We the People cannot afford the “Help” — Government Employees. What to do about it? written by Aptos, CA Psychologist

We The People cannot afford the Help — what the public sector provides to the public. They cost too much. It’s got to stop. Government workers make double what private sector employees make. What to do?

Imagine the following: A couple both work full time. And they have two children who are in school. And, they have a couple dogs. The couple want a House Cleaner to come and do the floors, bathrooms and kitchen for 4 hours a week.

But, the House Keeper charges double per hour what the couple makes. Can they afford the House Keeper? No. That is the situation that the country faces. We the People cannot afford the Help.

U.S. Government salaries have increased every year for the last 9 years. Now the average government employee makes DOUBLE what the typical person in the private sector makes.

What that means is that you and I in the private sector have to work TWO hours to pay for ONE hour of government work.

This is not Public Service, this is the Public Trough. We cannot afford the Help. Pure and simple.

What to do? Raise a howl. Write letters. Require that all salaries be re-negotiated and comparative to private sector salaries. Say NO MORE public trough.

The unions such as the SEIU and others are responsible for the huge increases in government salaries. The government sits down with the unions and nobody is there at the table representing US who pay the bill.

Think of the public schools. Who represents the kids? The teachers are out for a bigger hand out every year. The unions for the teachers negotiate so that bad teachers are not let go. The school boards are clueless how to reward better teachers and how to inform and involve the public.

So who is out to advocate for the children? There needs to be someone and that has to be parents and community members.

See the following from USA Today:

“At a time when workers’ pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees’ average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Federal workers have been awarded bigger average pay and benefit increases than private employees for nine years in a row. The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade.

“Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available…”

Obama puts foot in mouth equating a mosque at Ground Zero equal to a Temple or church says Brahimachara

Dreams of which fore-fathers?

What if the original colonists to America for 3-4 generations had all been of Islamic faith?

Imagine America founded by true believers of Islam. Since there is only Allah and one Faith, no other faiths would have been allowed in America. Like Saudi Arabia, which has no Christian churches, America would have only mosques. Had American been founded by Islamic believers, pedophilia (sex with pre-pubescent girls) would be OK, women would not have equal rights to men and America would not be a democracy. And on and on.

Obama just does not get it. Islam is principally a political ideology that seeks conquest through war. And non-believers at best — if followers of the Book– are to be humiliated and forced to pay a tax as a non-believer.

Now Obama has offended Hindus by equating mosques with temples. See below.

“A Hindu Temple and a Islamic Mosque is not the same thing. Obama should apologize for his misleading statement.: Brahmachari

(This message has been sent to the 9/11 protest organized by Hindu Human rights Watch from Upananda Brahmachari, Editor, Hindu Existence)
Barack Hussein Obama does not know about the Reality of Radical Islam.

“How could he really understand the difference of a Christian Church, a Hindu Temple and an Islamic Mosque?

I do not know extensive about Christianity and Jesus. But I believe that there is no scope of hatred preaching from the services of a Church. May it be for Justice, Peace and Love. And the Hindu Temples are the abode of peace and spirituality which embrace everybody in the fold of highest philanthropic attributes.
But the Mosques are the workshop of devils who want only Jehad to destroy the civil society to capture this world under a monolithic Islamic pattern. They don’t know democracy, not peace, love, brother hood anything with the non-believers. Mosques are the epicentre of all Islamic hatred, disharmony and the catastrophe for us. It is an arsenal of Allah to end up humanity.
“The mosques are our barracks, the domes are our helmets, the minarets are our swords, and the faithful are our army”… as they think so, why do you think different Mr. Obama?
The whole American Nation is against the proposed mosque near Ground Zero, where over 3000 innocent lives were lost under a complete Islamic massacre. And you are allowing a refuge of those radical Islamists in the name of Ground Zero Mosque. The rest of world is also against such aggression of Islam in NYC and USA.

Equating Hinduism with Islam, you did a Himalayan blander. Mr. President of US, you should apologize and keep the Ground Zero Mosque ever restrained.
There should be no Mosque at Ground Zero. Repeat, No Mosque at Ground Zero.
Brahmachari is available at hinduexistence@gmail.com or at +919007543148

Pedophilia – sex with children – is OK according to Quran? Yes says Islam-Watch.org

Islam-Watch exposes Islam as a false religion that is anti-democratic and opposed amongst other things to equality for women. Islam permits sex with prepubescent girls. See below:

“Conclusion: Quran 65:4 obviously stipulates Iddah to divorced prepubescent girls. Moreover, the Quran prescribes no waiting period or Iddah for a divorced woman, who makes no sexual contact with her husband. Therefore, divorced prepubescent girls need to observe Iddah, simply because sexual contact has occurred between her and her husband. This proves beyond any scope of doubt that the Quran endorses pedophilia, the most abominable and perverted of all sexual crimes.”

Obama: the goal of NASA is to improve relations with the Muslim world…Huh? Obama supported release of the terrorist bomber who killed 270 … huh? He lurches here and there… Maybe his father’s dreams explain Obama’s policies?

“A few weeks before Obama was elected President, I held my nose and read a used copy of his autobiography, ‘Dreams From My Father’.

I found the book to be a fraud. Instead of being a biography of Obama, it was instead a confusing sequence of rambling anecdotes about his search for his dead drunken, polygamist father. At the end of the book, I knew as little about Obama the person as I had when I’d started.

Nearly two years would pass before I discovered the reason for Obama’s vagueness about himself in his book; he didn’t write it. Obama literally couldn’t write anything; after four desperate years of trying, he hadn’t even been able to produce a one page outline. The task, therefore, had been given to Obama’s terrorist political mentor, Bill Ayers, who subsequently and effortlessly finished the book for him.

Despite that, however, the book did reveal something about Obama. And it is the superb insight of Dinesh D’Souza which now explains it to the world.


Unless one reads the book, one can not make sense of Obama’s seemingly contradictory policies as President.

Though elected as a ‘green’ President, Obama recently stunned his followers by pressing for funding for offshore drilling. He then bewildered them even more by threatening to refuse permission for banks to pay back their stimulus funding. He made it worse by threatening to impose even higher taxation on citizens who already contributed nearly 70% of the tax base. Though committed to defending Americans against terrorism, he instead pressed for the released of convicted terrorist Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, “the Lockerbie bomber convicted in connection with the deaths of 270 people, mostly Americans”. And, last but not least, he gave one of the most bizarre orders to NASA; from now on, “the primary mission of America’s space agency would be to improve relations with the Muslim world”.

All of this sounds bewildering – until Mr. D’Souza explains it all. The answer, he says, is stated clearly in the title of Obama’s book. Obama’s ‘dream’ for himself is actually a completion of the unfulfilled dream of his father – a dream to destroy the remnants of colonialism. For those who do not understand what anticolonialism is, D’Souza explains:

“Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama’s acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, “The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races.”

Anticolonialists hold that even when countries secure political independence they remain economically dependent on their former captors. This dependence is called neocolonialism, a term defined by the African statesman Kwame Nkrumah (1909–72) in his book Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. Nkrumah, Ghana’s first president, writes that poor countries may be nominally free, but they continue to be manipulated from abroad by powerful corporate and plutocratic elites. These forces of neocolonialism oppress not only Third World people but also citizens in their own countries. Obviously the solution is to resist and overthrow the oppressors. This was the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr…”

At the time that Obama, Sr. opposed colonialism in his native Kenya, the former colonialist structure had been the British empire. But by the time Obama, Sr. traveled to America to begin his studies at Harvard, he had come to realize that England had been totally surpassed in power and scope by a much greater colonialist, one that dwarfed all others on the face of this earth: America.

This then explains the bewildering actions of the President of the United States. Though elected to defend America, he is instead committed by his ideals and his past to destroying this country.

“From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.”

This then explains Obama’s seemingly contradictory edicts while in office. To begin with, the offshore drilling he supported is not American but Brazilian. Why? Because in preventing America from drilling for oil but allowing other countries to do so, Obama can destroy America’s ‘colonial’ greed to exploit the wealth of other nations. In refusing to allow banks to pay back government stimulus money, Obama thus prevents them from breaking free of government’s control.

In imposing even higher taxes on citizens who already pay the bulk of taxes, Obama thus destroys the financial heart of colonialism – i.e., wealthy individuals who were the main impetus and benefactors of exploitation of colonies in the past.

Finally, Obama has delivered a blow to the religious heart of colonialism – the Christian faith. Obama’s Muslim father (and atheist mother) viewed the Christian faith as an evil tool of colonial oppression. This then explains Obama’s obsession with opposing that faith at every turn – which translates into support for its foe, the Muslim faith. This is why Obama supported the release of a Muslim terrorist from Scottish prison; why he has warped NASA from a space agency into a PR firm of Muslim outreach; and why he now refuses to defend Americans from a mosque being built on the ashes of those who were murdered by Islamic terrorists on 9/11.

In short, Obama’s dreams are his father’s dreams – the destruction of the greatest colonialist in the world and all that it represents. He warned about it in his book but too few people picked up that warning. Now the dreamer sits in the Oval Office. And his dreams are now our nation’s nightmare.


What a dismal life so many Muslim women endure. Islam is a man’s religion and women treated so poorly. How can Western women reach out to Muslim women so that Muslim women have choice?

So few Muslim women speak out against their condition.

In A God Who Hates Wafa Sultan describes her grandmother’s life. Her husband, the grandmother’s husband, took a second wife after his sons died. The grandmother had to walk ahead of the couple and later had to serve the wife and stay in the background.

Some current info about Wafa Sultan follows:

Counterpoint: In defence of Wafa Sultan
Posted: March 12, 2010
By Joanne Hill

“Tarek Fatah has used the National Post to present a one-sided, inaccurate and potentially dangerous editorial about statements made by Dr. Wafa Sultan during her March 3rd debate in Toronto with Dr. Daniel Pipes.

“Mr. Fatah’s article is not an unbiased report: it is an opinion piece full of loaded terms such as slur, attack, hateful, anguish, Islam haters and vitriol. He misquotes Dr. Sultan and presents as fact a conclusion that is not supported by any of her statements: a conclusion that I believe puts her life in danger.

“I am a freelance reporter; I covered the debate between Dr. Pipes and Dr. Sultan for the Jewish Tribune. I have an audio recording of the entire event, including the Question and Answer period, so I can state with complete accuracy what was and was not said by Dr. Sultan.

“Mr. Fatah assumes the authority of a mind-reader to reveal what he claims is Dr. Sultan’s hidden intention. Given his first-hand experience of the eagerness of some Muslims (or “Islamists” if he would prefer) to issue death threats against anyone who is perceived as threatening Muslims, there are three reasons why I find it disturbing that he would attribute to Dr. Sultan this motivation: “Perhaps the answer she had in mind was too outrageous even by her own standards: Force Muslims to convert or die.”

This is disturbing, first of all, because Dr. Sultan said nothing that would lead the listener to come to this conclusion. When asked during the Q&A, “How do you get Muslims to reform? Do you expect them to convert to another religion?” Dr. Sultan replied:

“Give them the freedom to choose: that’s all I’m asking for. Give them the freedom to search, to ask, to be exposed to different sides, different values, different lifestyles. I can tell you from my very own experience, what has helped me to reform myself is being exposed to Western values and being free to express my conclusion. I always compare between my life under Islamic Sharia and my life as a free woman in America and I write about that on my website in Arabic. So when you expose people to different [sic], and you give them the freedom to choose, that’s all we need in the Islamic world. I’m not asking [them] to convert to a different religion; I’m asking to grant them the freedom to choose, the freedom to be, to follow whatever path they want to follow. That’s all.”

Second, this is what Dr. Sultan said at the conclusion of the Q & A:

“I’m not speaking up against Islam to please anyone but my conscience. We suffer a lot under Islamic Sharia. It is not fair. Enough is enough. We need to live our lives as human beings. I want you to know I’m not here to incite anyone against Muslims. Muslims are my family: my Mom, my brother, my sister. You know, I cannot peel off my own skin. I feel sorry for them because they are victims of a very hateful ideology. Really, if you take a look at any Islamic country, what do you see? Nothing but miserable situations, especially women who are living in this society. So I am speaking up to save them, looking for a better future for them. And believe it or not, when it comes to my readers in the Arab world, I feel it is easier for me to address my thoughts than to penetrate the Western mind. People in the West live by the Western ethical code which doesn’t allow them to judge people based on their religion – and there’s nothing wrong with that-but they need to know that Islam is not merely a religion: it is also a political ideology and that’s what I am fighting. That’s what I am speaking up against. And I hope one day, the future for our generation in the Muslim world will be much better than the life I lived under Islamic Sharia in Syria.”

And third, the terrible, secret motivation which Mr. Fatah attributes to Dr. Sultan is in fact a commandment made by Mohammed to his followers regarding non-Muslims:

“Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war… When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them… If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.” (Source: Sahih Muslim Book 19, Hadith #4294.)

There is more.

Contrary to what Mr. Fatah writes, Dr. Sultan did not say: “Muhammed was a child rapist.”

Rather, she said: “As a married man, Mohammed raped Aisha when she was nine; he was 54.”

If Mr. Fatah is hurt by this statement, perhaps he should consider the source: Islamic doctrine. I challenge Mr. Fatah to deny this.

When she said, “There is no moderate Islam,” Dr. Sultan stated quite clearly, more than once, that she was quoting the Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, who said in 2007 in response to the term “moderate Islam”: “These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

Again, perhaps Mr. Fatah should take umbrage with Mr. Erdogan unless he, like the people who took Macleans Magazine to the “human rights” courts, would suggest that it is no longer permissible in Canada to quote Muslims when they have said something unpleasant about Islam.

I was paying close attention throughout the debate and at no time did I see Dr. Sultan sneer. She did not say, per Mr. Fatah, “I am ‘clean’ of Islam.”

Dr. Sultan was speaking of the long, difficult process of breaking free from a religious upbringing that has been embedded in one’s psyche from childhood. She said, “It is not an easy process: it is very tough. I still behave, in many ways, as a Muslim. I debate in a way [that] I am right and everybody else is wrong.” This drew laughter and applause from the audience. Dr. Sultan continued, “So it’s under my skin. I don’t follow a specific religion. Of course I believe in God and I am empowered by Him.”

Mr. Fatah writes that he was “traumatized” by Dr. Sultan’s words. If this is truly the case, I would suggest that Mr. Fatah’s sensitive feelings render him too delicate for this Western society in which he has chosen to live, because we in the free world are not required to continually couch our statements in qualifiers or cushion our strong words. Dr. Sultan spoke plainly and strongly about her personal experience as a woman raised in an Islamic country under Sharia law. Contrary to Mr. Fatah’s characterization, she was funny, down-to-earth and as far from hateful as one can get.

Besides, even if Dr. Sultan does hate Islam, what business is that of Mr. Fatah’s? Is she not entitled to her express own opinion? As a Christian, I was irked when Dr. Pipes said that Christianity “started on a much lower base” than Islam. But so what? Only a fool would deny the history of crimes committed by Christians against Jews.

Why was Avi Benlolo required to spend at least 20 minutes after the debate placating the hurt feelings and smoothing the ruffled feathers of a self-described “hardened secular Muslim” who is supposed to be on the side of freedom of religion and freedom of speech?

I see at the bottom of Mr. Fatah’s article that his upcoming book is entitled, Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti- Semitism. On the night of the debate, Mr. Fatah informed Avi Benlolo (in my presence) without a trace of irony that his new book was going to be called, Why We Hate Jews.

Unlike Mr. Fatah, I will not presume to know his motivation in saying that to Mr. Benlolo or in writing his misleading editorial about Dr. Sultan. I will say, however, that I believe he owes Dr. Sultan, this newspaper and its readers an apology and a retraction.

National Post

Burn the Koran? No! Read it! Decide if you want that political philosophy running your community.

The Secretary of Defense called the preacher who planned to burn the Koran in protest against a mosque built at Ground Zero. And the preacher has backed down for now. No burning.

Better that the preacher and those who shape public policy in Washington D.C. and elsewhere read the Koran.

Look at the core values of the Koran and how those values shape Islamic societies.

So, is Jihad and beheading OK if you are Muslim?

Do you want religious freedom for Islamic persons to practice their religion as they choose in America? That sounds OK? General Colin Powell says so. He supports a mosque near Ground Zero.

What if the Islamic religion is not just a religion but also a political philosophy? What if Islamic religious law — Sharria law — makes you as a non-believer a second class citizen?

Do you want Islamic Sharria law to take root and spread via mosques throughout America? Do you want second class citizenship as a country?

Do you think marriage for 3rd graders is OK as Sharria law permits it? Do you want women required to wear a veil? Is it OK that a woman must have 4 witnesses to divorce and a man needs none? Do you want men to have 4 wives and multiple concubines? All of the above are integral to the political philosophy and Islamic Sharria law.

Stop thinking of Islam as a religion and think of it as a political philosophy.

How are people best organized as a political entity? Western civilization traces possible answers back to Plato and Socrates. The Middle East traces back to to Mo-hammed and the Koran.

Historically, we as Americans are tolerant. We don’t attack others. And we don’t lie down and give up when attacked.

Building an Islamic mosque near Ground zero is a provocation that should not be ignored.

Islamic terrorists are ruled by Islamic Sharria law. There is one law for Islam and another law for unbelievers which includes the West.

The events of 09-11, the day President Kennedy died and the bombing of Pearl Harbor are all defining moments for many Americans. Many of us remember where we were and what we were doing when we learned President Kennedy had been slain. And the same goes for 09-11. Only a few of us remain that personally remember the day Pearl Harbor was hit.

Without warning or provocation the Japanese killed thousands of American military at Pearl Harbor. Out of the blue, President Kennedy was slain while waving to people standing along the streets of Texas. On 09-11 America was attacked in multiple locations by Islamic extremists bent on murder.

09-11 woke America up. America had been hit before at the Trade Center but the first attack was prosecuted as a criminal act. On 09-11 America saw on TV a coordinated terrorist attack at multiple locations involving civilian and military victims.

It was some time before we learned that 14 of the 16 terrorists were young men from Saudi Arabia who shared the same political/religious Islamic political philosophy.

That on 09-11 there was dancing in the streets of some Muslim cities at the sight of the plane hitting the World Trade Center says a lot about how many Muslims view America — we are unbelievers who deserve to die.

Recently a Christian preacher threatened to burn the Koran. Bad idea!

Read the Koran! Learn about Sharria law and the political philosophy that under girds Islamic societies.

Let the words of the Koran burn into you.

After you have read the Koran, answer the following question: Do you want Islamic political philosophy and Sharria religious law organizing your local community? I don’t.

Where are the moderate Muslims?
Why have they not publicly rejected the terrorists and radical Islam? Do the moderates fear that some Iman like the Australian Fritz Mohannand might put a jehad out to be-head them?

Probably time to find out what is preached by Imams in your local mosque and Islamic community center. Islam is more than a religion, it is a political philosophy.

Building a mosque near Ground Zero has aroused many Americans. And rightly so. Americans believe in fair play.

It is not fair that a greek orthodox church cannot re-build near by and planners OK a mosque.

Mosques are built as a sign of victory. It is not right to memorialize 3,000 plus Americans killed in the name of Allah and jehad.

For a non-partisan exam of th role values play in current issues of public policy — and the issue of building a mosque at Ground Zero certainly involves public policy — take a look at The Public Philosopher found at: www.thepublicphilosopher.com

written by Cameron Jackson
Monterey Bay Forum