is better than doing nothing, and, believe it or not, it eases the pain of helplessness in not being able to do anything at all. In fact….

this could be as much fun as Rush’s Operation Chaos.

• Jihad literally translates to "My Struggle". So do the words "Mein Kampf"
• innocent = Islam, Muslims, and believers, all else are guilty.
• evil = Anything not Islamic or Muslim. Includes any and everything else in the world.
• peace = A condition where all are at one with Alla. There can be no peace without Alla.
• aggression - Does not include action taken to punish non-believers as this divine. Otherwise, it is any act taken against Islam to hinder or stop the observance or propagation of Islam or bring harm to the believers.
• Anti-Islam scheme = Anything that hinders or prevents the exercise of Islamic law, such as putting up a defense against military action defined as Jihad. Synonomous with aggression.
• Islam teaches there is only one true religion and it is to be propagated to the entire world. Whenever they say "follow Alla’s teachings" or "obey Him" etc, they mean to spread Islam. It is divinely ordered and MUST be done.
• Only Muslims can be opressed. Non-believers who are experiencing Jihad against them are not opressed as it is for you to become free of the world and a slave to Alla.

Do you see the trend here? It is the same "theology" Al Qaeda believes, the same Jihad, the same "we are the only true religion" religion. Read carefully, see how they feed us the same death sentence. This is the difference in radical and moderate Muslims, the moderates try a lot harder to convert you before they take off your head.

Response by Scholar:

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Dear questioner,

Thanks for your question, and we implore Allah to help us serve the cause of Islam and to render this work for His Sake.

Actually, as it has been clarified again and again that while Jihad serves as a means of defense for Muslims against aggression, and acts as a deterrent factor against any anti-Islam scheme launched by enemies, it must never be construed as something synonymous with aggression.

Jihad is never a tool of waging war against the innocents; it's never a means of flexing muscles or bullying the weak and oppressed. Jihad in Islam is something unique, established to defend the divine message from being eliminated or hindered by its enemies.

Shedding more light on the true concept of Jihad, here is the statement made by Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, president of the Fiqh Council ofNorth America, states:

Allah says, "And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive with sincerity and under discipline. He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the religion of your father Abraham. It is He, Allah, Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Messenger may be a witness for you, and you be witnesses for mankind! So establish regular Prayer, give regular Charity, and hold fast to Allah! He is your Protector, the best to protect and the Best to help!" (Al-Hajj 22: 78)

Jihad is one of the most misunderstood, and abused aspects of Islam. There are some Muslims who exploit and misuse this concept for their own political objectives. There are many non-Muslims who misunderstand it. There are some non-Muslims who misinterpret it to discredit Islam and Muslims.

The word Jihad does not mean "Holy War". It means "struggle" or "striving". The word for war in the Qur’an is "Harb" or "Qital". Jihad means serious and sincere struggle on the personal as well as on the social level. It is a struggle to do good and to remove injustice, oppression and evil from the society. This struggle should be spiritual as well as social, economic and political. Jihad is to work hard to do right things. In the Qur’an this word is used in its different forms 33 times. It often comes with other Qur’anic concepts such as faith, repentance, righteous deeds and migration.

Jihad is to protect one’s faith and one’s human rights. Jihad is not a war always although it can take the form of war. Islam is the religion of peace, but it does not mean that Islam accepts oppression. Islam teaches that one should do one’s utmost to eliminate tension and conflict. Islam promotes non-violent means to bring change and reform. Actually, Islam urges that one should eliminate evil through peaceful means without the use of force as much as possible. In Islamic history from the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) until now, Muslims most of the time resisted oppression and struggled for liberation in non-violent and peaceful manners.

Islam teaches proper ethics in the situation of war also. The war is permissible in Islam, but only when other peaceful means such as dialogue, negotiations and treaties fail. It is a last resort and should be avoided as much as possible. Its purpose is not to convert people by force, or to colonize people or to acquire land or wealth or for self-glory. Its purpose is basically: defense of life, property, land, honor and freedom for oneself as well as defense of others from injustice and oppression.

1. Be strong so that your enemy fear you and should not attack you.
2. Do not begin the hostilities. Work for peace as much as possible.
3. Fight only those who fight, no collective punishment; non-combatants should not be harmed. Weapons of mass destruction should not be used.
4. Stop hostilities as soon as the other party is inclined to peace.
5. Observe the treaties and agreements as long as the enemy observes them.

Allah says very clearly: (Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not do aggression, for Allah loves not the aggressors.) (Al-Baqarah 2: 190)

It is well accepted that Western culture is the target of a radical, Islamofascist society that seeks to dominate the people of the world and make them subjects to Islam and sharia law which has as its head the prophet Muhammad and their god, Alla. We in the west have always believed that it was the religion of Islam that was the reason for the animosity they felt for us. While that is a valid assesment, the reasoning most responsible for their violent nature and the zeal with which they wage jihad is the tribal society and culture that has been their way of life everyday for 3000 plus years. In all those centuries, very little has changed except the study of that culture by outside observers who, in the recent past, has effectively written them off as old news, finding newer, more lucritive studies to pursue.

The culture of the tribal sysytem was once well understood and revered at once as remarkable in its complexity of tradition and simplistic for lack of formal power structure. A society that has evolved in vast empty expanses over centuries, tribalism has elements of both democratic and socialist society. It has been this tribal society’s rituals of feuding, vigilanty justice, family dependencies, democratic problem solving, and rural existance that has molded the attitude of the tribal members. Islam would not be a factor for the first fifteen hundred years and is more likely to have been fashioned for these desert people by to comply with the standing culture than to be a major social change.

It was this prevailing tribal culture that Phillip Carl Saltzman rediscovered, studied, and understood that lead to his writing "Culture and Conflict in the Middle East" pub. Humanity Books. A summary of the message offered in the book can enlighten those who find themselves under attack by Islamic jihad in a way that can give them an understanding of the enemy that might be of use in their defense. It is worth the read if for no other reason.

Sparsity is the name of the game in the middle eastern deserts. Large cities are few and very far between and do not have the resources necessary to support large populations of citizens. Nomadic tribes have preferred the sands and the freedom from rulers the desert provides. The resulting seperation from the law and religious authorities has created a feuding, threatening, clan/tribal form of society where immediate and some extended family is the basis for a sort of democratic anarchist socialism.

Having no immediate authority to settle disputes and protect property and life, a system of constant tension caused by threat of violent feud as reprisal for misbehavior has served to provide a fairly close knit, well behaved form of self rule. Any decisions that affect the tribe, which is essentially familial in make up, are discussed and argued with every man having his rightful say on the matter. A course of action is agreed upon and becomes a law.

To insure the tribe obeys the members adapt an aggressive attitude toward their neighbor and other tribal members with feigned actions of threat and agression and it becomes common knowledge that he will fight anyone who violates his respect of and obediance to the law or custom. Therefore through threat and intimidation tension becomes the normal mode of life in within the tribe. Public acts of provocation and intimidation become a tradition of ceremony and is understood as a statement of attitude, but is not seen as a overt act requiring reprisal.

When compared to society which employs central authority such as police and courts, normally at ease without tension between neighbors, this tribal tension appears threatening and evokes a perceived need for defensive reaction. The lack of a return gesture of agression would be seen by the tribe as a sign of weakness in that they expect and receive such from fellow tribe members. That is the way they think. Intimidate, receive a mutual act of intimidation, both are honorable, life goes on.

An example of this would go like so…

Abjil has labored a week to find and harvest a good supply of palm trunks for making water containers and has stored them in public view in front of his dwelling for the sake of convenience. When he awakes one morning and they are gone he immediately goes to his brother, cousin, and son-in-law to enlist their support. The group, brandishing clubs and knives enters and searches the dwellings of other tribe families. The members allow this because, first, they do not usually have the force necessary to prevent them from doing so, and second, because it is understood that this happens for reasons deemed acceptible by the tribe in whole. All had agreed that such searches are necessary and that anyone objecting is suspected to be the guilty party.

The missing palm trunks are found in plain sight at Jalil’s dwelling and they are seized and Jalil dragged out into the public area and made to cower and explain the reason he had the palm trunks and they were not with their rightful owner. If Jalil’s explanation sounds sincere and is deemed reasonable and acceptable, he is allowed to return to his business without any apology or sign of thanks. That would be a sign of weakness on the part of Abjil. Jalil is allowed to keep both hands where they are. Abjil is seen as being a righteous man and is revered for his sense of justice. But, if Jalil hesitates as in trying to fabricate an excuse for theft, Abjil is fully justified in dealing out what reprimand he deems worthy, including execution or amputation of the offending limb.

Might is right and just as roosters strut and put on the act of domination in the barnyard, tribal members make much to do of their ability to raise support and actively pursue those who violate his integrity. As a sign of this display of readiness for action, while returning to his dwelling, Abjil again acts out the feigned violence on those who are present in the area as a show of his victory. Intimidation, gang action, and readiness to use force are the tribal form of crime deterence.

Addressing and mutually agreeing to individual rights to property, the pursuit of individual pleasures, and the right to have a voice in tribal matters, plus the use of socialist methods of producing and distributing wealth, plus vigilante tactics employed in maintaining peace and preventing crime, all act to form a primitive, unique, and sufficient form of organized anarchy.

This should give us outsiders an understanding, though not an approval, of all the threats, marches, and demostrations we all see and are intimidated by. That is their purpose. The problem they have with us is compounded with the fact that they do not see any reciprocal act to declare our honor, and that we consider the threatening acts as serious and deserving of a pre-emptory act of overwhelming power. This is not to say that they don’t mean us harm, as they most certainly intend to murder us all if we don’t convert to Islam. It is an explanation, though, that explains the constant rants we see and could serve as some small verification to us that they are just being what they have been for thousands of years. Nomadic, violent desert tribesmen who make a big show of everything.

The United Nations was founded on many of the principals our Constitution guarantees for the people of our nation. Issues such as human rights, sovereignty, crime, war, and religion were addressed and, for the most part, the UN charter was compatible with and supportive of those rights and sought to bring those and other rights to all the world.

But in the six decades since its inception, the UN has failed, in almost every way, to affect any real improvement in the treatment of human beings world wide, or to achieve peace between any rivals. Its actions have, time after time, been intentionally biased in favor of the non-free nations and their efforts to remain non-free. Instead of promoting resolutions that would increase human rights and end conflict in the world, the UN has sided with nations that are documented as being the elite in violating the rights of their people and promoting world conflict through intimidation and agression. The resolutions passed, the councils created and their actions, the advancement of rogue administrators, and the corruption of top officials all serve as visible, public evidence that the UN is not about the work of uniting nations but is pursuing U tter N onsense.

The two links below are are to articles documenting the attempt by the UN to weaken and then eliminate the right to freedom of speech from the people of the world and to destroy the soverignty of the USA. Take a moment or two and see what the UN has in store for freedom and peace in the world.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/wm1910.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/wm1899.cfm

Organizations and governments around the world, especially the UN Council on Human Rights, is being pressured by Muslim leaders and nations to abandon completely any policy that creates or supports the right to freedom of speech as pertains to Muslims. They say it is a tool used to disrespect and blaspheme Muslims and their beliefs around the world. The Muslims don’t believe in and prohibit free speech and they feel they are justified in demanding that the UN, in an effort to assure the rights of Muslims to not be ridiculed, abandon the support of, and implement punishment for speech that is debasing and insulting to the world of Islam. Talk about a swelled opinion of your importance in the world. The single,overiding mission for the UNC-HR is the preservation and proliferation of the right of all people to freedom of speech and freedom from reprisal for that speech.

I reserve the right to extend my impudance to any policies, beliefs, demands, actions, people, gods, prophets, nations, or to any aspect of the offender be it a whole or partial idea or physical item. In other words, I wont’ do anything you ask of me as long as you pursue and threaten to kill me because I won’t accept and adopt your religious belief.

I take this rather intolerant position because it is just that, intolerant, just as they are intolerant of all human kind. Turn about is fair play.

I think I know where we got all the liberal democrats who are trying their best, it seems, to cause as much damage and hurt to the USA as they can.

Remember Kruschev speaking at the U.N. in 1959? Remember him banging on the podium with his shoe? Do you remember what his topicwas? It was the infamous "We will bury you under a red blanket of socialism" speech. Nikita chose to deliver a message that day that threatened the American way of life. We retaliated the next day by cancelling his trip to Disneyland. He was really ticked off as he had been very excited about going there and had really been looking forward to it. Instead, he had lunch with 300 actors, producers, directors, and technicians at a Hollywood movie studio. Oh….. man, …..just the thought makes me queasy.

Anyway, after the bury in a blanket part, he went on to say something similar to the following, and I’m paraphrasing from memory of 1959…….

(picture a short, fat, baldheaded Russian standing in one shoe before the general assembly, hammering the podium with the heel of his other shoe as he yelled and ranted...)

Remember that? We thought he was crraaazzyy. Loooney Tuuunes. Conquer us through the children, and the schools. Yeah, they better send some MIGS to those schools too. They’re wacked man, way out!

They have succeeded. Even though their own nation failed economically, the seeds they managed to plant havesprouted and have grown healthy, commie pinko politicians and teachers. It hasn’t, yet, changed our economy, not much, but we sure have grown a bunch of socialists who try harder evryday to do just that. We all know that a lot of the educators in the higher grades and colleges/universities, are radical socialists, to the point of fascism in most cases. I think that the beatniks and Jack Kerouac generation were the last generation to make it through unscathed. After that, the coffee shops, then the folk era blended the coffee. It was right then that a vision of a perfect communal society started the airheads to really wondering if "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" could really work. With no means to try and experiment, the teens of 1959-1962 decided it was better in USSR than life was here. But they couldn’t just say it out in the open. They did blame the US as the reason the USSR had to build nukes. They had to, to protect themselves from us.

Those 1959-1962ers became the teachers and college professors of the 1966ers and on till now. They were the Bill Ayres types, Patty Hearst, Charlie, Hanoi Jane, SLA, SDS, Black Panthers, Abbie Hoffman, Joan Byez, and all the radical socialists in that era. And then THEY had children, turned hippy, and dropped man. And their children’s children are on YouTube everyday stinking that site all to Hell.

Yeah, that’s how we got stuck with all the liberal socialists we have today. If only we had never let Kruschev take off his shoe…..

Never mind…

I’m not talking about our government imposing stricter screening of travelers, nor am I referring to the relaxed search and seizure laws or the racial profiling policies initiated since 9/11. What I am talking about is the effective reversal of the intended, expressed meaning of the first ammendment and the near total repeal of the freedom of religion and religious expression guaranteed in that ammendment.

The first ammendment to the Constitution says …

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

We have been given an alternate interpretation of that ammendment which seeks to prevent anyone from being involuntarily subjected to any religious act of worship or expression of relious belief that they don’t agree with. The right they seek to enforce, freedom from exposure to religious expression, does not exist anywhere in the constitution. In fact the first ammendment is implicit that tolerance of all religious expression is necessary to meet the requirement of that ammendment..

In the past few decades a powerful, outspoken, radical group of liberal minded Americans have succeeded in getting the first ammendment turned outside in and upside down, and re-interpreted to their idea of what religious freedom should be, which is exactly the opposite of what the constitution actually says. They have managed to effectively outlaw religious displays in public, successfully bannished the ten commandments, the mention of God in any setting including the Pledge of Allegiance, and all mention or reference to God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit from schools, the workplace, and public gatherings. They have turned Chritianity and pride in America into a shameful embarrasment. They have done so under the pretense of enforcing the supposed constitutional "seperation of church and state". Why, you might wonder, have they gone so far and worked so hard to deny us our religious liberties? All I can say is misery loves company and the liberals in congress and on the apellate courts, and their atheist clients are definitely miserable. This is what they have forged as reality in America.

But reality isn’t necessarily the truth. The truth is:

1. The words, "seperation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution of the United States nor in the Declaration of Independence, or in any document upon which our country was founded. Seperation of church and state, and its vague doctrine, is an interpolated lie and no rights have been granted thereby,

and,

2. The Constitution is still the law of the land and, as such, the first ammendment is in force and can be proven in any court of law.

Government is not allowed to prohibit the free and open worship of any religion. Government is not allowed to put any restrictions, whatsoever, on your freedom to peacefully express your beliefs or your right to assemble peacefully for any reason, or to limit your ability to lodge complaints about the government to the government, or to punish you for doing so. The government IS forbidden from passing any law concerning religion. Religion is not to be subject to governmental regulation in any way.

The truth, fellow Americans, is that the first ammendment empowers the individual. The framers of the constitution labored diligently and with great concern for hours and days over the exact wording of every article and ammendment to the constitution so that there would not, and could not be, any doubt as to the intention or meaning of any aspect of that document. In all cases, a literal and precise defining of the written word will reveal the exact intent and meaning thereof. The terminology was never meant to be interpreted or examined or changed due to different circumstances or situations. What was said is what was meant in any case, and that is the truth.

We need to openly expose the lie and the perverting of the constitution, and its treatment of religion that have become reality, and re-enforce the truth which is the law. Truth of law will prevail over perverted reality. Your liberties don’t deny anyone the right to walk away, or to not participate. Dare them to challenge the truth of the constitution and make truth and reality one and the same.

****

Regarding prayer in our schools:

Section 9524 of the "Elementary and Secondary Education Act" ("ESEA") of 1965, as amended by the "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001," requires the Secretary of Education to issue guidance on constitutionally protected prayer in elementary and secondary schools.

To Wit:

Each local educational agency must certify in writing by October 1, of each year that it has no policy that prevents or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer in public schools as set forth in these Guidelines. Failure to, in a timely manner or fraudulently certify, may result in withholding of federal funds to that agency.

The Guidelines stress that…

1. When and where students are permitted to engage in secular verbal or written speech or meetings, they may also engage in prayer or religious expression.
2. Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction.
3. They may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour or other non-instructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities.
4. Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs and "see you at the pole" gatherings
5. Where student groups are permitted to advertise or announce their meetings, advertise in the student newspaper, use bulletin boards or public address system, or hand out leaflets, schools may not discriminate against students who use these methods to meet to pray.
6. Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written or oral assignments.
7. Where student speakers are selected using neutral criteria and retain control over the content of the message, they may engage in religious speech or pray in student assemblies or graduation.
8. Teachers may take part in religious activities where the context indicates they are not participating in their official capacities, and they may meet with student Bible clubs after school. They may also meet with other teachers for prayer to the same extent they engage in secular intercommunications.
9. They may open class with a minute of silence, and must accommodate students who chose to opt out of instruction which is contrary to the students' religious convictions.

The Secretary of Education has served notice to public schools that they must immediately come into compliance with the new federal law. The message is simple: School officials must not discriminate against students and teachers who choose to pray or engage in religious expression while at school.

The democratic members of Congress will do or say anything to advance their socialist agenda and to make themselves appear as always being right and the administration and its supporters appear incompetent. Most of the time what they say to the press or in session is a far cry from reality and is, more often than not, just plain false in its content. They have made a common practice of twisting the reality of events or fabricating their own versions and millions of trusting Americans accept or ignore it all to the detriment of our nation. The dems believe that if you tell a lie enough times people will start believing it.

One big lie they use to do this is that the war on terror, the invasion of Iraq, and the hunt for Al Qaeda, is going very badly. The Dems have, almost to a person, abandoned any similance of support for the war and have gone on record as being against it and for an immediate withdrawal. The worse these struggles are for the American forces the better they look and the worse the Reps look. They make quite the stir by publicly declaring that they were right in their resistance to the war, quoting the latest casualty figures, blasting the president for his mismanagement, and giving the enemy reason to continue their cowardly murder of civilians and our soldiers.

The liberal congressman also tell a tale of Bush invading Iraq to reap profit from the oil reserves there. This one would be laughable if the insurgents battling our forces didn’t count on it to undermine the moral of the coalition forces. If Bush had been after the oil, why were there no reports of tankers filling up and carrying the oil away? Why didn’t we here from the press in other countries about oil being purchased from the Bush administration by foreign governments? There is no grounds for this lie, no evidence of any kind that would even hint at such going on.

Another example is the insistence that President Bush lied to the people when claiming Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and then using that as the reason to go to war. These congressmen and women know very well that Bush honsestly believed the intelligence information about WMD because they, too, believed it and had called for the removal Hussein from power and even military action against Iraq before Bush was ever elected. These people who accuse Bush of deceit regarding WMD in Iraq must be lying about it judging from the collection of actual, verifiable quotes from Washington Post articles , all made by democrats and demanding that the people of America be protected.

www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

We have since learned that US forces found WMD within weeks of entering Iraq but were under orders not to disclose that information to keep it from falling into the hands of the insurgents and being used against US troops. It was through the efforts of two republican senators that the Defense Department made the information public. Did the democrats say, "Oh really, well we’re sorry then," or offer any apologies or congratulations for the news? No, instead they have made claims such as the WMD found are not the WMD we went to war over, that they were 1991 era wepons, and were degraded to the point of not being dangerous. Neither of these claims have any factual content whatsoever, but when they say these things, people believe them, to the detriment of our nation.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

The democratic response

The Democrats want one thing more than anything else, all of them want it. They will lie to the press, make grandiose, fantastic claims about the better way they have for America, and even call others liars when they can’t quote the lying statement, can’t provide any evidence that it is a lie, and still shout it to the world everyday, just in the hope that they will get what they want most. It isn’t a better, safer future for America that they seek. It isn’t anything so idealistic. All they want, is to be re-elected at any cost. That means they have to make themselves and their lies seem like the truth and reality of the world, and make the Republicans look as bad and evil as they can, ANYWAY they can.

They are not beyond even more direct action against our society though. The leader of the house and majority leader of the senate, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, both dems, have blocked the vote for approval of some 200 government agency appointees, some for as long as two years. Former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, finally quit the position he was filling temporarily because the evil Pelosi blocked the approval and wouldn’t even allow it to be voted on. The FAA can not implement any new policy or procedures because there are only five members of the executive board that should have eleven and a majority can not be obtained. The other six members have been waiting twenty months for their appointment to be approved. The same situation is crippling the Dept. of Interior, Nat’l. Transportation Safety Board, the FEC, FCC, DEA, DOE, DOA, and FDA. Of course, we’ve all heard about the trick Ms. Nancy pulled on delaying the vote on the electronic surveillence matter. Not to mention how she used a loophole in the house rules to avoid voting on the free trade agreement with Colombia. She says she will let it go to a vote once the election is over, knowing that if a dem becomes president they will veto the agreement, regardless of the fact that Colombia was counting on the agreement to continue their emergence from third world status.

The constitution requires the houses of congress to vote on these matters in a timely fashion. The elected officials have all sworn to abide by, and to protect and defend the constitution. Instead, the actions of the democrat members are exactly what is described in the US Code as collusion to disrupt the business of the government, and as treason by giving reason for hope and comfort to the enemies of the USA.

If you have ever read the book or seen the movie of George Orwell’s "1984" you can gain a pretty good insight on how and why the liberals and news networks would like the world to be. In 1984, the government wants lies about a war and their success, and their policies and actions. The truth, having been previously published in newspapers, was simply changed by going back and editing the copies of newspapers and speeches to say they had made the correct statements to begin with, that the lie is the truth. Simple. If anyone calls them a liar and tries to prove it so, they disappear. The liberals in our government and their media cohorts have not been so bold as to start editing back issues of newspapers and video tape, but they have had no problem in claiming to have said things when, in all reality, they said and did just the opposite of what they now claim. And anyone who can read can go back and read the news reports where their words were quoted and see that they are liars. There’s no doubt, the truth is provable, their lies are public record, yet they go on convincing some that they are sincere, patriotic soles who just want to make it all better.

We need to employ the same tactics they use but in reverse. If we tell the real story in as many places and as many times as we possibly can, in anyway we can, maybe the people will start believing the truth and seeing the liberals in congress for the lying anti-Americans they are, and vote them out of office. We can only hope and act accordingly.

This is in no way a formal or scientific discourse. It is only the conclusions I have come to after fifty-two years of life surrounded by females. I had five sisters, no brothers. I was fourth in the series and grew up knowing as fact that women were the superior beings. There was no other philosophy considered in our home. Mom and my three older sisters ruled. Period. And what a life it was. Sisters have friends, girlfriends, and that comes in handy. Sisters tell you what girls like and dislike, and that comes in handy. Sisters are just exceedingly helpful, and very precious too. Sisters are way better than smelly, competitive brothers. Much better.

My dad was the most intelligent human I’ve ever encountered. A tool and die supervisor for Boeing Military Division, Dad worked in a realm of 10/1000ths of an inch, tenths he called them. If a machinist could not hold a tolerance of plus or minus three tenths (.0003) all day long he wasn’t much of a machinist and didn’t stay at Boeing very long. In collaberation with James Picor (DeHavilland turbojet designer) Dad designed and built the first turret mill in the world. It was the only machine that can replicate itself, by itself. He was also responsible for the design and build of every tool, die, and jig used in the construction and testing of the B-47’s and B-52’s. That’s why those aircraft, especially the Buff, have had the life they’ve had. My dad, personally responsible. Haha!

The smartest thing that he ever did though, in my opinion, was to willingly subject himself totally to female rule and all that that entailed in our family setting. He always said that if something was so important to Mom or the three girls that they argued with him about it, it was important enough to stand aside and let them have their way, peacefully. Oh, they would have had their way regardless, the only choice to be made by Dad was whether he would make it hard on himself or accept it as reality and be happy with it. Like I said, a very smart man.

Like fire and water, men and women are opposites by nature. Their basic belief patterns are seemingly in opposition. Fire and water can destroy each other, or they can generate fantastic amounts of usable energy. Women and men are no different. Women were concieved with mental code that sees the world’s potential for beauty, health, and harmony. They have a utopian drive that would see the human race socializing and working in harmony to achieve Nirvana for all, and all the time not understanding why it is not already so.

Men, on the other side of the boiler, see the world as it really is, a complex and contrary system of physical laws, exceptions thereto, humans who are less than human, and obstacles to overcome, but all the time working within those constraints to achieve their goals.

Dwell for a moment on the differences between these two outlooks, and then imagine the possibilities it suggests. Men are the realists in a physical way, able to do things with materials and technology. Women are the dreamers of ideals seeing what could be and how it ought to be.

Men are also the softies of the species when it comes to women and love. They will do and say anything, fight, cheat, lie, and betray each other for the love of THE woman. That is nature working to insure the continuation of our species. But it was also meant to be the regulator of the fire/water steam engine.

Women inherently desire perfection and are the anchor in love. They express their desire for a better world to their man in ways that men don’t even realize that they are being given a goal to be achieved. To make his female happier and easier to live with, because you can’t live without them, the man goes about designing and constructing the better world she craves working by within the constraints of the physical world. What Lola wants Larry builds, and then gives to her. A perfect partnership of idealism in concept and realism in design and construction.

Behind every good man stands a what? Of course she does. She wouldn’t stand near a man who didn’t strive to provide her with the Heaven On Earth she has so carefully concieved in imagination. And he wouldn’t know how to spend his day if she wasn’t right there next to him telling him how it needs to be done. He couldn’t anymore ignore her dreams and just go his own way than she could build the world she dreams of without him. Instead, he takes on her dreams and desires as his own and builds both of them a better world and she rewards him in the way he loves best and as only she knows how.

With just a little bit of sensical analysis it does make perfect sense. When you were young and became ill who did you want caring for you? On your birthday who did you rely on for the perfect chocolate cake? When you snuggled into your clean sheets and pajamas at night who did you love for it? The female, that’s who. The nurturing, caring, loving perfectionism is instinctive behavior. It is only reasonable that the world according to women would be a better and happier place to be. There would be no conflict, and no reason for wepaons. All illness would be eradicated and hospitals would be free and doctors and teachers would be rich. All piano lessons would produce concert virtuosos and performances would be continuous in all neighborhood parks. Just take a look at the homes women provide their families. Clean, orderly, comfort to spare, and geared toward her man’s total satisfaction.

Growing up with a dad like mine was easy. He and I got out into the world together every chance we had. Fishing, camping, working on cars, and going to the kinfolk's. At home we watched Red Skelton and Gunsmoke on TV. Every Saturday morning we grabbed mandolin and fiddle and played along with Cal’s Corral artists doing bluegrass and old time, real country music. He taught me math in such a way that it is second nature. He taught me life’s complexities as practiced by bull and cow, stud and mare, and accordingly, how that applied to men and women. He said that the most desirable pleasures in Earthly life came as a result of men and women truly liking each other’s company and expressing that affection physically and with mutual enjoyment. The only comparable but not equal feeling in his mind was the pride and satisfaction that comes from supporting yourself and owning your own piece of the world. To be a compliant, giving, self-sacrificing lover of a good woman is man’s true destiny. We men are all quivering masses of jelly when females show interest. Be proud of it. They like us that way and we all like it when they like us. That is why I believe my dad did such a smart thing by accepting female superiority. He made our females a happy lot of women and they, in turn, made him a very happy and satisfied man. Smart. Really smart.

So, what the blazes does all this have to do with the way things are? Nothing really, but really, everything. Take it or leave it, whatever you wish. But, if you are a typical male of the species a woman and all she is figures relatively high in priority in your life. Isn’t the world beautiful when she is in a loving, generous mood? Oh yeah! OH YEAH! So doesn’t it seem worthwhile to do what you can to make her life enjoyable? Is life her way so bad you can’t live it? Actually, being slave, sex servant, and general mechanic for a good female is, uhhh, well...you know what I mean. So, give in. Make her always the winner. Tell her she’s right and you know it. It can only lead to goodness for you both.

Since who knows when, the government, to wit the officials elected to serve therein, have adopted a principal by which they determine the merit of pending legislation, qualifications of appointees, priority of budget items, and even the requirement of their attendance at regular sessions of business.

That principal is, "If there is a buck in it, OK. The one with the most bucks for me wins. If you don’t have any bucks for me, don’t even bother. The only loyalty wortwhile is to the greenback."

The normal, accepted course of business, the expected and demanded protocol for government officials has become one of greed, subversion, collusion, bribery, influence peddling, extortion, and outright grand theft from anyone and everyone seeking any favor, decision, or action from or by any of them. Their business creed, "If you can’t pay, go away. "

Political action committees, campaign funds, slush accounts, contract awards, illegal arms sales, drug trafficing, and prostitution have all become the legal tender recognized and demanded by those in public office. In fact, the overwhelming inspiration to seek public office is not the altruistic willingness to serve and improve our nation, but is the guarantee and adopted right of becoming insanely wealthy and never having to earn a dime of it. Jesse Unruh, a state official of California in the 60’s and 70’s, once said, "Money is the mother’s milk of politics, and there’s too many muthas getting too much milk." Mr. Unruh knew politics and what made it work and was not afraid to tell it.

I could go on and on spouting the methods and principals of congressmen and women in their efforts to rob the country and keep us from stopping them, but most any person not deeply sleeping and halfway cognizant knows the truth and can see the true reasons for the deficit, constantly increasing taxes, routine reductions in services and benefits to the public, and countless criminal actions against officials. Greed, the love of money.

Let me now attempt to meet the responsibilty that should be required of anyone publicly complaigning and criticizing anything, I will offer my suggestions for a remedy thereto.

Seeing that,

• Elected officials are expected to act on behalf of their constituents,
• Elected Officials are paid very well for their service,
• Bribery and extortion are real,
• They need to be free of non-pertinent influences,

 I hereby suggest laws be passed or changed to criminalize the posession of or attempt to posess any form of legal tender (money) by any local, state, or federal official who was elected to office by a general election of the voters. What did I say? Make it illegal for our elected officials to have any money of any kind whatsoever. My law would put a senator in prison for at least ten years if he was found with two dollars cash in his pocket, an undeclared checking or savings account, a jar of pennies under his bed, or even a postage stamp in his wallet. He would suffer the same penalty if he was caught giving college lectures on the side for pay, had an undeclared stock option, or was shown to have received loans, gifts, or any other payouts of cash not including his salary as an official. Essentially, posession of anything that could be used in trade as payment would be a prison sentence.

 In support of that,

• All elected officials will be required to declare all assets, cash, real property, investments, etc. and to deposit said assets into an escrow to be held active but unavailable to the official as long as he holds elected office.
  
•  The official will be paid a regular, considerable salary for their service and, in addition, will be alotted an all encompassing expense account to cover all of his and his family’s needs during the term of his service. All transportation costs such as gasoline, vehicle maintenance, insurance, all food, clothing, medical, and utility costs, all entertainment such as movie and stage theater tickets, sports events, concerts, vacation costs, books, games, toys, fishing/camping gear, etc., all mortgage/rent payments, declared and approved loan payments, virtually anything and everything he needs to provide a normal, upper middle class lifestyle for him and his family will be provided and paid for by the government, but he will never see a dime of it himself. Even postage will be provided via the congressional post office.
  
•  The official will be prohibited from any income generating activity such as speaking tours, book signings and publishings, lobbying, or anything that could cause him to receive cash or credit while in the public office.

 If you implement the statute and impose severe penalties there will still be a few who find a way to get around the law and sell the power we have bestowed on them to do our work to the highest bidder. But, is there any doubt that such a law would deter those whose hearts and minds were not criminally predetermined? Don’t you think that a law such as this would remove the surety of easy wealth as the main reason for most of those seeking office and thereby cull the undesirables?

 Make the law a promise to incarcerate them for ten or twenty, or even fifty years for violating the trust of the voters and I truly believe we would not be in the financial and legal state the government has put us in for very much longer.

…when a generation was called upon to save the world. And they did. That generation was the men and women of the United States Armed Forces that served in and, in alliance with brothers from like minded nations, won World War II. They were the parents of the baby-boomers, my dad, and my aunts and uncles, their cousins and friends, all of whom saw the need and dedicated themselves to the preservation of freedom and liberty in the world.

Just as dedicated as those in uniform were those who, for thousands of reasons, could not join their loved ones overseas but were just as zealous in the cause as those doing the dying. In a bigger than life way, these homeland soldiers played as big a part, even though not as direct nor costly, as the marines, sailors, grunts, and pilots did each day. They produced, and then produced some more, then produced ten times that much in half as much time. They produced enough, not just for our war needs, but for the needs of British bombing victims, which was the entire population of Great Britain, and the British forces via the Lend/Lease program. These patriots farmed wheat, corn, potatoes and other foods. They bred cattle, milked cows, made cheese, manufactured tanks, airplanes, jeeps, rifles, ammunition, cannon, bombs, submarines, radios, tents, cots, uniforms, medical supplies, gasoline and diesel fuels, tires, parachutes, cameras, blimps, portable bridges, ships, and every other conceivable necessity of war, and a lot of the comforts of home. They produced enough of it all that the combined industrial efforts of Japan, Italy, and Germany could not come close to matching it.