I must admit that I agree more with the people who do not want the Muslim Community Center and Mosque built near Ground Zero than those who do. I do see Mayor Michael Bloomberg's point about being able to build what you want on the land that you own, and I do see the Master and Commander's view on religious freedom in America and the message it might send, though as I said yesterday, I highly disagree with his invocation of the Founding Fathers to make his point, and more importantly, disagree with his position on the issue.
But, do you know what else I see? I see why if your loved one was killed on 9/11/01, you might not want to have to walk by a Muslim Community Center and Mosque with a questionable background on the way to the "hallowed ground" of the World Trade Center to visit the 9/11 memorial, or just to spend some time in the general area that you know your loved one spent the last few minutes of their life.
Do some research, and you will find that there were, in fact, a number of Muslims that died as victims of the attacks, but even the highest most trustworthy estimates put that number at well under 100 of the almost 3,000 victims that perished that day. A much larger number of the victims were believers in Christ-based faiths and Judaism. While the conspiracy theorists, far-leaning thinkers, and honestly, U.S.-haters, do not want us classifying them as such, the 19 men that caused 9/11 considered themselves to be Muslim. Regardless of the merits and beliefs of Islam and how the religious beliefs of most Muslims (especially those here in the U.S.) greatly differ in belief from what was carried out on 9/11, all the evidence seems to point to the fact that these 19 guys considered themselves to be Muslim and considered themselves to be waging a holy war against America and its Christians and Jews. All that being said, you really can see how the families of the victims and a large number of Americans might not want that Muslim Community Center and Mosque built right there, just a couple blocks from Ground Zero. I tend to find myself agreeing with this point.
What I would like to know more about, however, in light of this debate that I am hearing, is the background and financing trail of this group that wants to build this Muslim Community Center and Mosque right there next to Ground Zero. So, show me that this is a 100% completely upstanding group of Muslims who do not believe in violence, and do not believe that the September 11th attacks were something that we had coming, and maybe you will sway me. It just seems right now, that the jury is still out on that.
Do they have ties to terrorist groups and does their money have ties to terrorist groups? It seems no one is able to give us a straight answer on that, including the people that want to build the mosque. The people who want this mosque most definietly do not seem to be able to prove without a reasonable doubt that absolutely none of their money and support comes from extremist groups with an agenda. I do see that as a huge problem and a major part of this story, and my decision, which as I said, leans more towards the fact that this mosque should not be built there.
Yes, Mr. Bloomberg, they own the land and should be able to build what they want to on it by the letter of the law, and yes, Mr. Master and Commander, in that perfect little world that seems to only exist in your mind, we should live by the letter of the law in regards to religious freedom and what that means in America today, however, there are times when you need to look at things subjectively, regardless of what the laws say on paper. Isn't that what you believe about illegal immigration, Senor Obamos?
So, for now, I oppose the building of this mosque that close to Ground Zero. I understand the New York City Mayor's position, but disagree with it. I understand the President of The United States of America's position, but disagree with it, and will go as far as to say that I think he is speaking prematurely and has made a mistake that will cost him and his party some support from the American middle.
I understand what the separation is between the average everyday Muslim and these fanatical extremists, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that there are not extremist Muslims with agendas still living and working in this country. And let's not forget what a small group of dedicated, like-minded people out to kill as many Americans as they can are capable of doing.
This is a collection of my work, including both business and personal publications from a guy who considers it a great honor to earn a living doing what he loves...writing. Please note that the opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of my clients, employers, leaders, followers, associates, colleagues, family, pets, neighbors, ...
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
"The writ of our founders must endure"
When speaking recently on the proposed Muslim Community Center and Mosque to be built near Ground Zero, The Master and Commander commented that "The writ of our founders must endure", referring, of course to, as he said, "our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable".
First off, know that I don't want to go back in time and change anything - I am not saying that this country was founded incorrectly, that we need to fix it (though it would be nice to go back in time and have an America that was always free of slavery), but I do want us to think about something when we think of the Founding Fathers, and most definitely when we invoke their intentions with our fine nation during its initial creation in the context of furthering our political views today (I'm talking to you, Master and Commander).
Think along the lines of me not wanting to go back and change too many things because we will not end up with the same nation that we have today. Sure, there is room for improvement over history, but who knows what you'll end up with if you got back and start tampering with things.
That being said, however, can we all please remember that this nation was founded by a group of white, Christ-based faith believing, mostly slave-owning, straight (definitely in the closet if not) men, who, while progressive for their time in terms of their thinking on government, established a nation that did not allow women the right to vote or own land and allowed for a person to be enslaved in permanent bondage and servitude.
I personally am sick and tired of hearing how it was the intention of this group of men that all men and women of all races (literally every human being on the planet) should be equal in all regards, and should all have equal rights including a civil right to water, food, shelter and public services. I am not saying that I don't believe in this, and I am not saying that I do not want this nation to have those principles today, but what I am saying is let's not go back and revise history in our minds to think that the Founding Fathers, the guys who were at the Continental Congress, fought in the Revolution, and established the framework for the United States of America, believed in these same principles, because quite clearly, they did not.
If you go back and read what most of the founders of the United States of America were writing at the time, you will most definitely see that it was not their intention for non-Christ-based faiths, women voters, women land owners, and people of color to have an equal place in the country as them. White, Christ-fearing land owner, you're in and here's your ballot - all others, some other, lesser role of servitude, and don't bother coming to the polls on election day.
Again, let's stick to our values and what we know to be right, but can we all please stop portraying the Founding Fathers as saints, because quite frankly, they were far from it.
First off, know that I don't want to go back in time and change anything - I am not saying that this country was founded incorrectly, that we need to fix it (though it would be nice to go back in time and have an America that was always free of slavery), but I do want us to think about something when we think of the Founding Fathers, and most definitely when we invoke their intentions with our fine nation during its initial creation in the context of furthering our political views today (I'm talking to you, Master and Commander).
Think along the lines of me not wanting to go back and change too many things because we will not end up with the same nation that we have today. Sure, there is room for improvement over history, but who knows what you'll end up with if you got back and start tampering with things.
That being said, however, can we all please remember that this nation was founded by a group of white, Christ-based faith believing, mostly slave-owning, straight (definitely in the closet if not) men, who, while progressive for their time in terms of their thinking on government, established a nation that did not allow women the right to vote or own land and allowed for a person to be enslaved in permanent bondage and servitude.
I personally am sick and tired of hearing how it was the intention of this group of men that all men and women of all races (literally every human being on the planet) should be equal in all regards, and should all have equal rights including a civil right to water, food, shelter and public services. I am not saying that I don't believe in this, and I am not saying that I do not want this nation to have those principles today, but what I am saying is let's not go back and revise history in our minds to think that the Founding Fathers, the guys who were at the Continental Congress, fought in the Revolution, and established the framework for the United States of America, believed in these same principles, because quite clearly, they did not.
If you go back and read what most of the founders of the United States of America were writing at the time, you will most definitely see that it was not their intention for non-Christ-based faiths, women voters, women land owners, and people of color to have an equal place in the country as them. White, Christ-fearing land owner, you're in and here's your ballot - all others, some other, lesser role of servitude, and don't bother coming to the polls on election day.
Again, let's stick to our values and what we know to be right, but can we all please stop portraying the Founding Fathers as saints, because quite frankly, they were far from it.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Charlie Brown's B-17
Look carefully at the B-17 and note how shot up it is - one engine dead, tail, horizontal stabilizer and nose shot up. It was ready to fall out of the sky (this is a painting done by an artist from the description of both pilots many years later). Then realize that there is a German ME-109 fighter flying next to it. Now read the story below. I think you'll be surprised...
Charlie Brown was a B-17 Flying Fortress pilot with the 379th Bomber Group at Kimbolton, England. His B-17 was called 'Ye Old Pub' and was in a terrible state, having been hit by flak and fighters. The compass was damaged and they were flying deeper over enemy territory instead of heading home to Kimbolton.
After flying the B-17 over an enemy airfield, a German pilot named Franz Stigler was ordered to take off and shoot down the B-17. When he got near the B-17, he could not believe his eyes. In his words, he "had never seen a plane in such a bad state". The tail and rear section was severely damaged, and the tail gunner wounded. The top gunner was all over the top of the fuselage. The nose was smashed and there were holes everywhere.
Despite having ammunition, Franz flew to the side of the B-17 and looked at Charlie Brown, the pilot. Brown was scared and struggling to control his damaged and blood-stained plane.
Aware that they had no idea where they were going, Franz waved at Charlie to turn 180 degrees. Franz escorted and guided the stricken plane to, and slightly over, the North Sea towards England. He then saluted Charlie Brown and turned away, back to Europe. When Franz landed he told the CO that the plane had been shot down over the sea, and never told the truth to anybody. Charlie Brown and the remaining members of his crew told their commanding officers all about the German pilot at their mission debriefing, but were ordered never to talk about it.
More than 40 years later, Charlie Brown wanted to find the Luftwaffe pilot who saved the crew. After years of research, Franz Stigler was found. He had never talked about the incident, not even at post-war reunions.
They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now - all because Franz never fired his guns that day.
When asked why he didn't shoot them down, Stigler later said, "I didn't have the heart to finish those brave men. I flew beside them for a long time. They were trying desperately to get home and I was going to let them do that. I could not have shot at them. It would have been the same as shooting at a man in a parachute."
Both Brown and Stigler died in 2008.
While there are many hoaxes and false tales circulating in email and on the web, this story is true: http://www.snopes.com/military/charliebrown.asp
Charlie Brown was a B-17 Flying Fortress pilot with the 379th Bomber Group at Kimbolton, England. His B-17 was called 'Ye Old Pub' and was in a terrible state, having been hit by flak and fighters. The compass was damaged and they were flying deeper over enemy territory instead of heading home to Kimbolton.
After flying the B-17 over an enemy airfield, a German pilot named Franz Stigler was ordered to take off and shoot down the B-17. When he got near the B-17, he could not believe his eyes. In his words, he "had never seen a plane in such a bad state". The tail and rear section was severely damaged, and the tail gunner wounded. The top gunner was all over the top of the fuselage. The nose was smashed and there were holes everywhere.
Despite having ammunition, Franz flew to the side of the B-17 and looked at Charlie Brown, the pilot. Brown was scared and struggling to control his damaged and blood-stained plane.
Aware that they had no idea where they were going, Franz waved at Charlie to turn 180 degrees. Franz escorted and guided the stricken plane to, and slightly over, the North Sea towards England. He then saluted Charlie Brown and turned away, back to Europe. When Franz landed he told the CO that the plane had been shot down over the sea, and never told the truth to anybody. Charlie Brown and the remaining members of his crew told their commanding officers all about the German pilot at their mission debriefing, but were ordered never to talk about it.
More than 40 years later, Charlie Brown wanted to find the Luftwaffe pilot who saved the crew. After years of research, Franz Stigler was found. He had never talked about the incident, not even at post-war reunions.
They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now - all because Franz never fired his guns that day.
When asked why he didn't shoot them down, Stigler later said, "I didn't have the heart to finish those brave men. I flew beside them for a long time. They were trying desperately to get home and I was going to let them do that. I could not have shot at them. It would have been the same as shooting at a man in a parachute."
Both Brown and Stigler died in 2008.
While there are many hoaxes and false tales circulating in email and on the web, this story is true: http://www.snopes.com/military/charliebrown.asp
Labels:
Germany,
U.S. Air Force,
U.S. Army,
World War II,
World Wide Web
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Americans Owe Less...
You have no doubt heard by now, or perhaps have experienced first hand, that credit is a lot harder to come by than it was just a couple years ago. This may, in fact, not be such a bad thing for American consumers, forcing them to live within their means and drive down debt balances.
In March 2009, outstanding non-mortgage debt in the U.S. was $2.54 Trillion. By March 2010, that number had dropped to $2.45 Trillion. That's just about $9 Billion, but it is a good start in the right direction.
There have now been 18 straight months that have seen the level of revolving debt drop, with $935 Billion in March 2009, down to $853 Billion in March 2010.
Also, there are 16% less Americans that are 90 days behind or more on their credit cards today than a year ago, and 20% less that are 60 days behind or more on a car loan.
In March 2009, outstanding non-mortgage debt in the U.S. was $2.54 Trillion. By March 2010, that number had dropped to $2.45 Trillion. That's just about $9 Billion, but it is a good start in the right direction.
There have now been 18 straight months that have seen the level of revolving debt drop, with $935 Billion in March 2009, down to $853 Billion in March 2010.
Also, there are 16% less Americans that are 90 days behind or more on their credit cards today than a year ago, and 20% less that are 60 days behind or more on a car loan.
Labels:
budget,
business,
cars,
credit,
credit cards,
deficit,
personal finance,
spending,
U.S. Consumers
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Can We Talk About Spending Cuts, Please?...
We are going to be hearing some fierce debate in the coming weeks, and perhaps months, about the expiration of the Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003. While I do see this as something that we should be debating, the fact remains that the expiration of these tax cuts, as they will be allowed to expire by The Master and Commander, will only affect the top three percent of households in the country. The problem with the equation, however, is that these are the three percent of households that run the small businesses that create the jobs that we need so badly right now. I am hearing from the Master and Commander's Money Manager that they are now, after record-setting spending and borrowing, concerned about the growing national debt, and believe that allowing these tax cuts on people making more than $250,000 a year to expire will help bring down the deficit. Perhaps it will, but I also believe that the expiration of these tax cuts may have an effect on job creation by enterpreneurs. There will be a change in their bottom line and that change could result in them becoming wary of creating new jobs. Unlike the federal government, most people spend less when their income is reduced.
While all of this debate about the tax cuts is needed, I would very much like to see our government leaders, especially those on a particular side of the aisle, talking more about spending cuts. Spending cuts? In the middle of the worst economic crisis in history, with less and less money coming in, you want us to spend less? Now, that's just crazy talk, stupid constituent! There are so, so many ways in which our local, state, and federal governments can cut down on their spending, much in the same way that they have all seen the rest of America do during this crisis. We are not holding the federal government and this administration to the spending cuts that we should be seeing.
For a great example of government waste, click here to see a bill from the U.S. IRS issued to an Orange County resident for 1-cent. Now, of course, this is a drop in the well, nothing compared to other spending, etc. etc., but it is a good concrete example of somewhere we could start - proof positive that there are places that we could cut wasteful spending - most likely proof positive that if we are seeing waste like this, there is also waste elsewhere that we could cut.
So, as we all get caught up in this debate on the tax cuts, let's watch for the slight of hand and these politicians try to take our eyes away from where we should be looking - forcing them to spend less and save more, just like the rest of us are doing.
While all of this debate about the tax cuts is needed, I would very much like to see our government leaders, especially those on a particular side of the aisle, talking more about spending cuts. Spending cuts? In the middle of the worst economic crisis in history, with less and less money coming in, you want us to spend less? Now, that's just crazy talk, stupid constituent! There are so, so many ways in which our local, state, and federal governments can cut down on their spending, much in the same way that they have all seen the rest of America do during this crisis. We are not holding the federal government and this administration to the spending cuts that we should be seeing.
For a great example of government waste, click here to see a bill from the U.S. IRS issued to an Orange County resident for 1-cent. Now, of course, this is a drop in the well, nothing compared to other spending, etc. etc., but it is a good concrete example of somewhere we could start - proof positive that there are places that we could cut wasteful spending - most likely proof positive that if we are seeing waste like this, there is also waste elsewhere that we could cut.
So, as we all get caught up in this debate on the tax cuts, let's watch for the slight of hand and these politicians try to take our eyes away from where we should be looking - forcing them to spend less and save more, just like the rest of us are doing.
Labels:
Barak Obama,
budget,
communism,
deficit,
George W. Bush,
John Campbell,
socialism,
spending,
taxes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)