U.S. Government Anti-Piracy Tactic Manual

US Government Anti-Piracy Tactic Manual

Increased levels of piracy in East Africa are largely being driven by African-Somolians who face economic hardship at home and racial discrimination abroad. Some of the drivers of the rate they turn to piracy have been the lack of US action to pass legislation to combat global warming, the Arizona immigration law, the increasing gap between rich and poor in America, golden parachutes for bank executives on Wall Street, and the lack of full and equal civil rights for the LBGT community in the United States.

Piracy in East Africa and the world abroad is expected to be completely eliminated on August 25, 2010 as the IMO's "High Seas Gun Control Act" goes into effect the same day. The new IMO regulation bans all handguns and assault rifles on the high seas unless you are a member of the military and have registered with the United Nations.

Until then, it is advised to continue practicing the approved U.S. government anti-piracy tactics. The economic hardship pirates have faced means outreach is more important than ever. While the US policy has been that the US is for the pirates, but against the piracy, the words "piracy" and "pirates" is divisive and can lead to discrimination. They will be hence-fore replaced with "compulsory redistribution" and "economic equalizers"

If approached by a pirate ship, stop your ship immediately and welcome them for they are hungry and lack money for basic necessities like food, water, and affordable housing. If you surrender quickly, the pirates won't be as mad at you. It is also advised for you to quickly convert to Islam if requested by your new guests, so as not to harm their self-esteem. Have a travel bag ready, because they may insist that you take an extended vacation in Somolia while some haggling over the future of your former ship takes place.

No government healthcare?

I thought the Democrats told us there was no government healthcare in the Obamacare bill?



VPR: "If you're sick - or have ever been sick - and can't get insurance, the new health-care law promises fast relief: access to guaranteed coverage through a special federally funded insurance program starting in July. The goal is to provide comprehensive and affordable coverage to more people."

On the Shroud of Turin

The Pope visited the Shroud of Turin, as it is on display for the first time since 2002, so it's been in the news.

The basic evidence that Shroud is real.

1. Biblical account of the crucifixion are verified: There is wounds from the crown of thorns, the spear, and the scourging. There are nail marks in the wrists and feet. The legs are not broken.
2. The cloth is a very expensive cloth for the time. This lines up with the Biblical account of Joseph of Aramathea who purchased an expensive cloth.
3. Pollen fibers in the cloth are local to Israel.
4. There is no paint.
   

I can provide the validity of the shroud by being able to disprove the arguments against it.

The most popular argument against it is that it is a medieval hoax by an accomplished artist. This is the most popular, driven by that records of its existance prior to to the mid 14th century is unclear and a 1988 carbon dating test placed in in the 13th century.

The most compelling argument against the hoax theory is simple logic:

1. I'm supposed to believe a hoaxer in the middle ages created an magnificent fake that wouldn't really be visible for another 500+ years by technology unknown at the time?
2. Im supposed to belive that this hoaxer want to make a very faint image such that it would attract little attention. What kind of hoax is that? Remember the Shroud's prominence only really grew after it was first photographed and revealed to be a negative.
3. I'm also supposed to believe the 13th century hoaxer also used some other method creating a faint image instead of paint because he knew that paint could be identified by scientific testing in 500+ years.

The other theory is that it is another man that was crucified, not Christ. However there are two major arguments against that:

1. The crown of thorns was not a common practice. It was unique to Jesus due to being mocked as a king.
2. While common criminals were crucified, the were not buried in expensive burial cloths.

So if it isn't a fake and it isn't someone else from the time period, who else could it be?

I believe God put evidence out there for people to believe, and I think it is keeping with his style to not make the evidence irrefutable. Jesus certainly provided evidence to His divinity when he was on Earth through discrete miracles, but His works were done in such away that an active unbeliever could convince himself that Jesus was not the Christ.

The evidence in the Shroud is strong enough to help believers solidify their faith yet he leaves out that definitive proof so people who don't want to believe can find an out. He's given everyone evidence just as he presented himself to "Doubting" Thomas.

If you believe that the Shroud is real, then you must believe Christ is real, and everything he said is real too.

Arizona's New Immigration Law

Arizona's new law that makes it a crime to be in the state illegally and allows police to check citizenship at traffic stops and in arrests. Liberals have been up in arms that it is "racist" and will promote "racial profiling."

Democrats pander to illegals because they want to add 30 million voters who can be swayed by the Democrats efforts to give away other people's money.

Establishment Republicans think they can win the support of "Hispanics" by giving amnesty. Why would legal Hispanic immigrants have a lovefest for illegals who "cut the line?" It's a stupid play in identity politics.

Mexico's Calderon doesn't like the Arizona law, but has he looked at Mexico's laws and they way they treat their illegals from Central America?

Obamacare is going to force us to prove to the IRS that we have health insurance. Why is it so unreasonable to prove citizenship (via a drivers license) if pulled over? We need a drivers license to drive anyway.

Every politicans who opposes the Arizona law should be required to move their summer house from the Hamptons to the border. They are out of touch with reality.

Aborting Girls in India

Daily Mail - It is difficult for those of white British origins, who come from a culture where the safe arrival of a healthy baby girl is a cause for celebration, to understand the deep-rooted commitment of British Indian families to what has become known as 'son preference'.
You have to travel to India itself to even try to understand it. For it is only there that you begin to grasp the extraordinary paradox that is modern India.
On the one hand, you have one of the most vibrant and fast-growing economies in the world; on the other, you have a deeply patriarchal society, where women are not just seen as second-class citizens but as potentially ruinous economic liabilities, too.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1276902/Britains-hidden-gendercide-How-Britains-Asians-copying-Indian-cousins-aborting-girls.html#ixzz0neEoJimX

More proof that not all cultures are equal, yet we are taught multiculturism ad nauseum. Britian and the Western culture have been relentlessly criticized for decades. Few in Britian are even proud of their heritage. They self-flagilate themselves over colonialism and revere third world countries as being noble.

Honor killings in Islam, aborting girls in India, and leaving infant girls out to die in Atheist China are just the tip of the iceberg. Slavery still exists in parts of Africa and the Middle East. Ethnic genocide is rampant in other parts of Africa and south Asia. Mortality rate of Chinese construction workers is extremely high because human life is not valued.

What made the West different had been Christianity. Now that many in Britian have lost their faith, it won't be long before they are doing the same. The British and others in the West are aghast that girls are aborted because girls and have been deemend inconvienent, but are many Westerners much different?

In the West babies are aborted becuase:
--- a test says they may not be physically perfect
--- people don't want to take responsibility for their actions.
--- they are inconvienent --- they get in the way of their lifestyle.

Before we look down on Indians for aborting baby girls, we should hang our heads in shame because we abort babies that aren't deemed perfect or are deemed inconvienent.

Fuzzy Math for Stay-At-Home Salaries

NEEDHAM, MA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 05/05/10 -- Salary.com, Inc. (NASDAQ: SLRY) announced today the results of its annual Mom Salary Survey. For 2010, Salary.com determined that the time mothers spend performing the 10 most popular "mom job functions" would equate to an annual cash compensation of US$117,856 for a Stay-at-Home Mom. Working Moms would earn US$71,860 above their regular salary for their mom duties....

The job titles that best matched a mom's definition of her work in both countries are: laundry machine operator, janitor, van driver, computer operator, housekeeper, day care center teacher, cook, chief executive officer, psychologist, and facilities manager. The salary benchmarks for these jobs are based on salaries for a small company, as company size is a key factor that affects pay.

According to the Salary.com survey, the working mom puts in more than 96 hours a week when you combine her full-time job, mom hours, and mom overtime -- an increase of four hours from last year....

This is the stupidest thing I have to read every year. The value of something, when unknown, can be defined by the cost of alternatives. I could hire a full time nanny AND a maid for well less than their $117K figure. If stay-at-home Mom's would have such a high salary, then people that substitute for their duties would be paid more.

The value of raising your children to be good responsible adults is invaluable. No one needs outside valadition for the work they do by trying to valuate their job.