Corny but worth a few laughs!
When chemists die, they barium.
Jokes about German sausage are the wurst.
I know a guy who's addicted to brake fluid. He says he can stop any time.
How does Moses make his tea? Hebrews it.
I stayed up all night to see where the sun went. Then it dawned on me.
This girl said she recognized me from the vegetarian club, but I'd never met
I'm reading a book about anti-gravity. I just can't put it down.
I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.
They told me I had type-A blood, but it was a Type-O.
PMS jokes aren't funny; period.
Why were the Indians here first? They had reservations.
We're going on a class trip to the Coca-Cola factory. I hope there's no pop
I didn't like my beard at first. Then it grew on me.
Did you hear about the cross-eyed teacher who lost her job because she
couldn't control her pupils?
When you get a bladder infection urine trouble.
Broken pencils are pointless.
I tried to catch some fog, but I mist.
What do you call a dinosaur with an extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.
England has no kidney bank, but it does have a Liverpool .
I used to be a banker, but then I lost interest.
I dropped out of communism class because of lousy Marx.
All the toilets in London police stations have been stolen. The police have
nothing to go on.
I got a job at a bakery because I kneaded dough.
Haunted French pancakes give me the crepes.
Velcro - what a rip off!
A cartoonist was found dead in his home. Details are sketchy.
Venison for dinner again? Oh deer!
Food for thought!
This from friend and memo reader who seemed to miss my memos:
"Mr. Berkowitz, glad to have you back and here's a super follow up to your observations on obama's take on Islam that needs to be shared via your e-mail. It's verifiable and as they say in today's jargon, "spot on!" Churchill nailed it over 100 years ago." C---- D---."
This is amazing. Even more amazing is that this
hasn't been published long before now.
CHURCHILL ON ISLAM
Unbelievable, but the speech below was written in 1899...
(check Wikipedia - The River War).
The attached short speech from Winston Churchill, was
delivered by him in 1899 when he was a young soldier
and journalist. It probably sets out the current views of
many, but expresses in the wonderful Churchillian turn
of phrase and use of the English language, of which he
was a past master. Sir Winston Churchill was, without
doubt, one of the greatest men of the late 19th and 20th centuries.
He was a brave young soldier, a brilliant journalist, an
extraordinary politician and statesman, a great war
leader and British Prime Minister, to whom the Western
world must be forever in his debt. He was a prophet in
his own time. He died on 24th January 1965, at the grand
old age of 90 and, after a lifetime of service to his country,
was accorded a State funeral.
HERE IS THE SPEECH:
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays
on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as
dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this
fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many
countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture,
sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property
exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and
refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact
that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to
some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a
wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of
slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great
power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the
influence of the religion paralyses the social development
of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force
exists in the world. Far from being moribund,
Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.
It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising
fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity
is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science
against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of
modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome ..."
Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War,
first edition, Vol II, pages 248-250 London).
Churchill saw it coming......
Deportation has become a near-taboo word. Yet the recent Boston bombings inevitably rekindle old questions about the way the U.S. admits, or at times deports, foreign nationals.
Despite the Obama administration's politically driven and cyclical claims of deporting either a lot more or a lot fewer non-citizens, no one knows how many are really being sent home -- for a variety of reasons.
There are not any accurate statistics on how many people are living in the United States illegally. And how does one define deportation? If someone from Latin American is detained by authorities an hour after illegally crossing the border, does he count as "apprehended" or "deported"?
"Deportation" is now politically incorrect, sort of like the T-word -- "terrorism" -- that the administration also seeks to avoid. The current government emphasis is on increasing legal immigration and granting amnesties, but by no means is Washington as interested in clarifying deportation.
Why was the Tsarnaev family granted asylum into the United States -- and why were some of them not later deported? Officially, the Tsarnaevs came here as refugees. As ethnic Chechens and former residents of Kyrgyzstan, they sought "asylum" here from anti-Muslim persecution -- given that Russia had waged a brutal war in Chechnya against Islamic militants.
Yes, the environment of Islamic Russia was and can be deadly. But if the Tsarnaevs were supposedly in danger in their native country, why did the father, Anzor, after a few years choose to return to Dagestan, Russia, where he now apparently lives in relative safety? Why did one of the alleged Boston bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, return to his native land for six months last year -- given that escape from such an unsafe place was the very reason that the United States granted his family asylum in the first place?
That is not an irrelevant question. Recently, some supposedly persecuted Somalis were generously granted asylum to immigrate to Minnesota communities, only to later fly back to Somalia to wage jihad. Were they true refugees fleeing persecution against Muslims, or extremists looking for a breather in the United States?
What, exactly, justifies deportation of immigrants of any status? Failure to find work and to become self-supporting? Apparently not. The Tsarnaev family reportedly had been on public assistance. This is not an isolated or unusual concern. President Obama's own aunt, Zeituni Onyango, not only broke immigration law by overstaying her tourist visa but also compounded that violation by illegally receiving state assistance as a resident of public housing. Only after Obama was elected president was his aunt finally granted political asylum on the grounds that she would be unsafe in her native Kenya.
Should those residing here illegally at least avoid arrest and follow the rules of their adopted country? Apparently not -- given that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a skilled boxer, was charged in 2009 with domestic violence against his girlfriend. His mother, Zubeidat, also back in Russia now, was reportedly arrested last year on charges of shoplifting some $1,600 in goods from a Boston store.
Again, these are not irrelevant questions. President Obama's own uncle, Onyango Obama, is at present illegally residing in the United States. In 2011, he was cited for drunk driving after nearly slamming into a police car.
Would embracing radical ideological movements that have waged war on the United States be a cause for deportation? Apparently not. Tamerlan Tsarnaev was interviewed by the FBI in 2010, based on information from a foreign intelligence agency that he might pose a threat as a radical Islamist. The FBI knew from Tsarnaev's Web postings about his not-so-private sympathies with radical Islam.
Americans are a generous people who take in more immigrants than any other nation in the world. So the sticking point in the current debate over "immigration reform" is not necessarily the granting of residency per se -- given that most Americans are willing to consider a pathway to citizenship for even those who initially broke immigration law but have since not been arrested, have avoided public assistance, and have tried to learn the language and customs of their newly adopted country.
The problem is what to do with those who have not done all that.
Unless the government can assure the public that it is now enforcing immigration laws already on the books, that foreign nationals must at least avoid arrest and public assistance, and that it is disinclined to grant asylum to "refugees" from war-torn Islamic regions and then allow them periodically to go back and forth from their supposedly hostile homelands, there will be little support for the current immigration bill.
In short, the Tsarnaev brothers have offered us a proverbial teachable moment about what have become near-suicidal immigration policies.
2)Why Do So Many Muslims Embrace Religious and Ideological Warfare?Victor Sharpe