I Am A Proud Member of Vets For Freedom

For up to date progress in the War In Iraq, please visit Vets For Freedom, an organization I am proud to be a member in good standing of.

Veteran's Suicide Hot Line Number!

1-800-273-TALK (8255) Call this number if you need help!!

A Vast Collection Of Buzzings At Memeorandum

If you wish to catch a buzz without the usual after affects, CLICK TO MEMEORANDUM. (It will not disturb the current page) That will be all. We now return to regular programming.

This Blog Is Moving

Greetings. After this weekend, this Take Our Country Back Blog will be moving to the new web site. Too many conservatives are getting zapped by the intolerant dweebs of the Obama Goons and seeing that this editing platform is a free site, Blogger can do pretty much what it feels like doing. Hence, I now have a paid site and will be migrating the last 1400+ posts shortly.

So, one day, you just may click this page somewhere and it will show up as "private". It has been fun but the intolerant Czarbie Goon Squads are brain dead idiots. They can come play at the new site which I OWN outright.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Obamination: State of the Union: Economics?

In this installment on the STOTU we turn to economic issues.  [Click this link for the Prepared Remarks.]

"At stake right now is not who wins the next election – after all, we just had an election. At stake is whether new jobs and industries take root in this country, or somewhere else. It’s whether the hard work and industry of our people is rewarded. It’s whether we sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but a light to the world."


    In keeping with the manure pile concept, that paragraph contains a rich mix.  It begins with politics, with references to the immediate past and near future elections.  President Obama denied the obvious: the State of the Union Address is the first major campaign speech of the 2012 presidential contest.
   
    The establishment of new jobs and industries can not be facilitated by government action, it can only be hindered.  Creating a climate of uncertainty  is the worst possible hindrance to startups.  Business requires the ability to plan ahead, and that implies certainty, continuity & predictability.  When radical changes are threatened, the required certainty & predictability are destroyed.  Investors will keep their assets in cash or readily converted instruments in the absence of predictability. 

    Mounting deficits & debt load are counterproductive in the worst way. They discourage consumer, investor & entrepreneurial  confidence.  Hard work and industry are not rewarded by proposals to raise taxes on income.  Raising taxes reduces the funds available for investment and discretionary spending. Success is rewarded, failure is punished; hard work does not equate to success.  Most new startups fail within five years.  The success stories we hear about are the exception, not the rule.

    Escalating inflation in fuel, food, transportation, energy, insurance and medical services reduce the discretionary income available for investment and discretionary purchases.  We can't pay more and buy more without earning more.  We can't earn more without jobs.  We can't have more jobs unless people are able and willing to purchase the goods and services produced by people working in those jobs.

    We do not have any leadership to sustain; we have a misleader in the land's highest office. Obama is leading us onto the on ramp of the expressway to ruin.


"We are poised for progress. Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again."


    The stock market remains volatile and its gains are reversible.  Which corporate profits are up and how much?  Is that a function of their recent staff reductions?  How much is the economy growing and how much of that is real growth?

 "But we have never measured progress by these yardsticks alone. We measure progress by the success of our people. By the jobs they can find and the quality of life those jobs offer. By the prospects of a small business owner who dreams of turning a good idea into a thriving enterprise. By the opportunities for a better life that we pass on to our children."


    Jobs do not offer quality of life.  Jobs yield income which enables us to purchase the goods and services we need and want.  Quality of life is a complex concept involving much more than employment and income. 

    The small business owner can not make his enterprise thrive and grow while burdened by inflation, uncertainty, foreign competition and multiplying layers of regulations and restrictions.   We can not give the next generation opportunities for a better life while pursuing policies and actions that drag down and promise to destroy our economy.

"That’s the project the American people want us to work on. Together."


    "My way or the highway" would be closer to the real meaning of that sentence.   Those who understand  the elemental laws of economics must submit in silence; go along to get along or suffer condemnation as 'obstructionists'  who 'block progress'.

" We did that in December. Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today. Every business can write off the full cost of the new investments they make this year. These steps, taken by Democrats and Republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than one million private sector jobs created last year."


    In reality, you were dragged kicking and screaming into extending current income tax rates for two years. If your party would 'work together' the tax rate reductions made on Shrub's watch would be permanent, so that no extension would be required.  The ten year sunset clause was a 'crat demand.  Yours is the party of raising taxes.

    If the Republicans had not won a majority in the House of Representatives last November, you would have happily let the rate reductions expire. Disposable incomes would be considerably lower if you had not been forced to sign the extension into law.  No benefit was done; a great injury was staved off for two years.

    How many businesses have the cash reserves or credit necessary to invest in new investments in equipment?  How many  businesses have the sales potential to make economic use of expanded plants and equipment?   If full write offs are such a good thing, why do it for one year; why not make it permanent?

    How many new jobs were created last year? How many were destroyed?  What was the real net gain and how does that compare to a normal year?


"Many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job meant showing up at a nearby factory or a business downtown. You didn’t always need a degree, and your competition was pretty much limited to your neighbors. If you worked hard, chances are you’d have a job for life, with a decent paycheck, good benefits, and the occasional promotion. Maybe you’d even have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company.

That world has changed. And for many, the change has been painful.  I’ve seen it in the shuttered windows of once booming factories, and the vacant storefronts of once busy Main Streets. I’ve heard it in the frustrations of Americans who’ve seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear – proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game."

   
    The change mentioned above is the result of the golden goose being strangled by by Obama's allies: unions.  With the retirement of the Baby Boom generation, those hidden costs are threatening the solvency of the government as well as major industries.  'More for less; forever more'  does not work in the long run.   Demagogues who deny that fact are part of the problem, not part of the4 solution.

"They’re right. The rules have changed. In a single generation, revolutions in technology have transformed the way we live, work and do business. Steel mills that once needed 1,000 workers can now do the same work with 100.  Today, just about any company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there’s an internet connection."


    Computer software and entertainment can be delivered through an internet connection.  Real physical factors of production and consumer goods require physical delivery.  Obama's attacks on the petroleum industry are making delivery of goods more expensive, increasing inflation.

    Steel mills closed because of extortionate union contracts, burdensome government regulations and foreign competition.  Fifty years ago, economic development  was a major foreign policy objective.  It still is.  Those who want to stimulate 'economic development' in Africa & Asia seem to be incapable of comprehending the fact that competition with our own industries is an unintended consequence of their foreign policy.

"Sustaining the American Dream has never been about standing pat. It has required each generation to sacrifice, and struggle, and meet the demands of a new age."

"Now it’s our turn. We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time. We need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world. We have to make America the best place on Earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit, and reform our government. That’s how our people will prosper.  That’s how we’ll win the future. And tonight, I’d like to talk about how we get there."


    Translation: Pay higher taxes & prices; sacrifice your lifestyle without any present or future benefit because of a power grab by greedy politicians and their cronies in the union movement.

" None of us can predict with certainty what the next big industry will be, or where the new jobs will come from. Thirty years ago, we couldn’t know that something called the Internet would lead to an economic revolution. What we can do – what America does better than anyone – is spark the creativity and imagination of our people.  We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers; of Google and Facebook. In America, innovation doesn’t just change our lives. It’s how we make a living."

   
    How many people are employed by Google and Facebook?  How many people will they and similar corporations employ?  How does that compare to the number of full time jobs lost in the steel, auto and petroleum industries?  How many of the recently unemployed have a hope of gaining jobs with Google, etc?

    You can't eat innovation, warm your house with it in winter, cool your house with it in the summer or pay your taxes with it.  And when it increases productivity so that jobs are lost, you bitch about it.  You can't have it both ways.  The internet and other innovations make it possible for us to expose your contradictory statements and litany of lies. 

"Just think of all the good jobs – from manufacturing to retail – that have come from those breakthroughs."


    Great! Computer chips designed in Israel and produced in Asia. Computers assembled in Asia.  American jobs, yeah, right.

"This is our generation’s Sputnik moment. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven’t seen since the height of the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal.  We’ll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology – an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people."


    We are faced with insolvency, so the President proposes massive new spending. Its like buying a brewery for an alcoholic.  Whenever Obama says "invest" it really means more taxes, more debt, more deficit and more inflation. 

    "Clean energy" is the biggest boondoggle.  Every day we consume vast quantities of liquid fuel which contains 160,000 btu per gallon.  It is not possible to replace that fuel without matching its energy content and there is no alternative fuel that matches its energy density.  The scope and scale of the problem are incomprehensible. 

    There is no alternative energy source.  No matter what you burn, you consume oxygen and generate products of combustion.  The problems of industrial scale production & distribution  should be  sufficient to warn off any thinking person. 

    Electricity is not an alternative energy source. Most of it is produced by burning oil, gas or coal.  We are paying more for food and riots are breaking out in other parts of the world as a predictable consequence of diverting corn from food to motor fuel production. 

    There is no replacement for oil, and if there was, reducing our dependence of Arabian oil would not increase our security unless we were willing to confront Islam, which no current politician is willing to do.  We need leadership with brains, spines & testicles; those are not functions of reduced oil consumption.

    Anthropomorphic global climate change  is a big lie, as an increasing number of people are discovering.  Countless can be a very small number such as zero, it does not need to be a large number. New jobs?  Yeah, right.   Pedicab operators & bike couriers? 

"With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015."


    Assuming 30mpg., the energy consumption is about 5,333 btu/mile. One KWH is about 3412.1416 BTUH. That is about 1.6 KWH per mile.  Assume that each of those million electric vhicles travels 10,000 miles per year.  Where are those 1.2 billion KWH coming from?  Solar cells & windmills, yeah, right.

" We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s."


    Where is Obama letting oil companies explore for and produce oil?  Where is he permitting the construction of refineries?  Why are we dependent on oil produced in areas ruled by people inimical to our interests?  Considering the current price of $3.20 per gallon, how will Obama's scheme affect our pocket books?   Where was your head when you voted for him??

" Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they’re selling. So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen."


    Translation: drastic inflation: increased prices for electricity and motor fuel, further reductions in our lifestyles, fewer jobs and another great depression.  Natural gas is a byproduct of the oil production process.  Get a clue, for Chrissake!!  Clean coal?? Obama bragged that he would destroy the coal industry.  Nuclear power?  Litigation, regulations, insurance costs and union rates have made it impossible to build new reactors.

    You voted for change; you are getting it. Are you satisfied yet?

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Obamination: State of the Union: Bipartisan Compromise?

State of the Union: Prepared Remarks

    Because of the length and drek density of the Obamination, I will spread my disrespectful discourse over several blog posts. The first eight paragraphs of the prepared remarks allude to and tangentially rehash the blood tinged partisan acrimony that has hung like a polluted haze in the atmosphere in the weeks following the 'Tucson Massacre.  I take that as my starting point.

"It’s no secret that those of us here tonight have had our differences over the last two years. The debates have been contentious; we have fought fiercely for our beliefs. And that’s a good thing. That’s what a robust democracy demands. That’s what helps set us apart as a nation."

   
    The last two years?  As if only President Obama has had opposition, and contention is monopolar.  Does anyone remember what the nattering nabobs of negativism said about Nixon, Goldwater, Reagan, Bush Clinton & Shrub?  Assertions of warmongering extremism cost Goldwater his hope of election.  Does anyone remember the vitreol spewed at the judicial nominees of Reagan,  Bush & Shrub?  

    A book and movie about assassinating Shrub and an on the air rant about marching on Congressman Henry Hyde's home and stoning him to death stand out as examples of partisan hate speech.  But now they accuse those who voice principled criticism of Obama's policies & actions of inspiring the detestable act of a madman whose political leanings are closer to those of Obama than of his critics.  Indeed, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste, and Obamination won't let one pass unexploited.

    A fight for beliefs?  Yeah, right.  The mission of political parties is to obtain, retain and expand political power, which they translate into cash flow for themselves and their allies.

    Beliefs?  What beliefs?? Candidates are packaged, branded, promoted & marketed, usually without making clear declarations of political principles. The concept of pandering to the left in the primaries & caucuses before "moving to the center" in the general election and following a defeat in the mid term elections should be sufficient to disabuse any thinking mind of the 'fighting for our beliefs'  shibboleth. 

"Now, by itself, this simple recognition won’t usher in a new era of cooperation. What comes of this moment is up to us. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow."


    Cooperation = bipartisanship = Republicans surrender their 'principles' and "go along to get along".  Mixed seating is a matter of symbolism: symbolic of a fallacy.  When one side wants more of the poison that made the nation ill and the other wants a cure, there is no  practical compromise.  If a husband wants to use hydrochloric acid to clear a drain and his wife wants to use sodium  hydroxide, mixing the two may poison them both by releasing chlorine.  Some things should not be compromised.  "Work together" is another expression of the same dishonest concept. 

"I believe we can. I believe we must. That’s what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they’ve determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all – for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics. "


    Expectations?  Sixty percent of the electorate cast their votes for congressional candidates who they believed were most likely to assist in the repeal of Obama Don't Care.  Governing responsibly involves simple and direct solutions, not 2700 pages of convoluted bafflegab. 

    We face the threat of a greater depression; the total ruination of the economy.  We face the threat of national insolvency; the prospect of eroded faith & credit. We face the threat of rationing of medical tests & treatments;' of bureaucrats making  arbitrary life or death decisions. We face increased costs and prices that will make medical goods and services beyond the reach of a growing mass of citizens.  We face the prospect of more businesses closing as insurance premiums become unbearable.

    New laws should only pass on their merits, not based on which party proposes or opposes them. Content, substance & effects, including unanticipated consequences and diseconomies must be considered above partisan advantage through emotive nomenclature & propaganda.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Unfairness Doctrine

Renewed calls for restoration of the  'fairness doctrine'  & the LibTard chorus chanting the mantra of   'civility' followed the  recent  Arizona Massacre as flowers follow a spring rain.   Blood is the natural fertilizer of  idiotic demands for tyranny.

    The heinous act was not solicited, prompted or suggested by 'extremists' shouting 'hate filled' rants on talk radio. It was not related to the recent political campaign season.  It was the independent act  of a lone gunman acting out his own fantasy.  Local law enforcement had several opportunities to prevent the slaughter. Now they cover their incompetence & misfeasance by falsely assigning blame to others who had nothing to do with the affair.

    Remember Shrub's 'new tone in Washington' ?  It was a single flute drowned out by dozens of braying jackasses.  'Chimpy McBush', 'Bush lied and thousands died'  etc.  There were a book and a movie about assassinating Shrub, both celebrated by the left.  Then there was Dan Rather's infamous attack with spurious documents. 

    Does anyone remember a famous actor ranting about wanting to stone Congressman Henry Hyde to death?  Where was the outpouring of outrage over that blood thirsty rant?   There was note, because this issue is all one sided. 

    Hannity, Levin & Limbaugh spent several days replaying sound bytes of outrageous statements by president Obama and his cronies.  Those sound bytes fall on deaf ears. 
   
    The LibTards are determined to squelch opposition voices.  They don't want tone control or volume control, they want content control.  Their demand is 180° out of phase with the First Amendment.  Political speech must be protected speech because representative government requires the adversary process of debate.

    If they can't get their way in the legislature or the courts, they will turn to regulation by fiat.  Thus we have the FCC's recent 'net neutrality' ruling.  Ostensibly about preventing internet service providers from throttling competitor's content, it is really about content control and raising revenue.  Incrementally, little by little, they will  expand the rules to regulate content.  At the same time they will impose fees to 'cover the cost' of enforcing the rules. 

Reply to Ryan on What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims?

 The true nature of Islam: a continuing criminal enterprise which propagates perpetual warfare for profit while camouflaged by a  false mantle of religion, is mired in a deep and extensive swamp of denial. I repeatedly attack this issue because it is necessary to drain the swamp one drop at a time.

What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims?  at Islamophobia: Exposing Malicious Malarkey received a visit from Ryan, who left a comment which merits a  better reply  than a simple comment.  Likening my analysis to dog excrement, he  made three points. [Typographical errors original.]

1.) Jihad means "struggle". That is the literal arabic interpretation of the word. What is more, there have bbeen cases of jihad being conducted AGAINST OTHER MUSLIMS. Not to mentioon that there are muslim scholars who disagree with the definition provided in reliance of a traveller (which is one of many jurisprudence manuals). And there are four types of jihad, and jihad follows set rules (don't kill civillians, don't attack civillian targets).

2.) You claim that 60:1 is clear proof muslims aren't allowed to befriend non musims. verses 60:8 and 60:9 disagree. There are even verses in the quran which state that jews and christians can go to heaven.


3.) You make the mistake of assuming that all islamic manuals agree on what defines jihad. The truth is a hell of lot more complex, and there are scholars who have had differing interpetations. Just because a few guys have that interpreation odesn't mean all scholars do.

 

  1. When words are translated into actions, the actions give us the clearest possible indication of their meaning.  Turn to page 385 of Guillaume's translation of The Life of Muhammad, where the story of  Amr b.al-Jamuh   is retold. "He came to the apostle and told him that his sons wanted to keep him back and prevent his joining the army, 'Yet by God, I hope to tread the heavenly garden despite my lameness.' The apostle said, 'God has excused you, and Jihad is not incumbent on you;' and to his sons he said, 'You need not prevent him; perhaps God will favour him with martyrdom,' so he went along with him and was killed at Uhud." A parallel story is found in Sahih Bukhari 4.52.84, explaining 4:95, which exempts the lame and blind.
    There are 178 instances of "raid" in the Life of Muhammad, and 27 instances of "conquest".
  2. A search for "take not" in the Noble Qur'an [Hilali & Khan] returns 7 Surahs; these are the ayat prohibiting positive relations with Kuffar: 3:118, 4: 89, 144, 5: 51, 57, 9:23, 60: 1, 13.  Moe curses us in 2:161 & 9:30.  Sahih Muslim 6665 & 6666 say that Allah will take Muslims out of the fire, replacing them with Jews and Christians. 
  3. Jihad is covered in Ch 30 of Al-Risala, Maliki Fiqh and Al-Hedaya, Vol II, Book IX, Hanifi Fiqh.  Which of them contradicts Reliance significantly? This article samples 4 schools of jurisprudence.  Will you accept the opinion of Prof. Salih Al-Fawzan?  For a broader sample of ancient and modern Fiqh concerning jihad, see the Jihad in Fiqh chapter of FOMIJihad.chm.


    The meaning of jihad is not dependent on any single scholar. It becomes clear when we perceive the congruent pattern formed by Moe's recitation & sunnah. 

    Surah Al-Anfal treats of perpetual wars of aggression against pagans, the termination of which is conditioned on the cessation of resistance and a global monopoly for Islam.  (8:39:1) And fight them waqātilūhum

    Surah At-Taubah treats of perpetual wars of aggression against 'people of the book', the termination of which is conditioned on subjugation and extortion. 
(9:29:1) Fight qātilū

Get a God blessed clue!

waqātilūhum (وَقَٰتِلُوهُمْ) verb (2)
2nd person masculine plural (form III) imperative verb (فعل أمر)
  • (2:193:1) ... And fight (against) them ...
  • (8:39:1) ... And fight them ...
qātilū (قَٰتِلُوا۟) verb (3)
2nd person masculine plural (form III) imperative verb (فعل أمر)
  • (3:167:7) ... fight ...
  • (9:29:1) ... Fight ...
  • (9:123:4) ... Fight ...

Moe said something about that.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."


    The Qur'an contains two parallel fight-until loops and the hadith has a similar loop reflecting them.  Is that mere coincidence?  Get a God blessed clue!

The first raid: on Waddan 281
Hamza's raid to the coast 283
Raid on Buwat 285
Raid on al-'Ushayra 285
Raid on al-Kharrar 286
Raid on Safawan 286
Fighting in the sacred month 286
The change of the Qibla 289
Battle of Badr 289
Zaynab sets out for Medina 314
Abu'l-'As accepts Islam 316
'Umayr b. Wahb accepts Islam 318
The chapter of The Spoils 321
Raid on B. Sulaym 360
Raid called al-Sawiq 361
Raid on Dhu Amarr 362
Raid on al-Furu' 362
Attack on B. Qaynuqa' 363
Raid on al-Qarada 364
Killing of Ka'b b. al-Ashraf 364
Muhayyisa and Huwayyisa 369
Battle of Uhud 370
The Quran on UQud 391

That is a significant sample of the table of contents of Part III of The Life of Muhammad.  What was Moe commanded to do?  What did he do??  Do you remain clueless???

    Muslim apologists will assert that Moe only fought defensively, citing 2:190  and  22:39.   What? Does "fight them until" only apply after they attack Muslims?  Get a God blessed clue!

    Moe dictated and dispatched extortion letters.  This is among the most explicit thereof.

LETTER TO THE CHIEFS OF AQABA

In the name of ALLAH the compassionate, the Merciful

From Muhammad, Prophet of Allah

To the People of Aqaba

May peace be on you. I praise Allah who is one and except whom there is nobody else to be worshipped.

I do not intend to wage war against you till you receive my written reason for it. It is better for you, either to accept Islam or agree to pay Jiziya and consent to remain obedient to Allah, His prophet and his messengers. My messengers deserve honour. Treat them with respect. Whatever pleases my messengers, will also please me.

These people have been informed of the orders about Jiziya. If you desire that there should be peace and security in the world, obey Allah and His Prophet. Thereafter none in Arabia and Ajam (Iran) shall dare cast an evil eye on you. But the rights of Allah and His Prophet can at no time be waived.

If you do not accept these terms and set them aside, I do not need your presents and gifts. In that case, I shall have to wage war (to establish peace and security). Its result would be that the big ones shall be killed in war and the commoners shall be taken prisoners.

I assure you that I am a true Prophet of Allah. I believe in Allah, and His Books, and His Prophets and am of the faith that Maseeh (Messiah) son of Mariam (Mary), is a Prophet of Allah and His word.

Hurmala (Raziallah AnhoA.) who brought to me 3 wasaq (about 6 quintals) of barley, recommended your case. Had it not been in compliance of the command of Allah and the good opinion of Hurmala for you, it would not have been necessary for me to correspond with you and instead of it, there would have been a war. If you will obey my messengers, you shall immediately have my support and the help and support of everyone who is attached to me.

My messengers are Shuraih-beel, Obaiy, Hurmala and Hurais (Raziallah AnhoA.) and whatever decision they take in respect of you, shall be acceptable to me.

Your people are under the protection and responsibility of Allah and His Prophet.

Supply provisions to the Jews of Maqna, for their journey to their country.

If you accept obedience, may peace be on you.'

Seal: Allah's Prophet Muhammad .


    Moe sent an extortion letter to the Jews at the Khaibar Oasis. Then he sent his army. Who started that war? Did the Jews attack first?

Saturday, January 15, 2011

International Judge the Qur'an Day: Update

A Google search for "International Judge the Qur'an Day" now returns about 27,000 records and they are not all to my blog posts.  The event is now the subject of some media coverage. 

    The deleted Facebook page has been  replaced; the new page has 333 supporters.  Images of the Qur'an and related texts have been posted in evidence, 31 to date.  Two of its five discussion threads have current activity.

    Visitors to my blog previous blog post on this subject include:

  • Gainsville Police Department
  • Alachua County BOCC
  • University Of Florida/university Medical Center
  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security
  • U.S. Department of Justice

That post had 457 page views spread over several blogs. Asia, Australia & Europe are in the mix. One viewer in Tunisia came through a link sent by email.

    Rev. Terry Jones discusses the event in this new video, inviting "peaceful Muslims" to provide a defender and evidence in defense of the Qur'an.

Friday, January 14, 2011

Memorial Disservice

The video of President Barack Hussein Obama's address to the memorial in Tucson at the White House Blog, as is the transcript.   As usual, I will expose the lowlights.

" It raises a question of what, beyond prayers and expressions of concern, is required of us going forward.  How can we honor the fallen?  How can we be true to their memory?"


    The honest answer to that question is to press on with our lives, as the victims and heroes would be doing if the event had not occurred.  But the question is superfluous, propounded for partisan political purposes.  Its purpose is to lay the groundwork for renewed attacks upon the first and second amendments.

"Already we’ve seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health system. "


    The mainstream of the 'national conversation' flows from the mouths of politicians & pundits, falsely laying blame for the massacre at the tongues of those who oppose President Obama's Socialist agenda.  Despite the mounting evidence that the shooter has used drugs, aroused fear among his classmates & teachers and was mentally ill, President Obama's chorus assigns blame to Palin & Limbaugh, who had nothing to do with the event.

"But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.  (Applause.)"

 

  • 'If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun"
  • 'We're gonna punish our enemies'.
  • "Bitter clingers"

Rush Limbaugh had an excellent rant about the hypocrisy of the left's demand for 'civility'.

"We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future."


    Ever so subtle yet so obvious!  President Obama hinted at a renewed demand to disarm the citizenry, rendering us defenseless.  Does anyone else remember the old comic strip "There Oughta Be a Law?

"But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other."


    Perish the thought!  That is exactly what they have done, shrill & loudly, starting with Krugman.

"If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate -- as it should -- let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost.  (Applause.)  Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point-scoring and pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle."


    That is sheer hypocrisy, so obvious as to require no elaboration.

"And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their death helps usher in more civility in our public discourse, let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy -- it did not -- but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud. "

   
    What was it Nancy Pelosi promised us about four years back?  What did she deliver?  Open, honest, accountable & efficient government.  Yeah, right.  And Obama promised hope & change.  How well is that working out for you?   "You can keep your doctor."  "You can keep your insurance policy." "It won't raise the deficit." "No death panels."  Honest & civil! I really need to use profanity at this point.  Those are not white lies, they are not little brown lies; they are the stuff that makes your shoe stink even after you scrape it off the sole.

"I want to live up to her expectations.  (Applause.)  I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it.  I want America to be as good as she imagined it.  (Applause.)  All of us -– we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations.  (Applause.)"


    Even coming from an honest statesman, those statements would be inappropriate at a memorial service for murder victims.  They are the stuff of a campaign speech, not a memorial.  As it is, they come from the mouth of a lying, conniving traitor, and the hypocrisy disgusts me intensely.

    President Obama and his cronies seek to exploit a mass murder at once to condemn and silence his critics.  There is nothing so low that they will not limbo dance beneath it.  What appears to be a limbo dance is really a slithering sidewinder.     We made a horrific blunder in '08. We have a opportunity to correct it in '12.  We must take full advantage of that chance.


Monday, January 10, 2011

Blasphemy in Islam

In keeping with my habit of exposing & skewering liars, I quote the first paragraph of  Blasphemy and the Islamic way…..  from Islamic Blog.

"Due to some recent events in Pakistan, the issue of blasphemy is again in the news. It is generally held that Islam prescribes capital punishment for those who commit blasphemy; that is, using abusive language against the Prophet of Islam. But this is quite untrue. According to Islam, blasphemy is simply a misuse of freedom and not a cognisable offence; the blasphemer is not liable to incur legal punishment. This kind of law has no basis in Islamic scriptures. If someone uses abusive language against the Prophet, Muslims must take it as a case of misunderstanding, and then try to remove this misunderstanding. They are required to do so by engaging in discussion or by providing the blasphemer with Islamic literature that gives the true image of the Prophet of Islam."

 

cognisable offence

    This strange expression is used in the law of India & Pakistan, I presume that it originated in the colonial period.  It refers to a violation of law which the police can recognize, take notice of;  arrest & charge the perpetrator for.

blasphemy: capital offense?

    The author says that it is not; what does Shari'ah say?  Let us turn first to Reliance of the Traveller, Book o.

penalty:

o8.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.

o8.2 In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.

What treatment does an apostate deserve? What treatment does he receive if he does not recant?

apostacy

o8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam
...

-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace); 

...

-16- to revile the religion of Islam;

    If a Muslim reviles Allah, Moe or Islam, he is an apostate and must be ______. Can you fill in the blank?  Does Islam prescribe capital punishment for blasphemers?

scriptural basis  

4:89. They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allâh (to Muhammad ). But if they turn back (from Islâm), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.   

 

exemplary basis

Sahih Bukhari  Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369:

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it."[...]

Sahih Bukhari  Volume 3, Book 48, Number 829:

[...] Allah's Apostle said, 'Who will support me to punish that person ('Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul) who has hurt me by slandering the reputation of my family? By Allah, I know nothing about my family but good, and they have accused a person about whom I know nothing except good, and he never entered my house except in my company.' 

Sad bin Mu'adh got up and said, 'O Allah's Apostle! by Allah, I will relieve you from him. If that man is from the tribe of the Aus, then we will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, the Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.'[...]

Malik's Muwatta Book 36, Number 36.18.15: 

Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If someone changes his deen - strike his neck!"

The meaning of the statement of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in our opinion and Allah knows best, is that "if someone changes his deen, strike his neck!" refers to those who leave Islam for other than it - like the heretics and their like, about whom it is known. They are killed without being called to tawba because their tawba is not recognised. They were hiding their kufr and publishing their Islam, so I do not think that one calls such people to tawba, and one does not accept their word. As for the one who goes out of Islam to something else and divulges it, one calls him to tawba. If he does not turn in tawba, he is killed. [...]


    At the end of the article, I found attribution  to the Times of India. The source us under the byline of a noted Islamic scholar[1]" .   An 86 year old scholar who has written ten books should know his subject, but what he wrote in the article quoted above is not congruent with authentic source texts.

    Fake it 'till you make it does not work when authentic source texts can be referenced. Islam can not be reformed without eliminating the Qur'an & hadith, without which it would cease to be Islam.
 


Sunday, January 9, 2011

Obamination: Civilian Trials for Terrorists


When President Obama signed the "Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.", he made a statement which merits critical analysis.   Two crucial quotes from that statement  are reproduced below, with my  commentary.

 Section 1032 bars the use of funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act for fiscal year 2011 to transfer Guantanamo detainees into the United States,[...] Section 1032 represents a dangerous and unprecedented challenge to critical executive branch authority to determine when and where to prosecute Guantanamo detainees, based on the facts and the circumstances of each case and our national security interests.  The prosecution of terrorists in Federal court is a powerful tool in our efforts to protect the Nation and must be among the options available to us.  Any attempt to deprive the executive branch of that tool undermines our Nation's counterterrorism efforts and has the potential to harm our national security.


    President Obama complains that republicans defunded transfer of unlawful enemy combatants to the mainland for trial in civilian courts. He asserts that authority to decide where and how to prosecute those detainees is critical. 

    The President and Attorney General decided to try Khalid Sheikh  Mohammad in a civilian federal court in New York City.  The resulting uproar over issues of security, expense and psychological trauma to the survivors compelled  reconsideration of that idiotic and treasonous decision, which was delayed until after the general election for partisan political considerations. 

    The rights and privileges of citizens apply to citizens, they do not apply to unlawful enemy combatants who plotted attacks in the safety of sanctuaries provided by states with regimes inimical to the U.S.   The presumption of innocence, right to counsel, swift trial, confrontation of witnesses and discovery are intended to maximize individual liberty.  They are the best means we have of preventing the protector from morphing into a predator. 

    K.S.M. and his co-defendants are not charged with jay walking, petty theft or consumer fraud.  They plotted an act of war designed to maximize civilian casualties, inflict extreme economic damage and strike the first blow in a war to destroy this nation.  They authored and signed a confession of their guilt in which they revealed why they acted as they did and took pride in the act. Their confession was submitted to a military tribunal and is part of the record.  I have extracted the quote below from the opening paragraphs of that document of damnation, adding emphasis to make the obvious stand out so that even LibTards can perceive it.

In the Name ofAllah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate
The 9/11 Shura' Council
Many thanks to God who revealed the Torah, the Bible, and the Quran, and may God praise his
messenger, the prophet Mohamed, so that he causes mercy to the two realms. Also, may God praise
the prophet's household, his entire companionship, and his followers until judgment day.
With regards to these nine accusations that you are putting us on trial for; to us, they are not
accusations. To us they are badges of honor, which we carry with pride. Many thanks to God, for his
kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims.
Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your
attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion. These actions are our offerings to
God. In addition, it is the imposed reality on Muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, in the
land of the two holy sites [Mecca and Medina, Saudi Arabia], and in the rest of the world, where
Muslims are suffering from your brutality, terrorism, killing of the innocent, and occupying their lands
and their holy sites. Nevertheless, it would have been the greatest religious duty to fight you over your
infidelity. However, today, we fight you over defending Muslims, their land, their holy sites,and their
religion as a whole.


    How in Hell can any American citizen know this without cursing and disrespectfully  demanding the immediate death & damnation of the signatories to that document?  The citizen who can refrain must be deemed a traitor to the nation and to the human race. 

    Trial in federal court?  Trial in a military tribunal?  Hell No!!! Tie them and dump them from a helicopter into the holding tank of a hog farm.  As for those who want to try them, tar, feathers and a ride out of the country on a rail.

With respect to section 1033, the restrictions on the transfer of detainees to the custody or effective control of foreign countries interfere with the authority of the executive branch to make important and consequential foreign policy and national security determinations regarding whether and under what circumstances such transfers should occur in the context of an ongoing armed conflict.  We must have the ability to act swiftly and to have broad flexibility in conducting our negotiations with foreign countries.


    The President just declared catch & release to be a vital national interest.  What receiving nation has a program to incarcerate or execute those unlawful combatants?  Which of them will not release the miscreants to return to the battlefield? 

    The President and Attorney General must be impeached and removed from office for treason.

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Murderer Celebrated

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mumtaz-Qadri-hero-of-Islam/183355685017398?v=wall

Last Friday Facebook arbitrarily  deleted the International Judge the Koran page.  Today a new page appears, celebrating the handiwork of the perfidious body guard who murdered the Governor he was sworn to protect.  I have reproduced screen shots of the wall and information page below. Click them for the full sized image.

Screenshot of Facebook page.

Group Information page.


    A page announcing an upcoming event: investigation into the content & meaning of the Qur'an is arbitrarily pulled down, Then Muslims put up a page celebrating the murder of a critic of Islamic blasphemy law by his own bodyguard. 

    Here is one of the search engine results, the link will take you to the Facebook "news feed", not to the page described because it was deleted.

International Judge the Koran Day | Facebook

Welcome to a Facebook Page about International Judge the Koran Day. Join Facebook to start connecting with International Judge the Koran Day.
www.facebook.com/.../International-Judge-the-Koran-Day/171630126209459 - Cached

    Reverend Terry Jones plans to judge the Qur'an for two hours from 6 to 8 pm. March 20, 2011.  In reality, it should be judged constantly by an unending stream of new readers. 

7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

    (King James Bible, Matthew)


    Examine the root and stem first. See for yourself exactly what is in the Qur'an. The following links, where possible, are directed to Surah Al-Anfal 39, which commands Muslims to wage perpetual war against pagan disbelievers.


    Taste the fruit, is it sweet or bitter and salty from spilled blood?

    What are the relevant provisions of Islamic law?

    Last but not least, we turn to Sira: Islamic biography of the Profit.

    I do not demand that you take my word as gospel. I exhort you to investigate for yourself. Read the Qur'an, these Surahs at minimum: [Hilali/Khan]

    It will be easiest to sample the ahadith in Riyad us-Saliheen, which are selected from several collections. Then sample one of the books of Fiqh and one Sira.
Discover what "Allah said', what Moe said and what he did before making a final judgment.

Calumny by Innuendo

One of my Facebook friends gave me a link to an article by Dan Gardner . The article, entitled The not so great Islamist menace  and published on an Ottawa Citizen web site, is interesting because of the author's attitude. 

    Subsequent to reading the article, I became involved in the reader discussion. While there are several interesting replies, I singled this one out because it deserves a thorough rebuttal which will not fit in the small space allocated by the web site's comment system.


Ozy3

10:03 PM on January 5, 2011

People on this board have actually attacked Gardner for relying on hard facts, rather than promoting warped perceptions that they enjoy. They are angry because Gardner is undermining the luxurious and uncomplicated hatred they feel towards a group linked only by a religious belief. They don't want to question that hatred or see the targets of their anger as human beings. One poster is even implying that Muslims don't deserve sympathy because no matter what he or she may be like as an individual, the religious affiliation renders them unworthy of compassion.

This is the definition of dehumanizing. When Ann Coulter calls for carpet bombing Muslim countries and forcibly converting survivors to Christianity, she gets a standing ovation. But 65 years ago, that idea was called "The Final Solution". How did we forget so quickly when we swore "Never Again"?

And these views being aired in Canada, of all places? What have we become?

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/great+Islamist+menace/4058778/story.html#ixzz1AFu2Spcj

hard facts

    The opening paragraphs are full of attitude & perception, not hard facts. The last two sentences of the second paragraph stands out.

It’s Muslims. Or if you’re a little more careful with your language, it’s radical Muslims, or “Islamists.”


    Sorry, Mr. Gardner, responsibility for Islamic terrorism is not the property of any of the three listed entities. Muslims are people who have recited the Shehada three times in Arabic and subsequently obey Allah and his Messenger or whose fathers did.  The other two entities are fallacies whose mention is a token of political correctness and factual error. 

    Responsibility for Islamic terrorism is the province of Islamic doctrine and the texts & clerics who propagate it.  The Qur'an sanctifies & mandates terrorism. The hadith & Sira exemplify it for Muslims to emulate.

    One subsequent sentence stands out as an exemplar of arrogance in the guise of  'hard facts'.

"So the danger is big and growing, and Islamists are the source. Right?"


    When  you cite one botched suicide bombing and a Mumbai style attack that was thwarted by good police work, and use them to stake a case that Islamic terror does not pose a real proximate and persistent threat of death and injury, you are not being serious, you are being flippant and arrogant. How many deaths and serious injuries would have resulted if the bomb had not detonated prematurely? Fortunately, we will never know, that blood was not splattered.  To assert that the toll would be insignificant to the victims and their families is the height of inhumane indifference.

    The perpetrator and frustrated perpetrators had something in common: Islam, which commands them to participate in genocidal world conquest using terrorism as a battle tactic of asymmetrical warfare. Islam, not 'Islamists' is the 'source'. 

    'Islamists' implies that normative Islam is apolitical, a personal religion. It is not. Islam is a continuing criminal enterprise founded for the personal emolument of its founder through the professional practice of piracy and extortion. 

    The founder of Islam became a warlord when he emigrated to Yathrib, which he took over and renamed Medina. He seized both 'spiritual' and temporal power. He made all the decisions in his theocracy. Let doubters & dissenters observe what he said in Allah's name in 33:26.

    Next we come to the abuse of statistics.

"The European Union’s Terrorism Situation and Trend Report 2010 states that in 2009 there were “294 failed, foiled, or successfully executed attacks” in six European countries. This was down almost one-third from the total in 2008 and down by almost one-half from the total in 2007."

   
    Two hundred ninety-four attacks were failed, foiled or executed, in a declining trend. What was the planned scale of those attacks? How many others were in the planning stages but not carried out?   Failed and foiled attacks render the threat negligible and of course the trend is irreversible. Tell that to those injured in the most recent failed attack.  Tell it to one of the victims seriously injured in Madrid or London.  Chortle about it to a father whose wife and child were killed at the school in Beslan.  Thank you very much for your vacuum headed assurances.

   
"As for who’s responsible, forget Islamists. The overwhelming majority of the attacks— 237 of 294 — were carried out by separatist groups, such as the Basque ETA. A further 40 terrorists schemes were pinned on leftist and/or anarchist terrorists. Rightists were responsible for four attacks. Single-issue groups were behind two attacks, while responsibility for a further 10 was not clear."


    How many people do the ETA and other splinter groups kill? How does that statistic compare to the number of victims maimed and killed by Muslim terrorists?   Its as if the attacks on London, Madrid and Beslan never happened because there were more, smaller attacks by others that failed or were thwarted. 

    They did it once, they promise to do it again. That is the stuff of terror, of induced paranoia that will eventually make civil society impossible. And it is all reduced to insignificance and dismissed by an irrelevant and reversible statistical trend. 

warped perceptions  

    Here we have a thinly veiled ad hominem attack, totally devoid of substance; a prime exemplar of innuendo.

luxurious hatred

    Critics of Islam are accused of bigotry because we object to the unholy consequences of damnable doctrines which impel men to the most barbarian acts of mass murder in the name of their demon who demands blood sacrifice: "great slaughter". 

religious belief

    They believe that they have a divine mandate to conquer and subjugate the entire world; a divine license to kill us, rape our widows, enslave our children and seize our real and personal property for their own profit. We are supposed to respect & tolerate that belief and allow them to implement it. Yeah, right.

  • 33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.
  • 33:27.  And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.
    • "My judgement is that their fighters should be killed and their children and wealth should be seized.'' [The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah]
    • Relevant Islamic law
      • Reliance of the Traveller
        • o9.0    jihad defined
        • o9.1    religious obligation thereof & Islamic initiative
        • o9.8    perpetual war on Jews & Christians
        • o9.13  captive women and children enslaved
  • Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
    Narrated Anas bin Malik:
    Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have." 

targets of their anger

    Here we have an exemplar of the victim card. Muslims are victims because we react with anger to their attacks upon us. Resistance is evil, we should surrender, submit and suffer enslavement instead.  Yeah, right.

religious affiliation renders them unworthy of compassion

    The innuendo continues. LibTards can't comprehend the intrinsic evil of Islam. The fact that most Muslims are victims of Islam changes nothing. They impose it on new victims.  There are two possible ways to break the cycle: emancipate them from slavery to Allah or kill them.

dehumanizing

    Moe dehumanized his companions by enslaving them to Allah, for whom they fight, kill and are killed. LibTards can not comprehend the meaning of believers. The infliction of Islam is similar to a vampire bite, it dehumanizes its victims.

Ann Coulter

    Ann's excellent suggestion, expressed in hyperbole, has the ring of truth which LibTards can't hear.  Because Allah promises victory and makes the Muslim's eternal destiny dependent on participation in jihad,  When you believe that you will go to Hell if you don't go to war, you go to war. Because of that doctrine, Islam can not be defeated, it must be eradicated, a fatal fact which LibTards can not comprehend.

"The Final Solution"

    The innuendo continues with linkage to Hitler. Were Jews conspiring to dominate the world? Were they genetically inferior, carriers of disease and spreaders of insurrection? Were Jews behind every problem suffered by Germany?  The fact is that Jews were scapegoated, used as convenient targets to focus undeserved anger and hatred.  

"Never Again"

    Why should there be a pogrom against Jews?  What Hitler did was a horrific crime against humanity: genocide against innocent people.  The arrogant LibTard calumniates those of us who criticize and condemn Islam by suggesting that we want to emulate Hitler's genocide.  In reality, we want to preserve ourselves and innocent humanity from intra-species predation by Muslims motivated by Islam which promises them eternity in Allah's celestial bordello if they wage war against us and threatens them with eternal Hellfire if they refuse.   We  very much prefer to emancipate Muslims from Allah's yoke of slavery by fighting the war on the ideological front. Unfortunately, our governments lack the intelligence and courage to wage the intellectual war. If they do not wise up soon we will eventually be forced to resort to nukes. 
   
    We can have life, liberty and prosperity or we can have Islam, we can not have both. Which do you chose?  How do you chose to defeat Islam? 

Will you sign these petitions, cross post them and propagate them by email or are you part of the problem?

Visitor Tracker