Charlie's Chatter

In a recent referendum, the voters in Switzerland called for a ban on the construction of new minarets in the country. This is not a ban on new mosques, but rather on those tall towers called “minarets” which accompany almost every mosque. It is from the top of a minaret that a Muslim religious leader calls for the five daily prayers required of all Muslims, although today these “calls” are usually done with loudspeakers.
      I have found most of the reactions to this vote to be deplorable. The very title of this article, “Europe unites to deplore Swiss ban on minarets“, almost says it all. Who is uniting? Certainly not those European Swiss voters. Certainly not the majority of citizens in other European countries. Well, that article itself says it all when it reports that “The Swiss and European establishment united today in deploring yesterday’s decision by Swiss voters”.   Yes, it is the “establishment” that is uniting, and another word for the “establishment” is the word “elites”. The “elite”, you see, know better than you do. From the various reports on this matter, it turns out that nearly all of the “elites” who are speaking out against this ban belong to center and left-of-center political parties. Almost no one from a “right-wing” party is critizing this ban. In fact, as reported in that referenced article:

France’s far right National Front welcomed the outcome, saying that the “elites should stop denying the aspirations and fears of the European people, who, without opposing religious freedom, reject ostentatious signs that political-religious Muslim groups want to impose.” The French center-right party, the Union for a Popular Majority, said that the vote showed the degree to which radical Islam was alarming Europe’s citizens.

Note the use of the word “elites” in that paragraph. Well, surely everyone knows that the political parties on the right, especially on the far right such as the French National Front, are almost as bad as Nazis. They must be ignored at the very least.   (Yeh, right.)
      The politically-correct way to look at this vote was expressed by Le Temps, Geneva’s establishment newspaper, when it said: “The vote was inspired by fear, fantasies and ignorance.” Damage to the country’s international standing would be spectacular, it said. “Vengeance, boycotts, retaliation … this clash with Islam could cost dearly.”   Yeh, right. You jackasses. There already is a clash with Islam in Western Europe! Even before 9/11 there were terrorists bombings in France by Muslim extremists which cost lives. After 9/11 there were the deadly bombings in Spain and Great Britain, bombings carried out by Muslims. To say that the “The vote was inspired by fear, fantasies and ignorance” is not only false, but also an abominable and perhaps cowardly statement. It is true that at least some of the votes were inspired by fear. But this fear was justified. The votes were definitely not inspired by “fantasies” and “ignorance”. If anyone suffers from fantasies and ignorance in this matter, it is in fact the so-called “elites” or the “establishment”. It frightens me that those political leaders do not see that, or, if they do see it, they hide it out of cowardice.
      In the early 1960′s I spent over two years in Europe as an enlisted man in the United States Army, mostly in France. I do not remember seeing any Muslims. During the past 10 years I have visited Europe four times as a tourist, spending a total of over two months in France, England, Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg. This time I saw a fair amount of Muslims. I have some French friends, and I read French and speak enough French to get by. I often read the news about Europe on the Internet, to include reading news on the web sites of French newspapers. I thus know first-hand how many ordinary people in Europe feel about the growing population of Muslims in Europe, and the growing political influence of Islam in Europe. One of my French friends, the assistant mayor of a French village, told me that the next time I visit there will probably be a mosque in their village. He was speaking sarcastically, but there was a kernel of truth in his statement. It is important to realize that, at least in France, the fear and/or distrust of Muslims is not based on the fact that they happen not to be Christians. Instead it is based on the fact that the Muslim immigrants in France cling to their Muslim culture, a culture which disdains the secularism in France, a culture which clings to the Islam religion and its practices and which encourages extremism, at least to some extent. Last but not least, most Muslims are in favor of sharia law. The replacement of even any part of European laws by sharia laws would be not only harmful, but an absolute disgrace to the advances made by western civilization. (If it were up to me, I would not only ban minarets, I would also ban mosques.)

The Senate just barely passed the cloture vote on their current version of “heatlh care reform” legislation, a monstrous bill with over 2000 pages. For the time being, all this means is that debate on the actual legislation will go ahead after the Thanksgiving recess, a “debate” that will include a lot of horse-trading, proposed additions and amendments to the bill, and proposed cuts in certain existing provisions of the bill. What a disgraceful monstrosity. I will not discuss here the legislation as it now exists, except to note that it mostly ignores those people who actually provide us with medical care: doctors, nurses, their assistants, medical technicians, hospitals, medical equipment and drug companies. It’s as though those people and those companies are just assumed to exist, more or less doing their jobs, and that their needs and wishes, if any, need not be addressed by the legislation. If they get harmed by the legislation, well that’s tough. After all, “we” already know that they charge us “way too much” money. What a disgrace. (Left to themselves, the drug companies are doing just fine, thank you. Although I admit that most drugs are expensive, to lower their costs by force of law will lead to less research and development on drugs.)
      As just one example of the horse-trading that is going on with all this “health care reform” legislation business, I note that Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana provided one of the 60 votes needed to keep the legislation alive. She was offered a sweetener: at least $100 million in extra federal money for her home state. She announced her vote and also the financial “fix” she had arranged for Louisiana. “I am not going to be defensive,” she declared. “And it’s not a $100 million fix. It’s a $300 million fix.” (Note how she cleverly calls it a “fix” and not a “bribe”. Technically it is not a “bribe”, since none of that money goes into the Senator’s pocket. But clever politicians and lobbyists know that the only “legal” way to “bribe” a Congressman or Congresswoman is to provide more money for their State or District, such as funding for additional highway repairs, parks and new businesses, and by contributing to their re-election campaigns. All of that increases the power and influence of the Congressman or Congresswoman in their State or District, and increases their chances of getting re-elected.)   Senator Mary Landrieu also reportedly said, “It is clear to me that doing nothing is not an option”.   Not an Option ?   Question: WHY ?
      Here IS a very good option – All of you Senators go home, and don’t come back until next year. Then throw away all these monstrous, huge bills that have been so far proposed by both the House and the Senate, and fix some of the messes that you have made in the past in all sectors of our economy. For example, abolish the Community Reinvestment Act, (first passed in 1977 and subsequently amended and enforced), because that was just one of the things that helped lead to the sub-prime housing crisis. And although only the voters can get rid of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, you can at least remove them from their powerful positions on Congressional committees.
      By the way, the “extra” $100 to $300 million dollars allotted to Louisiania is for additional Medicaid funding. Medicaid is funded by both the federal government and the States. Most States are having problems providing the funding due to the poor economy. Although I do not know for sure, I will bet dollars to doughnuts that that additional Medicaid funding for Louisiana does not increase the reimbursement rate to the doctors and hospitals who provide the actual medical care to Medicaid patients. More and more doctors are refusing to take on additional Medicaid patients due to the low reimbursement rates. (I hate using that word “reimbursement” in this context, and I only use it because that is the word commonly used in this context. The word that should be used is “payment”. This is payment for services rendered, in the same way that you pay a barber for cutting your hair and that you pay a plumber for plumbing repairs in your house.)

Wow, the State of California is really going great guns, constantly showing the rest of the country how to manage “consumer goods” so as to improve the lives of everyone! I’m sure that most of us remember that California led the way in leading the auto manufacturers to produce automobiles that were both more energy-efficient and less-polluting. And for those of you who are not aware of it, California has also led the nation in setting efficiency requirements for dishwashers, washing machines and other household appliances. Now I have read that state energy regulators are considering a first-in-the nation mandate intended to compel consumers to buy televisions which use less electricity. The regulations will require televisions sold in California to be more energy efficient beginning in 2011. The requirement would be tougher in 2013, with only one-quarter of the TVs on the market currently meeting that standard. Way to go, California !   Why this regulation, if it is ever adopted, will save the average household in California roughly 30 dollars a year per TV in electricity costs. Of course this will also make it easier for California to handle the increased demand for electricity. No need, for example, to build any new polluting electricity plants which burn gas or fuel oil, not to mention those dangerous nuclear reactors !
      Well Californians, I’ve got news for you. Apart from earthquakes, the thing which most threatens your lives and your well-being is the increasingly large and bloated State government, which is already in debt up to its eyeballs. The State is either broke, or will soon be broke. And yet State authorities have the gall to come out with even more laws and regulations which affect the lives of millions of the state’s inhabitants. That’s “audacity” for you. No doubt most California lawmakers and bureaucrats have read Obama’s book with the title “the Audacity of Hope”.

Here we are, one week after Major Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and wounded 40 others at Fort Hood, Texas, and the “liberal” media still does abominable reporting. Much of the media has attempted to play down the fact that this guy is clearly now known to be an Islamic extremist, a guy whose primary morive (if not his only motive) was clearly to kill non-Muslims because of his extreme relgious belief in Islam. This CNN news article on the Internet bears the title: « Profiler: Fort Hood suspect a loner ». Not an Islamic fanatic; not an intensely religious man who killed in the name of Islam; oh no!   He was simply a “loner”. Why the contents of that article even included these sentences:

“A lot of people are jumping to the conclusion because this man spouted violent Islamic ideology that this is a terrorist attack,” criminologist Pat Brown said. Brown, who profiles killers, said Hasan’s profile is that of a loner. Instead “He was simply a lone guy who had issues, problems, psychopathic behaviors that escalated to the point where he wanted to get back at society, and he took it out on his workmates like most of them do,” he said.

Let’s drop the word “terrorist”, okay? Instead this guy was an Islamic extremist killer, an Islamic fanatic, who killed and wounded people primarily because of his Islamic beliefs. That should be obvious to any sane-thinking person, given all the evidence and information that has now been discovered about this man. Even if he did have some “issues” or “psychological problems”, apart from his Islamic fanaticism, they only played a minor role in his motivation.   So what if he was a “loner”? I myself am a “loner”, as my very few friends and neighbors know. So maybe you could even call this killer a “nut job”. Well, if so, then for the same reason you could call all Islamic fanatics “nut jobs”. Let’s get with the program people, and stop this political correctness! If we do not, well then you had better start learning the Coran, Koran, or Qur’an, or however Allah wants us to spell it in English. Also learn in what direction Mecca is from where you live, so that you can start bowing down in the right direction when you pray.
      Yes, it is quite possible that this guy had “issues” and even some “psychological problems”. But without his intense, fanatical belief in Islam, he would not have been a killer !

Not too long after Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan killed over ten people at Fort Hood, Texas, and wounded over a dozen more, president Obama commented briefly on this incident. Obama said that we should not “jump to conclusions”, at least so I read. I did not hear Obama’s comments myself. Well, it immediately occurred to me that Obama was thinking that people would say that the killings were done for religious reasons because the Army Major was a Muslim. After all, we must be considerate of all religions, and not quickly lay blame on a religion just because one of their members does something illegal. Well Mister President, I myself, given the very few facts that I knew at the time, did not jump to conclusions. Instead I told myself that it was probable that this man had killed those people because of some sort of Islamic extremism or an intense devotion to his Islamic beliefs. However, I could not definitely conclude that since all the facts were not yet in. I could only conclude that it was “probable” but not at all certain.
    In this column of his today, I find this paragraph written by Thomas Sowell to be especially appropriate:

It was fascinating to see Barack Obama warning us not to leap to conclusions about the killings at Fort Hood, Texas — after the way he leaped to conclusions over the arrest of Henry Louis Gates, when he knew less about the facts than we already know about the massacre at Fort Hood.

As for myself, several days after the killings, since more information has been revealed, I can now say that it is 99+ percent probable that Nidal Malik Hasan did kill all those people because he was a kind of religious fanatic when it came to Islam. There is almost no doubt at all about it.
    Only two hours ago I saw a commentator on television (CNN) who mentioned that Major Nidal Malik Hasan may very well have had severe mental problems which were responsible for the killings, and not because of any Islamic fanaticism or extremism. This commentator then mentioned the man who had killed one person and wounded five others in Orlando, Florida, on the day after the Fort Hood killings. This commentator said that the Florida killer almost definitely had mental problems, and that he was about 90 percent certain that Major Nidal Malik Hasan also had mental problems which caused him to kill. The commentator even used the word “bonkers” to describe these men. In other words, the man in Florida went “bonkers” and killed one man and wounded five others; Major Nidal Malik Hasan also went “bonkers” and killed all those people, wounding even more. Good grief !   Now that much more information is in, you have to be an idiot to draw that conclusion about Major Nidal Malik Hasan. (Well, I guess one could say that nearly all Muslim fanatics and Muslim extremists who kill because of their Islamic fervor are “bonkers”. To put it another way, you possibly could say that they are “religious nuts”. Well, whether “nutty” or not, if it is Islamic extremism or an intense belief in Islam which causes them to kill, then we need to recognize that; we should be careful with Muslims, especially with those whose words, writings and/or emails seem to show a tendency towards Islamic extremism.)

The House is expected to vote this Saturday on the “health care reform” legislation unveiled last week by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. According to this news article, Pelosi recently told reporters, “We are on the verge of doing something great.” What an absolutely idiotic and even horrifying statement. (Although come to think of it, it is true in the sense that the current House bill, if it ever becomes law, will cause great damage to our medical care sector and to the finances of taxpayers and the federal government.)