CLEXIT: Science Wins! Trump stomps on climate religion

‘This is very close to a religious issue. This is a theological issue. People take climate change that seriously.’ ‘We are proud of a president who is staring at the UN and saying we don’t want to give up our sovereignty so that UN bureaucrats can redistribute our wealth and do nothing for the climate. This is a great day for science.’

‘The UN has admitted they will redistribute wealth by climate policy. This is all politics, it is not about saving the planet and Trump is calling them on it.’ We been called a rogue nation along with Syria and Nicaragua. The U.S was founded as a rogue nation. Trump is showing true leadership. Standing up to the world and say we are not buying belief in superstition that a UN agreement that even if you believe in UN assumptions would have no measurable impact on temps in 100 years or has anything to do with saving the planet or climate. Donald Trump should win a medal of scientific courage and political courage for pulling out of this.’

Climate Depot Round Up

It’s Official! The U.S. has done a Clexit! CNN: Trump on Paris accord: ‘We’re getting out’ & BBC: Trump announces US will withdraw from UN Paris Climate deal

Statistician LOMBORG: TRUMP IS RIGHT TO REJECT PARIS CLIMATE DEAL: IT’S LIKELY TO BE A COSTLY FAILURE – Dr. Bjorn Lomborg: The Paris Treaty will be the most expensive global agreement in world history. It is foolhardy and foolish for world leaders to stay fixated on Paris – not only will it likely falter, but it will be hugely costly and do almost nothing to fix climate change. – After hundreds of billions of dollars in annual subsidies, we only get, according to the International Energy Agency, 0.5 per cent of the world’s energy needs from wind, and 0.1 per cent from solar PV.
CNN: Trump on Paris accord: ‘We’re getting out’
Media Clips: 

Watch: Morano in Sky News TV debate with Greenpeace: ‘It’s the greatest thing for the U.S. to leave Paris pact’ – Broadcast June 1, 2017 -Sky News -Marc Morano vs. Sky News Anchor Kay Burley and a Kaisa Kosonen, a spokesperson from Greenpeace International.

Morano: ‘This treaty has no basis not only in science, but in actual cost benefit analysis. Even if you use all the UN assumptions and believe everything they claim about the science, you would not be able to measure the temperature difference in a 100 years assuming all the countries did what thy planned to do…If we did face a climate apocalypse, you don’t need the UN to sit there and decide what energy mix countries should have. UN bureaucrats don’t have to be in charge. You don’t need central planning to determine that.

Sky News Anchor Kay Burley: Trump is really setting himself against almost every other country. is that what we want the leader of the free world to do?

Morano: Absolutely. We been called a rogue nation along with Syria and Nicaragua. The U.S was founded as a rogue nation. Trump wants to be a leader. Trump is showing true leadership. Standing up to the world and say we are not buying belief in superstition that a UN agreement that even if you believe in UN assumptions would have no measurable impact on temps in 100 years or has anything to do with saving the planet or climate. Donald Trump should win a medal of scientific courage and political courage for pulling out of this.

Listen: BBC radio features Morano in two separate shows: ‘We don’t want to give up our sovereignty so that UN bureaucrats do nothing for the climate’ -Climate Depot’s Morano on two BBC radio programs on Trump’s Clexit from UN Paris Treaty. Full audio from both programs below.

Morano: ‘This is very close to a religious issue. This is a theological issue. People take climate change that seriously.’ ‘We are proud of a president who is staring at the UN and saying ‘we don’t want to give up our sovereignty so that UN bureaucrats can redistribute our wealth and do nothing for the climate. This is a great day for science.’ ‘The UN has admitted they will redistribute wealth by climate policy. This is all politics, it is not about saving the planet and Trump is calling them on it.’

Morano on Blaze TV: ‘We are going to have a Clexit! A climate exit!’

Watch: Morano on Newsmax TV: UN Paris Accord Is About Wealth Redistribution, Not Climate – Morano on Newsmax TV’s Steve Malzberg show: “The UN has actually admitted the real reason for the treaty. They said this is not even environmental policy anymore, we will redistribute wealth by climate policy. That’s what they want, a $100 billion a year slush fund going to governments that are best able to keep your people locked in poverty. “This is all about social engineering, central planning, redistribution of wealth, and empowering UN bureaucrats.”

Watch Morano on TV: Trump touched on ‘religious belief’ – It’s a ‘theological debate’ on climate -Tipping Point With Liz Wheeler on OAN (One America News Network) Morano: ‘What Trump did today was a blow to superstition. No longer in Washington DC do we have to pretend that a UN climate treaty can save the planet or actually control temperature or impact storminess. This truly is a day that science has won out in DC and that is a rare day when it comes to climate change.’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano statement:

“A U.S. Clexit (Climate Exit from UN Paris Pact) is a victory for science. President Trump today, in one swoop, made perhaps the most consequential decision of his presidency both in domestic and international policy by announcing a Clexit of the U.S. from the UN Paris agreement. One of Trump’s core political principles has been an America first policy and knowing the art of a deal. Trump realized that the UN Paris climate pact would not serve the interests of U.S. foreign policy or domestic energy policy. The near total dismantling of former President Obama’s “climate legacy” is now almost complete. Bravo!  President Trump understands that the UN has no interest in climate. The UN’s real goal is “global governance” and “wealth redistribution.” Flashback: UN IPCC Official Edenhofer: ‘We Redistribute World’s Wealth By Climate Policy’

Climate Depot’s Morano predicted Trump’s actions today back in November 2016 while attending the UN climate summit in Morocco. Morano was ejected from the summit for shredding the UN Paris agreement. See: UN Armed Security Shuts Down Skeptics After SHREDDING UN Climate Treaty at Summit Next To Trump Cut-out – November 16, 2016

A UN climate agreement is totally meaningless when it comes to the climate. University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack  has noted: “None of the strategies that have been offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”

Climate Depot Marc Morano adds: In layman’s terms: All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!  Make no mistake, climate campaigners who tout UN agreements and EPA regulations as a way to control Earth’s temperature and storminess are guilty of belief in superstition. Today, America rejects superstition and the belief that government regulations and UN agreements can control the climate. 

NASA’s former lead global warming scientist Dr. James Hansen is also not a big fan of the UN Paris accord. See: ‘Fraud, Fake…Worthless Words’: NASA’s James Hansen on UN Paris Pact – Trump should take note – “[The Paris agreement] is a fraud really, a fake. It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”
Climate experts who have looked at the UN climate agreement think Trump is correct to dismantle it. Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote “Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all.” Lomborg added that Trump withdrawing from the UN treaty “will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end” because even if you accept the climate claims of the UN, the agreement “will matter very little to temperature rise.” (Also see: Bjorn Lomborg: ‘Germany Spends $110 Billion to Delay Global Warming by 37 Hours’)

Statistician: UN climate treaty will cost $100 trillion – To Have No Impact – Postpone warming by less than four years by 2100

Statistician: UN climate treaty will cost $100 trillion – To Have No Impact – Postpone warming by less than four years by 2100Lomborg: “If the U.S. delivers for the whole century on the President Obama’s very ambitious rhetoric, it would postpone global warming by about eight months at the end of the century.”Danish statistician Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, the President of the Copenhagen Consensus Center: “We will spend at least one hundred trillion dollars in order to reduce the temperature by the end of the century by a grand total of three tenths of one degree…the equivalent of postponing warming by less than four years…Again, that is using the UN’s own climate prediction model.” “But here is the biggest problem: These minuscule benefits do not come free — quite the contrary. The cost of the UN Paris climate pact is likely to run 1 to 2 trillion dollars every year.”Lomborg Blasts UN Paris Treaty’s $100 Trillion Price Tag For No Temp Impact: ‘You won’t be able to measure it in 100 years’ – Bjorn Lomborg: The debate about the UN Paris Agreement is “about identity politics. It’s about feeling good… but the climate doesn’t care about how you feel.”
Bjorn Lomborg on UN climate deal: ‘This is likely to be among most expensive treaties in the history of the world’

RELATED LINKS: 

‘Failure Of Paris Climate Deal Was Inevitable’

TRUMP: ‘Paris’ less about climate, more about others gaining advantage over US

Trump: ‘I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris’

Democrat Billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer: Trump’s Paris exit a ‘traitorous act of war’

Hulk Actor Mark Ruffalo: ‘Trump will have the death of whole nations on his hands’

Remaining Paris signatories plan to save planet by building 2,440 NEW coal plants. http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_Coal_Gap_Briefing_COP21.pdf …

We’re Outta There! President Pulling Out Of Paris Climate Accord

THE 10 DUMBEST REACTIONS TO TRUMP QUITTING THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD

1. Apparently of the opinion that Kathy Griffin pretending to behead Trump wasn’t quite distasteful enough, an editorial cartoonist for the Australian Financial Review, David Rowe, likened Trump leaving the Paris agreement to … beheading the entire planet.

9. John Kerry, one of the deal’s leading negotiators, said Trump is not helping the “forgotten Americans” he pledged to elevate, but instead will give their kids asthma (perhaps as soon as this summer!).

Weather Channel Website Goes Apocalyptic After Trump’s Paris Accord Repeal

De Blasio Declares NYC Will Defy Trump, Commit To Global Warming Agreement

Democrats Plot ‘Revolution’ To Circumvent Trump’s Paris Decision

Top Congressional Republicans Applaud Trump’s Decision To Pull Out Of Paris Climate Agreement

Environmentalists Call Trump’s Trashing Of Global Warming Deal A ‘Suicide Note For Earth’

Existing a Paris is racist?! ACLU: U.S. Exiting Paris Climate Accord Is ‘An Assault on Communities of Color’

As his climate legacy is erased, Obama slams Trump for leaving Paris agreement

Dem Senate Min. Leader Schumer: Trump tells Earth to ‘drop dead’

‘Failure Of Paris Climate Deal Was Inevitable’

TRUMP: ‘Paris’ less about climate, more about others gaining advantage over US

Trump: ‘I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris’

Democrat Billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer: Trump’s Paris exit a ‘traitorous act of war’

CNN: Trump on Paris accord: ‘We’re getting out’

BBC: Trump announces US will withdraw from UN Paris Climate deal

Hulk Actor Mark Ruffalo: ‘Trump will have the death of whole nations on his hands’

Watch Live: Trump’s announcement of UN Paris Climate Pact

It’s Over! White House Confirms Trump Will Announce U.S. Withdrawal from Paris Climate Accord

DiCaprio to Trump on UN Paris Pact: ‘I hope you’ll make the moral decision’

Fmr. CBS Newsman Dan Rather: ‘History will judge mercilessly Trump’s reported decision to withdraw from Paris’ pact

Update: CNN: Trump expected to withdraw from Paris climate agreement – Will Announce at 3pmThursday

Hillary on Trump Paris pullout: ‘Really stupid… totally incomprehensible… incredibly foolish’

VIDEO: President Trump withdraws from the Paris Accord — Let the Hysteria Begin!

President Trump has kept another campaign promise. On June 1st, 2017 he formally announced that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement stating, “I was elected to represent Pittsburgh, not Paris!”

In their column 4 Reasons Trump Was Right to Pull Out of the Paris Agreement Nicolas Loris  and Katie Tubb write:

President Donald Trump has fulfilled a key campaign pledge, announcing that the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement.

The Paris Agreement, which committed the U.S. to drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions, was a truly bad deal—bad for American taxpayers, American energy companies, and every single American who depends on affordable, reliable energy.

It was also bad for the countries that remain in the agreement. Here are four reasons Trump was right to withdraw.

1. The Paris Agreement was costly and ineffective.

2. The agreement wasted taxpayer money.

3. Withdrawal is a demonstration of leadership.

4. Withdrawal is good for American energy competitiveness.

Read more…

PowerLine’s  Steven Hayward reporting on the President’s decision wrote:

I know what you’re thinking. How can the climatistas be any more hysterical than they already are? Is it even possible to turn it up past 11? In any case, here are a few early returns, which I’ll update as the day unfolds. (That was a great speech, by the way: “I was elected to represent Pittsburgh, not Paris.”) Hear, hear! For now, this first one is the winner (although the ACLU tweet is a close rival):

Read more…

Watch the full remarks of Vice President Pence, President Trump and the Secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency Pruitt’s comments on withdrawing from the Paris Accord:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

DELINGPOLE: That Paris Speech Just Made Trump Great Again

NYT Peddles More Global Warming Science Without Numbers

Limbaugh explains why he believes American voters saved the country in 2016

Spying on You, Spying on Me, Spying on the President

RELATED VIDEO: Watch Rand Paul bulldoze through each global warming talking point – TheBlaze

Leftists Want Their Enemies Dead

Should neo-Nazis be allowed to use gym facilities?

It’s an odd question, but it has larger implications for the future of conservatives in the public square, and for America’s prospects of staving off a new civil war.

The question about neo-Nazis and the gym came up recently when Georgetown University professor Christine Fair happened upon neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, who is not me, at a gym and began berating him. The gym then revoked Richard Spencer’s membership.

I have no regard for Richard Spencer, as often as I am confused with him: he has more than once demanded that I reveal my “real” name, as he is convinced that I am secretly a Jew who has changed my name to fool good white folks like him. He has become notorious for openly espousing a white nationalism that most people would have rather remained a relic of history.

But does that mean he can’t even use gym facilities that he paid for, and in which he wasn’t bothering anyone?

I have nothing but disgust for Richard Spencer, but I have even greater disgust for Christine Fair, who in this incident showed herself to be more of a Nazi than Richard Spencer could ever hope to be.

Like the Nazis, Christine Fair wants those whom she hates destroyed, full stop. Just destroyed. She doesn’t want them to be able to speak in public. She doesn’t want them to be able to hold memberships in gyms. She doesn’t want them to be allowed to live in the city she lives in. She told Richard, among other things: “I find your presence in this gym to be unacceptable, your presence in this town to be unacceptable”.

Is there anything that Christine Fair thinks Richard Spencer ought to be allowed to do? Does she find his breathing unacceptable?

Fair’s berating of Richard Spencer, and getting him kicked out of his gym, was quintessentially Nazi behavior, and was in direct contradiction to the principles that make a society free.

While Richard Spencer is indeed a Nazi, albeit in a different way from how Fair is one, there is no excuse for what she did. As long as he was not breaking any laws, he had as much right to be in that gym as Christine Fair has.

Christine Fair has apparently not reflected upon the precedent she is setting, or on the possibility, as remote as it is, that one day her views could be out of favor, and she could find herself getting poisoned, and prevented from speaking by riots, and screamed at by campus fascists, and driven out of gyms, and the like, and that a healthier and freer society allows for the freedom of expression and doesn’t persecute or hound those whose ideas are unpopular or even unarguably obnoxious.

Instead, she believes we need ideological purity tests even for gym memberships. Once the precedent is set that one must hold a certain set of beliefs and shun others in order to be able to work out at the gym, the required beliefs could shift, and any individual or group could be victimized.

This is the road to totalitarianism, and we’re racing down it.

Another example of the Left’s determination to destroy utterly everyone who opposes it is the recent experience of Terry Jones, the infamous Qur’an-burning pastor. I am not a supporter of Terry Jones; I oppose burning books. I believe in free speech and free discourse. The thuggish, authoritarian Left shuts down opposing views and censors those whom it hates. Burning books is the kind of thing they do, if not literally, then by shutting down, smearing, and defaming those whom they hate. I am not inclined to emulate them.

All that said, however, Terry Jones lives in a nation that has the First Amendment in its Constitution. It is not illegal for him to dislike Islam or to burn Qur’ans. But in early February, the Washington Post wrote a gleeful story about how Jones had been working as an Uber driver, but had been fired by Uber after the Post reporter, a Muslim named Faiz Siddiqui, called Uber and alerted them to who Jones was.

So now your Uber driver has to love Islam. If he doesn’t appreciate Islam sufficiently, he could be fired.

What does loving Islam have to do with driving for Uber? About as much as being a neo-Nazi has to do with holding a gym membership. Is it acceptable for your plumber to take a dim view of Buddhism?

The Left is becoming so totalitarian, so inhospitable to the slightest dissent, that even when a critic of Islam is doing something that has nothing to do with Islam, Leftists move to shut him down. Jones had to close down a french fry stand he was running in a Florida mall, and he can’t drive for Uber. What can he do? The Left just wants him dead — that’s all.

Similarly, when I was scheduled to speak several years ago at an education conference that had nothing to do with Islam, Christine Fair’s colleague Nathan Lean of Georgetown University (who has several times posted a link on Twitter to what he thinks is my home address, in an obvious attempt to get me killed by jihadis and/or frighten me into silence) successfully got the host, a Catholic bishop, to cancel the event because of my work on Islam, even though Islam had nothing to do with what I was set to discuss. (The event was held at another location, and I spoke as planned.)…

Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Scotland: Muslim says Manchester jihad massacre was “inevitable consequence of UK policy towards Muslims”

Hugh Fitzgerald: Olivier Roy, “One of France’s Top Experts On Islamic Terrorism” (Part II)

French Legislative Elections: Part 2 and Zionist interlude

Apparently the Right is divided and heading for a big disappointment in the coming legislative elections (1st round June 11, 2nd round June 18th). Determined, a few short weeks ago, to grasp a legislative victory from the jaws of an unfair presidential defeat, les Républicains are reportedly fissured and wobbly. Candidates and voters have wilted like cut flowers under the hot sunshine of Macron’s victory. Even though the party minus François Fillon has toned down the platform, they can’t stop the drift of the centrist wing to Macron’s La République en marche powerhouse. Whatever happens this time around, les Républicains will sooner or later regroup and fortify. But the Front National is really truly falling apart. Years of effort to turn the autocratic family affair into a pseudo-party cleansed of its disgraceful antecedents have come to naught. Marine the Chief messed up her campaign because she was micromanaged by several different lieutenants pushing incompatible unworkable policies. All bluff and bluster, they now look pitiful. And yet polls are predicting the FN and LR tied at 20%. I don’t believe it.

Is it really possible to poll overall percentages for more than 500 separate races where countless local factors will determine the outcome for thousands candidates? In some districts there are as many as 17 candidates in the 1st round.

Does Macron’s right hand man know what his left hand is doing?

Le Canard Enchaîné does not slumber and will not sleep. Having pushed François Fillon out of the race and into political oblivion, the muckrakers drew fresh blood from Emmanuel Macron’s right hand man, Richard Ferrand, Minister of Territorial Cohesion and parliamentary candidate in the 6th district of the Finistère. We have already reported on Ferrand’s indulgent donation to France Palestine Solidarité, one of those questionable charitable organizations with Islamist ties. Now it seems he was far more indulgent with regard to his companion, Sandrine Doucen. A lawyer directly involved in the transaction confirms allegations that Ferrand, acting as director of Les Mutuelles de Bretagne, saw no harm in the health insurance company contracting with Ms. Doucen in 2011 for the rental of a property she did not yet own as head of a company that did not yet exist when she made the bid. Monsieur Ferrand claims les Mutuelles got a good deal, the lawyer says they should have bought the property instead of renting from Ms. Doucen, Richard Ferrand says he and his companion are neither married nor joined by a civil contract. They hold no property in common. The whole affair is perfectly legitimate and voters know he is an honest man.

The parquet national financier (PNF) that investigated François Fillon within 24 hours of the Canard’s revelations concerning his wife’s employment as parliamentary assistant and rushed full speed ahead to the mise en examen that sunk his candidature sees no reason to investigate the Ferrand case.  Ditto for the jurisdiction of Brest. By the way, monsieur Ferrand also employed his son as parliamentary assistant because, he says, he was the only qualified IT technician in the region. Will voters turn their backs on Ferrand the way they abandoned Fillon? Apparently not. Because LREM has made a priority of moralization of political life. The inimitable ultimate moralizer François Bayrou, propelled to the Olympian heights as Justice Minister, has not descended to street level to scold or forgive or even acknowledge the eventual misstep of Richard Ferrand. Other members of the new administration have forcefully declared that there is no reason for Ferrand to resign because there is no Ferrand scandal, all of this is a distraction from the top priority Moralization project.

François Bayrou’s right hand woman, Marielle de Sarnez, is under investigation for an alleged falsified work contract for her EU Parliamentary assistant. A former member of Bayrou’s party claims this was systematic practice. Which confirms my position on the Fillon political assassination: whatever he did, it did not betray the gentleman’s agreement of French politics. If citizens want moralization, they should have said so before the campaign. But if they were stupid enough to be influenced by the manipulation they will probably give Macron the legislative majority he needs to clinch his power grab.

Zionist interlude

After assiduously following the presidential campaign for months and days, I ran out on the winner and his République and boarded an El Al flight to Israel on the 10th of May. Four hours and some minutes later, I landed in a paradigm shift. The first time I visited Israel more than 20 years ago I felt like I was picking up a conversation with close or distant family members that had already begun years or centuries ago. Since then, the impression is sustained and intensified. I’m there as if I’d never left, I leave as if I’ll be back the next day.

So many thousands of words composed with the sincere conviction that what happens here in France will resound and ricochet, such scrupulous attention to detail and earnest effort to make the twists and turns of French politics comprehensible to the outside world…and it fades to insignificance as soon as I am immersed in the chorus of birdsong and the symphony of sunlight of Eretz, the land, that small plot of land that amplifies beyond geography. So much substance in such an intense concentration, so much confidence solidly anchored in courage, the vitality, the energy, the constant overcoming of obstacles. And always a touch of bewilderment from my friends and colleagues. All of them are world travelers, recognized experts, original thinkers, active, experienced, well-informed and struggling to understand European surrender, American Jewish naïveté, stubborn Western refusal to recognize that Israelis are doing what has to be done to defend themselves against the same enemy that is hacking away at our common foundations.

Their children or grandchildren are in the army, in harm’s way. They’ve lost brothers and uncles, they’ve endured years of atrocious shahid attacks, car rammings, stabbings, and they aren’t asking anyone to shield them from realty or to fight in their place. They’re wondering why the proliferation of martyrdom operations throughout the Western world hasn’t led to acknowledgement of a distinct similarity. Instead of which they see powerful European nations and the United States of America responding with flowers and candles to yet another mass murder and still one more and so many you can’t even count them but there’s always a politician, an NGO, an academic, a concerned citizen to scold Israel for its “harsh treatment of Palestinians.”

Catch 22

When I turned on my computer that day and caught a glimpse of “…attack… 22 dead, 59 wounded…I thought the dateline would be Baghdad or Idlib. After reading my emails, I came back to the death toll… in Manchester. Biggest “terrorist” attack since July 7, 2005. Like survivors rising from the dust, feeling for arms and legs, we reach out to friends and family members whenever jihad strikes in their vicinity. All clear for my Manchester. But twenty-two, mostly young people, are dead. The joys of being in Israel are always mixed with tragic landmarks. The Dolphinarium; young people waiting in line at a concert hall on the beach. The Moment Café, now Café de Paris. Sbarro Pizzeria, the daughter of dear friends. Mike’s Place. And the gutted buses. Twenty-eight Copts assassinated in their bus on the way to Ascension services in Egypt. We pass the Hyper Cacher at Porte de Vincennes on our way to the airport in Paris.

Only one explanation fits all: jihad. I have been writing about it for 17 years, I’ve learned from specialists who know more and knew sooner, but I learn quickly. In my books and articles I patiently explain the mechanisms, the strategy, the specific examples as they occur. Israel is the key. Not because I’m Jewish and a Zionist, but because 21st century jihad conquest starts there. The persistent “Mideast Conflict” misconception acts as blinders and hobbles our resistance against today’s totalitarian juggernaut.

It requires colossal effort to admit such a monumental sustained error of analysis before finally drawing lessons from Israel’s experience and stop condemning Israel for doing what we must sooner or later learn to do. As British authorities systematically locate and detain members of the Manchester cell, families mourn their dead. Life is tragic. Young people may die in accidents, of overdoses, murdered by vicious boyfriends or diabolical rivals but these are precisely accidents of life. Those that died in Manchester are casualties of a war that is being fought as if it were criminality. In the UK as in France, intelligence services can’t possibly keep an eye on some 3,000 high priority security risks. They should be in preventive detention.

Europeans rightfully assert that nations with strict controls-e.g. Israel, Russia, the United States-are also vulnerable to death by “terrorism.” Yes, but there is a difference between losing battles and not fighting a war.

President Trump in Arabia and Points West

You follow a presidential campaign, listen attentively to candidates, observe their behavior and attitudes. Most of them are so far from fitting the bill that you can’t believe voters will choose them. But they do. And suddenly the candidate turns into a president ferried around in motorcades, meeting other heads of state in palatial surroundings, making decisions of international scope, squiring a first lady whose outfits are a subject of international attention, and you see before your eyes what it means to take power.

So, what do you think about President Trump’s visit? Will he make peace? The question was raised by various taxi drivers during my stay in Israel. I was invited to comment on the question on i24 news [French channel, May 21st, 9:30 PM]. The most emphatic discourse was delivered at my expense by the oversize driver of a rather shabby taxi that had picked me up at Givat Shaul in Jerusalem. When he asked my opinion, I astutely returned the serve and listened respectfully as he outlined, with increasing volume, his peace plan. Roughly speaking it was ’67 borders, divided Jerusalem and the rest after you sign. He said he lived just 3 minutes from my destination in the German Colony. Would his corner of the German Colony, I ask naively, be part of the Palestinian state? He lives, precisely, in Abu Tor and, yes, he shouts at me, he wants to live in a Palestinian state because, he’s furious, look at this, and pulls out an administrative document, do you know what this is, he hollers, boiling with anger. It was a 500-shekel traffic ticket. He had of course done nothing wrong. “They hate Arabs.” 500 shekels, he’ll work two days for nothing. And his little boy wants a new bicycle. It costs exactly 500 shekels. He’s enraged!

My informant tells me that Trump can make peace, because they’ll do whatever he says. But not with Abbas, he grabs the money. Arafat was good, everyone loved him, he didn’t grab the money. Hamas is good, they don’t grab the money. Who’s the man that will make peace? Barghouti. Everyone loves him.

As we arrive at my destination I feel a tinge of regret. Why did I give him the exact address? I could have picked a corner 2 blocks away. What’s your name, he asked. And I went into a cheerful riff about my jealous husband. What’s your name? Hani. Aha, I laughed, can’t you see my husband when I tell him Hani from Abu Tor is coming to visit me? On that bubbly note, Hani announces a price that’s 20 shekels over the normal rate-a sleight of hand with the meter-and while I’m looking for the small change he’s passing me his cell phone with a picture that I’m hoping isn’t a Daesh snuff video, no it’s his adorable little boy against a multicolor background and the upshot is he succeeds in making me forget I gave him a 100-shekel bill so the total ripoff is about 70 shekels. When I walk into the kitchen, M. is there, and I blurt out “I got ripped off by an Arab taxi driver.” She recoils. “It could have been a Jewish taxi driver.”

That’s true. But he wouldn’t have done it by peace processing me.

On the other hand, 70 shekels is not too much to pay for a live demonstration of peace processing strategy and tactics. The mixture of intimidation, humiliation-provoked rage, domestic politics, seduction and exploitation of children made me forget what I was doing, to his advantage, and he expects, with the unanimously admired leader Marwan Barghouti serving several life terms in an Israeli prison he will make Israel hand over its strategic depth and half of Jerusalem. I like the way he told me that Abu Tor is 3 minutes from the German Colony. If that’s not breathing down your neck…

So what did I expect from President Donald J. Trump in Arabia & points west?  A holy alliance with some 50 Muslim states against “terrorism”? An art of the deal approach to the 2-state solution? An everything must go closeout of the lessons of recent history? The ladies did not wear hijab, Bibi wasn’t welcome at the kotel, you’re both great guys ready to make peace and compromise, this is a fabulous opportunity, a swing through Yad Vashem noblesse oblige…

Am I supposed to believe that none of this matters? It doesn’t matter what the president of the US says in his maiden voyage, with a retinue of 900, to the heart of the problem? It doesn’t matter if the leader of the free world talks terrorism shop with his Muslim buddies that finance totalitarian Islam in our fair lands, stoke the fires of genocidal anti-Zionism, and subscribe to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights? Of course they’ll be glad to have a Magen [shield of] David against Iran but that doesn’t mean they’re giving up their claims to Jerusalem, the Temple Mount and all that’s waqf under the sun. The close to 400 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia clinches the sellout.

The nuances escape me. If the brave new Mideast policy means pulling the 2-state “solution” out of history’s garbage heap, burnishing it with one’s own personal luster, and selling it for twice the original price, I have to reply that the deal is going nowhere. And if going nowhere with so much ballyhoo is some subtle way of outsmarting all the predecessors that went nowhere down the same rabbit hole, I repeat, the nuances escape me.

Which is why I will report in the very near future on a promising initiative piloted by my friend Mordechai Kedar: the 8-emirates solution.

Excerpts:

“Successful Arab leadership must be independent, local and firmly rooted with a traditional and homogenous sociological foundation. Israel and the world should recognize and support local leadership in the Arab Palestinian population centers that desire lasting peaceful relations as independent city-states

“The eight city-states would comprise the areas of Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah, Jericho, Tul-Karm, Kalkilya, the Arab part of Hebron and the Gaza strip. Local residents would become citizens of these eight independent countries.

“Complex problems require simple, workable solutions. The Palestinian Emirates vision is a viable alternative based on the Arab sociology of tribalism in Gaza, Judea and Samaria.”

I missed Israel apartheid week

It’s embarrassing but sometimes enlightening to make a faux pas. T., who knows about my interest in developing the Ethiopia-Israel connection, introduces me to O., an Ethiopian Israeli lawyer. What did I have in mind when I ask her if she goes “home” often? She smiles and says, “This is home, I was born in Israel.” In fact she’s been to Ethiopia once. And has already sketched out a typically Israeli development project with her non-Ethiopian friend. We’ll be working together in the near future. I call this photo of us on a windy afternoon on the Yaffo beach promenade is called “I missed Israeli apartheid week.”

Women in full Islamic dress (but not niqab) frolic on the Yaffo beach a few meters away from women in bikinis. Orthodox Jews, moderate and observant Muslims, tourists, yuppies, Russians, people to and from everywhere enjoy the beach promenade that goes all the way from the Northern Port of Tel Aviv to the Yaffo Port. They mingle in beachfront restaurants and cafés, Arab and Jewish restaurants offer delicacies all up and down the narrow Yaffo streets. The call of the muezzin is broadcast over and above rap music here, Mediterranean music there. Muslim families bring their rugs, barbecue paraphernalia, and shishas to picnic on grassy stretches behind the promenade. A young man on horseback gallops down the promenade leading a second horse by the bridle and you’re suddenly in Marrakesh! There is more juxtaposition than intermingling, but there too, I missed Israel apartheid week.

Friends and colleagues tell me success stories of proud to be Israeli Arabs. It’s not mushy and rosy, nothing is in this tough neighborhood. It’s a scattering and smattering, like the urban scene where shabby, dingy, crumbling properties stand side by side with the sleekly modern and everything is under construction and under repair. In the same way, the budding harmony of loyal Arab and Muslim citizens can flourish in a minefield of resentment, enemies within, brutal attacks.

Update Sarah Halimi

While I was in Israel, new and horrifying information about the jihad murder of Sarah Halimi was revealed. The victim’s brother, William Attal, has declared, based on the police report, that Kada Traoré beat and tortured his sister for one hour before throwing her out the window. She had twelve fractures on her face and body. The walls were splattered with blood. Neighbors heard the screams and tumult. One neighbor, sick with disgust at what he heard, recorded six minutes of the killer shouting allahu akhbar and koranic verses as he battered his victim. The “mentally deranged” but agile Traoré climbed from his family’s second floor apartment to the victim’s third floor balcony and smashed the window to burst into her apartment. The police, it is reported, were in the building waiting for reinforcements. For one hour. While a Jew hating madman pummeled and smashed a defenseless woman. The extent of his rage is no surprise to us. But the police? One hour? Waiting for reinforcements? They didn’t hear what the neighbor heard? How many years will we have to wait for a response from the authorities? A trial? A conviction. In the meantime, Traoré is in a mental hospital.

Now that the presidential election is over, the story bobbed up briefly in mainstream media. And disappeared.

N. said “She should have had a gun.” O., a journalist, said “I was in Belleville between the 1st and 2nd round, covering the election. I went around, spoke to people, I didn’t know anything about this murder. Nothing.

N.B. I’ll be reporting on the first round of the legislative elections from the United States. Back to Paris in time for the final round.

RELATED ARTICLE: Emmanuel Macron: An Apocalyptic Leader? | The Olive Branch Report

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Family Security Matters.

VIDEO: What not to tell the Canadian taxpayers about Syrian refugees

This is an excellent use of 6 minutes of your time!

I don’t know this program, but thank Paul for sending the youtube clip from The Rebel.

I’m guessing that what Faith Goldy learned about Canada’s new 40,000+ Syrian population applies to America’s flow as well.

We have followed Boy Trudeau’s rash Syrian resettlement program since it began in 2015, see our Canada archive for previous posts.

The Rebel learned that they can’t speak the language, that they are sick (TB!), and that they use large amounts of welfare because they aren’t finding work, but worst of all it was revealed that the documents, obtained by investigators, are littered with admonitions to not tell the taxpaying public the bad news!

If the video doesn’t play below, then watch it here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

HuffPo: U.S. Refugee processing pipeline being restarted, contractors optimistic

Falls Church, Virginia Mosque Dar al-Hijrah to Host Pro-Brotherhood Egyptian Imam

15,726 refugees admitted to U.S. since Inauguration Day, see where they went

Read the Confidential David Brock Memo Outlining Plans to Attack Trump

The G-7’s Outrageous Hypocrisy by John Tamny

An article in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal about the European leg of President Trump’s first foreign trip came with the headline: “Leaders Confront US on Russia, Climate.” In particular, non-US G-7 leaders are all strongly in favor of the 2015 Paris climate agreement that would require participating countries to limit carbon emissions, among other restraints on economic activity.

Trump disagrees, thus the confrontation, owing to his correct belief that the climate deal would prove a barrier to economic growth.That Trump was in opposition to the other G-7 members apparently led to some tense discussion about the US’s desire to exit commitments made during the presidency of Barack Obama. German Chancellor Angela Merkel confirmed that opinions expressed about the withering climate accord “were exchanged very intensively.”

You Obey, We Ignore

Merkel and other G-7 leaders disappointed in the 45th president have no leg to stand on, and certainly aren’t in the position to confront any US president. Trump should make this plain without an ounce of regret. The latter would be true even if the Paris accord were a credible answer to the theory that says economic progress is a major threat to our existence.

Indeed, the Europeans talk a big game about the importance of commitments, and of how the alleged fight to save the earth “has to be a collective effort,” but they’ve shown no remorse about their own persistent failure to honor their NATO spending pledges.

Translated, these nations expect the United States to weaken its economy based on an unproven, but rather expensive theory about the effects of climate change. But when it comes to living up to a longstanding agreement among NATO members to share the costs of a mutual defense shield, they’ll let the US foot the bill.

More interesting here is that in their desperation to keep the US in the Paris fold, Merkel and others are implicitly saying that any agreement made among leading western European countries without the US isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. With good reason.

So Much for Commitment

Consider non-NATO treaties like Maastricht, in which EU nations agreed to limit their deficit spending so that their debt/GDP ratios would always stay below 60%. Woops. As of 2015, Germany (74.4%), France (89.6%), and Italy (122.3%) were all well above what the G-7 countries committed to when they signed the treaty that led to the euro. As for their commitment to requiring euro member states to individually handle their debts, it too went out the window given the fear among EU members about what debt default would do to certain large banks.

Back to NATO, the European leaders so eager to guilt Trump into a climate commitment not his own have once again shown no commensurate guilt about their own safety being a function of US taxpayers and legislators regularly living up to commitments that they haven’t lived up to.

Mutual Defense

This is particularly galling when we remember that NATO’s mutual defense shield arguably has very little to do with US safety. Lest we forget, the US already has the strongest military in the world, and it’s also quite far from the world’s trouble spots. In short, the US has long stuck to an agreement that weakens it economically, and that has little to nothing to do with its ongoing existence.

Would Americans feel any less secure absent this pricey post-WWII arrangement? At the same time, could NATO survive and would Europeans still feel secure sans American support that gives NATO global relevance?The answer to the previous question explains why the Paris agreement will lose all meaning and relevance if the US backs out. We know this given the historical truth that non-US G-7 nations speak with a forked tongue.

They talk grandly about honoring commitments, but their actions invariably belie their lofty rhetoric. Just as they’ve done with NATO, or with their own inter-European treaties, they want the US to abide the Paris agreement so that they don’t have to.

In that case, President Trump would be very unwise to lend US credibility to an agreement that history says G-7 members will eventually trample on. While the Paris accord surely can’t survive without Trump’s support, neither can his commitment to 3 percent growth survive more government meddling meant to placate shaky G-7 members, all based on a theory. Trump has an easy answer; his rejection of the Paris agreement one that checks the political, economic and rationality boxes.

Trump has an easy answer; his rejection of the Paris agreement one that checks the political, economic and rationality boxes.

John Tamny

John Tamny is a Forbes contributor, editor of RealClearMarkets, a senior fellow in economics at Reason, and a senior economic adviser to Toreador Research & Trading. He’s the author of the 2016 book Who Needs the Fed? (Encounter), along with Popular Economics (Regnery Publishing, 2015).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Poll: Overwhelming majority of Israelis prefer sovereignty in Jerusalem over peace deal

Read the Confidential David Brock Memo Outlining Plans to Attack Trump

EDITORS NOTE: Get trained for success by leading entrepreneurs.  Learn more at FEEcon.org

The neo-Democrat Pedophile Pederast Party

The Democratic Party is the party of inclusion and tolerance. The Democrat Party has fully embraced the idea that gender is mutable and having sex with underage children is permissible, even laudable. The Democrat Party has made it a point to elect, hire and defend those who believe in pedophilia and pederasty.

So who are these people that the Democrat Party has embraced?

The Democrats.org website reads:

Democrats stand with the LGBT community’s fight for equality. We are committed to ending anti-LGBT violence, bullying, and discrimination, and to ensuring that LGBT Americans are treated with dignity and respect in their communities, their workplaces, and their schools.

These people fall into two categories: pedophiles and pederasts. A pedophile is a a person who is sexually attracted to children. A pederast is a man who desires or engages in sexual activity with a boy.

The most recent, of many, examples is the revelation that Democratic Mayor of New York city Bill De Blasio’s employee was arrested for child pornography. According to the Daily Mail:

Leading New York young Democrat Jacob Schwartz. Photo: UK Daily Mail.

A de Blasio administration employee and leading New York young Democrat has been arrested on felony charges of child pornography.

Jacob Schwartz, 29, was allegedly keeping more than 3,000 photographs and 89 videos of child pornography, including pictures of baby girls as young as six-months-old, court papers revealed.

The highly illegal content shows ‘young nude females between the approximate ages of six months and 16 (years) engaging in sexual conduct on an adult male,’ reported the New York Post.

[ … ]

Schwartz was the president of the Manhattan Young Democrats and the downstate region vice president of the state’s chapter.

Read more.

The Democrat Party is also supported in large part by the Muslim ummah (community). A poll released by the Council on American-Islamic Relations found that 74 percent voted for Hillary Clinton and 13 percent voted for Trump. Muslims believe in child marriage and female genital mutilation. LGBT Americans continue to skew Democratic and Liberal according to GallupNBC News reported:

A large majority of registered LGBT voters support Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump, according to results of two weeks of the NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll.

Seventy-two percent of registered LGBT voters support Clinton, compared to 20 percent who support Trump.

[ … ]

In past elections, LGBT voters have played an important role. According to results from the 2012 NBC News Exit Polls, 5 percent of voters identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual and 76 percent voted for Barack Obama.

Read more.

In my May 2016 column New Democrat Party: The Red–Green–Rainbow Troika I warned:

The Democratic Party is no longer the party of President John F. Kennedy. Seldom does one hear JFK’s name invoked by Democrats. Why? Because JFK was a war hero, a lifetime member of the NRA, a Catholic, he hated Communists and fought communism, he and his brother Bobby fought organized crime by profiling Italian Americans and he loved America.

Today JFK would be labeled by his own party as a Constitutional conservative.

The NDP has made it its mission to protect the “civil rights and civil liberties” of groups that are both incompatible with one another and with mainstream America.

The groups are incompatible for a number of reasons including:

  1. Communists hate Muslims and gays.
  2. Muslims hate Communists and execute gays (sodomites).
  3. Gays hate all religions, but make an exception for Islam (i.e. the enemy of my enemy is my friend).

At some point these divergent groups will turn on one another. But for the time being they have work to do. That work includes:

  1. Implementing a secular Marxist/Leninist/Socialist/Collectivist system of government in the USA.
  2. Implementing Shariah (Islamic) law in the USA, which, while totalitarian, is incompatible with #1 because it is not secular but rather based upon a strict interpretation of the Qur’an and Hadith.
  3. Demanding rights and privileges at the expense of others rights and privileges, an area of common ground but defined differently by each member of the RGRT.

It now appears that the Democrat Party is facing what the Catholic Church faced when pederast priests raped little boys. A crisis of culture. The Democrat Party is no longer the party of middle class America. It has morphed into the fringe party. The party of pedophiles, pederasts and Mohammed.

This column is a warning to the Republican Party.

Do not go down this pathway because, while the media will defend Democrats, they will not defend you if a Republican pederast or pedophile is exposed!

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Anthony Weiner Pleads Guilty to Federal Obscenity Charge

Democrat Poster Boy Anthony Weiner — WeinerGate the Movie

LGBT Community – Democrats.org: Change that Matters

LGBT Americans Continue to Skew Democratic and Liberal | Gallup

Now it’s new Democratic Party vs. American worker

Mattis Should Hit Pause on Obama-Era Decision to Let Transgender Individuals Serve in Military

A heroine for our times: Trump should invite Polish Prime Minister to White House!

If Donald Trump (the real Donald Trump ) is still a free man!, he should invite Beata Szydło to a meeting in the Oval Office followed by a lavish state dinner at the White House.

He would send a message to the wimps in Europe, to the cheapskates at NATO, and remind voters here of his promises to keep America safe (not to mention thrilling hardworking/patriotic Polish Americans!).

Did you know that RRW has a Facebook page?  It has 44,000 likes and this simple message, as of this morning, has reached over 50,000 people.  I have to admit (and apologize) that I stink at commenting and responding to comments, but I truly appreciate all of you who forward my page to your friends.

This (below) is a screenshot of the message that had been up for 24 hours as of last night when I captured it.  Thanks to whoever it was that drafted the message that has been making the rounds on Twitter and Facebook.

My complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive is here.

EDITORS NOTE: The map below shows terrorist attacks in Europe. Note that Poland has had no attacks.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

CCTV shows Manchester bomber sauntering towards gig on night of attack

Trump State Department opens the flood gates, refugee admissions will explode in coming weeks

At present rate of admissions, Trump FY17 refugee numbers will be in average range

Australia dumb deal: If this is “extreme vetting” we are in deep trouble!

Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society: Tell Congress we need more $$$ for refugees

U.S. State Department continues its pattern of secrecy regarding refugee resettlement

1,600 of Australia’s rejected migrants want to come to America in Obama “dumb” deal

Human Rights First and five refugee contractors/others oppose tightening U.S. security

There’s No Way Obamacare Can Last by Charles Hughes

The Congressional Budget Office score of the American Health Care Act [claims to shows] that the bill will reduce deficits by $119 billion over the next decade and result in 23 million more people being uninsured by 2026. This leaves the impression that people would be better off if Obamacare were unchanged. But a new report from the Department of Health and Human Services dispels this myth.

Premiums have doubled and tripled and are rising further. 

The HHS report shows that premiums in the individual market exchanges increased by 105 percent in the 39 states using Healthcare.gov from 2013 to 2017. This is equivalent to $244 per month in additional premium payments for people buying insurance through the exchanges, or $2,928 over the course of a year. People not eligible for exchange subsidies are fully exposed to these increases, while taxpayers will bear the brunt in the form of higher outlays for subsidies for enrollees who are eligible.Despite the promises that Obamacare would “cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year,” average premiums on the exchanges more than doubled over this period. In some states, such as Alabama and Alaska, the average premium more than tripled.

The high average increase is not driven by a few outliers, as 23 out of the 39 states included in the analysis experienced premium increases in excess of 105 percent. Only three states, North Dakota, New Hampshire, and New Jersey, had cumulative premium increases below 50 percent.

Source: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
Created with Datawrapper

As the report acknowledges, the composition of the population enrolling in plans through the exchanges has changed over time due to the adverse selection problems created by the laws subsidy and regulation frameworks.

For example, the community rating age bands, which dictate how much more companies can charge older, higher-risk enrollees, were set at 3:1 under Obamacare. A recent study by Milliman estimated that relaxing these age bands to 5:1 would reduce premiums for people aged 20-29 by 15 percent while increasing premiums for older enrollees.

Lower premiums for younger, healthier people would encourage more of them to enroll through the exchanges instead of foregoing health insurance because it is too expensive for them. Older, less healthy people make up a larger share of the exchange population now than in earlier years, which exacerbates the premium increases on that population.

Due to data limitations, the report does not deal with the population getting plans on the individual market but not through the exchanges. These people accounted for more than a third of the total individual market. They are not eligible for the law’s subsidies, so there is likely less adverse selection for the off-exchange population, but these enrollees have to bear the entirety of the costs of those increases.

Families choosing a plan through the exchanges have seen their premiums more than double since 2013. In some states, a wave of insurers leaving the exchange market has created situations where only one insurer is offering products for entire states.

Alabama and Alaska, which have seen the two highest cumulative premium increases, are both down to only one insurer. In the entire country, only Virginia saw the number of participating insurers increase from 2016 to 2017. Just today, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City announced it would be exiting the exchange, leaving 25 counties in Missouri without a participating insurer for now.The lack of choices and competition in a growing number of places makes it unlikely that there will be an end to rapid premium growth, absent reform. While the CBO estimates will provide some insight into the effects of the bill in its current iteration, a working group of Senators is crafting a revised bill with major alterations.

Getting the design of replacement legislation right is important, and the CBO score will give the working group of senators more information about which aspects of the bill that passed the House need the most adjustment. Provisions that allow for more competition and choice for people trying to get insurance through the individual market will help bring down annual premium increases.

Since 2013, this group has had to grapple with fewer choices while their premiums doubled. A well-crafted bill could go some way to reversing that unsustainable trend.

This originally ran on the E21 blog.

Charles Hughes

Charles Hughes is a research associate at the Cato Institute.

RELATED ARTICLE: In 3 Charts, the Biggest Revelations From New Obamacare Study

EDITORS NOTE: Get trained for success by leading entrepreneurs.  Learn more at FEEcon.org

Manchester Muslima wears shirt with LOVE spelled out with guns, knives and grenades

Coexist with that. What better way to show one’s horror at the Manchester jihad massacre than to wear a shirt showing the word “love” spelled out using various weapons as letters?

Is this niqabbed Muslima a moderate? Is her shirt moderate, or extremist? Was she radicalized on the Internet (where, presumably, she bought the shirt, since no one would sell such a thing among the peaceful and benign Muslim community in Britain, right?)? Did anyone in Britain notice or care about her shirt, which, given the context, seems unwise to ignore?

Channel 4 has pulled this segment, which is full of the usual finger-pointing and blaming of others by the Muslims who are interviewed, but the Internet remembers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Minnesota: Muslims arrested with guns and bomb-making materials get only light charges

Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s temporary immigration ban

8 Big-Government Policies that Hurt the Poor by Patrick Tyrrell

It’s clear that many big government policies are creating winners and losers in America.

The story has been the same for decades. Government makes friends with a company or an industry, blocks out the competition with regulation, and in some cases gives the company subsidies.

Such cronyism is bad for innovators and for consumers. But fewer people realize that it’s also bad for the poor. A recent report from The Heritage Foundation detailed 23 of these big government policies that hurt the poor, and provided concrete ways to address them.

Winners and losers from big government policies are not always clear. And yet for some crony policies, the winners and losers are very clear. The winners are a small group of identifiable government cronies, while the losers include people of little or no influence with the government.

Here is a look at eight big government policies from the report that benefit government cronies at the expense of other groups of people, including the poor.

1. Renewable Fuel Standard

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandated that renewable fuels be mixed into America’s gasoline supply, primarily by using corn-based ethanol. Then, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Acts significantly increased the amount that must be mixed in.

This mandate is known as the Renewable Fuel Standard. It forces the use of higher levels of biofuels than the market would otherwise bear. The result has been higher food and fuel prices.

Who Wins: Corn farmers, soybean farmers, and biofuel companies.

Who Loses: Consumers of gasoline, consumers of food, and farmers that rely on feedstock and restaurants.

2. Federal Sugar Program

The federal government tries to limit the supply of sugar that is sold in the United States.

This federal sugar program uses a combination of price supports, marketing allotments that limit how much sugar processors can sell each year, and import restrictions that reduce the amount of imports.

As a result, the price of American sugar is consistently higher than world prices.

Who WinsSugar growers and sugar harvesters.

Who Loses: Workers in sugar-using industries, and consumers of food (including bread) that contains sugar.

3. Catfish Inspection Program

As a result of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s catfish inspection program, the USDA inspects catfish while the Food and Drug Administration inspects all other seafood.

This creates duplication because seafood processing facilities that produce both catfish and any other seafood will have to deal with two different types of seafood regulatory schemes instead of just one.

This program also creates a non-tariff trade barrier that will make it extremely difficult for foreign catfish exporters to export to the U.S., likely reducing competition for the domestic catfish industry.

Who WinsDomestic catfish producers.

Who Loses: Domestic catfish consumers.

4. The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (the Jones Act)

The Merchant Marine Act – nicknamed after Sen. Wesley Jones, R-Wash. – requires the use of domestically built ships when transporting goods between U.S. ports. The ships must also be U.S.-owned, and mostly U.S.-crewed.

Who WinsThe U.S. domestic shipping industry.

Who Loses: The U.S. military, automobile drivers, users of propane and heating oil, and anyone benefitting from the trade and transportation of goods between U.S. ports.

5. Occupational Licensure

Licensure laws create government requirements for being allowed to practice a profession. These requirements exist even though the market would produce certification options if consumers desired such information.

Who WinsWorkers who have already obtained licenses.

Who Loses: People wanting to work who can’t because they don’t have a license, and consumers who have to pay higher prices for services.

6. Economic Development Takings

On June 23, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Kelo v. City of New London that the government can seize private property and transfer it to another private party for economic development.

This type of taking was deemed to be for “public use” and ruled a proper use of the government’s eminent domain power under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Who Wins: People who successfully lobby the government to seize other people’s property for financial gain.

Who LosesProperty owners who have their property seized.

7. Home-Sharing Regulations

Local governments sometimes ban or excessively regulate home-sharing – that is, renting out one’s home to accommodate travelers, such as through Airbnb.

When this happens, consumers have less choices of where to stay when traveling, hotels can charge higher prices, and homeowners and renters can’t make full use of their legally possessed homes to earn income for themselves.

Who WinsHotel employee union lobbies, and the hotel industry.

Who Loses: Homeowners and renters.

8. Ride-Sharing Regulations

In some state and local jurisdictions (such as outside Portland, Oregon; Alaska; and Austin, Texas), the government bans or heavily regulates ride-sharing companies like Uber and Lyft.

These companies are popping up all over because they meet consumers’ needs, but they are being held down in certain cities where the government backs the establishment industry.

Who WinsTraditional taxicab companies.

Who Loses: Uber, Lyft, and drivers looking for low barriers to entry; taxicab customers; customers who want to go in or out of certain neighborhoods that traditional taxi drivers avoid; and users of public transportation seeking to complete the “last mile” of their trips.

When industries or groups win special favors from politicians at the expense of ordinary Americans and the poor, it is an affront to freedom – especially to the economic freedom of the poor.

Policies that drive up prices – especially of commodities – are harder to absorb if you are poor.

The policies listed above can block off the only escape route that poor people have from poverty, preventing them from doing what they are good at for a living, for example, or from renting out their home or other property.

All Americans should have the same opportunities open to them. But when government cronyism rears its ugly head, they don’t.

Those who fall on the losing side of cronyism are more likely to agree with President Ronald Reagan when he said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Reprinted from Daily Signal.

Patrick Tyrrell

Patrick Tyrrell is a research coordinator in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis.

EDITORS NOTE: Get trained for success by leading entrepreneurs.  Learn more at FEEcon.org

President Trump’s ‘Taxpayer First’ Budget

President Trump’s first proposed budget shows respect for the people who pay the bills. The administration’s proposal reverses the damaging trends from previous administrations by putting our nation’s budget back into balance and reducing our debt through fiscally conservative principles, all the while delivering on President Trump’s campaign promise not to cut Social Security retirement or Medicare. The budget’s combination of regulatory, tax, and welfare reforms will provide opportunities for economic growth and creation. Get the facts about President Trump’s budget.

BALANCE & CUTTING SPENDING

Unlike any budget proposed by the previous administration, the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget achieves balance within the 10-year budget window and begins to reduce the national debt within that same window.

The policies in this Budget will drive down spending and grow the economy. By 2027, when the budget reaches balance, publicly held debt will be reduced to less than 60 percent of GDP, the lowest level since 2010.

NO CUTS TO MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY

The President’s Budget does not cut core Social Security benefits. And the President is fulfilling his presidential campaign promise not to cut Medicare benefits.

SAVING TAXPAYERS MONEY

President Trump’s budget saves the American people billions of dollars through welfare, tax, and regulatory reform.

SUPPORTING OUR MILITARY

The President is requesting $54 billion, or 10 percent, more than the defense level President Obama signed into law for both the 2017 CR and the 2018 budget cap. This increase balances the need to rebuild the military with the need for disciplined, strategy-driven, executable growth.

KEEPING AMERICANS SAFE

The Budget includes over $2.6 billion in new infrastructure and technology investments in 2018 to give CBP frontline law enforcement officers the tools and technologies they need to deter, deny, identify, track, and resolve illegal activity along the border.

PUTTING AMERICAN FAMILIES FIRST

President Trump’s budget provides national paid family leave for the first time in the history of this country.

Find out more information about President Trump’s Taxpayer First Budget at WhiteHouse.gov/taxpayers-first.

Here are the 66 programs eliminated in President Trump’s budget:

Agriculture Department — $855 million

  • McGovern-Dole International Food for Education
  • Rural Business-Cooperative Service
  • Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account
  • Single Family Housing Direct Loans

Commerce Department — $633 million

  • Economic Development Administration
  • Manufacturing Extension Partnership
  • Minority Business Development Agency
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Grants and Education

Education Department — $4.976 billion

  • 21st Century Community Learning Centers
  • Comprehensive Literacy Development Grants
  • Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants
  • Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property
  • International Education
  • Strengthening Institutions
  • Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants
  • Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants
  • Teacher Quality Partnership

Energy Department — $398 million

  • Advanced Research Projects Agency—Energy
  • Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program and Title 17 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program
  • Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility

Health and Human Services — $4.834 billion

  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • Community Services Block Grant
  • Health Professions and Nursing Training Programs
  • Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program

Homeland Security — $235 million

  • Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program
  • Transportation Security Administration Law Enforcement Grants

Housing and Urban Development — $4.123 billion

  • Choice Neighborhoods
  • Community Development Block
  • HOME Investment Partnerships Program
  • Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity Program Account

Interior Department — $122 million

  • Abandoned Mine Land Grants
  • Heritage Partnership Program
  • National Wildlife Refuge Fund

Justice Department — $210 million

  • State Criminal Alien Assistance Program

Labor Department — $527 million

  • Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Training
  • OSHA Training Grants
  • Senior Community Service Employment Program

State Department and USAID — $4.256 billion

  • Development Assistance

Earmarked Appropriations for Non-Profit Organizations

  • The Asia Foundation
  • East-West Center
  • P.L. 480 Title II Food Aid

State Department, USAID, and Treasury Department — $1.59 billion

  • Green Climate Fund and Global Climate Change Initiative

Transportation Department — $499 million

  • National Infrastructure Investments (TIGER)

Treasury Department — $43 million

  • Global Agriculture and Food Security Program

Environmental Protection Agency — $493 million

  • Energy Star and Voluntary Climate Programs
  • Geographic Programs

National Aeronautics and Space Administration — $269 million

  • Five Earth Science Missions
  • Office of Education

Other Independent Agencies — $2.683 billion

  • Chemical Safety Board
  • Corporation for National and Community Service
  • Corporation for Public Broadcasting
  • Institute of Museum and Library Services

International Development Foundations

  • African Development Foundation
  • Inter-American Foundation
  • Legal Services Corporation
  • National Endowment for the Arts
  • National Endowment for the Humanities
  • Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
  • Overseas Private Investment Corporation

Regional Commissions

  • Appalachian Regional Commission
  • Delta Regional Authority
  • Denali Commission
  • Northern Border Regional Commission
  • U.S. Institute of Peace
  • U.S. Trade and Development Agency
  • Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Why Washington Hates Trump’s Budget

Finally, a Budget That Slashes Funding at Education Department

5 Things Congress Can Do to Get a Budget That Controls Spending

9 Key Takeaways From Trump’s First Budget

RELATED VIDEO: Romina Boccia joins CNBC’s “Closing Bell” to talk President Trump’s budget.

England again! Trump calls perpetrators ‘evil losers in life’

Manchester terrorist attack survivor.

CBS News has confirmed that the man who blew himself up at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England, was 23-year-old Salman Abedi, a Muslim, who was known to British authorities prior to the attack.

England has embraced refuges from the Middle East. English politicians and police have covered up gangs of Muslim men who have “groomed” young English girls for lives of prostitution. England has looked the other way when radical Islamic terrorists have run down, stabbed and blown up its citizens. Even the Church of England has repeatedly defended Islam as the “religion of peace” and called for all English school children to be forced to learn about Islam.

All of this kowtowing and appeasement has not stopped the terrorist attacks.

The UK Mirror posted a video of a soldier of the Islamic State claiming responsibility for the bombing in Manchester, England. ISIS has claimed the attack was carried out by one of its soldier.

Many, like former DHS agent and author Phillip B. Haney, argue attempts not to offend Muslims or expose Islam’s basic tenants has emboldened terrorists, and terrorist organization like ISIS, to plan and execute more attacks, killing more innocents. David Gaubatz, a former U.S. federal agent and Iraq war veteran, writes:

There are no two separate Islams.  Sharia law is enforced in Saudi Arabia at the same level as ISIS does in Syria.  There is not a Sharia law interpretation for ISIS that is not practiced in the same manner as any Islamic country/government in the Islamic world.  People at some point must begin to understand that Islam is the enemy of the world, which is led by the Saudi government.  All Muslims are required to travel to Saudi Arabia at least one time in their life.  I have conducted research in over 280 plus mosques in America.  Most of the violent material is directly from Saudi Arabia.

I visited one such mosques in Ft. Walton Beach, Florida.  Sharia based material in the mosque advocated the killing of innocent people, especially our children.  The local media and police ignored the evidence.  For years I have warned that Islamic terrorists will target the hearts of innocent people.  The hearts are our children.

Last night in Manchester England we saw an example.

President Trump in his speech in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia said:

When we see the scenes of destruction in the wake of terror, we see no signs that those murdered were Jewish or Christian, Shia or Sunni. When we look upon the streams of innocent blood soaked into the ancient ground, we cannot see the faith or sect or tribe of the victims we see only that they were children of God whose deaths are an insult to all that is holy.

What we saw last evening in Manchester, England was “an insult to all that is holy.”

We learned that the attack took place at an Ariana Grande concert. Ariana Grande in 2015 was caught on video at a California donut shop saying, “What the f**k is that? I hate Americans. I hate America.”

There are those in England who hate England, including some who are English citizens. As this terrorist attack unfolds we shall see if this is yet another example of a follower of Mohammed carrying out the mandate to kill the infidel and strike fear into their hearts.

President Trump made comments on the Manchester attack at a press conference with Palestinian leader Mahmood Abbas in Israel. Here are President Trump’s remarks:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

CBS: 800 Churches Nationwide Harbor Illegal Immigrants

Refugee industry wants Trump to admit 75,000 refugees this fiscal year, and another 75,000 in FY18

Manchester Explosion: UK Has Been Targeted By Terrorists ‘Time and Time Again’

UK Schools told to change class times, exam times and sports days because of Ramadan

Ex-GITMO detainee ISIS Suicide BOMBER in Iraq awarded $1.5 MILLION by UK Govt.

Prince Charles and Islams “Sacred Spirituality” by Hugh Fitzgerald

VIDEO: Muslim Protesters in London Call for Caliphate

UK Police arrest 900 Muslim migrants for crimes including rape and child abuse

Trump’s triumph in Riyadh proves America is back on top of the world

Democrats who believe Hillary Clinton won the election and who remain dedicated to besmirching President’s Trump’s actions irrespective of facts need not read this column, since there is nothing this president can do that would win their approval.

For those still in touch with reality, please read on.

I was about to go the air on Sky News Arabia on Friday when Defense Secretary James Mattis began a live press conference, where he touted recent U.S. military success against ISIS.

You wouldn’t know about the on-the-record briefing, which also featured the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General James Dunford, and Obama-appointee roving ambassador Brett McGurk, from the U.S. news media.

In fact, even if you searched Google for it, you would find just a single mention of the press conference, which was just a preview from the Washington Examiner with the misleading headline, “Today’s Mattis briefing: Progress report, but no ISIS strategy.”

Think of that for just a moment: even Google, the world’s principal gatekeeper to information on the world wide web, is engaging in anti-Trump censorship.

Alternative web search engine Bing is slightly better. There, you would find seven relevant stories, led by a New York Times piece with the ominous headline, “Mattis says escalation against ISIS doesn’t imperil more civilians,” a reference to a charge from unnamed human rights organizations that an alleged change in U.S. rules of engagement has “jeopardized the safety of civilians” in countries of increased U.S. action.

Melania Trump shakes hands with Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud

Only in the ninth paragraph would you learn the news that U.S. military action, which vastly accelerated once President Trump took office, has pushed ISIS out of 55,000 square kilometers of territory it once occupied in Iraq and Syria, the core areas it is claiming as its caliphate.

Reporters at the press conference were so stunned — as I was — to hear such a statistic that they immediately tried to walk it back, and General Mattis obliged. “[We] were talking about the campaign since 2014,” Mattis said, when ISIS had the initiative and was “shattering every force in their path. “Since then it’s been reversed. We’ve accelerated…I was not saying it all started with us,” Mattis said.

Even more important than the numbers, however, is the momentum on the battlefield. ISIS is no longer winning. We are finally killing more of them than they are recruiting. And this was not happening under Obama.

Shortly after taking office, President Trump ordered a review of the war against ISIS. Two changes came from that review, as Mattis revealed, “Delegation of authority to lower command levels, and the president directed a tactical shift from shoving ISIS out of safe locations in an attrition fight to surrounding the enemy in their strongholds, so we can annihilate ISIS.”

Both changes were directed by the president with the goal of crushing ISIS. “The intent is to prevent the return home of escaped foreign fighters,” Mattis said.

This was welcome news to Saudi King Salman and the more than 50 Arab leaders he assembled in Riyadh over the weekend, who breathed a collective sigh of relief when President Trump arrived. And it wasn’t just because he and his cabinet took part in a traditional sword dance.

It was both Trump’s attitude and his reputation as a man of action — a reputation they could already changing the battlefields of Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Somalia.

The president’s signature accomplishment was the speech on Sunday, where he outlined America’s new approach to defeating radical Islamic terrorism. “We are not here to lecture,” Trump said, a clear allusion to President Obama’s June 2009 speech in Cairo, which is credited with having helped to spark the Arab spring revolts that brought down the governments in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt and led to the rise of ISIS.

Instead, President Trump laid out a vision where the United States and its allies, including Israel, cooperate with Muslim countries to vanquish radicalism before it takes root in the heart. “This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations,” he said. “This is a battle between Good and Evil.”

Instead of blaming Muslim leaders for the rise of radicalism, he called on them as partners to “drive them out”:

“Drive them out of your places of worship. Drive them out  of your communities. Drive them out of your holy land, and Drive them out of this earth.”

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi called Trump a “unique personality that is capable of doing the impossible.” With characteristic modesty, Trump replied, “I agree.” And everyone laughed — good-naturedly, not as the Washington insiders do, to conceal a snicker.

The Arab leaders gathered in Riyadh understood what they were witnessing: the strong horse has returned.

I say to the president’s critics, watch this president on the world stage and feel proud for your country. America is back.

RELATED VIDEO: President Trump’s Trip Abroad: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Hill.

Deportations of Africans up in 2016

You’ve been hearing the news here and at other news outlets about the stepped-up deportations of Somalis back to their homeland. Many failed asylum seekers are in the mix.

Asylum, for new readers, is, in a way, the other side of the same refugee coin.  Either ‘refugees’ are chosen abroad (usually by the UN these days) and are flown to your towns after supposedly proving that they are persecuted people, or one gets in to the US either illegally or through some temporary legal way and then applies for asylum.

It is difficult (impossible I think) to find photos of Somalis being deported from the US, but there are an unending supply of the Saudi deportations in 2014. Saudi Arabia deported as many as 12,000 Somalis that year. I wonder did Trump ask the Saudis why they don’t take any refugees, including their fellow Muslims?

When the wannabe ‘refugee’ cannot prove his or her case—that they will be persecuted if sent home—then they are supposed to go home!

Conversely, if granted asylum, the migrant is then given all the rights of a ‘refugee’ who was chosen abroad and flown here and will be put on track for US citizenship.

Now, under the Trump Administration, more of those who failed in their asylum bid are being found, detained and sent home.

By the way, this up-tick in deportations is news that should be sent far and wide so as to discourage even more illegal entry and flimsy asylum claims that clog up the courts.

DHS should actually promote an ad campaign around the world trumpeting the news of stepped-up deportations!

Here is Voice of America on the news about Africans, but more importantly I learned about a new and very cool data base.

The United States has expelled about 326 Somali nationals since January.

That number is greater than the total for all Somalis expelled from the country in 2016.

This is the third consecutive year in which the number of Somalis deported by the U.S. government has risen. The rising numbers have increased immigrants’ fears of raids, detentions and deportations.

The deportations of Somali citizens appear to be part of a larger movement, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse*** at Syracuse University. It found that in the first three months of 2017, the U.S. government ordered the deportation of more than 1,200 Africans. Citizens of Ghana, Nigeria, Somalia and Kenya have received the most removal orders.

Recent deportation orders are undoing a ten-year-long trend.
From 2006 to 2016, the number of Africans deported every year fell from 2,100 to about 1,000. If the trend continues, four times more Africans will be deported by the end of this year than during 2016.

Continue reading here.

***Now check out the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse!

Here is one page that I screenshot to show you what interesting stuff is archived there.

On this page we see that there were 19 deportations for reasons of national security in fiscal year 2017 (that fiscal year began on October 1, 2016). You can learn in what states and what courts those cases came from and the nationality of the person to be deported. From this screenshot page, we note that there was one, an Iraqi, ordered by the court in Detroit to be removed.

This post is filed in our Where to find information’ category.

You can watch that 2014 video about Saudi deportations here:

RELATED ARTICLES:

CBS: 800 Churches Nationwide Harbor Illegal Immigrants

Yes, Virginia, U.S. refugees commit crimes