Obama's Failure of Leadership

Two days after Mr. Obama's major racial speech, what are we to think of it? Is Mr.Obama an appropriate candidate for the leader of the free world?

Mr Obama said,

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America....

He is right, of course, but the statements were not mere snippets, cherry-picked to make Rev. Wright look bad. The "remarks" were entirely consistent with the church's overall philosophy and liberation theology. He sat in the pew for 20 years listening to this philosophy/theology. He did not speak up until the news media publicly revealed the hate-filled rhetoric.

If Mr. Obama were a leader, why did he merely follow Reverend Wright for 20 years? Why did he not speak up? Why did he not lead anyone to do what is right and reject the hate-filled philosophy?

He waited until he got caught.

I'm sorry. there can be only one conclusion. Mr. Obama is not a leader. I do not want him leading my country. And the truth is the Trinity United Church of Christ and its overarching Liberation Theology represents Mr. Obama's worldview, or he would not have stayed for 20 years.

Half Price Books: Victim Rich Zones

I received a letter to the effect that making their stores "gun free zones" (or sitting duck zones or victim rich zones) has been company policy for 14 years. Here is the letter. My response follows:

March 11,2008

Re: Half Price Books — No Guns Policy

Dear Mr. Carroll:

Thank you for your letter dated May 4, 2008 [sic.] and the earlier letter to the manager of one of our Columbus stores.

In February 22, 1996, our Board of Directors passed a resolution making all of our stores and facilities gun free. I am pleased to report that since the “gun free” policy was implemented, not a single person, customer or employee, has been the victim of gun violence in any of our stores or other facilities.

We have also researched whether or not states which have concealed weapons laws have seen a reduction in crime. So far, I have not found any correlation between the reduction in crime in right to carry states and all of the other states.

I regret that you believe you should boycott our stores because we do not want people carrying guns in our stores.

If you change your mind, you are welcome in any of our stores if you will follow our no guns policy.

John Albach
General Counsel

I sent my response today:

March 19, 2008

Mr. John Albach Esq.
General Counsel
Half Price Books
5803 East Northwest Highway
DallasTX 75231

Re: Concealed Carry in Half Price Stores

Dear Mr. Albach,

Thank you for your letter of March 11, 2008.

I am a lawyer in private practice. As part of my practice, I became chairman of the board of a nonprofit organization involved in counterterrorism activities. Last summer our security people strongly recommended that I obtain the necessary training and obtain a permit for concealed carry of a firearm.

Not being a fool, I did it.

Before that advice, I did not own a gun. I had never shot a handgun before, but I learned. Being a curious, inquisitive type, I also who decided to learn all that I could about concealed carry -- which was really a stretch out of my box. I have read pretty much everything I could on the subject of guns, concealed carry, gun rights, and crime.

According to your letter, the board voted on February 22, 1996, to make all of the Half-Price Bookstores gun free zones. Wow. So much has happened in 14 years.

Among other things, it has become plain that "gun free zones" are dangerous places if you do not want to be the victim of a gun crime. Gun free zones attract armed robbers and homicidal maniacs, because of the easy victims they present: In just the last 13 months there have been at least the following massacres of defenseless victims in gun free zones:

· February 14, 2008, Northern Illinois University, 5 dead, 40 wounded;

· February 2, 2008, Lane Bryant, Tinly Park, Illinois. 5 dead, 1 wounded;

· December 6, 2007, Westwood Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, 8 dead, 5 wounded;

· April 29, 2007, Ward Parkway Center, Kansas City MO, 1 dead;

· April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech University, 32 dead, 17 wounded;

· February 12, 2007, Trolley Square mall, Salt lake City UT, 5 dead, 4 wounded.

I doubt that any rational person actually thinks that a homicidal maniac or an armed robber will obey a gun free zone sign.

Your letter states that you have researched whether or not states which have concealed carry have seen a reduction in crime, but you have not found a correlation. The most comprehensive independent study, looking at all of the 3084 counties in the United States was done by John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard. Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997. The study was not funded by the NRA or any pro gun organization. Mr. Lott says he did not own a gun until his study showed him how important gun ownership was to his safety. Professor David L. Mustard writes in "Culture Affects Our Beliefs About Firearms, But Data Are Also Important," 151 U. Penn. L. Rev. 1387 (2003):

When I started my research on guns in 1995, I passionately disliked firearms. .... My views on this subject were formed primarily by media accounts of firearms, which unknowingly to me systematically emphasized the costs of firearms while virtually ignoring their benefits. I thought it obvious that passing laws that permitted law abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms would create many problems. [But research has convinced me that]... laws that require [right-to-carry] permits to be granted unless the applicant has a criminal history or history of significant mental illness reduced violent crime and have no impact on accidental deaths.

Mr. Lott has elaborated on the study in his book, More Guns, Less Crime (1998 and 2000), University of Chicago Press, with additional follow ups in: The Bias Against Guns (2002), Regnery Publishing, Straight Shooting: Firearms, Economics and Public Policy (2006), Regnery Publishing. The methodology of the studies has never been successfully assailed, but some of the reading is a bit thick, unless you have a background in economics (which I do). According to Mr. Lott, two-thirds of the studies he has seen indicated that right-to-carry laws reduce crime.

I was reading about Michigan yesterday. In the six years since Michigan enacted its concealed carry law., violent crime has dropped significantly. One in sixty-five Michigan citizens has a concealed carry permit.

There are now 40 right-to-carry states. That is a large number of potential customers that Half Price is turning off and turning away.

From a liability standpoint, consider that you are now on notice that gun free zones are dangerous to the employees and the public. If there is an unfortunate incident in one of your Ohio stores, You may now be liable to employees on a Blankenship claim (so called because of Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc., 69 Ohio St.2d 608, 433 N.E.2d 572 (Ohio 1982) whose harsh anti-employer ruling was almost modified by a tort reform bill ruled unconstitutional). The employee could beat the employer's immunity by asserting in essence that the employer knowingly exposed the employee to a risk of substantially certain injury from a "high risk" of harm (whatever that means). Fyffe v. Jeno's Inc. (1991), 59 Ohio St.3d 115.

Similarly, there is a significant risk of liability to customers, not only for negligence but possibly punitive damages for knowingly exposing the customers to the dangers of "gun free zones" which have a "high risk" of harm. A stretch? I don't know. Ohioans (including presumably jurors) favor concealed carry by a large margin.

On the other hand, Ohio by statute protects private employers from injuries caused by acts of concealed carry permit holders. This statutory immunity is in RC 2923.126(C)(2)(a):

(2)(a) A private employer shall be immune from liability in a civil action for any injury, death, or loss to person or property that allegedly was caused by or related to a licensee bringing a handgun onto the premises or property of the private employer, including motor vehicles owned by the private employer, unless the private employer acted with malicious purpose. A private employer is immune from liability in a civil action for any injury, death, or loss to person or property that allegedly was caused by or related to the private employer's decision to permit a licensee to bring, or prohibit a licensee from bringing, a handgun onto the premises or property of the private employer. As used in this division, "private employer" includes a private college, university, or other institution of higher education.

In Ohio, at least, a private employer appears to have greater legal protection by allowing concealed carry in its stores than by prohibiting it.

Of course, any business has the right to display "gun free zone" size. Every business has a right to act unwisely.

Contrary to your suggestion, I am not boycotting your stores. I and other law-abiding citizens have been disinvited by your policy.

I am an impulse stopper. However, I no longer have an impulse to stop if I have to go to the effort of disarming, safely storing my gun as required by Ohio law, and then entering your store which I know to be unsafe. I will submit your letter to the Ohioans for Concealed Carry Association's Do Not Patronize While Carrying list, so everyone can follow your rules (or avoid your stores, of course). If you change your mind, though, let me know and I will get you off the list.

In view of the legal situation in Ohio favorable to those who permit concealed carry, I respectfully request that the Board of Directors of Half-Price Books consider removing the "gun free zones" from its Ohio stores, because as an Ohio employer, it is the responsible thing to do.

Sincerely,

David Carroll

Obama's Jeremiah Wright Problem

I was shocked to see Barack Obama say that he had no idea about his 20 year pastor's bigoted and foolish remarks from the pulpit. Mr. Obama is a Harvard Law graduate, isn't he? And he attended Trinity for 20 years listening to Pastor Wright.

Until the couple of days Pastor Wright was a campaign endorser and was featured prominently on the Obama campaign web site. The truth is that Mr. Obama knew about Pastor Wright's controversial preaching. Because of the controversial church positions, the Obama campaign disinvited Pastor Wright from giving the invocation at Mr. Obama's announcement of his intention to run as reported in the New York Times on March 5, 2007.

I have long been concerned about the message of Mr. Obama's home church, the Trinity United Church of Christ.

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.

I understand that to be saying that whites are not welcome. If Mr. Obama gets the nomination and wins the election, Mr. Obama needs to be the president of all Americans. This does not seem to me to be a good sign that he would be.

Mr. Obama's claims of ignorance about Pastor Wright's hateful sermons do not bode well for either Mr. Obama's intelligence or his honesty: one or the other is deficient.

Hamas Uses Good People Like Mahmoud

I have met Mahmoud El-Yousseph and personally like him. And, as we have seen, he is not always on the wrong side. But he sent me the following which deserves discussion and refutation:

Way to go to Israel! by Mahmoud El-Yousseph

Finally the Israeli army killed the person who is responsible for missile and rocket attacks from Gaza. The suspect was killed by a single bullet to the head by an Israeli army death-squad, and was among 120 killed and 200 injured (many women and children included) in a series of Israeli air raids and ground invasions that lasted for 5 days. .

Surprisingly, this earth-moving news was not aired on Fox News, CNN, or reported by other major main stream media. Here is an update about this latest high value target that was executed. The victim was a two week old baby. Israel seems to actually think that this baby is capable of firing missiles and rockets.

Name: Amira [princes in Arabic] Abu 'Assr
Address: Deir El-Balah, Gaza, Palestine
Date of Death: March,5, 2008

To better understand why Israel targets Palestinian children, Jennifer Loewenstein a Jewish professor at the University of Wisconsin put it eloquently in a recently published article. She wrote, " Who really cares about these children? Every Palestinian is a militant because everyone (sooner or later) wants Israel off their land, out of their life, and forgotten like a horrible dream. It is for that reason they are all equal targets."

Just an added reminder, Amira's precious life was taken away while she was in her mother's arms. Her father was kidnapped by soldiers and her mother was seriously injured. As far as Amira is concern; rest in peace little princess!

Of course, it is absurd to say that Israel target Palestinian children. It is clear to all who will see that Israel targets terrorists.

But, as Hamas MP Fahti Hammad said,

Fathi Hammad: [The enemies of Allah] do not know that the Palestinian people has developed its [methods] of death and death-seeking. For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry, at which women excel, and so do all the people living on this land. The elderly excel at this, and so do the mujahideen and the children. This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine. It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: "We desire death like you desire life."

Well, guess what? If Hamas uses women and children as human shields, their blood is on the hands of Hamas, not Israel.

As to Mahmoud's eulogy for the unfortunate child, a similar eulagy could and should be written for each poor, defenseless seminary student heartlessly massacred by Hamas on March 6, 2008.

I understand that Muslims sympathize with the plight of thir fellow Muslims in Palestine, but, Mahmoud, will I have to spend my entire life getting you to see both sides of this conflict and to acknowledge the evil that is Hamas?

Mahmoud, don't be a dupe in Hamas's game. You are a warm hearted guy who bleeds in sympathy with the death of the child. What normal human would not ? (Hint: Hamas if the child were Jewish.) You are the target for the Hamas public relations campaign. Do not be fooled. Hamas caused the death. Hamas considers the death acceptable martyrdom. Hamas is using you because you are a warm and empathetic individual, something Hamas is not. See them for what they are. Please.

The Rocky Mountain News reports soaring applications for concealed carry permits. I don't suppose that the recent mass murders in a Colorado Springs church stopped by a CCP holder have anything to do with the increased applications.

Maketa said he's not concerned about the county's growing number of legally armed people. In fact, he said he believes law-abiding citizens make the region safer by getting the permits.

"Actually, I wish it was a higher number, because I know from experience that offenders in the jail system tell me they avoid crimes against people because they know there is a very high concealed-carry rate," Maketa said.

Thanks to John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime and Freedomnomics for this lead.

Islamism is Fascism, But Moderate Muslims Predominate

From the Middle East Quarterly, an interview with Mohamed Sifaoui, a highly educated Algerian Muslim who infiltrated an Al Qaeda cell:

MEQ: Would you use the term Islamo-fascism to describe this threat?

Sifaoui: I certainly am one of the first Muslims to consider Islamism to be fascism. This is not a subjective decision but rather a serious, academic argument. Fascism and Islamism are comparable in many aspects: Fascism, without evoking all its particularities, bears similarities to trends also present in Islamism. I am, of course, making a reference to their will to exterminate the Jews. On this point, the Islamists may go even further in their doctrine than the Nazis did, considering that the end of the world could only occur when there are no Jews left on earth. In the three monotheist religions, apocalypse, end of the world, and doomsday exist and are liturgical events invested with a high degree of spirituality. Hence, the Islamists interpret the end of the world in a very special way. Whereas it is written nowhere in the Qur'an, exegetes describe the end of the world as the day when even the trees and rocks will be able to talk and tell the Muslims: "Come here, there is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him." And this would go on, until there would not be any Jew left on earth. This ideology is pure fascism.

MEQ: Are there other similarities?

Sifaoui: The will to exterminate or do harm to homosexuals is another similarity between Nazism and Islamism. The Islamists, also, say that they are the best community in the world, a superior race thanks to their beliefs. They use political means to arrive at this erroneous exegesis. I do not fear to call it fascism. And there are many more similarities between fascism and Islamism.

MEQ: Do you believe it is possible to criticize Islamism without being called a racist?

Sifaoui: Absolutely, I would say that one must criticize Islamism. When I am criticizing Nazism, I am not being anti-German.

MEQ: When did you feel for the first time that you had to criticize Islamism?

Sifaoui: I have always felt that it was a moral duty.

MEQ: Do you believe that moderate Islam exists?

Sifaoui: Of course, it does. If the majority of Muslims were not moderate, Islamists would have destroyed the Western world a long time ago. Despite its technological lead, its nuclear power, and all its armies, the Western world would never be able to face an Islamist world entirely convinced by the terrorist cause. One billion people supporting Al-Qaeda would reduce the rest of the world to ashes. Islam contains violent texts that need not be applicable today. Islam is a religion of moderation. I know because I studied theology for four years.

Perhaps 20 percent of Muslims on the planet must be totally reeducated. We have to fight them politically, ideologically, and also militarily. Western societies do not fight them well; whenever they try to do so, they end up strengthening them.

One proof that moderate Islam exists is the huge number of sympathy messages that I received from Muslim people when my investigative story on Al-Qaeda Salafist networks, J'ai infiltré une cellule islamiste, was broadcast on French television M6.

Read it all.

Gun Free Zones Chase Away Customers

From CNNMoney.com on February 12, 2008:

One more merchant worry: Mall violence

For the first time, industry groups will meet with mall operators and retailers to discuss recent shooting sprees.

By Parija B. Kavilanz, CNNMoney.com senior writer

February 12 2008: 3:02 PM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Typically shoplifters, fraudsters and scammers pose the biggest threat to merchants' bottom line.

But a much more dangerous type of crime - mall shootings - has the retail industry on edge.

Earlier this month, five people were fatally wounded in a strip mall shooting in Illinois.

In December, a shooting at an Omaha mall - which was at least the fourth at a mall or a shopping center last year - resulted in the deaths of eight shoppers .

"There's been an increase of these incidents in the past months, and it's raised concern in the industry," said Joe LaRocca, vice president with the National Retail Federation (NRF), the industry's largest trade group.

The answer seems obvious to me: Stop inviting homicidal maniacs by posting the malls as "gun free zones." Recent history is clear. Gun free zones are really sitting duck zones. Malls would be safer if gun free zones were eliminated.

On March 3, 2008, I wore the following letter to Mr. La Rocca:

Joe La Rocca, President
National Retail Federation
325 7^th St. NW 1100
Washington DC 20004

Re: Decline in Mall Customer due to Gun Violence

Dear Mr. La Rocca,

I read that your federation is concerned about declining mall customers due to gun violence. From the recent history, it seems clear that homicidal maniacs are attracted by so-called gun-free zones. Consider the facts:

On December 6, 2007, a homicidal maniac entered the Westwood Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, and murdered eight people until an off duty police officer who just happened to be there fired at him and the shooter killed himself. The mall was a posted gun free zone. The shooting was at least the fourth at a mall or shopping center in 2007, following incidents in Salt Lake City, Utah; Kansas City, Missouri; and Douglasville, Georgia.

On April 17, 2007, a homicidal maniac opened fire on the Virginia Tech campus, hunting down his victims, ultimately murdering 32 students and teachers before killing himself. Virginia Tech is supposed to be a gun free zone, so no teachers could be armed to defend their students.

On February 14, 2008, another homicidal maniac murdered 7 defenseless victims and injured 21 more at Northern Illinois University in, you guessed it, a "gun free zone." Oh yes, and he had time to reload.

The lesson is clear: gun free zones attract homicidal maniacs. I see them as sitting duck zones and will not go there regardless of whether I am armed. They are too dangerous. I feel same only where guns are permitted, because the nuts will go elsewhere.

I enclose an excellent article by Ohio's liberal Columbus Dispatch newspaper which notes that since concealed carry was enacted in Ohio, there have been NO PROBLEMS from permit holders. The article is incorrect about concealed guns saving lives. Apparently the article's author did not research the Dispatch's own files. I attach a copy of an April 24, 2007 article where a concealed carry permit holder killed an armed robber who pulled a gun in the course of the attempted robbery. I also enclose an excellent summary of the issue by Ohioans for concealed carry.

I respectfully request that the National Retail Federation adopt a policy that will promote greater safety in member malls, specifically removing all "no guns" signs, thus opening the malls to the significant population of customers who have concealed carry permits.

Please respond with a clear statement of your position on removing the unsafe and abhorrent "no guns" signs from member malls.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

David Carroll

No response, yet. But, the voices of reason need to act together to contact these people who apparently think that homicidal maniacs will obey "No Guns" signs. Join me in contacting Mr. La Rocca.