Category Archives: Racial Profiling

Legalizing Terror In America With Benefits

Married To Children
Islam, Where Old Men Bethrothing Children Is A Legal Delicacy
IF ISLAM WITH ITS TERRORIST FOUNDER, role model and long bloody history gets all the fringe benefits, social largesse and tax breaks shouldn’t all other violent gangs with terrorist founders get the same benefits?

Was the founder of the Muslim gang mentality any less violent and hateful than Shoko Asahara of “Aum Shinkryo”, David Duke of K.K.K., Charles Manson of “The Family,” William Ayers of “Weather Underground” or gang-leaders of MS-13? Certainly not. Didn’t the founder of Islam kill and rob more people, enslave and rape more women than all the above mentioned gangsters combined? Isn't Mohammed considered the perfect example of an exemplary model of man, a man privileged to be unquestioned and instead, shamelessly imitated in all his ways. At least these other gangsters had the decency of not killing their own gang members and showing them mercy, but Prophet of Islam had no such reservations. He had his own followers burned alive when they got out of line. Meanwhile here another peek into Mohammed.

Type 1. Ticks the “Muslim” box on forms. Watches al Jazeera. Doesn’t drink in front of the children.

Type 2. Goes to mosque on Fridays. Buys Halal meat.

Type 3. Prays five times a day. Neat beards and headscarves. Advocates the non-violent bits of Sharia law.

Type 4. Supports full Sharia law, and world-wide Caliphate. Understands abrogation. Bushy beards and rent-a-tents.

Type 5. Taliban and al Qaeda.

Read it all at this website created by ex-Muslims.

And while the most gruesome of news continues to reach some of us concerning the volatility of global Islam on the rise, other oddball Islamic-inspired events also contribute to a mountain of evidence for concern to those of us who might wish for world peace if the question wasn't so damned contentious as to who gets to make the rules for that peace, such as this snippet from Kuwait, so many in the West sleep:

The only two women in Kuwait's executive branch risk being driven out from the government. The parliamentary legal committee has decided that their presence violates the constitution and the law, because they do not wear the hijab, the Islamic veil. The committee's statement will now be submitted to voting by the fifty members of parliament.

The Kuwaiti parliament is dominated by conservatives, who had four of the seven seats on the committee. But three "liberals" also voted against the two women. "The committee unanimously decided that appointing the two ministers in the cabinet violated article 82 of the constitution and article one of the election law for failing to abide by Islamic regulations," says Ali al-Hajeri, spokesman for the legal and legislative committee.

The two women under accusation are education minister Nuriya al-Sebih and administrative development minister Mudhi al-Humoud. Appointed following the elections on May 17, the two women immediately met with negative reactions from conservatives. At its first session, on June 1, parliament approved submission of the matter to the committee, which has now decided. That same day, as cabinet members took the oath, nine parliamentarians left the hall in protest against the "un-Islamic" attire of the two women. As one wit put it, guess in Kuwait you need to be a Type 3 Muslim to get along.

Unofficially...

Type 1. Ticks the “Muslim” box on forms. Watches al Jazeera. Doesn’t drink in front of the children.

Type 2. Goes to mosque on Fridays. Buys Halal meat.

Type 3. Prays five times a day. Neat beards and headscarves. Advocates the non-violent bits of Sharia law.

Type 4. Supports full Sharia law, and world-wide Caliphate. Understands abrogation. Bushy beards and rent-a-tents.

Type 5. Taliban and al Qaeda.

Like VP candidate Joe Biden said, "Gird yourself, people. It's going to get rough."

2 Muslim Crackers In South Carolina

I'M GOING TO LEAVE this one entirely up to the ouraged (as am I) readers over at Jihad Watch. A racial profiling discussion, at its best.

Outrageous Visa Waiver Program

We received this email. The compelling topic of illegal immigration warrants its republication here. There's a reason we do not seem to be winning the war for America's own hearts and minds. We have disintegrated as a people. We have sold our soul and our future. Is it too late to recover our sensibilities and our purpose? This is the issue at hand:

I was interviewed a couple of days ago by a reporter from the Saint Petersburg Times about the Visa Waiver Program. I have attached a copy of the article below. As you might expect, I remain absolutely opposed to this program that in my judgement creates an unacceptable vulnerability for our nation, especially as we continue to attempt to keep terrorists from entering our country and launching terrorist attacks that have the potential of wreaking havoc on our nation and slaughtering many of our citizens.

During the Second World War, our nation’s leaders did what was in America’s best interests to secure our nation and win the war. We live in a democratic country because of the leadership and efforts exhibited by the “Greatest Generation.” It is time that our leaders conducted themselves as true leaders especially as we prosecute a war on terror and made the decisions that will truly secure our nation, regardless of the demands of corporations that are motivated by obvious, unrelenting greed.
While much attention has been paid to our porous borders, especially our border with Mexico, it is estimated that as many as 40% of the illegal aliens currently in the United States did not run our nation's borders, but rather entered our country through ports of entry. On May 11, 2006 I testified before the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on International Relations.

The topic of the hearing was, "VISA OVERSTAYS: CAN WE BAR THE TERRORIST DOOR?" In considering the issue of aliens who overstay their authorized period of admission, the impact of the Visa Waiver Program on this issue was considered as an area of particular vulnerability. You can read the transcript of that hearing at:

US House of Representatives

I have written about my concerns regarding the impact of the Visa Waiver Program on previous occasions however, since this article deals with the Visa Waiver Program, I will explain once again, why I am opposed to it. In fact, I have copied a section of a recent commentary about the Visa Waiver Program and attached it below:

Before the attacks of 9/11 we used to be able to arrive at an airport 30 minutes before flight time to take a trip. Today we need to get to the airport at least 2 hours before flight time. If you take a couple of trips a year, you wind up spending more time at airports to comply with the ever more intrusive security requirements than an alien seeking a visa would have to spend at an American embassy or consulate.
The Visa Waiver Program continues on and the President has recently called for the expansion of this program that imperils our nation's security. The Visa Waiver Program makes it far easier for criminals and terrorists to enter the United States.

While American citizens are required to remove their shoes before boarding airliners because Richard Reid, the notorious "Shoe Bomber" secreted explosives in his shoes. Meanwhile, the fact that as a British citizen, Reid was able to board that airliner he intended to destroy in midair with his bombs, without first applying for and receiving a visa because of the Visa Waiver Program is conveniently ignored.

We are highly restricted in being able to bring any fluids on board airliners because a number of terrorists had planned to bring quantities of liquids on board airliners that are harmless by themselves but become explosives when mixed together with other fluids. This ingenious scheme involving binary explosives was put together by more citizens of Great Britain.

They too, could have boarded airliners without first obtaining visas. Visas also help beleaguered inspectors at ports of entry in the United States better screen foreign visitors seeking entry into the United States. The inspector is supposed to conduct an inspection of an arriving alien in about one minute and decide on the admissibility of that alien. The visa process, if done properly, can help make this process more effective. The visa application contains about 40 questions that can provide invaluable information to law enforcement and intelligence officials should that alien ultimately become the focus of an investigation. If an alien lies on an application for a visa, that lie can result in prosecution for visa fraud.

Such fraud is often easier to prove than it is to prove an alien is a terrorist. In fact, terrorist suspects are often charged with visa fraud. If it can be proven that an alien committed visa fraud in conjunction with drug trafficking, the penalty for such fraud increases to a maximum of 20 years in federal custody. The penalty further increases to a maximum of 25 years of incarceration should the alien be found to have committed visa fraud in conjunction with terrorism.

However, under the Visa Waiver Program, none of these potential benefits can be brought to bear. I have been told that this is the case because the travel, hospitality and airline industries have powerful lobbyists and that they are concerned that the visa requirement would discourage aliens from visiting our country, thereby cutting into their profits. In my judgement, this is a foolish and flawed concern.

First of all, in the days, weeks and months after the attacks of September 11, 2001 many airlines found a huge drop in the number of passengers buying tickets. Hotels in New York had a significant drop in occupancy rates and the world economy reverberated for years in the aftermath of the attacks.

Visas can be issued that are valid for up to 10 years so that well established travelers can travel as frequently as they desire and apply for a visa once every ten years. Generally, motorists in the United States and in other countries as well, need to spend a day at the dreaded DMV to renew driver's licenses. Yet nobody would refer to that process as unreasonable.

Before the attacks of 9/11 we used to be able to arrive at an airport 30 minutes before flight time to take a trip. Today we need to get to the airport at least 2 hours before flight time. If you take a couple of trips a year, you wind up spending more time at airports to comply with the ever more intrusive security requirements than an alien seeking a visa would have to spend at an American embassy or consulate.

richard_reid
Richard Reid
Yet our government refuses to require visas from the citizens of 27 countries that currently participate in the dangerous Visa Waiver Program. Incidentally, the e-passports that are finally being used are not a substitute for the visa requirement anymore than airbags do not obviate the need to wear seatbelts.

What is disconcerting, is the fact that the Visa Waiver Program is continuing on and, in fact, may be expanded if the President has his way, is the direct result of pressure being applied by the tourist-related industries that can not see beyond the bottom line. In effect, their greed is jeopardizing our nation's security and the safety of our citizens. The outrage is that their wishes appear to be this administration's commands!

Of course, the executives who want the Visa Waiver Program to be expanded are being extremely shortsighted, because if, indeed, there is another attack against our nation, their industry will suffer immeasurable harm. They are apparently being blinded by unfettered greed.

What I want to know, is how can our government yield to the pressure being applied by those lobbyists employed by those executives? In matters of national security, corporate interests should carry little if any weight. Yet this administration is doing what these corporate executives want. If you doubt this, read the news article below.

During the Second World War, our nation's leaders did what was in America's best interests to secure our nation and win the war. We live in a democratic country because of the leadership and efforts exhibited by the "Greatest Generation." It is time that our leaders conducted themselves as true leaders especially as we prosecute a war on terror and made the decisions that will truly secure our nation, regardless of the demands of corporations that are motivated by obvious, unrelenting greed.

—Michael Cutler

Moving Violations in Brunswick, GA

brunswick
Lover's Oak in Brunswick

MOSS-TRAINED BRUNSWICK, GA—Project readers might be interested in an example of how voter suppression and denial of voting rights has allegedly occurred down along the Georgia marshes where I once roamed. The following paragraph is taken from an online source: "Brunswick is a small port city on the Atlantic Ocean of about 17,000 people, some 70 percent African-American, who are mostly poor. Just across the marsh are St. Simon's Island and Sea Island, where the G-8 summit was held in the summer of 2004. Both islands are home to some of the wealthiest people in the U.S., particularly Sea Island, which is a privately owned resort."

However, as I was checking a few facts, I discovered that Brunswick is 59.8% black, 33.1% white non-hispanic, 5.8% hispanic, and nearly 4% other. Median house value was rated at $61, 200, and median household income was $22,272. Outside the county seat of Brunswick proper, Glynn County, which includes the islands mentioned in the article the numbers do change dramatically: population 70,356; whites non-hispanic 68.9%, black 26.5%, all others just over 5%. Median household income came in at $38,765, while median house value did rise to $114,500.

These two sets of figures dramatically alter the perspective the author was trying to urge on readers at Workers World.

True. Elaine Brown, former chair of the Black Panther Party, moved to Brunswick in the fall of 2004 after participating in the protest activities earlier that year at the summit. There has never been a black mayor in Brunswick. Although the port creates enormous wealth, conditions for the majority of the residents are appalling—low wages, deteriorating housing, few social services, polluted water and air, et cetera.

Port of Brunswick
Port of Brunswick

Probably true. Brown decided to run for mayor and conducted a grass-roots, door-to-door campaign, explaining her campaign platform of channeling the resources of the city into raising the standard of living for the majority. She especially opposed a multi-billion-dollar "improvement" plan, backed by Sea Island Corp. and other monied interests, to tear down the entire black community in the downtown area and build expensive condominiums, apartments and houses. Over 400 volunteers canvassed the neighborhoods. Brown spoke at more than 70 churches. Discussions were held in bars, neighborhood centers, and on porches about what the community needed.

Probably true. Just weeks before the Nov. 8 election, two people came forward to challenge her residency in Brunswick: a white businessman, friend of the current mayor, and a poor African-American woman. Neither of them had ever met Elaine Brown and said they didn't know each other, yet both were represented before the Election Commission by the same high-priced lawyer.

True. The Glynn County Board of Elections decided that Brown had not lived in Brunswick for a full year, even though she had registered to vote on Nov. 4, 2004, at her Brunswick address.

True. Brown's name was removed from the ballot. The board ordered that any write-in votes would not be counted. A week later an appeals judge sustained the disqualification without comment.

brunswickmap_14
Map of SE Georgia

Partially true. Then on November 7, one day before the election, a federal judge ruled that write-in votes for Brown would be counted. The next day, the election was held in Brunswick, Ga. There was a low voter turnout. Brian Thomas, the Sea Island candidate and proponent of the "redevelopment plan," won. This is what "democracy" looks like in south Georgia.

Perhaps this is what democracy "tends" to look like in south Georgia by those who don't see a larger picture (like most far left liberals today). The fact is other vital details have been left out which may or may not account for the election fraud of the Brunswick "white boy network." Ms. Brown ran as the Green Party candidate, often a stumbling block for "carpetbagging" candidates who rush into a new locale sensing opportunity without having read much of the small print. One suspects the Green Party is not an established route to public office in Brunswick, GA, and therefore Ms. Brown may have faced legal techicalities which her supporters such as Workers World may have simply ignored.

As a DC resident for nearly 25 years, I know that new or fringe political parties here must file signatured and ratified petitions, meeting all deadlines to be considered a viable ballot option, and those same parties must maintain a certain number of votes over a certain number of election cycles in order to remain a viable party in good standing. Is it not possible that this "small print" was the primary snag in her Green Party entrance into Republican turf, instead of the vicious conspiracy of rednecks and confederates that Ms. Brown and her supporters paint.

On her own website Brown posts an open and hopeful letter she wrote for the San Francisco Bay View where she calls on clemency and apotheosizes convicted felon and Crips gang co-founder Stanley Tookie Wiiliams, who nevertheless was executed on December 13, 2005 in the California electric chair despite a mass protest to have Gov. Schwarzenegger spare his life.

And in that same letter she trots out all the usual martyrs from the hey day of the BPP, Bunchy Carter, John Huggins, Fred Hampton, Bobby Hutton and Huey Newton, several of whom were gunned down by rival gangmembers and the usual arguments about local police oppression and CIA complicity in the black communities to shore up her roster of sympathies while adding George Bush to her list of contemporary enemies. I suppose the governator has made her list now.

brunswick-georgia61
US 17 in Brunswick

Okay. Fine. Dandy even. But most of these unfortunate events Ms. Brown embraces with a rather obvious longing took place over forty years ago, a fact that seems lost on a generation that seems to seek perpetual war rather than dedicating new resolve to focus on moving forward. We could start by playing by the rules as we find them and winning by them instead of whining and pleading oppression and bigotry at every turn. Notice that Ms. Brown does not refrain from using race-loaded language in describing her opponents.

Comprehend this. The world is unfair, and a lifelong struggle for most of us, of whatever race or creed we imagine ouselves. Hell, I feel victimized nearly every time I step into the streets to stretch my legs or when my health suddenly takes a strange turn and I can't get doctors to give me the time of day, but to suggest that I am being singled out EVERY time I face a hardship, is radicalized faulty thinking, and bad religion.

While it happens often enough (think Massachusetts native Robert F. Kennedy in NY, Hillary Rodham-Clinton carpetbagging in NY, Chicagoan Jesse Jackson in WDC), it always stuns me that voters would even consider someone who moves into their locale just to make an opportunistic run for public office—anyone but a carpetbagger unworthy of one's support. This is the true scandal in this news story, in my humble opinion. But then again, I'm not black, and I'm not running for public office. As they say, politics makes for strange bedfellows.