Question #1:
Influence of islam on the west?
Islam’s war against the infidels is not going to be defeated by guns or bombs. Force is merely the final solution to settling conflicts, but Islam’s violence is for now only the tip of the iceberg of a much larger campaign to make the world into an Islamic domain.While we fight with police actions and holding elections, the Islamists are seizing control of weak governments by force or by means of democratic elections… They are conquering African nations and staging civil wars in pacific ones too! They are importing millions of Muslims to Europe and America as Europe’s ‘Palestinians’ for a coming European Intifada. They are rewriting history to claim that the Arab explorers originally discovered America and Australia giving them claim to the land. They are aggressively evangelizing hundreds of thousands a year to Islam through misleading claims.
What we believe is a war is merely a minor skirmish in a global conquest! While we spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives to stabilize a single Muslim country, dozens of non-Muslim countries are being destabilized day by day. The true battle against Islam is not a military one; it is a cultural one. For Islam, it is a religious conflict for a global empire, intent on transforming every aspects of life into one defined by Islam (Islamic Shariah).
For us, it is about preserving our way of life.
The cartoon controversy woke many Europeans to the fact that free speech and many of the other attributes of democracy that they take for granted are incompatible with Islam. Under relentless pressure of multiculturalism, Muslims and we are increasingly deciding that our way of life has to bow to theirs. This is the ultimate victory of Islam!!!
Not the fall of the Twin Towers or any single act of terrorism is as great a victory for Islam as when our own government and press repeat their propagandas and muzzle their critics. This represents the submission of the West to their rule…! It turns Islam into the only legally sanctioned religion in Western nations that have long instituted separations of the Church and State.
Islam cannot be criticized by any public figure(s) without violence quickly following?
Islam cannot be criticized by the press without violence quickly following?
No disrespect, real or perceived, towards Islam can be tolerated either?
This is the lesson Muslim violence is teaching in the West, and much of their media, politicians and clergy are quickly becoming obedient students. Criticism of Islam by individuals will get you condemned as a bigot by those peoples, who are, for all intents and purposes, collaborating with our new tyrants!
While entertainers, academics and pundits of a liberalized West are free to criticize and impugn Christianity and Judaism, Islam is a No-Go Zone!!! While Judaism and Christianity cannot be taught in schools of the liberal West, Islam can be and is...! Muslim religious artifacts can be displayed, Muslim religion taught and its holy books present, whereas those of other religions cannot. This elevates Islam to a special status. It gives Muslims power over other religions and they use that power to their whims!
Question #2:
What does this article mean??...(brief summary please)?
Anti-abortion Group Targets Democrats In Radio AdsAnti-abortion Group Relies On Supreme Court Ruling To Call For Defeat Of 3 Democrats
Font size Print E-mail Share
(AP) WASHINGTON (AP) - An anti-abortion group plans to air radio ads in three congressional races calling for the defeat of Democratic incumbents, among the first ads to capitalize on a Supreme Court ruling this year that freed corporations to directly influence elections.
The group, AUL Action, is targeting Democratic Reps. John Boccieri of Ohio, Christopher Carney of Pennsylvania and Baron Hill of Indiana. AUL Action is the legislative arm of the nonprofit Americans United for Life.
The ads cross a new threshold in campaign communication and embrace the latitude granted by the Supreme Court in its 5-4 decision in January to increase the power of corporations and unions to sway government decisions.
Ad spending is on a record pace as outside groups raise more money from corporations, individuals and unions. As the November general election nears, political strategists believe more groups will follow AUL's path.
AUL Action is incorporated as a nonprofit under section 501(c)4 of the tax code. As such, it now enjoys the expanded rights granted by the court. Before that ruling, groups such as AUL were limited to airing "issue ads" that drew attention to candidates positions but could not recommend whether voters should vote them in or out of office.
Audio clips of the ads were obtained by The Associated Press from a Republican strategist not affiliated with Americans United. The group confirmed the placement of the ads.
Last month, AUL relied on the court's decision to endorse Colorado Republican Jane Norton for the Senate. Norton eventually lost to tea party-backed candidate Ken Buck, a county prosecutor.
AUL Action says Boccieri, Carney and Hill are the first of about a dozen members of Congress it intends to target with ads. The one-minute ads are scheduled to begin airing Friday for one week. They criticize Boccieri, Hill and Carney for voting for President Barack Obama's health care law. In a statement, AUL Action President Charmaine Yoest said the vote amounted to "the largest expansion of federal funding of abortion ever."
"They will not be able to hide from that vote any longer," she said.
Before the bill passed, Obama signed an executive order affirming long-standing restrictions on taxpayer-funded abortions.
Under the law, private plans in new insurance markets opening for business in 2014 can cover abortion, but payment must come from enrollees themselves, not from federal tax credits that will be offered to make premiums more affordable.
In the ads, a female narrators says, "The life of an innocent child may not matter" to Boccieri, Hill and Carney.
"It's time to send someone to Washington who shares our values, not Nancy Pelosi's," the ads say.
(This version CORRECTS to show Boccieri represents Ohio, not Indiana.)
&&&& How does this affect the community or the U.S as a whole
Question #3:
Wlll our next President believe in the Constitution?
President Obama wants to transform our free-market economy into a government-controlled economy. He wants to transform our family-centered society to a government-centered society. He wants to transform our national philosophy founded upon the primacy of the individual and the supremacy of God to one founded upon the primacy of the “collective good” of society and the supremacy of the central government.Mr. Obama’s problem is that the Constitution of the United States stands in his way. The Framers of the Constitution created this nation with the understanding that rights are not grants from government; they are gifts from Almighty God.
Question #4:
Obama I said let the illegals go free but Fed agents frustrated by judges’ immigration decisions?
In March, Jose Manuel Gonzalez-Sandoval — who had committed serious crimes in the United States since 1998 — stood before Florence, Ariz., Immigration Judge Bruce Taylor on a deportation hearing. That day the judge canceled his removal proceedings, allowing him to stay in the United States.Four months later, Sandoval was arrested again on an outstanding warrant but was released. Three days after that release he led police on a 100 mph car chase. Then in August, in response to a 911 call from his family, he shot at Arizona deputies who came to his home. That night, he escaped. He later turned himself into authorities after they began a public manhunt for him.
Sandoval, who had resident status, is only one example of a legal system that lacks working mechanisms for deporting criminal aliens, said Rep. Ted Poe, a Texas Republican and former judge.
“The federal government has the responsibility, the moral duty to send these criminal aliens back where they came from after they do their prison time and before they commit more crimes,” said Poe, who is co-chair of the Victims’ Rights Caucus. He said both the Obama and Bush administrations handled the issue ineffectively, hiding facts from the American people and “sugar-coating” the truth regarding the deportation of criminal aliens.
This month, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency announced that the Obama administration is planning to dismiss thousands of illegal alien deportation cases, possibly 17,000, if the immigrants have a potential path to legal residency or overstayed their visas.
But critics say many illegal aliens with long criminal records composed of what some courts consider to be lesser charges will see their deportation cases dismissed as well. They cite Sandoval as an example.
“The system is skewed to release these criminals,” said Poe, a former judge. He recalled many times he saw repeat criminal offenders back in his courtroom after issuing detainers, which required the federal government to deport them after they served their U.S. sentences.
“The detainers don’t work, because we either don’t have enough federal agents, the administration doesn’t make it a priority and there isn’t any accountability when alien criminals are released back into society,” Poe said.
ICE, Border Patrol and local law enforcement officers told The Washington Examiner that law enforcement agencies are frustrated by the judicial system’s approach to handling immigrants charged with crimes.
“In the case of Sandoval, ICE did the right thing,” said a federal official who spoke on the condition that he not be named. “They checked his long criminal history, he had two or more crimes involving morale turpitude and should have been deported and had his residency taken away. What does the administration have to say about this? He’s only one of thousands of bad guys that get away with this.”
Said an ICE agent: “What can we do when immigration judges are granted this huge discretionary authority? There is no oversight. This case could have resulted in the death of a police officer.”
Kathryn Mattingly, with the Executive Office for Immigration Reform, said, “The Office of the Chief Immigration Judge regularly monitors immigration judge performance and conduct through EOIR’s performance management program and through its daily supervision of the courts.”
She said that in “instances where concerns regarding an immigration judge’s conduct arise ... any allegations are investigated and resolved in a fair and expeditious manner,” adding that “such investigations could include scenarios where an immigration judge consistently makes ill-advised decisions.”
Sandoval’s Department of Homeland Security arrest record history was obtained by The Examiner.
He had used an alias, Samuel Mendoza, and as early as 1998 he had been arrested for damage to private property and simple assault. Since then he has been arrested for drunken driving, drug charges multiple aggravated assaults, multiple endangerment charges and use of a deadly weapon. In many cases, he was not prosecuted, simply fined and released, according to the documents.
The federal law governing criminal immigrants states that “if you have been convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct,” you are supposed to be deported.
However, judges have repeatedly used their own discretion not to deport him.
“There is no legal liability on the part of the judge, and you can’t charge a judge for using their discretion,” Poe said. “The judge is morally responsible to follow through with the law because if someone is killed or injured, the blood is on the judge’s hands.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Click Here
Question #5:
Why do Americans comply with having their liberties taken away...?
...as long as they think they would never use them?Take for example the War on Drugs. Americans think that "since I don't use drugs, I don't mind them being outlawed." Not that I am a drug user myself, but I don't grant the government authority over my body in ANY circumstance.
Too many times on here and in real life I've seen people, when asked if they would oppose a government mandate to have a tracking system installed in their car, police drones dispatched to patrol the skies, or a phone wiretap, reply "Go ahead. I have nothing to hide."
It's almost like they are trying to get patted on the head by Mommy Government in hopes they'll be called a good boy/girl and given a merit sticker for relinquishing their freedom.
If the founding fathers were alive today they would be disgusted and appalled at this attitude, and would have totally lost faith in the people's will and capacity for self-governance, as well as all hope that the world would ever experience a truly free society.
This mindset of complacency towards confiscated liberties that would otherwise probably not have been exercised, is exactly what leads to the onion layer effect. We lose our liberties one at a time until one day, a freedom we actually care about is taken from us and is justified through another law or dictum that at the time it was proposed, we let pass without complaint.
Will we ever learn?
Question #6:
What website can I go to for government grants. That are free. No money down?
Question #7:
Any loan or grant or anything I can get since in online high school for high school diploma (adult)?
Can I get financial aid or any free government loan or anything if I am an adult with low income and going back to school from home online? I am going back to school online to get my high school diploma right now. Also, is there a place I can get a free computer since I am in online high school since my computer is messing up? Since I am in home online school just for my high school diploma, is there any free or any help I can get? I am low income and have no job.Question #8:
My understanding of predictions. Do you agree?
No man has the power to predict anything. However, I have heard that a man can speak to beings, which I do beleive do have this power over humanity. Maybe without an EXACT time/date, this is only with God, but maybe an approximate period. Whether holy or evil. As far as I know, these predictions can be for the lord's purpose or satan's. It's like a gift, but it's how and why you asked for it.. The devil is known to deceive therefore, the devil's predictions cannot always be trusted regardless.I have heard of WW3 predictions, but I see what is happening in the world & media. It's moving more and more towards humanity. What I do beleive is explained in the Book of Revelation, which explains the end times for his people on earth and the temporary rise of satan. I don't think the world is to end, but there will most likely be very drastic occurances which will shock & change the whole world, and will help give that extra push to change the ways of humanity (communism/one world/lack of freewill) and to completely disregard the lord. There are people who work with the devil to ensure this happens in the most deceptive way to the human so it will be easy for the human to transition and to beleive the way of the human rather than the lord, through blasphemous ways, humans & idol's. People are to either choose at this point if they are to follow the beast (ways) or death, and upon death be granted to heaven. At this point it will not appear as a beast to the human eye, but will be a beast as portraited in the Bible.
The Rapture. Loss of Free Will. One World Order? Communism? The Anti-Christ? Removing GOD from the currency and anthem? Not only in the USA? Following the beast into the abyss? Number of heads of the beast (as nations)/G8? Media/Entertainment idols moving more towards earthly things to help confuse the beleivers of the lord. People in high status, high-admiration values to humans and power with-in world government involved within a secret society which allow's blasphemy of the lord to gain benefits of humanity/science/technology.
The devil promises you all the earthly things, in return for your belief in him, but for the price of what? Eternal death? Regardless of what Satan can give you, the nature of the human, as God has made it, is destined to fall into itself. Following the Lord is the only way out of this mess. Everything he has created is all to add to his glory. Remember, the angel's in heaven rejoice when these time's begin.
Question #9:
losing and paying back financial aid?
Okay, so, I went to college last year as a freshman for free because of fafsa... now this year, i filled out fafsa, but forgot to do the signing and pins... and tried going to the same school as last year.. I cant afford college, meaning now I cant go this year.. would i lose my financial aid for future years if i skip this year? would i have to pay back the grants the government and state gave me to go to college?Question #10:
Obama declares victory?
CAMP SPRINGS, MD—Addressing troops at Andrews Air Force Base Tuesday, President Barack Obama claimed victory in Iraq, saying that formal combat operations in the region would end Aug. 31, and that the United States had emerged from the seven-year war triumphant, kind of."For nearly a decade, our mission in Iraq has been to root out those who would choose violence over peace, to create a stable Iraqi government, and to transfer power to an incorruptible civilian police force," Obama said. "And, in a manner of speaking, we sort of did some of that, right? More or less?"
"Granted, this is not the definitive, World War II–like victory most of us expected," Obama continued. "But there's a military triumph in there somewhere, I swear. You just have to look at it from the right angles."
According to the president, the relative victory could be credited to a number of achieved benchmarks, depending upon how strict one's definition of "achieved" is. Obama pointed to the democratic election of an Iraqi parliament currently being held together by a thread; the streets of Iraq being slightly less hellish than they were in 2006; and the fact that women are now, for the most part, free to move around the country so long as they don't make a big production out of it.
Obama also noted that during the war more Iraqi insurgents died than American troops, which, he admitted, isn't necessarily the best way to determine a war's victor, but is nonetheless still preferable to the other way around.
"By the end of this month, victory, to a certain extent, will be ours, and we can finally welcome our troops back home," Obama concluded. "That is unless they are one of the 50,000 U.S. soldiers who will have to stay in the region for the foreseeable future."
Following the president's address, a car bomb ripped through an outdoor market in Baghdad killing eight Iraqis and wounding 32.
Pentagon officials also declared the mission, in a sense, kind of sort of accomplished Tuesday, citing the handful of Iraqi hearts and minds that may have been won over by the U.S. occupancy, and the fact that Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki had not yet been assassinated.
"In cases where we were unable to rebuild infrastructure or quell violent civil unrest, it wasn't for lack of trying," Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said during last Sunday's taping of ABC's This Week. "And trying your best, one could argue, is technically a triumph in and of itself."
"And hey, Saddam Hussein isn't in power anymore," Odierno continued. "So that's something."
With the cessation of combat operations, and the declaration of what sources said couldn't be called a complete and utter failure because to do so would be to admit that the U.S. wasted $750 billion, lost 4,400 troops, and killed 100,000 Iraqi civilians for absolutely nothing, both Democrats and Republicans have attempted to take credit for the quasi-victory.
"President Obama deserves zero praise for this borderline accomplishment," Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) told reporters. "After all, if it weren't for President Bush ordering the initial invasion of Iraq and making it his central foreign policy initiative, we wouldn't be here right now awkwardly celebrating the muddled outcome of whatever the hell it is we've been doing over there for the past seven years."
Pentagon and White House sources said the American people should expect more wince-inducing victory-if-you-can-call-it-that celebrations 10 or 15 years from now when we kind of, but not really, win in Afghanistan
Click Here
Question #11:
Since the controversial mosque will be a cultural center, will it be allowed to get government grants?
If this cultural center was to sponsor a government or state events (like a county fair) will they be allowed to pass out free tickets to those who worship at the mosque inside the cultural center?If so wouldn't that be in clear violation of the Constitution?
What exactly do they mean by cultural center? Because in my state most cultural centers have a state/government connection. If so isn't it illegal to have in religious entity in side a cultural center?
From wikipedia:
"A Cultural Center or Cultural Centre is an organization, building or complex that promotes culture and arts. Cultural centers can be neighborhood community arts organizations, private facilities, government-sponsored, or activist-run."
Will the state of New York be able to completely be seperate from this cultural center? Will a state event be allowed to be hosted there if there is a religous place in the building?
From what a gather plenty of people are opposed to the government connection to the Boys Scout and to tax exempts of churches.
So......
Question #12:
where do you get free government grants from?
Question #13:
Why do the critics of capitalism espouse such nonsense as "free market monopoly" and "Robber Barons"?
Classical economists rarely mentioned the monopoly, because a free market monpoly is almost a ludicrous concept.Monopolies, such as the Dutch East India Company, DeBeers diamonds, and Standard Oil, are creatures of the state, which require laws and privileges (such as the Dutch East India Company receiving exclusive rights of sale) granted by the government in order to sustain themselves. Corrupt corporations love government. Lobbyist groups such as the AMA love government.
And then there's the "Robber Barons" baloney. Did the robber barons exist? Are there robber barons? Yes, of course they did, and yes, there still are corrupt people. But this entire argument ignores the extreme prosperity created during the 19th century, due to industrial capitalism. It ignores the fact that the 19th century saw the rise of charitable organizations beyond any other period in history. It ignores the fact that people came here in droves in order to prosper, and did; and this was all with little gov intervention.
Robber barons are often sustained by laws; they are not a free market concept.
Milton Friedman, renowned author and economist, easily debunks the whole Robber Baron myth
Click Here
Yes, NeoNerd, people can collude. But in a free market, what is to stop anyone from undercutting them?
Monopolies in a FREE MARKET are no where near as dangerous, or as long-lasting, or as intense as monpolies sustained by violence, aka, the government
Mr Nice Guy:
Indeed, because if I were to ask you to name a single monopoly that arose in a free market and sustained itself over any significant period of time, I'm sure you couldn't name even one.
Monopolies are aided by the state.
Ducky guy: I'm using history to back up my argument. What's a single monopoly that you can think of that didn't get help from the government?
Ducky: I never said monopolies didn't exist. I'm asking you what monopolies were created and sustained in a FREE MARKET.
The monopolies you list all had government assistance.
And Milton Friedman is far more educated than you could ever be.
Question #14:
Can you name a single example of a monopoly that arose in a free market?
I must stress the end bit: ...that arose in a free market.That already excludes most of what you're probably going to say, such as the Dutch East India Company, Standard Oil, DeBeers, et cetera, which were all granted some sort of government privileges.
Oh right, you can't, because it's a ludicrous concept. This is why classical economists rarely wrote about the topic of monopolies.
Wizard and Felcher: Standard Oil? AMA? Are y'all serious?
Those depend(ed) on government intervention (the AMA is a lobbyist group)
try again
Question #15:
What do you think Liberals are up to today? Can you name some things?
Let's see what the neo-nazi liberals are up to today:- Still wanting no disagreement with their agenda
- Still wanting anyone that doesn't agree with them to die
- Still trying to ban freedom of speech
- Still burning flags
- Still trying to end all religion
- Still operating the GITMO prison
- Still crying racist every time some one says anything about Obama
- Still taxing all businesses into bankruptcy
- Still trying to tax all citizens onto food stamps
- Still trying to grant amnesty to all illegal immigrants
- Still giving all illegal immigrants welfare and free medical care
- Still calling this "recovery summer"
- Still forcing a government takeover of the economy
- Still telling us that things are getting better
- Still claiming the stimuus bill saved jobs
- Still not spending half the stimulus money
- Still paying off the unions
- Still pushing cap and trade
Yep ... things are normal ... what a sick bunch.
Question #16:
Camerons Council home reform, what is he thinking of?
Been readinga nd hearing a lot about this , things like if your given a council home it will be reviewed in so many years and if your earning more you will be made to move on to other housing , Also that if you have lived in a large house all your life and your children have grown up and moved out you will be made to swap to smaller accomodation?I cant see this working I ca only see major protesets
firstly- say a single parent or a non working family move into council home , eventually get a minimukm wage job with some sort of working tax credits and little help with rent (ie rent usually £68 pw , housing benefit top up of £28 pw) then a review after 5 years now says they are working so need to move to allow a non working person in
Here is the problem, as they are on minmum wage and may have had debt probs due to being out of work it is highly unlikely they will be accepted for a mortgage , and then they could get a private landlord but a lot of landlords dont accept any form of tenants on benefits even working tax , plus the rents are ridiculous , usually up to £150 for a 3 bed house , anyone claiming tax credits may get around £40- £50 of this paid which still leaves over £100 just on rent in which case there would be no point in working as you would be left with nothing and back to benefits
secondly is it really fair to throw an older person out of their family home which they have lived all there lives and amke them take up a grotty high rise single flat in another area , leaving their friends and miles away from work , plus the council have a thing where if they make or force tenants to move they have to give them relocation grants usually in the sum of £2000- £3000 plus removal costs , therefore costing the council and government even more
Therefore this reform is pointless
What they need to do is stop the immigrants coming here and going to top of housing lists for the large council homes , send all the ones here back and problem solved , a few thousand free homes , after all I wonder how many British people occupycheap social housing in Pakistan or Poland and get it paid for them ?
Question #17:
looking for a free Government Grant?
I am looking for a grant to do home improvements on our home. The house is very old and needs work. I know there are grants to do this I just need direction. I don't want to purchase those grant kits either. I don't want a $50 a month fee. Thanks!Question #18:
Is a deist capable of ever being free?
I am an Atheist and a Libertarian. These are two concepts that are as one to me. I have heard Christians claim that since their rights are granted to them by god according to the bill of rights, that government cannot take them away.My belief however is, that anything granted can be taken away. The only way to be free is to say: "I am free, and I will fight to defend my freedom."
So, are deists capable of ever being free? Since by the very nature of their belief structure, they start from the foundation of: "God grants me whatever I have."
How can anyone be free when they start from the belief that they are enslaved to a higher power?
I mean deist in the traditional meaning of the word here people :) Anyone who believes in a deity.
The religion reffered to as deist is a new thing. (Speaking from a historical perspective) Deist traditionaly meant someone who believes in a deity. Theist means someone who believes in a theology.
I am saying how can you be free if you believe a deity grants you your rights?
Bianca, thank you, lol. I do not agree with you, but at least you actually read the durn question.
People seem to be going through the rolls of religious terms and turning them, one after another, into religions. So please read the whole question, not just the first line of it :)
Deist meant originally, one who believes in a deity. Theist means one who believes in a theology. Atheist means one who believes in no theology so there actually isnt a word for what I am, but I accept the term because it's the best weve got, lol.
Question #19:
How can I find and apply for a government grant without spending money out of my own pocket to apply?
There are alot of websites that claim to help you with getting free money from government grants, but is'nt there a loophole to where I can just go straight to the source and apply directly with the government without having these different websites asking me for money? I want to see what grants that I might qualify for without spending money out of my own pocket, any advice???Question #20:
why do stupid girls who get pregnant get rewarded?
why is it that my silly 17 year old cousin who has got herself pregnant while single gets a £500 grant and a free flat and grants to furnish it is entitled to this. While i , who have worked all my life and just manages to pay my mortgage has to scrimp and save to pay for the arrival of our child.Does the English government think this will deter teenagers from having babies?yes she got herself pregnant as she thinks it will be cool to not have to work and get a free home like her mates have!
** Powered by Yahoo Answers