Target Corporation backs the ‘Criminalizing Christianity Act’ [HR 3185]

/in , , , , /by

The popular department store giant Target has recently signed on as a corporate endorser of the radical homosexual-transgender “Equality Act” (HR 3185; S. 1858). AFTAH has renamed this LGBT bill the “Homosexual Superiority Act” or the“Criminalizing Christianity Act” because it will accelerate pro-homosexual State tyranny against people of faith or morals who oppose sinful, unnatural homosexual behavior and same-sex “marriage.” See this piece on HR 3185.

Target recently put out a statement on HR 3185–which was ballyhooed by the powerful, anti-Christian homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign (a Target ally):

“Target proudly stands with the LGBT community through all that we do, from our partnerships with organizations like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), to our volunteer efforts, and even the products we sell. We want to be a champion for an inclusive society by using our influence and resources to support equality in the communities where our team members and guests live and work…

“Target is helping to lead the fight against discrimination by putting its support behind the Equality Act. Discrimination has no place in the workplace, and Target is demonstrating to all that inclusion is a pillar of any successful business,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “The time has come for full federal equality, and HRC is proud to include Target as a partner in this fight. Everyone should have a fair chance to earn a living, provide for their families, and live free from fear of discrimination, including Americans who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.”

HRC continues in its statement:

Target has a history of scoring highly on HRC’s Corporate Equality Index, and was named as one of HRC’s 2015 “Best Places to Work”.

Target joins a number of leading American corporations, including Amazon, American Airlines, Apple, the Dow Chemical Company, Facebook, General Electric, General Mills, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Levi Strauss & Co, Microsoft, Nike, Oracle, Orbitz, PayPal and Symantec Corporation in support of federal LGBT non-discrimination protections.

As AFTAH has documented, HRC’s rigged “Corporate Equality Index” is a woefully-biased”scorecard” that gives companies points toward a Perfect 100 rating for making grants to LGBT activist groups–buttakes points away from corporations that give to, say, pro-traditional-marriage groups. The homosexual-transgender lobby group continues to ratchet up the scoring criteria so that pro-“gay” corporations that have attained the “100 percent” ranking are pressured to make ever greater capitulations to LGBT demands to keep their “perfect” rating. In recent years that includes massive grants to pro-LGBT events such as “gay pride parades” [see Walmart’s funding of “New York City pride” HERE] and health insurance coverage for transgender employees seeking body-disfiguring “sex reassignment surgeries” as they “transition” to the opposite sex.

For more information about the “Criminalizing Christianity Act,” go HERE. Target’s pandering and capitulations to LGBT activists go way back: see this 2011 L.A. Times article reporting Target’s pledge to give at least half a million dollars per year to homosexual activist organizations. HRC is relying on large corporations to build support in Congress for the radical “Equality Act”; see thisHRC release.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Target Corporation: [(800)440-0680; or call 612-696-3400 and hit #1; email: guest.relations@target.com. or press@target.com

Urge Speaker Paul Ryan and Congress to oppose the “Criminalizing Christianity Act” (HR 3185). Call 202-225-3121 for the House and 202-224-3121 for the Senate. More information from AFTAH HERE.

Contact information for Target Corporation: [(800)440-0680; or call 612-696-3400 and hit #1; email: guest.relations@target.com, or press@target.com]

Urge them to reverse their support of the anti-Christian “Equality Act”; [HR 3185; S. 1858] a.k.a. the “Criminalizing Christianity Act” or “Homosexual Superiority Act.” 

Suggest to Target that they would be smarter to at least stay neutral in the Culture Wars over redefining marriage and “civil rights” rather than siding with intolerant homosexual and transgender activists. The latter now champion anti-Christian bigotry by equating the defense of biblical morality and marriage with “hate”–and make shameful comparisons between cross-dressing men using Female restrooms and racist Jim Crow laws from the past that persecuted Black Americans.

For more information about the “Criminalizing Christianity Act,” go HERE. Target’s pandering and capitulations to LGBT activists go way back: see this 2011 L.A. Times article reporting Target’s pledge to give at least half a million dollars per year to homosexual activist organizations.

Radical Muslim Organization attacks Trump and Carson as ‘Islamophobes’

/in , , , , /by

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim advocacy organization and an unindicted supporter of terrorism today condemned both leading Republican presidential candidates for “Islamophobic and unconstitutional” comments targeting American Muslims and Syrian refugees.

According to Discover the Networks:

CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber, all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad previously had served, respectively, as IAP’s Public Relations Director and President. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.

CAIR opened its first office in Washington, DC, with the help of a $5,000 donation from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a self-described charity founded by Mousa Abu Marzook. In May 1996, CAIR coordinated a press conference to protest the decision of the U.S. government to extradite Marzook for his connection to terrorist acts performed by Hamas. CAIR characterized the extradition as “anti-Islamic” and “anti-American.” When President Bush closed HLF in December 2001 for collecting money “to support the Hamas terror organization,” CAIR decried his action as “unjust” and “disturbing.”

Notable facts about CAIR’s pas de deux with Islamic extremism and terrorism include the following:

  • Co-founder Nihad Awad asserted at a 1994 meeting at Barry University, “I am a supporter of the Hamas movement.” Awad wrote in the Muslim World Monitor that the 1994 trial which had resulted in the conviction of four Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who had perpetrated the previous year’s World Trade Center bombing was “a travesty of justice.”
  • On February 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named CAIR Advisory Board member and New York imam Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in Islamic Group leader Omar Abdel Rahman‘s foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
  • On June 6, 2006, CAIR’s Ohio affiliate held a large fundraiser in honor of Siraj Wahhaj. Following the event, CAIR-Ohio issued a press release heralding the more than $100,000 that Wahhaj had helped raise that evening for the organization’s “civil liberties work.”
  • In October 1998, CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy.” According to CAIR, this depiction was “offensive to Muslims.”
  • In 1998, CAIR denied bin Laden’s responsibility for the two al Qaeda bombings of American embassies in Africa. According to Ibrahim Hooper, the bombings resulted from “misunderstandings of both sides.”
  • In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Khafagi founded, the Islamic Assembly of North America, had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States. Khafagi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
  • In July 2004, Ghassan Elashi, a founding Board member of CAIR’s Texas chapter, was convicted along with his four brothers of having illegally shipped computers from their Dallas-area business, InfoCom Corporation, to Libya and Syria, two designated state sponsors of terrorism. That same month, Elashi was charged with having provided more than $12.4 million to Hamas while he was running HLF. In April 2005, Elashi and two of his brothers were also convicted of knowingly doing business with Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook, who was Elashi’s brother-in-law. Elashi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR, whose Dallas-Fort Worth chapter depicted the Elashis’ indictment as “a war on Islam and Muslims.”
  • On September 6, 2001, the day that federal agents first raided Infocom’s headquarters, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad denounced the U.S. government for “tak[ing] us back to the McCarthy era.”
  • FBI wiretap evidence which was introduced during the 2007 trial of the Holy Land Foundation (a trial that explored HLF’s financial ties to Hamas), proved that Nihad Awad had attended a 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives who collaborated on a plan to disguise funding for Hamas as charitable donations.
  • CAIR co-founder and Chairman Emeritus Omar Ahmad was named, in the same 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial, as an unindicted co-conspirator with HLF. During the trial, evidence was supplied proving that Ahmad had attended, along with Nihad Awad, the aforementioned 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives. Moreover, prosecutors described Ahmad as a member of theMuslim Brotherhood‘s “Palestine Committee” in America.
  • The home of Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was raided in 2006 by FBI agents in connection with an active terrorism investigation. FBI agents also searched the offices of Focus on Advocacy and Advancement of International Relations, al-Hanooti’s Michigan- and Washington DC-based consulting firm that investigators suspect to be a front supporting the Sunni-led insurgency in Iraq.

CAIR condemned Donald Trump for refusing to rule out special IDs and a surveillance database for American Muslims and the civil rights group similarly condemned Ben Carson for comparing Syrian refugees to “rabid dogs.”

Yahoo News asked Trump whether increased surveillance of American Muslims could include warrantless searches. “We’re going to have to do things that we never did before. And some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule,” Trump said. “And certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy. And so we’re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago.”

When asked whether tracking American Muslims might require registering them in a database or giving them a form of “special identification that noted their religion,” he refused to rule it out.

“We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely,” said Trump. “We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.”

SEE: Donald Trump Has Big Plans for ‘Radical Islamic’ Terrorists, 2016 and ‘That Communist’ Bernie Sanders
http://tinyurl.com/nm525n9

While talking about Syrian refugees Thursday in Alabama, Ben Carson compared them to “rabid dogs.”

Carson said: “If there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you’re probably not going to assume something good about that dog. And you’re probably going to put your children out of the way.”

SEE: Ben Carson Compares Syrian Refugees to Rabid, ‘Mad’ Dogs
http://tinyurl.com/pesawxc

“By mainstreaming Islamophobic and unconstitutional policies, Donald Trump and Ben Carson are contributing to an already toxic environment that may be difficult to correct once their political ambitions have been satisfied,” said CAIR Government Affairs Manager Robert McCaw. “Such extremist rhetoric is unbecoming of anyone who seeks our nation’s highest office and must be strongly repudiated by leaders from across the political spectrum.”

In October, CAIR condemned similar remarks Trump made about his apparent willingness to close down American mosques.

SEE: CAIR Condemns Donald Trump’s Statement on Closing U.S. Mosques
http://tinyurl.com/okz43so

In September, CAIR called on Trump to also clarify what he meant when stating that he was “going to be looking at that” to a question about the Muslim “problem in this country” and “When can we get rid of them?”

SEE: CAIR Calls on Donald Trump to Clarify ‘Looking At’ Getting Rid of Muslims
http://tinyurl.com/o67lzm7

Also in September, CAIR announced the renewal of its “Share the Quran” campaign in response to Ben Carson’s false claim that Islam is “inconsistent” with the Constitution and his bigoted belief that a Muslim should not be elected president.

SEE: CAIR Announces Quran Giveaway in Response to Ben Carson’s Anti-Muslim Remarks
http://tinyurl.com/okvrcgn

CAIR is America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Radisson hotel in Mali attacked; 170 hostages taken; men shout ‘Allahu Akbar’

Islamic State Tactics Shift, Borrowing From al Qaeda

U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes 

“Affordable Care”: Higher Premiums, Higher Deductibles, Worse Healthcare by Michael F. Cannon

/in , , , , /by

Aside from one necessary clarification (see far below), it would be difficult to improve on what the New York Times, the Boston Globe, and the enrollees they interview have to say about ObamaCare.

First, from yesterday’s New York Times article, “Many Say High Deductibles Make Their Health Law Insurance All but Useless”:

For many consumers, the sticker shock is coming not on the front end, when they purchase the plans, but on the back end when they get sick: sky-high deductibles that are leaving some newly insured feeling nearly as vulnerable as they were before they had coverage.

“The deductible, $3,000 a year, makes it impossible to actually go to the doctor,” said David R. Reines, 60, of Jefferson Township, N.J., a former hardware salesman with chronic knee pain. “We have insurance, but can’t afford to use it.” …

“We could not afford the deductible,” said Kevin Fanning, 59, who lives in North Texas, near Wichita Falls. “Basically I was paying for insurance I could not afford to use.”

He dropped his policy. …

“Our deductible is so high, we practically pay for all of our medical expenses out of pocket,” said Wendy Kaplan, 50, of Evanston, Ill. “So our policy is really there for emergencies only, and basic wellness appointments.”

Her family of four pays premiums of $1,200 a month for coverage with an annual deductible of $12,700. …

Alexis C. Phillips, 29, of Houston, is the kind of consumer federal officials would like to enroll this fall. But after reviewing the available plans, she said, she concluded: “The deductibles are ridiculously high. I will never be able to go over the deductible unless something catastrophic happened to me. I’m better off not purchasing that insurance and saving the money in case something bad happens.”

“While my premiums are affordable, the out-of-pocket expenses required to meet the deductible are not,” said [Karin] Rosner, who makes about $30,000 a year. …

“When they said affordable, I thought they really meant affordable,” [Anne Cornwell of Chattanooga, Tenn.,] said.

And from today’s Boston Globe article, “High-Deductible Health Plans Make Affordable Care Act ‘Unaffordable,’ Critics Say”:

“We can’t afford the Affordable Care Act, quite honestly,” said Cassaundra Anderson, whose family canvassed for Obama in their neighborhood, a Republican stronghold outside Cincinnati. “The intention is great, but there is so much wrong. . . . I’m mad.” …

The Andersons’ experience echoes that of hundreds of thousands of newly insured Americans facing sticker shock over out-of-pocket costs. …

“This will be an issue at least one more time in the 2016 election. It could absolutely still hurt Democrats,” said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy and political analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health. “Polls about the Affordable Care Act have a considerable amount of middle-income people who say either the program has done nothing for them or actually hurt them.” …

“Unfortunately, what we are headed toward now is universal crappy health insurance,” said Dr. Budd Shenkin, a California pediatrician. … “It’s just not a good deal for people,” he said.

“We’re in the process of looking at going without insurance,” [Cassaundra Anderson] said, calculating that the family will be better off financially just paying the $2,000 tax penalty for not abiding by the law’s mandate. “What am I even paying these insurance people for? Why should we reenroll?” …

“I cannot get anything with this insurance. Nothing,” said [Laura] Torres, who avoids seeking treatment for her thyroid condition and high blood pressure because of cost. “I just pay my monthly payments, try to take care of myself, go to work, and hope something serious doesn’t happen to me.” …

Amete Kahsay, 53, works as a temporary warehouse packer in Columbus. The Affordable Care marketplace is her only option for health insurance. She and her husband, an airport shuttle driver, pay $275 a month for a “bronze” plan with a $13,200 deductible.

Shortly after they signed up for insurance last year, her husband rushed her to the emergency room when she experienced dizziness. The visit, which included a CT scan of her brain, cost $1,700. She paid the charge from her savings, then returned to her native Ethiopia, where care is cheaper, to consult a neurologist and seek follow-up care.

“I support Obamacare. Without it, I wouldn’t have any type of insurance. But I’m not sure it’s worth the money,” said Kahsay, a US citizen who is registered as an independent voter. “Now, unless I get very, very sick, like only if it’s life-threatening, I won’t go to the doctor. I just lay down and take a rest.”

The necessary clarification is that these people are not complaining about high-deductibles in a market system. In a market system, consumers who choose high deductibles save money on their premiums and therefore have more resources to help them pay their out-of-pocket expenses.

ObamaCare, on the other hand, manages to pair high deductibles with higher premiums, stripping many people of this benefit of high-deductible plans and leaving them unable to pay their medical bills.

Cross-posted from Cato.org.

Michael F. Cannon
Michael F. Cannon

Michael F. Cannon is the Cato Institute’s director of health policy studies.

Poll: Trump Lapping the Field in Florida — Clinton Trails GOP Frontrunners

/in , , , /by

fau polling initiative logoBOCA RATON, Florida /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Donald Trump has doubled the votes of his nearest challenger in Florida, where Hillary Clinton trails in matchups with several GOP frontrunners, according to a new poll by the Florida Atlantic University Business and Economics Polling Initiative (FAU BEPI).

The survey was conducted in Florida from Nov. 15-16, immediately following the latest Democratic debate.

Trump leads the GOP field with 36 percent, followed by Marco Rubio at 18 percent, Ben Carson at 15 percent and Ted Cruz at 10 percent. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush placed fifth with just 8.9 percent, down more than two points from BEPI’s poll in September when he took 11.3 percent of the vote in Florida.

“Despite conjecture that Donald Trump has plateaued, his support in Florida remains very strong and could be growing,” said Kevin Wagner, Ph.D., associate professor of political science at FAU and a research fellow of the Initiative.

While Clinton holds a 43-point lead (65.5 percent to 22.4 percent) over Bernie Sanders on the Democratic side, she continues to trail in head-to-head matchups with the GOP frontrunners, with Carson holding the biggest margin at 9.7 points (50.2 percent to 40.5 percent). Trump leads Clinton by 8.7 points (49.2 percent to 40.5 percent).

“While Clinton is losing in all the trial heats, she is winning among females,” said Monica Escaleras, Ph.D., director of the BEPI. “Thus it appears that her strategy of targeting women is working.”

Regardless of their poll numbers, the favorability ratings for many of the candidates are low. Trump has a favorable rating of just 41 percent among all voters, while 51 percent have an unfavorable impression of him. Clinton also suffers from negative name recognition, with 41 percent of all voters giving her a favorable rating, compared with 54 percent saying they have an unfavorable impression of her.

The polling sample for the Democratic and the Republican primary consisted of 297 and 355 likely Floridavoters, respectively, with a margin of error of +/-5.6 percent and +/-5.2 percent at a 95 percent confidence level. The General Election Sample consisted of 829 registered voters with a margin of error of +/-3.3 percent and a 95 percent confidence level.

Former Marine Captain declares war against Obama’s Migration of Syrian Muslims to U.S.

/in , , , , /by

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today, Jonathan McConnell, former Marine Captain, veteran of two tours in the War on Terror and candidate for U.S. Senate, called for immediate legislation to halt Obama and the Washington ruling class from settling Syrian refugees in America.

“Our values and way of life are under attack by radical Islamic terrorists. Many of these terrorists are exploiting the refugee crisis in Syria — just as I predicted months ago — to gain entrance into Western nations, possibly including the United States,” stated McConnell.

“I have fought on the front lines in the War on Terror, including the border of Syria. I have seen first hand the havoc and carnage these terrorists are capable of inflicting. Common sense in the War on Terror is not common and we need leaders with a proven history of fighting for America and against radical Islam.

“36 year Washingtonian Richard Shelby, as recently as two months ago, refused to take the lead and to take the fight to the radical Islam and terrorists. We must win the future. We must defeat radical Islam and terrorists. We must be willing to fight and have leaders with the experience and knowledge to win this fight against radical Islam.

“We must stand up to the Obama administration and radical Islam and say enough is enough.  This is a failure of leadership by the Obama administration and a failure of oversight by Congress.  We must not allow Syrian refugees into the United States until we can effectively vet and research those seeking entry to ensure they pose no threat to the safety of Americans. American safety must always trump political correctness.

“It is not enough for individual governors to request blockage of radicals into our state. Our leaders inWashington must be willing to stand up to the Obama administration to stop any of these radicals from gaining entry to the U.S.  What good is a state blockage if a radical can be located just over the state border and then travel to our neighborhoods and communities to wreak havoc?

“Washington career politicians have failed us. They have the ability to enact legislation preventing refugees into America who have not been vetted. Washington insiders know the current process does not come to close to credibly vetting refugees to ensure the safety of our communities, families and way of life. Yet they refuse to lead.

“No credible leader in Washington believes these refugees are thoroughly being vetted so why do they bow to political correctness and refuse to stand up to Obama and for Americans? Alabamians need a proven fighterand Americans need leaders of courage and conviction. Months ago I was calling on D.C. to prevent radical refugees from entering the U.S. and today I call again for legislation to stand up to Obama and radical Islam.

“As the next U.S. Senator from Alabama I will stand up to Obama and against radical Islam. Alabamians deserve a Senator willing to fight for America,” he concluded.

In 2009 McConnell founded a global security firm to continue fighting terrorists, providing security for ships across the world against terrorists.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Jonathan McConnell, shown at the Port of Mobile, who operates Meridian Global Consulting, a company focused on protecting ships at sea.

VIDEO: Reporter buys forged Syrian Passport in Turkey — Cost $2,000

/in , , , , /by

I chanced to watch a Fox and Friends interview with UK Daily Mail  Senior Reporter Nick Fagge who revealed how be bought forged Syrian documents in Southern Turkey for $2,000 in less than four days.  For Fagge this was a reprise of a mid-September interview onFox and Friends. It was prompted because of the Syrian passport found at the scene of a suicide bombing at the French soccer stadium last Friday. The passport purportedly belonged to an alleged Syrian refugee who entered the EU via Greece in early October 2015 as an alleged ISIS jihadi who infiltrated the refugee flood from Turkey. Fagge noted  that a German security expert who asked to inspect his documents said that the forged identity card and driver’s license were easy to detect because of errors. However, the German expert indicated that the Syrian Passport was an authentic one but clearly forged with Fagge’s  new identity.  This raised a question about the representations by  White House Deputy National Security Director, Ben Rhodes.  Speaking from the G20 summit in Antalya, Turkey,  he suggested  that  Syrian refugees admitted to this country were capable of being ‘thoroughly” vetted. Note this New York Post  report:

The Administration is going ahead with its plan to admit thousands of Syrian refugees into the US despite the horrific attack in Paris — where at least one of the attackers is believed to have posed as a Syrian migrant to get into the country.

“We’re still planning to take in Syrian refugees,” White House national Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told “Fox News Sunday.”

Rhodes, who is traveling with President Obama in Turkey, said there would be “very robust vetting” to “sort out that foreign fighter flow.”

Referring to refugees, he said: “They are tragic victims of this conflict. They are women and children and orphans of this war.”

Rhodes said the “careful” vetting would rely on input from “our intelligence community, our national Counterterrorism Center, the Department of Homeland Security, so we can make sure that we’re carefully screening anybody who comes to the United States.”

He made those statements on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Rhodes’ representations  caused immediate pushback from  eight Republican governors about halting and funding of Syrian refugees admissions that were announced by President Obama.

We have also seen reported the Assad regime was  literally issuing millions of passports to promote the flight of Syrians abroad.  Clearly many of those  authentic passports have ended up in the hands of forgers and can be purchased by  ISIS operatives and families and even non-Syrians.

The Fox and Friends interview with Fagge noted:

Nick Fagge traveled to Turkey to meet with the forger, and paid him $2,000 for the documents.

Fagge reported in September:

The genuine documents were stolen from Syria when they were blank. The forger added our reporter’s picture and gave him the identity of a Syrian man from Aleppo killed last year.

[…]

The passport book MailOnline acquired is genuine, made from a batch seized from one of the many Syrian government offices captured by advancing opposition forces.

The forger explained that the militias fighting the forces of Assad make a beeline for government offices when they over-run a town. They know the value of the documents there and steal the passports, papers and even the printers that are used to create identity cards and driving licenses.

Fagge said today that it is “impossible to say” how many fake passports are floating around, adding that he doubts European border officials can put a figure on it either.

He said that the problem isn’t just Syrians coming to Europe, but also Europeans who travel to Syria, become radicalized, and then return to Europe.

Fagge said after his story was published, he met with a forgery expert from the German police force, who wanted to look at the documents he obtained.

The expert explained that it was tricky verifying documents presented by refugees from Syria.

“He said he found this very difficult because he couldn’t compare their documents with a real or a forged one,” said Fagge.

Fagge recalled that the expert could tell the driver’s license and ID card were forgeries, but said the passport looked “genuine.”

“He said, this is a real passport,” Fagge said.

Watch the Fox and Friends reprise interview with UK Daily Mail journalist Fagge

RELATED ARTICLES:

Syrian passports found at Paris jihad attacks scene were fakes made in Turkey

Obama calls idea of screening Syrian refugees based on religion ‘shameful,’ defends White House strategy

As governors decry migrants, Obama holds line

Lawmakers Demand Answers About Illegal Immigrant Gang Member Who Assaulted Police Officer

What Michelle Malkin Thinks Is Wrong With the Current H-1B Visa System

In first six weeks of FY2016 we resettled 827 Somalis; all but one are Muslim

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

16 Governors want Syrian Muslim Resettlement Suspended

/in , , , , , /by

New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan becomes the first Democrat to want an opt-out on Syrian refugee resettlement. Of course, we wonder if the U.S. State Department will be honoring their requests, but you can be sure we will be watching with great interest! The governors may be soon get an unwelcome message on states rights.

map syrian refugees in us

Those blue circles represent where Syrian refugees have been resettled so far (since 2012) and the states whose governors are now saying NO, are in yellow. Go to the original map because the cities are on it as well.

maggie-hassan-1

Democrat New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan

From The Hill:

Fifteen Republican governors and one Democrat have announced plans to block Syrian refugees from resettling in their states in the wake of last week’s terrorist attacks in Paris.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley issued statements Sunday saying that they wanted to prioritize the safety of the residents in their states.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott; Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a GOP presidential candidate; Arkansas Gov. Gov. Asa Hutchinson; Indiana Gov. Mike Pence; Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant; Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner; Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker; Florida Gov. Rick Scott; North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory; Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a Republican presidential candidate; Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; and Maine Gov. Paul LePage joined them on Monday.

New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan, who is challenging Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R) for her Senate seat, became the first Democratic governor to call for halting the acceptance of refugees until the vetting process is reviewed.

More here.

states taking syrian migrants cnn

I don’t want to diminish this major breakthrough in garnering attention for this here-to-fore secretive refugee program, but tomorrow, when I get a minute I am going to have to remind readers about the thousands and thousands of Iraqi, Afghan, Burmese and Somali Muslims pouring into the US through the RAP (Refugee Admissions Program) every year as we fixate on the small number of Syrians so far.

I’m telling you they can’t screen most of those any better (especially those Somalis who have left Africa and traveled illegally to places like Malta in Europe where we scoop up their illegal aliens, call them refugees, and fly them to America—including to South Carolina as we learned earlier this year).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Tennessee GOP leader: Round up Syrian refugees, remove from state

NYT: Eight governors (so far) have said they don’t want Syrians resettled in their states

U.S. Embassy in Paris turned away Americans seeking safe haven during Islamic State slaughter

/in , , , /by

“They decided to walk two miles to the U.S. Embassy, hoping they could take shelter there. But, her husband said, they were turned away.” Why? Would letting them in have been tantamount to admitting that there is a jihad threat?

“Passengers arrive at Atlanta airport safely after Paris ordeal,” by Carrie Teegardin, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, November 14, 2015 (thanks to Jerk Chicken):

Travelers arriving in Atlanta from Paris on Saturday afternoon described extraordinary long lines in Paris to get through security.

Claudio Merloni, who lives in Paris and was arriving in Atlanta for business, said it took more than two hours to go through a security line that usually takes him 10 minutes. Merloni said there was nobody on the streets in Paris when he left for the airport today.

“It’s two attacks, both in France in the same year,” he said. “You start to feel really targeted.”

In the midst of the chaos that erupted in Paris Friday night, Rebecca Hill-Bogle started to wonder how she and her husband, Will Bogle, were going to get back home to Georgia.

They were in Paris to celebrate Will’s birthday and were having dinner when Will looked at his phone and realized something was going on. The server at their restaurant told them they were about 10 minutes away from one of the deadly explosions that occurred during Friday night’s wave of terrorist attacks in the heart of the city.

“We saw a lot of police and ambulances; they were scurrying through the streets,” Will Bogle said.

The Macon couple tried to get a cab to get back to their hotel, but all the taxis were full.

Hill-Bogle is six months pregnant and she was starting to panic. They decided to walk two miles to the U.S. Embassy, hoping they could take shelter there.

But, her husband said, they were turned away.

“I was pretty disheartened that we weren’t allowed to get in,” he said….

RELATED ARTICLES:

How Can France Fight ISIS? By Helping Israel

After Paris jihad massacre, Lindsey Graham wants to double funding for Syrian “refugees” and bring even more to U.S.

NATO top dog on Paris jihad massacre: “This is not a fight between the Islamic world and the western world”

Bernie Sanders: Climate change is directly related to the growth of Muslim terrorism

/in , , , , , /by

“I would argue that the disastrous invasion of Iraq, something that I strongly opposed, has unraveled the region completely and led to the rise of Al Qaeda and to ISIS.” That is true. However, it contradicts Sanders’ other claim, that climate change, that is, “limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops,” led to the rise of terrorism. If it were really all about fights over diminished resources, then these jihad groups would have arisen even without the U.S. taking out Saddam Hussein, no? In any case, if climate change has given rise to terrorism, why don’t we see Arab Christian or Yazidi terrorists? After all, they lived in Iraq and Syria alongside the Muslims. So why weren’t they driven by the lack of water and land to form their own terrorist groups?

It is astonishing that a man this deluded could be taken seriously as a candidate for President. But his view here is a mainstream Democrat Party position.

“Bernie Sanders: Climate Change is Directly Related To Terrorism,” by Michelle Fields, Breitbart, November 15, 2015:

Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said on Saturday that climate change is directly related to terrorism.“In fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism,” said Sanders.

“And if we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you’re going to see counties [sic] all over the world…they’re going to be struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops, and you’re going to see all kinds of international conflict.”

Sanders said at the second Democratic debate in Iowa that climate change poses the biggest threat to America’s national security and to security of the world.

Sanders also argued that the growth of national terrorism and instability in the Middle East was caused by the invasion of Iraq.

“I would argue that the disastrous invasion of Iraq, something that I strongly opposed, has unraveled the region completely and led to the rise of Al Qaeda and to ISIS,” Sanders said.

When Sanders was asked his thoughts about Hillary Clinton’s vote for the Iraq war he added: ” I don’t think any sensible person would disagree that the invasion of Iraq led to the massive level of instability we are seeing right now.”

“I think that was one of the worst foreign policy blunders in the more than history of the United States,” hr [sic] claimed.

RELATED ARTICLES:

In the wake of the Paris jihad attacks, France says it’s “essential” to combat…climate change

FBI top dog won’t release motive in Chattanooga jihad shootings: “We don’t want to smear people”

Minnesota Democrat Party candidate: ‘The Islamic State isn’t necessarily evil’

/in , , , , /by

Dan Kimmel has withdrawn from the race, and for that we can be grateful, but his statement, with all of its moral equivalence and toleration of evil, is a succinct expression of what hamstrings our ability to face the Islamic State and defeat it. This is why the Islamic State will be plaguing free people worldwide for years to come.

“Minnesota State Representative Candidate Withdraws From Race After Saying ‘ISIS is Not Evil,’” by Kaitlyn Schallhorn, Daily Caller, November 15, 2015:

A Democrat candidate for a state representative seat in Minnesota has withdrawn from the race after he drew ire from many — including those in his own party — with a controversial tweet following the Paris terrorist attacks.

“ISIS isn’t necessarily evil,” Dan Kimmel, a candidate for a Minnesota state representative seat tweeted Saturday. “It is made up of people doing what they think is best for their community. Violence is not the answer, though.”

The Islamic State has taken responsibility for the terrorist attacks in Paris Friday that claimed the lives of more than 120 people and injured hundreds of others. In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, French President Francois Hollande said he viewed the attack as an “act of war” and promised a “pitiless” response.

Kimmel, 63, asserted in a follow-up that he “deplores” the Islamic State’s actions and was not defended them. However, the candidate still drew the ire of many on social media, including the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party leaders.

In a post on his campaign website, Kimmel said his tweet was “poorly worded” and thus announced the end of his candidacy.

“I am folding up my campaign tent,” Kimmel said, adding an apology for those who volunteered or donated to his campaign.

“I do think the attacks in Paris yesterday, along with other ISIS terrorist actions, are cowardly and despicable. My heart breaks for the people of France, of Paris, the families of those wounded or killed and the casualties themselves,” Kimmel said. “My thoughts are with them. I condemn the attacks, as I condemn all violence.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Two of the Paris jihad murderers came into Europe as refugees

In the wake of the Paris jihad attacks, France says it’s “essential” to combat…climate change

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Dan Kimmel. Kimmel is the one on the left..

The GOP Debate: Missing the Banana Boat on Immigration

/in , , , , , /by

It’s a tragic fact of man’s nature that people prescribe an ounce of prevention when a pound of cure is needed — and a pound of cure when times call for a ton of desperate measures.

Immigration, rightly and largely thanks to Donald Trump, has become a big issue this election cycle.

But not big enough.

And Tuesday’s GOP debate was illustrative of the problem. When John “Can’t do” Kasich and Jeb “Invasion is an act of love” Bush both scoffed at the idea of following the law, saying we “can’t” deport illegals, the response was lacking. Only Senator Ted Cruz rode in to save the issue from their demagoguery. He said it was “offensive” to suggest that enforcing the law is anti-immigrant and warned that the Republicans will lose if they “join Democrats as the party of amnesty.” He also quite eloquently pointed out that the media wouldn’t be suppressing the dark reality of illegal migration if “a bunch of people with journalism degrees were coming over and driving down the wages in the press,” and that there’s nothing compassionate about diminishing millions of Americans’ earnings.

Yet even the intelligent, staunchly traditionalist Cruz misses the boat on immigration. Even the intrepid, titillatingly anti-establishment Trump does. In 2013, Cruz proposed (at 3:28 in this video) increasing H1B visas 500 percent and doubling legal immigration. And Trump repeats the theme that immigration must be done “legally.” The problem?

Americans are “legally” being done out of their jobs. They’re “legally” being pushed into socialism. And they’re “legally” having their culture stolen away. Yet much more than this went unmentioned during Tuesday’s debate.

“Think about the families!” cried Kasich, alluding to family unification. “C’mon, folks!” Okay, c’mon, let’s think about families.

The families argument is pure propaganda. Families can also be united by sending people the other way — back to their native countries, where most family members often are in the first place. Second, the families argument could be used as a pretext for not enforcing any law. Why imprison people for bank robbery or embezzlement? If they have children, the kids will be left without a parent, or even parentless and have to languish in foster care. And as with illegals, many other law-breakers engage in their crimes “because they want a better life.” How many mafia figures didn’t use their ill-gotten gains to support their families?

Moreover, failure to enforce immigration law is discriminatory. If such law can be flouted with impunity, why should any of us have to follow the law? The amnesty crowd are essentially creating a privileged group — illegal migrants — who alone will get a pass on their criminality. Is unfair discrimination compassionate?

Kasich also trumpeted Ronald Reagan’s 1986 amnesty and said the idea of deporting “11 million people who are law-abiding…is not an adult argument.” But is this a mature statement? The illegals by definition aren’t “law-abiding” because they broke the law in coming to the U.S. in the first place. Here’s something else unmentioned: Reagan reportedly called the 1986 amnesty “My biggest mistake.”

And Kasich, Bush, “Gang of Eight” Marco Rubio and others think we should repeat it.

Note that since the ’86 mistake there have been six more amnesties, each one attended by promises to secure the border. It’s said, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” Should we play the fool an eighth time? Are we Charlie Brown with the football?

Transitioning to political footballs, there’s the Kasich-Bush-Insane notion that we “can’t deport 11 million people.” Here’s the ideal debate response:

Well, we certainly can’t if we look to make not good policy but excuses. But despite what “Can’t do” Kasich might say this isn’t a matter of capability but will. But first realize that we don’t have to deport illegals — we can get them to deport themselves.

You use a carrot-and-stick approach; the removal of the carrot and application of the stick. First make sure illegals can’t get any government benefits; of course, this includes no driver’s licenses, which can enable illegals to vote in our elections. Then ensure they can’t get jobs by punishing employers hiring them. Once these incentives to remain are gone, most will leave voluntarily, as Arizona’s crackdown on illegals some years back proved. And once most depart, deporting the few remaining will be an easy task. So the issue isn’t complicated; it’s only made so by pandering politicians who put votes ahead of country.

Speaking of a treasonous spirit, the topic of H1B visas — which allow employers to recruit high-skilled foreign workers — came up during the second-to-last GOP debate on Oct. 28. Once again, no candidate fielded it sufficiently. Ideal debate statement:

In the news there has been story after story recently about corporations replacing high-skilled American workers with lower-wage foreigners; this is a violation of the law, which stipulates that an H1B-visa recruit can only be retained if it “will not affect the working conditions of workers similarly employed,” but this law is routinely flouted and unenforced. Outrageously and rubbing salt in the wound, in some cases these Americans have even been forced to train their foreign replacements under threat of losing their severance packages! This is treasonous! And think about the families, the families that these Americans can no longer support. Is this compassionate? Is this an “act of love”?

The H1B-visa program is being abused, and is used to abuse Americans, by crony capitalists in and out of government who grease each other’s palms. This will stop, cold, under my presidency. More than 94 million Americans are not in the labor force. We need to ensure that corporations hire available American talent. Let high-skilled foreigners build up their foreign countries, and let high-skilled Americans have the jobs that are their birthright.

Returning to Tuesday’s debate, many candidates mentioned Islamic terrorism when asked to cite America’s biggest current threat. Yet not a single debater pointed out the following. Debate statement:

With many millions of unknown-quantity illegals violating our border during the last couple of decades, probability dictates that some terrorists have come across. There’s no doubt that some weapons of mass destruction have come across. Yet we can’t get it across to our feckless leaders that it’s silly, in the extreme, to talk about a “war on terror” and pursue “nation building” in faraway lands while leaving our back door to Mexico vulnerable. It’s a bit like going to the nearest crime-ridden naked-city street looking to be Charles Bronson in Death Wish and leaving your home’s door wide open on your way out. And think about the families on 9/11 and those on the next 9/11, whose loved ones will have been sacrificed on the altar of political pandering. Leaving your national family’s door open isn’t an act of love. It’s criminal negligence and an act of treason.

Having said all this, none of the above addresses our main “legal” problem: legal immigration. Since the Immigration Reform and Nationality Act of 1965, 85 percent of our immigrants have hailed from the Third World and Asia; 70 to 90 percent of those vote for socialistic candidates upon being naturalized. This is a universal Western phenomenon, mind you, and was actually referenced by Labour Party operative Andrew Neather. A former aide to ex-British prime minister Tony Blair, he admitted in 2009 that the massive immigration into the United Kingdom over the last 15 years was designed to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

Yet such schemes wouldn’t be possible had Westerners, including conservative ones, not fallen victim to “immigrationism”: the idea that immigration is always good, always necessary and must be unquestioned. The reality?

Immigration always presents problems of assimilation. It’s just a matter of whether the likelihood of it is great or virtually nil.

As to the latter, a recent poll showed that a majority of Muslims in America prefer Sharia law to American civil law. Note also the studies showing that young Muslims in the West are actually more Islamic and anti-Western than their elders.

In addition, note that amnesty duly passed into law would be as “legal” as our widely accepted legal immigration. Legal is not synonymous with smart.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

U.S. State Department Genocide Victim Ruling Excludes Middle East Christians

/in , , , , /by

Nina Shea of the Washington, D.C.-based Hudson Institute Center for Religious Freedman is the most outspoken critic of Administration policies towards Middle Eastern Christian and other non-Muslim religious minorities.  The latest episode concerns a proposed ruling by the State Department of minorities threatened by extinction by the Islamic State, as a predicate for possible rescue, asylum determinations and assistance. Incredibly this ruling excludes, those Christians in Syria and Iraq, who are threatened with extinction by ISIS barbarity.. Shea writes about this in a National Review On-line article, “ISIS Genocide Victims Do Not Include Christians, the State Department Is Poised to Rule.”

The State Department official poised to issue the ruling is none other than Anne Patterson, former U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, and now Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Near East Affairs. Patterson was a controversial figure and supporter of ousted Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader.

Shea cites an investigative  report by Michael Isikoff about the callous rationale behind why Patterson chose to Include Yazidis, but exclude Syriac and, especially Chaldean Christians:

Yazidis, according to the story by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, are going to be officially recognized as genocide victims, and rightly so. Yet Christians, who are also among the most vulnerable religious minority groups that have been deliberately and mercilessly targeted for eradication by ISIS, are not. This is not an academic matter. A genocide designation would have significant policy implications for American efforts to restore property and lands taken from the minority groups and for offers of aid, asylum, and other protections to such victims. Worse, it would mean that, under the Genocide Convention, the United States and other governments would not be bound to act to suppress or even prevent the genocide of these Christians.

The rationale for Patterson ruling:

An unnamed State Department official was quoted by Isikoff as saying that only the attacks on Yazidis have made “the high bar” of the genocide standard and as pointing to the mass killing of 1,000 Yazidi men and the enslavement of thousands of Yazidi women and girls. To propose that Christians have been simply driven off their land but not suffered similar fates is deeply misinformed. In fact, the last Christians to pray in the language spoken by Jesus are also being deliberately targeted for extinction through equally brutal measures. Christians have been executed by the thousands. Christian women and girls are vulnerable to sexual enslavement. Many of their clergy have been assassinated and their churches and ancient monasteries demolished or desecrated. They have been systematically stripped of all their wealth, and those too elderly or sick to flee ISIS-controlled territory have been forcibly converted to Islam or killed, such as an 80-year-old woman who was burned to death for refusing to abide by ISIS religious rules.

Shea notes the clear evidence of ISIS atrocities against  Christian communities in Syria and Iraq;

ISIS atrocities against Christians became public in June 2014 when the jihadists stamped Christian homes in Mosul with the red letter N for “Nazarene” and began enforcing its “convert or die” policy. The atrocities continue. Recently the Melkite Catholic bishop of Aleppo reported that 1,000 Christians, including two Orthodox bishops, have been kidnapped and murdered in his city alone. In September, ISIS executed, on videotape, three Assyrian Christian men and threatened to do the same to 200 more being held captive by the terrorist group. Recent reports by an American Christian aid group state that several Christians who refused to renounce their faith were raped, beheaded, or crucified a few months ago.

Christian women and girls are also enslaved and sexually abused. Three Christian females sold in ISIS slave markets were profiled in a New York Times Magazine report last summer. ISIS rules allow Christian sabaya, that is, their sexual enslavement. Its magazine Dabiq explicitly approved the enslavement of Christian girls in Nigeria, and the jihadist group posted prices for Christian, as well as Yazidi, female slaves in Raqqa.

The Congressional response to the State Department exclusion of Christians-  H.R. 75:

In recent weeks, the stalwart Knights of Columbus have been placing emotionally searing ads in Politico and elsewhere advocating the passage of H.R. 75.

This bipartisan bill was initiated by Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R., Neb.) and Representative Anna Eshoo (D., Calif.) to declare that genocide is being faced by Christians, Yazidis, and other vulnerable groups. The ads — depicting a mother and child, who appear as the very personifications of grief, against a landscape of ISIS destruction — might strike a nerve within the Obama administration. But as of now, the administration looks poised to preempt the bill and render a grave injustice to the suffering Christians of Iraq and Syria.

One who knows how dangerous this misbegotten ruling by Patterson is Joseph Kassab, President of the Iraqi Christian Advocacy and Empowerment Institution. (See out interview with Kassab in the November, NER: Iraqi Christians Face Extinction.  Note this exchange with Kassab:

‘Gordon:  How threatening is the ISIS genocide towards Assyrian–Chaldean Christian communities in both Iraq and Syria?

Kassab:  ISIS brutalities and atrocities committed against innocent Christians and Yazidis in Iraq is a very serious issue that needs to be immediately confronted by the international community. These evil acts of ISIS are leading to serious cultural and human genocide. ISIS’ acts of brutality are intentional to gain the attention of the world and the global media is falling for it. Our suggestion is not to fall for it as it is better to look into their evil Islamic ideology and expose it to the world.

Kassab voiced  prescient concern about the fate of his Chaldean Christian  co-religionists following the fall of Mosul to ISIS in June 2014. Watch this  You Tube Overview video interview by Raymond Arroyo with Kassab. Note Kassab’s prediction of the fate that may already  have be fallen Iraqi Christians, extinction;  if assistance is not speedily  forthcoming from the Administration.

Over a year has passed since Iraqi Christians fled from Mosul and the Biblical Nineveh plains. They languish ill-housed as urban refugees in Iraqi Kurdistan. They are without prospects for sanctuary in the West and Diaspora, because they allegedly do not qualify for asylum status under UN definitions applied by the State Department Bureau of population, Migration and Refugees.  Now, Assistant Secretary Patterson is poised to deprive Syrian and Iraqi Christians of sanctuary here in the US. Despite, as Kassab has demonstrated they have been vetted and accredited for possible P2/P3 Family reunification Visas.

The mean-spiritedness of Patterson and the State Department may assign these ancient Christian minorities to possible extinction with this proposed Genocide ruling. Their behavior is appalling and beyond contempt. All Americans should be outraged. They should press for passage of H.R. 75 by the House effectively rebuking this incredulous State Department proposed ruling.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of the two blindfolded men, shaved by Islamic militants, who were crucified for their belief in Christianity.

Trump: University of Missouri leadership ‘weak, ineffective’, student’s demands ‘crazy’

/in , , , , /by

The university has been plagued with racial protests over the past few weeks, which have lead to the resignation of university president Tim Wolfe. Wolfe’s resignation was followed by Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin announcing he would leave office at the end of the year due to mounting pressure.

Trump said the leaders stepping aside was a “weak” move.

“I think the two people that resigned are weak, ineffective people,” he said. “I think that when they resigned, they set something in motion that’s going to be a disaster for the next long period of time. They were weak, ineffective people.”

“Trump should have been the chancellor of that university. Believe me, there would have been no resignations,” he added.

He also said the demands from the student-protest group, Concerned Student 1950, were “crazy.” These demands include that the university increase its percentage of black faculty and staff by 10 percent and a mandatory “comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum.”

“By the way, did you look at their demands?” Trump said. “Their demands are like crazy. The things that they are asking for, many of those things are like crazy. So it’s just disgraceful.”

Trump’s never been quiet about the political correctness running rampant in the country and he’s not going to let this protest slide by.

We can’t let these kinds of protests undermine the institutions and foundations that this country was founded on.

GOP Debate: No-Fly Zones, Military Spending, Confronting Putin

/in , , , , , /by

Military spending, the implementation of a no-fly zone over Syria and policy towards Russia were hot topics at the November 10th Republican presidential debate. The following is a summary of what each candidate said in regards to national security, as well as Lindsey Graham who was denied participation but commented online.

Donald Trump

Trump stood out as the only candidate to support Russia’s military intervention in Syria, even going so far as to say he gets along with Russian President Putin. Trump said he has no issue if Putin wants to “knock the hell out of ISIS, apparently unaware that the primary targets of Russian airstrikes are not ISIS or Al-Qaeda. He said he’d tell other countries like Germany to defend Ukraine instead of U.S. taxpayer money being spent.

Trump and Rand Paul were the only two candidates to call for the U.S. to stay out of the civil war in Syria. Trump said he was told by a U.S. general recently that we don’t know who the Syrian rebels are and so he opposes arming forces that could be worse than the Assad regime.

He supported increased military spending, arguing that the deterrence it creates will save money.

Trump is currently the frontrunner. He is leading nationally with a polling average of 25%; an increase of 2% since the last debate. He is tied for the lead in Iowa with 24% (3-point increase); New Hampshire with 27% (3-point decrease) and South Carolina with 29% (4-point decrease). You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Ben Carson

Carson supports President Obama’s deployment of 50 special operations personnel to Syria to train “moderate” rebels, saying that it is better than nothing. He said the U.S. needs a presence in the area to counter Russia and China.

Carson made an important point about the need to make the Islamic State (ISIS) “look like losers” because the appearance of success is what drives their strength. The Clarion Project has written about how jihadists rely upon success to validate their ideology. He said that the U.S. military should help retake an Iraqi outfield outside of Anbar Province to begin destroying the Islamic State caliphate.

Carson is currently the runner-up. He is in second place nationally with a polling average of 24%. He ties Trump for the lead in Iowa with 24%; is in second in New Hampshire with 15% and is in second in South Carolina with 23%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Marco Rubio

Rubio’s biggest clash was with Rand Paul over his proposal to increase defense spending by $1 trillion, with Rubio deriding him as a “committed isolationist.” He had another big moment when he said that Islamist terrorists do not hate the U.S. just because of its support for Israel, but because of its values such as allowing women to drive.

Rubio called for countering Russian influence in the Middle East and described Putin as an organized crime figure.

Rubio is in third place nationally with a polling average of 12%, a 3-point increase since the last debate. He is in third in Iowa with 13% (3-point increase); third in New Hampshire with 10% (2-point increase) and tied with Cruz for third in South Carolina with 10% (2-point increase).

Ted Cruz

Cruz shined during the discussion about increasing the defense budget by saying there’s a middle path where the cost is paid for by cutting government spending on programs like subsidies. He said, “If you think defending the country is expensive, try not defending it.”

Cruz is in fourth place nationally with a polling average of 10%. He is in fourth place in Iowa with 12%; in sixth place in New Hampshire with 7% and tied with Rubio for third place in South Carolina with 10%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Jeb Bush

Bush said that Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat with the Islamic State caliphate growing to the size of Indiana. Bush supports using the U.S. military to implement a no-fly zone over Syria and arming the remnants of the Free Syrian Army, an umbrella of “moderate” Syrian rebels. He said that creating safe zones inside Syria would stem the flow of refugees.

Bush is in fifth place nationally with a polling average of 6%. He is in fifth place in Iowa (6%); fifth place in New Hampshire (7%) and fifth place in South Carolina (7%). You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Rand Paul

Paul spoke out the strongest against having the U.S. military impose a no-fly zone over Syria (which he mistakenly referred to as Iraq) and pointed out that Russia already owns the skies over the country. He said that supporters of a no-fly zone would have to be willing to shoot down Russian aircraft and to send their children to possibly die in another Middle East war.

He also blamed his competitors who support arming “moderate” Syrian rebels for contributing to the rise of ISIS. Paul pointed out that the rebels are allies of Al-Qaeda.

He criticized Rubio’s plan for a $1 trillion increase in military spending, mentioning that the U.S. defense budget is more than the next 10 countries combined. Rubio responded by calling him a “committed isolationist.” He criticized Fiorina for saying she would not speak to Russian President Putin, at least for awhile.

Paul is tied for sixth place nationally with Fiorina and Kasich at 3% in the polling average. He is in 11th place in Iowa with 2%; ninth place in New Hampshire with 3% and 10th place in South Carolina with 1%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

John Kasich

Kasich spoke in favor of a no-fly zone along the Turkish and Jordanian borders that could potentially shoot down Russian aircraft if there were multiple violations. He would also counter Russia by providing weapons to Ukraine and working with Finland and the Baltic States.

Kasich said he would end all public criticism of Israel and be committed to keeping the Jordanian monarchy in power “for 1,000 years.” He praised Egypt as a “moderate” force along with Bahrain. He would demand that Saudi Arabia stop its funding of radical clerics around the world, but continue to work with the Saudis in areas of mutual interest.

He also would have a policy of responding to cyber attacks with retaliation to destroy the attacker’s mechanisms.

Kasich is tied for sixth place nationally with Paul and Fiorina at 3%. He is in 10th place in Iowa with 2%; fourth place in New Hampshire with 9% and seventh place in South Carolina with 2%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Carly Fiorina

Fiorina clashed with Rand Paul when she said she would not talk to Putin, but then clarified to say she’d be willing to speak to Russia after a period of time where strength had been established. She expressed support for a no-fly zone over Syria and for providing increased aid to Arab allies to fight the Islamic State.

Fiorina said that Jordanian King Abdullah has been denied requests for bombs and material aid and Egypt has been denied intelligence-sharing and that she’d grant both. She would grant requests for arms to the Kurds and ally with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, as well.

To pressure Russia, she would rebuild the 6th Fleet, assemble anti-ballistic missile systems in Poland, conduct military exercises in the Baltic States and possibly send a few thousand troops to Germany.

Fiorina is tied for sixth place nationally with Paul and Kasich at 3%. She is in sixth place in Iowa at 5%; seventh in New Hampshire with 6% and sixth in South Carolina with 4%. You can read our factsheet on her stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee’s brightest moment came when he was discussing the Syrian refugee crisis. He said that only one of five refugees in Europe is actually Syrian and accepting large amounts of is a security and economic risk.

Huckabee said the U.S. should instead provide humanitarian aid to the refugees to keep them closer to their home, instead of bringing them into America where they may have trouble assimilating. He is open to accepting refugees who are fully vetted.

He blamed the administration’s Middle East strategy for creating the refugee crisis and allowing Christians to be slaughtered and not helping the Kurds enough. Huckabee said he’d pressure neighbors like Saudi Arabia to take care of the situation.

Huckabee is tied with Christie for ninth place nationally at 2%. He is in eighth place in Iowa with 3%; 12th place in New Hampshire with less than 1% and eighth place in South Carolina with 2%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Chris Christie

Christie’s biggest moment on security came when he discussed how he’d respond to cyber attacks from adversaries like China. Christie said he is a victim of Chinese hacking and that they stole his social security number and fingerprints when they hacked into governmental personnel data.

Under his administration, “They’re going to see cyber warfare like they have never seen before” if they did it again. Christie would respond by hacking into the Chinese government and publishing incriminating information like corruption for its population to see. This is a policy that Christie would presumably apply to other countries involved in cyber attacks on the U.S. like Iran and North Korea.

Christie is tied with Huckabee for ninth place nationally at 2%. He is in ninth place in Iowa with 3%; eighth place in New Hampshire with 5% (a 2-point increase) and 11th place in South Carolina with 1%.

Bobby Jindal

Jindal made no significant statements regarding national security policy.

Jindal is tied with Santorum for 11th place nationally with 1%. He is in seventh place in Iowa with 3%; tenth in New Hampshire with less than 1% and 13th place in South Carolina with less than 1%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Rick Santorum

Santorum made no significant statements regarding national security policy.

Santorum is tied with Jindal for 11th place nationally with 1%. He is in 12th place in Iowa with 1%; 13th place in New Hampshire with less than 1% and 12th place in South Carolina with 1%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

Lindsey Graham

Graham did not qualify for either debate, but commented online during the event. He mocked Rand Paul for opposing increases to the defense budget, saying that the Army is on track to be the smallest it’s been since 1940 and the Navy will be the smallest since 1945.

Graham also made some interesting comments about Egypt. He said that “so goes Egypt, so goes the Middle East,” and that he would help President El-Sisi confront radical Islam but pressure him to avoid strong-arm tactics to maintain power and to permit free press and rule of law.

“To win the war against radical Islam, there has to be economic and social justice,” Graham wrote online.

Graham is in 14th place nationally with less than 1%. He is in 13thplace in Iowa with less than 1%; 15th place in New Hampshire with less than 1% and ninth place in South Carolina with 2%. You can read our factsheet on his stances related to Islamist extremism here.

George Pataki & Jim Gilmore

George Pataki and Jim Gilmore did not qualify for either debate. You can read our factsheet on Pataki’s platform here and our factsheet on Gilmore here.

You can read the Clarion Project’s factsheets on each candidate’s positions related to Islamist extremism here.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrat Candidates: Wide Differences on Islamist Terror

GOP Debate on Mute About National Security

CAIR Berates Trump for Support of Closing Extremist Mosques

National Security Highlights From First Democratic Debate

Democrat Candidates: Wide Differences on Islamist Terror by Ryan Mauro

/in , , , , /by

The remaining three Democratic presidential candidates participated in a forum with MSNBC last Friday and it exposed very important divisions within the party about the sources of Islamist terrorism. One side sees it as an ideological battle and the other sees it as a repercussion of Muslim grievances against American policy.

Senator Bernie Sanders described the war with the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) as a battle for the “soul of Islam” whose primary participants must be Muslim. Because he sees it as a Muslim-on-Muslim conflict where the West is caught in the crossfire, Sanders thinks it is counterproductive for the U.S. to take the lead in fighting the Islamic State.

Sanders said he disagrees with President Obama’s decision to send ground troops to Iraq to aid the Iraqi security forces. The U.S. should play a supporting role, he argued, but the surrounding Muslim countries should be the only ones to send in ground forces to fight it out with the Islamic State.

The viewpoint of Sanders about the nature of the war puts him more in line with Clinton than with Martin O’Malley.

“Jihadist groups are governing territory. They will never stay there, though. They are driven to expand. Their raison d’etre is to be against the West, against the Crusaders, against the fill-in-the-blank—and we all fit into one of these categories,” Clinton said in an interview withThe Atlantic in August 2014.

She also said the U.S. needs to have an ideological strategy like it had during the Cold War, when we had “a kind of overarching framework about what we were trying to do that did lead to the defeat of the Soviet Union and the collapse of Communism.”

The difference between her and Sanders is in how to respond to the ideological threat. Clinton is far more interventionist and believes in pro-actively promoting democratic values, whereas Sanders sees the threat as something that is mostly in the hands of the Muslim world to solve.

O’Malley separated himself from the two at the Democratic forum by claiming that military experts have informed him that the two biggest recruiters for Al-Qaeda and ISIS are the presences of U.S. military forces on the ground in the Muslim world and the failure to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp for terrorists.

The statement means that O’Malley sees Islamist terrorism as a byproduct of perceived mistreatment of Muslims by U.S. policymakers. This puts him more in the camp of former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (whose son, Rand Paul, is currently running) and President Obama. This viewpoint is contradicted by the words of Islamist terrorists like Osama Bin Laden and basic logic.

The three candidates represent three different camps within the Democratic Party: An interventionist view that sees the Islamist threat as ideological (Clinton); a more non-interventionist view that sees the Islamist threat as ideological (Sanders) and a non-interventionist view that blames “blowback” from U.S. policy for sparking the Islamist threat (O’Malley).

Click here to read the Clarion Project’s fact sheets on each presidential candidate’s positions related to Islamism.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

RELATED ARTICLES:

GOP Debate on Mute About National Security

CAIR Berates Trump for Support of Closing Extremist Mosques

National Security Highlights From First Democratic Debate

Carson Calls on IRS to Terminate CAIR’s Tax-Exempt Status

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Democratic Candidate (L to R): Marin O’Malley, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders