Does Megyn Kelly understand the Fallacy of Radical Islam and Moderate Muslims?

Megyn Kelly of Fox News has done an outstanding job of pounding CAIR’s Spokesperson Ibrahim ‘Dougie’ Hooper. Although she and other major journalists and self proclaimed counter-terrorism experts continue to make the same mistake. 

I counted at least a half dozen times that Ms. Kelly used the term “radical Islam.” If you really want to fight and defeat the Islamic ideology that advocates the destruction of Israel and America this practice must stop.

Is it intentional so as not to offend the Saudi government and terrorist supporting organizations such as CAIR? Islam is Islam and there is no word within Islam, the Hadith, or within Sharia law, for the term ‘Radical Islam’. One is either fully practicing Islam with their hearts, soul, and minds, or they have chosen to not practice Islam completely. In accordance with Sharia law these people are referred to as Apostates within Islam.

I will use an analogy but first must make a statement. Never, ever try to correlate
Christianity or Judaism with Islam. It can’t be done and Islam never intended them to be understood as having the same rules and guidelines. For instance. I often hear people saying there are Christians who do not adhere to all aspects of Christianity. This is true, but in comparison to Islam there is nothing within Christianity that says a non practicing Christian can be killed for this action. Sharia law does condone and advocate killing people within Islam who practice and adhere to Islam partially.

If a Christian does adhere to all 10 Commandments of the Bible is he/she a ‘Radical Christian’ or is it not better to define him/her as a practicing Christians? If a Muslim follows all aspects of Sharia law are they ‘Radical Muslims’? No, they are doing exactly what Islam dictates to be a good Muslim.

Journalists make the huge mistake by continuing to use the term ‘Radical’. The groups such as Hamas, Al Qaeda, Taliban, and the Saudi government are practicing Islam as Islamic leaders from 1400 years stated it must be followed. They are not being ‘Radical’ by following their ideology of hatred of Jews, Christians, and others. They are being faithful to their ideology.

I have released the following a couple of times. It is a more extensive explanation of the’ fallacy of the moderate Muslim’.

The Fallacy of the “Moderate Muslim”

There have been, and will continue to be, debates on the authenticity of ‘who and what are moderate Muslims’? I could spend two years giving my personal opinion and it would mean as much as Bill O’Reilly giving his opinion of the next Super Bowl Game. The point being there are no experts pertaining to the Islamic based ideology. During my years of first-hand research I have obtained thousands of materials from Islamic Centers/Mosques, interviewed hundreds of Islamic scholars and Imams. The evidence I provide in this article is based on their information and not my opinion. In accordance with Sharia law a Muslim is either 100% Sharia compliant or they are not. If they do not accept all aspects of Sharia law they are considered Apostates. This eliminates the term ‘Moderate Muslim’. This term is man-made and in reality has no meaning or existence. In other words a ‘Moderate Muslim’ is simply a non practicing Muslim. Since 1979 I have been traveling throughout the Middle East and have met thousands of good people who have called themselves Muslim. Again in reality the ‘good Muslims’ were people who did not adhere to Sharia law, specifically in regards to physical Jihad.

Many will by right now wondering why I did not use the word ‘religion’ in the same context as Islam. To best answer this it is best to explain to the reader that my background has led me to the Middle East since 1979. Since that period of time I have had the fortunate opportunity to speak with hundreds of the leading Islamic leaders and Imams throughout the world. I was selected as the first U.S. Federal Agent to enter Iraq in 2003. Although the rules of engagement did not specifically give us the authority to enter mosques, schools, and hospitals, I had insisted the men and women with me check these places before all others. My number one responsibility was to ensure the young 18 and 19 year old kids who were putting their lives on the line for people of all religions, races, and cultures, were going to go home and be with their families – regardless what a ‘political General’ had read from a book about sensitivity training in dealing with the Muslim people.

Per my suspicions our team located senior Saddam Forces, Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Fedeyeen forces hiding in the off limit areas: schools, mosques and hospitals… We captured them without incident.

Many Muslim people risked their lives and in fact many gave the ultimate sacrifice to assist the American forces. Of course in war this is not seen by the enemy as a ‘medal of honor’ nominee. On the contrary the Muslims who helped protect Americans were considered traitors and ‘Apostates’ of Islam. Islamic Sharia law demanded the death penalty for the Muslims who assisted the enemy (the American forces and their allies).

Why would I bring up a war time situation to try and explain ‘moderate Muslims’ living in America? The one and only point is for the American people to understand Muslims can only have allegiance to either Allah and Sharia law, or to the U.S. Constitution and America. Islamic leaders stress this avidly to their worshippers across the U.S. A Muslim can’t serve two masters. Sharia law and the U.S. Constitution are not compatible.

Again the word of Dave Gaubatz is not important. The words of Islamic leaders such as Yusef Estes, Ahmad Sakr, Zaid Shakir, Siraj Wahhaj, CAIR and ISNA Executives and a half dozen other pseudo-based Islamic leaders need to be listened to before me. These leaders take their orders directly from Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, and more importantly from the Saudi government.

I have personally visited over 250 Islamic Centers/Mosques throughout America. 95% are Sunni dominated (“Pure Islam”). Islamic leaders put out material distributed from Pakistan, India, and Saudi Arabia detailing the specifics of how a ‘Pure Muslim’ should lead their lives in accordance with Sharia law. A Muslim can’t pick and choose which aspects of Sharia they want to adhere to and which ones they prefer not. A Muslim is either Sharia compliant or they are not. In other words, they either practice Sharia law or they are non practicing Muslims. If a Muslim does not adhere at least in his or her heart to all aspects of Sharia law, they are considered Apostates by their leaders. This is a death sentence for them regardless of what country they reside in. Islam and Sharia law have no boundaries. Boundaries are man-made specifically by Jews and Christians, and in the hearts of Muslims they are meaningless.

Within America we have politicians and media who use the term ‘moderate Muslim’ as if this word has a legitimate meaning to ‘Pure Muslims’ who control the actions of Islamic terror groups. There are three requirements which non Muslim world leaders must come to terms with if we are ever going to live in safety and if our children are to ever have a fighting chance of having peace from Islamic terror groups in their lifetimes.

The following three requirements are directly from Islamic leaders/Imams from whom my research team and I have received advice over the last three years. The intelligence I collect is always first-hand intelligence.

  1. Islam is not a religion.
  2. Islam is a political, economic, and military ideology.
  3. Religion within Islam is used as a tactic to achieve the ultimate goal of Islam which is an Islamic Ummah (nation) worldwide and under Sharia law.

Sharia law is an all or nothing. A Muslim can’t pick and choose which parts of Sharia they desire to adhere to. 90% of Sharia law may be peaceful, but it is the 10% that innocent people must ‘fear’. This part pertains to the intolerance of other religions, the hatred of Jews, Christians, and even Muslims who do not adhere to Sharia law, and physical Jihad. All Muslims are not required to physically fight their enemies, but ‘All’ Muslims must assist in equipping and financing their brothers and sisters who are engaged in physical Jihad. For a Muslim to choose not to do so equate to him/her being an Apostate of Islam; again this is a death sentence for the accused.

The innocent people of all races, religions, and cultures are at war with Islam. This is the hardest and most difficult concept for people to understand. The Muslims who committed murder on 11 Sept. 2001 were doing so in the name of Islam. The 4000 plus men and women who have been murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed in the name of Islam. Maj. Hassan from Ft. Hood who killed several people did so in the name of Islam. The same materials being studied by Hamas, al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the Taliban are the exact materials being distributed across America and provided to innocent young Muslim children to study in order to be ‘Pure Muslim’.

Readers should note that in 90 plus percent of the mosques my research team visited in America, the following was being advocated for the worshippers. The manuals of ‘Riyadh Ul Salheen’ are literally an explanation to Muslims on how to interpret the Quran in their present day lives. For instance the following is an explanation of how Muslims should always be prepared for war against their enemies; yes even in America!

“In accordance with the conditions of his times, the Prophet (PBUH) ordained the Muslims to acquire every possible power and keep it ready for war. Elucidating his order on this point, he stated that by power he meant archery and then he repeated this word three times to stress its importance. He did it because the art of archery had fundamental importance in war at that time. In the present-day world, archery has lost its value as it has been replaced by other inventions like tanks, guns, atom bombs, etc. Similar is the case of devices which are used in naval war, and all these military wares have superb importance in modern warfare.

In the present-day context, the injunction of the Noble Quran to acquire power means manufacturing and possession of all these devices. It is incumbent on the Muslims that they equip themselves with all this material and show no carelessness in this regard. In modern times, Muslims have badly neglected this field with the result that non-Muslims have more knowledge of modern warfare and by dint of that they are dominating the world and making a claim of their supremacy all over the world. Unless Muslims pursue the Quranic injunctions on this score and acquire greater or equal or at least similar measure and style of power, as is possessed by the non-Muslims, they will not be able to check the onslaught of their enemies, and to defeat them. It is incumbent upon the Muslims to overpower the might and power of the infidels for the “glorification of Islam”.

The commentary and instruction to the Muslim worshippers throughout America is:

“It is essential that they should not slack in acquiring the material resources required for war, nor neglect military preparations and exercises. Modern military weapons and new style of warfare have now taken the place of archery, and Muslims should master all of them”.

“He who neither performs a good deed nor aspires for it, has a hypocritical disposition. This is especially true of a Muslim who does not even aspire to take part in Jihad. Such a Muslim develops a resemblance with hypocrites”.

If our country has even the remotest chance of securing our nation we must accept America is indeed at war with Islam. There is no nice way to ignore the violence within neither Islam nor its teachings. There are millions of ‘good people who call themselves Muslim’, but in actuality they do not follow Sharia law and are Apostates of Islam. Sharia adherent Muslims are not ‘good Muslims’. Islam forbids this trait which naïve Americans desire. There is nothing I have said in this article that the leaders of Islam have not repeated over and over to their worshippers and to non-Muslims.

Now is the time to take them for their word, or else you are risking the lives of your children by ignoring their warnings.

RELATED STORIES:

Legalized Rape: Iraq Legalizes the Raping of Young Girls Starting at the Age of Nine
EXCLUSIVE: Report: Ansar Bait Al-Maqdis Threatens To Harm American Interests In Egypt Including KFC
AQAP Cleric Calls On Muslims To Avoid Infighting And Killing Of Other Muslims, Says Allegiance To Islam Takes Precedence Over Differences
ISIS French Spokesman: ‘Woe To The Infidels And The Apostates Facing The Islamic State (ISIS)’

Obama’s Chickens Have Come Home

In a March 26, 2014 article for The Jerusalem Post, titled Column One: Campus Brownshirts Rising, writer Caroline Glick reports on the efforts of Vassar College Earth sciences professor Jill Schneiderman’s abortive attempt to arrange a field trip to Israel to study water supply issues in the Holy Land.

The trouble started when Professor Schneiderman conducted a pre-trip seminar for students who intended to participate in the field trip to Israel.  When the Vassar student chapter of an anti-Semitic hate group, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), picketed her seminar, pressuring Earth science students to drop Schneiderman’s class and to forego any plans to travel to Israel, Schneiderman complained to Vassar college administrators, seeking redress for her students whose civil rights and academic freedom were under attack by the SJP.

Instead of taking action against the thuggish actions of the pro-Palestinian students, college administrators once again demonstrated the sort of cowardice that has become so common among college and university administrators across the country.  They referred the issue to the college’s Committee on Inclusion and Excellence.  But when those vested with the responsibility for “inclusion and excellence” at Vassar convened to discuss the anti-Semitic outrage, Professor Schneiderman was, as she noted in her blog, “knocked off-center by a belligerent academic community dedicated to vilifying anyone who dared set foot in Israel.”

As Schneiderman and her Vassar students proceeded with plans for their trip to Israel, the University of Michigan student government was voting on a motion to suspend debate, indefinitely, on a resolution submitted by an anti-Jewish student group, calling upon the University to boycott and divest from all companies that do business with Israel… precipitating yet another confrontation in which Jewish interests came in second to the interests of Muslims on a traditionally liberal college campus.

According to the Jerusalem Post, a Michigan students group, calling itself Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE), “responded with rage and violence,” staging sit-ins at the student government offices and cursing Jewish members of the council, hurling epithets such as “kike” and “dirty Jew.”

Then, on Thursday, March 27, 2014, fascism reared its ugly head on the Dearborn campus of the University of Michigan.  On that evening the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was successful in blocking the screening of a documentary film, titled Honor Diaries.  The film tells the story of the unspeakable horrors endured by women throughout the Muslim world, including such brutal practices as female genital mutilation, honor violence, honor killings, the forced marriage of eight and nine year old girls to thirty and forty-year-old men, the lack of educational opportunities for women, and restrictions on their freedom of movement.

However, according to a Fox News report, CAIR wasn’t doing its own dirty work, or even its own research.  The group relied on facts and arguments presented by Richard Silverstein, a liberal blogger who argued, “One has to ask why a film about the purported abuse of Muslim women was produced by Jews… ”  In other words, how could a group of Jews possibly produce a film that profiles human rights abuses against Muslim women?  It flies directly in the face of Muslim sensibilities… the truth of the matter be damned.

In the end, those who sponsored the screening of the film were fearful that the showing would be seen as “Islamophobic.”  Wishing not to offend the Islamic community… and perhaps in fear of violent retribution… university administrators canceled the screening, proving once again that intimidation works.  But, as the Fox report asks, “Who is being offended when we are talking about mutilation and women setting themselves on fire to escape marriage before puberty?”

Then, just days later, the April 9, 2014 edition of Frontpage Magazine reported that Brandeis University, a longtime bastion of liberal orthodoxy, had conferred an honorary degree on leftist anti-Semitic writer, Amos Oz, who has described religious Jews as “Hezbollah in a skullcap.”  Brandeis is the very same “progressive” institution which yielded to pressure from Muslim Brotherhood front groups, such as CAIR and the Muslim Students Association, causing the university to withdraw a similar honor intended for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a noted Somali critic of Islam and co-producer of the Honor Diaries film.

So what’s happening on our college and university campuses?  Haven’t the most liberal colleges and universities always been places where Jewish academics hold forth and children of Jewish families are prepared for lucrative careers in medicine, academia, and the law?

CarolineGlick

Caroline Glick

For answers we might refer to a February 1, 2014 Jerusalem Post article by Caroline Glick,  titled, Column one: The New York Times Destroys Obama.”  In that column, Glick quotes extensively from a Times report by David Kirkpatrick on Barack Obama’s handling of the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.  Glick writes that Kirkpatrick “tore to shreds the foundations of President Barack Obama’s counterterrorism strategy and his overall policy in the Middle East.”

Glick reminds us that “Obama first enunciated those foundations in his June 4, 2009 speech to the Muslim world at Cairo University.”  It was his first venture abroad as president and is best remembered for his warm embrace of Islam, for his unprecedented bow to the King of Saudi Arabia… described in the Washington Times as a “shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate”… and for the cold shoulder he delivered to Israel, America’s most steadfast ally.

The thought that a newly-inaugurated president of the United States would take a major overseas trip, passing within fifty miles of Israeli territory, and not pay a courtesy call on the Israelis… the only functioning democracy in the Middle East… was a snub of gargantuan proportions and a major diplomatic faux pas.  It was also a portent of things to come in the Obama foreign policy.

Reassuring his friends in the Muslim world of his belief that the violent extremists in the Muslim world were but a “small but potent minority of Muslims,” Obama went on to say that he had traveled to Cairo “to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition.”  Instead, he asserted, “they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”

The Israelis, listening to his words from less than 220 miles away, must have been shocked and dismayed to hear Obama refer to Islam… the most violent and intolerant force on the face of the Earth, where Christians, Jews, and others are brutally murdered and persecuted simply because they are not Muslims… as sharing American principles of justice and progress, tolerance, and the dignity of human beings.

Then Obama went on to say that Islam had “carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment.  It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed… And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

It was then that he shocked Americans, describing how “Islam has always been a part of America’s story…”  He reassured Muslims that “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the (Sharia) laws, religion, or tranquility of Muslims.”  He claimed that, “since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States.  They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch.  And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.”

So, if we wonder how radical Muslims have come to feel as if they are welcomed with open arms at our institutions of higher learning, and if we are wondering why Muslims feel as though they can shut down major portions of America’s busiest cities by holding prayer sessions in the middle of public thoroughfares, we may have struck on the answer.  It is Barack Obama who has set the stage and who has invited them to take full advantage of American tolerance and generosity.

Since the first day that Obama occupied the White House, he has extended the hand of friendship to the most brutal and intolerant people on the face of the Earth.  In doing so, he has denied the Judeo-Christian origins of our great nation.  He has caused the gloom of a declining culture to fall across the face of America; his chickens have come home to roost.

EDITORS NOTE: The features image is courtesy of S. Schofield and Watchdog Wire.

Ding Dong, The Witch is Dead, The Wicked Witch, The Wicked Witch

Photo caption: Barack, now that we have wrecked havoc on all the Christians in this country with my HHS Mandate – I think it’s time that I resign and let you and Nancy take it from here. Remember, focus on the 70 Million Catholics. Like Nancy and I – the Majority of them are not “real Catholics”.

There is a GOD and I believe in Miracles. And, I love the movie, “The Wizard of Oz”. Great classic that has such a surprising ending. Sure, it was all a dream that took place in the tornado alley of Kansas and Dorothy experienced something out of this world in the Emerald City, while meeting a scarecrow, a tin man and a cowardly lion on her way to meet a wizard. But, it was all a dream.

The HHS Mandate is not a dream. It’s a reality. It is still going on as I write this piece, and there is no wizard at the controls. Far from a wizard. There is a liberal dictator by the name of Barack Hussein Obama at the controls behind that curtain, pushing all the buttons with no regard for anybody – but, at least the “wicked witch behind the Mandate is dead”…or, at least resigned – as in Kathleen Sebelius…the wicked witch – and yes, she also spent quite a bit of time in Kansas.

Just like Dorothy and Toto’s episode taking place on a farm in Kansas – the “Pro-abortion” 65 year-old Sebelius was once governor of Kansas. Not a coincidence. Dorothy’s beautiful story was a dream. Sebelius’ controversial story was a nightmare. But, after 5 years of raising hell, of going head-to-head with Cardinal Dolan and the Catholic Church – she finally decided to “throw in the broom” and call it a day. “I’m melting”…but, how much damage has been done??

Like I have said for over two years, “When Sebelius & the Obama administration introduced the H.H.S. Mandate back on January 20th, 2012 – challenging the Catholic Church in a big way – Cardinal Dolan (then President of the USCCB), should have never “backed down”, and given Sebelius & Obama any window of opportunity to control the countless Catholic institutions in this country. Had Dolan taken a stronger stance against this liberal administration and had he instructed “every single Catholic institution to file a lawsuit against the H.H.S. two years ago”, we would have never spent more than a month on this issue. We would have been able to put it to rest immediately…and Obamacare would have gone away before our very own eyes… almost like pouring a bucket of water on a wicked witch, to put out a fire on a helpless scarecrow.

Needless to say, that did not happen. Only seventy-seven lawsuits from Catholic institutions have taken place to date; Cardinal Dolan is no longer the President of the USCCB; and Obamacare is trying to survive as the number of enrolled Americans has been inflated greatly by Obama, himself, stating that 7.1 million Americans have signed up – or were forced to sign up – for this controversial health care.

So, we shall see what happens from this point on. Is it too late for the new president of the USCCB, Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, to instruct every single Catholic institution to file a law suit against this unethical H.H.S. Mandate? Is the Catholic Church finally going to stand up to the liberal Obama administration and this H.H.S. fiasco, while the transition from Sebelius to Sylvia Mathews Burwell, is taking place?

Will the ever-popular Pope Francis put in his two cents worth during this up-coming Holy Week and remind Obama what he shared with him back on March 27th, when the two met at the Vatican? Or, are we going to go back to that famous 5th Amendment cop-out cliche and say once again – “WHO AM I TO JUDGE”???

The Methane Hoax Cranks Up

Having spent decades trying to convince everyone that carbon dioxide (CO2) was a “greenhouse gas” that was going to cause the Earth to heat up, the same environmental charlatans are now embarking on a campaign to do the same with methane. In the U.S. the first move was announced by the White House in late March.

The carbon dioxide hoax fell apart in the wake of a cooling cycle affecting the Earth that began around 1997 and continues to this day. Warming and cooling cycles are natural events and both are tied to the activity or lack of it of the Sun. Humans have nothing to do with the climate other to enjoy or endure it.

Why methane? It has a lot to do with the development of hydraulic fracturing, commonly called “fracking”, and the way it unlocks natural gas, aka methane, all of which portends an America that is energy independent, along with its huge reserves of coal and oil. If, of course, the government permits this to occur.

As we know, the Obama administration does not want that. It would mean more jobs, greater prosperity, and the ability to pay down the national debt, not to mention drive down the cost of electricity, gasoline, and everything else that depends on energy.

Despite the cooling cycle that is likely to last for many more years, Steve Hamburg, chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, was quoted by the Washington Post saying that “ounce for ounce, methane is 84 times as potent as a greenhouse gas over 20 years” compared to carbon dioxide. “More than a third of the warming that we’ll see as a result of today’s emissions over the next couple of decades comes from, essentially, methane. We need to remain focused on carbon dioxide emissions, but doing so is not enough.”

Excuse me, but the Environmental Defense Fund and countless other Green advocacy groups have been focused on carbon dioxide for decades and the Earth is cooling, not warming. What part of this does Hamburg not understand?

James M. Taylor, the managing editor of Environment & Climate News, a national monthly published by The Heartland Institute, reported in January that “Natural gas fracking is not causing a spike in the U.S. methane emissions”, citing Environmental Protection Agency data. “Methane emissions specific to natural gas are in a long-term decline, down ten percent since 1990 and down seven percent since 2007 when the fracking boom began.”

The Washington Post, however, asserted that emission levels “are set to rise by 2030 as shale oil and shale gas production expands in the United States.” Do you remember all those predictions about the increase of carbon dioxide emissions and how, in ten, twenty, fifty or a hundred years, the Earth would heat up?

This is not about methane, it is about finding a way to shut down fracking and the extraction of natural gas and oil in the same way the Obama administration’s “war on coal” has caused the loss of over 150 coal-fired plants that until it began, were providing electricity. Reducing sources of electricity drives up its cost to everyone. As more natural gas came on line by 2013 it had become the second greatest source of U.S. electricity, but overall the amount of electricity produced was less than in 2007 before the war on coal began.

A natural component of the Earth, it has a number of sources, but one that has also caught the eye of government regulators involves cow flatulence and belching.

cow-farts-costa-ricaThe White House has proposed cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25% by 2020. The Environmental Protection Agency has been tracking cow farts since 2012 and now the dairy industry has to worry along with the oil and gas industry. In addition to the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management will be announcing “new standards this fall to reduce venting and flaring from oil and gas production on public lands.”

It’s often best just to let the Greens speak for themselves, revealing their never-ending efforts to attack the energy industry that keeps our lights on, heats and cools our homes, and fuels our cars and trucks. “President Obama’s plan to reduce climate-disrupting methane pollution is an important step in reining in an out of control industry exempt from too many public health protections,” said Deborah Nardone, the director of the Sierra Club’s Keeping Dirty Fuels in the Ground campaign.

“However,” said Ms. Nardone, “even with the most rigorous methane controls in place, we will still fall short of what is needed to fight climate disruption if we do not reduce our reliance on these dirty fossil fuels.”

What the heck is a climate disruption? A blizzard, a hurricane, a flood, tornadoes? None of these phenomena have anything to do with using fossil fuels. This is the kind of utter drivel we have all been hearing for decades.

It has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with denying access and use of the greatest reserves of coal, oil and natural gas that exist in the greatest nation on Earth, the United States of America.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

A Little Past Due Love for Cousin Glen

COUSIN GLEN

Cousin Glen, drawing by Lloyd Marcus.

A homosexual, Glen’s adult life was cut extremely short due to AIDS. My purpose for writing is to let the world know that Glen was here, his suffering and that I loved him.

Aunt Bummie was my mom’s older sister. Their childhood was horrendous. Their father was accidentally killed in a street shooting. Their alcoholic mother would abandon the two little girls for long periods of time. Mom and Bummie endured things kids should not have to endure.

In the 1950s when Dad broke the color barrier to become a Baltimore City firefighter, our family (mom and four younger siblings) moved out of the government projects into our own home in a black suburban community.

Aunt Bummie and her five sons by two absentee fathers remained in the projects on welfare. I enjoyed occasional sleepovers at my cousins’ government provided townhouse in the city. Aunt Bummie’s house was unkempt with holes punched in walls and broken furniture.

“Aunt Bummie, when I grow up, I’m gonna buy you new furniture”. “Thanks Peanut”,(my nickname), she replied.

I got along great with Aunt Bummie and her boys. And yet, I felt my cousins’ envy of me having a dad in our home. I felt sorry for them.

Aunt Bummie and her boys lived different than my family. Aunt Bummie did not have a job. Unlike my home, the refrigerator was off limits to her children. Food was very valuable; each boy was protective of his food when eating. I remember large generic labeled boxes of government cheese and powdered milk – cans of meat and peanut butter.

Fondly, I remember Aunt Bummie covering her table with newspapers and dumping a huge pile of fried chicken necks and backs on it for us boys to devour. I still like fried chicken necks and backs.

Even as a little boy, I felt the sadness, anger and dysfunction of their household. Aunt Bummie was extremely kind and gentle with me, but brutal towards her boys – Glen in particular, the baby. I vaguely recall overhearing my parents saying Bummie hated Glen because he reminded her the most of his father.

Their household humor was weird and violent – the five boys along with Aunt Bummie would laugh hysterically about the time she broke the baseball bat while beating Jimmie and how she bent the cooking pot while beating Glen.

Glen was the family servant. When everyone was watching TV, anyone could order Glen to go fetch something for them. The slightest non compliance from Glen would result in Aunt Bummie screaming at him, and/or beating him; not spanking, beating. My heart always went out to Glen as I watched him cry during his beatings. The lack of love. The unfairness. The cruelty.

Lawrence, the eldest, was very intelligent and responsible. He played substitute dad to his brothers. Glen was intelligent and responsible. Aunt Bummie’s other three sons acted like Neanderthals. And yet, she catered to her two most lazy and irresponsible boys while being extremely tough on Lawrence and Glen.

Etched in my brain is the day I witnessed something emotionally die in Glen. Aunt Bummie was beating Glen, pounding away at him with her fists. Though his seven or eight year old body bent in reaction to her punches, Glen just stood there with a blank look on his face, not shedding a tear. It was chilling.

Sadly, Aunt Bummie and four of her sons died young. Her surviving son is one of her favorites who is now in his 50s. He never had a job in his life and lives in a nursing home.

The one bright spot in Aunt Bummie’s depressed household was her eldest son, Lawrence. Incredibility, Lawrence worked his way through college and achieved great things. Her favorite jobless adult sons lived at home. Despite two non working adult sons living with Aunt Bummie, a phone call would bring Lawrence with financial support. Lawrence, a homosexual, died of AIDS in his late 30s.

My heart goes out to Aunt Bummie and her boys, no husband in the home for her and no father for her sons. She was prone to explosive fits of rage. Aunt Bummie and her adult sons embraced cradle-to-grave government dependency. I believe their lives could have been so much more. Aunt Bummie eventually became a born-again Christian. Praise God!

But there is a special place in my heart for Glen. That kid never got any love. When he became an adult, according to the family grapevine, Glen was a bit wild and crazy, sexually promiscuous with very little self-respect. What if Glen would have had a real dad rather than the federal government? His life would have probably been much different. Truly sad. Truly tragic.

African Diplomats Shun Black Business Owners

Last week I attended a very nice reception hosted by two of my friends, Rosa Whitaker and Bernadette Paolo. Rosa is CEO and President of the Whitaker Group, a Washington, D.C.- based consultancy specializing in trade and investment in Africa. She previously served as the first Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Africa in the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. In 2010, Whitaker was named one of Foreign Policy’s Top Global Thinkers.

Paolo succeeded the former president and Founder of The Africa Society, Leonard H. Robinson, Jr., in 2006, after his untimely death. Prior to assuming her new position, Paolo served as Vice President of The Africa Society and Vice President of The National Summit on Africa.

AmbMulamula2

Liberata Mulamula of Tanzania

At the event promoted as “Reception, Tribute and Discussion for East Africa’s Four New Female Ambassadors to the U.S.” The ambassadors honored were Mathilde Mukantabana of Rwanda [pictured above], Liberata Mulamula of Tanzania, Oliver Wonekha of Uganda, and Jean Kamau of Kenya.

Each of these women has a fascinating background and sterling accomplishments.

Oliver Wonekha of Uganda

Oliver Wonekha of Uganda

For those who are not followers of Africa, it’s important to remember that the continent of Africa is extremely patriarchal. Women are barely beginning to be welcomed into decision making positions in government, business, and politics, etc. In many African countries, women’s roles in society are clearly defined, with most of their roles being relegated to motherhood and the raising of the children.

In foreign affairs, to be posted as ambassador to the U.S. is like winning the Super Bowl; it is a crowning achievement for any diplomat. So, to have these four women from East Africa posted in the U.S. is a historic development in diplomatic circles.

Therefore, I want to use this column, to speak directly to these four distinguished ambassadors:

I have spoken to many of your male predecessors about the role of an ambassador in a foreign country. The main objective of an ambassador is to be the voice and the face of their home country’s foreign policy towards the U.S. They should be the head cheerleader for their country and engage with as many Americans as possible.

Jean Kamau of Kenya

Jean Kamau of Kenya

I am very optimistic about the long term future of Africa. I have travelled and done work in many countries on the continent. But, I am and have been very critical of Africa and many of their ambassadors for their lack of engagement with Blacks in the U.S. Since women claim to be better listeners than men, let’s put this theory to the test.

Madam Ambassadors, each of you stated that you wanted Americans, especially Blacks, to invest in your respective countries. Why should we? What is the business case for such an investment? Most African ambassadors have little engagement with the Black community, especially the businessman. People all over the world tend to do business with people they know.

There are Black businessmen who have created and run multi-billion dollar companies and have never had an African ambassador come to meet with them. Businessmen are not just going to magically show up in your country and want to invest millions of dollars in your country and you have never found the need to establish a relationship with these successful businessmen.

When your presidents come to the U.S., they always meet with the same group of White organizations: the Corporate Council on Africa, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, or the U.S. Institute for Peace, etc.

Madame Ambassadors, why is it that your presidents refuse to meet with these successful Black entrepreneurs when they are in the U.S.?
These same presidents would miss their own mother’s funeral to meet with Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, or Mark Zuckerberg, but when it comes to meeting the Black owner of a $ 6 billion IT firm, they can’t find time.

Madame Ambassadors, how many of you know that there are more than 200 Black newspapers in the U.S.? When you are allocating money to promote tourism to your country, why do you never consider partnering with these Black media outlets? Do you think Blacks can’t afford to travel or have no discretionary income?

Madame Ambassadors, how many of you have made yourself available to be interviewed by those who own Black newspapers, magazines, or websites? Do you not believe that Blacks read or care about the motherland?

Before there can be an investment of money; there first has to be an investment of time.

Madam Ambassadors, remember, when all is said and done; there is more said than done.

Chasing Dystopian Rainbows by STEWART DOMPE, ADAM C. SMITH

It seems scientism passes for science these days.

There are rarely any happy prophets. To get headlines you have to claim the world is ending. Add generous helpings of doom and gloom—and a pinch of apocalypse—and you’ll widen your audience.

The most recent batch of dire predictions for humanity’s future takes the same dramatic approach. You might think these are coming from the usual suspects—believers in the Mayan calendar or radical Evangelical interpretations of the Hebrew Bible. Nope. Apparently, this global, glass-half-empty prediction is the consensus of the mainstream scientific community. Or so we’re told.

Just last week, the United Nations released its IPCC report, which states that if we don’t meet global climate change head on, then all of humanity will soon be a vulnerable, dreary mess with plenty of natural disasters, famines, and other dismal scenarios to look forward to. Despite its attempt at shock and awe, there’s nothing new being offered in the report. We don’t want to suggest there are no potential problems looming in the future, but rather remind readers that one must be precise in articulating the problem if one is to propose a solution. Even among the strongest proponents of climate change, there is still considerable debate about the strength of their models given the serious shortcomings in the precision of their forecasts.

Collapse: Houston, We Have a Problem

One exemplar of this wave of dystopia is a bit of research ostensibly conducted at the behest of NASA, presumably with your tax dollars. (See hereherehere, and here.) Study authors argue that not only will human civilization collapse, but that income inequality is intricately intertwined both in the causal process and in the timing of the collapse.

The NASA study is a good illustration of the risks in applying analytical tools to problems they are unsuited to analyze. Its Human and Nature DYnamics (HANDY) model is built on the predator-prey model—which simulates interactions among wolves and rabbits—where predator Elites do everything but literally cannibalize the Commoners. Their biological model, in this instance, is simply inappropriate. Or more charitably, it’s severely limited in dealing with problems better suited to political economy.

The study starts with an assumption about inequality that would make even Paul Krugman blush. People are placed into two categories: Elites and Commoners. “The economic activity of Elites is modeled to represent executive, management, and supervisory functions, but not engagement in the direct extraction of resources, which is done by Commoners. Thus, only Commoners produce,” the report says. Elites, as much modern thinking goes, do nothing but skim off the labor performed by Commoners. Given such assumptions, the model has nothing very encouraging to say about our future.

Models Just Aren’t That Smart

The authors might contend that theirs is a model of predator (humans) and prey (nature) but the Elites can only eat because of the existence of the Commoners. This is problematic for various reasons. For example, are Commoners also responsible for entrepreneurial discovery? Going further, the authors assume that not only do the Elites hold the Commoners at a subsistence wage but that the Elites will always pay themselves a wage times larger than subsistence.

Over time, the gap widens as Elites populate at greater rates than Commoners, thus placing tremendous burdens on the supply of natural resources. At some point, this burden becomes so pronounced that extraction rates fall because the total population has exceeded the carrying capacity of the environment. Here’s what happens:

  • The Elites always pay themselves first;
  • Forced extraction exceeds the natural regeneration of the environment;
  • Commoners are then driven below subsistence income; and
  • Famine ensues.

Once Commoners start dying out, Elites are unable to sustain the economy without them and presto! Doomsday. (Have a nice day!)

Such a model might explain the population dynamics of North Korea, but it seems inapplicable to most of the modern world. So, the main problem with this “study” is that it doesn’t go much further than nineteenth-century economics in its assumptions about how the economy actually works. Using neo-Malthusian pseudoscience with a touch of Marxian class struggle only leaves us with an embarrassingly outdated framework that is about two hundred years past its prime. However elegant the mathematical model, the assumptions used to create it are beyond spurious.

The Ultimate Resource Redux

One of the fundamental differences between humankind and the rest of the animal kingdom is that we humans discover new resources and modes of production. When there are more wolves, there are fewer rabbits; but when there are more humans, there are more chickens. Malthus, despite some interesting insights, was catastrophically wrong in his prognostications about population and agricultural output. And neo-Malthusians have been even more wrong.

The simulation only serves to give the underlying argument a veneer of scientistic respectability. But it really is just as wrongheaded as Malthus’s original theory. Relaxing the initial assumption of extreme wealth inequality would not only be more realistic but would overturn the result, as Elites would only be able to extract surplus above wages set by the market, which would certainly be greater than subsistence for most workers. This would in turn check their ability to damage the underlying resource base.

Furthermore, the model assumes that any efficiency gains from technological progress are undermined by greater consumption (akin to Peltzman’s argument that better safety technology leads to greater consumption of risk). But then how do we explain how productivity gains in agriculture have led to exponential growth in other emergent sectors (manufacturing, services, computers, etc.)? We may consume more food but not nearly enough to balance out the productivity gains. So farm employment shrinks and resources move to other pursuits, making the world a wealthier place. These real-world phenomena are literally an impossible result in the NASA model.

Cross-disciplinary studies can offer new insights into how we should view human behavior. That said, those that offer only partisan parlor tricks and dystopian caterwauling should stick with reading Mayan calendars.

ABOUT STEWART DOMPE

Stewart Dompe is an instructor of economics at Johnson & Wales University. He has published articles in Econ Journal Watch and is a contributor to the forthcoming Homer Economicus: Using The Simpsons to Teach Economics.

ABOUT ADAM C. SMITH

Adam C. Smith is an assistant professor of economics and director of the Center for Free Market Studies at Johnson & Wales University. He is also a visiting scholar with the Regulatory Studies Center at George Washington University and coauthor of the forthcoming Bootleggers and Baptists: How Economic Forces and Moral Persuasion Interact to Shape Regulatory Politics.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

New Mozilla browser called “BackFireFox”

This just in: Mozilla has launched a new browser called BackFireFox. But seriously, folks, what’s the firing of some Mozilla CEO with old-fashioned views on marriage compared to the potential advancements in technology the progressive Mozilla team can unleash once it’s been liberated from this guy’s heteronormative oppression?

All Brendan Eich has ever done was invent JavaScript. But we all know that the world-wide proletarian revolution is being organized according to a different script, which does not involve Java.

mozilla add ons peoples cube

For a larger view click on the Mozilla menu.

Here is just a small sampling of new Mozilla plugins, extensions, and themes proposed by us on Twitter hashtag #NewMozillaAdOns.

  • Drudge Block
  • Shovel-Ready Jobs Locator
  • E-Z Tantrum Scheduler
  • Hyperventilation Tantrum Protocol
  • The Current Truth status updates
  • Thoughtcrime Analyzer
  • “Denounce your Neighbor” auto-fill function
  • Gulagosphere Migration Tool
  • Guilt Acceleration Plug-in
  • Thought-Corrective Action
  • One-Click Report-a-Christian
  • Browser Reeducation Camp
  • Opinion Block Plus

Is visiting Africa a stretch?

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (physician, writer, lecturer and father of the U.S. Supreme Court jurist by the same name) wrote:

“The mind, once stretched by a new idea, never returns to its original dimensions.”

The sooner African leaders come to appreciate this, the better off we will all be. Many of the African leaders I meet with in my consulting activities complain about how Africa is portrayed in the U.S. media. Yet, they are without an effective, proactive, public relations strategy.

Tourism provides the perfect platform to improve one’s brand, by educating visitors who have hitherto been exposed exclusively to filtered media images. Before more U.S. companies and individuals embrace Africa as an investment destination, they need to be “shown around”. Living the experience changes perspectives and it changes lives.

Americans must be disabused of the broad stroke images of Africa as a poor, unstable place that is wracked by famine and war. Indeed, these problems are present, but I remind you that Africa is not a country. It is a continent that is made up of 54 nations. Look at Botswana, where proceeds from diamond mining are used to give citizens free education all the way through university. (You don’t see that in the richest country on earth). Ghana is one of the more stable economies on the continent. South Africa is booming and Nigeria is nipping at its heels.

Africa must not wait for others to tell their story. They must tell their own story! If you live on the east coast of the U.S. you can be in Dakar, Senegal in about the same time it takes to get to Los Angeles or San Francisco. Did you know that Delta Airline’s most profitable route, worldwide, is Atlanta to Lagos (Nigeria)?

Let’s talk national security. The best way to fight terrorism is (also) with education. The more we know and the more our African friends know, the more difficult it is to paint the west as anti-African or anti-Muslim and the more difficult it is for westerners to think of Africa as a basket case.

Questions for my African friends: What has your country done to educate Americans? Do your government leaders meet with other than mainstream journalists when they are in the U.S.? Do your tourism officials meet with tour operators and other travel professionals abroad?

A good stretch before a physical workout will help you to avoid injury. Stretching can be uncomfortable, but it’s worth the effort. If Africa is willing to stretch into a more constructive engagement with Americans and we are willing to learn more about a vast emerging continent by seeing it first hand, then stereotypes and inaccurate portrayals will cause less harm.

Do some stretching. It’s worth it.

EDITORS NOTE:  The featured image is a map of Africa produced in Amsterdam. It is a first edition circa 1689 using copper engraving.

If the goal is “energy independence,” what issues should be a priority in America? by Marita Noon

Surely NOT the ones listed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee!

Recently the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) sent out a “2014 Priority Issues Survey.” In addition to the obligatory Tea Party bashing: “help the Democrats protect the progress we have made from Tea Party radicals, deliver the positive changes America needs and help Democrats win a Majority in the U.S. House of Representatives!” and the fundraising requests to “help protect House Democrats against Republican attacks”—there is a section on energy.

Section VII, asks: “Which of the following will help America achieve energy independence?” It offers five options that do little to move America toward energy independence—which isn’t even a realistic goal given the fungible nature of liquid fuels. Additionally, most of the choices given on the DCCC survey actually increase energy costs for all Americans—serving as a hidden tax—but hurt those on the lower end of the socio-economic scale the most. The proposals hurt the very people the party purports to champion.

The survey asks respondents to “check all that apply.”

Raising gas mileage standards for all new cars and trucks

This choice presumes that making a law requiring something will make it happen. Sorry, not even the Democrats have that kind of power. Even the current Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standard of 54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2025—finalized on August 28, 2012, and called “the largest mandatory fuel economy increase in history”—will be tough to hit.

The CAFE standards mean that a carmaker’s passenger vehicle fleet average must achieve 54.5 mpg. To meet that, and produce the big pickup trucks and SUVs Americans like to drive, the manufacturers must also produce the little itty-bitty cars with mpg above 60 and the more expensive hybrids (not one of which was on the top ten best-seller list for 2013)—or have a loss leader like the Chevy Volt to help bring down the average.

Suggesting a forced raising of gas mileage standards implies that auto manufacturers are in collusion with oil companies and are intentionally producing gas guzzlers to force Americans into buying lots of gasoline.

With the price of gasoline wavering between $3.00 and $4.00 a gallon, most people are very conscious of their fuel expenditures. If it were technologically possible to build a cost-effective truck or SUV that had the size and safety Americans want and that got 50 mpg, that manufacturer would have the car-buying public beating a path to its door. Every car company would love to be the one to corner that market—but it is not easy, it probably won’t be possible, and it surely won’t be cheap.

When the new standards were introduced in November 2011, Edmunds.com did an analysis of the potential impact: 6 Ways New CAFE Standards Could Affect You. The six points include cost and safety and highlights some concerns that are not obvious at first glance.

Achieving the higher mileage will require new technologies that include, according to Edmunds, “turbochargers and new generations of multi speed automatic transmissions to battery-electric powertrains.” The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency have estimated that the average new car will cost $2,000 extra by 2025 because of the proposed new fuel-efficiency standards.

Additionally, new materials will have to be used, such as the proposed new Ford F-150 made with aluminum, which is predicted to add $1,500 over steel to the cost of a new truck. Aluminum also complicates both the manufacturing and repair processes. Edmunds reports: “Insurance costs could rise, both because of the increased cost of cars and the anticipated hike in collision repair costs associated with the greater use of the plastics, lightweight alloys, and aluminum necessary for lighter, more fuel-efficient vehicles. (Plastics, lightweight alloys, and aluminum are all more difficult than steel to repair.)”

smartmessAnother concern is safety. “The use of weight-saving materials will not only affect repair costs but could make newer vehicles more susceptible to damage in collisions with older, heavier vehicles, especially SUVs and pickups. Their occupants could be at a safety disadvantage.”

One of the subtle consequences of high-mileage vehicles is the probable increase in taxes. Edmunds points out that lower driving cost may increase wear-and-tear on the nation’s highway system as consumers drive more freely. “Declining gas sales mean a further decrease in already inadequate fuel-tax revenue used to pay for road and infrastructure repair and improvement. … As more untaxed alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas and electricity are used for transportation, fuel tax revenue falls even farther. All of this is likely to lead to calls for a road tax based on miles driven and not the type of fuel used.”

Instead of increasing costs by forcing a higher mpg, a free-market encourages manufacturers to produce the cars the customers want. The Wall Street Journal story on the Ford F-150s points out: “In 2004, as the auto market soared, Ford sold a record 939,511 F-series pickups. That amounted to 5.5% of the entire U.S. vehicle market. But four years later, gas prices rose above $4 a gallon, sales of pickups began tumbling.” Then, consumers wanted small cars with better mileage. I often quote an ad for Hyundai I once saw. As I recall, it said: “It’s not that complicated. If gas costs a lot of money, we’ll produce cars that use less of it.”

In response to an article in US News on the 54.5-mpg CAFE standard, a reader commented: “ALL CAFE regulations should be repealed. Let the market and fuel prices decide what vehicles are purchased. The federal government should not be forcing mileage standards down the throats of the automaker or the consumers. This is still America, right?”

Develop Renewable Energy Sources

There is nothing inherently wrong with the idea renewable energy. However, the cost factor is one of the biggest problems. When I do radio interviews, people often call in and point out Germany’s renewable energy success story: “The share of renewable electricity in Germany rose from 6% to nearly 25% in only 10 years.” While that may be true, it doesn’t address the results: “Rising energy costs are becoming a problem for more and more citizens in Germany. Just from 2008 to 2011 the share of energy-poor households in the Federal Republic jumped from 13.8% to 17%.”

Germany has been faced with a potential exodus of industry as a result of its high energy costs. For example, in February, BASF, the world’s biggest germanynaturalgasplantchemical maker by sales, announced that for the first time, it “will make the most of its capital investments outside Europe.” According to the Financial TimesKurt Bock, BASF chief executive, explained: “In Europe we have the most expensive energy and we are not prepared to exploit the energy resources we have, such as shale gas.”

Throughout America people are beginning to feel the escalating costs of the forced renewable energy utility companies are required to add as a result of Renewable Portfolio Standards that more than half of the states passed nearly a decade ago.

But the cost is not where I take issue with the DCCC’s inclusion of “Developing renewable energy sources” in its survey. The survey question is about achieving “energy independence.”

In preparation for writing this column, I posted this question on my Facebook page: If the goal is “energy independence,” what issues should be a priority in America? The first answer posted was: “Smart grid and fast ramp natural gas turbines.” Another offered: “High efficiency appliances and lights. I am a LED FAN!” Yet, another: “Solar, tidal, water.” Bzzzzzzt, all wrong answers.

All of the above suggestions are about electricity. The U.S. is already electricity independent. We have enough coal and uranium under our soil to provide for our electrical needs for the next several centuries. Add to that America’s newfound abundance of natural gas and we are set indefinitely. By the time we might run out of fuel for electricity, new technologies will have been developed based on something totally different, and, I believe, something that no one is even thinking about today.

Developing more “solar, tidal, water,” or wind energy won’t “help America achieve energy independence.” Nor will a smart grid or natural gas turbines. High efficiency appliances or LED light bulbs won’t either.

Encouraging consumer and industrial conservation

Consumers are already feeling the pinch of higher energy costs—both electricity and liquid fuels. When possible, people are restricting driving by taking a stay-cation rather than a traditional vacation. Many people who can afford the option are switching to more energy-efficient light bulbs.

F150As the BASF story above makes clear, most industry is energy intensive. In the story about the Ford F-150’s use of aluminum, the WSJ says that the new manufacturing process requires “powerful and electricity-hungry vacuums.” Industry cannot stay in business without profit. Therefore, in interest of preservation,  energy conservation is virtually an instinct.

The cost of energy drives conservation.

Including this question in the survey is a red herring that would lead the respondent to think conservation is a big issue.

Investing in energy efficient technology

When the word “investing” is used in reference to a government document or program, it always means spending taxpayer dollars. In a time of ongoing economic stress, we don’t need to borrow more money to spend it on something of questionable impact on energy independence.

Remember, much of the “efficiency” numbers bandied about refer to electricity, which has nothing to do with energy independence. Energy.gov states: “Every year, much of the energy the U.S. consumes is wasted through transmission, heat loss, and inefficient technology…Energy efficiency is one of the easiest and most cost effective ways to … improve the competitiveness of our businesses and reduce energy costs for consumers. The Department of Energy is working with universities, businesses, and the National Labs to develop new, energy-efficient technologies while boosting the efficiency of current technologies on the market.” Among the “solutions” presented on the page are “developing a more efficient air conditioner” and “a new smart sensor developed by NREL researchers that could help commercial buildings save on lighting and ventilation costs.” Nothing is offered that will actually impact energy independence.

Increasing offshore drilling and oil exploration in wilderness areas

Respondents are discouraged from selecting the one item on the list that could actually lead to “energy independence” by the inclusion of the words “offshore” and “wilderness areas”—as if those are the only places drilling could take place.

Yes, we should increase exploration and drilling—and, while there are risks, it can be, and has been, done safely in offshore and wilderness areas. But there are vast resources available on federal lands that are either locked up or are under a de facto ban due to the slow-walking of drilling permits.

Instead of phrasing the choice “Increasing offshore drilling and oil exploration in wilderness areas,” if the goal is energy independence, the option should have read: “Release America’s vast energy resources by expediting permitting on federal lands.

While the options on the DCCC survey, even if a respondent checked them all, will do little to “help America achieve energy independence,” the survey didn’t include any choices that could really make a difference in America’s reliance on oil from hostile sources.

Some selections that would indicate a true desire to see America freed from OPEC’s grip should include:

  • Approving the Keystone pipeline;
  • Revising the Endangered Species Act so that it isn’t used to block American energy development;
  • Encouraging the use of compressed natural gas as a transportation fuel in passenger vehicles and commercial trucks;
  • Expediting permitting for exploration and drilling on federal lands;
  • Opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; and
  • Cutting red tape and duplicative regulations to encourage development.

The fact that not one of these options that would truly make a difference was included in the DCCC survey belies the ideology of the Democratic Party. Its goals do not include energy independence. Instead, it wants to continue the crony corruption that has become the hallmark of the Obama Administration as evidenced by Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz’s April 2 announcement that: “[T]he department would probably throw open the door for new applications for renewable energy project loan guarantees during the second quarter of this year.”

Like the Ukraine, until there is a change at the top, the U.S. will likely remain dependent on the whims of countries who want to use energy as a weapon of control. The goal should be energy freedom.

About Marita Noon

Marita Noon

The author of Energy FreedomMarita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for energy.

‘Ukraine’ to the tune of Clapton’s ‘Cocaine,’ by Joe Pags

A radio talk show host Joe “Pags” Pagliarulo has modified Eric Clapton’s “Cocaine,” and I couldn’t help but illustrate it.

Click here to listen to the new version

UKRAINE

Words and Vocal – Joe Pags

The world says get out. But, Putin says.. no doubt, Ukraine.
Obama frowns, but Putin’s getting down in Ukraine.
He don’t buy, or stand by, or say why; Ukraine.

Obama talked tough but, Putin called his bluff Ukraine.
When the day is done Putin won; Ukraine.
BO lied by the side watch Vlad ride – in Ukraine.

He sanctioned some guys hoping to turn the tide: Ukraine.
Don’t forget this fact, Putin won’t give it back; Ukraine.
Let’s talk gays, women’s raise, ACA – ignoring Ukraine
BO’s weak, Putin streaked moved his fleet – to Ukraine.

The repulsive stench of liberal hypocrisy by Allen West

Little Haiti Al Sharpton 1992

Vintage Sharpton circa 1992

There’s a chapter in my book, Guardian of the Republic, called, “The Hunt for the Black Conservative.” In it I address how the liberal progressive Left will spare no efforts to demean, denigrate, destroy, and discredit black conservatives. The interesting hypocrisy is that if you are an acceptable black person — namely a liberal progressive — all manner of protections will be afforded regardless of how disgusting and heinous your offenses may be.

Take for example the abhorrent past and behavior of one Rev. Al Sharpton. If you don’t remember his Tawana Brawley episode, you can read about it here. FYI, this was during his obese, tracksuit phase. However, MSNBC is so proud of this charlatan, they gave him his own show.

In contrast, liberal progressives recently have attacked former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice claiming she is not qualified to be the commencement speaker at two universities, Rutgers and Minnesota.

Without a doubt the greatest evidence of liberal progressive socialist hypocrisy is the shielding of Barack Hussein Obama. Here is truly the most unqualified person ever to hold the office of president. He is indeed the nation’s first affirmative action president — considering the abject dismissal of his lack of accomplishments and papering over of his formative years.

Obama’s voting record as a state and US Senator is replete with votes of “present.” And his empty rhetoric and bumper-sticker slogans have resulted in America’s worst economic recovery and diminished global standing as a result of failed foreign policy.

Obama lies and deceives the American people at the drop of a hat — if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor, period. And we all know 7.1 million Americans didn’t magically sign up for Obamacare — whatever sign up means.

But most despicable were his abandonment of Americans under terrorist attack to die in Benghazi and the use of a government agency, the IRS, to attack Americans who oppose his radical socialist agenda. But what do he and the Left say? These are just phony scandals.

It is unconscionable to me that the black community as a whole follows these white liberal progressive masters and the orders of their black overseers to remain on the new economic plantation and support the lies and deceit. And then they join in attacking their black brothers and sisters who are conservatives and have managed to escape this political servitude. Shameful.

I care not what liberal progressive socialists and their media accomplices think of me. Liberal hypocrisy has a repulsive stench. If they ever own up to the highest levels of honor, integrity, and character they’ll earn some respect. Unfortunately, that appears to be an unachievable goal for progressive socialists.

Take the plank from your own eye before you consider examining a speck in mine.

RELATED STORY: DETAILS: SHARPTON WAS FBI MOB RAT…

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Gay Intolerance versus Corporate Integrity

I am going to draw on decades of having been a public relations counselor to corporations and other organizations for some thoughts about the resignation of Mozilla’s co-founder  Brendan Eich, after his donation to support a California proposition banning gay marriage eight years ago became an issue for the company less than two weeks after he became its CEO.

Despite the passage of the ban, voted upon by a majority (52%) of Californians who believe that marriage should be restricted to the union of a man and a woman, the California Supreme Court ruled against it. Same sex marriages in California resumed after the U.S. Supreme Court restored the federal district court’s ruling that overturned Proposition 8 as unconstitutional. Heeding the will of the people is not the California way.

At the end of 2008, same-sex marriages were legal only in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Today seventeen states, including California, allow such marriages. The gay, lesbian and transgender population of America is about three percent, but they are among the most vocal special interest groups in the nation.

From a PR point of view, Eich’s decision was a very bad one. Other corporations have found themselves targeted by the gay community. Chick-fil-A, an Atlanta based company has opposed gay marriage based on its commitment to Christian values, but most corporations regard any vocal opposition with more fear than courage. It has a lot to do with being in the business of selling products and services as well as being answerable to their investors.

It also explains, for example, why most embrace environmental demands in some fashion, including Big Oil and Big Coal. It’s no accident that BP Oil has a television advertising campaign going these days emphasizing the way drilling for oil in Alaska generates thousands of jobs elsewhere in the nation. The Gulf of Mexico oil spill is fading into the past as well it should. Simply said, accidents happen.

I suspect that Eich’s decision was based in part on the fact that its corporate headquarters are located in San Francisco. A Reuters news article noted that “Gay rights are widely embraced in the San Francisco area” described as “long known for its thriving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Silicon Valley’s tech culture reflects that sensitivity and its companies rely on their CEOs to set that kind of tone.”

The curious thing is that Eich’s “views about gay marriage had been known within Mozilla for nearly two years…” His appointment as CEO put him in the limelight and a call for a boycott by OkCupid opened the doors to a decision to stand by his views or leave, presumably in the interest of the company. The company chairwoman, Mitchell Baker, said of his resignation that “you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.”

After freedom of religion, free speech is the next one cited in the Constitution’s First Amendment. It’s not hard to stand for it if you have the courage to do so.

Largely unknown to most Americans is the growing matrix of laws at the state level that grant a special status to the GLBT community. This is particularly true in Massachusetts. At the federal level, the “Employment Non-Discrimination Act” has passed the Senate and is headed for a vote in the House. Critics say it would create a federally-enforced special employment status for homosexuals and transsexuals. Such a law would create a privileged inequality, not equality in the workplace.

Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay blogger, showed the kind of courage that Eich should have. “You want to squander the real gains we have made by argument and engagement by becoming just as intolerant of others’ views as the Christians?” asked Sullivan. “You’ve just found a great way to do this. It’s a bad, self-inflicted blow. And all of us will come to regret it.” From a PR point of view, Sullivan is right.

“If this is the gay rights movement today—hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else—then count me out,” said Sullivan.

Christian views are not the stuff of “fanaticism” but rather reflect deeply held spiritual values and a definition of marriage that goes back 5,000 years or more. Those views should be defended.

Reuters noted that Robert P. George, a Princeton University professor, “said Eich’s case was another example of how religious conservatives who only support heterosexual marriage are being victimized for their views. Now that the bullies have Eich’s head as a trophy on their wall, they will put the heat on every other corporation and major employer.”

Therein is the reason why Eich’s swift departure was a mistake. He could have and should have allowed the controversy to rage for a short while and watched it disappear.

Polls about gay marriage reveal how sharply divided Americans are on this issue. It goes well beyond being “Christian” or any other religious affiliation. It goes to the issue of whether members of the same sex should be granted the legal rights associated with marriage. For as long as civilization has existed, opposition to same-sex marriage has been a central element of what is deemed moral behavior.

It isn’t, as the courts have ruled, an issue of “equality.” Heterosexual marriage goes to the core of what a society requires to maintain itself. It is the heart of a healthy society and redefining it because a minority whose sexual orientation demands it can only weaken society and the nation that bows to their demands.

Gays could have accepted civil unions, but they choose not to. Now they are out to transform America by employing an intolerance that endangers it.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

My Congressman asks me to sign his re-election petition

I received a letter from my congressman former Democrat converted to Republican Jeff Miller (FL District 1). Miller was an executive assistant to Democratic state Agriculture Commissioner Doyle Conner from 1984 to 1988. He was a lifelong Democrat until he switched parties in 1997 to run for the Florida Legislature

This is the first time he ever bothered to contact me and it was only to benefit him. He wanted me to sign a petition to put him on the ballot for the 2014 election. Jeff Miller is a good family man. He has been in office for almost thirteen years and that means I have been contributing to his government paycheck all that time.

But what has he done for us here in District 1 and for our nation?

He did manage to introduce a non confrontational bill that passed called the TSA Loose Change Act (H.R. 1095; 113th Congress). The legislation forces the TSA to hand over all the loose coins they find at the airports and give it to provide aid and comfort for veterans while they travel. Thanks, much appreciated. But perhaps Congressman Miller what you should have done is introduce a bill to abolish the TSA and allow private security companies to assume control at US airports?

Congressman Miller what else have you done besides support bills? How about write some bills. Mark Levin asked me once what have you done in regards to proactive legislation vice kicking back supporting the bills of others. I told Mark none that would put this nation on a new course. He said well its time for you to go Jeff.

I have lost faith in the Republican Party and its current membership. In order for me to return to the GOP I expect the following bills to be written by my Representative Jeff Miller and then be co-sponsored by his fellow Congressmen.

(1) Defund all taxpayer money to the United Nations. Return the building being used by the UN in New York back to the hands of private enterprise and the American people. Donald Trump would be in to buy it. He did mention to me once he was interested.

(2) Defund and abolish the Dept. Of Education. The US Constitution doesn’t permit taxpayer money to be collected to fund a centralized control of our education. Its up to the states to do this. Currently the Communist Michelle Obama thinks she can tell school districts that take Dept. of Education money what the kids can eat. Toss that miscreant Communist out of these schools and STOP taking money from the Jimmy Carter created Dept. of Education. Common Core, the UN inspired Marxist dumbing down of our kids paid for by stimulus money borrowed from Communist China now gives Obama control of the curriculum and standards in the states that signed up for this crap funded via Jimmy Carters’ Dept. of Education. Get rid of the Dept. of Education. Write the bill Jeff!

(3) Defund and abolish the Internal Revenue Service and abolish the 16th Amendment. Congressman Miller how long will it take you to write this bill ? Yesterday I wrote a check to the IRS for $13,400.00. WHY? Who gives the IRS authority to tax my hard work and the fruits of my labor and the risks I take? Do you know what I can do with this money? What will the IRS do with it, cover a round of golf at Pebble Beach for President Obama? Fund Nancy Pelosi’s tax payer funded jet? It would buy Michelle Obama a nice dress. Congressman Miller write the bill and I will support you.

(4) Defund the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and give control back to the states as per the Tenth Amendment. It should take you 20 minutes to write this up.

(5) Defund and abolish the Department of Energy. How much energy has the Department of Energy drilled for? How many barrels of oil have they dug out of the ground? How many cubic feet of natural gas have they extracted? How many oil tankers have they built? (ZERO) Defund and abolish it. It should take you 30 minutes to write the bill Jeff.

(6) Write a bill that restores the constitutional rights of Americans to carry a concealed weapon onto military bases. You support the NRA right? Big deal. What good is that? We all support some form of pro-Second Amendment gun groups. Your job, sir, is to change the direction of the nation not sit back in your big comfy office chair in DC and rub your NRA lapel pin. Anyone can do that. Write the bill, sir. Clinton thinks I am not responsible to carry my 9mm onto military bases. Do you think I am Congressman Miller? Fort Hood is a double tragedy but the biggest tragedy was disarming the military folks and preventing them from defending themselves from these lunatics. I spent 30 years in the US Navy. I carried M-16’s AR, a Glock 9mm, a .45 pistol and shot guns to protect you sir. But I am denied the right to protect myself. Why don’t you fix this? WRITE THE BILL!

Congressman Miller in closing my column, I wish you well and much luck in your campaign for your continued never ending career as a lifelong Congressman funded by Florida taxpayers paying you over $15,000 a month to work maybe seventy-five days a year.

And to end my correspondence to you sir. The next time you visit my friend Colonel Bud Day’s grave site in Pensacola please don’t pose for pictures at his grave for publicity pictures for your web page. Colonel Day is not a pawn for your political advancement he was my friend. I visit his grave many times privately and I share my thought with him privately. I miss his dearly. I expect you to do the same. Leave your camera at home.

The Antichrist Revealed

Since the early days of our world’s short history there have been debates on who the Antichrist is as mentioned in the Bible. I have given this some deep thought and although I am far from being a scholar on the Bible, I do believe I am a decent investigator.

Based on my experiences the vast majority of people believe the Antichrist is a person. There have been conspiracy theories that the Antichrist will be a person with such a character as to draw in billions of people to their fold. I suggest the true Antichrist has been around for approximately 1400 years and is not a person but rather an ideology.

This is the Islamic ideology. For centuries this evil ideology has brought billions to their knees in worshiping a belief that is based solely on deceit, hate, and violence. Could the Antichrist then be an ideology and not a person of flesh?

Allegedly the Antichrist will be so powerful that world leaders will bow to it. Are there not world leaders who bow to the Islamic ideology even though many are not Muslim? This ideology has had a magical hold on very intelligent (and some not so intelligent) people for centuries.

There is an abundance of evidence clearly showing the Islamic ideology is pure evil. We must remember Islam uses as their prime example of character and pureness a false prophet (Mohammed). The Islamic ideology does not hide the fact that Mohammed was a child rapist. Mohammed hated the Jews and Christians. This same hatred was taught 1400 years ago and in 2014 it is still being taught across the world.

Islamic leaders will tell you they respect Jesus Christ, but it doesn’t take any amount of digging to know Islam does not recognize Jesus as a Christian. The belief of Muslims is that Jesus was actually a Muslim even before the formal ideology of Islam was conceived.

James Neuman wrote:

” It is supposed that God created man in His own image. Prophet Muhammad did God one better. Muhammad created God in his own image and bestowed upon his god – Allah (the AntiGod) – his own characteristics, personality, desires and ambitions. Muhammad made up the Allah of the Quran (the AntiGod) and all the Quranic teachings to create a perfect totalitarian system. How could the word of God be challenged? Muhammad was Allah and Allah was Muhammad”

“Islam is a cesspool of literally thousands of teachings contained in the Quran and Sunna of ‘prophet Muhammad’ that amount to hate crimes.Just as Hitler laid the moral and intellectual foundation for the extermination of Jews in Mein Kampf,so Islam creates the moral, intellectual and religious justification for the various hate crimes of extermination, murder, torture, terrorization, looting, pillaging, rape and enslavement directed at “kaffirs” (non-Muslims), apostates from Islam, gays and kafir women and children”.

SUNNA OF EVIL PERFECTION

The following are a short-list of the evil Sunnah of Muhammad, recorded in the Hadiths of Bukhari:

  • Child sexual molestation and Pedophilia is Sunna in Islam.
  • Murder, even Mass Murder, is Sunna in Islam.
  • Extermination and ethnic cleansing of communities is Sunna in Islam.
  • Rape is Sunna in Islam.
  • Sex Slavery is Sunna in IslamBeheading is Sunna in Islam.
  • Stoning to death for sexual deviation is Sunna in Islam.Beating one’s wife is Sunna in Islam
  • Murdering Kafir children is Sunna in Islam.
  • Murdering Muslims’ own children is Sunna in Islam.
  • Murdering Jews is Sunna in Islam
  • Murdering Christians is Sunna in Islam
  • Slavery is Sunna in Islam
  • Booty is Sunna in Islam
  • Whipping is Sunna in Islam
  • Torture is Sunna in Islam
  • Terror is Sunna in Islam
  • Maiming is Sunna in Islam
  • Jihad is Sunna in Islam
  • Extortion is Sunna in Islam

The list goes on and on and there is little doubt that the Islamic ideology is the most evil of all evils.

“But in Islam, they represent the Sunnah, the sacred “path”. And quite desirably this is the Sunna that Muslim men were emulating at the Kenyan, Boston, World Trade Center and all the other Jihad massacres across the globe. Since the Muslim perpetrators of those Jihadi terror attacks were simply modeling their behavior on Muhammad, they are good, moral Muslims – not deviant fanatics. Far from the naïve thinking that their violence and intolerance are alien to inherently peaceful Islam, they are directly rooted in Muhammad’s example.The above catalogue of Muhammad’s evil Sunnah would obviate that he was among the rare instances of evil persons ever walked the earth, not the person of moral perfection as claimed by Allah. And when Allah picked such an “evil incarnate” as his best representative to mankind, then Allah could not be a loving and merciful creator of the Universe but a “Monster of Evil”.

I encourage readers to review some of the articles and books written by James Neuman.

Do we need more proof that the Islamic ideology is evil? If the Antichrist is not Islam itself, then God help us because I could never imagine anything more evil.

Can we defeat the Antichrist?

The Bible is the best reference to use to answer this question. Most people are waiting for an Antichrist to appear and then begin the fight to defeat it. It is my firm belief the Antichrist reared its ugly head 1400 years ago and we are far from defeating this evil, but at least the innocent people around the world should consider Islam as the true Antichrist.

In order to defeat any enemy one must first know who the enemy is.

RELATED STORIES:

New York: Woman converts to Islam, shocked to discover she’s now considered inferior to men

Accomplice? Boston jihad murderer’s widow refused to cooperate with FBI

Is Islam a race? Birmingham trial will tell

California politician who tried to broker arms deal for jihad group escapes terrorism charges