Topic category:  Other/General

ANYTHING in the wrong hands can be used as a weapon.

A businessman's necktie.

A cup of hot coffee.

A plastic knife embedded in someone's eye.

A set of car keys protruding from a clenched fist.

Should we just continue down this path of further stripping away our rights by banning everything that terrorists try to blow up a plane with, or should we ban the terrorists?

A recent Gallup poll asked "should Muslims be subject to special security checks." 41% of respondents said yes, 57% said no. This should give you an idea of how blind to the emerging threat of Islamic Fascism Americans truly are. And how much work I have left to do.

I cringe every time I hear an average American interviewed on television, and completely resigned to this continued gang-rape of our Constitutional rights.

Critics of profiling, including Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff who appeared on Fox News Sunday, August 13th, 2006, say profiling is wrong and ineffective, because it wouldn't have caught Jose Padilla or Richard Reid.

But it probably would have caught Mohammed Atta and the other 18 demon spawn. Just because it wouldn't catch all terrorists is not a valid reason to refuse to profile. Is it ?

Even if it only caught one third of terrorists, you should adopt that measure, and then compliment it with something to catch the rest of them. You don't throw it out because it isn't one hundred percent effective.

Since when does the Federal Government ever achieve one hundred percent accuracy in anything?

Why then, are they basing their decision to profile on whether or not they can achieve 100 accuracy? Pure, unadulterated, political considerations.

Critics say profiling would alienate Muslims. I say "Too bad." If they wish to be part of the solution, they can begin globally denouncing the beheadings and bloodbaths.

It's time for Muslims who want peace to start turning their backs on those who practice this perverted brand of Islamic Fascism, turn them in, or banish them from their villages instead of calling for us to stop being the aggressor.

The Federal Government is insane if it expects me to spend hundreds of dollars so I can;

A). Wait in line for hours.

B). Watch my wife get fondled, and her underwire bra wanded repeatedly.

C). Have my toiletries and bottled water seized. And;

D). Be subjected to random security checks when I object to my wife being fondled.

So that after being molested, I can:

A). Board an aircraft.

B). Then die inside a flaming missile when it hurtles to the ground at 400 MPH and disintegrates after a terrorist's bomb explodes in the cargo hold.

Because, the truth is, while they banned my water and my wife's lipstick, they don't x-ray all cargo, and refuse to scrutinize Muslims, whether they be the cell members on the airplane who are the plot's foot soldiers or their support network, the employees at the airport who assist them.

No profiling, No thanks.

Jayme Evans

Biography - Jayme Evans

Jayme Evans is a veteran of the United States Navy, a military analyst, conservative opinion columnist, and an advocate for disabled and other veterans. He has served for many years as a Subject Matter Expert specializing in the testing of systems software for numerous major US organizations. He has extensively studied amateur astronomy and metallurgy, as well as military and US history. His brutally honest, in-your-face political commentary has been published in many west coast newspapers, and he is a regular contributing columnist to a multitude of internet sites, including WebCommentary.com, The Conservative Voice, and Conservative Crusader. Mr. Evans has also written guest editorials for Military Magazine, and he has been a frequent guest columnist on WorldNetDaily, writing about legislative and veteran's issues.