Wishing you all a safe and Happy New Year. In the words of John Lennon and Yoko One, "Let's hope it's a good one, without any fear."
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
A Modern Proposal
This morning on Fox News, someone said that there is no way to identify the ideology of a passenger on a plane but that we should continue to identify radical Muslims as jihadist. We currently do neither, and it's about time we did both.
Since 9/11, we continue to live the ridiculous myth that bombings in the name of Islam, can, have, and will be perpetrated by anyone other than Muslims so we must therefore screen everyone. This is farcical, unnecessary, and we all know it to be unmitigated bullshit. Not only does this practice perpetuate the mirage of security, but, in the end, is extremely dangerous. The latest attempt to blow apart an American airliner is a perfect example of this. Forget for a moment, that this young man from Nigeria purchased his one-way ticket with cash, had no luggage, or that his father had warned the authorities of his radicalism. He should have been on anybody's no-fly list because his name is UMAR FAROUK ABDULMUTALLAB!
Zenaphobic? No, I'm being pragmatic. Instead of assuming that all people are interested in, let alone capable of, blowing up Western, Christian, or Jewish things, let's assume that all Muslims are. Then it remains their problem in clearing their individual names off of any no-fly or border crossing lists. Although Muslims make up a large, and growing, portion of the worlds' population, their numbers are still more manageable than an entire planets. I have friends that are Muslim, and they would have no problem in clearing their names within minutes. Would these friends be upset with my proposal? Perhaps, but we can ill afford to worry about such trivialities anymore. It's time we put an end to "politically correct."
This practice would also push non-violent Muslims to help fight, what continues to be for many, a reluctant war against some of their own. Let's put the onus, once and for all, where it belongs. If the Muslim religion is so peace-loving and humanitarian, and I believe that it is, prove it. Help us destroy this insidious cancer before it threatens to consume us all.
Since 9/11, we continue to live the ridiculous myth that bombings in the name of Islam, can, have, and will be perpetrated by anyone other than Muslims so we must therefore screen everyone. This is farcical, unnecessary, and we all know it to be unmitigated bullshit. Not only does this practice perpetuate the mirage of security, but, in the end, is extremely dangerous. The latest attempt to blow apart an American airliner is a perfect example of this. Forget for a moment, that this young man from Nigeria purchased his one-way ticket with cash, had no luggage, or that his father had warned the authorities of his radicalism. He should have been on anybody's no-fly list because his name is UMAR FAROUK ABDULMUTALLAB!
Zenaphobic? No, I'm being pragmatic. Instead of assuming that all people are interested in, let alone capable of, blowing up Western, Christian, or Jewish things, let's assume that all Muslims are. Then it remains their problem in clearing their individual names off of any no-fly or border crossing lists. Although Muslims make up a large, and growing, portion of the worlds' population, their numbers are still more manageable than an entire planets. I have friends that are Muslim, and they would have no problem in clearing their names within minutes. Would these friends be upset with my proposal? Perhaps, but we can ill afford to worry about such trivialities anymore. It's time we put an end to "politically correct."
This practice would also push non-violent Muslims to help fight, what continues to be for many, a reluctant war against some of their own. Let's put the onus, once and for all, where it belongs. If the Muslim religion is so peace-loving and humanitarian, and I believe that it is, prove it. Help us destroy this insidious cancer before it threatens to consume us all.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Elevated Threats
My brother and my oldest son share an absurd and ridiculous similarity with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the young Nigerian who most recently tried to blow up an airliner bound for Detroit on Christmas Day. All three are on a list called the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment. So are another 550,000 people worldwide. It can make travel a hassle. I suspect that my brother Kevin and my son Sean are on the list because someone in Belfast, or some other part of Northern Ireland, with the last name of Kelly, might have once purchased a scone or some soda bread at an IRA bake sale. Being included on the list doesn't prevent one from flying but it does require some additional explanation at the airport.
Had authorities included the information provided to the U.S. Embassy in Lagos by the suspects father, that his son Umar had developed terrorist tendencies, the young man would have been put on the Terrorist Screening Database and barred from boarding an airplane. It most certainly would have prevented him from being issued a "multi entry visa" from our State Department. Another classic example of the authorities not connecting the dots. For two years, security personnel have known about Abdulmutallab. Thankfully, the "sophisticated explosive device" he had strapped to his leg proved more sophisticated than he himself could manage, and the whole thing went up in smoke. Next time we might not be so lucky.
For years we've been told that these suicide bombers are the product of bad neighborhoods, with little to look forward to in life. So to substantiate their miserable lives, they seek to destroy the lives of others in the name of Islam. Turns out this latest spawn of Mohammed comes from an affluent and influential family. So did Osama bin Laden by the way. In Super Freakonomics, by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, a study that the book sites, claims that "terrorists tend to be drawn from well-educated, middle-class or high-income families." My guess is that killing westerners is a pastime enjoyed by all socioeconomic strata of jihadist.
New restrictions on the flying public will no doubt bubble up from the cauldrons of politically correct bureaucrats. Already international passengers are being told they cannot leave their seats, or touch their carry-on luggage, if they are within an hour from landing at their American destination. For now, U.S. officials are blaming lax security measures at oversees airports. Abdulmutallab boarded the original leg of Flight 253 in Lagos, Nigeria. From an account I read on the internet, "American authorities are still confident they can prevent an active bomber from boarding a plane at a domestic airport." I suspect these are the same American authorities who couldn't, didn't or wouldn't, connect the dots that led to Nidal Malik Hasan killing twelve, and wounding 42, fellow soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Smoke Signals
I quit smoking in March of this year. I had smoked about two packs of cigarettes per day for the last 35 years. I'd had enough. Along with the related health problems, the costs of smoking were becoming too high. For a number of years now, states across this country have been trying to solve their budgetary problems on the lungs of smokers by trying to raise revenue through increased taxes on tobacco products. Here in Michigan, we have the fourth highest cigarette tax in America at $2, plus an additional federal tax of $1.01. At almost $6 per pack, taxes equal at least 50% of the cost of the product. Add it all up and those are costs I can live without, literally, thank you very much.
Smokers are an easy target. Who wants to align themselves with foul smelling, doorway clogging litterbugs who pollute our air and treat our world as their personal ashtray. Certainly not me, nor the do gooders of the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes brought to you by the National Fire Protection Association or NFPA. The NFPA's mission is to "reduce the worldwide burden of fire and other hazards on the quality of life by providing and advocating consensus codes and standards, research, training and education." Ok, first off, three questions: 1) Who's quality of life are you trying to protect?, 2) Could conservatives be another "hazard" you wish to eliminate?, and 3) Is fire really a burden? And, by the way, what the heck are the oxymoronically named fire-safe cigarettes (FSC's) anyway?
Glad you asked, because beginning on January 1, 2010, Michigan retailers will only be able to sell you fire-safe cigarettes whether or not you want to smoke them. And apparently, we are one of the last states to comply with the wishes of the National Fire Protection Association. New York smokers have been sucking these things down since 2004 (and you thought Governor Paterson, Chuck Schumer, and high taxes were the reason for the mass exodus of the Empire State). FSC's, or lower ignition cigarettes, will extinguish themselves if not inhaled on a frequent enough basis. Why do we need FSC's? Because according to the coalition and the U.S. Fire Administration, a division of the Federal Emergency Management Agency or FEMA, almost 1000 people die every year in house fires caused by higher ignition or "unsafe" cigarettes. You got that right. Almost 500,000 people die every year from smoking related health problems, and yet the coalition wants to save one thousand of them from burning to death in their own homes.
Can you imagine the kinds of fire retardant chemicals necessary to make a cigarette fire-safe? Not to worry. According to a Harvard study, "there were no substantial differences in toxicity when key indicators were measured for fire-safe cigarettes and their conventional counterparts." Despite showing higher levels of poisonous compounds in FSC's, the study concluded that "there is no evidence that these increases affect the already highly toxic nature of cigarette smoke." In other words, why not put more shit into your shit sandwich?
With friends like the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes looking out for their safety, smokers have fewer enemies. And who are some of the people behind the coalition? Among the usual suspects like the AARP, the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the American Fire Sprinkler Association, there is the Boston Society of Vulcans. The Vulcans, no relation to the Dr. Spock variety, at least I don't think so, are a 501(c)3 non profit organization "focused on empowering people in need through education and support in the area of fire and public safety, prevention and employment into the fire service." Kind of like an ACORN for pyros.
Another partner in the coalition is the Center for Polyurethanes Industry. In their intro, they want us to know that they were formerly known as the Alliance for Polyurethanes Industry. So glad they cleared that one up for us. The scandal that prompted that name change must have been horrific. Anyhoo, the Center promotes the "sustainable growth of the polyurethane industry," and you can bet that the continued manufacture of FSC's will go a long ways towards that effort. In any event, in addition to the above mentioned entities that comprise the coalition, we can all take comfort in the fact that the Tobacco Free Kids are listed as a supporter.
Mind you that the same kind of progressive mentalities and government interventions of the cigarette safety coalition are the same ones which will produce and run Obamacare. Once again, your government is spending massive amounts of money on measures and initiatives that only marginally move the numbers. A near collapse of our economy just so a few American presidents could say they increased home ownership. Billions spent on incentivizing people to buy foreign cars when the American people owned GM and Chrysler. A healthcare program that could further ruin our economy just to insure another 12% of our population. None of this makes sense yet we invariably vote for more. Let's start to recover what we've lost in the process, common sense, come 2010.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Jungle Fever and OPM in Copenhagen
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama sure like to spend the OPM (other people's money). They both have pledged to to put the U.S. taxpayer on the hook for $100 billion annually (that's per year) to support a global fund to pay restitution (read extortion) to African and other developing nations for all the damage we and the rest of the industrialized world have supposedly inflicted on their peoples. Regardless of what you think about this pledge, and I disagree wholeheartedly, how does paying off other countries cool down the earth's temperature?
Help Me Help You
Don't you just love the way politicians think. Even when they try to do the right thing, they invariably return to what they know best and that is usually making everything about themselves. Take Michigan's struggle to compete for the Obama administrations' "Race to The Top" education funds. Michigan stands to receive $400 million in additional Department of Education funds if the Michigan Legislature can agree on a proper mix of school reforms as promoted by President Obama. Ironically it's the Democrats who are dragging their feet on these reforms because their overlords, organized labor, in this case the Michigan Education Association or MEA, disagrees with increasing the number of charter schools or tying teacher pay to student performance.
Nevertheless, a handful of reform minded Democrats led by Rep. Tim Melton (D- Auburn Hills) and Sen. Buzz Thomas (D-Detroit) agree with the required reform measures. Melton, chair of the House Education Committee, has said, "What's been terrible for me the last few years is watching the communities that are most affected by this (failing schools), that are Democratic districts, and Democrats seem to be the ones that don't want to stand up and say enough is enough. Well enough is enough." Unfortunately, their solution to this problem is to raise funds for themselves. The aforementioned lawmakers announced their formation of a political action committee, Michigan Democrats for Education Reform.
Nevertheless, a handful of reform minded Democrats led by Rep. Tim Melton (D- Auburn Hills) and Sen. Buzz Thomas (D-Detroit) agree with the required reform measures. Melton, chair of the House Education Committee, has said, "What's been terrible for me the last few years is watching the communities that are most affected by this (failing schools), that are Democratic districts, and Democrats seem to be the ones that don't want to stand up and say enough is enough. Well enough is enough." Unfortunately, their solution to this problem is to raise funds for themselves. The aforementioned lawmakers announced their formation of a political action committee, Michigan Democrats for Education Reform.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)