U.S. Muslim leaders forbid aid to troops

U.S. Muslim leaders forbid aid to troops

Islamic jurists decree giving soldiers food ‘not permissible’

Posted: March 08, 2010
10:34 pm Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

American Muslims are banned from helping U.S. soldiers deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq and other “Muslim lands,” according to a shocking fatwa, or religious decree, recently issued by American-based Islamic jurists.

One of the most respected Islamic law authorities in America has decreed it is “not permissible” for even Muslims who are citizens of America to send food or other aid to American troops serving in those Muslim countries.

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, or AMJA, ruled it is a “sin” to help the U.S. military in its multi-front war on terror. AMJA delivered the ruling through its online “fatwa bank”:

“Q: Is it permissible to participate in taking food to the American and foreign soldiers working in Muslim lands?”

“A: That would not be permissible, for that would be helping others in sin and transgression.”

Critics warn that such anti-military views by Muslim scholars have translated into homegrown violence against American soldiers.

Another American cleric, Anwar Awlaki, has decreed that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are crimes against Muslims and has warned fellow Muslim Americans not to serve in the U.S. military or support U.S. military efforts in any way. Recently, he has issued fatwas declaring U.S. troops and military bases open target for jihad.

The Fort Dix Six terrorists cited Awlaki’s sermons as a prime motivating factor in their plot to attack Army personnel based at the New Jersey post.

“He gave the fatwa,” Muslim terrorist Dritan Duka of New Jersey said of Awlaki. “Hit them (American soldiers) here” in the U.S.

In a series of e-mail exchanges, Awlaki personally counseled Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the accused Fort Hood terrorist, who railed against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars during a PowerPoint presentation to Army colleagues. He also praised a deadly 2009 attack on an Army recruiting station in Arkansas by a Muslim American.

Hasan in late 2008 and early 2009 had asked Awlaki “about killing American soldiers and officers and whether that was legitimate or not.”

In response, Awlaki gave his blessing to such attacks.

After the Fort Hood massacre, Awlaki declared Hasan a “hero” and exhorted other Muslim soldiers to “follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.” Awlaki’s sermons are recorded on CDs and sold as box sets at mosques and Islamic bookstores across America.

Another popular American Muslim cleric, Zaid Shakir, who is still preaching in America, has encouraged Muslims to attack U.S. military planes flying in and out of Fort Bragg, N.C., according to the book, “Muslim Mafia,” an expose of the radical Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups in America. Shakir is a regular speaker at Council on American-Islamic Relations events.

Terror expert Paul Sperry, author of “Infiltration” and “Muslim Mafia,” says AMJA is top-heavy with radical Muslim Brotherhood leaders posing as moderates.

He notes that many of its jurists teach Islam at the radical Saudi-funded American Open University, a fully accredited satellite campus of the Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Al-Azhar University in Egypt.

One prominent AMJA jurist listed is Sheik Omar Shahin, an admitted former supporter of Osama bin Laden and the ringleader of the so-called Flying Imams who disrupted a US Airways flight in 2006.

The Muslim Brotherhood promulgates the strict Islamic code known as Shariah.

“Bringing about the enforcement of the Divine Law (Shariah) and the abolition of man-made laws cannot be achieved only through preaching,” the late Muslim Brotherhood leader Sayyid Qutb of Egypt beseeched followers in his book “Milestones.” “When obstacles and practical difficulties are put in its way, it has no recourse but to remove them by force.”

“Islam has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions. It is the duty of Islam to annihilate all such systems,” Qutb argued. “Wherever an Islamic community exists which is a concrete example of the Divinely ordained system of life, it has a God-given right to step forward and take control of the political authority so that it may establish the Divine system on earth.”

AMJA has called for reviving the call to “Shariah rule.”

“Muslims are to be ruled and governed only by the Shariah,” it says in one recent fatwa.

Critics say many of its rulings are misogynistic, oppressing women’s rights and micromanaging every aspect of their lives.

According to AMJA’s fatwas, Muslim women living in America are prohibited from:

  • Growing their fingernails or using nail polish;
  • Plucking their eyebrows;
  • Showing their hair in public;
  • Wearing jeans in public;
  • Handling the Quran during menstruation, or praying in the mosque during menstruation;
  • Traveling without a male escort who is a close relative;
  • Resisting their husband’s sexual advances outside of the menstrual period;
  • Praying in close proximity to men in the mosque or anywhere near the front of the prayer room;
  • Swimming or sunbathing in a bathing suit even in a women-only area;
  • Undergoing surgical contraception such as tubal ligation;
  • Running for political office;
  • Posting photos of themselves on Facebook or MySpace.

“Women are Satan’s snare,” AMJA says.

AMJA supports Shariah punishment including “lashing” women who have premarital sex (zina) and “stoning” those who have sex outside their marriage.

“We should emphasize here that the way out of these problems in this day and age is to judge by Shariah and to implement the Divinely ordained criminal punishments (hudood), as commanded by Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, at the hands of the rulers,” AMJA scholars agree, “for establishing one of the hadd punishments in a land is better for its people than if it were to rain every morning for 40 years.”

AMJA also says President Obama, whose father and stepfather were Muslim, was born and raised a Muslim and should return to Islam.

“We ask Allah to bring him back to his religion,” AMJA says.

Obama says he became a Christian as an adult while attending Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Broad business coalition opposing health care bill


Mar 9, 2:01 PM (ET)

WASHINGTON (AP) – Major business groups say President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul is a job killer, and they’re launching a multimillion-dollar ad campaign to take that message to voters.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and groups ranging from contractors to retailers said Tuesday the Democratic health care bills would raise their expenses, while failing to control health care costs.

Advertisements will start airing nationwide Wednesday on cable television and shift in a few days to 17 states, targeting moderate and conservative Democrats whose votes are critical to passing the bill in the House. The campaign is estimated to cost between $4 million and $10 million, with the insurance industry paying part of the cost.


Obama using ‘bounty hunters’ for health care fraud

Obama using ‘bounty hunters’ for health care fraud

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer 15 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said Tuesday he’ll bring in high-tech bounty hunters to help root out health care fraud, grabbing a populist idea with bipartisan backing in his final push to overhaul the system.

The White House announcement came as Obama prepared to travel to Missouri on Wednesday, taking his closing argument to the nation’s heartland. The trip will be his second public appearance this week to rally support and fire up nervous Democrats.

The White House released details of the anti-fraud plan hours after a fresh challenge to the administration from major business groups that unveiled a multimillion-dollar ad campaign arguing that under Obama’s plan “health care costs will go even higher, making a bad economy worse.”

The ad buy, costing between $4 million and $10 million, will start Wednesday on national cable TV outlets. Later in the week, the campaign shifts to 17 states home to moderate and conservative Democrats. Their votes are critical to Obama’s endgame for passing legislation to expand coverage to millions who now lack it and revamp the health insurance system.

On Capitol Hill, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and other senior administration officials met with House and Senate Democratic leaders, who have struggled to secure the votes for the stalled health care legislation.

The two-step approach now being pursued calls for the House to approve a Senate-passed bill from last year, despite House Democrats’ opposition to several of its provisions. Both chambers then would follow by approving a companion measure to make changes in that first bill.

“We’re going to get it done as soon as possible,” Emanuel told reporters after the meeting.

But Republicans are playing on House Democrats’ suspicions of their Senate colleagues, arguing that Senate Democrats may not hold up their end of the bargain and the votes will be politically damaging for Democrats in November.

“They will be voting, when they pass the Senate bill, to endorse the Cornhusker kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, the Gator-aid, the closed-door deal, the special deal for the unions, which may or may not bother any Democrats, I don’t know — but it will be riddled with special deals,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said.

Obama’s anti-fraud announcement was aimed directly at the political middle.

Waste and fraud are pervasive problems for Medicare and Medicaid, the giant government health insurance programs for seniors and low-income people. Improper payments — in the wrong amounts, to the wrong person or for the wrong reason — totaled an estimated $54 billion in 2009. They range from simple errors such as duplicate billing to elaborate schemes operated by fraudsters peddling everything from wheelchairs to hospice care.

The bounty hunters in this case would be private auditors armed with sophisticated computer programs to scan Medicare and Medicaid billing data for patterns of bogus claims. The auditors would get to keep part of any funds they recover for the government. The White House said a pilot program run by Medicare in California, New York and Texas recouped $900 million for taxpayers from 2005-2008.

The presidential memorandum Obama signed Tuesday directs Cabinet secretaries and agency heads throughout the government to intensify their use of private auditors under current legal authority. Obama also announced his support for a bipartisan bill that would expand the ways government agencies can pay for such audits using recovered funds. Among its co-sponsors is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Obama’s GOP opponent in the 2008 presidential race.

The White House estimates that expanded use of private audits throughout the government could recoup at least $2 billion for taxpayers over the next three years. Much of that would come from Medicare and Medicaid, which have to scramble to keep up with the endless proliferation of new fraud schemes.

Obama his placing a heavy emphasis on battling waste and fraud in his final health care push. The repackaged bill he announced last month contained more than dozen anti-fraud ideas. A common theme linking them is the increased use of technology to spot suspicious billing patterns and keep track of service providers with a track record of problems.


The charade of civil trials for terrorists

The charade of civil trials for terrorists

Don Watson

Eric Holder has said there is no way these guys at Gitmo are walking. If any did it would be political suicide. What does Obama get from this except praise from the loonies?

We maintain a large and complex legal rights system for ourselves for the purpose of minimizing potential abuse from the law. There is nothing divine about it. It is not about being moral. What’s moral about throwing out damning evidence that was improperly obtained? It is a bargain. We know that these rights can result in criminals avoiding prosecution. We willingly pay this price. The more legal rights there are the more loopholes there are for criminals to escape the law. We pay this price in defense of our freedom from over bearing or corrupt law enforcement. Now why on earth would we want to pay this price for foreign combatants who we know have sworn to destroy us?

Not all is fair in love and war. Love maybe, but not in war. The Geneva conventions are treaties between countries to reduce the horrors of war. They are a bargain. The loonies advocating for civil trials for enemy combatants are advocating an asymmetric standard. There is no bargain. What is the reason for doing this? To impress moderate Muslims that we are fair minded? Do they think by this we will lure the fence sitters back to peace and moderation and away from jihad? Do they think they will admire the morality of it?

They won’t. Major Hason was shown an unbelievable, some would say unconscionable, amount of fairness and tolerance for his extreme views. He admired none of it. No Muslim country comes close to having the legal rights that we have even for their own people so why should we think this charade will impress them. They know it’s a charade.

Don Watson

The folly of rushing into green energy schemes

The folly of rushing into green energy schemes

Ed Lasky

Environmentalists, renewable energy advocates, and solar energy promoters tout the supposed benefits of solar energy. We know the problems: inefficient conversion of sunrays into electricity, intermittent energy generation, the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) reflex that prevents power lines and solar farms from being built; and the need for massive subsidies that would be better spent in other ways to generate power.

Even environmentalists have opposed massive solar farms that disrupt the ecology. Now comes another example of the manifold problems that result when promoters and politicians get together to concoct a solar power venture. This time, the place is a small town in Spain and the time is now:

Two years ago, this gritty mining city hosted a brief 21st-century gold rush. Long famous for coal, Puertollano discovered another energy source it had overlooked: the relentless, scorching sun.Armed with generous incentives from the Spanish government to jump-start a national solar energy industry, the city set out to replace its failing coal economy by attracting solar companies, with a campaign slogan: “The Sun Moves Us.”

Soon, Puertollano, home to the Museum of the Mining Industry, had two enormous solar power plants, factories making solar panels and silicon wafers, and clean energy research institutes. Half the solar power installed globally in 2008 was installed in Spain.

Farmers sold land for solar plants. Boutiques opened. And people from all over the world, seeing business opportunities, moved to the city, which had suffered from 20 percent unemployment and a population exodus.

But as low-quality, poorly designed solar plants sprang up on Spain’s plateaus, Spanish officials came to realize that they would have to subsidize many of them indefinitely, and that the industry they had created might never produce efficient green energy on its own.

In September the government abruptly changed course, cutting payments and capping solar construction. Puertollano’s brief boom turned bust. Factories and stores shut, thousands of workers lost jobs, foreign companies and banks abandoned contracts that had already been negotiated.

Even the New York Times owns up to the prospect this “cautionary tale” holds for America.

Subsidies fed the boom, which was unsustainable because solar energy is inefficient and uneconomic.

To encourage development of solar power and reduce dependence on fossil fuels, Europe has generally relied on so-called feed-in tariffs, through which governments pay a hefty premium for electricity from renewable resources. Regulators in the United States have favored less direct incentives like requiring municipalities to buy a percentage of their electricity from companies making renewable energy, although a few cities and states, most notably Vermont, are experimenting with the feed-in concept.

When it was announced in the summer of 2007, Spain’s premium payment for solar power was the most generous anywhere – 58 cents per kilowatt-hour – with few strings attached.

But many of the hastily opened plants offered no hope of being cost-competitive with conventional power, being poorly designed or located where sunshine was inadequate, for example.

America has seen this story before. When ethanol became the rage due to mandates and subsidies, ethanol plants bloomed across the Midwest (helped by the fact that politicians like to cultivate the political landscape there). Now many have gone bust, scientists have come to doubt that there is any net energy savings in ethanol production, corn prices shot up thereby making food more expensive; fertilizer needed to grow corn has leached into water tables, streams and rivers; and the thirsty corn crop has helped to deplete aquifers.

We don’t need lessons from across the ocean to teach us the folly of rushing into so-called green energy schemes. We have them in our own backyard.

New Obama rules may prohibit citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters…

Culled out

By Robert Montgomery

The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

  Anglering for access united we fish rally capitol washington fishing
One sign at the United We Fish rally at the Capital summed up the feelings of recreational and commercial fishermen.

This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is “fluid” and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn’t issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

That’s a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning.

“When the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) completed their successful campaign to convince the Ontario government to end one of the best scientifically managed big game hunts in North America (spring bear), the results of their agenda had severe economic impacts on small family businesses and the tourism economy of communities across northern and central Ontario,” said Phil Morlock, director of environmental affairs for Shimano.

“Now we see NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and the administration planning the future of recreational fishing access in America based on a similar agenda of these same groups and other Big Green anti-use organizations, through an Executive Order by the President. The current U.S. direction with fishing is a direct parallel to what happened in Canada with hunting: The negative economic impacts on hard working American families and small businesses are being ignored.

“In spite of what we hear daily in the press about the President’s concern for jobs and the economy and contrary to what he stated in the June order creating this process, we have seen no evidence from NOAA or the task force that recreational fishing and related jobs are receiving any priority.”



Consequently, unless anglers speak up and convince their Congressional representatives to stop this bureaucratic freight train, it appears that the task force will issue a final report for “marine spatial planning” by late March, with President Barack Obama then issuing an Executive Order to implement its recommendations — whatever they may be.

Led by NOAA’s Jane Lubchenco, the task force has shown no overt dislike of recreational angling, but its indifference to the economic, social and biological value of the sport has been deafening.

Additionally, Lubchenco and others in the administration have close ties to environmental groups who would like nothing better than to ban recreational angling. And evidence suggests that these organizations have been the engine behind the task force since before Obama issued a memo creating it last June.

As ESPN previously reported, WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and others produced a document entitled “Transition Green” shortly after Obama was elected in 2008. What has happened since suggests that the task force has been in lockstep with that position paper.

Then in late summer, just after he created the task force, these groups produced “Recommendations for the Adoption and Implementation of an Oceans, Coasts, and Great Lakes National Policy.” This document makes repeated references to “overfishing,” but doesn’t once reference recreational angling, its importance, and its benefits, both to participants and the resource.

Additionally, some of these same organizations have revealed their anti-fishing bias by playing fast and loose with “facts,” in attempts to ban tackle containing lead in the United States and Canada.

That same tunnel vision, in which recreational angling and commercial fishing are indiscriminately lumped together as harmful to the resource, has persisted with the task force, despite protests by the angling industry.

As more evidence of collusion, the green groups began clamoring for an Executive Order to implement the task force’s recommendations even before the public comment period ended in February. Fishing advocates had no idea that this was coming.

Perhaps not so coincidentally, the New York Times reported on Feb. 12 that “President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.”

  Anglering for access
Click here for archive

Morlock fears that “what we’re seeing coming at us is an attempted dismantling of the science-based fish and wildlife model that has served us so well. There’s no basis in science for the agendas of these groups who are trying to push the public out of being able to fish and recreate.

“Conflicts (user) are overstated and problems are manufactured. It’s all just an excuse to put us off the water.”

In the wake of the task force’s framework document, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) and its partners in the U.S. Recreational Fishing & Boating Coalition against voiced their concerns to the administration.

“Some of the potential policy implications of this interim framework have the potential to be a real threat to recreational anglers who not only contribute billions of dollars to the economy and millions of dollars in tax revenues to support fisheries conservation, but who are also the backbone of the American fish and wildlife conservation ethic,” said CSF President Jeff Crane.

Morlock, a member of the CSF board, added, “There are over one million jobs in America supported coast to coast by recreational fishing. The task force has not included any accountability requirements in their reports for evaluating or mitigating how the new policies they are drafting will impact the fishing industry or related economies.

“Given that the scope of this process appears to include a new set of policies for all coastal and inland waters of the United States, the omission of economic considerations is inexcusable.”

This is not the only access issue threatening the public’s right to fish, but it definitely is the most serious, according to Chris Horton, national conservation director for BASS.

“With what’s being created, the same principles could apply inland as apply to the oceans,” he said. “Under the guise of ‘marine spatial planning’ entire watersheds could be shut down, even 2,000 miles up a river drainage from the ocean.

“Every angler needs to be aware because if it’s not happening in your backyard today or tomorrow, it will be eventually.

“We have one of the largest voting blocks in the country and we need to use it. We must not sit idly by.”

Winnie Mandela accuses Nelson of ‘betraying’ the blacks of South Africa

Winnie Mandela accuses Nelson of ‘betraying’ the blacks of South Africa

By Colin Fernandez
Last updated at 12:34 AM on 09th March 2010




Nelson Mandela has been accused by his former wife of betraying South Africa’s black population.


In a savage attack, Winnie Mandela said he had done nothing for the poor and should not have accepted the Nobel peace prize with the man who jailed him, FW de Klerk.


The 73-year-old said her ex-husband had become a ‘corporate foundation’ who was ‘wheeled out’ only to raise money for the ANC party he once led.


Nelson Mandela and wife Winnie walk hand-in hand-with after Mandela's release from prison
Nelson Mandela and wife Winnie walk hand-in hand-with after Mandela’s release from prison



She said Archbishop Desmond Tutu was a cretin and claimed the sacrifices of Steve Biko and others in the fight against apartheid were being overlooked.


The comments were made in an interview yesterday with Nadira Naipaul, the wife of novelist V S Naipaul.


Mrs Mandela became notorious in 1991 when she was jailed for six years for the kidnap of Stompie Moeketsi – a sentence later cut to a fine.


Stompie, 14, had been murdered three years earlier by members of Mrs Mandela’s bodyguard, the Mandela United Football Club.


Party: Nelson and Winnie Mandela in 2004
Party: Nelson and Winnie Mandela in 2004



She also caused outrage by endorsing the punishment of apartheid collaborators with ‘ necklacing’ – putting burning tyres around their necks.


Yesterday she said: ‘This name Mandela is an albatross around the necks of my family.


‘You all must realise that Mandela was not the only man who suffered. There were many others, hundreds who languished in prison and died.


‘Mandela did go to prison and he went in there as a young revolutionary but look what came out.


‘Mandela let us down. He agreed to a bad deal for the blacks. Economically we are still on the outside. The economy is very much “white”.


‘I cannot forgive him for going to receive the Nobel with his jailer de Klerk. Hand in hand they went. Do you think de Klerk released him from the goodness of his heart?


‘He had to. The times dictated it, the world had changed.’


The pair pictured together in 1990
The pair pictured together in 1990



The Mandelas, who divorced in 1996, were married for 38 years – although together for only five.


Mrs Mandela criticised her country’s Truth and Reconciliation Committee – which she appeared before in 1997 and which implicated her in gross violations of human rights.


She said: ‘What good does the truth do? How does it help to anyone to know where and how their loved ones are killed or buried?


‘That Bishop Tutu who turned it all into a religious circus came here. He had a cheek to tell me to appear.


‘I told him that he and his other like-minded cretins were only sitting there because of our struggle and me. Look what they make him do. The great Mandela. He has no control or say any more.


‘They put that huge statue of him right in the middle of the most affluent white area of Johannesburg. Not here [in Soweto] where we spilled our blood.


‘Mandela is now like a corporate foundation. He is wheeled out globally to collect the money.’


She said her daughters, Zenani, 51, and Zindzi, 50, had to struggle through red tape to speak to their 91-year-old father, who led South Africa from 1994 to 1999.




Share this article:

Add your comments

Comments (11)

Here’s what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

What an evil woman she is, only lives her life to please herself, enriching herself wherever she can – what has she ever done for the poor, has she ever spend a cent of her own on others,not herself…sure she’ll go straight to hell 

– Lisa, Gauteng RSA, 09/3/2010 05:45

Click to rate     Rating   113

Report abuse

Madame Matches and her ANC party are incrementally taking South Africa down the path to Zimbabwe. She will eventually get her wish and have a “black” economy, which means no economy ( really a typically African Marxist economy) and then we will all finally be equally poor, except for the the ANC elite who will still be living off the largess of the tax payer and driving around in their luxury vehicles. For a party that claims to hate capitalism, the ANC sure seem to enjoy the spoils of the free market. One thing is sure, the ANC is hellbent on stirring the race pot and fomenting hatred for the whites here. The only thing that happened in 1994 was that the revolution was postponed. The blood bath is on the way thanks to the hate of those like Winnie! 

– Mark C, Cape Town, South Africa, 09/3/2010 05:23

Click to rate     Rating   205

Report abuse

HEY LADY! YOUR husband was a TERRORIST! YOU knew about it! You could do a LOT more for humanity and history by telling us more about the facts, ma’am. We all know now that the Nobel prize is a farce. 

– David, Bedford, New Hampshire, USA, 09/3/2010 04:48

Click to rate     Rating   99

Report abuse

The lady speaks the truth! 

– Divine Truth, L.A. USA, 09/3/2010 04:42

Click to rate     Rating   158

Report abuse

Guess she’s saying he sold out. What about her? Is she still out there suffering in Soweto? I doubt it.

Like Jesus said,
“First take the chunks from out your eye and then you may behold the splinter in your brother’s eye and help him take it out.”

Mr Mandela chose not give his life for the cause like Gandhi and MLKJ did. That’s his own personal choice.

At the same time she would have wielded her “fire tyre justice” on as many bad “white” people as possible. I fail to see how that would have made things better. Is that revenge or “justice”?

“An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.”
Mohandas K. Gandhi 

– steve, hamburg, 09/3/2010 04:11

Click to rate     Rating   74

Report abuse

Just look to the North of South Africa and look how the once prosperous Rhodesia, the breadbasket of Africa, is now starving and completely coming apart as a gangland and rotten dictatorship grown from nepotism/despotism.
South Africa is a facade, its gonna collapse, because no matter how much money we throw at this raqcial divide mess, and no matter how hard the media tries to paint a pretty picture of balckness, the black run government is heading for a cliff and determined to drive everyone off the cliff like lemmings..I think we should go back to the way things were 50 years ago, and throw Mandela and his criminal wife back in jail and this time throw away the key for good. No more aid. Survival of the fittest…like Nigeria and Liberia…and every single country in sub sahara Africa..a rotten mess that was once kept civilized by colonialism. Lets go back to that, it worked and worked well. 

– HOWARD HOFELICH, Kona Hawaii, 09/3/2010 04:07










Obamacare: The Bankrupting of America

Obamacare: The Bankrupting of America

Posted By David Swindle On March 8, 2010 @ 12:04 am In FrontPage | 69 Comments

A review of The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care [1]  by T.R. Reid

Even when I considered the Left my political home I knew how effectively the movement could sabotage itself in its presentations of its ideas.

When I was in high school and saw Michael Moore’s anti-gun pseudo-docmentary “Bowling for Columbine” I walked out of the theatre with the exact opposite point of view that the notorious neo-communist propagandist had hoped to instill. I became pro-gun rights. Why? Because Moore was stupid enough to admit this fact: Canada has about the same level of gun ownership (per capita) as the United States but a fraction of the gun violence. Ergo sum: the staunch gun control of European countries was not the reason why they had fewer gun deaths. Government stepping in and trying to take away guns — in flagrant violation of the second amendment — would not reduce gun deaths. Moore’s unruly Oscar-winner fired shots all over the place, including through his foot. (Thus as a college leftist I could confuse my conservative friends by taking a second amendment position often to their right.)

In this regard, Journalist T.R. Reid’s popular paean for socialized medicine The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care, might as well be called “Bowling for Obamacare.” Each of Reid’s 13 chapters are ultimately gutter balls, totally failing to demonstrate that a system of socialized medicine could actually work.

I read The Healing of America because one of my progressive friends insisted that I must. Throughout the last eight months of debating health care Reid’s book was his Bible. My friend sang of how great other countries systems were compared to our expensive, unjust, immoral abomination. So I decided to give Reid a shot to make his case.

Reid’s method is not to argue for any specific health care plan. Instead he goes globe-trotting, visiting France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada, Taiwan, India, and Switzerland. Reid explains the differences in each of these systems, talks about his personal experiences, and sings the praises of how superior most of these systems are when compared to the American system that fails to cover everyone.

But in chapter after chapter there’s a continual confession: these systems are running deficits. Reid talks about how in France they have to “reform” the system every few years to try and keep it afloat. But how long can foreign governments keep shuffling the debts around before the system finally collapses?

And how is it that other countries can manage to pay their doctors so much less than the United States does? Well, a system of socialized education in other countries ensures that doctors do not have the kind of six-figure student loan debt they do here in America. Socialized medicine requires socialized higher education. Such is the socialism snowball. The government absorbing one sector of society requires another and then another.

Reid also wants to claim that these other health care systems result in a healthier population. So he cites statistics like infant mortality rates to try and prove his point. But it’s quite clear [2] that infant mortality is an inaccurate measure of the health of a country. Further, Reid does not bother to admit how other country’s markedly different cultures, diets and lifestyles affect the overall health of the nation. He cannot effectively link the means a country uses to pay for health care with things like life expectancy. There are just too many variables involved in the collective health of a nation.

Reid also shows his political ignorance. He does not bother to actually explain why our country has the system it does. Why is it that our country embraces a system where in most cases the individual is responsible for providing his own healthcare? One need only read our founding documents — the Constitution and the Federalist Papers. Our country is based on the principle that the individual is responsible for himself. The sole purpose of the state is to ensure freedom for the individual. Other countries do not have this heritage of liberty. So of course nowhere does Reid even bother to ask, “Gee, are European-style health care systems constitutional? When our country was founded we were designed to do this?” Such questions have no relevance whatsoever to him.

All of these points I’ve raised are pretty obvious:

A) Socialized medical systems at home and abroad are going bankrupt. Why? Because they are based on fraudulent economics that do not understand human nature.
B) These systems require drastically higher taxes than we have now. This is something that is virtually never talked about honestly.
C) Nationalized medical systems in other countries are reliant on taxpayer-funded higher education to train the doctors. Socialism begets socialism.
D) These systems are not cheaper. Government mandating a price for a good or service does not lower the actual cost set by the market.
E) There is no evidence that these systems actually result in healthier populations. Correlation does not equal causation.

F) Such systems are directly at odds with the principles upon which our country was founded. The government was never intended to provide health insurance for every citizen.

So why can’t Reid see it? Why can’t my friend who insisted I read his Bible acknowledge this stuff? Why is it that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and President Barack Obama cannot grasp these points when they have supposedly been waist-deep in these issues for years?

It’s the same reason why Moore cannot even perceive that his own film refutes the gun control cause. The overwhelming psychological need to pursue “social justice” steamrolls over all contradictory facts. In confronting advocates of socialized medicine conservatives are not dealing with rational actors fairly pursuing the truth. They’re in a contest with True Believers whose minds were made up long ago. Understand this single point and all of a sudden the last year’s worth of health care “dialogue” suddenly make sense.

As conservatives near the endgame on the political fight over Obamacare that’s what needs to be kept in mind.

Obama’s Failed Weatherization Efforts

Obama’s Failed Weatherization Efforts

March 9th, 2010

By Rich Lowry, Real Clear Politics

 Obama’s Infomercial for weather stripping created no new jobs

A year ago, President Barack Obama peered into our economic future and saw foam sealant and weatherstripping.

In the midst of a punishing recession, Obama would wield that incomparable jobs-creating tool, the caulk gun. What the Works Progress Administration was to Franklin Roosevelt, the government-funded weatherization of homes would be to Obama.

“If you allocate money to weatherize homes,” Obama effused to an audience in Elkhart, Ind., “the homeowner gets the benefit of lower energy bills. You right away put people back to work, many of whom in the construction industry and in the housing industry are out of work right now.” And it’s a step to “a new energy future.”

Obama was hawking another one of his cost-free, best-of-all-worlds scenarios, one that has been exposed in all its self-deluding inanity in the space of a year. As a writer parodying such magical thinking long ago observed, “Sun-beams may be extracted from cucumbers, but the process is tedious.” A sun-beam extraction program might have been just as effective, and nearly as timely.

Obama poured $5 billion into weatherization as part of last year’s stimulus and wanted to spend billions more in a second stimulus. The Department of Energy managed to get the money to the states, where it has swelled the coffers for weatherization and done little else.

Read More:

Obama: I will Pass Health Care even if it kills me

Obama: I will Pass Health Care even if it kills me

March 9th, 2010


 Obama is on a mission to pass healthcare no matter what

In private pitches to Democrats, President Barack Obama says he will persuade Congress to pass his health care overhaul even if it kills him and even if he has to ask deeply distrustful lawmakers to trust him on a promise the White House doesn’t have the power to keep.

That, in a sometimes darkly joking way, is what the president is telling Democratic House members as he begins an all-out push to coax Congress into passing his proposals despite voters’ misgivings and Republicans’ dire warnings.

“He made the case, ‘Listen, we put in a very hard year working on health care reform and the time for action is now,’” said Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., one of several Democrats who met with Obama at the White House on Thursday.

Obama joked that the political battle has contributed to the recent rise in his cholesterol, Kind said, and the president noted how ironic it would be if health care drove him to his grave.

But Obama is anything but sickly these days, making health care pitches Monday in Philadelphia and Wednesday in St. Louis, and instructing aides to address every question or concern Democratic lawmakers possibly can raise.

Read More: