Fox News’ Sean Hannity interviewed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about Hamas terrorism and the security of Israel.
From skinny dippers to people who have actual intercourse with nature, ecosexuality is a growing movement taking a new approach to combatting climate change.
If you happen to find yourself in Sydney this week, you have the unique opportunity to have sex with the earth. You just need to stop by the “ecosexual bathhouse,” which is currently part of the Syndey LiveWorks Festival of experimental art. The bathhouse is an interactive installation created by artists Loren Kronemyer and Ian Sinclair of Pony Express, who described the work to me as a “no-holds-barred extravaganza meant to dissolve the barriers between species as we descend into oblivion” as the result of our global environmental crisis. But they also see their piece as a part of a much larger ecosexual movement, which they say is gathering momentum around the world.
And they may be right. Jennifer Reed, a PhD candidate in sociology at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, is writing a dissertation on ecosexuality, and says that the number of people who identify as ecosexuals has increased markedly in the past two years. And Google search data confirms that interest in the term has spiked dramatically over the past year. We may look back on 2016 as the year ecosexuality hit the mainstream.
Ecosexuality is a term with wide-ranging definitions, which vary depending on who you ask.
According to Wikipedia, “Earth religion is a term used mostly in the context of neopaganism.”
I wish after reading McArthur’s column I could find a way to justify this renewal of barbarism, this neopaganism. But I can’t.
If this isn’t worshiping a false idol I don’t know what is.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of participants at the Ecosexual Bathhouse by the art group Pony Express. Photo by Matt Sav
“Having spent the day in D.C. on April 22 interviewing the marchers, it struck me about how this is first and foremost a march for endless government funding, ideology and in support of a no dissent policy. (Another new study gives plenty of reason to dissent: New Climate Study Calls EPA’s Labeling Of CO2 A Pollutant ‘Totally False’) The Trump administration can help make science great again by resisting these pay up and shut up demands for taxpayer research money.” See: Bloomberg News: Obama ‘stashed’ $77 billion in ‘climate money’ across agencies to elude budget cuts
Watch: Princeton Physicist Dr. Will Happer criticizes ‘March for Science’: ‘It is sort of a religious belief for them’ – Dr. Will Happer on Fox News: Asked about more government funded science? Happer: “We’ve had 8 years of very highly politicized so-called research on climate. It’s not what most of us would recognize as real scientific research. Something where the outcome was demanded before the funding was provided. We should tend to real environmental problems and fix them and stop chasing these phantom problems that are really just religious dogma.”
Pictures and reports about the ‘March for Science’
‘March for Science’: Politics Disguised as Science: When to Doubt a Scientific ‘Consensus’ – The early claims of 97% ‘consensus’: In 1992, former Vice President Al Gore reassured his listeners, “Only an insignificant fraction of scientists deny the global warming crisis. The time for debate is over. The science is settled.”
Climatologist Dr. Roger A. Pielke Sr: “If there was any doubt the “March on Science” is political – The march is explicitly a political movement” See full article
The March is over:
Prof. Roger Pielke Jr.: ‘The smartest people on the planet want to oppose Trump and the best they can come up with is a march in support of themselves?’
MARCH FOR SCIENCE UNDER ATTACK FOR LEFT-TILTING POLITICAL AGENDA – “It clearly has a partisan framing,” said Roger A. Pielke Sr., senior research scientist, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder. Mr. Pielke, who has been criticized by the climate-change movement for challenging the “consensus,” said he fears the event may erode the public’s trust in science by reinforcing the impression that research is being spun to advance political causes. “I feel this will hurt the reputation of scientists as honest brokers,” said Mr. Pielke in an email. “This march will make them (appropriately) seen as advocates for the liberal side of the Democratic Party. This is not healthy for science, and more broadly, in terms of how scientists engage with policymakers.”
The Anti-Science ‘March for Science’: ‘Soviet-style central planning of economy in name of ‘saving’ Mother Earth – Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr.: “If the climate science is “settled”, as claimed at the March, why argue for so much money for multidecadal climate prediction modeling?”
Physicist: ‘March For Science’ is deeply misguided, unethical – Trying to get money for left-wing activists & pretend it’s money for science – Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl on March For Science: “It’s a political event organized by extreme leftists whom I can’t respect and it tries to promote various pet causes of these extremists such as the affirmative action as well as junk science such as the climate hysteria to the status of science, and to get money for basically left-wing activists, although they want to pretend it’s the money for science.”
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano interviewing at the march
John Stossel: ‘Gore creatively misremembers his own movie’ & Climate march is ‘really marching for a left-wing religion’ – John Stossel: ‘Now Gore claims “the most criticized” part of the film was his assertion that the 9/11 memorial site would flood. Then, during Hurricane Sandy, it did! But Gore creatively misremembers his own movie. He had claimed the World Trade Center would flood because of a permanent 20-foot sea-level rise. Actual scientists called that nonsense. It would take hundreds of years for such a thing to possibly happen. But since the area flooded, briefly, Gore spins that as confirmation of his exaggerations.’
On March for Science in DC: ‘The alarmists claim they’re marching for “science,” but they’re really marching for a left-wing religion.’
It’s a march for “robust funding” (give us the money)
This Isn’t A ‘March For Science’ — This Is About Economic And Political Policy
CFACT’s David Rothbard at the March filming:
As you know, the first round of the French presidential election took place this past Sunday, April 23rd.
Emmanuel Macron (who is the direct heir of the incompetent and traitor and anti-French socialist president François Hollande) and the nationalist Marine Le Pen are qualified for the second round. But Marine Le Pen has almost no possibility to win and become the next French president.
Macron will most probably be the next French president. This Macron is a sort of white Obama, but more extremist, more anti-Western, more anti-Christian, more anti-Jewish, than Obama was!
Emmanuel Macron was called by and talked with Barack Obama after the election.
Macron is the horrible crossbreeding of Obama and Soros and Justin Trudeau.
Macron is an ultra-leftist who viscerally hates France and the French people. He has said many times that “there is no French culture”, that “he has never seen French art” (meaning that French art doesn’t exist), therefore he denies the very existence of the French people (because all people has his own culture)! And he has accused France of crimes against humanity in Algeria, when in fact it’s the Algerians who are guilty of crimes against humanity, because they reduced into slavery more than 1 million of our ancestors and slaughtered more than 1 million French people from 8th to 19th century!
Macron has said time and again that he supports mass immigration into France from Africa ! That millions of immigrants will continue to invade our European countries and that it’s a good thing! And he has praised the traitor to the German people Angela Merkel for letting 1 million illegal Muslim immigrants invade Germany in 2015, resulting in thousands of German women raped and numerous terrorist attacks!
Macron has said that he wants to create an “French-Algerian Youth Office” to increase the entry of Algerians into France, these Algerians being predominantly racist scums who insult and rape our wives and daughters, who attack and kill our parents and children, who rob, maim, kill, commit terror attack after terror attack. As a reminder, Muslims represent more than 70% of the prisoners in our prisons.
Macron has many Muslim extremists around him, one of them (Mohamed Saou) who refused to condemn the assassination of Charlie Hebdo’s journalists in January 2015!
Macron is very close to Marwan Muhammad, a fanatical Muslim extremist who was fired by the OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) for spreading anti-Western Muslim propaganda, who wants to suppress any critic of Islam, and who supports islamization, burkas, burkinis and shariah (Islamic) law in France!
Macron has said he plans to introduce “positive” discrimination, which is, as it has been proven in America, anti-White racism. And he plans to use this “positive” discrimination to hire Muslims in place of French people.
Macron will dramatically increase the Islamization of France, and will do everything he can to force us to submit to Islam, this ideology worse than nazism ! That’s why all the Muslim organizations in France have called today Muslims to “vote massively” for Macron.
Paris and France will become even more dangerous places than they are already. Jews and Christians and non-Muslims will be attacked more and more often, and forced to flee France!
This is a catastrophe!
The first round victory of Macron was made possible by a horrendous “coup d’Etat”, orchestrated by François Hollande and the socialist government, who fabricated fake accusations against François Fillon, the leader of the French right, and ordered leftist judges to prosecute Fillon in violation of the French laws and the French Constitution, and by leftist journalists (more than 90% of French journalists are ultra-leftists) who have spread lies and disinformation against Fillon day after day during months.
America shall not follow Europe’s path!
RELATED VIDEO: Marine Le Pen delivered a rousing speech to her enthusiastic supporters last night, declaring that it is time to “free the French people” from the destructive policies of open borders, open immigration and crushing EU regulations.
When you buy a new car, you get an indispensable document called an Owner’s Manual. Nobody ever throws the manual away while he owns the car. It’s far more important than the slip of paper you get with a new flashlight that tells you where to put the batteries; you could figure that out on your own. A car has a maze of electronic circuitry; lots of buttons, dials and periodic maintenance requirements; and numerous moving parts both visible and hidden. Many things could go wrong if you don’t get things right.
Citizenship in a free republic is similar. Historically, it’s a scarce and valuable commodity. The freedom it conveys is much sought after but most people in history never achieved it and most of those currently living never will. Some who have it will lose it through assault or neglect. If and when you’re blessed to possess it, you will discover that it won’t run on its own.
You must take charge. Maintenance, after all, requires an active maintainer. So it is that citizenship in a free republic requires an Owner’s Manual, and now for Americans at least, activist and philanthropist Helen Krieble has given us one.
Helen Krieble, formerly of Colorado and now a resident again of her home state of Connecticut, is president of the Vernon K. Krieble Foundation. She’s a lifelong promoter and benefactor of freedom-related causes from regulation to immigration. Her late father, Robert Krieble, co-founder of the Loctite Corporation and former vice chairman of the Heritage Foundation, was known for his role in supporting freedom movements within the old Soviet Empire.
Helen has tangled with intrusive governments herself right in her own backyard, battling regulators in Colorado whose nonsense forced her to close and sell her beloved Colorado Horse Park, an international equestrian and events center.
She knows that freedom is never automatic or guaranteed from one generation to the next. She also knows that defending it begins at the most local level, the individual.
Helen is the prime mover behind many effective projects over the years, including the impressive Leadership Program of the Rockies. Her latest is the Lens of Liberty Citizenship Initiative , “a series of projects and programs to educate Americans on what it means to be a United States citizen, and on the responsibilities that come with citizenship.”
It’s nothing like the nondescript mush you hear from groups that purposefully steer clear of any principled message—you know, the ones that go no deeper than tell you to vote (for anybody, so long as you vote), write your congressman, tour the capitol building and attend school board meetings. Everything Helen’s organization produces is aimed at getting Americans to see all issues through the “lens of liberty” and then equipping them to act on behalf of their vanishing freedoms.
The 50-page Your American Citizenship Owner’s Manual is one of the Lens of Liberty’s publications. It includes a “Parts List” and sections on “The Privileges of Ownership,” “Teaching Other Drivers,” “Maintenance Responsibilities,” “Operating the Controls,” “Roadside Emergencies” and even one on “Recalling Defective Parts.” It’s included in the free “Freedom Kit” you can request here.
Citizenship in a free republic, in Helen Krieble’s view, requires that we understand and appreciate these principles: equality before the law, unalienable individual rights, personal responsibility, the rule of law, free enterprise and private property, among others. Moreover, we must put our time and talents to work for them. We must speak truth to power and challenge unconstitutional or unwarranted assaults on our freedoms whether they come from the distant federal government or from the local zoning board. “Every citizen,” says Helen, “must hold government accountable for preserving our freedom, not taking it, and our home towns are great places to start.”
At FEE, we educate people (young ones especially) in pretty much the same ideals that Helen’s new effort does, so we are especially pleased to partner with the Lens of Liberty Citizenship Initiative. When I am asked, as I frequently am, “What can I do now that I’m sold on liberty?” I urge principled people to start a Bastiat Society chapter, sponsor students to a FEE seminar, get involved in media or politics or any number of other activities where their talents are best deployed.
Now to that list I proudly add Helen Krieble’s Lens of Liberty! You can start by learning more about the organization and by ordering your Freedom Kit today.
America is more than just a place—it is an ideal and a set of principles. In America, government exists for and with the consent of the people—a radical concept in the beginning that the founders knew would require informed and responsible citizens. American citizens who enjoy the privileges of a free society must play a role in keeping the nation’s ideals of freedom on course.
~ Helen Krieble, founder of the Lens of Liberty Citizenship Initiative.
Lawrence W. Reed is President of the Foundation for Economic Education and the author of the book Real Heroes: Inspiring True Stories of Courage, Character and Conviction. Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook.
It snowed last Thursday (April 20) in Colorado.
It’s not unusual for folks in the Centennial State to witness snow in April if the snowflakes are outside. But on this occasion, they appeared inside a university classroom, which, it turns out, is not unusual either.
Having been invited by the local chapter of the student organization, Turning Point USA, I arrived on the campus of the University of Colorado-Denver to deliver a lecture on “Lessons from Ancient Rome.” The subject was 2,500-year-old history with a sprinkling of observations about what we today might learn from it all. Not exactly a hot-button topic such as abortion, immigration, Trump, or the most recent season of “The Walking Dead.”
What I saw from a minority of radicalized students in the audience, however, was an appalling microcosm of the smug, arrogant, self-righteous, politically-correct, campus insanity that you see on TV with increasing frequency these days.
About a dozen of the students at last Thursday’s event interrupted my lecture repeatedly with lengthy diatribes. One held up a sign that read, “Bullshit!” They heckled me. When that failed, they accused me of racism. I was able to deal with the interruptions and conclude my speech, but that was due to a failure in the protesters’ organizing capabilities rather than any generosity in their intent. They exhibited far more “selfishness” than the conservatives and libertarians they think of as “selfish” and seek to silence. It certainly helped that the rest of the audience wanted me to speak, and enthusiastically applauded each time I put a protester in his place.
For me, next year will mark 50 years in the “liberty movement.” It was in 1968, a month shy of my 15th birthday and prompted by the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, that I participated in a public demonstration in Pittsburgh. So I know and appreciate the importance of protest. In the right places and at the proper times and for noble causes, it’s a healthy and necessary thing. In Mellon Square in downtown Pittsburgh that day forty-nine years ago, we protested the vicious deployment of tanks, guns and troops by a communist regime to crush the rights and freedoms of a neighboring country.
What the hooligans last Thursday at my lecture in Colorado were objecting to was a very different kind of invasion—a peaceful, voluntary offering of ideas they were unaware of, didn’t want to hear, and thought it was their right to prevent others from hearing. Their intent was to intimidate, to harass, to silence, to dominate. This is not conduct that a citadel of education should tolerate for an instant.
Interesting, isn’t it, that what some go to college for, others find “offensive.” As I watched the incident occur, I thought to myself, “I’m standing in a taxpayer-funded institution of supposedly ‘higher’ education, not a Khmer Rouge re-education camp, for crying out loud!”
The disruptions commenced a mere five minutes into my lecture on Roman history, before I had progressed much beyond about 300 B.C. So it was hardly anything I could have said that the disrupters truly found indecent. They had come voluntarily but were annoyed—deeply and personally aggrieved, it seemed—for no more reason than the speaker and the sponsoring organization possessed viewpoints they knew little about, didn’t understand, couldn’t articulate, and don’t like.
Far-left students derailing speakers with whom they disagree have been in the news a lot. Sometimes they’ve resorted to violence. Many times, the speech being protested was cancelled before it happened or protesters forcibly prevented the speaker from finishing his job. My encounter was small potatoes by comparison and fortunately, never descended into fisticuffs. And I did push back, and I did finish speaking.
When I taught college classes 40 years ago, I didn’t tolerate a sleeper or a ball cap, let alone a bad-mannered brat with no respect for the rights of his fellow students. So I wasn’t about to let these “progressive” brownshirts shut me up.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald explained where this tawdry deportment is coming from:
Campus intolerance is at root not a psychological phenomenon but an ideological one. At its center is a worldview that sees Western culture as endemically racist and sexist. The overriding goal of the educational establishment is to teach young people within the ever-growing list of official victim classifications to view themselves as existentially oppressed. One outcome of that teaching is the forceful silencing of contrarian speech…The silencing of speech is a massive problem, but it is a symptom of an even more profound distortion of reality.
Like Mac Donald, I doubt that many of the anti-free speech bullies in today’s colleges and universities enter those institutions with the intent to shut people up. It’s not typically their parents who teach them intolerance, it’s a handful of their professors—the very professors their parents are bankrolling with their hard-earned tax and tuition dollars. They are besmirching the entire profession, which neither the serious students who want to learn or the good professors who want to teach deserve.
I’m guessing that UC-Denver’s course on “Problematizing Whiteness: Educating for Racial Justice” is not helping matters.
My FEE colleague Jeffrey Tucker recently shed light on the influence of Herbert Marcuse, a key Marxist intellectual from whom the troublemakers draw inspiration. In a similar vein, I wrote four years ago about how ugly ideas permeating British academia contributed to ugly behavior in the streets in the wake of Margaret Thatcher’s death in 2013.
Here are some highlights of the exchange at the University of Colorado-Denver last week:
A few minutes into my lecture, a student raised his hand and started speaking. I politely said, “Please let me get through my lecture and then we’ll have a Q & A period.” He muttered something that only those around him could hear, but I doubt it was “Thank you.”
A minute or two later, I mentioned that ancient Roman road-building was so massive that nothing would compare in magnitude until the 20th Century. One of the snowflakes found that offensive.
“Not true! The Mayans built roads too!” that same student rudely interjected from the back of the room.
“Yes, the Mayans built roads too, but nothing on the scale of the Romans,” I responded.
“Not true!” he insisted. “We have professors who have researched this!”
Well, here are the cold, hard facts: Roman road mileage totaled 250,000. By contrast, the most extensive road system in pre-Columbian South America was constructed by the Incas, not the Mayans, and it amounted to a mere 25,000 miles. Mayan civilization (everything, not just the roads) covered about 125,000 square miles at its height, compared to Rome’s 2.5 million square miles. You could fit all of the Mayan Empire into just half of the Roman province of Egypt. So the student who felt so put upon and so sure of himself that he had to interrupt the speaker didn’t actually have a clue of what he was babbling about.
There’s another point worth making here. Why do you suppose the student was so indignant that I didn’t give inflated road-building credit to the Mayans in a lecture on Rome? Answer: Because Romans were white Europeans and in the official Newspeak of far-Left academia, white Europeans are barely a notch above persona non grata. Mayans, on the other hand, were “indigenous, native peoples” who must be elevated and celebrated.
Never mind that the state religion of the Mayan Empire incorporated idol worship, human sacrifice, hallucinogenic rituals and decapitations. Let’s not talk about the pandemic internecine warfare of the Mayan Empire, or its severe environmental degradation and enslavement of subjugated peoples, either. That would not be politically correct.
Again, I asked that I be allowed to make my presentation and take questions afterwards. Mumblings and a few brief outbursts persisted but I mostly ignored them.
Fifteen or so minutes later, another student raised his voice from the back row, “You haven’t allowed any questions yet!”
I replied, “I already said I would take questions when the lecture is over, and I promise I’ll call on you first.” He insisted on speaking then and there, whereupon one of the Turning Point students asked him to leave the room. He did, but returned moments later.
In the video clip above, you can observe a part of this student’s Second Coming. As promised, I called on him during the Q & A. Do you suppose his question was about Roman history? Of course not. Here, slightly abbreviated, is how it unfolded:
Student: “You wouldn’t take my question when I wanted to ask it. Why should I listen to anything you say if you won’t listen to what I say? Why should I bother?”
Me: “What am I doing right now but listening to you?” A few incoherent mumblings in response, which prompted me to then assert, “This has happened before on some campuses and I’m guessing that you just can’t stand the fact that somebody might have a viewpoint different from yours.” Vigorous applause followed from the great majority of the audience, boos and catcalls from the minority.
The video clip, unfortunately, doesn’t quite capture a subsequent moment that I regard as the high point of the whole affair. I raised my voice to convey an important observation to the disrupter: “You have a character problem!” I doubt he understood that I was informing him that his rude intolerance was not only indefensible, it was a manifestation of something wrong inside, something flawed about his personal choices and conduct.
“Now you’re calling me an idiot!” he exclaimed, to which I instantly shot back, “I did NOT say you were an idiot. I said you have a character problem!”
That’s when some shouting and epithets began to pour forth from the know-it-all snowflakes: “You’re a racist! “Bullshit!” Nazi!” And a few F-bombs as well, the first of several aimed at me both during the event and while I was walking to my car. It was amazing how swiftly and seamlessly these wise guys toggled between “offended“ and “offensive”!
And oh, the sanctimony was so thick you could cut it with a knife! The slogans that rolled off those immature tongues were what Anthony Esolen refers to in his superb book, “Out of the Ashes: Rebuilding American Culture” as “cant”—the insincere or hypocritical use of pious language to cover up for one’s ignorance while making a pretense to moral superiority. In Esolen’s words,
You have to be educated into cant; it is a kind of stupidity that surpasses the capacity of unaided Nature to confer….
People are especially prone to cant when they describe their feelings in public. When someone says, “I am offended by that remark,” the first thing you must think, in our time, is that the remark has broken upon the person’s day like the bright sun through a week of rain and gloom. An owl is not offended by the little field mouse; it is just what the owl is on the lookout for. If the offended person loses any sleep that night, it will not be for sorrow, but for delightful dreams of vengeance and public displays of virtue. The cannibal rolls up his sleeves and whets the knife. For truly tolerant people are hard to offend. They do not seek occasion to bring others into ill repute. They do not put the worst construction on someone else’s words or deeds.
Disturbingly, this lowering of the most basic standards of interpersonal communication makes a mockery of “higher” education in this troubled age of ours.
Blake Scott from Littleton, Colorado was there last Thursday evening (and provided the video clip). In his words, “I was shocked at how the students attacked Mr. Reed with unwarranted claims. Rather than derailing from his speech that he was invited to give, he respectfully took the moral high ground. Hecklers accused him of racism during the question and answer session, claiming he selectively picked students for questions by racial profile, without any evidence whatever. The students constantly attempted to disrupt the speech but he calmly rebutted their outbursts.”
Bradley Beck of Erie, Colorado, another eyewitness, says, “The whole time, Mr. Reed smiled and stayed professional, calm and in charge.”
So the good news is that this time, the bad guys didn’t get away with it.
The increasing frenzy of the campus Left may be an indication that, in the words of Robert Tracinski in “The Federalist,” we are approaching “peak leftism.” We should certainly hope Tracinski is right.
Writing in The Washington Post on April 20 (the same day as my Colorado speech, coincidentally), Catherine Rampell advised, “Don’t blame college students for their hostility to free expression. The fault ultimately lies with cowardly school administrations, who so often cave to student demands for censorship.” (In that same article, she recounted a crazy episode at American University in Washington. It’s worth your attention. Also, check out the headlines to commentary at The College Fix and you’ll get the drift.)
Rampell makes a good point. Cowardly school administrators are indeed partly at fault, and not just because they coddle reprehensible student conduct. When they hire barbarians to teach in their classrooms and collaborate with them to blackball serious scholars of a different viewpoint, they are accomplices in the degradation of education and the decay of civilization.
But I don’t let the students off the hook. They are young adults. Even if they act like toddlers in a temper tantrum, nothing will nip this stuff in the bud quicker than treating them as adults. That means one fair warning before a second offense. Then you get expelled and perhaps fined and maybe even a night or two in the slammer, if I had my druthers. Unlike the barbarian Left, I take freedom of speech seriously, and assaults on it even more seriously. Let’s stand up to these bullies. Civilization depends on it.
The students from the UC-Denver Turning Point chapter suffer through intimidation tactics from the campus Left all the time, as do courageous students from TPUSA chapters elsewhere, along with students in similar organizations like Young Americans for Liberty, Students for Liberty, Young Americans for Freedom, and the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. At FEE, we are proud to work with them, provide literature and speakers and moral support, and we applaud their efforts to resist the barbarians in their midst. If anything, the incident last week only emboldens us to assist them all the more.
Lawrence W. Reed is President of the Foundation for Economic Education and the author of the book Real Heroes: Inspiring True Stories of Courage, Character and Conviction. Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook.
RELATED ARTICLE: The Shadowy Extremist Group Behind the Anti-Trump Riots | LifeZette
Hardly surprising. Another felony on the enemedia’s rap sheet of violating the public trust and abusing power. The more the media deceives and dissembles, the more the American people move away from traditional news outlets and alter their news consumption habits. It’s why the left is working so furiously to shut down sites like mine. The left always shuts down free speech. It is essential to achieving their totalitarian goals.
WASH POST POLL HIDES: TRUMP STILL BEATS CLINTON, 43%-40%
by Paul Bedard | Washington Examiner, April 23, 2017:
A NEW WASHINGTON POST POLL THAT DECLARES PRESIDENT TRUMP AS “THE LEAST POPULAR PRESIDENT IN MODERN TIMES,” WAITS UNTIL THE SECOND TO LAST PARAGRAPH TO REVEAL ANOTHER TIDBIT: HE’D STILL BEAT HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON IF THE ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY AND IN THE POPULAR VOTE, NOT JUST ELECTORAL COLLEGE.
The poll found that Trump’s polls continue to be upside down, with a 42 percent approval and 53 percent disapproval.
Also unchanged: His base still likes him.
It’s not until the second to last paragraph of the long story that it’s shown Clinton would still lose to the president, despite the high disapproval ratings and problems with his first 100 days detailed by the paper. It reads:
The new survey finds 46 percent saying they voted for Clinton and 43 percent for Trump, similar to her two-point national vote margin. Asked how they would vote if the election were held today, 43 say they would support Trump and 40 percent say Clinton.
ABC’s Jonathan Karl tweeted, “According to the ABC/WP poll, among 2016 voters, @realDonaldTrump would beat Hillary Clinton in a rematch — in the popular vote, no less.”
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report.
EDITORS NOTE: Marine Le Pen delivered a rousing speech to her enthusiastic supporters last night, declaring that it is time to “free the French people” from the destructive policies of open borders, open immigration and crushing EU regulations.
The first round of the 2017 French presidential election was held on 23 April 2017. As no candidate won a majority, a run-off election between the top two candidates Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen will be held on 7 May 2017.
I am sorry to see Fillon miss his shot.
Emmanuel Macron is a former banker (Banque Rothschild) who served as François Hollande’s Minister of the Economy.
“The callow 38 year-old Emmanuel Macron, generally assumed to make it past the first round (April 23) to confront and defeat Marine Le Pen in the second round (May 7), is running on a vacuous Somewhat Right Somewhat Left platform. How did the fabulously unpopular François Hollande manage to place his alter ego in pole position while standing aside in studied absence as the cream of the Socialist party boards Macron’s cruise ship? ID: En Marche”
“His government will invest in ecology and all that’s renewable, offer culture to the rich & poor, recycle the jobless with modern skills, solve conflict with love not hate, welcome immigration with hospitality not rejection of the Other. Cut & paste plagiarizer, Macron takes bits & pieces of Fillon’s security measures…and then claims his rival doesn’t have a program.
(CNN)France’s far-right leader Marine Le Pen will face a relative novice, the independent centrist Emmanuel Macron, in the final round of the country’s presidential election, early projections suggest.
The result, if confirmed, is a comprehensive rejection of traditional French politics. Neither candidate hails from the establishment parties that have dominated France for decades.
BFMTV and Elabe suggest scandal-hit conservative François Fillon and far-left wildcard Jean-Luc Mélenchon won 19.9% and 19.3% of the vote respectively, and have been knocked out of the closely-fought race.
Speaking to supporters in Henin-Beaumont, anti-immigration, anti-European Union candidate Le Pen hailed the result: “It is time to free French people from arrogant elites … I am the people’s candidate.”
“The French people must seize this opportunity, because the enormous challenge of this election is the wild globalization that puts our civilization at risk,” Le Pen said.
“Either we continue to disintegrate without any borders, without any controls, unfair international competition, mass immigration and the free circulation of terrorists, or you choose France with borders,” she added.
French presidential candidate for the En Marche! movement Emmanuel Macron shakes hands with supporters after casting his vote in Le Touquet.
A huge cheer went up at Macron’s campaign headquarters as news of the results came through. “France’s political map is tonight redrawn,” said CNN’s Melissa Bell, who was at the scene.
“It’s a political earthquake in this country and in Europe,” veteran journalist Christine Ockrent told CNN. “Macron’s is a remarkable achievement, because he represents optimism.”
Sunday’s first round contest was held under tight security after a terror attack in Paris Thursday night disrupted the final day of campaigning Friday.
By 5 p.m. local time (11 a.m. ET) 69.42% of France’s 47 million registered voters had cast their ballots, according to the Interior Ministry — a marginally lower turnout than at the same point in 2012.
With 11 names on the ballot, no one candidate had been expected to win an outright majority; instead the top two candidates will face a second and final ballot on May 7.
Who is Marine Le Pen? 01:47
The incumbent President, socialist François Hollande, whose approval ratings have remained in the doldrums for several years, made the unusual decision not to run for a second term.
As the results became clear, French politicians and several of the defeated candidates appeared to throw their support behind Macron — or to speak out against Le Pen.
Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve tweeted an appeal to all voters to back Macron in the second round, “to combat the National Front’s disastrous project to take France backwards and to divide the French people.”
The Socialist Party’s candidate, Benoît Hamon secured just 6.3% of the vote, according to BFMTV-Elabe estimates.
Speaking at his campaign headquarters, Hamon said he took full responsibility for the poor result, and urged his supporters to vote for Macron to defeat Le Pen in the second round, “even if he is not left-wing.”
Fillon, the mainstream Republican candidate, was an early favorite for the presidency, but his campaign stumbled because of a scandal over claims he paid his wife and children for work they did not do. He denies any wrongdoing.
He told his supporters, “we have to choose what is preferable for our country, and I am not going to rejoice. Abstention is not in my genes, especially when an extremist party is close to power.”
“The party created by Jean-Marie Le Pen has a history known for its violence and intolerance,” Fillon said. “Its economic and social program will lead our country to failure … I promise you, extremism can only bring unhappiness and division to France.”
Independent centrist Macron, 39, a former banker, has never held elected office, though he served as economy minister under Prime Minister Manuel Valls.
But he attracted support from left and right with promises to boost the economy and improve security. His party, “En Marche!” which was only created in September, now has more than 200,000 members and his meetings have attracted vast crowds.
Far-right National Front leader Le Pen, 48, is best known for her anti-immigration rhetoric; she told supporters her first move as president would be to impose a temporary ban on legal immigration to France. She has also vowed to take France out of the EU.
Far-left firebrand Mélenchon has so far refused to concede defeat, insisting it is too early to accept the results.
“We do not recognize the score announced on the basis of opinion polls,” he wrote on Facebook. “The results of the larger towns and cities are not yet known,” he added, calling for “restraint” and urging commentators to “be cautious.”
Mélenchon‘s popularity surged in the final weeks of the race, following impressive performances in the candidates’ television debates.
CNN’s James Masters, Saskya Vandoorne, Laura Smith-Spark contributed to this report.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Geller Report.
10:44 AM: I feel like my country, the country I’ve lived in for over 44 years, is a patient in intensive care. Tubes and catheters, control panels, IT graphs, pulsing images, flashing lights. We’re waiting with sinking hearts for the specialist to come in and interpret the lab results. Something ineluctable is about to be revealed. But what?
I’m going to the outdoor market. When I get back, maybe I’ll run the vacuum cleaner. To keep my mind fresh. Plans for my visit to Israel in May are shaping up. Then 2 weeks in June in the US. A week in the South of France after that. Life goes on. I’ll walk around and take a look at the polling places. All the candidate posters have been defaced by anarchists and other heavy metal destroy protestors.
3 PM: The hawk is out, a merciless cold wind is slamming our hopes for springtime. The sun is hot and bright. It’s not enough. Anarchists and other looking-for-a-fight protesters at yesterday’s Social 1st Round left their filthy messages all up and down boulevard Beaumarchais. Last night they threw bottles and other hard edged objects at the police. Their graffiti looks like blood, talk about broad brush, they obscure whatever they touch. WAR ON THE RICH here POLICE ASSASSINS there. Can’t someone get them out of our face, out of our hair, out of the national conversation? Their causes are rotten. They grab at anything as an excuse for slopping signs and breaking windows, attacking the police and whatever else they get their hands on.
I’m on edge. Up to now, everything was possible, you grasped it with your rational mind. Now it is happening. People are voting. The verdict will soon fall.
I’m sharply impatient and here they come again with Marine Le Pen. A friend tells me about an article in the Jerusalem Post, CNN is in her stomping grounds at Bénin-Haumont and President Trump thinks she’s the best on frontiers and all that sovereignty, and the only one that’s dealing with that pesky problem. C’mon guys, either find out what’s really happening here or comment on another poker game. You want Marine le Pen for president? Help yourself. But leave us out of it
Oh they’re so sure she’ll get to the 2nd round. I just hope they’re wrong. I’m so tired of her misrepresentation.
I have to leave for the concert.
8:17 PM: The concert lasted longer than I expected. My friend Isaac Bensimhon brought to life Jean Ferhat and it brought tears to my eyes, the beauty of song, the commitment to social justice, the innocence (he was a Communist fellow traveler) and the reality of the Soviet Union. Tears for the idealism of our youth, with nothing but hollow bushel barrels to harvest their hopes.
Authorities fear an outbreak of violence after the election results are announced.
A helicopter turns in the cold skies.
I meant to write hour by hour but I kept bumping into friends and neighbors, heard fantastic theories of what was about to happen.
I sensed it, didn’t I? The smug pollsters. Oh my friend, our pollsters are not like your pollsters. Ours are French sharpshooters. Haven’t they been telling us for weeks and months that it would be Le Pen and Macron? Didn’t they make fun of us for seeking other sources that would comfort are vain hopes.
OK, it’s Macron and le Pen. A few minutes ago Fillon squeezed a few centimeter ahead of Mélenchon. Merci, c’est gentil.
Le Pen and Macron. Are you happy, foreign media and friends from everywhere that have been promising Marine would make it to the 2nd round? And win. Forgive me, I had a higher evaluation of French citizens.
Excuse me, for the moment I’ve lost interest in this story.
Now I have to go and endure their victory speeches.
Merci, François Hollande, you realized the dream of the Left: run against the Front National instead of the parliamentary Right. And win.
What a loss!
Tapper is simply pointing out the blazingly obvious (and despite his preening here, he was little better). The press is no longer the press. It is just a propaganda arm for the far left and the Democrat Party. No sane person should trust what CNN or the New York Times or the rest of them say. You want news? Come to the Geller Report.
“Jake Tapper: Press Was ‘Very Friendly’ to Obama, Many Drank ‘The Kool-Aid,’” by Alex Griswold, Washington Free Beacon, April 20, 2017:
CNN host Jake Tapper accused the mainstream media of being too friendly with former President Barack Obama during his administration.
In a candid interview with GQ published Tuesday, Tapper acknowledged that after his tough interviews of administration figures like Kellyanne Conway, he picked up a following from many critics of President Donald Trump.
“It’s nice to be recognized, but I also know that a lot of the people who are happy with me now are not going to be happy with me in four to eight years,” he predicted.
Tapper said that he was just as tough on Obama, and earned his share of grief for it at the time.
“A lot of people sending me nice tweets today were cursing me when I was asking questions about Benghazi in 2012,” he said.
“President Obama was not friendly to the press, but the press was very friendly to President Obama,” Tapper told GQ. “I mean, President Obama did not like me, and I understand why. I was a pain in his ass and I didn’t drink the Kool-Aid, and, you know, a lot of other people did.”
Tapper has made similar indictments before, saying that the mainstream media had a “cultural bias” that was more complicated that just liberal bias….
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Geller Report.
Treason in the classroom.
These are the real-life villains teaching our children, brainwashing and inculcating them into the army of gossestepping leftist zombies. I have one word for Americans — Homeschool.
If that’s not an option, get active. Get on school boards, fight!
Sherman Junior High School
Principal: Matt Riggs
9846 Coal River Rd, Seth, WV 25181
Phone: (304) 837-3694
How sure are these totalitarian soldiers? The teacher Ms. Judy said she doesn’t try to push her liberalism on others, but asserted that the children who saw her patch on Thursday were “like-minded.”
WEST VIRGINIA MIDDLE SCHOOL TEACHER PHOTOGRAPHED WEARING ‘TUCK FRUMP’ SHIRT IN CLASS
By Jessica Chasmar – The Washington Times – Wednesday, April 19, 2017
A West Virginia middle school teacher is under fire after she was photographed by a student in class wearing a jacket with the words, “Tuck Frump,” emblazoned on the back.
Cheryl Judy, an art teacher for Sherman Junior and Senior high schools in Boone County, told the Charleston Gazette-Mail that the profane anti-President Trump message was written on a patch that she later attached to her jacket while in class Thursday afternoon.
Ms. Judy said she was planning on wearing the patch to a school board meeting later that evening, so she briefly tried it on in class to make sure it was on straight. She said that “without thinking,” she then allowed a student to take a picture of the patch, which the student shared on Snapchat.
The picture quickly exploded on social media, and now some parents are calling for Ms. Judy’s resignation.
Superintendent Jeff Huffman said he can’t comment specifically on Ms. Judy’s case but vowed to investigate once spring break concludes this week.
“We expect professionalism with both conduct and appearance,” Mr. Huffman told WSAZ. “It seems to have caused a great amount of concern from around the area and around the nation, as we’ve received multiple phone calls today.”
Ms. Judy said she’s been teaching in Boone County for more than 13 years and is the secretary for the local chapter of the American Federation of Teachers labor union. She said she doesn’t try to push her liberalism on others but asserted that the children who saw her patch on Thursday were “like-minded.”
“We had discussed this kind of stuff before,” Ms. Judy told WSAZ. “They were not offended by it. It doesn’t really have anything inappropriate on it unless you read it the wrong way.”
“I don’t want to lose my job. I want to teach my students, but if I have to, I have to. It’s just a shame that students are going to be losing someone they care about and really cares about them, each and every one of them,” she told the Gazette-Mail.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Geller Report.
In 1964, when Malcolm X noticed that the then Negro leadership was working and planning an August 28th, Civil Rights March on D.C., with the Democrat White House of Lyndon Johnson, Bobby Kennedy, and the whole Democrat Party, as blacks peoples’ former chattel slave masters for 245 years; and the time, 99 years of Black Codes and Jim Crowism; the very cause for the civil rights movement, Malcolm X, admonished to them the following:
That black people was having the “wool pulled over their eyes”, hoodwinked, run-a-muck, bamboozled.
Now, 53 years later, alarmingly, he has been proven right.
Didn’t Malcolm X try to fore warn today’s progressive black Democrats—that the Democrats are not what they appear to be?
Malcolm X on the Democrats in America:
How are citizens supposed to detect fake news when the real news is so bizarre? How did Karim Cheurfi, born 31 December 1977 à Livry-Gargan (Seine-St. Denis outskirts of Paris) achieve his lifetime dream of killing a policeman despite the “vigilance” of the courts and law enforcement? How did he manage to do it on the Champs Elysées smack in the middle of the final all- candidate show of a problematical presidential campaign? How could this emblematic attack not influence the results of the first-round vote on April 23rd?
The final 11-candidate show
Because several of the leading candidates refused to participate in a last-minute debate, France 2 organized an 11-piece candidate show on the 21st of April. Expecting a routine replay of all that had gone before, bottom-heavy with the obligatory presence of all 11 candidates, I faced up to my self-imposed obligation to miss nothing, follow everything, dig everywhere, and think uninterruptedly.
In fact, it was more interesting than the “debates” that channel candidates into one-minute statements on contrived questions. In the close up 15-minute segments with each candidate in turn, hosts David Pujadas and Lea Salomé were less intrusive, the candidates were more expansive, and….one hour into the broadcast, Pujadas announced the “terrorist attack” on the Champs Elysées. Yes, from the first flash, authorities labeled the attack with the code word terrorist meaning jihad. From that point on, candidates integrated into their 15-minute slot a spontaneous reaction to the breaking news. I reported details as they emerged in updates to Part 3 of this series.
As the broadcast came to an end, all 11 candidates lined up in the studio and gave 2-minute closing statements. With the exception of Marine Le Pen and François Fillon, they were incapable of integrating the sudden intervention of harsh reality. After a brief expression of condolence for the family of the slain policeman and wishes for the prompt recovery of his wounded colleagues, they each delivered the vote-for-me speech they had prepared in advance. Le Pen, Fillon, and Macron announced cancellation of events scheduled for the following day, Friday, the last day of the campaign.
Special Edition (= Breaking News)
Midnight. Switch to the Champs Elysées, thick with police vans and flashing blue lights, reminding me of the scene on bd. Beaumarchais on the fateful night of November 13, 2015. As if the central nervous system of Paris were emitting an alert of immediate massive danger. Details emerged, some confirmed others corrected the following day. A policeman died instantly, shot in the head as he sat at the wheel of his van. Another critically wounded, a third less seriously hit. The assailant shot dead before he could kill anyone else. Already identified, his ID is in the Audi he drove up to his private little killing field. For the purposes of the investigation, his name would not yet be released. Daesh took claim for the attack but something doesn’t fit, they identify the soldier as Belgian. Is there another one on the way?
The previous arrest of two jihad hopefuls ready to strike in Marseille did not get the attention it deserved. This studied avoidance is a familiar practice of French media. We know the reasoning: uh-oh terrorist attack, might be to the advantage of Le Pen and Fillon and disadvantage peace & love Macron, so let’s not talk about it. Kamil Cheurfi’s exploit could not be ignored. Especially as details of the determined cop killer’s CV rolled out. He spent 14 of the past 16 years in jail. It started in 2001 when the stolen car he was driving collided with a vehicle driven by a rookie policeman and his brother. Cheurfi broke and ran, the two men chased him down and when they got close, he fired, wounding both of them seriously in the chest. While in detention for this crime he tricked a gendarme into entering his cell, grabbed his gun, and shot at him. All three of these victims survived. In 2008 he was charged with assaulting a prison guard and attacking a cellmate in 2009. Authorities recently received an alert from an acquaintance of Cheurfi: he said he wants to kill policemen because they ruined his life. Because they didn’t let him get away with the stolen car? Drawing him into a vicious circle?
Friday morning, Marine Le Pen and François Fillon made statements from their respective headquarters. Le Pen was as usual emotional, bombastic, long-winded and all over the place. She solemnly enjoined the government to take immediate measures to seal the frontiers, stop all immigration, deport bi-national terror risks, close radical mosques, a whole program of things it never did and can’t do now, two weeks before vacating the premises. She accused the government of doing nothing and claimed she could have done everything. Last night’s shooting, the Mohamed Merah massacre, and everything in between would never have happened if she were president. After spending most of her campaign touting ridiculous retrograde isolationist protectionism, she splattered her fire at Islam.
Shortly after Le Pen’s speech, François Fillon spoke briefly, soberly, and to the point, rightfully reminding voters that he has been warning about Islamic totalitarianism for years, published a book on the subject as he entered the primary campaign, gave it a prominent role in his program and campaign, and will combat it with an iron fist as president. He emphasized that we must be armed politically, militarily, and ideologically; the aim of this totalitarian movement is to destroy our civilization. He outlined measures that will be taken: control our frontiers, maintain the state of emergency, reinforce the police and military, improve intelligence services, tighten the judicial response to security risks, increase prison capacity, and form a strong coalition to defeat Daesh abroad. Curiously, he includes Iran in this coalition. When he is president, I hope he will give another thought to that one.
The same polls that almost kicked François Fillon into 5th position credited him with 30% the first week after he won his party’s nomination. The same journalists and commentators that spent two months rubbing his nose in scandals that wouldn’t have caused a ripple 2 years ago, wondered how the terrorism issue had managed to slip out of the campaign only to enter with a bang on the Champs Elysées at the eleventh hour. In fact, every time Fillon had tried to talk about The Issue, they pulled him back to The Scandals. If François Fillon is really polling at 20% someone has to explain where the other 10% of voter intention went. To Marine Le Pen? Nothing can be excluded, but it would be so irrational. No one who is truly on the Right could swallow her Mélenchon-friendly economic program. No one who understands what it means to use political power could believe that Marine Le Pen would be capable of leading a modern nation through international mine fields.
Did the Center-Right inch over to Emmanuel Macron? He intervened at 12:45 with a stiff wooden declaration, so carefully calculated it sounded like it was concocted with social media tools-key words, emotion stickers, reassurance with a capital R. First, he promised to create a task force (in English in the text), and then went into a riff of I’ll be relentless in the DEFENSE of your SECURITY, I’ll PROTECT you, don’t let
FEAR influence your choice, I will bring UNITY with my PROGRESSIVE project, I will transform our society by CULTURE and EDUCATION. He managed to pronounce the words “radical Islam” once without choking. And he got in a swipe at “the one who” (Sarkozy) weakened our intelligence gathering services.
This was followed by an astounding faux pas on the part of the outgoing prime minister. His intervention was so shocking that it produced uninhibited reactions from journalists and invited guests. Whatever their personal preferences, they were simply astonished that Hollande would stoop so low as to send his PM onto the battlefield to shore up the wavering wunderkind Macron. A righteously indignant Cazeneuve denounced the indecency of Marine Le Pen and François Fillon trying to make political hay of a tragic incident on the Champs Elysées.
It is these terrible low moments that should make us grateful for our albeit imperfect democracies: In a dictatorship the prime minister would have sent goons to arrest the two unwanted candidates. Or have them shot then and there.
The short unhappy life of Karim Cheurfi
As is his wont, Paris prosecutor François Molins began his statement to the press Friday afternoon on a philosophical note: this tragic event teaches us humility. Understood as- one attempt foiled, one that slipped through the armor. Then he recited like a Zen monk at a funeral the verified facts of the case. The weapons found in a sports bag in the trunk of the car, including a koran. The weapons found in the killer’s lodgings, plus the IT material, plus a prayer rug and koran. (Of course acquaintances said he was not religious, just a loner). His various crimes and convictions. He spent 14 of the past 16 years in prison. Four convictions. Shooting at the rookie policeman in 2001, shooting at the gendarme, attacking his cellmate and, recently, breaking and entering, theft, disorderly conduct… The math is a bit complicated. Apparently released several years before the end of the first 15-year sentence, sentenced to 2 years of prison and 2 years suspended sentence for the latest crime, he was under surveillance while preparing to finally kill policemen.
Maître Jean-Laurent Panier, the lawyer who defended him in the last case, doesn’t think his client was religious or radicalized; his problem is psychological. He was a loner. His family tried to help but didn’t succeed. Cheurfi’s mother, born in Algeria, is divorced from his father and from her second husband, a “Frenchman.” The lawyer complains that his client didn’t get proper psychiatric treatment while on parole. Maître Panier happened to be on the Champs Elysées Thursday night, not far from N° 102 where Xavier Jugelé the murdered policeman was stationed to protect the Turkish tourist association. Yes, the lawyer had given it a thought-he might have been collateral damage in the shooting. I don’t know if he gave it a thought that Xavier Jugelé might be still alive if he hadn’t got his client off with a suspended sentence.
Furious grieving law enforcement
Law enforcement is fed up. State of emergency, Nuit Debout, weekly demonstrations against the el Khomri labor reform, targeted by violent anarchists, jihadists, union radicals and misguided kids. Thousands of policemen injured, several almost burned alive, a police couple savagely slaughtered, and now this…
Kamil Cheurfi was briefly detained in February after authorities were alerted to his plans to kill policemen in revenge for what France was doing in Syria. He was reportedly contacting jihadists and trying to procure weapons. His lodgings were searched (he lived in a sort of add-on to his mother’s home), some IT material was confiscated, his phone was tapped, he was watched. In the absence of any sign of radicalization, he was released. Though he had spent a month in Algeria from mid-January to mid-February without informing the surveillance officer, he was not sent back to prison.
Dominique Riset of BFM TV read passages from the police report. I don’t think he invented it! Asked to explain why he had purchased-via Amazon of course-two hunting knives, a go-pro camera, and a fencing mask, Cheurfi said the knives were to cut fish and the mask was for a carnival disguise. Further, the report states that the ex-convict did say he wanted to kill policemen but did not target any specific policeman by name. There was no evidence whatsoever of any psychiatric problem. The trip to Algeria? He went there to get married. N.B. Mohamed Merah used the same excuse for his extended visits to jihad territory in the Middle East. Nevertheless a new investigation was initiated on March 3rd for “self-radicalization.” Nevertheless, he was able to procure weapons and turn the Champs Elysées into one more battleground.
The ineluctable reality of the pollsters
Pollsters, journalists, and commentators spent the day speculating on the eventual influence on voters of the last-minute terrorist attack. They more or less agreed that it might cause a very slight shift here and there, but nothing dramatic. No upset. Pollsters seem to be more sure of themselves than ever. Almost smug. Whatever you think, ladies and gentlemen, we know what will be on the menu Sunday night. You might be trembling with suspense, but we’re endowed with the scientific tools of political fortune telling. You had a bash at the outdoor snack & drink with Jean-Luc (Mélenchon) and his Podemos compadre on Friday when the bigshot candidates were cowering in their headquarters but we know your guy is not going to make it to the 2nd round. You think, monsieur ‘dame, that François Fillon, having overcome the handicap of Penelopegate and all the etcetera, will ride to victory on the white stallion of his decades of political experience, enjoy your pipe dreams. Sunday night it’s going to be Macron and Le Pen. You can throw your big data analysis in the trash file.
Social 1st round
The CGT (Communist labor union) and associates are helping themselves to a “social 1 round” this Saturday, the day before voters go to the polls. Apparently the government authorized the demonstration at Place de la République, despite the state of emergency, despite the fact that law enforcement is stretched thin, despite the risk of violence and vandalism by anarchist fringe elements. They’re in the streets with sound systems and slogans, determined “to impose their demands” on candidates and voters combined.
Last week, a modest demonstration by Kabyles yearning for independence went unnoticed. We’re fed up, they told me, with that repressive Algerian government. I asked if they get support from any political forces in France. Nothing, they replied. And we are good citizens. We integrate, we support the nation, we obey the law and even if we’re Muslim we aren’t extremists We live and let live. The Kabyle increasingly insist on the distinction between themselves and Algerians
Citing immigration irregularities and numerous lies on various applications the U.S. government has revoked the citizenship of a suspected al Qaeda terrorist. This is excellent news and should be done with every Muslim who has been convicted of jihad terror activity here or abroad.
A confessed al-Qaida operative who recruited other naturalized U.S. citizens to commit attacks and helped Egyptian terrorists avoid detection by running a communications hub from his northern California home has been stripped of U.S. citizenship by a federal district judge in Washington, D.C.
A former Silicon Valley car salesman, al Dahab lived in California for 12 years. He married in the U.S. three times and fathered five children, according to court records and a 2001 news report. His naturalization application was approved in December 1996, and he became a U.S. citizen in February 1997, according to court records.
Convicted of terrorism-related crimes in Egypt, al Dahab later confessed to his membership of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and that he had traveled to a terrorist training camp near Jalalabad, Afghanistan. There he received military-style training and in turn, taught foreign fighters how to hang glide as part of a plot to free imprisoned members of the terrorist group.
While in the United States, al Dahab told investigators, he recruited 10 Muslim Americans to join al-Qaida. From his apartment in Santa Clara, California, he helped Egyptian Islamic Jihad operatives avoid detection in their communication by using three-way calling to connect operatives and skirt electronic surveillance inside their country. Those efforts supported terrorist attacks in Egypt and Pakistan, according to the Justice Department. In doing so, al Dahab failed to establish good moral character, a requirement for naturalization, the government argued.
The Justice Department alleged that he repeatedly lied on his naturalization application and during an interview with an Immigration and Naturalization Service officer about where he lived, his foreign travel, past marriages and his affiliation with a terrorist group. The court order requires al Dahab to surrender and immediately deliver his citizenship papers to U.S. authorities. (more here)
Khaled Abu al Dahab, 57, most likely found out that the government wanted to denaturalize him through Facebook.
JUDGE REVOKES SUSPECTED AL-QAEDA TERRORIST’S CITIZENSHIP
Courthouse News Service, April 21, 2017
WASHINGTON (CN) – A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS REVOKED THE U.S. CITIZENSHIP OF AN EGYPTIAN MAN THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMS IS A SENIOR AL-QAIDA JIHADIST OPERATIVE.
Barely mentioning Khaled Abu al-Dahab’s alleged links to terrorism, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell instead found that he had illegally procured his citizenship after falsifying information on his naturalization applications three times.
Howell focused on the fact that al-Dahab, who was naturalized as a citizen in 1997, had lied about his marital and travel histories. He had also falsely claimed in a 1988 employment application to be a U.S. citizen.
“The defendant’s false testimony and statements on these three occasions establish by clear, unequivocal, and convincing—indeed, undisputed—evidence that the defendant procured his citizenship illegally,” Howell’s 17-page opinion, released Wednesday, states.
Al-Dahab, 57, came to the U.S. in 1986 on a non-immigrant visa. He married three times, but according to the court ruling, concealed his third marriage during a naturalization interview and in his application paperwork.
Al-Dahab, who now resides in Alexandria, Egypt, also said he had not left the country in the five years prior to submitting several applications for naturalization. On his second application, however, he claimed to have left the country once on an emergency trip because he thought he would have to donate a kidney to his mother.
But the Department of Justice cites far more sinister reasons for its desire to revoke al-Dahab’s citizenship. In a press release about the court ruling, the DOJ said al-Dahab had worked in Silicon Valley as a car salesman, where he confessed to being a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
Howell’s opinion only mentions this claim once, buried in a footnote on page 12.
“The government also claims that the defendant gave untrue statements about his residences and an alleged affiliation with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a terrorist organization, supporting these claims with declarations by a single FBI Special Agent,” the footnote states.
The DOJ disclosed the prosecution’s original 33-page complaint and 35-page motion for summary judgment to Courthouse News, both of which outline al-Dahab’s terror associations in more detail.
“From on or about November 2, 1989 through at least on or about October 29, 1998, Defendant was a member or associated with EIJ,” the government’s Oct. 31, 2016, motion for summary judgment states.
The U.S. government designated the EIJ as a foreign terrorist organization on Sept. 24, 2001.
A Nov. 21, 2001, San Francisco Gate article by Lance Williams supports the government’s assertions. According to the article, which is based on unspecified accounts of Egyptian court proceedings and interviews with people who knew al-Dahab, al-Dahab confessed to an Egyptian military court that he was a member of the EIJ.
By Williams’ account, al-Dahab turned against the U.S., Israeli and Egyptian governments after his father’s death in a 1973 plane crash.
Israeli fighter jets shot down the Cairo-bound plane when it strayed into airspace over the Sinai Peninsula, which Israel still occupied after conquering the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War.
Williams reported that Egyptian authorities arrested al-Dahab in Cairo in 1998. A military court sentenced him to 15 years in prison for his Islamic Jihad membership and his role in plotting to overthrow the Egyptian government.
Howell ignored this alleged history in her ruling, even though the government had used it to argue for revocation of al-Dahab’s citizenship.
“Defendant’s membership or affiliation with EIJ constitutes prima facie evidence that he was not attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and was not well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States at the time of naturalization,” the government’s motion states.
The government also claims al-Dahab had confessed to recruiting 10 U.S. citizens to al-Qaida — which reportedly delighted Osama bin Laden — during the 12 years he lived in California.
“Al-Dahab told the investigators that Osama bin Laden was eager to recruit American citizens of Middle Eastern descent because their U.S. passports could be used to facilitate international travel by al Qaeda terrorists, and that bin Laden personally congratulated him for this work,” the DOJ said in a statement (alternative spelling of al-Quaida in the original).
Al-Dahab allegedly confessed to traveling to Afghanistan to report directly to Osama bin Laden about his recruitment successes.
According to the government’s motion for summary judgment, al-Dahab had attended a camp in Jalalabad, Afghanistan to receive military training and teach other Islamic Jihad members to fly hang gliders for use in terror attacks.
The government says he also operated a communications hub for the Egyptian Islamic Jihad from his Santa Clara, California, apartment, which facilitated terror attacks abroad.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions applauded the DOJ for prosecuting al-Dahab.
“We will protect our national security and our borders, and when we identify individuals tied to foreign terrorist organizations who procured their U.S. citizenship by fraud, we will initiate denaturalization proceedings – whether you reside here or abroad – and ensure you are denied entry into the United States,” Sessions said in a statement.
RELATED ARTICLE: Haitian ‘temporary’ refugees to test Trump’s resolve on immigration
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Geller Report.
How asinine is American academia today? It just keeps getting worse. What expanse of territory does the NRA control? How many people has the NRA beheaded and brutalized there? What calls has the NRA issued to its followers and other sympathetic people to murder civilians in the U.S. and other countries? Where are the sex slaves that the NRA has captured from among feminist gun control advocates?
A blinkered Leftist propagandist such as George Kennedy should not be allowed anywhere near a university classroom. Instead, however, the Missouri School of Journalism will probably bring him back and make him head of the department.
“MO School of Journalism Prof: NRA More Dangerous Than Islamic State,” by AWR Hawkins, Breitbart, April 20, 2017:
Missouri School of Journalism professor emeritus George Kennedy suggests the National Rifle Association (NRA) is more dangerous than Islamic State.
Writing in the Missourian, Kennedy observed:
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is a terrorist organization founded in 1999, headquartered in Syria and feared around the world. The NRA was founded in 1891, headquartered in Fairfax, Virginia, and is feared by politicians across America.
To be fair, the NRA was actually founded in 1871, but Kennedy continued:
What makes the Islamic State so feared it its willingness to kill in pursuit of its goal of creating a fundamentalist caliphate.
What makes the NRA so feared is its willingness to spend heavily and campaign aggressively in pursuit of its goal of removing all restrictions on the possession and use of firearms just about anywhere by just about anyone.
Notice how Kennedy went from incorrect information–the wrong founding date for the NRA–to unsubstantiated claims that the NRA wants to allow “possession and use of firearms just about anywhere by just about anyone.” In reality, the NRA fights for the enforcement of the law and the prosecution of firearm-wielding criminals with a fervor equaled only by its defense of law-abiding citizens’ right to keep and bear arms. Kennedy’s language muddies the water and misses the point.
Kennedy then claims the number of Americans killed by ISIS jihadists since 9/11 is nine. That is not a typo, he actually links to a Euronews source and claims only nine Americans have been killed by ISIS jihadists since the terror attacks on NYC in 2001.
Where were Kennedy and the Euronews when an attacker claiming allegiance to ISIS attacked Orlando Pulse and killed 49 people on June 12, 2016? That gunman literally used a 911 call to announce his allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. And the Orlando Pulse attack is not the only one that could be mentioned to disprove Kennedy and his Euronews source.
Kennedy’s purpose is claiming “only nine” Americans killed by terrorists was really to set up his second point, that “11,737 Americans” are murdered each year with guns. This figure is actually close to the truth. The average number of firearm-related homicides hovers around 10,500 to 11,500 annually. Many of these homicides occur in gang-riddled cities like Chicago and Baltimore. For example, there were nearly 800 homicides in Chicago in 2016 and over 300 in Baltimore. So a tenth of our nation’s homicides occurred in two Democrat-controlled cities, both of which look to gun control as the solution for the failure of gun control….