Become Prostitute or Lose Coverage

The Germans once again divide law from ethics and don't seem to get it at all.




A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.
The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.
She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.
Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.
The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.
When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.
"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."
Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting. Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued.
Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.
"Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova.
Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them.
Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in women and cut links to organised crime.
Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services.
"They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said.
"Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do."

I do not know what to say

Hmm.

No Other Words Needed

Ashamed to be an American?

As the above link shows, a Miss Berns Rothchild went abroad to London, England but seemed to not like being associated with... the United States.

"I sort of felt ashamed, and didn't really want to be associated with being an American," said Rothchild, who lives in New York City and voted for John Kerry.

Yet another example of who really are the ones who promote division and anti-American feelings. She could have said many things while overseas, yet she decided it best to act as if she weren't American.

Perhaps it's best that she doesn't in the end. If she really can't take being called an American there are ways to stop those charges from ever being leveled against her.

Oh yes, the whole story is about armbands, like Lance Armstrong's anti-Cancer bands. I guess hers might be considered anti-associating-as-an-American, or maybe just take the first and last words and scrap everything in between the hyphens.

So many forms of whining, so few forms of understanding.

Education System and a Prince

So Prince Harry was educated in the UK (and possibly elsewhere) but I see that they aren't too good at educating people either. It's not that he might not have learned what 2+2 is, but he does not understand what good and evil is.

The fact that his nation was also hit hard, London was left burning, and Europe was left destroyed didn't enter his mind. What mattered was him being aloof and rebellious. What that Nazis did was like nothing else on Earth ever. The reason it was different is because it came from a supposed 'Civilized Nation', a developed nation, a sophisticated nation where the likes of Wagner, Bach, and Beethoven, and if you include Germanic nations with it Mozart and many other of the elite class and intelligentsia.

Here we have another elite member of an exclusive group without understanding that science and art is amoral, and that even parties require no moral or ethical guide. THIS is the largest problem with what some say, and those who defend him, or wish to down play the whole mess: Your life should never be separate from your ethics or morality. Everything you do is a reflection of who you are and what you value. We all make mistakes, but realizing them does not absolve us from having made them.

I recently took a tour of the Holocaust Memorial in Washington D.C. now that we life close to the nation's capital (and Capitol), and although I knew much about it and World War Two as well since I am an avid reader about history, that place took the knowledge and put in closer to reality.

There is one exhibit of nothing but shoes from the victims. Countless shoes are in one area. They had to remove them once they arrived and before they were 'deloused'. Every two shoes is one person. I kept saying that to myself, but I could not quite get a grip on any number since I could not count the shoes. And the shoes were of all different sizes: baby shoes, frumpy old shoes, females' shoes, and the list goes on.

Seeing that and so much more gave me an understanding, a perspective of the knowledge I already had. I've stated before, and I believe it more now than ever that knowledge without perspective is useless and can actually do harm.

Wearing such a uniform in such a casual and even joking way is more than a 'goof', it is reprehensible.

Dean paid Bloggers for Positive Spin?

Say it isn’t so!

Actually, this is a story that, despite what some might make of it, is idiotic. Campaign Finance Reform has been nothing but a joke and lie. The only thing it successfully does is make it so that someone like myself can not run for office because in the end I can only accept a maximum of $2000 from any one person. Sounds good in theory, but in reality if I start with zero dollars – which is what I have currently – I would have to go door to door 161288 times and get the maximum amount to equal what only John Kerry had to spend.

CFR also tells me how and when I can spend that money. This is ridiculous since if there one form of free speech and media that should be inviolate it would be that regarding politics and national issues. But no, and it backed by the likes of Republican Senator John McCain and Democrat Senator Russell Feingold.

With such bipartisan backing it is no wonder it passed 59-41 in the Senate because it protects those in power and those who are well off. But the average person cannot run with such caps and limitations. No one has heard of me, but I’m told that there are limits and restrictions on how I can spend my money, how I can get more money, and what media I can use. How would I ever beat a career politician who can use his position of power and access to free media coverage to beat me before I even have the money to run?

I’m not upset with Howard Dean on this one at all. I’m all for a disclosure of HOW the money was given and how it was spent, but that’s it. The methods used should be up to the candidate and no matter what any court may say if limiting you access to the media (i.e. the press) is not being violated then we should just remove that from the First Amendment.

Cobb County Georgia Loses

"Adopted by the school board, funded by the money of taxpayers, and inserted by school personnel, the sticker conveys an impermissible message of endorsement and tells some citizens that they are political outsiders while telling others they are political insiders," U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper said in his 44-page ruling.

This sounds very horrible, how could this be? Here's what the sticker actually says:

"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

Even more proof that the left is not in favor of open minds, they are only in favor of destroying religion. I guess it's time Cobb County Georgia got with the liberal agenda. Not once is God, Creator, nor anything religious mentioned yet some judge who had no interest nor understanding of Cobb County thought it was a violation of a 'clause' that does not even exist in the Constitution. Folly. Perhaps they will have resources to go to the Supreme Court.

The ACLU was of course behind this, since they could not let people of a district make their own rules and decisions... open minded, hmm?

A Strangely Misleading News Story

http://reuters.myway.com/article/20050111/2005-01-11T231117Z_01_N11310356_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAQ-ABUSE-DC.html

The title of the above is, "Iraqi Victim Says U.S. Torture Worse That Saddam".

After reading the story though, I find no reference to the Prisoner ever having said that. Let's examine the quotes and just as importantly a parenthesized word in one of them.

"I couldn't believe in the beginning that this could happen, but I wished I could kill myself because no one was there to stop it,"

Of course he didn't kill himself and now stands to profit for it all. It takes them not ime to learn how to assume the victim role even over there.

"They were torturing us as though it was theater for them,"

OK. I guess he's trying to show that big bad Americans revel in such things. I wonder how much money he stands to get.

"I was extremely emotional because (even) Saddam didn't do this to us."

The added word is 'even'. This irresponsible journalist (Adam Tanner) added a very large word in an effort to give his piece the wonderful title of the US being worse than Saddam.

Does Tanner bother to note that Saddam never permitted victims to have a hearing, a trial, or evn publically complain about their treatment? No, he seems to be far too in bed with the idea of having a shocking headline than actually trying to give perspective and understanding. Adam Tanner represents a very large group of reporters who do not wish to be considered opinion journalists, but offer much more than a reporting of observations, quotes, and facts within the framework.

"Al-Sheikh, well known in Abu Ghraib for having once obtained a gun from an Iraqi guard and exchanged fire with American soldiers, appeared wary in his testimony.

"That Graner guy is a man who hurt his country, hurt his people and I think he will receive his punishment," he said. He said Graner forced him to eat pork and drink alcohol, practices against his Islamic religion."

Ah, now we are to feel that the word of a guy willing to shoot at US guards while in prison is something worth hearing. And we are to sympathize with his plight over pork and alcohol. I'm sorry but the river of tears seems to be stagnate right now. According to Al-Sheikh, Graner hurt the US and the US people by taking such measures upon Al-sheikh. Yes, he must be a good judge of character considering his background. He is doing the US a service by pointing this out, right?

Irresponsible journalism has been around for a while, but it still is a sad thing to read.

Adam Tanner obviously has his biases since he is willing to add word to the testimony of prisoners, but when a US lawyer says that some of the acts are no worse than what cheerleaders, Tanner feels the need to put quotes around cheerleaders. Why?

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N10209253.htm
Iraqi abuse was like act of "cheerleaders" -lawyer

Before he had a chance to sympathize with Iraqi criminals, Tanner was an environmentalist, "Asians say global warming a cause of recent floods" http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/50/042.html

anti-Nuclear testing - even on computers "Ultrafast Supercomputer to Simulate Nuke Explosion" http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:yJbwofYG1dUJ:asia.tech.yahoo.com/041226/3/1ts5c.html+%22%2BBy+Adam+Tanner%22&hl=en where about half the story says that the computers cost too much and he only interviews those who agree.

In 2002 he was already perpetuating th eimage of Bush making Europe nervous. "Europeans Fret, Fearing a Bolder Bush" http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1106-01.htm

He found time to address Rosie O'Donnell's gay wedding, and take shots at Bush for wanting an Amendment http://www.gaypasg.org/PressClippings/2004/February%202004/Comedian%20Rosie%20O'Donnell%20Weds%20Gay%20Partner.htm

He made sure to talk about Ganja, "Passions High as U.S. Ganja Guru Awaits Sentencing" http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread16512.shtml

Next time you find a new story, do a searrch on the report's name via Google, the results may be interesting. I now understand why many news agencies do not list the names of contributors: It hides the trail.

Lawsuits and Corporate America

President Bush promised some tort reform and it will not come soon enough. While the lawsuits are filed even against private citizens, the fact remains that the corporate world is the main target due it having the most money and fame.

Nothing like Jesse Jackson shaking down a business instead of him actually having to find a real job is what he considers to be racist America. Come on Jesse, if you have any skills at all it'd be easy. I'm not at all saying that individuals are not racist, but the American establishment as a whole is not - no matter what he might have us think.

We all recall the moron suing McDonald's because she discovered that coffee was served hot. We've seen the idiotic warning labels on all sorts of items, and we all hear about the new lawsuits all the time.

Why? There has been a growing attempt in the sophisticated left over some decades to vilify anyone or anything that makes money. When communism failed, all the diehards had no place to go, no place to revere, and no example of what they though was a better way. This didn't stop them. It is another example of the Anyone But Bush mentality. It's the Anything But Capitalism mentality. Since the Soviets could not bring McDonalds to its knees, they'll sue them into oblivion.

Another method is the smear tactic. As old as any political campaign, leftist love to kick corporate America around. They coin terms like Corporate Citizenship and then go out to prove that a company like McDonalds really doesn't care about society as much as they do making money.

This actually surprises people on the Left. They seem shocked to discover that after McDonalds sells you a hamburger and you pay for it, they owe you nothing. Sales complete, have a good day. Of course those greedy corporate-types say, "Come again," just to get more of your money.

The left does well to attach Boss Tweed-type names to the corporate world: Big Business, Big Oil, Big Energy, Big Tobacco, Big Guns, Big Pharmaceutical, so forth and so on. They missed two though: Big Government and Big Unions.

This is not to say that it wouldn't be nice to have corporations give freely and help out those who might live in the same neighborhoods who might purchase their products, but some do and some do not. It is the same with individual charity: some people are more inclined than others.

The idea that because some people decide to pay into the triple digits for a pair of shoes that Nike owes the community something is both foolish and childish. To the left all the corporate world looms over society taking from it while giving nothing back.

Many people I know on the right - myself included - do not feel this way. We feel that, as a rules, the corporate world is amoral. It wants money, market share, etc., and for its own survival it must compete to get these things. The product may be $120 shoes, or a new medicine that will help cure a disease, but in the end the corporation is doing it for the bottom line.

This is not to say that making a medicine can not be motivated by a desire to help the world, but the desire to help the world alone will not pay your bills. If you think otherwise please tell the collection agency that you're a nice person and that that you mean well, but you feel it unreasonable that they want money you do not have. If you're an employer tell your employees that you know they like money but to constantly expect a check instead of a pat on the back is capitalist and unacceptable. As an employee how long would you work there?

As a consumer I do expect the best product I can get, and I must match my ability and desire to pay for said object against the quality I seek. In the end I hope to find the common ground that will result in a sale. I do not expect the company to put me through college (though it would be great!) because in the end they didn't say they would, nor did I buy their product expecting a college grant.

The corporate world is like the science industry: the same technology that make the nuclear bomb can be used to end a bloody war, or destroy a city of millions who only want to do their own thing from day to day.

We need to be responsible individual citizens when dealing with the corporate world and if we witness behavior we do not like out of a corporation we need to have the moral fiber to discontinue buying from them and let them know that we will not support them as long as said behavior or policy continues - even if they have the best price, are the highest quality, or the only ones who make a certain item.

Europe and the US Left

The modern left is a strange beast indeed. For Europe it is a natural progression from the days of Kings and Queens who ran everything without so much as considering the population unless the threat of revolution seemed unstoppable. Even then royalty sometimes decided not to act in the interest of the populace, preferring to use force to put down all those who voice a disagreement.

Europe is still running away from this type of government – and I can’t say that I blame them. France has had five governments in the same amount of time that the United States has had one. Germany… well, we all know about Germany. The rest of Europe has not fared much better historically and as such it seems logical that they may be slightly apprehensive when it comes to The Church and even religion in general after the Inquisition and other such terrors.

Authority – in its various forms – has not been kind to Europe. Indeed, historically, Europe has had a decent share of despots and totalitarian systems and it seems to have made them gun shy.

This may serve a bit of understanding in an empathetic way as to why so much of Europe does not understand the US, and in many cases why Europe does not like the US either.

The United States has not had a totalitarian regime, has not been run by either despot or theologian, and has a Constitution protecting the freedoms and rights of the people against the government itself.

So why then does the American left react with such revulsion towards religion and even the rule of law? They attempt to portray our system of government in the exact say way that they portray those in Europe. They may mention slavery or the lack of civil rights as evidence, but if one looks at the nature of America in contrast with the nature of Europe during those same periods one is forced to observe that the US is no worse – and often times better – than our European counterparts.

The American left is running away from Dark Ages Europe and through this mental disorder the entire structure of the nation can be seen to be slipping into the grips of Torquemada ever so slowly. With George W. Bush being re-elected, this slippery slope can be seen to be increasing in the steepness of the grade and soon Dominican Monks will be going around burning all the infidels at the stake.

The modern left in the US has no ideas of its own and as such it is dependent upon Europe for them. From Universal Healthcare, to gun control, to pushing religion further and further out of the lives of citizens, the left’s reliance can be seen for what it is: An attempt to make the New World into Old Europe.

Europe’s consensus-style of governing and their esteem for the UN fall right into line with American leftist ideology as well; making the American left simply Labour Party Light.

Anyone but Bush did not win, although that was the battle cry of the left since it didn’t matter who ran – it was not W and that was good enough. President Bush rejects most of the ideas of Europe and because of that he has distanced us from them, or perhaps they are the ones who are shifting away from us. The United States has always been about and for the United States, and there is no shame in that no matter how Europe tries to make the term ‘Cowboy’ into an insult. I rather like it, actually.

When the Democrats were of the JFK-style things were different. These Democrats understood that we cannot ever again afford to idly sit around as the world turns. Kennedy understood the need for pre-emptive strikes in Vietnam and Cuba, he understood the need for tough talk and the resolve that tough talk needs to be backed by tough action when he went on the offensive during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Imagine a tough Democrat last election. Imagine if these were some of this fictional candidate’s quotes:

“Whether of not you may agree with going into Iraq is now moot. We are there and under my leadership we will win, it will be decisive, it will be complete, and it will be bring honor upon our military and our nation as a whole.”

“Now is not the time to second guess the ability or the plans of our military. I know that no matter how the orders are given, and I know that no matter what condition the equipment may be in our soldiers will win the day. This is not to say that I agree with all the strategic aspects as prioritized by the current administration, but it seems that no matter what the mission may be our soldiers are up to it.”

“We are a nation who now has a very rare opportunity in the world: We have a chance to both secure our citizens and secure the citizens of another nation by removing a horrible, horrible person from power. We have both an obligation as well as a desire to help ourselves and the world and we will not falter nor shall we stumble.”

If these were the messages without the flip-flopping and all the half-steps, this election may have been very different.

But the current Democratic Party has no concept of America First, unless it is to blame America First, and it shows. Self-loathing has no place in a nation as grand and as wonderful as this one, so perhaps all those leftist who promised to move to Europe or Canada (Europe Jr.) should so. Let the rest us get back to finding ways to make America better – but not necessarily better in the eyes of Europe.

Haloscan

I've been reading about this suggestion so we'll see how it works.