I never thought it possible, but I adgree with Palin: Profiling is essential, but profiling only without undignifying subjects! The “Hasan massacare,” a reenforcement.

Any time Sarah Palin name appears in the news, I cringe. This lady who quit Alaska’s governorship to feather her own nest, is irritating, and appears to lack substance.

But, Sarah Palin’s recent statements about profiling, are right on. The ex-Governor concentrated on Muslims, and that is not right. Members of any group with an agenda, or history of harming United States citizens, should be profiled.

Freedoms intended by the Founding Father did not include to hurt others. Free speech, for example does not include the right to “shout fire, in a crowded theater.” Killing innocent people in the name of religion, in the name of righting past wrongs, or almost any other cause, are not a freedoms Americans have, or should have.

Government and law enforcement do profile as part of their routine work, but they try to cover that fact by being politically correct. For example, an officer in the Watts district of LA would be fool heart to not be more concerned, and act accordingly when encountering African-American, or Latino youth than whites, in suspicious surroundings.

The Government is also engaged in “economic profiling.” On flights the Transportation Administration (TSA) now insist that airlines do not let passenger in economy class use facilities in business and first class, an area closer to the cockpit than the economy section.

Profiling is alive and well, and should be expended to protect the public. The “Hasan massacre” of Fort Hood is but a clear example why Muslims in the United States should be profiled, as they are, for example, in Israel. In Israel it takes my wife and I about five minutes to go through airport security, for a Muslim couple ir would take an hour, or perhaps more. But please not, when you see a Muslim couple interrogated and their luggage searched, it is done in a manner that is impersonal allowing the Muslims to maintain their dignity.

Profiling is an important law enforcement tool and should be use to protect public safety. profiling Muslims whose religion does teach violence is the prudent thing to di in the United States. This on place where Sarah Pain and I Agree!

When will Obama learn to listen? Last week Ahmadinejad made it clear that if the US continues to “clasp Israel’s hand,” there will be no negotiation for Iran with the United States! Or, will Obama capitulate and throw Israel under the bus?

President Obama was insisting in Korea that he still intends to use diplomacy with Iran. President Obama said that after Ahmadinejad told an Islamic conference in Turkey that unless the US severe relations with Israel, there will not be Iran/US discussions.

For Obama to say what he said regarding diplomacy with Iran, after Ahmadinejad speech, suggests one, or two things:

1. That Obama is so eager to deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran, that he is willing to throw Israel under the bus.

2. That President Obama is so naive that he believes that he can break Iran will, and bring about negotiation.

Regardless of all his good will, Barak Hussein Obama must wake up and realize the neither Iran, nor any other Islamic entity is interested in being his friend…

All of Jerusalem is Israel’s via Divine authority!

Jerusalem is Israel’s Capital by Divine authority, regardless how hard [human] leaders try, they have no authority to relinquish any part of the city since its status was dictated by the Divine.

Netanyahu, and other leaders, may be able to negotiate some of the West bank even though land taken in a defensive war is historically, and by any de facto International Law, for the conquerer to control, or relinquish, at its largess.

Palin: From hockey-mom to Governor, to President, to Pope?

Sarah Palin quit Governorship to run for President, would she quit if President to try for Pope? Or, is President higher than Pope?

Or, once a quitter, always a quitter! Commitments are important, and could the act of letting Alaska’s voters down be a trend?

Enough said!

Unilaterally declared Palestinian state will be a boon for Israel!

As a governing authority, the Palestinian Authority was able to claim, once, and once again, that it does not control acts against Israel that come from its borders. The PA kept stating that acts by fringe groups such as Hamas and other Jihadies, are out of its control.
As a sovereign state, the Government of such state, will be responsible for all acts from within its border, and may be faced with a formal state of war which Israel.
If such situation develops, Israel may just welcome a formal war to use as a vehicle for “adjusting it borders,” something that it would dearly, and for good reasons, like to do.
The Palestinian authorities may wish to thing long and hard before declaring statehood, because with statehood comes responsibility, and risks, that they may well not be ready to assume.

Is Obama trying to “whitewash” the Ft. Hood massacare?

President Obama requested Congress to put off any inquiry into the Fort Hood massacre; he stated that he would like the military to conduct its own inquiry, and that Congress has “more important work.”

On the surface President Obama’s request may have some merit if not for a number of facts. The most obvious fact has to do with the military not wanting to expose its flaws in allowing the situation to occur in the first place.

But, moving on. The Congress has no more important work than fighting terror, and there are enough reason to classify the Fort Hood massacre as a terrorist act. Adding to that, getting out 100 shots from two handguns in the short time that major Hasan did his dastardly deed, would require a magician; was the Major that good, and if he was, how did a medical doctor become so proficient in the use of handguns?

There are many other reasons to suggest that an inquiry independent of the military is in order. The question that President Obama’ request raises, however, has to do with the fact that he seems to protect anything Muslim; is that his actual motive?

Ahmadinejad “line-in-the-sand,” to Obama: Drop all Israel association, or no discussions with Iran!

Ahmadinejad, at an Islamic Conference in Turkey, informed Obama that any additional association of the United States with Israel will rule out any discussions between his regime and the United States. The Iranian leader did not speak of support, but rather of any association (“clasping of the hands”,) with the State of Israel.

Will Obama further his actions of dissociation the United States from Israel and attempt to deal with Iran? Or, will Obama stay on track of historical American friendship with Israel and take “non diplomatic” steps in dealing with the Islamic Republic of Iran?

“Rhambo” to foes of Democrats, yet a puppy on Obama’s leash: Emanuel is not a friend of Israel! Or, did Ahmadinejad trump Obama, again?

Rham Emanuel, the son of a Jewish-Israeli father, is no friend of Israel! Only 4% of Israeli Jews consider President Obama a friend of Israel, and Rham Emanuel, the Presidents’s chief of staff, simply parrots his boss. Much of the bidding Rham Emanuel does on behalf of his boss, is done at the expense of Israel’s interests.

When President Obama was speaking at the Fort Hood memorial service trying to be conciliatory to Muslims, his chief of staff was substituting for him and addressing a Jewish group in Washington DC, Emanuel was simply trying to push the Obama’s agenda particularly Obama’s anti-Israel policies.

Emanuel was introduced to the Jewish audience as “one of us,” when in reality he should have been called a turn-coat on Israel and on Judaism. Emanuel called tor the immediate freeze on settlements, even though, with his upbringing, he should have realized that he was asking the Jewish people to act in a manner contrary to what their god instructed them to do. Does Rhambo Emanuel expect Israel, the Jewish people, and the Israeli leadership, to accept directives from his boss over orders from God?

A chasm between Israel and the United States grows. This wide chasm that was created by Barak Hussein Obama and his Administration in the few short months, since taking office, is becoming so wide, that regardless of how sympathetic to Israel future Administrations may be, the chasm may never be closed, and the United States may lose its most, or perhaps, only, dependable ally that it has in the Middle East.

Mahmoud Ahamdinejad just called President Obama’s bluff! The Iranian leader suggested that if President Obama wishes to engage Iran diplomatically, as he claims, the American President will have to essentially “divorce” the United States from Israel.

Barak Hussein Obama’s actions in the next few weeks will reveal his true colors; will he still insist on negotiation with Iran and tacitly accept Ahmadinejad notion that the US disassociate itself from Israel? Or, will Obama finally dispel the notion that he is anti-Jewish, and anti-Israel, and deal forcibly with the Iran’s regime?

Should President Obama capitulate to Ahmadinejad and others of his ilk, and insist on continuing diplomacy with Iran, will the Administration’s “Jewish contingency” of Emanuel, Axelrod, etc., stand behind Israel, or will these
people remain Obama’s “lap-dogs,” and support his every move, as irrational as it may be?

Prejean, and Palin, disgracful GOP voices; and a blight on American litrature!

There was a time that to publish a book in the United States one needed to have credible content, and the ability to write; things changed!

For publishers to expose the American public to Sarah Palin, an irresponsible politician, and to Carrie Prejean, a young lady who appears to do almost anything in order to get publicity, borders on the ridiculous. This is especially unreasonable since neither lady is writing her book, professional writer do the job.

Palin, the inexperienced ex Vice Presidential candidate who quit her job as governor of Alaska (letting down Alaska’s votes,) in order to “feather her own nest,” and Prejean, whose words do not reflect her actions, now have book deals, and will become wealthy at the expense of the gullible American public.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that these two ladies were embraced by many GOP conservatives who are looking for voices, especially since Rush Limbaugh the major conservative spokesperson, and the party, are now at odds. Having these two ladies appear to represent the GOP makes that party look like even a larger loser than it is!

One can only hope that the American public will become outraged enough not to buy a large number of books by these two leeches.

Obama irrational with Muslims: Example, his speech at the Ft. Hood [Massacare] memorial!

The President of the United States of America, Barak Hussein Obama, is a bright, and articulate young man, but a person who seems to lose his objectivity when dealing with his Muslim brethren. Though Barak Obama is a practicing Christian, there is no doubt that his Muslim-birth, and the Islamic environment of his formative years, caused lasting sympathies towards the Muslim people. Being sympathetic to muslims may be a good thing, but doing so with a blind eye to the violent nature of its religious teaching, is dangerous.

In his speech at the memorial to those Americans who were fallen by the American Army Muslim Major Hasan, in Fort Hood, the American President took the occasion to be conciliatory towards Muslims rather than to concentrate on the magnitude of the event, and to admit that Muslims represent more violence than do most other Americans. This is not to say that all non-Muslim American people are violent-free, but it is to say, that in today’s world, based on statistics, Muslims cause more terror acts than all other groups combined.

It is time that the Muslim-born President of the United States, a person who formally adopted Christianity, stood up and admitted to the fact that Islam is a violent religion. It is time that the President, in order to protect the American public (the President’s most important function,) accept the fact that Muslims should, within reasonable bounds, be scrutinized more closely by law-enforcement, than non-Muslims.

The Fort Hood massacre by an American army officer of the Muslim faith, a man who killed in the name of Allah, should have woken President Barak Hussein Obama to the fact that Islam preaches, and in a large way encourages, violence. The American President should, for the moment, forget his Islamic heritage, his Islamic sympathies, Islamic instincts, and Islamic influences, and rise about his emotional ties to admit that Muslims are statistically more dangerous to Americans than non-Muslims.