Liberalism Created the WDBJ Killer

/in , , , , /by

Barack Obama won’t be saying, “If I had a psycho son, he’d look like Vester Lee.” But he might as well. Because Vester Lee Flanagan II, the bigoted maniac who murdered the WDBJ reporter and cameraman Wednesday on live TV, was a philosophical offspring of the Left.

It’s well known now that Flanagan was a professional victim, nurturing grudges against all and sundry based on his “status” as a homosexual black man. He had an axe to grind with white women because they supposedly made racial statements to him, and against black men because they supposedly directed anti-homosexual remarks his way. And it didn’t seem as if he liked anyone very much.

Of course, most of the bigotry he perceived from others was in his head, a function of his own prejudice, inculcated via decades of liberal indoctrination. When you dislike others, you view them through tinted lenses and ascribe negative motivations to everything they do. Where a fair-minded individual might interpret a comment as innocuous, simply a misunderstanding or an example of the issuer merely having a bad day, you see malice. “Of course it was racial! That’s the way white people are.” And, “That had to be ‘homophobic’ in this society, which macro and microaggresses against everything that I am!” (of course, certain things are supposed to be stigmatized). These notions, again, were put in Flanagan’s mixed-up head by liberals and liberals alone. They disgorge hateful, pure and utter nonsense such as microaggression theory, “white privilege,” critical-race theory and 1000 other things designed to divide with lies. It is evil.

Flanagan had described himself as “human powder keg,” but what was he so angry about? He lived in the most prosperous nation in the most prosperous time in man’s history; he could walk into any supermarket and avail himself of thousands of delicious foods from the world over at reasonable prices, a luxury that would have made the jaws of people existing in former ages drop. He was living, as we all do, in Shangri-la. But his attitude was hardly inexplicable.

To paraphrase G.K. Chesterton, “Goods look a lot better when they come wrapped as gifts.” Everything is a gift, but the Left teaches just the opposite: to have a sense of entitlement, to believe you’re owed, to ever and always view our very large glass as half empty. Some have asked, quite naively, how it is that despite Flanagan’s pathetic performance as a reporter, he was hired by more than one media outlet and given chance after chance to right the ship. Well, golly gee, Cletus, it’s a mystery.

Flanagan was clearly an affirmative-action hire, enjoying the daily-double victim status of being black and homosexual. And that was part of the problem: too much was given to him on a silver platter — because of liberalism.

There have been many articles in recent years about how college graduates today enter the workforce with unrealistic expectations about their economic self-worth and starting salary. We hear about how so many of them can’t tolerate criticism and rejection; act as if their own feelings are inordinately important and should command respect; and how they lack a sense of propriety, a grasp of their place in a workplace’s hierarchy. As a consequence, they may barge into an office to vent their feelings, even if it’s neither the time nor the place.

This is all the result of liberal parenting, of the psychobabble disgorged by the likes of Dr. Benjamin Spock. It’s no wonder many young people today have little sense of just hierarchies — their permissive liberal parents didn’t establish a just hierarchy in the home. Instead, they acted as if their family was a dysfunctional democracy and junior a special-interest group that political correctness dictated must be coddled and catered to. Junior seldom heard the word “No!” uttered in exclamatory fashion; junior seldom had to delay gratification; junior got participation trophies just for showing up. He was treated as a little prince around whom the world revolved. He was marinated in “self-esteem” pap in schools, telling him how great and special he was. The result? Junior and many of his peers (not that he imagined he had any peers) grew up to be narcissists.

As for Flanagan, it has been reported that his refrigerator was covered with pictures of himself. We know what this means. A mother may display numerous pictures of her children because she loves her children. And a man would display numerous pictures of himself because…?

It all reminds me of the Satan character’s line in the film The Devil’s Advocate: “Vanity is my favorite sin.” “Pride” is probably even more accurate. But it all gets at the matter’s heart. We don’t need some hard and fast psychological diagnosis here. Whether Flanagan was most correctly characterized as a “narcissist” or just a self-centered, entitled jerk, the bottom line is that his state was attributable to a philosophical disease, a disordered way of thinking that masquerades under an ideological banner:

Liberalism.

Of course, liberals will blame guns. This is partially because, unlike with Dylann Roof, they can’t blame Confederate flags or 19th-century statues. But it’s also because they’re incapable of putting the blame where it really belongs: the man in the mirror.

Guns don’t kill people. Liberalism does.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Cop Killer Charged: Attended Same University as Sandra Bland

VIDEO: Black Marine GOES off on Black Lives Matter With Message Facebook Is Trying to Silence

Armed Black Panthers to Texas Cops: ‘We Will Start Creeping up on You in Darkness’

Virginia Killer Wrote Disgusting Notes on This Subject [+video]

EDITORS NOTE: You mAY contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

World’s Poor: “We Want Capitalism” by Iain Murray

/in , , , , /by

In the forests of India, something exciting is going on. Villagers are regaining property taken from them when the British colonial authorities nationalized their forests. Just as exciting, in urban Kenya and elsewhere, people are doing away with the need for banks by exchanging and saving their money digitally. All over the world, poor people are discovering the blessings of bottom-up capitalism.

Sadly, though, developed country governments and anti-poverty activists ignore this fact and insist that developing nations need a paternalistic hand up. Both are missing an opportunity, because there are billions of capitalists in waiting at the bottom of the pyramid.

Next month, the United Nations will formally announce the successors to its Millennium Development Goals, the global body’s approach to poverty alleviation since the year 2000. These new goals will be touted as “sustainable.” The event will coincide with a visit by the pope, at which he is expected to concentrate on climate change and materialism as the greatest threats to the welfare of the people of the developing world.

Don’t expect to hear much on the way people in the Western world lifted themselves out of poverty: free-market capitalism.

The phrase “the fortune at the bottom of the pyramid” was coined by the late C.K. Prahalad, building on the work of Nobel laureate Amartya Sen. In his groundbreaking 1999 work, Development as Freedom, Sen pointed out that one of the most important aspects of development is freedom of opportunity, a vital part of which is access to capital and credit. Capital and credit, however, appear nowhere in the draft UN goals.

When capital is sufficiently available, would-be entrepreneurs at the bottom of the pyramid have demonstrated a willingness to launch new ventures and invest in their futures — that is, to embrace free-market capitalism to the benefit of all concerned.

There are several ways to ensure access to capital in the developing world, but the most important approach is to unlock the productive potential of the capital already available there.

Land Titling

In many countries, people could possess access to capital by virtue of the real estate they already occupy, but they are unable to prove ownership of the land due to inadequate land-titling systems or because of traditional forms of property ownership where everything belongs to the village chief. As Hernando de Soto explained in his book, The Mystery of Capital, land-titling reforms significantly benefit the poor, enabling

such opportunities as access to credit, the establishment of systems of identification, the creation of systems for credit and insurance information, the provision for housing and infrastructure, the issue of shares, the mortgage of property and a host of other economic activities that drive a modern market economy.

De Soto estimates that up to $10 trillion of capital worldwide is locked away unused because of inadequate titling systems. A recent study by the Peru-based Institute for Liberal Democracy (ILD), which De Soto heads, estimated Egyptian workers’ real estate holdings to be worth around $360 billion, “eight times more than all the foreign direct investment in Egypt since Napoleon’s invasion.”

Similarly, many local assets around the world remain in common ownership — in reality, owned by no one. Initiatives such as India’s privatization of forest resources seek to address this problem by enabling the titling of assets by indigenous peoples, who can then tap into those resources for access to credit to open up new opportunities. Estimates suggest that similar initiatives could be extended to 900 million plots of land across the developing world.

There are also exciting opportunities that could arise for the public recording and utilization of such capital through the distributed public-ledger system known as the blockchain, best known for its role in the development of bitcoin. Development of the blockchain for property recording and titling would significantly reduce both the transaction costs and the widespread corruption  associated with government-controlled titling systems. Significantly, De Soto’s ILD is promoting these initiatives.

Microfinance

Recent innovations have enabled the development of microfinance — access to small amounts of credit for specific purposes. Today, microfinance institutions all over the developing world provide small loans, access to savings, and microinsurance to families or small businesses.

By giving them access to proper investment capital and affordable financial institutions, microfinance providers help small- and medium-sized enterprises in developing countries to grow. Often, these businesses are so small that they can neither afford the interest rates on bank loans nor come up with the capital they need on the their own. When implemented correctly, microfinance loans empower their customers to invest, grow, and be productive, all of which contribute to diminishing poverty within communities.

One of the most prominent examples of microfinance is Muhammad Yunus’s Grameen Bank, first established in Bangladesh. According to a RAND Corporation study, areas where Grameen Bank offers programs saw unemployment rates drop from 31 percent to 11 percent in their first year. Occupational mobility improved, with many people moving up from low-wage positions to more entrepreneurial ones. There is evidence of increased wage rates for local farmers. Women’s participation in income-generating activities also rose significantly.

The Consumers at the Bottom of the Pyramid

Access to capital and credit enable new markets to spring up where none existed before. Entrepreneurial activity is unleashed. Consider one of Prahalad’s case studies of Nirmal, a small Indian firm that sold detergent products designed for rural village uses, such as in rivers. The products came in small packages at low prices suitable for Indian villagers’ daily cash flow. The company soon found itself with a market share equal to that of consumer-goods giant Unilever’s Indian subsidiary. Unilever responded by introducing similar products, thereby growing this new market. In the process, more environmentally friendly products were invented and sold, too.

As Prahalad points out, over four billion people in the world lived on an annual income of $1,500 or less (in 2002 dollars), with one billion living on less than a dollar a day. Nevertheless, based on purchasing power parity, this market represents an economy of $13 trillion or more, not that far off from the entire developed world.

The underdeveloped world is ripe for capitalism. The “unemployed” protestors of the Arab Spring were, in fact, small businessmen who were pushed to the breaking point by continually having their capital and profits expropriated by corrupt government officials, as De Soto points out. So, while the Western media portrayed the protests as being mostly about politics and freedom of expression, they were as much — if not more — about the freedom to do business.

Kenya: Mobile Phones and Payments

Despite corruption and bureaucracy, strong markets have grown up in developing countries. Kenya is a case in point. It leapfrogged the Western world’s development process for mobile communications technology. Kenyans went from having few telephones to virtually everyone having a mobile phone without needing the stage of landline infrastructure in between. A similar process is now taking place in personal finance.

Vodafone, along with its Kenyan subsidiary, Safaricom, developed m-pesa, a mobile payment and value storage system to be used on its phones. Transactions are capped at about $500, but crucially can be person-to-person, acting as digitized cash. Introduced in 2007, it had 9 million users — 40 percent of Kenya’s population — just two years later. By 2013, 17 million Kenyans were using it, with transactions valued at over $24 billion — over half of Kenya’s GDP.

M-pesa has in turn improved access to capital even more, and technology businesses are thriving all over Kenya as a result.

Kenya is not alone. The phenomenon is spreading to other African countries and to some South American countries such as Paraguay.

Environment, education, and health all benefit from wealth creation. Perhaps the real mystery of capitalism is that neither the United Nations nor the pope recognize the benefits it can bring to four billion of the world’s poor. Free enterprise and human welfare boom where governments allow new markets with access to capital and credit. That is all it takes to meet the UN’s development goals.

Iain Murray
Iain Murray

Iain Murray is vice president at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Former UK Defense Chief: Cameron lacked “balls” to head off rise of Islamic State

/in , , , , /by

“Lord Richards reportedly told author Sir Anthony Seldon that the prime minister had in 2012 rejected a ‘coherent military strategy’ to take on the regime of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, which would in his view have seen the Islamic extremists ‘squeezed out of existence.’” It seems fanciful that taking on the Islamic State’s enemy, Assad, would have “squeezed” the Islamic State “out of existence,” but it is manifestly true that David Cameron lacks the courage and vision to take on the jihad threat in general, and is instead following a disastrous policy of appeasement and accommodation of Islamic supremacists that is going to result in nothing less than the ruin of Britain if it isn’t stopped.

“Too often it seems to be more about the Notting Hill liberal agenda rather than statecraft.” No doubt about that.

“David Cameron lacked ‘balls’ to head off the rise of Isis, says former defence chief,” by Frances Perraudin, Guardian, August 30, 2015 01.06 EDT
Last modified on Sunday 30 August 2015:

David Cameron lacked “the balls” to take the military action in Syria that could have prevented the rise of Islamic State, a former head of the armed forces has said.

In a scathing analysis of the UK prime minister’s approach, Gen Lord Richards of Herstmonceux said Cameron’s approach seemed “more about the Notting Hill liberal agenda rather than statecraft”.

Lord Richards reportedly told author Sir Anthony Seldon that the prime minister had in 2012 rejected a “coherent military strategy” to take on the regime of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, which would in his view have seen the Islamic extremists “squeezed out of existence”.

The comments are detailed in Seldon’s biography of Cameron – titled Cameron at 10: the Inside Story 2010-2015 – which is being serialised in the Mail on Sunday.

Lord Richards, who was chief of the defence staff from October 2010 to July 2013, is quoted as saying: “If they had the balls they would have gone through with it … if they’d done what I’d argued, they wouldn’t be where they are with Isis.

“In Ukraine, as in Syria and Libya, there is a clear lack of strategy and statecraft. The problem is the inability to think things through. Too often it seems to be more about the Notting Hill liberal agenda rather than statecraft.”

The House of Commons voted against military action in Syria in 2013 and parliamentary authorisation has so far only been given to UK airstrikes against Isis in neighbouring Iraq.

But Cameron and the defence secretary, Michael Fallon, made clear they were considering extending the military air campaign to Syria in the wake of the Tunisian beach massacre on 26 June, which claimed 30 British victims among the 38 dead….

RELATED ARTICLES:

General Secretary for Danish Refugee Help: “We face an Armageddon scenario”

New Islamic State coins commemorate eventual conquest of “Rome and America”

Research Findings a Blow to Anti-gun Academics

/in , , , , /by

For decades, anti-gun academics have attacked firearms and firearm owners by conducting “research” that purportedly offers insight into the psyche of gun owners. The dubious findings of these psychology studies typically portray gun owners in a negative light, and are frequently published in uncritical academic journals, and then touted by gun control activists and the mainstream media as legitimate science. However, as a study published this week in the journal Science reveals, the entire field of psychology research warrants severe skepticism; and consequently the field’s frivolous attacks on gun ownership.

Perhaps the most famous item on this topic that has long been heralded by gun control activists is Leonard Berkowitz and Anthony LePage’s, already largely debunked, “Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli,” published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 1967. This research popularized the notion of a “weapons effect,” where supposedly the mere presence of a firearm elicits aggression in an individual.

More recently, in 2012, researchers James R. Brockmole and Jessica K. Witt’s article “Action Alters Object Identification: Wielding a Gun Increases The Bias to See Guns,” was published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. This paper contended that when individuals are armed with a gun, they are more likely to perceive others as being armed. Gun control advocates were quick to seize on the findings to promote the idea that gun owners are paranoid and prone to react with outsize responses to potential threats.

Some recent psychology studies have attacked gun owners more personally. A 2013 item published in PLS One titled, “Racism, Gun Ownership and Gun Control: Biased Attitudes in US Whites May Influence Policy Decisions,” tried to link gun ownership to racism. The researchers concluded “Symbolic racism was related to having a gun in the home and opposition to gun control policies in US whites.” Anti-gun publications, such as the New York Daily News, Huffington Post, and Salon.com were all-too-willing to parrot the findings.

The study recently published in Science is the result of a four-year effort to improve the accuracy of psychological science. A team of 270 scientists led by University of Virginia Professor Brian Nosek attempted to replicate 98 studies published in some of psychology’s most prestigious journals by conducting 100 attempts at replication. In the end, according to a Science article accompanying the study, “only 39% [of the studies] could be replicated unambiguously.”

In the same article, University of Missouri Psychologist and Editor at the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (which published the Berkowitz and LePage study) Lynne Cooper, was quoted as saying of the findings, “Their data are sobering and present a clear challenge to the field.” She went on to note that the journal is working on reforms that will push “authors, editors, and reviewers… to reexamine and recalibrate basic notions about what constitutes good scholarship.”

The scale of the problem could be even greater than the recent study reveals. In an article on the team’s findings, the journal Nature noted, “John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at Stanford University in California, says that the true replication-failure rate could exceed 80%, even higher than Nosek’s study suggests.

Further, psychology isn’t the only field to suffer these problems. In reporting on this matter, the New York Times noted, “The report appears at a time when the number of retractions of published papers is rising sharply in a wide variety of disciplines. Scientists have pointed to a hypercompetitive culture across science that favors novel, sexy results and provides little incentive for researchers to replicate the findings of others, or for journals to publish studies that fail to find a splashy result.” For better, or worse, results involving guns might accurately be described as “sexy,” and the editors of the nation’s major newspapers appear willing to splash any gun control supporting findings all over their publications.

These findings and the accompanying comments by those in scientific research community encourage a healthy dose of skepticism when examining studies; regardless of how prestigious the journal, or the schools the authors hail from. The problems outlined in this study, along with pre-existing knowledge of the political bias in some portions of academia, should embolden gun rights supporters to further confront the findings of anti-gun studies, while hopefully also causing those who report on these topics to question research findings more critically.

Members of #FukYoFlag movement call for the lynching of white people and cops

/in , , , , /by
kXVtNY2p_400x400

Sunshine. Source: Twitter

Days before the execution of a Texas police officer by a black man a Texas blog radio show aired “calling for the lynching of white people and cops.” Below is a tape of the show Sunshine’s F***ing Opinion Radio Show hosted by a black anarchist called Sunshine.

Sunshine on her Twitter account “LOLatWhiteFear” describes herself as “The noncompliant negro female formerly known as founder of  campaign. 1 of the organizers of .”

Here is the excerpt from Sunshine’s show – WARNING GRAPHIC LANGUAGE:

SNAPSHOT-Twitter-Radio-Call-Invite

Sunshine Tweet calling for racial anarchy.

Lana Shadwick from Breitbart reports:

One of the #F**YoFlag movement supporters allegedly told a veteran who infiltrated their publicly posted conference call, “We are going to rape and gut your pregnant wife, and your f***ing piece of sh*t unborn creature will be hung from a tree.”

Breitbart Texas previously encountered Sunshine at a Sandra Bland protest at the Waller County Jail in Texas, where she said all white people should be killed. She told journalists and photographers, “You see this nappy-ass hair on my head? … That means I am one of those more militant Negroes.” She said she was at the protest because “these redneck mother-f**kers murdered Sandra Bland because she had nappy hair like me.”

#FYF911 black radicals say they will be holding the “imperial powers” that are actually responsible for the terrorist attacks on September 11th accountable on that day, asreported by Breitbart Texas. There are several websites and Twitter handles for the movement.

“Palmetto Star” describes himself as one of the head organizers. He said in a YouTube video that supporters will be burning their symbols of “the illusion of their superiority,” their “false white supremacy,” like the American flag, the British flag, police uniforms, and Ku Klux Klan hoods.

Read more.

Days after this broadcast a Harris County Sheriff’s Deputy was shot execution style by a black man at a gas station while reportedly in full uniform. The deputy was filling up his patrol car.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a black woman named Nocturnus Libertus a member of the FukYoFlag movement. Source: Twitter

Minnesota: Muslim terror suspect gets driver’s license, wants to drive school buses

/in , , , , , /by

What could possibly go wrong, you greasy Islamophobe? “Terrorism Suspect Gets Driving License: Can Now Drive Large Trucks, Wants To Drive School Buses Next!,” by Jelani James, HNGN, August 28, 2015:

A terrorism suspect whose name appears on the “No Fly” list has been allegedly given a Class-A commercial driver’s license, which would allow him to drive semi-trucks that he can fill with whatever seemingly legal item he chooses.

Amir Meshal had been attempting to get his Class A license from a South St. Paul Truck Driving School in Minnesota. The $4,000 tuition was paid for through the state workforce program.

The Minnesota Department of Public Safety confirmed he earned his license on Aug. 8 after the road test, according to the Canada Free Press.

The Department of Homeland Security has regarded this man as a terrorist threat and has the evidence to back it up, according to Cain TV.

In May 2014, Meshal was allegedly removed from a Bloomington, Minn., mosque after he was suspected of radicalizing younger people who would later travel to Syria. According to a police report, leaders at the mosque said, “We have concerns about Meshal interacting with our youth.”

Meshal was asked to leave a mosque in Eden Prairie, Minn., for similar reasons.

Dating further back, in 2007 Meshal was arrested in Kenya by the FBI after he was believed to have attended a terror training camp in Somalia.

Meshal and the American Civil Liberties Union recently sued the U.S. government for detaining him for three months after he was arrested in Kenya. According to the lawsuit, the FBI had tried to convince him to become an informant.

The two also sued TSA and Homeland Security to have Meshal removed from the “No Fly” list, reported Fox Minnesota affiliate Fox 9. However, Homeland Security responded in a letter saying, “[Meshal] may be a threat to civil aviation or national security,” adding, “It has been determined that you [Amir Meshal] are an individual who represents a threat of engaging in or conducting a violent act of terrorism and who is operationally capable of doing so.”

As if this story didn’t raise enough red flags, a spokesman from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety also revealed that Meshal also wants to drive school buses!…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bill O’Reilly: “Jihad…is a perversion of Islam, we all know that”

Miami: Muslim gets 15 years for conspiring to support jihad mass murderers

Nora Patterson former Democrat and Planned Parenthood Board Member running for Florida Senate

/in , , , , , /by
nora patterson at opening of pp facility in sarasota

Nora Patterson (sixth from the left) at ribbon cutting of largest Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Florida, located in the City of Sarasota.

Career politician Nora Patterson has filed to run for the Florida Senate in District 23. Patterson will be running against Florida State Representative Greg Steube and and former Florida State Representative Doug Holder in the Republican primary in Sarasota County, Florida.

Patterson is a long time supporter and former President of the Board of Directors of the largest Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Florida, located in Rosemary District, a minority area in North Sarasota County.

In 1998, when running for the Sarasota City Commission, Rod Thompson from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reported that Patterson “has served as president of the board of directors for Planned Parenthood of Southwest Florida” … and she is “very much a supporter of Planned Parenthood.”

john and nora patterson

John and Nora Patterson at the March 2013 Planned Parenthood annual dinner. Source: Gulfshore Media, LLC.

In June, 2006 Patterson, with her husband John who is a partner with Shutt & Bowen, LLP law firm, attended a Planned Parenthood fundraiser. Sarasota Magazine reported on the Ruby Gala and wrote:

At the Ruby gala, big names were everywhere: Cornelia Matson in regal purple, Lee Peterson, Nancy Reinheimer, Betty Schoenbaum, Anita Holec, Caren Lobo, Flori Roberts,Leila Gompertz-too many to name. And husbands galore! Many politicos-Mayor Mary Ann Servian, former Mayor Mollie Cardamone, Commissioner Ken Shelin, School Board members John Lewis and Carol Todd, County Commissioner Nora Patterson and Betty Castor. Alex Sink, and other candidates for office were also there.

In 2007 Sarasota County voted for an $8 million bond to help fund a new Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.

While a Sarasota County Commissioner Patterson was the only one to vote to continue using county taxes to continue funding for Planned Parenthood. Steven Ertlet from LifeNews.com in 2008 reported:

Sarasota County in Florida has cut the money it sends to a local Planned Parenthood abortion business. Officials, citing poor economic conditions and the need to better balance the city budget, removed the second $12,500 of the original $25,000 allocated for Planned Parenthood family planning programs.

[ … ]

Nora Patterson was the only member of the commission to vote to retain the Planned Parenthood funding. The county gave the abortion center a $30,000 grant in 2007 and $28,000 in 2006.

Zac Anderson from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports, “Patterson is viewed as a moderate on a number of issues. She is a former Democrat who supports abortion rights ‘up to a certain point in the pregnancy’ and once served as president of the board of Planned Parenthood of Southwest Florida, although she noted her board stint was before the local affiliate performed abortions.” [Emphasis added]

Patterson’s efforts to distance herself from Planned Parenthood is misrepresenting the fact that she has consistently supported abortions, and the funding thereof, using Sarasota tax dollars ever since she left as President of Southwest Florida Planned Parenthood.

Stephanie Armour from the Wall Street Journal reports:

Three Planned Parenthood Federation of America clinics in Florida were ordered to stop performing second-trimester abortions after an investigation found they didn’t have the proper licenses, the state Agency for Health Care Administration said Wednesday.

The investigation also found one clinic that wasn’t keeping proper logs relating to fetal remains, according to the agency. The state may take additional actions, including administrative sanctions, against the clinics.

“Licenses are in place to protect the patient from unscrupulous operators and the state of Florida will ensure every facility is held accountable for its actions,” the agency said in a news release.

[ … ]

Florida Gov. Rick Scott last month ordered an investigation of Planned Parenthood clinics in the state following an antiabortion group’s release of undercover videos of Planned Parenthood officials discussing the procurement of fetal tissue for research following abortions.

Perhaps Sarasota County voters should judge Nora Patterson on the company she keeps? That company being Planned Parenthood, and the industrial complex that makes a profit off of baby body parts.

Nora Patterson has been a loyal soldier in the war against the innocent and unborn.

RELATED ARTICLES:

4 Ways the Senate Could End Taxpayer Funding of Planned Parenthood

What the New York Times Didn’t Tell You About the Planned Parenthood Video Analysis

Black Pastors Demand Smithsonian Remove Planned Parenthood Founder’s Bust

‘Planned Parenthood Is Flailing’: Bobby Jindal Fights Back After Louisiana Sued for Terminating Medicaid Contract

The Feminist War on Family Science

Curt Schilling and the Death of Free Speech

/in , , , , , /by

Curt Schilling islam tweetHe told the truth. He apologized. It still wasn’t enough. In FrontPage today, I discuss the savaging of Curt Schilling:

“Curt Schilling’s tweet comparing Muslims to Nazis is even worse than it sounds,” howled Max Fisher in Vox – one of the many voices this week screaming for Schilling’s head for transgressing against America’s new and unwritten, but nonetheless frightfully draconian, speech codes.

Fisher professes ignorance of the perp’s illustrious career, semaphoring that he is a good Leftist elitist, ignorant of Schilling’s brutish, bourgeois athletic achievements: “Curt Schilling, whom Wikipedia informs me is a former baseball star and current ESPN commentator, sent a tweet on Tuesday that seems to have emerged straight from the internet nether-void of racist email forwards.”

“Racist”? Schilling tweeted a graphic that read, “It’s said only 5-10% of Muslims are extremists. In 1940, only 7% of Germans were Nazis. How’d that go?” So where is the “racism”? What race are “extremist Muslims”? What race are Muslims in the aggregate? What race is Islam? Or did Fisher mean that Schilling’s tweet was racist against Germans?

Fisher compounds this muddled thinking by doubling down on the false claim in his headline, that Schilling likened Muslims to Nazis: “The argument here is pretty clear, even if the numbers are pure nonsense, but just so it’s not lost: Schilling is saying that the religion of Islam is akin to Nazi Germany, and that the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims are responsible for the actions of a tiny minority of extremists in the same way that Nazi-era Germans were complicit in Nazi crimes.”

Actually, Schilling’s tweet does neither of those things. It likens not the religion of Islam, but “extremist Muslims,” to Nazis, and it doesn’t say a think about all Muslims being responsible for the crimes of Islamic jihadists. And Fisher’s woolly logic is typical of the firestorm that has engulfed Schilling, as he has been removed from ESPN’s coverage of the Little League World Series and is being pilloried everywhere. Schilling himself is repentant and apologetic, but it may do no good: he may be facing more punishment, and is taking a beating in the mainstream media for being “insensitive.”

But what exactly is so offensive about his tweet? Is it that he compared “extremist Muslims” to Nazis? Surely that can’t be it. The Islamic State hasn’t murdered six million Jews, but surely would if it could, and meanwhile its gleeful bloodlust, sex slavery, terrorizing of non-Muslims and all the rest of it make the comparison reasonable.

Or was Schilling “insensitive” for daring to suggest that peaceful Muslims aren’t doing much to rein in their violent coreligionists? Well, let’s see. Last month, Muslims in Ireland held a demonstration against the Islamic State. How many Muslims showed up? Fewer than fifty. And in October 2014 in Houston, a rally against the Islamic State organized by the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) drew the grand total of ten people. In August 2013 in Boston, about 25 Muslims rallied against “misperceptions” that Islam was violent. About the same number showed up in June 2013 at a progressive Muslim rally in Toronto to claim that their religion had been “hijacked.”

And back in 2005, a group called the Free Muslims Coalition held what it dubbed a “Free Muslims March Against Terror,” intending to “send a message to the terrorists and extremists that their days are numbered … and to send a message to the people of the Middle East, the Muslim world and all people who seek freedom, democracy and peaceful coexistence that we support them.” In the run-up to the event it got enthusiastic national and international publicity, but it ended up drawing about twenty-five people.

Contrast those paltry showings to the thousands of Muslims who have turned out for rallies against cartoons of Muhammad or against Israel. Here are some headlines from the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo jihad massacre of Muhammad cartoonists in January 2015:

Chechnya: 800,000 Muslims protest Muhammad cartoons; protests also in Iran, Pakistan, Ingushetia, elsewhere

Pakistan: 10,000 Muslims protest against Charlie Hebdo’s Muhammad cartoons

Australia: 1,000 Muslims rally against Charlie Hebdo and the freedom of speech

Kyrgyztsan: 1,000 Muslims rally: “I am not Charlie, I love my Prophet.”

But given a chance to show how Muslims overwhelmingly reject “extremism,” only a handful show up.

So Fisher and the other Leftists gleefully stomping on Schilling’s professional corpse today should explain how exactly he was offensive or insensitive (aside from having been a member of the 2001 Arizona Diamondbacks and 2004 Boston Red Sox). ESPN should restore him to active duty immediately, but it is much more likely that they will force him to issue a groveling apology first, or just fire him outright.

The savaging of Curt Schilling is disquieting proof of what I’ve pointed out many times over the years: that anyone and everyone who dares to speak a word against jihad terror will inevitably be mauled in the public square, and charged with “racism,” “bigotry” and “Islamophobia” – despite the fact that everyone, including the leading Muslim groups in the U.S., are supposed to be against jihad terror. Schilling, unprepared for the onslaught, backed down immediately, thereby reinforcing the usefulness of this firestorm as a tactic.

The ultimate goal is to inhibit all criticism of jihad terror, so that the jihad imperative can advance unimpeded. We’re well on the way there.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ESPN Erases Curt Schilling From Baseball History

UK Home Secretary Theresa May pledges government fight against “Islamist extremism” and “neo-Nazi extremism”

France jihadi’s brother: He’s not terrorist, “We are Muslims. We respect people.”

Immigration: The Refugee Scam

/in , , , , /by

Jeb Bush has called illegal migration “an act of love.” And all over the West we see nations being loved to death, with endless human waves from Third World countries washing ashore. The results were predictable and are now plain: balkanization, riots, ethnic and racial strife and no-go areas in European lands. Yet we’re told that accepting what are “refugees” is a humanitarian imperative. Yet no one, it seems, points out an obvious fact, something that really is the crux of the matter.

If a stranger in need happens by your area and you’re a charitable sort, you may take him in for a time, feed him and provide other basic necessities.

You don’t generally make him an official part of your family and empower him to help decide on finances, what products to buy, how your kids will be educated and what values will prevail within your home.

The point? At issue in the current “refugee crisis” is not charity and the humane treatment of refugees. This isn’t only because most of the migrants in question may not even be refugees.

It’s because the issue is granting uninvited guests citizenship.

People talk about the financial burden of accommodating Third World migrants, largely because money (as opposed to national integrity) is all a demoralized and denationalized people think to discuss and because finances are a politically correct subject. But a national family can recover from devastated finances. It can’t recover from a destroyed national family.

I have pointed out again and again and again that the groups represented by virtually all illegal migrants and refugees — and 85 percent of legal immigrants since 1965 — vote for socialistic candidates between 70 to 90 percent of the time upon being naturalized. Related to this but also generally overlooked is that the people make the culture and government. Replace a Western people with Muslims or Mexicans and you no longer have Western civilization. You have Mexico Norte or Iran West.

Unfortunately, the granting of aid and the granting of citizenship have been so melded into one amorphous, superficially homogenous blob of bad policy that most people don’t even recognize they should be two distinct and separate issues — as they had been for most of history.

Of course, this serves the Left’s ends. The Refugee Crisis™ debate is framed as a battle between compassionate liberals responding to desperate pleas and coin-counting, callous, conservative reactionaries. But charitable motives animate the Left little, if at all. Liberals are notoriously tightfisted with (their own) charitable dollars; even more to the point, when a shipload of Jews fleeing Nazi persecution wanted safe haven in the US, leftist icon FDR turned it away. It’s one of those curious coincidences in history that the Left’s attitude toward refugees changed precisely when leftists discovered they could import voters who would empower them.

And does attaching something as a rider — citizenship — to charity aid the cause of charity? Are people more or less likely to offer charity to a person if the act begins and ends with charity, or if they must grant the individual some decision-making power in their home as well? That’s a package deal only a masochist could love.

So there’s an easy way to uncover liberals’ true motivations and whether they’re serious about charity for refugees. Make a simple offer: you’ll give bona fide refugees safe haven, and you’ll do your best to ensure they’re treated well. But there’s no citizenship. Ever. And they’ll be expected to eventually return to their homelands. See if the leftists bite…anything but your extended hand.

But liberals have already tipped their hand. Andrew Neather, a former adviser to ex-British prime minister Tony Blair, admitted in 2009 that one of the goals of the mass immigration authored by his Labour Party was “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.” Barack Obama said in February he was “pretty optimistic” that because immigration was making the US “more of a hodgepodge of folks,” conservatism would be drowned out. Even more incredibly, there was this report, which tells us that “Obama’s amnesty plan is to use illegal aliens as ‘seedlings’…[who will] ‘navigate, not assimilate,’ as they ‘take over the host,’ create a ‘country within a country’ and start ‘pushing the citizens into the shadows,’” as I wrote in March. And a refugee scam is part of this: in order to get around immigration law and maximize Third World migration into the US, the Obama administration is categorizing as many people as possible as “refugees.”

This brings us to a contradiction here. On the one hand, liberals sometimes point out that despite doom-and-gloom prognostication, we live in the most “peaceful era in human history.” And they cite statistics backing up the assertion. On the other, they claim we must suddenly accommodate endless troves of “refugees” fleeing persecution. Question: if the world is unprecedentedly peaceful, why now do we have a supposedly worse refugee crisis than in more warlike times?

There’s another contradiction. We’re told that prosperous countries have a moral responsibility to the world’s poorer nations. So why then are wealthy Asian Tigers never asked to absorb any “refugees”? Japan, in fact, has virtually no immigration whatsoever despite having an extremely low birthrate and shrinking population. Moreover, since many refugees are Muslim, why aren’t Saudi Arabia, Qatar, The United Arab Emirates and the other oil-rich Arab nations taking them in? Wouldn’t it seem a natural fit? (Then they could stop importing the Filipinos and others they use for domestic help.) Maybe they know something we don’t.

In a sense, most of the world could be said to comprise would-be economic refugees. After all, how many people in Asia, Africa and Latin America wouldn’t want to emigrate to the West and enjoy the welfare state? And how many should, and can, the West absorb? One billion? Two billion? Three billion?

There undoubtedly are people in this world facing serious persecution. As to this, the West in general and the Obama administration in particular have done nothing to aid, for instance, the Christians being slaughtered in Muslim lands. But the bottom line is that the “refugees” are coming to the West simply because the West is nicer than where they come from. And they will keep coming until they’ve turned the West into where they’ve come from — unless we change course.

There’s much talk today about anchor babies, but that’s only part of our obsession with granting citizenship to foreigners. Workers should be expected to work and go home. Guests should be expected to visit and go home. For whether or not you believe charity begins at home, for certain is that conflating it with family status is robbing us of our home.

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

Unpacking the On Air Murders and ‘Targeted Violence’

/in , , , /by

The horrific murders of Virginia’s WDBJ journalists, Alison Parker and Adam Ward, at the hands of Vester Flanagan II is an example of what the Secret Service refers to as an incident of “targeted violence.” Secret Service researchers define targeted violence as “any incident of violence where a known or knowable attacker selects a particular target prior to their violent attack.”

The Secret Service, tasked with protecting the President of the United States and foreign heads of state, has over a century of experience in dealing with targeted political violence and has engaged in exhaustive research into the behavioral patterns of people who engage in this type of violence.

Their Exceptional Case Study Project was a pioneering research piece, which documented the reported thoughts and behaviors of over 80 individuals who either attacked, or planned to attack a public figure. The results of this study, combined with the Secret Service’s work on targeted school violence in their Safe School Initiative Report can provide some helpful information for public figures in the media, school principals, security professionals, law enforcement and intelligence operators.

Here are some of the highlights of their targeted violence research:

  •  “Handguns were the most common weapons used during a Principal Incident but a number of subjects reported using knives when they were unable to procure handguns.”
  • “While more than 60% of the subjects had had contact with a mental health professional at some point in their lives before the Principal Incident, fewer than one-fourth had such contact in the year before their attack or near lethal approach.”
  • “Most subjects had used weapons but few had formal training.”
  • “One-fifth of the subjects had been arrested for a violent crime.”
  • “Motives included wishes for notoriety, revenge, idiosyncratic thinking about the target, hopes to be killed, interest to bring about political change, and desires for money.”

Here are some of the highlights of their school violence research:

  • “Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely were sudden, impulsive acts.”
  • “Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.”
  • “There is no accurate or useful ‘profile’ of students who engaged in targeted school violence.”
  • “Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.”
  • “Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Moreover many had considered or attempted suicide.”

There are no easy answers here and, thankfully, violent incidents such as this are still rare, but this information can assist in attuning the senses of those in leadership positions to the warning signs that may otherwise be missed.

In my experience as a Secret Service agent interviewing potential assassins and attackers I feel that this is the most important takeaway from this research:

“In two-thirds of the incidents, the subject had a grievance. Usually grievances concerned the target (of the attack).” And, “Many subjects had taken action in response to a grievance, such as writing a letter or visiting an office.”

There are no easy answers here and, thankfully, violent incidents such as this are still rare, but this information can assist in attuning the senses of those in leadership positions to the warning signs that may otherwise be missed.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Conservative Review. The featured image of CBS anchors grieving is of WDBJ-TV7 news morning anchor Kimberly McBroom, center, gets a hug from visiting anchor Steve Grant, left, as meteorologist Leo Hirsbrunner reflects after their early morning newscast at the station, Thursday, Aug. 27, 2015, in Roanoke, Va. Reporter Alison Parker and cameraman Adam Ward were killed during a live broadcast Wednesday, while on assignment in Moneta. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

Poll: Trump leads Republican field and Clinton in West Virginia

/in , , , /by

CHARLESTON, W.Va. /PRNewswire/ — If the 2016 General Election were held today, 26 percent of West Virginians would vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton, while 58 percent would vote for an unspecified Republican candidate, according to a survey conducted by Orion Strategies, a strategic communications firm with offices in Charleston and Buckhannon.

Donald Trump holds a commanding lead among Republican presidential candidates, according to the Orion Strategies poll. Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they would vote for Trump, compared to eight percent for his closest challenger, Marco Rubio – who is statistically tied with Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carsonand Ted Cruz.  Still, a plurality of Republican and Independents are undecided.

Orion Strategies today released the first results of a new, wide-ranging statewide poll that measured voter attitudes toward next year’s election and significant national issues – including questions about Obamacare, Planned Parenthood, the use of body cameras by police and the treaty with Iran.

“Every year or two, Orion Strategies compiles a list of all the questions we ourselves want to ask,” said Curtis Wilkerson, president and CEO of Orion Strategies.  “We poll often, but almost all of the polling we do on a regular basis remains proprietary. So this is always a fun and enlightening project.”

Orion Strategies also asked a number of questions regarding West Virginia-based state issues. The results of the state-oriented poll questions will be released tomorrow.

The live-interview telephone survey was conducted among historic, likely voters in West Virginia.   A total of 406 respondents completed the entire survey – giving the poll a 4.9 +/- margin of error with a 95 percent confidence rate.  The sample was proportionate to each of the three congressional districts in the state. All 55 counties were called, and results were collected from 54 of those counties.  Partisan registration among respondents was 52 percent Democratic, 34 percent Republican and 14 percent Independent.

Orion Strategies conducts polling and research surveys on behalf of various clients, including trade associations, law firms, universities, media outlets and political campaigns.  The firm also conducts surveys for change of venue requests on prominent court cases. Curtis Wilkerson, Principal of Orion Strategies, is a member of the American Association of Public Opinion Research.  Learn more about Orion Strategies at www.orion-strategies.com

Key Findings of the Survey

In the 2016 General Election for President, would you likely vote for a Democratic or Republican Candidate?

28%

Democratic

52%

Republican

If in the 2016 General Election for President, your choices were Hillary Clinton and a Republican candidate, for whom would you vote?

26%

Clinton

58%

Republican Candidate

If the 2016 Republican Presidential Primary in West Virginia were held today, for which candidate would you vote? (Republicans and Independents only)

29%

Trump

8%

Rubio

7%

Bush

7%

Huckabee

7%

Carson

5%

Cruz

2%

Walker

2%

Fiorina

1%

Kasich

1%

Paul

32%

Other/Undecided

If the 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary in West Virginia were held today, for which candidate would you vote? (Democrats and Independents only)

23%

Clinton

12%

Sanders

16%

Biden

49%

Other/Undecided

If in the 2016 General Election for President, your choices were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, for whom would you vote?

30%

Clinton

53%

Trump

17%

Undecided

Other key findings:

  • 61% believe that things in West Virginia are not headed in the right direction
  • 36% believe that Planned Parenthood should receive state and federal funding, while 54% do not
  • 77% oppose paying college athletes salaries in addition to athletic scholarships, with 17% in support
  • 91% of respondents support the use of body cameras by all law enforcement officers
  • 63% believe that the death penalty should be reinstated while 23% are opposed and 13% undecided
  • 19% believe Congress should ratify the current proposed treaty with Iran, with 62% against and 18% undecided
  • 29% of respondents agree with the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the ability for same sex couples to marry, while 66% were opposed

Respondents were asked two similar questions with altered names at very different points in the poll:

–Do you believe that Obamacare is effective in providing more healthcare to residents in West Virginia?

35%

Yes

50%

No

–Do you believe that the Affordable Care Act is effective in providing more healthcare to residents of West Virginia

40%

Yes

46%

No

In regards to United States President Barack Obama, how would you rate his job performance?

8%

Excellent

16%

Good

13%

Fair

64%

Poor

SOURCE Orion Strategies

Al Jazeera: Stop saying the word “migrant” and call them all “refugees”

/in , , , /by

Invasion of Europe news….

We’ve seen this coming for some time—the word-police are out in force and want to be sure you stop using certain words to describe the “invasion” of Europe.

By the way, “invasion” is one of those words you are NOT to use, which is precisely why we won’t stop using it!

According to Al Jazeera, any “migrant” on the move even for economic reasons or for nefarious reasons is to be called a “refugee.”

We are seeing it right here in America as the illegal alien kids are rushing (LOL! swarming!) the U.S. southern border and the Obama Administration and the resettlement contractors refer to them as “refugees” or “asylum seekers.”

Here is the Washington Post telling us about Al Jazeera:

Reading a British tabloid newspaper in 2015, you might wonder if Europe was again at risk of being conquered by the Mongol Empire. The continent is under “siege,” the papers report, facing an “invasion” from a “horde.” Parts of Europe have become like a “war zone,” they say, as“marauding” foreigners “swarm” the borders. The reality, of course, is that there is no army at the gates. The migrants that cause Europe such angst aren’t arriving in warships. Instead, most arrive in a human trafficker’s dinghy, if they arrive at all.

It’s not hard to see that using sort of language could have a dangerous impact on the discourse surrounding migrants. “Words that convey an exaggerated sense of threat can fuel anti-immigration sentiment and a climate of intolerance and xenophobia,” Alexander Betts, director of the Refugee Studies Center at Oxford University, told WorldViews recently. Critically analyzing the derogatory words used to describe migrants is clearly prudent, but some want to go even further: Last week, Al Jazeera English broke with other major news organizations to announce that it was ditching the word “migrant.”

“The umbrella term migrant is no longer fit for purpose when it comes to describing the horror unfolding in the Mediterranean,” Barry Malone, the online editor of Al Jazeera English, explained in a blog post. “It has evolved from its dictionary definitions into a tool that dehumanises and distances, a blunt pejorative.” Instead, Malone wrote, his news organization would use the term “refugee” to describe those crossing the Mediterranean. “Migrant is a word that strips suffering people of voice,” Malone concluded. “Substituting refugee for it is – in the smallest way – an attempt to give some back.”

For more and for embedded links go here.

By the way, the word “refugee” holds an even greater meaning when one understands that in much of the first world it entitles those so designated to be given welfare goodies of all sorts.

I kind of like some of those words in the first paragraph, words like “swarm!” I’ll have to remember that one for future use.

RELATED ARTICLES:

SC writer: Refugee program is fake Christian compassion

Serkan Engin: “Words of Satan: Islam”

Satanic Cult Partners with Planned Parenthood — A match made in Hell

/in , , , , , /by
PARTIAL BIRTH

Example of Planned Parenthood method of slaughtering babies.

Satanic cults embrace human sacrifice so it makes perfect sense that the Satanic Temple of Detroit would support Planned Parenthood.

In April I wrote a column titled “Time to Remove Satan from the Public Square“.  I wrote that “Satan takes away the ‘essence of what it is to be human’.” Since publishing my column there have been two very public examples of Satanic cults and witchcraft embraced by two progressive groups, supporters of Planned Parenthood and LGBT activists, respectively.

The Washington Examiner reports:

Satan worshipers launched a counter-protest against pro-lifers outside the Detroit and Ferndale, Michigan Planned Parenthood locations Saturday.

Clad in black robes, members of the Satanic Temple of Detroit drenched bound women with milk, simulating water-boarding to “illustrate the theocratic agenda imposed upon female bodies.” The milk symbolized breast milk, one of the protest organizers explained on Facebook.

The group attached a symbol of their temple to the American flag and held up a sign that read, “America is not a theocracy. End forced motherhood.”

Read more.

Below is a short video of the Detroit Satanic Temple’s tactics in support of Planned Parenthood, which is in fact a war against Christians, Jews and humanity itself:

queer devil worshiper

Colby Gaudet, queer Devil worshiper.

In my column “Homosexuals and Transgenders Embracing Witchcraft” I noted:

It’s not enough that homosexuals and transgenders hate Christians. Now we learn that young members of the LGBT community are embracing witchcraft. Moira Donovan in a column titled “How Witchcraft Is Empowering Queer and Trans Young People” on Vice.com reports:

…Witchcraft is seeing a resurgence among queer-identified young people seeking a powerful identity that celebrates the freedom to choose who you are.

Soft-spoken and covered in tattoos, Colby Gaudet doesn’t exactly fit the stereotypical image of the witch. But Gaudet’s been known to launch into a ritual when the moment is right. And identifying as a witch appeals to Gaudet’s self-professed “strange exhibitionist quality” by playing with people’s preconceived notions of tattoos, of Gaudet’s non-binary gender identity, and of how a witch should look.

Non-binary? Really? There you have it. LGBT youth embracing witchcraft to justify their unnatural sexual behaviors. They certainly have sided with the right guy – Satan. Their “powerful identity” is with the devil.

The old crone at the edge of the village has been replaced by the queerest of witches. The Satanist in black robes has embraced Planned Parenthood, which sells aborted babies for profit.

A match made in Hell.

RELATED ARTICLES:

In New Video, StemExpress CEO Says She Wants ‘Intact Cases,’ ’50 Livers a Week’ From Abortion Facilities

How the 3 Congressional Investigations of Planned Parenthood Will Work

It’s Not Hypocritical to Oppose Gay Marriage and Let Infertile Couples Marry. Here’s Why.

Minnesota: Somali Muslim Day Care Fraud Cases Piling Up

/in , , , , /by

Again, not enough time to give you all the ins and outs of these cases, you need to read this story yourselves.  Thanks to a reader for sending it!

For those of you thinking that this is Minnesota’s problem, think again!

The federal Office of Refugee Resettlement is giving grants to some of the nine major federal contractors and subcontractors responsible for resettling refugees to help refugee women set up dare care facilities to provide “culturally appropriate” day care in towns where you live (see below)!  BTW, they are basically using your tax dollars to compete with American women who might want to become day care providers.   And, you might want to ask, well what about assimilating to America if they are placing Somali kids only in Somali run day care centers?  Where is the multiculturalism in this?

From Alphanews:

Since the Minnesota Department of Health and Human Services (DHS) fully-staffed their new child care fraud investigative unit in the spring of 2014, they’ve worked with the FBI to shutter daycare centers around the state. Of the cases that have hit the news since then, all have involved Somali-run businesses.

Khadra Hirsi

Khadra Hirsi

Khadra Abdisafad Hirsi, 47, was the director and co-owner of Ace Daycare Center in Eden Prairie. In February, Hirsi pleaded guilty to knowingly submitting fraudulent claims to the state of Minnesota’s Child Care Assistance Program. From November of 2011-May of 2013, Hirisi inflated the number of children using her daycare’s services and fraudulently obtained $300,000 in payments from the state of Minnesota and the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services.Earlier this month Hirsi was sentenced to one year and one day in federal prison and ordered to pay $300,000 in restitution.

[….]

Deqo daycare center, which had three locations in Apple Valley, St. Paul, and Minneapolis was shut down in 2013 due to licensing violations and prosecutors charged husband and wife Ahmed Aden Mohamed and Yasmin Abdulle Ali for bilking the state out of nearly $3.7 million, $3.1 million of which was collected from April 2012-January 2013. The duo had recruited more than 100 parents to enroll their own children in the program.

There is much more here.

Now be sure to visit the Office of Refugee Resettlement, Microenterprise Development—Home Based Child Care program where your tax dollars are handed out in grants to help Somalis (and other refugees) become day care owners and operators.  Go here and be sick!

And, I suspect that the contractor administering the grant is not audited to determine where exactly this money is spent!  People ask me all the time how can a contractor make enough money simply by collecting the per-head payment for each refugee they resettle.  Well, it is grants like these that send more money into their coffers.

RELATED ARTICLE: Merkel blasts anti-immigrant rioters, Hollande wrings his hands

RELATED VIDEO: Day care fraud in Ohio

Donald Trump gave Marine Sergeant Tahmooressi $25,000 after He was Freed

/in , , , /by

Justin Carters from IJReview.com reports:

On Thursday, Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren revealed the identity of the GOP candidate who helped Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi after he was finally freed from a Mexican prison.

The candidate, Donald Trump, acknowledged Sustersen’s activism at a town hall earlier this week.

He said:

“We don’t have a good relationship with Mexico. Remember Sergeant Tahmooressi, they kept him in jail, we couldn’t get him out. We had a president that wanted to make a phone call. He was in that jail, rotting in that jail and I helped him with Greta and some people, and I helped him financially.

And finally he got out. But he was in there so long. By the way without her, he’d probably still be there.”

As it turns out, Trump sent Tahmooressi a big check to help get him back on his feet.

One thing Trump has said while on the campaign trail is that our “veterans are treated like third-class citizens.”

Trump sent Marine Sergeant Tahmooressi a check for $25,000 to help him get back on his feet after his extended imprisonment in Mexico.