Men did not have a good life in the past

We are often reminded of how well men lived in the past and how they oppressed women. To listen to the histrionics of the "women are virtuous victims" culture, one would think men had a gentle past.

If one looks at the suffering of humanity for most of its existences one will realize that men as well as women suffered. The appended story from Canadian TV of 300 soldiers executed for cowardice in World War One. No women were executed!

American soldiers were also executed in World War One. Those men who were executed gave up their constitutional rights and had the Uniform Code of Military Justice thrust upon them. Most were drafted, or shamed into joining, but they all became members of the most socialistic and collective organization of the State. They ate the same foods, slept in the same type sleeping quarters, and wore the same uniform, all for promoting and protecting the STATE.

"War is the health of the State". Randolph Bourne

Charles Tolleson

Wed. Aug. 16 2006

More than 300 soldiers -- including 23 Canadians -- who were executed for cowardice during the First World War are set to be formally pardoned, Britain's Defence Ministry confirmed Wednesday.

Defence secretary Des Browne is expected to announce a group pardon, approved by Parliament, for the 306 men on moral grounds.

The soldiers were shot by firing squad for cowardice or desertion in the 1914-1918 war -- many after court martial hearings that lasted just minutes.

Among them was British soldier Private Harry Farr, who was shot for cowardice in 1916 aged 25.

Farr's family have been campaigning for years for him to be pardoned, arguing that he was suffering from post-traumatic stress and should not have been sent back to the trenches.

The families of all the executed soldiers, who have long argued that the soldiers broke down amid the horrors in the trenches, received no military pensions, in addition to the stigma they suffered.

"I don't want to be in a position of second guessing the commanders in the field who were making decisions," but injustices "were clearly done," Browne told BBC Radio Four's Today program Wednesday.

A statutory "blanket pardon" recognizes that "everybody involved in these terrible cases were as much victims of World War I as those who died in the battlefield," Browne added.

However, not everyone agrees with the pardons.

Cliff Chadderton, chairman of Canada's National Council of Veteran Associations, told The Globe and Mail that while executing a soldier for desertion "sounds very brutal in today's world," it was critical for military leaders to ensure soldiers were prepared to sacrifice their lives for their fellow soldiers.

Deserters, he said, were "bad role models for other troops."

Al-Qaida in Nigeria, Time to Invade

A Nigerian airline passenger, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, tried to blow up an airliner as it approached Detroit. I doubt if he had enough explosive material in the small liquid containers passengers are allowed to carry on board aircraft to blow a hole in a large aircraft. All he was able to accomplish was to start a small fire that quickly consumed all its energy and died out. All the materials used to build the inside of the cabin are flame resistant.

The State mob is quick to say Abdulmmutallab was directed by al-Qaida, located in Nigeria, and now Yemen. So Yemen has become the target de jour. The U.S., led by the Jewish lobbies, wants to invade any Islamic country. Now we will invade Yemen because there may be a dozen al-Qaida members there who hate the U.S. invasion and occupation of Arab countries, and the U.S. support of tribal leaders that take all of the oil revenue for themselves.

I wonder if the al-Qaida members in Yemen who told Abdulmutallab to blow up and airliner were undercover CIA operatives posing as al-Qaida.
No harm done. The entrapment allows the government mob to show how important they are to protecting the hoi polloi, who will be frightened, again, and will give up some more freedoms, again, for an illusion of more safety.

Now the sheep will be willing to spend billions on body scanning equipment and accept the government mob's laughter at seeing our body scans.

The State is the only organization that profits from its failure.

The news story said Abdumutallab was on a watch list but not on a denied boarding list. If he was on an intelligence watch list, why was he allowed into the United States? Maybe the CIA wanted him to make contacts that would lead to more terrorists, so the CIA did not put him on the no fly list. The CIA probably wanted him to come into the U.S. and make contacts. The CIA however did not know he would have explosives.

His father had warned the U.S. embassy in Nigeria about his son. Still the government protectors allowed him into the U.S. So much for the protection they proudly claim to provide us.

I thought the new Department of Homeland Security was supposed to coordinate all intelligence from all the bureaucrats in dozens of security departments and agencies. It looks like it failed and now Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says they have implemented more rules to make flying more uncomfortable for passengers because DHS screwed up. Now passengers must remain in their seats the last hour of the flight. "Travelers on incoming international flights said that during the final hour, attendants removed blankets, banned opening overhead bins, and told passengers to stay in their seats with their hands in plain sight." Will passengers be issued diapers to urinate in? No, you must bring your own. All of these new rules when the rules that were in place would have worked had the mob bureaucrats done their jobs. Napolitano herself admitted that Abdulmmutallab was in a database to be watched.

Instead of relying on the government mob for protection, Dutch tourist Jasper Schuringa got out of his seat, (I wonder if he will be cited for violating a TSA rule) and put out the fire started by Abdumutallab. Imagine that. People can protect themselves if they are not promised protection by the mob. And they can protect themselves for a lot less than charged by the mob. How much inconvenience would passengers have to put up with if private security was in place of government security? The airline that provided the most effective and convenient service and security would be successful. Look at these photos of an airship that has no cockpit door between the pilots and passengers.

The sheeple passengers being interviewed about new and tighter security measures implemented by the mob said they did not mind. They are afraid of another religious zealot wanting to harm them, the United States. Their odds of being killed by their spouse is greater than their odds of being killed by a terrorist. They fail to ask why someone wants to harm such a nice, warm and fuzzy country like the U.S. Maybe it is because the nice, warm and fuzzy U.S. invades, and kills innocent people in other countries.

The sheep should be afraid of the mob more than a few religious zealots. The mob has concentrated power. The lone zealot has diffused power.

Charles Tolleson

Organized Labor and Power

I was reading a discussion about how the American worker has been replaced with cheaper overseas labor. Some blamed it on the greedy business leaders. Those who blamed the business leaders failed to realize they themselves, shop for the best deal. The capital of the producers and the consumers flows to its most efficient route.

There have been past attempts made by the U.S. Congress to promote competition. The Sherman Anti Trust Act, passed in 1890, was such legislation. It even included the labor organization, the American Railway Union, ARU, because the labor union with its 150,000 members prevented competition and harmed the consumer. It seems the congress of the 21st century is more interested in having the U.S. economy run by the Federal Government than it is in promoting competition.

At the turn of the 20th century the American economy became more industrial instead of agrarian. The American labor force gained more political power. The Clayton Act was passed in 1914. Important difference between the Clayton act and its predecessor, the Sherman act, is that the Clayton act contained safe harbors for union activities. Now unions could create practices that reduced competition and hurt consumers.

The United Auto Workers was formed in 1935. Over the years it would reach a membership of 1.5 million in 1979. In 2009 its membership was down to less than 500 thousand. The UAW was one of the first unions to organize black Americans. That's because capital flows to the most productive use and poor southern black Americans would work for lower wages than white Americans, so the UAW organized the black Americans. After businesses were required to pay the same wages to blacks as to whites, then racism set in.

The UAW would negotiate with one auto maker and apply that contract to all three manufactures. Soon the monopoly of the UAW hurt the consumer. Enter foreign competition and increased consumer choices and you have the results. A smaller UAW and General Motors, a company that WAS to big to fail, now in bankruptcy. The only thing saving them is the federal government's help to organized labor.

The government employees unions have no threat from foreign labor. The government employee unions have no threat from competition. They have a monopoly that hurts consumers and benefits the government employees. The government employees make almost twice what the average private employee makes.

Power should not be held by groups. Power should be diffused to the smallest holder, the individual. Whether held by labor, business, church, or state, power corrupts.

Charles Tolleson

The powerful lobby of the war enablers

This is a paragraph from a letter by Michael M. Dunn, President and CEO of the Air Force Association to Senator Carl Levin, December 15, 2009. "Bearing in mind our sacred obligation to care for those who make selfless, extraordinary sacrifices for our freedoms, we ask that you make America's unequivocal gratitude apparent in any senate passed health care reform legislation".

What strikes me in this paragraph is the incredible self love. Dunn said military personnel make "selfless, extraordinary sacrifices". Bah! They are not selfless. They are not sacrifices. They simply are people working for great benefits, benefits that Dunn is trying to protect. If they were selfless, why is he wanting the taxpayer to keep on paying and paying. He even asks Senator Levin to make America's "unequivocal gratitude" apparent. People who perform selfless and extraordinary sacrifices do not ask for unequivocal gratitude.

Men have always fought each other. They plundered for property and women. It's in their genes. It is the result of a million years of evolution.

The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent uniformed service and veterans organizations representing more than 5.5 million active duty, Guard, Reserve, retired and former service members plus their families and survivors, is writing to urge you to vote for H.R. 3961 to reverse the 21% reduction in the Medicare and military TRICARE physician payment rates that will take effect as of January 1, 2010unless Congress acts before that date.

What a lobby! Five million warriors demanding benefits. They expect accolades, respect and panegyrics. They will never be satisfied.

Charles Tolleson

Americans love their military

A recent Rasmussen poll, November 2009, shows 81% of Americans approve of the U.S. Military war enablers. I suspect 81% of Russians and Chinese also approve of their military war enablers.

The Americans who approve of the U.S. military helots are war enablers themselves. If they did not approve of the military, young warriors would not become mercenaries to fight in unnecessary foreign wars that have nothing to do with protecting America. These wars are simply a projection of American hubris by force.

Tribal members usually approve of their warrior and priests class. The members want to know they are protected so their approval is a way to encourage the young warriors to take risks in protecting the tribe. They are rewarded with prizes, including mates.

According to Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs, esteem, the desire to be respected by others is one of humans' needs. With an 81% approval by your tribe towards members in the military, hiring on as a war enabler is a quick way to win respect. Joining the military means you give up your constitutional rights and become subject to the code of military justice. You become a socialist; wearing the same clothes, sleeping in the same place, and eating the same meals, all to win respect.

Imagine what the people in an Islamic country think about being occupied by the American Christian army. What is their approval rating of the U.S. war enablers who make the native populations stand for hours at checkpoints?

Try to imagine these war enablers that you approve of walking around an Afghanistan village of poor men and women. The war enablers are walking around in the fashionable wrap around sun glasses and the latest high tech killing equipment and freshly laundered fatigues. The Afghan men are searched and humiliated in front of their women and children. What do you think these humiliated men will pray for the next time they pray to Allah? I suspect they will ask Allah that he give them the power to kill an American.

Why should we ask our warriors to go into another country and murder strangers just because our leaders have a quarrel with each other?

The best recruitment for the radical Muslims is our presences in their countries. Imagine how you would feel if a Muslim army invaded and occupied your country and tried to tell you to run your country the way Muslims run their country. I suspect many of you would become "terrorists" or "insurgents", as described by the occupiers.

The Imams are not afraid of our armies, they are afraid of the words in our Bill of Rights. If you must invade other countries, invade them by dropping from drones, copies of our Bill of Rights.

To the war enablers I ask, what happens when you destroy the Taliban and al Qaida in Afghanistan? Do you then invade Pakistan to rid them of al Qaida? Who is next? The Philippines, Indonesia, Ukraine, and any other country that will have people who resent the bullying tactics of the Mighty U.S.? There are 50 countries with Muslim populations totaling about 1.5 billion people. If only 1% of those hate America enough to take action, you have 15 million people willing to attack America. If only 10% of those want to attack America you have 150 thousand Muslim, only .001% of the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world! If Even if you destroy al-Qaida you will not get the rest of the world to love you by your bullying, and your safety will always be at risk.

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.” Voltaire

Charles Tolleson

Domestic Violence, Witchcraft in the 21st Century

A new law in Arizona about domestic violence applying to dating couples or to someone who has sex, just once, seems like domestic violence laws are more about politics than violence, especially when a woman can say she is afraid of a man, though the man has done no violence to her nor has he threatened her. Domestic violence definitions are so ambiguous one can be prosecuted when no violence exists. This is the same logic as the witch hunts in Salem, MA in 1692. In Salem, a person did not have to perform any witchery. The person only had to be labeled a witch by teenage girls to send them to trial.

Those teenage girls in Salem in 1692 had needs. They needed to feel important, even if their actions to gain recognition caused the death of dozens. Or, maybe the teenagers in Salem just had a sadistic streak in them and enjoyed seeing people suffer. Maybe that same sadism lives in the lives of modern women who enjoy seeing men suffer by her lies and irrational fears. What power the words of a woman have.

Governments have always favored the most powerful political class. It's about power. Advocates for this always use the word "empower women" to make it sound like women have no power, when in fact they have more power than men. From the article, - "Gestalum said it's important to empower victims, especially women, to seek help on their own."

Women want aggressive men. They just want the men to be obediant, like a German Sheppard guard dog, who will defend and attack when ordered.

Women may not be as strong as men, but the mob, the State, with its enforcers and hit men, will do all the aggression and violence needed to satisfy the wrath of a woman.

Women practice more passive aggression than men. When a woman picks up the phone and calls 911 and accuses a man of abuse, she is practicing passive aggression. Chivalry is alive and well and it allows the passive aggressiveness of the little women to prevail over the overt aggression of the males.

Modern women also have a need for sympathy and recognition. Many modern women have a misandric attitude and they will do anything to sooth their wrath towards men.

I like women. I am not a misogynist. I think men and women will negotiate, compromise, succeed and fail in their relationships. These personal relationships should be between two private individuals. What I dislike and disapprove of is the State taking sides in these personal relationships. If this trend of the State aiding and abetting women, it will soon be law that in all personal relationships between men and women, the woman is in charge.

The Sword of Damocles hangs over any man who is in a relationship with an American woman.

Charles Tolleson, masculinist

Family Awareness for Military Recruitment

During the pilot strike at United Airlines in 1985 the Air line Pilots Association (ALPA) had a program called "Family Awareness". The program was designed to get the support of the pilots' spouses. Family coordinators would hold meetings to keep families informed and help improve morale so pilots would not be encouraged by their spouses to cross the picket line and return to work. It was a very effective program.

The Department of Defense now has a similar program to retain military personnel in an all volunteer (mercenary) army. The New GI Bill will allow military personnel to transfer their GI benefits for college to, you guessed it, their dependents. If you don't think a female spouse will not see this and put pressure on her military husband to re-enlist then you don't know how self interest motivates people. The wife also sees the transfer of college benefits to her children as a positive.

She also knows these benefits will someday be community property in a divorce. Re-enlist honey! War is not so bad. We all love you and are proud of you. Just make sure those benefits keep coming.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates interviewed by the Today Show's Matt Lauer, live from Camp Eggers in Kabul, Afghanistan.- To the families back home: “[I want them to know] how much we appreciate their sacrifice. You know, the line is ‘you enlist the soldier and you re-enlist the family.’ And the families are so important to our success and so important to the success of our all-volunteer force. They are as critical as the soldiers themselves.”

The mercenary army base pay has increased more than the rate of inflation. In 1955, E-5 (Sgt) pay was around $135, or about $1100 in 2009 dollars. Of course the draft was still in place in 1955 so the government did not have to hire as many mercenaries. Today the base pay, without a draft, for that same E-5 mercenary, is around $2100. The military has almost doubled the base pay, adjusted for inflation, and increased family benefits, in order to pay for their mercenary army. This does not factor in all of the private mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan, who outnumber the military personnel.

"Man is the only animal that deals in that atrocity of atrocities, War. He is the only one that gathers his brethren about him and goes forth in cold blood and calm pulse to exterminate his kind. He is the only animal that for sordid wages will march out and help to slaughter strangers of his own species who have done him no harm and with whom he has no quarrel . . . And in the intervals between campaigns he washes the blood off his hands and works for "the universal brotherhood of man" - with his mouth." Mark Twain

Charles Tolleson

Surgeon General calls for more minority doctors

ATLANTA — The new U.S. Surgeon General on Thursday called for stepped-up efforts in increasing the number of minority physicians.

In what was one of her first speeches to a large crowd since she was sworn in Nov. 3, Dr. Regina Benjamin noted that the proportion of U.S. physicians who are minorities is only 6 percent — the same proportion as a century ago.

I agree with Dr Benjamin's request for more minority doctors. I think we also just need MORE doctors, of any race or gender, to lower the cost of health care.

Dr. Benjamin is a member of an exclusive cartel, the American Medical Association. The cartel, like all other crafts and clubs, make it more difficult for new members to enter, if there is a profit to be gained by the already entrenched members. If there is profit to be made by lowering the standards in order to grow the membership of a club or organization, then the existing members will lower the standards.

As it currently stands the requirements to become a doctor are so expensive and time consuming that the supply of potential doctors is small, and even smaller for minorities. It is rare to find a minority that can afford hundreds of thousands of dollars for college and medical school, and who can sit through 8 to 10 years of instructions and supervision, often ridiculed in the form of initiation rites from entrenched doctors.

Dr. Benjamin, and other leaders, should break the monopoly of the doctor, nurses, and hospital association that keep out competition. They should lobby for a shorter training period for one to become a doctor or nurse and any person or organization should be able to open a hospital anywhere they wish. There is not reason a person should be required to go to school for 8 to 10 years and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just to learn how to remove a gall bladder.

And if Dr. Benjamin is to promote a healthy America, she should lose some weight.

Charles Tolleson, 6', 160 lbs.

Pearl Harbor Day, The Greatest Generation

"Men will face powder and steel because they cannot face public opinion." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin, minister and orator (1814-1880)

Here it is Pearl Harbor Day, December 7, again. It will be a day to pay tribute to the "Greatest Generation", a title to a book that Tom Brokaw wrote. The title made sure there would be plenty of buyers who wanted to read about themselves. We are all egoists.

This video is of a fighter pilot, Jim Brooks, in WW II, and the P-51 airplane. His grandson is actually envious of his grandfather for the way he got to prove his manhood. One commentator said, "They don't make men like this anymore."

I think they still make men like this. I think Jim Brooks' grandson has his genes and is just like him. His grandson just does not have a glorious mission to carry out.

The Greatest Generation had to be drafted to duty. In WW II 90% of the U.S.Infantry were draftees.

I take exception to calling one generation the "greatest generation". Where is the data that shows other generations placed in the same time and place would have behaved differently?

What about the fathers of the "Greatest Generation" who charged into the withering fire of the latest war weapon, the Maxim Machine Gun, in the First World War? "The courage of a soldier is found to be the cheapest and most common quality of human nature". - Edward Gibbon

And what about their fathers who charged up San Juan Hill? And their forefathers who charged into deadly artillery fire at Gettysburg?

Why are the sons of the Greatest Generation who served at Heartbreak Ridge and "Frozen" Chosin Reservoir in Korea not considered great? Some of them at the Chosin Reservoir had served as the Greatest Generation in WW II.

Thirty thousand UN troops were surrounded by 60,000 Chinese troops at the Chosin Reservoir. The UN troops, including the First US Marine Division, fought for 17 days before breaking out while inflicting heavy casualties on the superior Chinese force. The men of the First Marine Division were great! They had the same genes as their WW II fathers. Why do we not hear about how great they were? Is it because we settled for a draw in Korea? Those brave men who fought in Korea, the forgotten war, have been discarded, forgotten.

What about the sons who were called on to fight in an unnecessary war in Vietnam. Why wasn't the country as supportive of them as those who fought in WW II. Why are the Vietnam vets not treated with the respect of WW II vets? Could it be we think we lost the unnecessary war in Vietnam? Tribes don't like it when their tribe loses.

No one gets to pick when and where they will be born. That does not make one better or worse than someone born in a different time.

What gives the label 'Greatest' to the WW II generation is simply a different war and a different time. It has nothing to do with being great. It just happened to be a war that most of the tribe supported when there was no television or Internet that showed the horrors of war like TV showed of Vietnam. The past does not exist, but some people want it to.

I believe the fighter pilot in the video, Jim Brooks, did what his grandson would do if they traded places. Warriors throughout history have fought other warriors. Most of these warriors would do the same thing no matter which war they were in. War is common event between tribes.

"Distorted History boasts of bellicose glory and seduces the souls of boys to seek mystical bliss in bloodshed and in battles." Alfred Adler

Charles Tolleson

Tiger Woods

The black community is not supporting Tiger Woods because he has chosen white women over black women.

I think it interesting that we see many more black men with white women than black women with white men. This means black women are losing in the competition for the rich successful black, or white, men.

The black commentators seem to think blacks should marry other blacks in order to promote and sustain the black culture, whatever that is. I suspect the meaning behind their dissembling is they want to support and sustain the black race. People of the same races but different cultures always seem to want, for some reason, to save their culture, though it may not be worth saving. People seem to think the culture they were accidentally born into is a reflection of their own value.

So much of human behavior is based on biology and instinct. The humanitarians, those who want to do good (a desire to control others) will blame behavior on racism and other social factors. The fact that humans want to be with their own race and ethnic groups is an instinctive desire for survival and an instinctive desire to spread our genes. These instincts are why humans are one of the few species to survive; predators, famine, diseases, and natural disasters. Some argue that more than 90% of all species that ever existed are extinct.

If two women were put on the slave block during the slave trading days the healthiest and the most beautiful woman would have demanded the highest price. The same applies in today's non slave market. The most beautiful woman will demand the highest price. A rich man like Tiger Woods can afford the price. His wife, Elin, a woman with no skills, she was a nanny and a model, can demand a price in the millions. Is any woman worth that much just as a mate?

I think the blacks who are against blacks marrying whites are simply envious. Many blacks and other non whites would choose a white mate if they had the opportunity. The same applies to a younger woman mating with an older rich man. There simply are not enough older rich men to supply the demand. There are simply not enough beautiful white mates for every non white person looking to mate. Some even predict a further decline in the percentage of whites in the world population. I disagree with this prediction. In the future, because of bio engineering, people will be able to change their skin, hair, eyes, etc. They will choose the most attractive qualities so they can increase their value.

I think the blacks who are against interracial marriages should appreciate the freedom one has in today's society to satisfy one's preference in mate selection. Interracial marriages will be the best solution to eliminating racism in the world. Marriages between religions and different cultures will increase tolerances and reduce the power of the State. Interracial marriages used to be illegal. Will the government bring back a prohibition on interracial marriages and create an "Equal Opportunity Marriage" law that insures black women have equal access to rich black men?

Tiger Woods has two beautiful children by his white wife. The children are neither black nor white, but they have a beautiful copper tone color. Evolution, and bio engineering will decide which human characteristics are valuable.

The State always tries to favor one group over other groups in order to maintain power. Currently there are more female than male voters in the U.S. so the State caters to the female voters. The same applies to groups who want to keep their group pure, Purity means more power. Power equals survival.

The State of Israel sees its power in an all Jewish State so it tries to prevent Jews from marrying Arabs.

"Israeli groups, both public and private, have launched efforts to prevent Jewish women from dating and marrying Arab men – this, after an opinion poll found that more than 50 percent of Jewish Israelis equate intermarriage with "national treason." Journalist Jonathan Cook reported on a religious organization, Yad L’Achim, dedicated to "saving" – through military-style "rescues" – Jewish women from their significant Arab others. "The Jewish soul is a precious, all-too-rare resource, and we are not prepared to give up on even a single one," says the group’s Web site. "

Maybe the desire to mate is stronger than tribal beliefs.

Charles Tolleson, whitey

President Obama's speech on escalating the war in Afghanistan

President Obama's speech was at West Point, in front of war enablers and myrmidons, was escalating the Afghanistan war and indicates he is trying to have it both ways. He is trying to appease the war lovers and the peace lovers. He is escalating the war in Afghanistan but will bring all the troops home from Iraq by 2011 ("Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the Iraq war to a responsible end. We will remove our combat brigades from Iraq by the end of next summer, and all of our troops by the end of 2011.") and will bring the troops home from Afghanistan by 2011, ("And as commander in chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. "). Just in time for the 2012 election where he will campaign on the points that he ended the Iraq war and is bringing the troops home from Afghanistan. He will say this will help reduce the deficit. This will keep the support of the anti war democrats. Smart politics.

I liked President Obama's speech where he sympathized with the Afghans for having suffered foreign occupiers. He deftly left out the American occupiers. ("The people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have been confronted with occupation — by the Soviet Union, and then by foreign al-Qaida fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes.")





And the usual scare rhetoric from the politicians who always benefit from keeping the populace scared. ("For what's at stake is not simply a test of NATO's credibility — what's at stake is the security of our Allies and the common security of the world.") Imagine that. If we don't defeat a bunch of raghead radicals the whole world will be destroyed.

War will not change the hearts and minds of Islam. Technology will. Cell phones, the birth control pill, and the Internet are already diminishing the power of the Imams the same way technology diminished the power of Christianity.

The best recruitment for the radical Muslims is our presences in their countries. Imagine how you would feel if a Muslim army invaded and occupied your country and tried to tell you to run your country the way they run their country. I suspect many of you would become "terrorists" or "insurgents" as described by the occupiers.

The Imams are not afraid of our armies, they are afraid of the words in our Bill of Rights.

To the war lovers I ask, what happens when you destroy the Taliban and al Qaida in Afghanistan? Do you then invade Pakistan to rid them of al Qaida? Who is next? The Philippines, Indonesia, Ukraine, and any other country that will have people who resent the bullying tactics of the Mighty U.S.? Even if you destroy al-Qaida you will not get the rest of the world to love you, and your safety will always be at risk because you act like an arrogant, haughty, bully.

Since the war of 1812 the U.S. has never been at war with a country that was more powerful than it. The U.S. has always attacked and invaded countries that were smaller than it. No wonder the world thinks we are a bully.

War lovers are right out of the book, "The Demonic Male", by Dale Peterson and Richard Wrangham.

If the world was all one race, religion, and government, men would still kill each other. They are the only animal that can produce their own food, and more than they need, and man can desalinate water, thus preventing droughts and famines. Despite these wonderful abilities, the human animal is still the only one that kills its own kind for pleasure. Public torture was banned only a few decades ago. Now it is in the back rooms or on TV for our virtual pleasure.

“Man can be the most affectionate and altruistic of creatures, yet he's potentially more vicious than any other. He is the only one who can be persuaded to hate millions of his own kind whom he has never seen and to kill as many as he can lay his hands on in the name of his tribe or his God.” -Benjamin Spock, pediatrician and author (1903-1998)

Charles Tolleson

Another failed government program, unemployment insurance

Governments have forced employers to withhold unemployment insurance from their employees. This is another government program that forces citizens to buy a service or product.

The government program of unemployment insurance is a failure. It does not collect enough premiums to pay for a high unemployment rate. The FDIC is another government forced insurance program that has only about 1.5% of the amount of deposits it insures. The government could not allow a run on the banks so it spent money it did not have.

When a government program fails there is no one to advocate eliminating the programs. Instead there are plenty of advocates who want to spend more money to save a failed program. All of the stimulus money of 2009 was to save the FDIC, the PBGC, the States, and other government programs that are run by government employees whose salaries and benefits are far superior to the private sector.

The latest proposal to help the failed unemployment insurance is $100 billion to give to the unemployed. The government and the American Chamber of Commerce hopes the unemployed will buy goods and services and therefore the stores will collect sales tax and prevent further unemployment. The government is desperate to keep the unemployment low for the election of 2010.

If the government wants to reduce unemployment the government should get out of the way. For two years the government should eliminate the EEOC requirements for employment. For two years the Federal and State governments should eliminate the minimum wage. For two years the government should eliminate the requirement to withhold social security taxes.

With these obstacles to wealth creation removed the U.S. economy will grow.

Charles Tolleson