Saying No to the Culture of Death

I have been very busy with the traffic exchanges and I hope to be able to write up something quite substantial about my experience. I am still not convinced over the methods of Internet marketing to have confidence in the variety of schemes that are offered. It is amusing that people new to the business of Internet marketing are told to use their photographs because it is seen to give the persona a face or presence, when I find some of the photos to be quite a turnoff as far as those people are concerned. Some of the people make me feel uneasy.

I have become a member of more than 20 exchanges, but I do intend dropping most of them. I have had the most fun with Royal Surf and Medieval Hits. I have had fun with Dodgem Cars, but I find it is a real drag trying to earn traffic tokens via a dodgem race where it can yield between 2 and 10 tokens. After surfing 15 sites, a yield of 2-4 tokens is a very poor return. It is extremely difficult to win the extra dodgem points to end up in the top 25 finishers for the week in order to earn more tokens so the effort seems to be a little too much.

There are other exchanges that have been bringing better rewards, and I found one today that brings rewards in a different way because the beneficiaries of the exchange are children in Burundia. The exchange is being run by a Catholic priest!! However, Fr. Dave is making every effort to ensure that what he recommends is ethical. Perhaps following his lead is not such a bad thing.

Whilst I have been occupying myself in this way, things are finally happening with the sale of our house. At last the buyer has given the go ahead to come off the cooling off period, and settlement will be next week. After all of the carry on about getting an approval from Sydney Water for the construction of a Florida room, it turned out that the sewer is encased in concrete. The concrete platform that we have is more than adequate to have gain the necessary approval from Sydney Water. The next step is documentation being processed by the bank.  It is extremely difficult having to deal with these problems. I will be glad when settlement has taken place and the responsibility for the house shifts to another party. I have had quite enough of the tensions that it has generated within our household.

There is a scandal in the land of Australia, for Sheik al-Hilaly has opened his big mouth yet again, and has managed to offend both Muslim and Australian women in one hit. The Sheik compared the women who do not wear the veil to "uncovered meat", waiting to be taken by a prowling cat. The sheik in his speech stated that if a woman was uncovered then it is her fault if she is raped, and anyone who comes before a judge is being treated unjustly by getting 65 years (referring to Bilal Skaf). The uproar over this speech has reverberated across the world, but what is encouraging to me is that Muslim women all over Australia have spoken up and let the sheik know that they are very unhappy. They have demanded his resignation from the role of Mufti in Australia.

Al-Hilaly is a real big mouth, and he is a dangerous radical, in my opinion. This is not the first time that he has been controversial. He is a supporter of Al-Qaeda, even though he claims that he did not support the acts of terror in London and New York (I guess pigs will just have to fly over that little porker). The last of these statements occurred probably two weeks ago. Chris Hurford, when he was Immigration Minister attempted to have al-Hilaly deported, but somebody higher up (Paul Keating) who was keen to keep the Lebanese vote in the Federal seat of Bankstown, stopped the deportation order. Now we are stuck with this man because he has been made an Australian citizenship. After over 20 years in this country al-Hilaly cannot speak much in the way of English. This is something that should be mandatory, but this man, whilst thumbing his nose at the government claims that English is not necessary.

However, despite the claims that Muslim men do not attack women who are covered with the veil, it would seem that after a month of being deprived of having sexual relations, these men gather in a mob and attack any girl who gets in their way. This is certainly the case in Cairo and Alexandria in Egypt. The story is disgusting because the rights of the young women were overriden and their modesty was compromised by a group of men ranging in age from around 10 years of age to around 40. The blogger forsoothsayer has described the event in some detail, and I recommend that any reader has a look at the story.

The police, it seems, did nothing to try and stop the attempted sexual assault of the girls who were caught by the mob. Some girls were rescued by shopowners, a taxi driver and others who came to their rescue, but some who were in the appropriate Muslim clothing, had their clothing ripped off, and in one case the girl was stark naked when she managed to get away and escape into a shop.

If this is what happens in Egypt, since the Muslim Brotherhood have begun their rise to power, then the world is in a very sorry mess. The law enforcement officers in Cairo failed to do their job. They were nowhere to be seen. They did nothing to stop the sexual assault of these girls. The same has been happening in Alexandria for several years. The men just go on the prowl, in a mob of hundreds, and they actually demand to have sex with any girl that they see.

The animal behaviour of these men, and the fact that young boys are being encouraged to participate in these attempts to sexually assault these girls, then there is something very wrong with their society. If the religion that they follow does not put the brake on such behaviour, then one has to come to the conclusion that Islam is a false religion, and Mohammed is a false prophet.

One of the issues being brought before the British Parliament at the present time is a bill requiring that faith schools accept one quarter of pupils from other faiths. To an outsider, like myself, it is not at all clear why such a bill is necessary, or why such a requirement is being mooted. From what I have read so far on the subject, it is not clear if this is an attempt to have Muslims admitted into Christians and Jewish schools, or whether it is meant to have Christian and Jewish pupils admitted to Muslim schools. From an outsider's point of view, the requirement is sheer lunacy on the part of the British government.

Is this the price that the faith schools have to pay because of government funding? What seems to be happening in Great Britain is that the secularists are having too much say on what is allowable for faith schools. Why should a Catholic school have to admit pupils who are Muslims or Jews, just because of a government requirement? However there is another side that has been brought to my attention concerning the way in which secularists are attempting to control who is employed by the faith schools. It seems that the unions are opposed to a bill that will allow the faith schools employ staff who are members of their own faith. According to those opposed to this bill, this would increase intolerance. Well to be honest I believe that such a reaction sounds a lot like politically correct twaddle by a minority who want to impose their views over who can be employed in faith schools.

Let's face it, the controversy over the niqab wearing Muslim teacher is one that should not have happened if faith schools were allowed to appoint support staff amongst members of their own faith. In that case the school was a Church of England School. The teacher's assistant role was to work as a translator. The woman who won the job was a Muslim and she attended the interview without wearing the niqab, plus, she did not tell the people who interviewed her that she wanted to wear the veil at work. The pupils who needed her assistance complained because they could not communicate with her behind the veil. They could not understand her whilst she wore the veil. It was only after she got the job at a Church of England school, that she demanded the right to wear this item of clothing because there were male teachers in the school. What a load of hogwash!!!!

According to this article:

http://education.guardian.co.uk/faithschools/story/0,,192...

"Lord Adonis, the schools minister, has brought forward an amendment to the education bill which will allow faith schools to favour members of the same religion when choosing support staff.

The government says the move is intended to help schools choose staff who will offer "pastoral support". But the GMB union and the National Secular Society warned last night the change could extend discrimination in about 3,000 schools."

What has the National Secular Society got to do with who can be employed by faith schools? If the issue related to a government school, then I agree, that there would be a case regarding employment of the best person for the job. Surely a Catholic school, for example has the right to determine the selection criteria for teachers including a criteria that teachers must be of the Catholic faith!!

There is more than one issue that has surfaced here. The Catholics and the Jewish are opposed to the attempt to force new schools to take in a quarter of pupils who do not belong to their faith. The Catholic schools already accept pupils from other faiths, when they have the vacancies. The Catholic schools exist so that Catholic children can receive a faith education, usually at a low cost for the parents. The same goes for the Jewish schools. If the government forces the schools to accept the situation of a quarter of the pupils from other faiths, then this would in effect be discrimination against these schools. Why is this requirement being mooted? Well, there is only one reason, it comes back to the good old Culture of Death, otherwise known as Islam.

According to this article:

http://education.guardian.co.uk/faithschools/story/0,,192...

"The amendment to the education bill is designed to encourage communities to mix. But the Catholic church's education service voiced strong opposition to the measure, which would require it to accept a substantial proportion of non-Catholic pupils in its 2,000 schools. Unlike Church of England schools , Catholic schools were set up specifically to educate members of the faith."

"MPs warned yesterday that existing divisions were becoming more entrenched as rows over faith and its public expression continued. John Denham, the influential Labour chairman of the home affairs select committee, said comments by ministers were exacerbating tensions.

"In a situation where there is, frankly, too little understanding between the Muslim community and the wider community and vice versa, it seems to be producing a defensiveness and lack of willingness to debate on the Muslim side, and in the majority a sort of generalised feeling that Muslims as a whole pose some sort of threat to our entire way of life ... that is not a debate," he told BBC Radio 4."

So here is the real reason why this bill is being proposed. It is to accomodate the Muslims. There is no consideration at all for the members of the Catholic Faith, Church of England, or even Jewish religions. Everything is based upon appeasing the Muslims. The Catholic Church schools already take in pupils from other faith groups, and the children who belong to these other faiths are not expected to attend anything that is specifically Catholic. The danger of demanding that Muslim children attend a Catholic school is that the Muslims would start demanding that the religious symbols of the Catholic faith, such as the Crucifix be removed from the wall of the school. Why on earth should a minority person who does not belong to the faith be allowed to dictate what is on the wall of a Catholic school? This is the end result if the government in the UK goes ahead with this requirement. On top of that there are the secularists who seem to think that faith schools lead to discriminatory practices and that faith schools are a part of the problem.

The Brits really do need to wake up and get their act together. They need to stop behaving like bleeding hearts who see the aggressive Muslims as the victims. The political parties need to stop the appeasement and vote chasing. They need to put these Muslims back in their place. The veil must be banned in public places, and no woman wearing a niqab should be allowed to be in control of a motor vehicle. The faith schools need to be allowed to choose teachers from their own faith, and there should be no forcing children who are not of that faith into a faith school. The problem is due to the way in which the left wing members of society have failed to understand Islam. They need to stop listening to the Muslim councils, and they need to start calling the shots. If the Muslims are not happy with the changes, then they can pack up and leave.

As an Australian I can only shake my head in disgust over the selection of candidates for President of the USA. Whilst I am not a huge fan of G.W. Bush, mostly because I remain uncertain about his leadership qualities, I have to say that the most recent Democratic Party Presidents have been an absolute disaster. I have the utmost respect for Ronald Reagan, who in all respects showed himself to be a real statesman. The same cannot be said for either Jimmy the Dhimmi, Carter, and the one eyed trouser snake Bill Clinton. It seems that I had forgotten all of the reasons that I had disliked Carter, until I have been given some very timely reminders about his incompetencies to have ever been trusted with the role of President.

It seems that Jimmy the Dhimmi thinks that North Korea has no choice but to develop nuclear weapons, because the Bush administration named North Korea as a part of the "axis of evil".  Now it seems that Jimmy is trying to shore up his own deal that he brokered with North Korea, claiming that this deal had been working. He obviously is suffering from delusions of grandeur at the present time, believing that he was the great diplomat who was brokering good deals for the sake of world peace.

I wonder whether the history text books of the future will see the deals made by Carter in such a benign light. You see many of Carter's deals were a total disaster. There is almost nothing to show for his alleged contribution to world peace. It was during his leadership that the Shah of Iran felt the knife in his back that allowed Ayatollah Khomenei to seize power, and the terror reign of the mullahs began in earnest. I need to study this issue from all sides, not just the side of those who are pro-Shah of Iran. I need to know more about the last years of the Shah's reign. Most of all I need to verify the failures of the Carter administration, with regard to a regime that had been friendly to the USA, and now Iran has become a powerful enemy. How much blame for that situation rests at the feet of Jimmy the Dhimmi Carter.

The danger in this situation is that Carter seems keen to make his voice heard, not for the benefit of the USA but for the benefit of how Carter is remembered in posterity. His administration was not one of strength. As a President, this man was hopelessly weak. He prefers appeasement at all costs. He brokers deals without considering the consequences of an ill-conceived deal where there is no follow up. The end result of course, is that North Korean was never going to keep the brokered deal, and that they were going to continue illegally working on the production of nuclear weapons. Carter wants to blame George Bush for this situation, but the real blame lies solely with North Korea, and the plans of a man who has other ideas. It is worth noting that Iran has sent her scientists to North Korea to be observors. It is no conincidence that Iran is involved in the North Korean weapons program.