Extreme Vetting of Refugees. Underlying Cause of Death of Anne Frank.

On October 31, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Donald J. Trump tweeted:

I have just ordered Homeland Security to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program. Being politically correct is fine, but not for this!

ref: What is extreme vetting? White House outlines proposed immigration policy, By BLAIR GUILD CBS NEWS November 1, 2017, 7:47 PM

Many Trump supporters are strong advocates of Extreme Vetting of Refugees.

It is my opinion that those persons in agreement with this public policy position of Extreme Vetting of Refugees have not clearly thought out all of the possibile consequences of enforcement of extreme vetting; for example, that innocent refugees may indeed lose their lives. Or. if they have thought it all the way through, they do not truly value the sanctity of life.

Otto Frank, father of Anne Frank, tried desperately to find a safe haven for his family. It was in 1941 that Otto Frank tried to seek refuge in the United States of America; but his efforts to obtain permission from the American government were refused.  Why? - Because of the American public policy of Extreme Vetting of Refugees at that time.

It was under the administration of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt that the United States of America adopted the public policy of that "no refugee with close relatives in Europe could come to the U.S., on the grounds that the Nazis might hold their relatives hostage in order to force the refugee to undertake espionage for Hitler."

ref: Snopes, 

Documents uncovered in 2007 revealed that Anne Frank's father, Otto Frank, desperately attempted to secure asylum in the United States.

Were it not for the American policy of Extreme Vetting of Refugees at that time, Anne Frank could very well have survived the horrors of The Holocaust and escaped her ultimate untimely death at the tender age of 15.

My firmly held opinion is that
Extreme Vetting of Refugees was the Underlying Cause of Death of Anne Frank.

BOGO is BOGUS

I am so sick and tired of false and misleading advertising from the private retail business sector.

My specific gripe concerns those "Buy One Get One Free" offers, aka BOGO.

Every time I see or hear of a BOGO offer from a retailer, I want to scream FALSE ADVERTISING.

I was taught that the word "free" in the world of consumer goods and services meant "without cost or payment; without charge; free of charge; given or available without charge."

Have you ever gone to a merchant that was advertising BOGO offerings, and say "I do not want to buy one, I just want the free one" and then actually get the free one? I have made that statement on more than one occassion, and have been refused each and every time. On such occasions, the merchant has always told me that I have to buy one in order to get the free one. Upon being refused the free item without making a financial transaction, I have informed the merchant of the definition of "free" to which the merchant persists with the response "You must buy one to get one free."

Am I stupid or what? To me, free is free, and does not have any cost requirement!

I am of the understanding that the word "bogus" means "false;  fraudulent; having a misleading appearance; counterfeit or fake; not genuine."

Given my uderstanding of BOGO and of BOGUS, I postulate that retailers who make BOGO offers are practicing, perpetuating and participating in a form of consumer fraud. Ergo, the appropriate governmental agencies who are charged with the responsibility of protecting citizens from consumer fraud should take legal action to force retailers to cease and desist from their false advertising.

BOGO is BOGUS.