Florida Consumer Viewpoint
Keep up to date with Florida Consumer Action Network (FCAN) the state's largest consumer group. FCAN fights for consumers on environmental, insurance, utility, and health care issues.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Insurers Make $60 BILLION Profit
An article in the Wall Street Journal's Market Watch, aptly titled, "Sweet are the uses of adversity," says that "Industry experts are forecasting a $60 billion industry profit in 2006." The article quotes the Insurance Information Instutite as saying that this profit, which doesn't even include investment income, is "the best in a generation (or two)." All this at the expense of consumers.For comparison, an Insurance Information Institute analysis indicates that the cumulative underwriting loss on Florida homeowners insurance from 1990 through 2005 was $13 billion.While you really should read the entire article, I will quote further for those who wish to read only briefly.
"Following every major disaster or scandal, a simple formula protects insurance industry profits: raise rates, reduce coverage and deny claims."
"The American insurance Association justifies increases on account of "horrific" forecasts for upcoming storm seasons -- based on dubious new risk modeling formulae that J. Robert Hunter of the Consumer Federation of America has called 'collusive.'""Over the past ten years, the insurance industry has sought relentlessly to reduce the scope of homeowners' coverage.""As reported by the AP, Cori and Kerri Rigsby, two sisters who had long performed claims work for State Farm on a contract basis, have provided homeowners' attorneys and regulators with 15,000 pages of evidence suggesting that while processing Katrina claims, State Farm had its claims managers memorize language to avoid acknowledging wind damage when water contributed to the loss. Further, these brave whistleblowers allege that when State Farm disliked the results of an engineer's report, the company regularly substituted a second "cookie-cutter" report concluding that the bulk of damage was caused by rising water (as opposed to wind) and therefore excluded. The Rigsby sisters state simply:, "We believe State Farm has committed fraud, and we have turned it over to be investigated."The insurance industry must be regulated to prevent these abuses. The industry is pressing for deregulation, but it is clear it has not earned the right for more responsibility.What is most appalling here in Florida, is that the hurricane "risk models" are grossly wrong and have resulted in vast overcharging of consumers. Where is the Office of Insurance Regulation? Why don't we have a stronger insurance consumer advocate? Why has the legislature not investigated these ripoffs?
posted by Bill Newton @ 9:36 AM 1 comments links to this post

1 Comments:
At 3:16 PM, xchagalx said... $60 Billion profit for Insurers .. sky high costs and rock bottom/diminishing coverage for insurees

Thanks for this information. This insurance gouging is another example of a regulated industry with a powerful lobby force being facilitated by our elected officials in Tallahassee. Result .. out of sight rates and planned increases about which the Florida government feigns action but seldom delivers. The hurricanes and storms are bad enough for realtors, home builders and other segments of the housing arena. Now the 24/7 media have focused on these outrageous costs to the homeowner. The advantage of no personal income tax, in most cases, is nullified by soaring insurance policies. All this contributes to scaring potential residents from coming south of North Carolina. When one considers the mud slides, fires and potential earthquakes in California, flooding throughout the U.S., tornados in the midwest .. why do we stick out like a sore thumb?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
<$BlogBacklinkTitle$>
<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$> posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>
if (typeof BL_addOnLoadEvent == 'function') { BL_addOnLoadEvent(function() { BL_writeBacklinks(); }); }
function BlogThis() {
Q=''; x=document; y=window;
if(x.selection) {
Q=x.selection.createRange().text;
} else if (y.getSelection) {
Q=y.getSelection();
} else if (x.getSelection) {
Q=x.getSelection();
}
popw = y.open('http://beta.blogger.com/blog-this.g?t=' +
escape(Q) + '&u=' + escape(location.href) + '&n=' +
escape(document.title),'bloggerForm',
'scrollbars=no,width=475,height=300,top=175,left=75,status=yes,resizable=yes');
void(0);
}
Create a Link
<<>
About Me Name: Bill Newton Location: Tampa, Florida, US View my complete profile -->


Site Feed
Florida Politics Blog
Grapefruit Blog
Homeowners Against Citizens
Fair Insurance Rates in Monroe
Florida Politics
Previous Posts
Those Funky Computer Models
Citizens Rate Increases
Nationwide not on your side
Charlie breaks promise day after election
Davis and Crist on Prescription Drugs
Tax Cuts?
Jennings Slams Crist Plan
More Crist Blather
Insurers Make $60 BILLION Profit
Jim Davis' Insurance Plan
This is a paragraph of text that could go in the sidebar.
-->
© Copyright 2006 Florida Consumer Action Network Inc. All rights reserved.
_uacct = "UA-310563-2";
urchinTracker();
postamble();

xchagalx
Florida Insurance rates .. sky high costs .. rock bottom and diminishing coverage


Florida Consumer Viewpoint
Keep up to date with Florida Consumer Action Network (FCAN) the state's largest consumer group. FCAN fights for consumers on environmental, insurance, utility, and health care issues.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Insurers Make $60 BILLION Profit
An article in the Wall Street Journal's Market Watch, aptly titled, "Sweet are the uses of adversity," says that "Industry experts are forecasting a $60 billion industry profit in 2006." The article quotes the Insurance Information Instutite as saying that this profit, which doesn't even include investment income, is "the best in a generation (or two)." All this at the expense of consumers.For comparison, an Insurance Information Institute analysis indicates that the cumulative underwriting loss on Florida homeowners insurance from 1990 through 2005 was $13 billion.While you really should read the entire article, I will quote further for those who wish to read only briefly.
"Following every major disaster or scandal, a simple formula protects insurance industry profits: raise rates, reduce coverage and deny claims."
"The American insurance Association justifies increases on account of "horrific" forecasts for upcoming storm seasons -- based on dubious new risk modeling formulae that J. Robert Hunter of the Consumer Federation of America has called 'collusive.'""Over the past ten years, the insurance industry has sought relentlessly to reduce the scope of homeowners' coverage.""As reported by the AP, Cori and Kerri Rigsby, two sisters who had long performed claims work for State Farm on a contract basis, have provided homeowners' attorneys and regulators with 15,000 pages of evidence suggesting that while processing Katrina claims, State Farm had its claims managers memorize language to avoid acknowledging wind damage when water contributed to the loss. Further, these brave whistleblowers allege that when State Farm disliked the results of an engineer's report, the company regularly substituted a second "cookie-cutter" report concluding that the bulk of damage was caused by rising water (as opposed to wind) and therefore excluded. The Rigsby sisters state simply:, "We believe State Farm has committed fraud, and we have turned it over to be investigated."The insurance industry must be regulated to prevent these abuses. The industry is pressing for deregulation, but it is clear it has not earned the right for more responsibility.What is most appalling here in Florida, is that the hurricane "risk models" are grossly wrong and have resulted in vast overcharging of consumers. Where is the Office of Insurance Regulation? Why don't we have a stronger insurance consumer advocate? Why has the legislature not investigated these ripoffs?
posted by Bill Newton @ 9:36 AM 1 comments links to this post

1 Comments:
At 3:16 PM, xchagalx said...
Thanks for this information. This insurance gouging is another example of a regulated industry with a powerful lobby force being facilitated by our elected officials in Tallahassee. Result .. out of sight rates and planned increases about which the Florida government feigns action but seldom delivers. The hurricanes and storms are bad enough for realtors, home builders and other segments of the housing arena. Now the 24/7 media have focused on these outrageous costs to the homeowner. The advantage of no personal income tax, in most cases, is nullified by soaring insurance policies. All this contributes to scaring potential residents from coming south of North Carolina. When one considers the mud slides, fires and potential earthquakes in California, flooding throughout the U.S., tornados in the midwest .. why do we stick out like a sore thumb?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
<$BlogBacklinkTitle$>
<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$> posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>
if (typeof BL_addOnLoadEvent == 'function') { BL_addOnLoadEvent(function() { BL_writeBacklinks(); }); }
function BlogThis() {
Q=''; x=document; y=window;
if(x.selection) {
Q=x.selection.createRange().text;
} else if (y.getSelection) {
Q=y.getSelection();
} else if (x.getSelection) {
Q=x.getSelection();
}
popw = y.open('http://beta.blogger.com/blog-this.g?t=' +
escape(Q) + '&u=' + escape(location.href) + '&n=' +
escape(document.title),'bloggerForm',
'scrollbars=no,width=475,height=300,top=175,left=75,status=yes,resizable=yes');
void(0);
}
Create a Link
<<>
About Me Name: Bill Newton Location: Tampa, Florida, US View my complete profile -->


Site Feed
Florida Politics Blog
Grapefruit Blog
Homeowners Against Citizens
Fair Insurance Rates in Monroe
Florida Politics
Previous Posts
Those Funky Computer Models
Citizens Rate Increases
Nationwide not on your side
Charlie breaks promise day after election
Davis and Crist on Prescription Drugs
Tax Cuts?
Jennings Slams Crist Plan
More Crist Blather
Insurers Make $60 BILLION Profit
Jim Davis' Insurance Plan
This is a paragraph of text that could go in the sidebar.
-->
© Copyright 2006 Florida Consumer Action Network Inc. All rights reserved.
_uacct = "UA-310563-2";
urchinTracker();
postamble();

xchagalx

5,000 YEARS OF WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST

This HYPERLINK below depicts in 90 seconds what the long haul required in wars amid the turbulence of the middle East .. like determination, stamina, beastiality, hatred, no conscience, specific goals as in "unconditional surrender".. and a predisposition for and the belief in self-sacrifice. All this exacerbated by inexplicable fanaticism.

http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf

If we don't face the threat and history's lessons ....

xchagalx
Oil Industry Denies Tightening Supply To Boost Prices
Skip directly to the full story at http://www.tbo.com/news/nationworld/MGBLQDLXYUE.html
By JEFF DONN The Associated Press
Published: Nov 26, 2006 in the Tampa Bay Triibune




BAKERSFIELD, CALIF. - You would think it was Texas. Dusty roads crisscross the scrubland toward oil tanks and warehouses. Beefy men talk oil over burritos at lunch. Like grazing herds, oil wells dip nonstop amid the tumbleweed - or even into the asphalt of a parking lot.
That's why the rumor sounded so wrong here in California's lower San Joaquin Valley, where petroleum has gushed up more riches than the entire gold rush. Why would Shell Oil Co. simply close its Bakersfield refinery? Why scrap a profit maker?
The rumor seemed to make no sense. Yet it was true.
The company says it could make more money on other projects. It denies it intended to squeeze the market, as its critics would claim, to drive up gasoline profits at its other refineries in the region.
Whatever the truth in Bakersfield, an Associated Press analysis suggests big oil companies have been crimping supplies in subtler ways across the country for years. Tighter supplies tend to drive up prices.

Let's face it. Oil is worth fighting for until such time as a significant alternative takes over. Oil is a vital artery in the economic viability of this nation. Given that many of us are of the opinion that skyrocketing gasoline prices were a scam arranged without interference by our federal government. It's free enterprise that's the password. Yet when you must have a means to get to work, the hospital, shopping .. there's not much in the way of doing without petrol. You pay the price .. and pay .. and pay some more. Jawboning by our President wasn't even considered throughout this $$$$ surge upward. The true kick in the face was dropping the price of gas late in the election campaign .. then going back up after the political outs won elevation to the ins status. But all this is insignificant to fact .. not fiction. The Mid-East is busting open with turmoil. Yet the billions we are paying to the oil rich nations is helping to fuel that turmoil and feed the Islamic hatred for us and our nation. I may only speak for myself, but I think our huge oil conglomerates don't really give even passing notice to this predicament and its impact on our future.

Declaring War House member Charles Rangel, D-NY, is not far from the mark when he calls for re-instatement of the draft. But with one caveat .. only so in time of war as declared by the Congress. The last war we won was WWII. A declaration of war was sought by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and granted unanimously by both chambers of Congress on December 8th, 1941. It was the day following Japan's sneak attack at Pearl Harbor. Our ensuing effort was an all hands evolution. Winning took nearly four years. No American was excused from its consequences. Rationing of goods, gasoline, automobiles and some diminished freedoms were applied universally. Normal living was on pause. It was put up or shut up time. Americans put up. Not since that historic conflict, has war been declared by the Congress as clearly stipulated in our Constitution's Article 1 Section 8. Coincidentally, not one of the last three major WARS in which we have taken part have resulted in victory. Committing our armed forces into war is a grave decision. It's a time of criticality, separations, shattered lives, suffering and sadness It must be entered into as such. Given this, why the War Powers Resolution of 1973? This act by Congress was and remains a tarnished abdication of one of the Congresses' most critical responsibilites. It' a political cop-out and institutional disgrace. It should be exorcised from the books. This Act made the disastrous tragedies of Korea, Vietnam and Iraq not only possible, but near impossible to avoid. Will our next Congress be prepared to declare war on terrorism?

xchagalx

xchagalx Listen up mates, there's a new threat at sea!

Ahoy, Navy men and women. Seems we have further confirmation that in this 21st century and its potential technilogical breakthroughs, we can't take our security for granted. NBC has an interesting take on advancements in undersea warfare .. that leave us with an empty feeling of not knowing what's up .. or more importantly down.

NBC tells us about the AIP Swedish submarine. What's its 'big deal' capabilities? Take a look at their report http://www.nbc4.tv/print/10116514/detail.html
it's enough to make an old ASW sailor cry, "Man your battle stations!"
If that's not enough, the Washington Times (most assuredly not the Washington Post) adds significantly to what should be our deep concern.
You can see why at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061113-121539-3317r.htm
Ask yourself .. is our Trident system still invulnerable? And what are we doing about this development?

Thinking the Unthinkable and Out of Control Nuclear Proliferation Halloween is over ... but the threats to western civilization are as real today as is sundown occuring this evening.North Korea's Kim Jong Il is proclaiming his country to be a nuclear force to be respected. He hates America.Iran is working to be so considered. Its leadership hates America. A danger exists that terrorists will get such a weapon and use it against the U. S. The Islamic terrorists hate America.We find ourselves over committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, Bosnia with far too many boots on the ground in these and other places around the world.We think of ourselves as the good guys. We .. more and more .. are not by too many other countries. Our nation has spent the taxpayers' treasure in the billions and billions of dollars .. even at a time when a billion here and a billion there wasn't considered chump change. We are without any doubt whatsoever the most powerful nation that ever existed.But for whatever reason, we appear paralyzed when threatened by pipsqueaks of diminuitive importance on the world stage.What to do about it?Frightening as they are, options are available - not inviting, but they provide alternatives. Most importantly, even the hint of consideration would make us instantly unpredictable. For instance, USS PUEBLO still lays captive in Korean waters. It's a reminder to the world, if not to us, that our immediate past is replete with examples of our tissue-paper tiger stature. Let's suppose Kim Jong Il has been successful in developing THE bomb and a delivery system capable of reaching the United States.The time is at hand to move on to the unthinkable:Option 1: Launch a multiple war-head ICBM with one conventional war head and the remainder dummies. Mission: take out Pueblo and splash those dummie warheads along both coasts of North Korea. No advance warning and no follow-up explanation. Leave it to the world to digest our meaning. Crazy? Maybe .. maybe not.Option 2: Begin removing our troops post haste from South Korea. Again, no explanation. Leave the stewing and worry to the bad guys! Why have the Americans decided on leaving after all these years? Crazy? No. It's time we changed our policy of using American lives as a stopgap shield in potentially impossible/improbable defensive circumstances. And our signal would be crystal clear. Our power will consist of brutal technology and not the lives of 40,000+ American men and women of our armed forces to prove our support of an ally.Option 3: Immediately leak plans to provide Japan a limited nuclear capability to protect themselves. Crazy? Why? This is a reality the Russians and Chinese dread. Given history, both have every reason to dread any such possibility.Option 4: At a point when all hope of any diplomatic success is gone, and other nations fail to join in stopping avowed enemies threatening the world, we resort to our technical advantages. We take out the offensive missile facilities as well as those involved in the production of nuclear weapons, initially with conventional weaponry and, as a last resort limited nukes. This final option need not be a precursor to total war. Why?Put yourself in Beijing and Moscow as the leadership of those nations. Are you willing to sacrifice everything for Kim Jong Il a miniaturized madman? Or the Iranian clerics whose direction is a threat to and including China and Russia.But these options are all crazy. The U. S. doesn't do such things. Doing such would be unthinkable.Most probably! Yet even thinking about any one of these alternatives involves reawakening a deterrent value which has diminished to the point of non-existence.In a strategic sense, the United States must not allow itself to remain taken for granted. Vietnam proved vacuous a policy by which we told the world what we were going to do. And, at the same time, telling an enemy what we weren't going to do forged an iron-clad formula for defeat.>Edit-Me

xchagalx

Edit-Me

Thinking the Unthinkable When Facing Nuclear Proliferation that Is Out of Congrol

Halloween is over ... but the threats to western civilization are as real today as is sundown occuring this evening.North Korea's Kim Jong Il is proclaiming his country to be a nuclear force to be respected. He hates America.Iran is working to be so considered. Its leadership hates America. A danger exists that terrorists will get such a weapon and use it against the U. S. The Islamic terrorists hate America.We find ourselves over committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, Bosnia with far too many boots on the ground in these and other places around the world.We think of ourselves as the good guys. We .. more and more .. are not by too many other countries. Our nation has spent the taxpayers' treasure in the billions and billions of dollars .. even at a time when a billion here and a billion there wasn't considered chump change. We are without any doubt whatsoever the most powerful nation that ever existed.But for whatever reason, we appear paralyzed when threatened by pipsqueaks of diminuitive importance on the world stage.What to do about it?Frightening as they are, options are available - not inviting, but they provide alternatives. Most importantly, even the hint of consideration would make us instantly unpredictable. For instance, USS PUEBLO still lays captive in Korean waters. It's a reminder to the world, if not to us, that our immediate past is replete with examples of our tissue-paper tiger stature. Let's suppose Kim Jong Il has been successful in developing THE bomb and a delivery system capable of reaching the United States.The time is at hand to move on to the unthinkable:Option 1: Launch a multiple war-head ICBM with one conventional war head and the remainder dummies. Mission: take out Pueblo and splash those dummie warheads along both coasts of North Korea. No advance warning and no follow-up explanation. Leave it to the world to digest our meaning. Crazy? Maybe .. maybe not.Option 2: Begin removing our troops post haste from South Korea. Again, no explanation. Leave the stewing and worry to the bad guys! Why have the Americans decided on leaving after all these years? Crazy? No. It's time we changed our policy of using American lives as a stopgap shield in potentially impossible/improbable defensive circumstances. And our signal would be crystal clear. Our power will consist of brutal technology and not the lives of 40,000+ American men and women of our armed forces to prove our support of an ally.Option 3: Immediately leak plans to provide Japan a limited nuclear capability to protect themselves. Crazy? Why? This is a reality the Russians and Chinese dread. Given history, both have every reason to dread any such possibility.Option 4: At a point when all hope of any diplomatic success is gone, and other nations fail to join in stopping avowed enemies threatening the world, we resort to our technical advantages. We take out the offensive missile facilities as well as those involved in the production of nuclear weapons, initially with conventional weaponry and, as a last resort limited nukes. This final option need not be a precursor to total war. Why?Put yourself in Beijing and Moscow as the leadership of those nations. Are you willing to sacrifice everything for Kim Jong Il a miniaturized madman? Or the Iranian clerics whose direction is a threat to and including China and Russia.But these options are all crazy. The U. S. doesn't do such things. Doing such would be unthinkable.Most probably! Yet even thinking about any one of these alternatives involves reawakening a deterrent value which has diminished to the point of non-existence.In a strategic sense, the United States must not allow itself to remain taken for granted. Vietnam proved vacuous a policy by which we told the world what we were going to do. And, at the same time, telling an enemy what we weren't going to do forged an iron-clad formula for defeat.

xchagalx

xchagalx
Thinking the Unthinkable
Halloween may be over ... but the threats to western civilization are as real today as sundown occuring this evening.
North Korea's Kim Il Jung is claiming his country to be a nuclear force to be respected. He hates America.
Iran is working to be so considered. Its leadership hates America.
A danger exists that terrorists will get such a weapon and use it against the U. S. The Islamic terrorists hate America.
We find ourselves over committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, Bosnia with far too many boots on the ground in these and other places around the world.
We think of ourselves as the good guys. Our nation has spent the taxpayers' treasure in the billions and billions of dollars .. even at a time when a billion here and a billion there wasn't considered chump change. We are without any doubt whatsoever the most powerful nation that ever existed.
But for whatever reason, we appear paralyzed when threatened by pipsqueaks of diminuitive importance on the world stage.

What to do about it?

Frightening as they are, options are available - not inviting, but they provide alternatives. Most importantly, even the hint of consideration makes us instantly unpredictable.
For instance, USS PUEBLO still lays captive in Korean waters. It's a reminder to the world, if not to us, that our immediate past is replete with examples of our tissue-paper tiger stature. Let's suppose Kim Il Sung has been successful in developing THE bomb and a delivery system capable of reaching the United States.
The time is at hand to move on to the unthinkable:
Option 1: Launch a multiple head ICBM with one non-nuclear war head and the remainder dummies. Mission: take out Pueblo and splash those dummie warheads along the coast of North Korea. No advance warning and no follow-up explanation. Leave it to the world to digest its meaning. Crazy? Maybe .. or maybe not.
Option 2: Begin removing our troops post haste from South Korea. Again, no explanation. Leave the stewing and worry to the bad guys! Why are the Americans leaving after all these years? Crazy? No. It's time we changed our policy of using American lives as a shield in potentially impossible circumstances. And our signal would be crystal clear. Our power will consist of brutal technology and not the lives of 30,000 American men and women of our armed forces.
Option 3: Immediately leak plans to provide Japan a limited nuclear capability to protect themselves. Crazy? Why? This is a reality the Russians and Chinese dread .. and given history, both have every reason to dread any such possibility.
Option 4: At a point when all hope of any diplomatic success is gone, and other nations fail to join in stopping North Korea and/or Iran from threatening the world, we resort to our technical advantage. We take out the offensive missile facilities as well as those involved in the production of nuclear weapons, first with conventional weaponry and, as a last resort limited nukes. This final option need not be a precursor to total war. Why?
Put yourself in Beijing and Moscow as the leadership of those nations. Are you willing to sacrifice everything for Kim Il Jong, a miniaturized madman? Or the Iranian clerics whose direction is a threat to China and Russia.
But these options are all crazy. The U. S. doesn't do such things. Doing such would be unthinkable.
Most probably! Yet even thinking about any one of these alternatives involves reawakening a deterrent value which has diminished to the point of non-existence.
In a strategic sense, the United States must not allow itself to remain taken for granted. Vietnam proved vacuous a policy by which we told the world what we were going to do. And, at the same time, telling an enemy what we weren't going to do forged an iron-clad formula for defeat.

xchagalx

Britons wary of Bush more than Kim Jong-il: poll
Fri Nov 3, 12:44 AM ET

No need to be surprised by this headline .. or the article which follows. When our own media excoriate our President day after day as they have since the day he assumed the Presidency, it's a ripe invitation to pick up the banner and stick it to Uncle Sam.

Who could be more jealous of this country than our two immediate neighbors? And I have about as much faith in foreign polls as I do in those of the Washington Post, New York Times, et al. They get the responses their questions elicit in the specially selected polling areas they can depend upon. If our government leaked it was 'thinking the unthinkable', it might well serve to put deterrent value back into our nuclear advantage. Mega billions of our taxpayers' treasure has bought us nothing but jealousy, hatred, rejection and diminishment among our enemies and would be allies. My motto for the immediate future ... 'not a single American combat boot on foreign soil' and put that together with 'don't tread on me or mine .. your survival may depend upon it'.

Back to the Article

Britons wary of Bush more than Kim Jong-il: poll
Fri Nov 3, 12:44 AM ET
The United States is seen as a threat to world peace by its closest neighbors and allies, with Britons saying President George W. Bush poses a greater danger than North Korea's Kim Jong-il, a survey found on Friday.
A majority of people quizzed in three out of four countries polled also rejected the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
The findings came just days before the U.S. mid-term congressional elections, with a growing number of U.S. voters wanting their troops in Iraq to be brought home.
Britain's Guardian newspaper said it carried out the survey along with Israel's Haaretz, La Presse and Toronto Star in Canada and Mexico's Reforma.
In Britain, which alongside Israel is traditionally a close Washington ally, 69 percent of those questioned said they felt U.S. policy had made the world less safe since 2001.
A majority of Canadians and Mexicans agreed, with 62 percent of those polled in Canada and 57 percent in Mexico saying their neighbor's policy had made the world more dangerous.
As for Israel, just 25 percent of people asked said Bush had made the world safer, while 36 percent felt he had upped the risk of conflict and a further 30 percent said at best he had made no difference.
Israelis alone were in favor of Bush's decision to invade Iraq, with 59 percent for the war and 34 percent against.
The ratio was starkly different in the three other nations.
Some 89 percent of Mexicans felt the invasion to topple Saddam Hussein was unjustified, as did 73 percent of Canadians and 71 percent of Britons, the survey said.
The perceived failings of U.S. foreign policy placed Bush alongside al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, North Korean leader Kim Jong-il and Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a cause of global anxiety, it said.
North Korea's nuclear test last month drew worldwide condemnation, while Western powers are trying to force Iran to scale back atomic work they fear may be used to make bombs. Iran says its aims are purely peaceful.
Asked whether they thought the U.S. leader was a great or moderate danger to peace, 75 percent of British people said yes. Some 87 percent felt the same about bin Laden, while Kim scored 69 percent and Ahmadinejad clocked 62 percent.
Just 23 percent of Israelis said Bush he represented a serious danger, with 61 percent disagreeing.
ICM interviewed 1,010 adults from October 27-30 in Britain. Professional local opinion polling was used in the other three countries, the Guardian said. In Israel, 1,078 people were asked, 1,007 were quizzed in Canada and 1,010 in Mexico.
Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

xchagalxGiven the state of conditions in the Mid-East and other parts of the world, this is a timely primer on what Mohammad had in mind for those of us not of the Islamic faith. It's worth the 20 or so minutes you devote to it. If you find yourself wanting more, try THE SWORD OF THE PROPHET by Serge Trafkovic. The author is one identified by Muslim apologists as 'politically incorrect' about the subject at hand.


Dhimmitude for DummiesBy Victor Sharpe, Israel Hasbara Committee >From Frontpagemag.com.September 26, 2006http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24592Ask one hundred people in the United States what a dhimmi is and perhaps two orthree might know. In Western Europe the number would be slightly higher becauseof latent memories of battles fought against invading Moslem armies overhundreds of years. In 732, Charles Martel led his Frankish forces at Tours to victory against anIslamic invasion of France, which nearly destroyed Christian Europe.Similarly, Islam was ousted from Spain in 1492 after an occupation of theIberian Peninsula by the Moslems for hundreds of years. Sadly, the SpanishChristian monarchs, Isabella and Ferdinand, and the Portuguese a few yearslater, also expelled the Jewish community although the Jews had lived in Spainand Portugal for many centuries and had never posed a threat to either Moslem orChristian sovereignty.In Italy, Islamic power was brought to an end when the heavy Turkish galleyswere defeated by Venetian galleasses at the great naval battle of Lepanto in1571. And the Moslem Ottoman power, which at its height again threatened all ofWestern Europe, was barely turned back at the gates of Vienna on 11 September1683 by a coalition of European armies. Incidentally, could there be aconnection between 9.11.1683 and 9.11.2001, or is it just coincidence?These were four major defeats by Europe of Islamic attempts of conquest andsubjugation set against a history of victorious Moslem invasions and conqueststhat had been the hallmark of Islam since its founding in the seventh century.But what of the peoples and nations that fell under Islamic occupation? For themthe story was one of forced conversions to Islam, slavery, death and the Islamicinstitution of dhimmitude.This is the word that describes the parlous state of those who refused toconvert to Islam and became the subjugated, non-Muslims who were forced toaccept a restrictive and humiliating subordination to a superior Islamic powerand live as second class citizens in order to avoid enslavement or death. Thesepeoples and populations were known as dhimmis, and if such a status was nothumiliating enough, a special tax or tribute, called the jizya, was imposed uponthem and upon all dhimmis.Dhimmitude is the direct outcome of jihad, which is the military conquest ofnon-Islamic territory mandated by Allah as a spiritual obligation for everyindividual Moslem and Moslem nation.>From its beginnings in the seventh century, Islam spread through violentconquest of non-Moslem lands. In the eighth century, a formal set of rules togovern relationships between Moslems and non-Moslems was created based uponMoslem conquests of non-Moslem peoples. These rules were based upon jihad, whichestablished how the Moslems would treat the conquered non-Moslems in terms oftheir submission to Islam.Jihad can be pursued through force or other means such as propaganda, writing,or subversion against the perceived enemy. The so-called enemies are those whooppose the establishment of Islamic law or its spread, mission, or sovereigntyover them and their land.Propaganda and subversion are the very means now being employed against the Westand Judeo-Christian civilization, and Islamists have shown themselves to bebrilliantly adept at manipulating the gullible and uninformed western media inpursuit of their aims of world domination.As I have written in previous articles, non-Islamic lands are considered the daral-harb, the "house of war," until they submit to Islamic rule and enter the daral-Islam. The 'infidel' falls into three categories: those who resist Islam withforce, those living in a country that has a temporary truce with Islam, andthose who have surrendered to Islam by exchanging land for peace.Since the Oslo Accords, successive Israeli governments have been guilty of thenow thoroughly discredited notion of "land for peace" in which Israel gives awayland but never receives peace. Even the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan arecold at best and the lands given away to Lebanon and the Arab Palestinians hasbeen a calamitous error. The belief that Moslem Arab powers respond to overturesof peace by ending their aggression is but a mirage in the desert. This isproven time and again to be a delusion and is, in fact, a classic example of themindset and behavior of the dhimmi.A non-Moslem community forced to accept dhimmitude is condemned to live in asystem that will only protect it from jihad if it is subservient to the Moslemmaster. In return, it is guaranteed limited rights under a system ofdiscriminations that it must accept, or face forced conversion, slavery, ordeath.In the early years of the Islamic conquests, the "tribute" or jizya was paid asa yearly poll tax, which symbolized the subordination of the dhimmi.Later, the inferior status of Jews and Christians was reinforced through aseries of regulations that governed the behavior of the dhimmi. Jews andChristians were awarded a different status than other faiths. They wereconsidered to be under protection as "people of the book." People ofnon-monotheistic faiths, pagans, or atheists were simply to be exterminated.According to Mitchell G. Bard, who has written extensively on the subject andproduced the excellent rebuttal to Arab and pro-Arab propaganda in his book,Myths and Facts, "... dhimmis, on pain of death, were forbidden to mock orcriticize the Koran, Islam or Muhammad, to proselytize among Moslems or to toucha Moslem woman (though a Moslem man could take a non--Moslem as a wife)."Dhimmis were excluded from public office and armed service, and were forbiddento bear arms. They were not allowed to ride horses or camels, to buildsynagogues or churches taller than mosques, to construct houses higher thanthose of Muslims or to drink wine in public. They were not allowed to pray ormourn in loud voices as that might offend the Moslems."The dhimmi had to show public deference toward Moslems, always yielding themthe center of the road. The dhimmi was not allowed to give evidence in courtagainst a Moslem, and his oath was unacceptable in an Islamic court.To defend himself the dhimmi would have to purchase Moslem witnesses at greatexpense. This left the dhimmi with little legal recourse when harmed by aMoslem."Dhimmis were also forced to wear distinctive clothing. In the ninth century,for example, Baghdad's Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews,setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later."By the twentieth century, the status of the dhimmi in Moslem lands had notsignificantly improved. H.E.W. Young, British Vice-Consul in Mosul, wrote in1909:"The attitude of the Muslims toward the Christians and the Jews is that of amaster towards slaves, whom he treats with a certain lordly tolerance so long asthey keep their place. Any sign of pretension to equality is promptlyrepressed."The concept of jihad is not something now discarded by Islam as a quaint beliefappropriate to the distant past. On the contrary, it is a cardinal belief in the21st century for Moslems based upon Koranic injunctions. It is believed in bymillions of Moslems around the Third world, as much as by Moslems living inAmerica, Britain, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. It is a belief,passionately held, that one day the entire world will become Islamic and acceptcompletely the will of Allah.It is vital, therefore, that the general public in every non-Moslem country bemade aware that Moslems consider themselves in a perpetual state of war withtheir non-Moslem neighbors. If Islamic armies are unable to defeat what theyconsider the "infidels," (that's you and me), then a period of "truce"exists, which has several conditions. These include allowing Islam to bepropagated, and if a non-Moslem nation forbids it or rejects mass proselytizingto Islam, then that nation will be considered as subject to holy jihad.Sheikh Zayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaida's second in command, recently invitedAmerica to embrace Islam. The invitation is always given, according to someexperts, prior to a major assault upon the "infidel nation," because anyrejection is considered by Moslems as an empirical reason to wage war upon thenon-Moslem state; in this case the United States of America.It is nearly impossible for sophisticated and secularized Western and Europeanelites to understand or accept such medieval concepts, let alone the idea that areligious war is being waged against them. But their dismissal and amuseddisregard of what is taking place is as calamitous as that exemplified by themyopic politicians in Britain and America before the Second World War.The lone voice in the wilderness at that time, Winston Churchill, appealed invain to the political leaders who had not the ears to hear or the eyes to seethe growing fascist menace during the 1930s posed by Germany and Italy.He called one such British politician an "epileptic corpse," and reached backthrough his prodigious memory to find a poem, which characterized the failure ofthe Baldwin government in 1935 to re-arm. The apt poem was, The ClatteringTrain, which could equally be applied to the later appeasement of Hitler byNeville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax."Those in charge of the clattering train, the axles creak and the couplingsstrain. The pace is hot and the points are near and sleep has deadened thedriver's air. The signals flash in the night in vain, for death is in charge ofthe clattering train."Western notions of peaceful co-existence between states, human rights andliberal democracy are all alien to the bin-Ladens and Zawahiris of the Islamicworld. Hizbullah, Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Al Qaida, adnauseum, all reject Judeo-Christian civilization as being in theological error.For them, the entire human race must embrace Allah's pre-eminence and the Moslembeliever is the divine instrument to bring about the "Umma" (worldwide Moslemcommunity) in whatever way possible, including warfare and terror.Jihad has reappeared as a way of wiping out the humiliation the Arab and Moslemworld has felt as Western power became ascendant, especially after the defeat ofthe Ottoman Turkish Empire at the end of the First World War.With a fabulous and never ending flow of petrodollars pouring into Arab andMoslem coffers, the belief among Moslems is that the time is now right for Islamto reassert itself in dominating the world and bringing it to Allah through allout war, including nuclear war, if necessary.The corollary to jihad is dhimmitude. This is what appeasement by non-Moslems toIslamist threats and terror leads to. Winston Churchill would have been shockedbut not surprised at the craven appeasement displayed by today's elitists in theEuropean political echelons.It is in marked contrast to the manner in which their ancestors confronted anearlier existential Islamic threat when they defeated decisively the Moslems atTours, Iberia (Spain and Portugal), Lepanto and Vienna.But without a similarly decisive defeat of present day Islamist aggression andIslamo-fascism we may all be faced, sooner than we think, with the choice offorced conversion to Islam or subservience and wretchedness as dhimmis.Better, therefore, for us all to be aware of the facts and not also be dummies.==================DISCLAIMER: The views exchanged in NIPmail are those of individual members and do not necessarily represent the views of the Naval Intelligence Professionals organization nor its officers and directors. For more info: http://www.navintpro.org

Google Blog Search