Trump: When asked about repealing Refugee Resettlement Act responded ‘I agree’

This morning our Ex. Dir. of Refugee Resettlement Relief spoke with the presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump at the Trump Victory event. Our director raised his hand and was acknowledged by Mr. Trump, then stated: “Mr. Trump please repeal the Refugee Resettlement Act.*** That is how the terrorist are getting into the country.”

Trump responded, “I agree” and then pointed out several recent acts of Islamic terrorism committed by refugees and their families.

Mr. Trump had already spent most of his time talking about terrorism. With regard to the mass shooting in Orlando at the Pulse nightclub he said a high ranking representative in the gay community told him that the LGBT community was going to support him because “they know I am the only one who is going to protect them.” He went on to say that this is not only true for the gay community, but for all of us.

He again committed to building the wall and reminded us that the 16,000 Federal Border Patrol employees have endorsed him—-something they have never done in any other presidential race.

Trump emphasized the immigration issue at the Mexican border.  He dwelled on the massive amount of illegal drugs coming across the border, and claimed that the wall would help stem the flow of the drugs.

Trump was calm, well spoken and reasonable. He was a very pleasant, but a firmly committed gentleman. This is not the Donald Trump the media is describing. Donald Trump is thoroughly a gentleman, knows where he is going and what he wants to do when elected president.”

LOL! Check out this story about the event. Trump left empty seats for the banned Washington Post Reporters!

***Of course we all know it takes Congress to repeal the Act (Trump can press Congress from the bully pulpit), that is why it is so important that Speaker Ryan be given the heave-ho. Under his leadership it will never happen!

For all of our comments worth noting and guest posts, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: If you are a regular reader, you know that occasionally we post a comment from a reader that we don’t want to lose buried at a specific post.  This is from Joe Newton of Georgia’sRefugee Resettlement Relief’ a citizens’ group (a pocket of resistance!).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump and Democratic Political Incorrectness

UN wants 170,000 refugees permanently resettled next year

Story about Somali woman who attacked Georgia Mom is surreal

Help defeat Speaker Paul Ryan! Ignorance about Islam is dangerous!

Amarillo Somali refugee taken down by police in hostage situation

Is forced multiculturalism to blame for second generation Muslim killers?

More active TB cases in the refugee population, Colorado this time

Syrian ‘refugees’ going home, thought they were going to be cared for in Europe

Donald J. Trump: On Terrorism, Immigration and National Security [Video]

Donald J. Trump gave a major national security speech at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire on June 13, 2016 one day after the massacre in Florida by Omar Mateen, a Muslim who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.

David Horowitz characterized Trump’s speech as follows:

Donald Trump’s speech on national security, which he delivered the day after the terrorist attack in Orlando, Florida, will change the dynamic of this election.

The speech was specific, detailed, and on the money. Trump showed how strategic securing the border is, how important stopping immigration from terror zones like Syria is, and how deadly political correctness has become.

Political correctness – which transforms the Islamic world, which has a lot to answer for, from aggressors into innocent victims – functions as a shield for Islamic terrorists, and handcuffs law-abiding citizens prompting them not to report suspicious activities by Muslims for fear of being called racist.

Read more.

Watch Donald J. Trump’s speech:

FULL TEXT OF REMARKS BY DONALD J. TRUMP

Thank you for joining me today.

This was going to be a speech on Hillary Clinton and how bad a President, especially in these times of Radical Islamic Terrorism, she would be.

Even her former Secret Service Agent, who has seen her under pressure and in times of stress, has stated that she lacks the temperament and integrity to be president.

There will be plenty of opportunity to discuss these important issues at a later time, and I will deliver that speech soon.

But today there is only one thing to discuss: the growing threat of terrorism inside of our borders.

The attack on the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida, was the worst terrorist strike on our soil since September 11th, and the worst mass shooting in our country’s history.

So many people dead, so many people gravely injured, so much carnage, such a disgrace.

The horror is beyond description.

The families of these wonderful people are totally devastated. Likewise, our whole nation, and indeed the whole world, is devastated.

We express our deepest sympathies to the victims, the wounded, and their families.

We mourn, as one people, for our nation’s loss – and pledge our support to any and all who need it.

I would like to ask now that we all observe a moment of silence for the victims of the attack.

[SILENCE]

Our nation stands together in solidarity with the members of Orlando’s LGBT Community.

This is a very dark moment in America’s history.

A radical Islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub not only because he wanted to kill Americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation.

It is a strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation.

It is an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want and express their identity.

It is an attack on the right of every single American to live in peace and safety in their own country.

We need to respond to this attack on America as one united people – with force, purpose and determination.

But the current politically correct response cripples our ability to talk and think and act clearly.

If we don’t get tough, and we don’t get smart – and fast – we’re not going to have a country anymore — there will be nothing left.

The killer, whose name I will not use, or ever say, was born to Afghan parents who immigrated to the United States. His father published support for the Afghan Taliban, a regime which murders those who don’t share its radical views. The father even said he was running for President of that country.

The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here.

That is a fact, and it’s a fact we need to talk about.

We have a dysfunctional immigration system which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens.

We have an incompetent administration, and if I am not elected President, that will not change over the next four years — but it must change, and it must change now.

With fifty people dead, and dozens more wounded, we cannot afford to talk around the issue anymore — we have to address it head on.

I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so — and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country.

The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate.

I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.

After a full, impartial and long overdue security assessment, we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America.

We cannot continue to allow thousands upon thousands of people to pour into our country, many of whom have the same thought process as this savage killer.

Many of the principles of Radical Islam are incompatible with Western values and institutions.

Radical Islam is anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-American.

I refuse to allow America to become a place where gay people, Christian people, and Jewish people, are the targets of persecution and intimidation by Radical Islamic preachers of hate and violence.

It’s not just a national security issue. It is a quality of life issue.

If we want to protect the quality of life for all Americans – women and children, gay and straight, Jews and Christians and all people – then we need to tell the truth about Radical Islam.

We need to tell the truth, also, about how Radical Islam is coming to our shores.

We are importing Radical Islamic Terrorism into the West through a failed immigration system — and through an intelligence community held back by our president.

Even our own FBI Director has admitted that we cannot effectively check the backgrounds of the people we are letting into America.

All of the September 11th hijackers were issued visas.

Large numbers of Somali refugees in Minnesota have tried to join ISIS.

The Boston Bombers came here through political asylum.

The male shooter in San Bernardino – again, whose name I won’t mention — was the child of immigrants from Pakistan, and he brought his wife – the other terrorist – from Saudi Arabia, through another one of our easily exploited visa programs.

Immigration from Afghanistan into the United States has increased nearly five-fold in just one year. According to Pew Research, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law.

We admit many more from other countries in the region who share these same oppressive views.

If we want to remain a free and open society, then we have to control our borders.

Yet, Hillary Clinton – for months and despite so many attacks – repeatedly refused to even say the words “radical Islam,” until I challenged her yesterday to say the words or leave the race.

However, Hillary Clinton – who has been forced to say the words today after policies she supports have caused us so much damage – still has no clue what Radical Islam is, and won’t speak honestly about what it is.

She is in total denial, and her continuing reluctance to ever name the enemy broadcasts weakness across the world.

In fact, just a few weeks before the San Bernardino slaughter, Hillary Clinton explained her refusal to say the words Radical Islam. Here is what she said: “Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people, and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.”

Hillary Clinton says the solution is to ban guns. They tried that in France, which has among the toughest gun laws in the world, and 130 were brutally murdered by Islamic terrorists in cold blood. Her plan is to disarm law-abiding Americans, abolishing the 2nd amendment, and leaving only the bad guys and terrorists with guns. She wants to take away Americans’ guns, then admit the very people who want to slaughter us.

I will be meeting with the NRA, which has given me their earliest endorsement in a Presidential race, to discuss how to ensure Americans have the means to protect themselves in this age of terror.

The bottom line is that Hillary supports the policies that bring the threat of Radical Islam into America, and allow it to grow overseas.

In fact, Hillary Clinton’s catastrophic immigration plan will bring vastly more Radical Islamic immigration into this country, threatening not only our security but our way of life.

When it comes to Radical Islamic terrorism, ignorance is not bliss – it’s deadly.

The Obama Administration, with the support of Hillary Clinton and others, has also damaged our security by restraining our intelligence-gathering and failing to support law enforcement. They have put political correctness above common sense, above your safety, and above all else.

I refuse to be politically correct.

I will do the right thing–I want to straighten things out and to Make America Great Again.

The days of deadly ignorance will end, and they will end soon.

As President I will give our intelligence community, law enforcement and military the tools they need to prevent terrorist attacks.

We need an intelligence-gathering system second to none. That includes better cooperation between state, local and federal officials – and with our allies.

I will have an Attorney General, a Director of National Intelligence, and a Secretary of Defense who will know how to fight the war on Radical Islamic Terrorism – and who will have the support they require to get the job done.

We also must ensure the American people are provided the information they need to understand the threat.

The Senate Subcommittee on Immigration has already identified hundreds of immigrants charged with terrorist activities inside the United States since September 11th.

Nearly a year ago, the Senate Subcommittee asked President Obama’s Departments of Justice, State and Homeland Security to provide the immigration history of all terrorists inside the United States.

These Departments refused to comply.

President Obama must release the full and complete immigration histories of all individuals implicated in terrorist activity of any kind since 9/11.

The public has a right to know how these people got here.

We have to screen applicants to know whether they are affiliated with, or support, radical groups and beliefs.

We have to control the amount of future immigration into this country to prevent large pockets of radicalization from forming inside America.

Even a single individual can be devastating, just look at what happened in Orlando. Can you imagine large groups?

Truly, our President doesn’t know what he is doing. He has failed us, and failed us badly, and under his leadership, this situation will not get any better — it will only get worse.

Each year, the United States permanently admits more than 100,000 immigrants from the Middle East, and many more from Muslim countries outside the Middle East. Our government has been admitting ever-growing numbers, year after year, without any effective plan for our security.

In fact, Clinton’s State Department was in charge of the admissions process for people applying to enter from overseas.

Having learned nothing from these attacks, she now plans to massively increase admissions without a screening plan, including a 500% increase in Syrian refugees.

This could be a better, bigger version of the legendary Trojan Horse.

We can’t let this happen.

Altogether, under the Clinton plan, you’d be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of their children.

The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why she believes immigration from these dangerous countries should be increased without any effective system to screen who we are bringing in.

The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why we should admit anyone into our country who supports violence of any kind against gay and lesbian Americans.

The burden is also on Hillary Clinton to tell us how she will pay for it. Her plan will cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars long-term.

Wouldn’t this money be better spent on rebuilding America for our current population, including the many poor people already living here?

We have to stop the tremendous flow of Syrian refugees into the United States – we don’t know who they are, they have no documentation, and we don’t know what they’re planning.

What I want is common sense. I want a mainstream immigration policy that promotes American values.

That is the choice I put before the American people: a mainstream immigration policy designed to benefit America, or Hillary Clinton’s radical immigration policy designed to benefit politically-correct special interests.

We’ve got to get smart, and tough, and vigilant, and we’ve got to do it now, because later is too late.

Ask yourself, who is really the friend of women and the LGBT community, Donald Trump with his actions, or Hillary Clinton with her words? Clinton wants to allow Radical Islamic terrorists to pour into our country—they enslave women, and murder gays.

I don’t want them in our country.

The terrorist attack on the Pulse Night Club demands a full and complete investigation into every aspect of the assault.

In San Bernardino, as an example, people knew what was going on, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it.

We need to know what the killer discussed with his relatives, parents, friends and associates.

We need to know if he was affiliated with any radical Mosques or radical activists and what, if any, is their immigration status.

We need to know if he travelled anywhere, and who he travelled with.

We need to make sure every single last person involved in this plan – including anyone who knew something but didn’t tell us – is brought to justice.

If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time .

America must do more – much more – to protect its citizens, especially people who are potential victims of crimes based on their backgrounds or sexual orientations.

It also means we must change our foreign policy.

The decision to overthrow the regime in Libya, then pushing for the overthrow of the regime in Syria, among other things, without plans for the day after, have created space for ISIS to expand and grow.

These actions, along with our disastrous Iran deal, have also reduced our ability to work in partnership with our Muslim allies in the region.

That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism, not nation-building.

For instance, the last major NATO mission was Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya. That mission helped unleash ISIS on a new continent.

I’ve said NATO needs to change its focus to stopping terrorism. Since I’ve raised that criticism, NATO has since announced a new initiative focused on just that.

America must unite the whole civilized world in the fight against Islamic terrorism, just like we did against communism in the Cold War.

We’ve tried it President Obama’s way. He gave the world his apology tour, we got ISIS, and many other problems, in return.

I’d like to conclude my remarks today by again expressing our solidarity with the people of Orlando who have come under attack.

When I am President, I pledge to protect and defend all Americans who live inside of our borders. Wherever they come from, wherever they were born, all Americans living here and following our laws will be protected.

America will be a tolerant and open society.

America will also be a safe society.

We will protect our borders at home.

We will defeat ISIS overseas.

We will ensure every parent can raise their children in peace and safety.

We will make America rich again.

We will make America safe again.

We will make American Great Again.

Thank you.

The media talks about “homegrown,” terrorism, but Islamic radicalism, and the networks that nurture it, are imports from overseas.

Yes, there are many radicalized people already inside our country as a result of the poor policies of the past. But the whole point is that it will be much, much easier to deal with our current problem if we don’t keep on bringing in people who add to the problem.

For instance, the controversial Mosque attended by the Boston Bombers had as its founder an immigrant from overseas charged in an assassination plot.

This shooter in Orlando was the child of an immigrant father who supported one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. Why would we admit people who support violent hatred?

Hillary Clinton can never claim to be a friend of the gay community as long as she continues to support immigration policies that bring Islamic extremists to our country who suppress women, gays and anyone who doesn’t share their views.

She can’t have it both ways. She can’t claim to be supportive of these communities while trying to increase the number of people coming in who want to oppress them.

How does this kind of immigration make our life better? How does this kind of immigration make our country better?

Why does Hillary Clinton want to bring people here—in vast numbers—who reject our values?

Immigration is a privilege, and we should not let anyone into this country who doesn’t support our communities – all of our communities.

America has already admitted four times more immigrants than any country on earth, and we continue to admit millions more with no real checks or scrutiny.

Not surprisingly, wages for our workers haven’t budged in many years.

So whether it’s matter of national security, or financial security, we can’t afford to keep on going like this. We owe $19 trillion in debt, and no longer have options.

All our communities, from all backgrounds, are ready for some relief. This is not an act of offense against anyone; it is an act of defense.

I want us all to work together, including in partnership with our Muslim communities. But Muslim communities must cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad – and they do know where they are.

I want to fix our schools, roads, bridges and job market. I want every American to succeed. Hillary Clinton wants to empty out the Treasury to bring people into the country that include individuals who preach hate against our own citizens.

I want to protect our citizens – all of our citizens.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump and Democratic Political Incorrectness

Horowitz: Donald Trump’s Speech Is a Game Changer

4 Reasons Why We Need Another 9/11 Commission After Orlando

What If the Orlando Murderer Was a Christian?

Planned Parenthood, Leader in Violence Against Humans, Defends Islamic Terrorism

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Donald Trump on cover of his new book ‘Crippled America.’

A Crisis of Confidence: Obama’s Gay Agenda and Muslims in America

In a column titled Western Civilization: Crisis of Confidence Stephen W. Browne writes:

We’re caught in an awful contradiction when we welcome into our midst members of a culture that accepts chattel slavery, the brutal subjugation of women, the murder of apostates, honor killings, murdering homosexuals, and killing those who insult their religion.

Tom Trento from The United West, reporting for Breitbart News, interviewed Florida Senator Bill Nelson (D) about Omar Mir Seddique Mateen, a Muslim who slaughtered 50 homosexuals in the Pulse, a gay bar in Orlando. The Pulse Gay Club was founded to “promote awareness of the area’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community” according to USA Today. Here is the Trento video interview:

President Obama in his comments about the shooting said:

I just finished a meeting with FBI Director Comey and my homeland security and national security advisors. The FBI is on the scene and leading the investigation, in partnership with local law enforcement. I’ve directed that the full resources of the federal government be made available for this investigation.

We are still learning all the facts. This is an open investigation. We’ve reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer. The FBI is appropriately investigating this as an act of terrorism.

President Obama and Senator Nelson appear to be caught in a crisis of confidence.

Nelson calls Omar Mateen a “lone wolf” and says he cannot confirm “with certainty” that Islamic jihadist ideology led the shooter to perform his crime. Obama stated, “We’ve reached no definitive judgement on the precise motivations of the killer.”

“It is a fact that Muslims communities are extremely homophobic,” Sohail Ahmed, an anti-Islamism campaigner and openly gay Muslim told the Clarion Project. “According to traditionalist Islam, homosexuality is one of the worst sins one can commit. In addition, it is a mainstream view that the punishment for homosexuality is death. Given all this, it is not in the least bit surprising that this attack has occurred, so soon after an ISIS spokesman called for lone-wolf attacks during the holy month of Ramadan.”

Jamie Schram and Tina Moore from the New York Post reported:

Mateen “made a pledge of allegiance to ISIS,” California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told CNN.

Schiff said the timing and target of the attack can’t be a coincidence.

[ … ]

Mateen was licensed to work as an armed security guard in the state of Florida, federal law enforcement sources said.

Read more.

President Obama has made it a point to further the “gay agenda” most recently via his Department of Education’s edict requiring schools to allow transgenders to use the bathroom of their choice in public schools or lose federal funding.  At the same time President Obama has embraced the Islamic community (ummah) and has repeatedly called Islam the “religion of peace.” As we reported Mateen was registered as a Democrat.

Have Obama’s social policies lead to a crisis of confidence within the Democratic Party and the United States?

President Obama and the Democratic Party have created a clash of cultures within America. This clash of cultures is the proximate cause of the slaughter in Orlando. You cannot have it both ways, as is seen by those who follow Mohammed and those who violate the Quran on homosexuality. The Democratic Party has two tribes that are at war with one another. Orlando is just one manifestation of that war. The Islamic holy war (jihad) is against any non-believer, just one of which are homosexuals, and the war for gay rights, understanding that homosexuality is a life style choice and not race based.

The Muslims who are registered as Democrats are conflicted as are the homosexuals registered as Democrats. Muslims do not tolerate homosexuality, homosexuals do not  tolerate religion in general.

Perhaps it is time for cultural clarity and time to end this crisis of confidence?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Horowitz: Donald Trump’s Speech Is a Game Changer

4 Reasons Why We Need Another 9/11 Commission After Orlando

Orlando nightclub jihadi cheered 9/11 terror attacks, taunted American students

What If the Orlando Murderer Was a Christian?

Planned Parenthood, Leader in Violence Against Humans, Defends Islamic Terrorism

Horowitz: Donald Trump’s Speech Is a Game Changer

4 Reasons Why We Need Another 9/11 Commission After Orlando

Obama: ‘We’ are to blame, not Islamic terrorism, for massacre

Newt Gingrich to Gay Movement: Islamic Supremacy Is Your ‘Mortal Enemy’

Obama’s Shameful Pivot to Gun Control After Orlando

Where Does the Hate Come From?

Obama’s Shameful Pivot to Gun Control After Orlando

Where Does the Hate Come From?

Meet the Clinton insiders who attended Bilderberg this weekend

If you aren’t an Islamophobe today you are very naive

Has ISIS Infiltrated Homeland Security? Orlando Terrorist Worked for Major DHS Contractor

EDITORS NOTE: The Counter Jihad Report published the following:

Officials say Omar Mir Seddique Mateen, an Afghan-American who held two firearms licenses and a security officer license, was employed by the security firm G4S Secure Solutions USA Inc. since Sept. 10, 2007. The Jupiter, Fla.-based company merged with the Wackenhut Corp. after 9/11 and assumed federal contracts.

“G4S supports the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection (CPB), with its operations at the U.S. ­ Mexico border and with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to transport illegal immigrants in selected urban areas,” the company says in a brochure, titled “Providing Manpower Solutions for Government Services.”

Ramadan in Florida: Muslim slaughters 50, wounds 53 at Orlando gay nightclub

omar mateen

Suspected shooter 29-year old Omar H. Mateen from Port St. Lucie, FL.

“Police said the gunman was believed to be in his 20s was not a local man, and the FBI believe he may have ‘leanings to radical Islamic terrorism.’”

We tried to sound a warning on this, and were vilified for doing so. When AFDI ran ads highlighting the mistreatment of gays in Islamic law, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which is its city council, issued a resolution condemning not that mistreatment, but our ads.

Gay advocates such as Theresa Sparks and Chris Stedman attacked us for daring to call attention to the institutionalized mistreatment of gays under Islamic law. Their gay advocacy doesn’t extend to standing up to Sharia oppression of gays, even though that oppression is far more virulent and violent than anything from “right-wing extremists” in the U.S. And you can’t blame them: given the Leftist/jihadist alliance, it’s clear that if they spoke out against Sharia mistreatment of gays, they would no longer be invited to the best parties, and might even be branded as “right-wing.” Their moral cowardice and duplicity, however, are obvious, and monstrous in the light of what has just happened in Orlando.

Pulse club Orlando Florida

“‘We consider this an act of terrorism’: Suspected Islamic extremist shoots dead at least 20 dead at Florida gay club after bursting in ‘wearing a suicide vest’ and taking hostages – injuring a further 42,” by Matt Hunter and Jenny Stanton, Dailymail.com, June 12, 2016:

A suspected Islamic extremist [Omar Mateen] wielding an assault rifle and a handgun has killed about 20 people after taking party-goers hostage inside a gay nightclub in Orlando.

The gunman was carrying a suspicious device, possibly a suicide vest, when he opened fire inside Pulse in the early hours of this morning.

Orlando Police Chief John Mina said authorities have not determined the exact number of people killed, but that ‘approximately 20’ have died. Another 42 people were taken to hospital.

An FBI spokesman said the mass shooting is being investigated as an act of terrorism. He explained authorities are looking into whether this was an act of domestic or international terror, and if the shooter was a lone wolf.

Police said the gunman was believed to be in his 20s was not a local man, and the FBI believe he may have ‘leanings to radical Islamic terrorism’.

The killings took place less than four miles from where The Voice singer and YouTube star Christina Grimmie, 22, was shot dead at The Plaza Live in Orlando on Friday.

Party-goers were urged to ‘get out and keep running’ as bullets started flying at around 2am local time.

Eyewitnesses described the gunman having a bomb strapped to himself when he started shooting today.

At around 6.00 local time (11am GMT) police said on Twitter: ‘Pulse Shooting: The shooter inside the club is dead.’ Officers described it as a ‘mass shooting’.

One man who said he was inside the club posted that the shooting broke out around 2 a.m. and that he heard about 40 shots being fired.

Police earlier carried out an controlled explosion at 5.15 local time (10.15am GMT today). but it is not yet clear whether that was linked with the gunman’s death.

It was thought that at least one hostage had been locked in a bathroom with gunshot wounds.

Around 100 officers were involved in the hostage situation before the gunman was killed.

During the gunfire, an officer was shot, but he was saved by his helmet.

Local TV reporter Stewart Moore said that more than 20 people had been shot with an assault rifle.

Jon Alamo said he was at the back of one of the club’s rooms when a man holding a weapon came into the front of the room.

‘I heard 20, 40, 50 shots,’ Alamo said. ‘The music stopped.’

Club-goer Rob Rick said it happened around, 2 a.m., just before closing time. ‘Everybody was drinking their last sip,’ he said.

He estimated more than 100 people were still inside when he heard shots, got on the ground and crawled toward a DJ booth.

A bouncer knocked down a partition between the club area and an area in the back where only workers are allowed. People inside were able to then escape through the back of the club.

Christopher Hansen said he was in the VIP lounge when he started hearing gunshots.

‘I was thinking, are you kidding me? So I just dropped down. I just said please, please, please, I want to make it out,’ he said. ‘And when I did, I saw people shot. I saw blood. You hope and pray you don’t get shot.’

He continued to hear shooting even after he emerged, where police were telling people to back away from the club. He saw injured people being tended to across the street.

Mina Justice was outside the club trying to contact her 30-year-old son Eddie, who texted her when the shooting happened and asked her to call police.

He told her he ran into a bathroom with other club patrons to hide. He then texted her: ‘He’s coming.’

‘The next text said: `He has us, and he’s in here with us,” she said. ‘That was the last conversation.’

Ricardo Almodovar was in the nightclub. He said: ‘Shooter opened fire at around 2.00am. People on the dance floor and bar got down on the floor and some of us who were near the bar and back exit managed to go out through the outdoor area and just ran.

‘I am safely home and hoping everyone gets home safely as well.’ Juan Rivera said on Twitter: ‘Never seen so many dead bodies on the floor, God is good that my friends and I didn’t get shot’.

Anthony Torres heard people screaming that others in the nightclub were dead.

Rosie Feba was in the club with her girlfriend and described the moment the shooting happened to the Orlando Sentinal.

She said: ‘Everyone was getting on the floor.I told her [girlfriend] I didn’t think it was real, I thought it was just part of the music, until I saw fire coming out of his gun.’

A police dispatcher described the incident as an ‘active shooting’. Officers are advising locals to stay away from the area.

He said: ‘There are injuries. I am not sure if there are any deceased at this time.’

‘Officers are going in to search the building and to get people out,’ the dispatcher said.

The police department posted on their official Twitter account: ‘Multiple injuries. Stay away from the area.’

Pulse nightclub said on its Facebook account: ‘Everyone get out of Pulse and keep running.’

Dozens of officers and medics are at the scene including Orlando Fire Department’s bomb squad and hazardous material team.

Police have not given any further updates on the hostage situation or the gunman….

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS Cheers Orlando #Pulse Nightclub Massacre – Warns of More Attacks on Disbelievers

Major Muslim Terrorists Makes This Declaration To All Americans: We Are Coming After You, We Will Attack Florida And Slaughter Americans There

Reading the Qur’an during Ramadan 8: Juz Wa law annana

EDITORS NOTE: The suspected shooter is 29-year old Omar Mateen, a U.S. citizen from Port St. Lucie, Florida. Mateen was born to Afghan parents. Mateen is related to Mariam Seddique and Sabrina Seddique.

The Islamic State has hailed the slaughter in the below Facebook post:

dr-faisla-shaman-anzi-575x560

PM Trudeau! Please Assure Me and Canadians About Free Press

An Open Letter to Justin Trudeau about intimidations and threats from Muslim MPs in the government.

Dear Mr. Prime Minister Hon. Justin Trudeau,

As a journalist, a member of PEN Canada and a member of CJFE, I agree with you what you have clearly said last Friday that freedom of the press is very important to you and Canada.

You were saying this in the context of Chinese Foreign Minister’s angry remarks in Ottawa about a Canadian Journalist, Kevin Garratt, who has been jailed in China. But sadly I got harassed, humiliated and bullied by your three MPs on the following day in Mississauga in the wake of my rights for free press.

On that harassing incident, I was about to call the police but then took a deep breath and decided to reflect in it the press.

On a bright sunny Saturday afternoon, I saw MP Omar Alghabra walking to an event stage with two other MPs, Salma Zahid and Iqra Khalid. I was standing with my wife, Haleema Sadia and a few friends at the Halal Food Festival, Celebration Square Mississauga.

As we knew all three MPs, my wife and I greeted them. My wife, an anchor person, asked MP Omar Alghabra to come to our TAG TV Studio. Alghabra blasted us in return and pointed out to me that I wrote a misleading article against him and the infiltration of Islamists to the liberal party.

I answered that I didn’t write any misleading article.

Then he opened his smart phone and showed me my article with the title, “Brotherhood Front Groups Target Canadian Parliament,” that was published in April 3, 2014.

He accused me of attacking the Muslim Brotherhood, Jama’at-e-Islami and other Muslim groups in that article and called me a discredited journalist. He then lectured me about ethics of journalism for around fifteen minutes.

MP Salma Zahid jumped into the discussion and accused me of mentioning her name against previous government’s Bill C51 (that I never did). Then MP Iqra Khalid accused me of associating her with Jama’at-e-Islami.

Sadly, the way those MPs surrounded and harassed me and my wife that Saturday afternoon prove my fears what I have expressed in the same article two years ago.

I pondered that if my single article about my opinion on growing Islamic extremism is upsetting those Canadian Muslim MPs to that extent that they were so intolerant and humiliating to me and my wife (we are both Progressive Canadian Muslims who don’t necessarily buy their perception of Islam) and towards dissident thoughts, how could we expect them to create a bridge between the government and Canada’s diverse Muslim communities?

It’s not the first time we experienced such attacking behavior from them. They have been observed by other community members as talking negatively about our writing and speaking our ideas in the Canadian Pakistani and Muslim communities.

My wife was shocked and wondered, based on this highly irresponsible and humiliating behavior, whether or not those MPs belong in the Canadian Parliament or rather a parliament in Pakistan or Syria.

She fearfully asks me what would happen to us as those three member parliaments have in a way threatened us and our right to a free press.

I responded to my wife that we will keep fighting for our rights for a free press, even against those powerful people who misuse their powers and try to harm us.

I hope you will help assure our safety and maintain environment of a free press that is dear to you and all Canadians as well.

ABOUT TAHIR GORA

Tahir Gora is a Pakistani and the Director of the Canadian Thinkers’ Forum, a member of the Coalition of Progressive Muslim Canadian Organizations. He can be followed on Twitter at Twitter.com/TahirGora.

RECENT ARTICLES:

Copenhagen: Islamic gangs intimidate bar patrons, tell them no drinking in Sharia zones

Islam and Nationhood: Part II

Four Killed in Tel Aviv Terror Attack

More Reps on Board to Designate Brotherhood as Terrorists

FBI Director: ISIS Is Top Threat to US

Trump’s ‘rhetoric resonates’ with Democrats, Independents and Republicans alike

SHELTON, Conn. /PRNewswire/ — Since announcing his run for president last June, Donald J. Trump’s public remarks have had the world talking. In a recent online study of 1,500 voters, SSI, the global leader in research data collection, measured respondent agreement and disagreement with 200 policy statements made by Trump. Several of his statements received positive responses from voters across the political spectrum.

After reading each statement, respondents indicated whether it increased, decreased or had no impact on their likelihood to vote for Trump. Respondents selected “has no impact” 49 percent of the time, “increases” 29 percent of the time and “decreases” their likelihood of voting for Trump 22 percent of the time.

“Although Trump is often regarded as a polarizing figure, our study shows that the sentiment and substance of many of his statements do resonate with most Americans,” said Paul Johnson, director of analytics, SSI. “Voters are aware of what Trump has said and they like many elements. In fact, Trump’s rhetoric persuades more swing voters than it pushes away.”

In particular, several of Trump’s populist statements scored high across all party affiliations. Republicans, Democrats and Independents in the study were unanimous in their positive response to the following: “We need to once again have a government that is of the people, for the people and by the people.” Respondents from every party also reacted positively to this statement: “The only special interest not being served by our government is the American people.”

Trump’s Top Ranking Statements — All Parties

1. Our country needs a truly great leader, and we need a truly great leader now.

2. One of the key problems today is that politics is such a disgrace. Good people don’t go into government.

3. We need to once again have a government that is of the people, for the people and by the people.

4. I want to save Medicare and Social Security.

5. Too few Americans are working, too many jobs have been shipped overseas and too many middle class families cannot make ends meet.

Many of Trump’s statements had a strong impact on Independent voters. “While only a minority of people, less than five percent, switched their preferred candidate after reading the Trump statements, 56 percent of them were Independents,” said Johnson. “Eighteen percent of these switchers went away from Trump, but 30 percent switched to Trump, giving him a net positive take among undecided voters.”

Two policy themes that resonated strongly with both Independents and Republicans were domestic job protection and budget discipline. However, Independents reacted negatively to statements around waterboarding and global warming denial.

Trump’s Top Ranking Statements — Independents

1. Our country needs a truly great leader, and we need a truly great leader now.

2. One of the key problems today is that politics is such a disgrace. Good people don’t go into government.

3. We need to once again have a government that is of the people, for the people and by the people.

4. If you tax something you get less of it. It’s as simple as that. The more you tax work, the less people are willing to work. The more you tax investments, the fewer investments you’ll get. This isn’t rocket science.

5. We’ve got to bring on the competition. Education reformers call this school choice, charter schools, vouchers, even opportunity scholarships. I call it competition—the American way.

The remaining top statements vary significantly by Republican versus Democratic audiences. Respondents who identify themselves as Republicans agree most with statements emphasizing the importance of building a wall along the Mexico border, building up the military and imposing budget discipline.

Those who identify as Democrats agree most with statements promoting universal healthcare, unions, Medicare, Social Security, Planned Parenthood and LGBT rights. In several cases, top statements for Republicans appeared as lowest ranking statements for Democrats and vice versa.

About the Study

SSI tested 200 statements made by Trump (regarding a variety of policy topics and positions). The study measured respondent agreement and disagreement with between 30 to 200 different policy statements. All respondents were exposed to at least 30 statements, with some respondents opting into additional rounds of exposure to more statements.

Initially, respondents were not aware that the statements had been made by Trump. Following statement exposure, respondents were informed that all statements were, in fact, from Trump. Respondents were asked both before and after statement testing who was their preferred candidate. Switchers were those who were not consistent pre- and post-statement attribution.

SSI is the premier global provider of data solutions and technology for consumer and business-to-business survey research, reaching respondents in 100+ countries via Internet, telephone, mobile/wireless and mixed-access offerings. SSI staff operates from 30 offices in 21 countries, offering sample, data collection, CATI, questionnaire design consultation, programming and hosting, online custom reporting and data processing. SSI’s 3,600 employees serve more than 2,500 clients worldwide. Visit SSI at www.surveysampling.com.

RELATED ARTICLES:

In Robust Response to Tel Aviv Terror, Trump Rips ‘Uncivilized’ Palestinians Who Praised Attack

“La Raza” means “Master Race”

Trump Shatters Republican Primary Vote Record by 1.4 Million Votes

Hispanic activists’ anti-Trump efforts fall flat as citizenship push sputters – Washington Times

Stunning New Development!! Media calls Trump Racist

La Raza Circulates State-By-State Guide On Where To Vote Without ID

Meet The Pro-Illegal Immigrant Groups The La Raza Lawyers Of San Diego Consider Part Of Their ‘Community’

Homeland Security Whistleblower: 10 Jarring Revelations

A new book by Dept.of Homeland Security whistleblower Philip Haney is filled with first-hand testimony that will make your mouth drop.

A new book by Department of Homeland Security whistleblower Philip Haney, titled See Something Say Nothing, is filled with first-hand testimony that will make your mouth drop.

If you read the Clarion Project, then you’re aware of how U.S. governments, Democrats and Republicans, have tried to accommodate Islamism and political correctness. This book shows that it’s even worse than we thought.

A little background: Haney’s research on Islamist movements—rather than a narrow focus on membership in proscribed terrorist organizations derived from such movements– won the respect of his peers, many of whom are quoted in the book.

Haney was commended for identifying over 300 possible terrorist suspects and working on important and complex counter-terrorism cases. He and 10 colleagues were honored by a FBI Special Agent-in-Charge for proactively contributing to 98 FBI investigations, identifying 67 individuals engaged in suspicion activity who were previously known to the Joint Terrorism Task Force and identifying 24 persons of interest.

He developed a database of 185 Islamist terrorist groups in 81 countries and associated Islamist movements, believing that we need to “connect the dots” between the movements and radicalization, instead of only “connecting the dots” between individual jihadist operatives.

Here are 10 jarring revelations from DHS whistleblower Philip Haney’s new book:

Investigations into Islamist movements like the Tablighi Jamaat and Muslim Brotherhood were stopped by the federal government in the name of religious liberties.

The National Targeting Center investigation into the Tablighi Jamaat networks resulted in over 1,200 law enforcement actions, such as denial of visas to Jamaat members who wanted to enter the country. Then the State Department Civil Rights Division intervened.

“We know that members of the Tablighi Jamaat are fundamentalists, but they’re not terrorists,” Haney recalls a State Department representative informing him and his colleagues.

They informed the State Department official that its own consular officers were rejected three out of four Tablighi Jamaat-affiliated visa applications because of security concerns. That soon came to an end.

The same story happened with the Muslim Brotherhood, despite the fact that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas are an intertwined network, as shown by the Justice Department in the trial of a Brotherhood front (Holy Land Foundation) for financing Hamas.

The hard work of the investigations was not only stopped; it was thrown out. Haney was ordered to delete over 800 records related to Islamist extremists.

Haney calls it the “great purge” and counter-terrorism personnel unconnected to him have also talked about databases related to Islamist extremist movements being cleansed.

Thanks to the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, a narrow focus on illegal activity in support of banned terrorist organizations took hold. The DHS deemed that data collection related to permitted Islamist movements like Tablighi Jamaat and Muslim Brotherhood is a threat to religious freedom and must be deleted in order to prevent profiling.

The deleted files may have prevented the “underwear” bomb plot, the Boston bombings and the San Bernardino attacks.

Haney’s story, along with copious amounts of other evidence, proves the worthiness of targeting the “radicalizer” (Islamist movements) and not just the radicalized (the jihadist terrorist). Underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Tsarnaev brothers, and San Bernardino shooters Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik all associated with Islamist movements and institutions that were investigated by Haney and his colleagues. Had they continued, it is likely that they would have been denied visas into the U.S. and/or been put under surveillance.. He was exonerated each time.

When one of their own acclaimed experts offered to explain Islamism and its networks, the higher-ups didn’t even reply.

This is a bipartisan problem, as Haney can attest to. He saw the problems develop starting in 2006 under the Bush Administration with each year getting progressively worse. When the Department of Homeland Security began adopting politically-correct language that avoided the ideology, setting a precedent that the Obama Administration would later intensify, Haney offered to explain the ideology and his concerns to his supervisors and anyone who would listen. No one replied.

DHS even rejected the FBI’s request to use him for investigating a Muslim Brotherhood front.

Haney wasn’t just stopped from pursuing his investigations within Customs and Border Protection (which is part of DHS), his supervisors even stopped him from helping the FBI in regards to a Brotherhood front. He was not even told whether they replied to the FBI agent’s request for his help.

Senior officials intervened to let Islamists fly into the U.S. against the advice of their own personnel.

In addition to the changed attitude towards letting Tablighi Jamaat members into the U.S., the federal government also granted entry to terror-linked Muslim Brotherhood activist Jamal Badawi. Customs and Border Patrol had even prepared a dossier making the case against letting him.

Badawi’s complaints about receiving secondary inspections when traveling to the U.S. and lawsuit worked. The Brotherhood/Hamas-linked activist was allowed to enter the U.S. to speak at a Brotherhood/Hamas-linked organization’s conference.

Six individuals affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood fronts helped craft the Obama Administration’s Countering Violent Extremism approach to counter-terrorism.

The result, as you might have expected, was Islamist-friendly training guidelines; ones that even excluded “Muslim reformers” as trainers. You can read more the Clarion Project’s review of these guidelines and the personnel responsible here. Most recently, the Obama Administration picked an activist linked to a Brotherhood front as its liaison to the Muslim-American community.

Haney documented over 50 meetings between members of the executive and legislative branches and members of organizations identified by the U.S. government as Muslim Brotherhood fronts between 1998 and 2009.

There has been little, or no, controversy when members of the federal government, including members of Congress and the White House, meet and consult with Islamist groups that the Justice Department has labeled as Brotherhood entities and unindicted co-conspirators in terrorism financing. But when an opponent of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood teaches law enforcement, that’s a different story.

Islamist political pressure and lawfare works.

You can read Haney’s book for story after story of Islamists using political pressure, provocation and lawsuits to bend U.S. government agencies to their demands, with the above example involving Jamal Badawi being only one. If the U.S. government caves from lawsuits and complaining, then what will happen in the future if these groups continue to become more powerful?

Haney was repeatedly disciplined and investigated for his approach in tackling Islamic extremism, which took on the Islamist ideology as well as the results of that ideology. He was exonerated each time.

If only the government were that hostile to Islamists and their apologists.

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:

Let the Muslims Fast

Louisiana House Censures Gov’t, Police Working with CAIR

Damning Lies About Iran Deal Told by State Dept. Exposed

Hijabs in the Workplace: To Wear or Not to Wear?

VIDEO: The Story of Hillary Rodham and the First Degree Rape of a 12-year old girl

Forty-one years ago in the town of Springdale, Arkansas, a horrific crime was committed against a 12-year-old girl. But it was the injustice that followed that has defined her life.

This is the true story Hillary Rodham (Clinton) hoped you would never hear.

RELATED ARTICLES:

An early look at how Clinton deals with crisis by Glenn Thrush

The Hillary Tapes: Clinton tells of defense of child rapist in newly unearthed recordings

Hillary Goes to Bat for Sexual Predators

50 Interesting Facts about Hillary Clinton – Random Facts

Dalai Lama: Germany must not become an Arab country

He gets it!

These Buddhists are smarter and braver than your average Christian or Jew.  We saw that in Burma where the Buddhist monks had the courage to carry protest banners opposing Islam and the arrival of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) in Burma.

burma-buddhist

Buddhist monks protesting in Burma.

Now here is arguably the most important Buddhist world leader, the Dalai Lama saying Germany must take in fewer Muslim migrants and only keep them temporarily.

I saw this news last week and tweeted it, but since I’ve been away more of you have sent me the story so I thought I better post it.

From Breitbart:

The Dalai Lama has said there are too many migrants pouring into Europe, warning against the continent becoming Arabised, and claiming the solution is the eventual repatriation of migrants.

Agence France-Presse has reported that the leader of Tibetan Buddhism said: “When we look at the face of each refugee, but especially those of the children and women, we feel their suffering, and a human being who has a better situation in life has the responsibility to help them.

Dalai Lama book

“But on the other hand, there are too many at the moment… Europe, Germany in particular, cannot become an Arab country, Germany is Germany”.

“There are so many that in practice it becomes difficult.”
The Dalai Lama added that “from a moral point of view too, I think that the refugees should only be admitted temporarily”.

“The goal should be that they return and help rebuild their countries.”

Continue reading here.

On this last point, we agree completely especially for the US.  Many people, when they first learn about the refugee program for their towns and cities, think it is a temporary arrangement.  It is not!

See our complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ series by clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama’s Real Legacy on Immigration Enforcement

DOJ Wants to Hide the Names of Illegal Aliens Granted Amnesty

Obama adding “bandwidth” to refugee admissions program (or big embarrassment at UN in September!)

Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) a longtime supporter of refugee resettlement is shocked! What no Christians!

No break for NH as feds approve just short of 500 new refugees for the state

Of Course Trump Can Win

In this week’s politics chat, we check in on some surprising/crazy/totally normal general election polls. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

micah (Micah Cohen, politics editor): Let’s talk general election polls. We’re a little over five months from Election Day, and polls show a close race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Today’s question: What should a sophisticated political observer make of these polls? To set us up, Harry, give us a rundown of the latest polling, national and state. Where do things stand?

harry (Harry Enten, senior political writer): National polls show Clinton with a slight advantage. Doing an average of all the polls since Trump vanquished Ted Cruz and John Kasich a little over a month ago finds Clinton ahead by about 2 percentage points. State-level polling is a bit odder: We’ve seen surveys showing Clinton close in Arizona (which has gone Democratic in just one presidential election since 1952) and Trump close in New Jersey (which hasn’t gone Republican since 1988). Most of the polls in the traditional swing states are close. Clinton holds a slight lead, roughly 3 percentage points, in Ohio. Same thing in Florida. Clinton leads by about 5 percentage points in Pennsylvania. (That’s all according to the HuffPost Pollster aggregates.)

micah: That state polling is weird. What gives?

harry: For one thing, it shows that we can’t be sure how the map will look. That is, the swing states in 2016 may not be the same as they were in 2012. We have a completely new pair of candidates (i.e., there’s no incumbent president running for re-election). Also, a lot of these states have only one or two polls, so we don’t have a lot of data.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): I’m not ready to accept yet that we’ll have a whole new map this time around. There will probably be some differences, yes. But my prior is that we’ll still have mostly the same swing states as last time, and I haven’t seen persuasive enough evidence yet to convince me otherwise. Here’s why: These polls are showing huge, enormous numbers of undecided voters. In that Monmouth poll of New Jersey, for instance, it’s Clinton 38 percent and Trump 34 percent, leaving 28 percent undecided, voting third party or saying they’ll sit out the general election. The Monmouth poll is a bit of an extreme case, but there are plenty of polls that are like, Clinton 43 percent, Trump 41 percent, undecided/other 16 percent, which is still a huge number.

micah: Is that unusual?

natesilver: It’s unusual, yes. By comparison, in 2012, we were seeing numbers more like Obama 47 percent, Romney 45 percent at a comparable point in the campaign.

But my point is that with all these undecided voters, it makes the state-by-state numbers a little flatter right now, if that makes sense.

I’d guess that if you looked at the makeup of the undecided voters in New Jersey, they’d look like they’ll probably wind up being Clinton supporters. And if you look at them in Arizona or Utah or one of the states where Trump has looked surprisingly vulnerable, they’d look like they’ll eventually be Trump supporters.

harry: That’s what Monmouth University’s Patrick Murray pointed out in his news release. And keep in mind, a poll can be accurate at this time even if it doesn’t end up being predictive.

micah: But is the fact that those voters are undecided now meaningful? (Even if they look like Trump voters in Arizona and Clinton voters in New Jersey.)

harry: More undecided voters now gives credence to the idea that this year may be good for third-party candidates (see Johnson, Gary). I made this argument two weeks ago.

natesilver: Sure, and one thing the pollsters are going to have to decide soon is whether to include Johnson in their surveys.

harry: I’m of the belief that pollsters should at least offer Johnson as an option to some respondents. Otherwise pollsters are putting their thumb on the scale, in my opinion. Johnson has more electoral experience than Trump does. Why isn’t he serious?

natesilver: I agree. Some pollsters don’t like to include third-party candidates because, for a variety of reasons, polls sometimes overstate their numbers. But it’s not a pollster’s job, in my view, to take that choice away from the voter when they’ll have it on the ballot. They can always ask the question both ways, too — with Johnson and without.

harry: This poll by Monmouth did exactly that.

micah: Isn’t the unusually high number of undecided voters, in addition to being a good sign for Johnson, also a sign that the map could change more than usual?

harry: If more undecideds is good for a third party, then that third-party candidate may pull different support from different candidates in different places. Perhaps Johnson pulls more Republicans in Arizona, which gives Clinton a chance there. Perhaps Johnson pulls more upscale liberals in the southeast Philadelphia suburbs in Pennsylvania, who might otherwise vote for Clinton. That could potentially change the map. We don’t know.

natesilver: I’d say it’s a sign that there’s a lot of uncertainty in the outcome. In general, the more undecideds you have, the larger the error in the polling.

harry: That’s at least part of the reason that primaries have larger polling errors than general elections. There are often many more undecided voters.

natesilver: I still think, though, that we’re not really at the starting line yet. One candidate has wrapped up the nomination, and the other one hasn’t.

harry: Yes, we’ve seen some attempts to try to estimate what the Trump vs. Clinton race will look like once Bernie Sanders concedes the Democratic primary. Most of those give Clinton extra support as at least some Sanders supporters move to her.

natesilver: I guess I’m getting sort of annoyed with almost all the discussion of general election polls I’m reading. Granted, it doesn’t take much to annoy me, especially on the Tuesday after a three-day weekend.

micah: Wait, what’s annoying?

natesilver: On the one hand, you have people (mostly Democratic-leaning commentators) trying to nitpick individual polls. That’s generally an unhealthy exercise, and it usually involves a lot of cherry-picking. And the trend is clear that Trump has gained significantly on Clinton.

On the other hand, you have people treating the recent polls as though they’re the new normal, the baseline case for the general election, when we don’t really know that yet. It’s not certain by any means — but I’d say it’sprobable that Clinton will gain ground when/if Sanders concedes. The third-party stuff is another thing that’s still in the process of working itself out.

On the third hand, I’ve seen a lot of pieces lately framed around the notion of “why Trump could win.” And a lot of those pieces are smart and well-argued when you get past the headline. But the premise slightly annoys me because I don’t see a lot of people saying Trump can’t win. So they’re sort of arguing against a straw man. I mean, of course Trump could win. There are only two major-party candidates, both of them are really unpopular, the “fundamentals” point toward a close election, the polls have tightened, random news events could intervene, and Trump is a candidate who has defied a lot of precedent. Of course he could win. But what are the odds?

micah: I don’t know … I was surprised by how quickly and easily Trump consolidated the GOP vote, and I think that fact is feeding a lot of the “wow, he could win this” sentiment.

natesilver: Sure, which is why it’s appropriate to say that his odds have gone up, as they have at betting markets.

micah: What’s been the swing in betting markets?

natesilver: Trump has closed from being a 3:1 underdog to a 2:1 underdog, roughly speaking.

harry: Right.

micah: That’s a pretty big change. Well, not that big, I guess.

natesilver: If I say his chances have increased from 25 percent to 33 percent, that doesn’t sound so big.

micah: Yeah.

harry: And don’t be shocked if Trump’s odds fall again once Clinton clinches the nomination and her polling goes up.

RELATED ARTICLE: GOP Voters Are Rallying Behind Trump As If He Were Any Other Candidate

Sweden took in 162,000 Muslim migrants in 2015 — 494 got jobs

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

margaret murders in sweden by a muslim

In lieu of the jizya, there is welfare. It is the duty of the Infidels to pay for the upkeep of Muslims, as that Qur’an verse makes clear. UK jhadist Anjem Choudary said in February 2013:

“We are on Jihad Seekers Allowance, We take the Jizya (protection money paid to Muslims by non-Muslims) which is ours anyway. The normal situation is to take money from the Kafir (non-Muslim), isn’t it? So this is normal situation. They give us the money. You work, give us the money. Allah Akbar, we take the money. Hopefully there is no one from the DSS (Department of Social Security) listening. Ah, but you see people will say you are not working. But the normal situation is for you to take money from the Kuffar (non-Muslim) So we take Jihad Seeker’s Allowance.”

Malmo Refugees Welcome Sweden

“Sweden Took 162k Refugees Last Year, 494 Got Jobs,” by Jacob Bojesson, Daily Caller, June 1, 2016 (thanks to Steve):

Just 494 out of the 162,000 refugees who applied for asylum in Sweden in 2015 have managed to get a job, according to government figures released Tuesday.

Refugees are eligible to work while their applications are pending as long as they can show a valid identification document and haven’t been rejected for asylum in the past. A majority of asylum seekers would qualify for a work permit, but the national migration office was only capable of issuing one to one-third due to the high demand.

“There was an incredible amount of people who applied for asylum in Sweden, and for us to be able to register everyone we had to disregard certain areas, and employment was one of them,” Lisa Bergstrand, officer at the Swedish immigration office, told Swedish public broadcaster SVT. “We do what we’ve been told to do.”

Getting migrants off welfare and into the job market has been a problem for most European countries during the ongoing refugee crisis.

Germany announced reforms to its labor laws in May to make it easier for migrants to enter the job market. Migrants are exempt from minimum wage regulations and thousands of  “one-euro jobs” —  in which refugees can work for low wages of between $1.13 and $2.80 per hour — have been created.

The center-left government in Sweden has proposed a reform to asylum laws to force migrants into the work force. If an applicant can’t support himself after three years in the country, they won’t be eligible for permanent residency if the reforms pass.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Germany To Strip Job Protection From Citizens To Make Room For Refugees

San Jose: Muslim chases, tackles Trump supporter after rally, then brags on Twitter

Terror scare on UK-bound flight after Muslim passenger screams “Allahu akbar” and “Boom”

Sadly, Muhammad Ali was a loser

I was an amateur boxer and followed Muhammad Ali’s, formerly Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr., career very closely. Ali was simply amazing, probably the greatest fighter ever.

But as a “religious” leader, an example for others, Muhammad Ali was an abject failure.

In 1964 at 22 years old, with Malcolm X as his mentor, Ali converted from Christianity to Elijah Muhammad’s Nation of Islam and became a black racist activist.

In 1975 Ali once again converted, this time to Sunni Islam, which is the Saudi Arabian form of Islam.

Finally in 2005 Ali converts to Sufism, which is a very mystical aspect of Islam where you try to perfect yourself on earth by following the exact teachings of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad.

Notwithstanding his “goodwill trips to many countries” Muhammad Ali spent the majority of his life promoting the failed, theocratic, supremacist political system known as Islam.

It is reported that at his deathbed he believed he would be with Allah in Paradise because he did more good in his life than evil.

My question for all people to consider, as the world mourns Muhammad Ali, the greatest boxer ever:

Who is it that decides whether more good was done in a life than evil, you…or God?

EDITORS NOTE: On April 28, 1967, with the United States at war in Vietnam, Muhammad Ali refused to be inducted into the armed forces, saying “I ain’t got no quarrel with those Vietcong.” On June 20, 1967, Ali was convicted of draft evasion, sentenced to five years in prison, fined $10,000 and banned from boxing for three years.

Arabic_IslamAli stated that “Islam is not a killer religion” and “Islam means peace.”

The translation of the Arabic word Islam is “submission.” Today we see Islam in general and the Islamic State in particular as anything but peaceful.

The Nation of Islam according to Discover The Networks:

The Nation of Islam (NOI) was founded in Detroit in 1930 by Wallace Dodd Fard, an itinerant salesman. Fard’s movement was composed of  traditional Islamic teachings augmented by, and interlaced with obscure mathematical, Gnostic, and heretical accretions, including an identification of all blacks as “Asiatic.” This message resonated among American blacks who had migrated north, seeking to escape racial oppression and rural poverty.

One of Fard’s earliest converts was Elijah Poole, a grade-school dropout and alcoholic Georgian who had moved to Detroit in 1923. By 1931, Poole had become known as Elijah Muhammad, and upon Fard’s sudden and mysterious disappearance in 1934, he became head of NOI.

Elijah Muhammad moved to Washington, D.C. in 1935 and began proselytizing for NOI in different cities throughout the U.S.  He advocated the creation of a separate black nation on the U.S. mainland, separate from white society in every way — economically, politically, and spiritually.

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLE: A civil rights hero? Muhammad Ali was anything but

When Employers Compete, Workers Win — When They Can’t, Workers Lose by Donald J. Boudreaux

David Henderson does a very nice job summarizing why stripping workers of the right to offer X as part of an employment contract makes most workers worse off, even if the intention of the government officials who do the stripping is to help workers — and, indeed, even if a Nobel laureate economist misses this reality.

Here’s another part of the picture.

Workers’ bargaining power ultimately is tied positively to workers’ alternatives: the greater the number, and the better the quality, of a worker’s employment options, the stronger is that worker’s bargaining power. If many different employers are competing for your services — each by offering you good pay, good benefits, and good work conditions — you as a worker have splendid bargaining power.*

It follows that government interventions that reduce the creation of good jobs— that is, interventions that reduce firms’ incentives to create better opportunities for employing human labor — reduce workers’ bargaining power. In turn, it follows that if overtime-pay arrangements of the sort that emerge in the absence of government restrictions on employment contracts are for many firms and workers the most efficient sorts of labor contracts available — as they are likely to be in a competitive economy — then government prohibitions that make those contract terms illegal will reduce firms’ efficiencies and, hence, dampen their willingness to create new jobs that pay as much as jobs would pay in the absence of those prohibitions.

Put differently, government restrictions that shrink the ways that employers can squeeze more efficiency into their operations shrink the number of jobs that are created, or reduce the maximum pay that employers can offer to employers who perform newly created jobs.

Over time, therefore, regulations such as the newly imposed overtime-pay diktats dampen workers’ bargaining power by reducing the number of high-as-possible-quality jobs created by employers. With fewer such jobs, there’s less competition for workers.  And with less competition for workers, workers’ bargaining power shrinks.

Note that empirically documenting this reduced competition for workers, as well as documenting its effects on workers’ pay (lower than otherwise), fringes (lower than otherwise), and work conditions (worse than otherwise) would be practically impossible. Because the consequences of these diktats play out fully only over a long span of time, it is simply too difficult for an empirical investigator to uncover, amidst all the countless other changes that occur in the economy, the details of what pay, fringes, and work conditions would beotherwise — that is, had such diktats not been imposed.

Yet unless you think you can say nothing absent empirical evidence about the effects on workers’ well-being of a reduction in the intensity and quality of competition for labor, then you should worry that these new overtime-pay diktats will, over time, make many workers worse off than they would otherwise be.

* Note that if, in this situation, you as the worker (whose services employers are competing for) agree to reduce the value that you will receive on one margin (say, pay) in order to increase the value you will receive on another margin (say, working conditions), it would be wholly mistaken for an outside observer to notice your agreement to work for lower pay and conclude from that observation that youremployer has undue bargaining power over you. And it would harm you if this outside observer, arrogant in his or her ignorance of the details of your and your employer’s affairs, orders your employer to increase your pay to some level higher than you agreed to accept.

Cross-posted from the indispensable Cafe Hayek.

Donald J. Boudreaux

Donald J. Boudreaux

Donald Boudreaux is a senior fellow with the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a Mercatus Center Board Member, a professor of economics and former economics-department chair at George Mason University, and a former FEE president.

Making History is Sometimes About Timing

Former British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill once stated, “To every man there comes in his lifetime that special moment when he is figuratively tapped on the shoulder and offered a chance to do a very special thing, unique to him and fitted to his talents. What a tragedy if that moment finds him unprepared or unqualified for the work which would be his finest hour.”

In each of our lives, we all get one or two of these Churchillian “taps on the shoulder;” in many ways, how we respond to these taps, will determine our lot in life.

Let me give you two examples from a couple of friends of mine.

Anthony “Spud” Webb played 13 years in the National Basketball Association (NBA), though only standing five foot seven inches tall (which was and still is unheard of in professional basketball). Spud is most known for being the shortest person in the history of the NBA to win the slam dunk contest (1986). He defeated his then Atlanta Hawks teammate, Dominique Wilkins who stood at six feet eight inches tall.

Spud was told his whole life that he was too short to play basketball, though he could dunk the ball when he was only five foot three inches.

Despite averaging 26 points a game on his varsity high school team, Spud received little interest from college and university basketball programs. He ended up playing for a junior college, Midland College in Midland, Texas. He was named a National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) All-American.

He was then offered a scholarship to play for legendary North Carolina State University basketball coach, Jim Valvano.

After college, Spud was told by most NBA scouts that he should play in Europe because of his size. He ended up being drafted in the fourth round of the 1985 draft that began his illustrious NBA career.

Ray “Mick” Mickens played eleven seasons as a cornerback in the National Football League (NFL), though standing only five foot eight inches tall and weighing a mere 180 lbs.

Mick was a standout corner for Texas A&M University, as well as a sprinter for the track team. Considered one of the top corners in the country, he was named an All-American and All-Southwest Conference player in both his junior and senior years.

Mick was drafted by the New York Jets in the third-round of the 1996 NFL Draft and went on to play over a decade in the NFL against all odds.

By all the professional metrics then and today, Spud or Mick should have never played professional sports. They didn’t fit neatly into the boxes that the establishment had set up to determine who could play on the professional level. Neither was of the right height or weight; but how do you measure a person’s heart or determination?

In a similar manner, based on all political metrics set up by the establishment, Donald Trump should not be the Republican nominee for president. He had never run for any office before, was never active in the Republican Party, and was not a part of the “good old boys” network.

But how do you measure a person’s ability to connect with the public at large? How do you measure a person’s ability to connect with the people in a language that they understand? How do you explain the ability of a billionaire to connect with the working class?

On paper, Spud and Mick should never have played pro sports, let alone, play for over a decade, each at the highest level.

In a similar vein, on paper, there is no way anyone could have predicted Trump’s ascendancy to become the Republican standard bearer for president; it defies all conventional wisdom.

Spud, Mick, and Trump all changed the “conventional wisdom” approach to basketball, football, and politics. Sports are one of the most egalitarian institutions in the world: either you can play or you can’t; either you can help a team win or you can’t.

Politics is less egalitarian than sports and is more subjective. Politics is more answering the question: “Can I trust you and can I believe you are going to do the things you promised?” Politics is about answering the question: “Are you going to make my life better and provide a brighter future for my children?”

Spud and Mick would have a much more difficult time breaking into professional sports today. I would go so far as to say that they would not make a pro team today simply because the leagues are so data driven, despite a person’s level of accomplishment. Basketball players at various positions should be of a certain height and weight; football players should be at a certain height, weight and speed based on their positions played.

If a player doesn’t fit neatly into these metrics, in many instances, a coach or scout won’t even look at a player. This explains why and how the political establishment overlooked the Trump candidacy. The Democrats made the same mistake with Bernie Sanders.

Spud and Mick have proven that they were prepared for that tap on the shoulder; thus far, I would say Trump has proven he was ready also.

Often times, making history is as much about timing as it is skills. Could it be that Trump was born for such a time as this?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in BlackPressUSA.

Death by Demography: The 2016 Presidential race will decide America’s future

It is as simple (and as scary as that)!

And, everyone of us must now, immediately, begin or continue to educate ourselves about Islam and what the expanding Muslim population will do to Western Civilization, America and our way of life.

We can already see what it is doing to Europe, what more do we need!  Do we think that somehow we will escape? Do you believe America’s melting pot can withstand the Islamic demographic juggernaut (the hijra!) coming our way?

Update May 31: be sure to see Leo Hohmann’s story at WND about the huge numbers of green cards we are giving out to Muslims from all over the world, here.

Ellison and Cardon

Representatives Keith Ellison and Andre Carson went to the National Press Club last week to speak against ‘Islamophobia’ and said of Trump: Trump in particular appeals to people’s “paternalistic, tribalistic impulse,”…. Sheesh, and of course Ellison isn’t doing the same for his Islamic tribe!

After seeing this enlightening and provocative post at ‘Gates of Vienna’ thanks to Richard at Blue Ridge Forum, I wanted to say something here about how every one of you reading this must begin to thoroughly educate yourselves about what Islam really is!Do you know the ten Arabic words?***And, since I read that post last week, I see that America’s first Muslim Congressmen took to the podium at the National Press Club to exhort their fellow Muslims to get into the Presidential election to defeat Donald Trump and “Islamophobia” here.

It is not about ‘Islamophobia,’ it is all about migration and the fear among Islamists that Trump (and you) will demand a halt to the migration, the hijra.

In Minnesota, where Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison represents the large and growing Somali ‘community’ we see the Minneapolis Star Tribune (also last week) go ballistic over speaking engagements throughout the state by an Egyptian Coptic Christian using the Koran to explain to the public what Islam’s goals for world domination entail. (Hint: It involves migration!)

We have Daniel Greenfield, writing at Frontpage magazine last week telling us that the Muslim migration will not end because Muslim countries are largely dysfunctional and Muslims procreate at higher levels than do westerners. The invasion will not end, for Europe and for us, there are just too many of them!

So how much do you know about Islam? Do you know what the ten words mean?

RELATED ARTICLES:

May: 1,035 Syrian Muslims admitted to U.S., only 2 Christians

U.S. to deport illegal alien Somalis

Does Janesville, Wisconsin get refugees?

Some states are pretty secretive about refugee health data—Tennessee is one of them

Bowling Green, KY pastor: ‘we need to have more faith in the process’

What will Senator Rand Paul do about new influx of Muslims to his hometown?