My name is Hassan

I was born in the camps 22 years ago. Life was hard. I have two older brothers, and one more and a sister were born after me. My father struggled very hard to provide for us, but work was hard to find. Sometimes, often, there was not enough food for all of us to eat. Then my mother would put the food on the table, and she and my sister would go into the other room and pretend to eat, though I knew there was no food there for them.

Our home was a very poor affair, a small house, more of a hut, made from scraps of building materials my brothers and I could take at night from nearby construction sites. But it was our home.

I was very lucky. I was always the smart one in the family. My father, a very devout man, visited the Mosque every day for ablutions and prayers. I often went with him, from the time I was a very small boy. I love the Q’uran, and learned it quickly. I am very devout, and the Mullah noticed this, Praise be to Allah. He took special notice of me, and allowed me to go to school at the madrassa. I learned much there.

I learned that Allah is great, and all is the will of Allah. En sh’Allah, Allah willing, all the peoples of the world can become the instruments of Allah’s plan for this world, in preparation for entry to Paradise in the next.

I learned that the Great Prophet Muhammed, may his name be praised, revealed to us His plan in the Q’uran as to how we should prepare for that day. That we should convert all Infidels to Islam. That those of The Book should be allowed full conversion, and the rest allowed a form of generous accommodation. As long as they acknowledge Allah as the one true god.

We must remain chaste, especially our women; sisters, mothers, daughters. Chastity is good, and the men of the family are honor bound to enforce this virtue.

We must pray five times each day, facing Mecca. The M’uzzin shall make their call to remind us, and we must heed their call.

But at the madrassa and the Mosque, I also learned some things that disturbed me very much. I learned that the reason why I, and my father before me, could not find work to provide for the family is that the Jews and the Americans conspire to keep us poor. They wish to control all the Middle East, and its oil. They wish to make the Faith and the Imams and Mullahs weak, by imposing “democracy”, in which any person, regardless of how faithful they are or are not, shall have the same voice as the Faithful. And this includes women! They would give women the same voice as men! Even in the Mosque, where all are equal in the eyes of Allah, women sit in an area away from the men. This “democracy” would put all together. This is heresy!

In my final year at the madrassa I was honored to be chosen, with a very few others deemed as true believers and good students, for special instruction. We were introduced to the Imam. We pursued further, special studies. We were shown videotapes, taken right from the Infidels’ own television stations in America and Europe, showing how degraded their culture truly is. I was shocked at what I saw, and felt the sin of even watching such evil and debasement.

I was shown videos from the television news shows in the West, films that showed how greedy the Infidels are, with their big cars and big houses, the souks they call “malls” with wasteful and shameful things for purchase. The Imam instructed us that the only reason the Infidels can afford such shameful, sinful luxury is by stealing the wealth of our homelands. Their greedy companies make dishonest deals taking advantage of the owners of the oil, to make unfair profits. The Jews keep the Arab brothers at each other’s throats through their lies, then steal when they are distracted. They make their bread for their religious days from the blood of the young Faithful. I learned of how the Jews plan to conquer all the lands of the Faithful. It was all in a book called The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, written by the Jews and Zionists themselves. It was truly frightening.

I saw movies that showed the actors, men and women together, the women shamefully exposed. Even movies with the people doing the forbidden act, which is only for man and woman when married. Imagine! In a movie! It is beyond shameful, beyond sinful! The people who would do these things are no better than animals, pigs rutting in the mud.

It is with shame that I have to confess that when I saw these things, my body betrayed me. I could not arise from my seat because my shame was so obvious, but the Imam, in his kindness, Allah be praised, put his hand on my shoulder and told me he understood. That the shame was for the people who would do these disgusting things in front of a camera. He made me understand that the shame is not in the act itself, because it is right for a married man and woman who wish to have children. And it is also right as a reward in Paradise for those who are martyrs to Jihad. That Allah, in His wisdom, has reserved virgins for those who become martyrs to Jihad, and all is right.

I have chosen the path to fight for Jihad, and if Allah is willing, to become a martyr for Jihad. I have taken special instruction in how to do this. Tomorrow is my day.

Do not forget me. My name is Hassan.

On Thursday 20 September, in the LA Daily News, AKA LA Liberal Times Lite, AKA Al Jezheera West Lite, I read a very interesting article. Apparently our termed-out State Attorney General, Bill Lockyer (who cannot run for Attorney General again, and so is now running for State Treasurer [“those stupid voters! Term limits be damned!”]) has filed a lawsuit in federal court against six of the major automobile manufacturers for damages to the State of Kalifornia due to auto emissions as a cause of global warming. Evidently this bonehead’s legal theory is that car emissions have caused harm to the state in the form of unreimbursed health care costs and damage to the environment. He wants the court to force the auto manufacturers to pay the state for these “damages”. Named in the suit are: Chrysler, GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan.

Lockyer’s true motivation, of course, is most likely to focus attention on himself in a race to which no one is paying any attention – that of State Treasurer – as he continues to try to further his career at the public trough as an elected official. No better way to do that than to be controversial, especially on such a hot button topic. So this is probably simply a political stunt.

But let’s take a look at the real world ramifications of this action. The State and the carmakers are going to have to expend real money to address this nonsense, in the millions of dollars each. Assuming the State loses (a pretty good assumption, given that Kalifornia already has the toughest emission laws in the nation) the State will also have to assume the cost of reimbursing the carmakers for their expenses; even more cost to the taxpayers. If the carmakers lose, who do you think is going to ultimately pay for the cost of the monetary damages? Why, the car-buying public, of course. So auto prices will climb even higher.

All so Lockyer can move to a new job. What a set of gonads this guy has!

Further, note the list of respondents. What about Saab? Where’s Ferrari (this is Kalifornia, after all)? How about Porsche? Volkswagen? Mercedes? Rolls? What is this list based on, and how were the respondents chosen or omitted?

So you say to yourself: LOL! Those poor Kalifornians! What losers! But this has nothing to do with me.

Wrong, mi amigo. Don’t forget; what happens here is coming your way (and aren’t you happy about that?).

For years, I’ve been saying that the ground broken by the state lawsuits against the tobacco industry were setting extraordinarily bad precedent. Gun manufacturers have already been victimized by the same bullying tactics, fortunately so far unsuccessfully. The fast food industry is probably next in line; opening salvos have already been fired. Lockyer is a sterling example of how political hacks and lawyers are abusing the tort system of this country for their own personal gain.

It’s time for a major overhaul of the tort system in this country.

One of the key elements in the philosophical difference between the Right and Left is how each regards and responds to acts of terrorism as they are promulgated against our allies and us.

I think it’s first helpful to define the term. To me, terrorism is an act of violence or intimidation performed by an individual or group, targeted at another individual or group, the goal of which is to gain a cultural, social or political objective as opposed to personal benefit.

The response of the Left to terrorist acts has been to approach them as individual criminal acts, to be investigated using the techniques of standard police procedure. When the wrongdoer is captured, he is afforded all the rights of any other criminal defendant, including right to counsel, jury trial, Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections, etc.

The inherent weaknesses to this approach are many and varied. There are limits to police-type investigative procedures that are exceeded by terrorist capabilities, not the least of which is that action planning occurs, in many if not most cases, in geographical areas that don’t fall clearly into jurisdictional arenas. They can involve many different individuals and groups scattered in diverse regions of the globe. U.S. criminal court systems -- even putting aside the issue of their legitimacy in handling this type of case -- can easily get bogged down by the potential volume of cases that may be presented as time goes on. Further, and most important, this approach ignores the reality defined earlier as to motivation, which is the distinguishing factor between a simple crime and an act of terrorism.

The Right, on the other hand, views terrorism as a form of unconventional warfare. This approach more realistically addresses the motivating factors of the terrorists while at the same time simplifying the countermeasures and responses that can be brought into play. If the terrorists are considered unconventional warriors they are not recognized as eligible for Geneva Conventions protection. Agencies with investigative capabilities far in excess of standard police organizations, such as the CIA and the various intelligence branches of the military, can be brought into play along with their counterparts from cooperative ally nations. As the goal is or should be eradication rather than arrest and conviction, special operations (Spec Ops) forces – such as Delta – can be utilized much more effectively than arrest-oriented police agencies. Further, these are all organizations with an international scope that more capably addresses the globe-spanning reality of terrorism.

Have you noticed that anti-gun legislation has been prominently missing the last few years? Not only have those efforts died down on the national scene because gun-friendly Republicans control Congress and the White House, but even on the state levels the activity has quieted. The last flurry of activity we had featured pictures of Kerry and Edwards ridiculously clad in brand new hunting garb, staring in wonder at the borrowed shotguns that had miraculously appeared in their hands for photo ops, accompanied by Kerry’s breathless tale about “low-crawling” after ducks and deer.

It seems that Democrats have gotten wise to the fact that overtly trying to ban private gun ownership is a political loser. Even Clinton acknowledged his political losses due to the anger of gun owners flooding the polls in response to his blatant attempts at restriction.

Anti-gunners are nothing, though, if not Energizer Bunnies for their goal of a gun-free America. They’ve simply learned from their mistakes, and are taking a new tack. Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI) has now renamed itself the Brady Campaign to Control Gun Violence. Americans for Gun Safety (AGS) was founded by Jonathan Cowan, a former board member of HCI and avowed anti-gunner. AGS’s goal is the registration of all guns and gun owners in America, which they claim is a reasonable step toward “gun safety”. Of course, as we’ve seen in Chicago, Washington, DC, Great Britain, Australia and elsewhere, registration is the first step toward confiscation. Other examples abound. Notice the common theme? “Safety” instead of “confiscation”.

The latest wrinkle out here on the Left Coast: a pair of bills (AB 352 and SB 357) that would have required the following: micro-engraving on the face of firing pins that would transfer the gun’s serial number to the primer of the shell case when fired; serial numbers on all bullets.

You can view details of these bills here:

http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml?year=2006&aex=ab352&ex=&displaypos=&displaystat=#ab352

Micro-engraving can be defeated by simply filing down the face of the firing pin, or even just replacing the firing pin. I have no idea how the serial number on a bullet would survive the firing of that ammo; the base of the bullet is subject to extremely hot gasses, and slightly melts; the sides of the bullet scrape down the barrel of the gun; and the head of the bullet impacts the target. Further, bullets are usually badly misshapen if not turned into lumps of metal upon impact.

Imprinted ammo cases can be simply scooped up by potential criminals at any shooting range or area and then dropped at a crime scene. The cost on serializing individual boxes of ammo would be so prohibitive that it would have made Leftifornia an unviable market for ammo manufacturers. You don’t think that was the plan all along, do you?

Do you?

Fortunately, these bills have been defeated for now. The Governator isn’t a strong Second amendment supporter, but he’s up for re-election this year, as are the members of the State Assembly. Neither wants to face an irate and motivated electorate of gun owners. The last time the anti-gunners made that mistake, with Prop 15, they took a whuppin’ and Deukmejian got elected as Governor.

But these bills have been proposed before, and next year’s not an election year.

On a personal note: those who know me personally know how committed I am to the battle for Second amendment rights. It’s the issue that first motivated me to become politically active, when I was agitating against the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968 when I was in college. It’s the issue near and dear to my heart. It’s what got me motivated to learn about the Constitution and its background. I know they’ve been wondering why, in all these weeks of writing essays on my blog, I haven’t even mentioned the topic. After all, I’m a known “gun nut”. Well, guys, now you know that I do, indeed, have a broader range of material than you may have given me credit for! But here it finally is.

In a startlingly inept display of political marksmanship last week, the Senate Democrat majority in Sacramento, while aiming at its own political foot, managed to hit its own collective head. Whether or not the wound is fatal remains to be seen.

At issue is how Leftifornia selects its delegates to the Electoral College (EC) to cast its ballots in the Presidential elections, as mandated by the U.S. Constitution.

A little background is in order. In four Presidential elections in U.S. history – 1824, 1876, 1888 and 2000 – one of which (1824) went to the House of Representatives for resolution, one of which went to the Florida and U.S. Supreme Courts (2000), the election of the President did not align with the numerical total of the popular vote count, which is basically a plebiscite.

As we all know, the 2000 election has been a constant thorn in the side of the Left; Bush was “selected, not elected”. Or as the old saying goes: “We was robbed!” In the last two Presidential elections the Electoral race was so close that the outcome essentially, in both races, boiled down to the results of a single state: Florida in 2000, and Ohio in 2004.

California, of course, with its 55 electoral votes out of the needed 270, is the gorilla in the room that nobody needs pay attention to, because as a “winner takes all” state in the Electoral delegation process – and being a securely Democrat majority state – the gorilla is sound asleep. Drugged, even. He’s simply taken for granted by both sides.

Enter the California State Senate Democrats.

They have proposed a bill that would change the way Leftifornia selects its Electoral delegates. Their “rationale” is that since Leftifornia is such a dependably Democrat state Electorally, candidates of both parties don’t bother spending much time or energy here, thereby shortchanging the state of … something, I’m not sure what. Campaign speeches, I guess. A sense of self-importance is being slighted? Who knows? Sounds like a therapy topic to me.

But I digress!

The State Senate Democrats’ solution to this slight to their kingmaking powers? Pass a law mandating that California’s entire 55 vote delegation to the EC be based not on statewide results, but on the results of the national plebiscite after the popular count is taken. What this means is that after the popular vote is tabulated, all of California’s 55 electoral votes would go to the holder of the largest numerical popular vote count.

Wow!

Putting aside the fact that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) will never approve this, as it’s a blatant attempt to circumvent the Constitutional mandate defining the role of the EC, I actually love this proposal.

As a conservative in Leftifornia, my influence on the outcome of the Presidential election is limited to my vote in the primaries under the current (and legal) system. I’ve always hated the “winner takes all” system in place here, as it essentially disenfranchises me in the national Presidential contest. I’ve always advocated the “apportioned” approach, in which a state’s delegates to the EC are allocated based on the percentage of the state’s popular election returns, as contemplated by the U.S. Constitution, and mangled by state law, further abetted by the FEC.

Under this new plan, however, I’d certainly be even more motivated than usual to go out and cast my vote, as I’m adding to the true determinant for California, the national popular vote count! No longer would I be part of the sleeping gorilla; I’d have a real say in the Presidential election outcome, as my vote ALONE might be the one that, at 50% + 1, might throw all of California’s 55 electoral votes into the “Win” column of my candidate of choice, which would most certainly NOT be some liberal or Democrat.

Further, they seem to forget that though this state in many ways swings Left, there is a very strong conservative element that can’t be discounted. It gets animated when it sees issues that appeal to principle, such as Prop 15 in the ‘80s, which would have banned private gun ownership – and which issue propelled Deukmejian to the governorship – Prop 187 (ban on public services for illegal aliens), Prop 13 in the late 70s (property tax reform and limitation), among others. Don’t forget, Ronald Reagan started here!

Leftifornia Libs are driven, motivated, and animated by blind hate of the Right in general, and Bush in particular. Evidently, to the point where it blinds them to the reality of the actions they take (no surprise there). I certainly wish them, in all honesty, the best in this current endeavor.

However, talk about “The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight”!