Compilation 1: France-Chirac-Fuel-Global Tax, Religious War: East-West, Polycultural multigamy-Votes -- Multi Husbands for Women? Whee!
List of Articles:
* Chirac: Global tax needed for AIDS -- French leader tells economic confab he wants levy on airline tickets, fuel
* Check this out: "Religious War: East and West" -- Muslim Rage School -- Clash of Civilizations School -- the "eternal questions"
* "ENEMIES WITHIN: How the United Nations supports terrorists and fuels global chaos"-- This book sounds like a barn burner -- No, I don't get a kick back.
* Polycultural multigamy -- the quest for votes -- "If the number of Muslims and Mormons account for more votes than the number of people opposed to polygamy, then changing the law is a done deal. " -- mentions Tamil Tigers, Mohammed Elmasry
Chirac: Global tax needed for AIDS -- French leader tells economic confab he wants levy on airline tickets, fuel
The leaders comments were made via video link at the World Economic Forum's meeting of political and business leaders at the Swiss resort of Davos, reported Agence France-Presse.
Calling it an "experimental" tax, Chirac proposed a levy on airline tickets, some fuels or financial transactions.[. . . . ]
AFP reported that among Chirac's ideas were a "contribution" on international financial transactions, a tax on aviation and maritime fuel, a tax on capital movements in or out of countries that practiced banking secrecy, or a "small levy" such as a dollar on the 3 billion airline tickets sold every year. [. . . . ]
I just happen to have a friend who owns . . . . . .
Does Chirac have any stock in the Maurice Strong / Chinese enviro car? Does he have any airline or AIDS drug stock? Check before taking any of these ideas at face value. It's the cynic in me.
Have you ever seen the end of an "experimental" tax? Think of the income tax imposed--if I recall correctly--for World War 1.
Check this out: Muslim Rage School -- Clash of Civilizations School -- the "eternal questions"
The underground diplomats at the New Sisyphus make an eloquent case for listening to those who want to kill us, something which the Munich generation neglected to do to Adolph Hitler.
One of the most common observations about World War II was that if only Western leaders had heeded what the National Socialist Worker's Party and its leader Adolf Hitler were saying, they would have known of the grave danger facing the world. After all, it's not as if the Nazi Party or its frenzied Fuhrer tried to hide what they were about. On the contrary, in speech after speech, newspaper after newspaper and book after book, Hitler and other senior Nazis laid out in some detail their plans for European domination, the destruction of parliamentary democracy and the elimination of the Jewish people.
But when we ourselves have supplied the rationale for our own condemnation then listening to the indictments of the enemy is a waste of time. To the question 'why does Bin Laden hate us', there are those who unhelpfully suggest that we ask Bin Laden. Besides being unacceptable it is also unnecessary because some already know why we should be hated. There is no need to listen further. The New Sisyphus observes that while there are two competing explanations for Islamic extremism, only one explanation is provided by the Islamic extremists themselves. [. . . . ]
Lengthy -- worth reading.
"ENEMIES WITHIN: How the United Nations supports terrorists and fuels global chaos" -- This book sounds like a barn burner -- No, I don't get a kick back.
In light of unprecedented United Nations scandals – from widespread sexual abuse and rape of women and children to the terrorism-supporting Oil-for-Food scandal – more Americans than ever are pushing for the U.S. to alter or abolish its relationship with the U.N. The latest issue of WND's Whistleblower magazine – titled "ENEMIES WITHIN: How the United Nations supports terrorists and fuels global chaos"
Polycultural multigamy- the quest for votes -- "If the number of Muslims and Mormons account for more votes than the number of people opposed to polygamy, then changing the law is a done deal. " -- mentions Tamil Tigers, Mohammed Elmasry
Mohammad Elmasry, one of Canada’s "most prominent Muslims" is already making noises about how much more palatable polygamy is than monogamy that includes a lover on the side.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander? Could women have two breadwinners? Oh, heck, let's have a breadwinner and a boy toy -- make that three -- one, a hairdresser and masseuse.
I’m finding it tough to follow the current firestorm about the legalization of same-sex marriage opening the door to the slippery slope of polygamy and other unorthodox marital arrangements. Many of the more rational pundits that I have read of late, both left and right, seem to agree in well-reasoned prose that re-defining marriage as a union of one person with one other person rather than a union of one man and one woman, will not necessarily lead to the general redefinition of marriage. Thus, they reason, since the new legislation still defines marriage as a union between two individuals, we need not worry about seeing legalized polygamy any time soon. Yes, and tomorrow the temperature is going to climb to 30 degrees Celsius.
I believe these reasonable and rational pundits are missing the point entirely. [. . . . ]
