Marine Le Pen is Shopping for Allies at the EU Parliament

/in , , , /by

Follow the story in real time:

Having outdone the major opposition party—UMP—and trounced the governing Socialists in last week’s European elections, Marine Le Pen went off to Brussels today, looking for allies. If she can form a block of at least 25 deputies representing seven different countries, she will drastically improve her chances to influence EU policy while sharing in the perks: funding, chauffeur-driven cars, offices, legislative privileges, etc. The Front National itself has 24 Eurodeputies; the problem is finding the 7 nations. More or less assured of her alliance with Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party, the Austrian FPO, Belgium’s Vlams Blang, she is hard put to find the missing allies. Both UKIP and the Danish People’s Party have ruled out any alliance with the FN. On the other hand, Marine Le Pen can’t risk alliances with blatantly anti-Semitic antidemocratic parties like Golden Dawn, Jobbik, and other minor parties of similar persuasion.

What do committed and potential allies know about the Front National? Apparently not much. Marine Le Pen has pursued a forceful normalization strategy to rid the Front National of the sleazy image shaped by her father Jean-Marie Le Pen and upheld by party leaders and rank & file over the past 40 years since its founding. For some mysterious reason this window dressing has been respected by French media and gone unnoticed, with rare exceptions, in international media.

One of these exceptions, Gatestone Institute, links to Marine Le Pen’s foreign January 22nd foreign policy press conference, where she presents a superficially reasonable foreign policy and a seemingly brilliant advisor, Aymeric Chauprade, political scientist, author, professor, advisor, world traveler, and more. You don’t have to understand French to see how professional it looks. But you have to listen very carefully to Mme. Le Pen’s presentation to recognize the underlying values, affinities, logic, passion, and motives. (summarized in the Gatestone article http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4160/marine-le-pen-chauprade)

Does it have anything to do with the anti-jihad hopes pinned on the Front Natinal by well-informed thinkers with no hateful undertones? Does it have anything remotely concerned with the hopes of Europeans for relief from Eurabian oppression?

Aymeric Chauprrade, Marine Le Pen’s foreign policy chief—imagine him Minister of Foreign Affairs in a future Le Pen government—believes that we are victims of an Atlantico-Zionist conspiracy. Big banks, American imperialism, and Zionism are conspiring to rule the world and ruin the decent European citizen who wants to live a decent life in a sovereign nation. Chauprade believes that the CIA infiltrates jihadi groups and triggers human bomb explosions when and where it suits the evil American purposes. These jihadis, as he describes them, are sort of sleepy misguided losers who would sit around smoking pot if the Americans didn’t push them into senseless action. 9/11 for example: an inside job, a prime example of American manipulation of otherwise innocent Muslims.

Listening carefully to Marine Le Pen’s major foreign policy statement it is clear that the arch-enemy is not Islam or Islamization, it is the United States of America. Marine Le Pen accuses the French government of increasingly falling under the influence of the United States to the point of making friends with Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, France should improve relations with Iran and Russia. Though the Front National is opposed to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, Iran should be allowed to develop nuclear power for peaceful civilian purposes. Iran should have been invited to the Geneva 2 Conference on Syria. The Americans and Germans impose sanctions on Iran while sneaking in by the back door in preparation for juicy business as soon as the sanctions are lifted… or before.

Marine Le Pen will give a press conference from Brussels shortly. An update will follow. BFM TV reports that Nigel Farage of UKIP, who is in fierce competition to form a Eurexit group, met with a delegation from Italy’s Northern League, allegedly committed to Marine Le Pen’s alliance.

SPARK: The latest Republican Fundraising Weapon

/in , , , /by

TYSONS CORNER, Va., May 28, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — CMDI has launched what could become one of the most important online fundraising tools of the 2014 election cycle, Spark™ Smart Donation Forms.  Much like Amazon’s recommendation engine that suggests products that will most likely appeal to a shopper based on their past shopping behavior, Spark looks at a donor’s past giving history and generates custom donation amounts optimized for each donor’s giving behavior.

“With current online fundraising methods, campaigns are leaving money on the table,” said John Simms, CMDI founder. “Campaigns are pushing donors to generic forms that may ask for less than the donor has already given and fail to ask for an upgrade lift. Spark optimizes the ‘ask’ for each donor so campaigns can get the highest yield from each supporter.”

Fundraising is not a one size fits all business. You shouldn’t ask a $500 donor for $5. Nor should you ask a $5donor for $1,000. By customizing the ask amount for each individual donor, campaigns can substantially increase their online fundraising totals.

In addition, Spark utilizes best-in-class online fundraising methodology to convert supporters into donors, including:

One-Click Donations

Popularized by the 2012 Obama for President campaign, enterprise one-click donation processing has not been available to Republican campaigns… until now. Starting today, Republican campaigns across the country have begun accepting political donations, sparked by the single click of a button.

Spark’s innovation is in how it allows campaigns to use any action by a supporter to trigger a donation. Donations can be triggered by:

  • single clicks on a “donate” button,
  • text messages,
  • a link in an email,
  • QR code scans,
  • or any other action that takes place on an internet connected device.

“One-click is just the tip of the iceberg when you think about taking the friction out of fundraising,” commentedJohn Simms, CMDI’s Founder. “With Spark, imagination is really the only limit in how campaigns can collect donations.”

Another significant benefit of Spark is that donors who give to any campaign through Spark, can also one-click donate to any other campaign who also utilizes Spark. The pre-existing network of Spark donors will be a huge advantage for the 2016 Republican presidential cycle.

As friction is removed from the giving process, supporters are more likely to give more and more frequently.

Sequential multi-step contribution forms

For new donors to a campaign, it has been proven that sequential multi-step contribution forms can increase donation rates by 5%-10%. Spark now makes multi-step donation forms available to all Republican campaigns.

Learn more at CMDI.com/spark.

ABOUT CMDI 

CMDI is America’s largest Republican campaign finance services platform, providing software and FEC compliance services that have managed over $8.5 billion for federal campaigns and committees. During the 2012 cycle, CMDI’s flagship software, Crimson, was used to manage $2 out of every $3 raised for Republican federal committees.

As a close partner with the Republican Party, CMDI has consistently provided innovative solutions throughout the company’s 30 year history.

Florida: Would-be jihad mass murderer allowed not to stand when judge enters court

/in , , , /by

He wanted to commit mass murder in the name of Islam and jihad, and now he wants taxpayers to provide him clothing that reflects those same religious beliefs. And when Judge Scriven granted him permission not to stand when she entered, was she aware of the fact that Osmakac’s remaining seated signifies that he doesn’t respect Infidel laws or authorities, but only the law of Allah, and would consider standing for an American judge tantamount to idolatry — showing respect that is due only to Allah. It is, in other words, a statement of complete disrespect for and rejection of the authority of the court and of U.S. law in general. As such, it should never have been permitted in a U.S. court. But the willful ignorance is all-pervasive.

Oh, and Sami Osmakac is not an Arab. It isn’t Arab clothing he wants to wear. It’s Islamic clothing.

“Man asks court to provide Arab clothing during Tampa trial,” by Elaine Silvestrini, Tampa Tribune, May 23, 2014 (thanks to Teresa):

TAMPA — Sami Osmakac is asking taxpayers to provide him traditional Arab clothing for him to wear when he goes on trial next week on charges he plotted a terrorist attack in Tampa.

Osmakac’s lawyer told a federal magistrate this morning that Osmakac’s family doesn’t want to pay to clothe him in a robe garment called a thobe and a head wrap known as a keffiyeh. Lawyer George Tragos [from the law firm Tragos, Sartes & Tragos] said he couldn’t say why Osmakac wants to wear the clothes. U.S. Magistrate Anthony Porcelli planned to confer with District Judge Mary Scriven about what clothing might be available for Osmakac to wear.

The judge has previously given Osmakac permission not to stand when the judge or jury enters the courtroom because of his religious beliefs. Potential jurors will be asked whether they can still be fair to him, given that belief.

Osmakac was also found competent to stand trial, after a court-appointed expert concluded he is able to proceed.

Jury selection is scheduled to start Tuesday, and the trial is expected to last up to four weeks, including jury selection.

Authorities allege Osmakac plotted to blow up a popular Tampa night spot and then take hostages and demand the release of Islamic prisoners. He was arrested as part of an FBI sting.

The defense maintains Osmakac was entrapped and that he was vulnerable to influence because of his mental illness.

The defense also asserts that Osmakac was targeted by the FBI partly because of his “radical” Islamic beliefs.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Cal Poly: Free speech under attack in academia
Kerry: US starting $5 billion “terrorism partnership fund”
TSA check misses empty AK-47 clips in Yemeni man’s luggage
U.S. to keep 9,800 troops in Afghanistan
Obama close to authorizing military training of Syrian jihadists

Judgement Day: Pro-Israel Z-Street trial “Will Force the IRS to Open its Books”

/in , , , , , , /by

In the August 2013 New English Review (NER) we interviewed Lori Lowenthal Marcus, national correspondent for The Jewish Press and co-founder of Z Street- the Zionist antidote to anti-Israel J Street.  It was about the July 19, 2013 hearing held before Judge Ketanji Brown of the DC Federal  Court in the matter of Z Street v IRS. The case had been filed in the Eastern District in Pennsylvania and then transferred  to the DC Federal court as this was a federal government matter. The original Z Street matter was based on a First Amendment issue, “viewpoint discrimination”. In our NER interview article we noted what the basis of the original filing was about:

A news release by Z STREET, issued  just prior to the DC court proceeding cited the June 24, 2013 House Ways and Means release of acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel’s responses to a letter from Ranking  Member, Sander Levin (D-MI). Z STREET’s supplementary filing revealed that there were no “progressive” groups scrutinized by the IRS “Touch and Go” Group (TAG) in Washington, DC. Instead due diligence of the IRS documents revealed that Z STREET was the sole subject by the TAG review because of “Israel-connected” views of the group in its original 501 (c ) (3) application.   

We further noted the contretemps at the July 19, 2013 DC federal court hearing:

Alana Goodman of The Washington Free Beacon who attended the DC Federal Court hearing noted in her report the IRS argument and the reaction of Judge Brown:

The government argued in court on Friday that Z STREET should resolve its tax-exempt status, which is still in limbo, before any policy questions can be addressed.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson seemed skeptical of the argument, saying that the government appeared to be mischaracterizing the remedy that Z Street was seeking.

“That’s not what they want,” Judge Jackson snapped at one point.

Z STREET said the government was misrepresenting its position.

“We’re not seeking tax-exempt status in this case. We are seeking an untainted process,” said Counsel Jerome Marcus. “What is the policy that the IRS has been following since 2010, and is that process constitutional?”

Is the Z Street case against the IRS evidence of bureaucratic ineptitude or something else? If discovery is granted by the DC Court ruling we may find who and why an unconstitutional act of viewpoint discrimination was perpetrated against Z STREET.

Today’s Wall Street Journal reported Judge Katanji Brown ruling effectively granting discovery to Z Street, “IRS Judgment Day: The un-talkative agency comes under scrutiny from a federal judge”:

In August 2010, Z Street sued the IRS on grounds that the position amounts to viewpoint discrimination and violates the First Amendment. The IRS responded by claiming special protections, including the Anti-Injunction Act, a law written to protect the IRS from litigation that could interfere with its ability to collect revenue.

But Washington, D.C. federal district Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled that the Anti-Injunction Act has not been interpreted by the courts as preventing constitutional claims. In its attempt to “thwart” the action, she wrote in denying the IRS motion to dismiss, the IRS tries to “transform a lawsuit that clearly challenges the constitutionality of the process . . . into a dispute over tax liability.”

The IRS also tried to duck out under the sovereign immunity doctrine, which was designed to deter lawsuits against the feds. But that claim fails, Judge Jackson writes, because the Administrative Procedures Act “waives sovereign immunity with respect to suits for nonmonetary damages that allege wrongful action by an agency or its officers or employees, and the instant lawsuit fits precisely those criteria.”

This ruling will force the IRS to open its books on the procedures it used and decisions it made reviewing Z Street’s tax-exempt application, procedures it has tried to keep shrouded. As the case proceeds, Z Street’s attorneys can seek depositions from many who have been part of the larger attempt to sit on similar applications by other conservative groups.

It will be fascinating to see which names— Lois Lerner, former head of IRS tax-exempt scrutiny?—show up in the internal email traffic. The Administration may have a harder time evading accountability now that a judge will be supervising the testimony.

In our NER interview with Ms. Marcus, we asked her what the best outcome that might emerge with Judge Ketanji’s ruling.  Here is the exchange:

Gordon:  What do you believe would be the best outcome of the D.C. Federal Court after its review of the various filings in terms of handing down a ruling in this case?

Marcus:  Naturally, I think the court should sign the proposed Order that we submitted and provide us with access to what is called discovery. Meaning we are permitted to seek information about how the IRS set about creating this policy, who formulated it, who approved it, who knew about it, who had to apply it, to whom was it applied. That is what we need to find out in order to learn how the IRS came to create policies that are not just inappropriate, not just mismanagement, but which constitute violations of the U.S. Constitution. We need to find out because unless we do, there are going to be greater and greater restrictions on fundamental freedoms.

Way to go Judge Brown.  Now the IRS has no shield against discovery by Z Street. This could an interesting turn of events vis a vis the original viewpoint discrimination issue raised in the Z Street Federal court filling.  Whatever names emerge on the BOTL emails might cause  a flood of filings from other possible social welfare filers. As baseball great Yogi Berra might opine, “It ain’t over till it’s over”.  Congratulations to Lori Lowenthal Marcus and her counsel, her husband Jerome, for undertaking this landmark case for Z Street and all Americans. Let’s see how the IRS counsel  responds  to Judge Brown’s ruling.

As a Z Street board member this federal court ruling has justified the four year wait for justice to be done in the matter. To paraphrase Justice Brandeis Judge Brown’s ruling is good “disinfectant”.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

5 steps for fixing the VA problems — if I were in charge

/in , , , , , , /by

As I watch the events unfold regarding the Veterans Administration scandal — certainly not a phony one – I’m waiting to hear a concrete plan of action and solutions.

We do not need any more studies, assessments and reports. We certainly don’t need another agency within the Obama administration investigating itself.

I’m also concerned about the number of retired military officers circling the wagons around, it seems, one of their own — retired former Chief of Staff, now Secretary of Veterans Administration, General Eric Shinseki.

What amazes me is that, in uniform, this type of abject and systematic failure over the past six years would have resulted in relief of command. However, it now seems there are different standards and measures of effectiveness in the quagmire we call government bureaucracy — I would have hoped the code of honor and integrity transcends the day one takes off the uniform.

In any event, here are five steps the administration should be taking (not holding my breath):

1. Change of management – I didn’t say leadership because it seems no one is leading and they are certainly mismanaging. But it begins at the top with the Secretary and must go to the senior levels where these issues are being raised.

Some will say leave Secretary Shinseki in place to fix the VA problems, it’s been almost six years and the problem has been exacerbated. Some believe (or hope) once there are resignations, the media will move on and this won’t be a hot topic anymore – that may apply to the fawning Obama liberal media but not the rest of us.

In that vein, we should be listening to our Veterans Service Organizations such as the VFW, American Legion, ROA, NAUS, AMVETS and MOAA as they are the true “voices of our veterans.”

General Shinseki and senior levels of the VA have lost the confidence of the veteran community. As a matter of fact, it seems he’s completely turned his back on it and become just another “Beltway Bandit” — forgetting his oath of office as a commissioned officer in exchange for political loyalties. We thank him for his countless years of service to our nation in uniform, but this is inexcusable.

2. Provide immediate relief with vouchers to civilian hospitals for proper care – of course this process will need scrutiny and tracking to ensure good stewardship of the taxpayer dollar — which we all would humbly want to see go to caring for those who have borne such a burden for this Republic. But the voucher program is not the panacea to solve the greater problem.

3. Develop regional “Centers of Excellence” – five to be exact: North, South, East, Midwest, and West, based upon veteran population concentration, focus resources for staffing and look at relationships with local private hospitals. As well, outpatient clinics should be part of these COEs and we should develop best practices for better automation as part of this initiative. I would say these would be our Tier IA Veteran care facilities and there should be a determination as to their coverage areas.

4. Provide local alternatives for remote areas – we need to assess the remote areas where our veterans need care and coverage and look at developing a process and a system whereby their first line of healthcare can come from a local private hospital. Again, there would need to be a system in place to track these individuals. Along with this comes a very well-trained and responsive system of “Help Centers” that can address issues and resolve them for our vets, and I don’t mean “we will get back to you.”

5. Improve record-keeping – if the Obama administration was so adept at contacting voters they should be able to develop a better automation system for records and caring of our veterans. It is imperative that we are able to quickly and seamlessly transition health records of those who have served in uniform, regardless of Active Duty or Reserve Component, into the VA system. No more drop-offs into the abyss.

You might have thought this would have been what President Obama would have articulated last week, instead of more faux outrage and lecturing about others taking responsibility.

And yes, something criminal has occurred within the Veterans Administration and the US Attorney General, Eric Holder, should conduct an independent investigation — or is it just not that important?

I always taught my young officers that any issues you bring to me must have at least once recommendation for a solution — above are just a few off the top of my head. And I don’t have an entire policy staff.

But I must ask, if the Obama administration, indeed government itself, is having a problem handling veterans healthcare, which is less than two percent of our American population, how do you think they’ll handle trying to manage the entire country’s healthcare?

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

RELATED ARTICLE: America’s Veterans Deserve Better: 5 Priorities to Fix VA

FL District 9 Congressional Candidate Jorge Bonilla Calls for VA IG Investigation and vouchers for veterans

/in , , , , /by

Florida District 9 Republican Congressional candidate Jorge Bonilla released the following statement calling for an Inspector General investigation of the Department of Veterans Affairs and vouchers for veterans to obtain healthcare outside the single-payer VA system:

The unfolding scandal surrounding the Department of Veterans’ Affairs has revealed many ugly truths about the executive competence of this administration and about the disastrous practical application of single-payer healthcare in the United States. But worst of all, this scandal has revealed the extent to which we have reneged on our solemn debt of honor towards our returning heroes.

I recently called on Secretary Eric Shinseki to step down from the VA. However, we continue to receive new reports of clandestine wait lists, with no concrete action yet taken.

It is now time for our Commander in Chief to lead from the front, and relieve Secretary Shinseki of his duties at the VA. Rather than send a deputy chief of staff to review a single clinic, I call on the White House to appoint an independent Inspector General to conduct a system wide review of the manner in which our Veterans are cared for.

A proper investigation of the wait list scandal also calls for the appointment of a special independent prosecutor. A thorough, unimpeded investigation of the facts at hand will determine whether or not these are indeed isolated incidents, and if not, whether there is probable cause for prosecution of those responsible under federal RICO statutes.

Make no mistake; if the deaths of over 40 Veterans and the needless suffering of countless others are the result of denied care as part of a systemic effort to enforce wait list metrics, then we have broken faith with our Wounded Warriors, and there is no other option except to pursue swift justice.

Finally, I join Congressional Republicans who have called for enactment of a Veterans’ voucher system. Our Veterans are at the short end of the sort of bureaucratic entanglements and critical staffing shortages that are endemic to the single-payer healthcare system, and this is unacceptable.

Veterans (or all Americans, actually) should be able to see a doctor of their choice at a time of their choice. A voucher system could break the logjam at the VA, and allow those who need specialized VA care to receive it in a timely manner.

This is the very least we could do for those to whom we owe a debt of honor

There is Only One Way to Prevent Shariah from Destroying America

/in , , /by

I am not going to spend hours and hours to answer this question.  America, Israel, Canada, and other non Islamic countries can be spared their destruction from the evils of the Islamic ideology by only one method.

I am not a war monger, not do I desire any form of violence, or want to see innocent children harmed by a war in their country.  I am providing my professional analysis of a very serious problem.  The problem is the Islamic ideology.  It is an ideology that lives, breeds, and grows faster than any known terminal form of cancer.

If we do not want America to be destroyed it is going to take Americans saying no to Islam.  Not just with bumper stickers.  Americans are going to have to demand the Islamic ideology and Shariah law to be labeled as an Islamic terrorist group.

Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram, and the dozens of other Islamic terrorist groups are just splinters from the Islamic ideology itself.  There is no good with such violent groups as the KKK, Al Sharpton’s organization, or the Islamic ideology.

Think back the last decade, how many days have gone by in which Islam and their murderers have not been in the world news.  In the name of Islam, their fighters have murdered thousands upon thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

Americans must stand up and fight the ‘Holy War’ Islamic leaders have always expressed their desire for.  The days of shaking hands and allowing Islam to spread in America are gone.  There are approximately 2300 mosques in America. Their numbers are growing and existing mosques are expanding in size.

How do Americans fight? 

Again this is my analysis, not my desire.  During the civil war Americans (due to politics) had to fight other Americans.  Politicians left Americans with no choice.  In 2014 after six long years of Socialist Obama, politics are again pitting Americans against people living in America.  The people within Islam are not Americans, regardless of what a court or politician dictates.  One can only be an American if he/she vows to put the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.  An American vows to give his/her life for America against enemies from the inside and out.

The Islamic ideology and it’s followers living in America do not support the U.S. Constitution over Shariah law.  If a Muslim tells you he/she does, they are lying to you. The only solution to save America is for America to be a land for Americans only or those who would give their life to support the U.S. Constitution. If a person does not meet this requirement then he/she should be considered an enemy of America.

Boko Haram, the group that kidnapped 300 innocent Christian children in Nigeria are practicing Islam as Mohammed and Shariah law dictate.  They are not radical. They are ‘Pure Muslims’ who desire to live in a land as Mohammed wanted.  They are just carrying out his commands. See:

Shariah Law: Family Stones Pregnant Lady

Muslim Clerics Resist Stopping Child Marriages 

Trolley Square, SLC, Utah: Murders By Muslim

On 12 Feb 2007, a Muslim left a mosque in Salt Lake City, Utah.  He proceeded to Trolley Square Mall and murdered 5 innocent people in the name of Islam. I had personally conducted research at this mosque and rated it at the highest level for the potential of violence. This mosque is about a one minute walk to the Shopping Mall.

A bit of interesting trivia:

  • How many people die on average each year due to ‘Guns’?  30,000
  • How many people die on average each year due to ‘Alcohol’?  88,000
  • How many people die each year due to ‘Tobacco’?  443,000
  • How many Babies’ are murdered each year in the name of ‘Abortion’?  1.7 million

Do readers truly believe politicians, our law enforcement, media, or liberals really want to save Americans from needless death?  Why do they choose to put guns as their number one enemy, when a hundred times more die from Alcohol or Tobacco?  A thousand times more innocent babies are killed by abortions each year in America than people killed by guns (30,000).

It would be more appropriate for these hypocrites to ban alcohol, tobacco, and stop murdering innocent children if they really care about human life. The fact is, sadly, they don’t care.

That Cold-Hearted Discipline by David J. Hebert

/in , , , /by

Good economics teaches cooperation and the limits of politics, not greed.

But of all the duties of beneficence, those which gratitude recommends to us approach nearest to what is called a perfect and complete obligation. What friendship, what generosity, what charity, would prompt us to do with universal approbation, is still more free, and can still less be extorted by force than the duties of gratitude. — Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments

A recent article by Wharton Professor Adam Grant has been popping up here and there, most recently in Psychology Today. Grant suggests that studying economics breeds greed, and he cites several studies to support his claim. The studies conclude economics professors give less money to charity than other professions, economics students are more likely to deceive others for personal gain, and people who study economics have less of a concern for fairness and tend to think that “greed” is okay.

To his credit, Grant does consider the alternative: that maybe economics actually attracts greedy people or that greedy people tend to thrive by studying economics. He dismisses these possibilities by noting that “there is evidence for selection…but this doesn’t rule out the possibility that studying economics pushes people further toward the selfish extreme.” He goes on to chide practitioners of the discipline for teaching self-interest in the classroom.

Finally, he concludes with four points that are meant to provide evidence of the social harm in studying economics, which can be summarized in two overarching points:

1) Economics justifies greedy behavior, and

2) Studying economics makes people less altruistic.

Economics Justifies Greedy Behavior?

Studying economics, and specifically the role of incentives, teaches us that relying on altruism is a brave assumption that has but limited applicability. For example, among people we know, we can rely on a certain degree of altruism or benevolence. I know, for example, that my family and friends will be there for me not because I pay them to do so, but because they care about me. Similarly, they know I will be there for them. However, I don’t know the same thing about random people I encounter on the street.

And yet in order to enjoy the immense wealth that the division of labor affords us, society demands that we have interactions both with people we know well and people we do not know at all. These two distinct spheres of activity require two distinct forms of cooperation, which one might get from reading Adam Smith’s twin pillars of economics: The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations.

More tidily, perhaps, F. A. Hayek describes this situation in The Fatal Conceit by noting the difference between the macro-economy and the micro-economy. Macro, in this context, refers to society as a whole, while micro refers to just the people to whom we are close. Hayek says that if we were to apply the same rules of the family unit to the macro, as would be the case if we were to allocate resources altruistically, we would destroy the macro. This is because there would be a complete lack of economic calculation, resources would be misallocated, and plans would fail to be coordinated (see these articles for more on economic calculation).

Hayek also notes that the reverse is true: If we were to apply the rules of the market to the family, we would destroy it as well. We don’t need prices and incomes at the dinner table to allocate the food. Even the most ardent defender of markets would agree that having prices and such as the means of allocating food at the dinner table would be wrong, just like paying your friends to help you move across town would be strange. (Beer and pizza don’t count.)

Instead, students of economics recognize not that greed is good, as the saying goes, but that greed can be transformed into the service of others given the proper institutional setting. That institutional setting, which has been thoroughly discussed elsewhere, is one that celebrates the role of property rights, prices, and profits (and losses) and recognizes their role in creating the incentives to properly husband resources, generates the information about the relative scarcities of various goods and transmits this information to consumers and producers in a quick and efficient manner, all of which provides a feedback mechanism to drive continued innovation.

Economics Makes People Less Altruistic?

Grant cites a 2005 article by Neil Gandal et. al. as concluding that “students who planned to study economics rated helpfulness, honesty, loyalty, and responsibility as just as important as students who were studying communications, political science, and sociology,” but that by the third year, economics students rated these values “significantly less important than first-year economics students.”

While the Gandal study does include such conclusions, it also includes much more. For example, economics students attribute less importance to fairness. Evidencing this, Gandal points out that, when questioned about the allocation of radio frequencies to different mobile-phone service providers, students who study economics are more likely to advocate selling the rights to the highest bidder while students of other disciplines are more likely to advocate for allocating the rights to “anybody who meets some minimal eligibility criteria.”

Students of economics do not advocate for property rights because we are greedy; we advocate for property rights because we understand and take seriously potential incentive problems in politics. The notion of minimal eligibility requirements may sound nice, for example, but problems may lie in who gets to draw that line, by what process that line gets drawn, and the incentives faced by the line-drawers. As Madison points out in Federalist 51, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”

Economics students know men are no angels. And as Nobel laureate James Buchanan points out, government officials are human beings, too, with their own hopes, dreams, and aspirations—and yes, forms of avarice. Supporting the allocation of resources to the highest bidder sidesteps the issues raised by these potential incentive problems. This means that the choice of how to allocate resources fundamentally comes down to a choice of institutions.

We can have a central authority establish guidelines by which anyone who wants can use the radio frequencies, or we can let the market decide. The former leads to a standard tragedy of the commons problem, whereby the radio frequency gets overused. In the case of cell phones, this means that the frequency would be crowded with multiple conversations simultaneously; imagine trying to shout to your friend across a crowded bar. The latter leads to the frequencies being allocated to the person who is best able to utilize them to serve the general population. So AT&T, for example, gets exclusive rights to a certain bandwidth and then tries to figure out how to best serve its customers. In this case, the customer gets to enjoy a clear phone call without the distraction of several other conversations in their ear simultaneously.

In any case, these are not examples of quelling altruism, but of keeping it in its place.

Less Greed, More Cooperation

Viewed in this light, economics does not so much teach greed but rather the beauty of cooperation. How else could we explain how a woolen coat gets made, how Paris gets fed, or how a pencil gets made? And if allocating, say, radio frequencies based on highest valued use makes people learn to discard fairness, well, how exactly is that a bad thing?

ABOUT DAVID J. HEBERT

David Hebert is a Ph.D. student in economics at George Mason University. His research interests include public finance and property rights.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from FEE and Shutterstock.

European Parliamentary Elections: Eurosceptic Parties Win — but can they organize an Alliance?

/in , , , , /by

Yesterday afternoon, I spoke with my Geneva based European observer following the close of European Parliamentary Elections in 28 member countries. He indicated that both the UK Independent Party (UKIP) led by Nigel Farage and Marine le Pen ‘s National Front each were poised to pick up 24 seats in their country’s  MEP delegations. Eurosceptic parties  like Denmark’s  anti- immigrant People’s Party led with  26.7 percent  doubling its delegate slate,  while  Greece’s left progressive Syrizia  came out on top  with 26.5 percent. Geert Wilders’ Freedom party tied for second in The Netherland despite poor exit polls on Thursday evening.  Elsewhere, the right wing Austrian People’s Party appeared  to be leading with 20 percent of the vote up from 7 percent in 2009. In Italy, the Democrat Party led by PM Matteo Renzi trounced the Five Star Movement copping fully 40 percent of the vote. Italy will take over the revolving Presidency  next month.

However, there was evidence that some anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi parties won delegates in their European parliamentary slates. Witness Hungary’s Jobbik Party which  came in second with 14.7 percent, while Greece’s Golden Dawn was third with 9.7 percent.

farage

UKIP leader Nigel Farage interviewed after MEP victory. Source: AFP

For results overall and by EU Member countries, consult the Financial Times European Parliament election results on –line, at this interactive graphic, here.

The Financial Times (FT) reported on the “earthquake” that Farage predicted for the UKIP. The Euro Parliamentary Elections in the UK coincided with local council elections, as well. The UKIP at 27.5 percent of the Euro Parliament vote tally has defeated the Liberal Democrats, unnerved Nick Clegg, junior partner in the ruling Westminster parliament coalition. The UKIP significant electoral victory   upset the Labor Party led by  Ed Milleband while causing Conservative PM David Cameron to suggest to the Tories, “that it was not business as  usual”. These UK Euro Parliament results may portend a scramble for the 2015 Westminster Parliamentary elections. The FT account noted:

Nick Clegg’s grey face told the story of Britain’s European elections. The leader of the pro-European Liberal Democrats was subdued, his eyes glassy, as he spoke of his party’s “heartbreaking” electoral annihilation.

Meanwhile across town at a central London hotel, Nigel Farage was mobbed by reporters as he celebrated the UK Independence party’s “historic” breakthrough, topping the national poll with 27.5 per cent of the vote and 24 seats.

[…]

It was also the first time the Conservatives had come third in such a vote, trailing in with only 24 per cent of the vote. For Labor, second with 25.5 per cent, it was an unimpressive performance, raising doubts about whether Mr. Miliband has the momentum to take the party to victory in next year’s general election.

The FT quipped:

There is no obvious policy fix: any attempt to “out-Ukip Ukip” on immigration or Europe is unlikely to succeed. Meanwhile none of the three main parties has a leader capable of matching Mr. Farage’s “man in the pub” style.

la pen

Ms. Marine Le Pen of the French National Front interviewed in the Elsyee Lounge. Source: AFP

Among UK voters who may have swung to the UKIP in droves were reported to be Britain’s Jews.  They may have been motivated by Farage’s disavowal of the troubling anti-Semitic positions of some of the Eurosceptic parties. The exception is the Dutch Freedom Party led by Geert Wilders, who is pro-Israel, while opposing mass immigration and critical of Islam.

Ms. Le Pen has also achieved a stunning upset victory coming in first in France. In her post election remarks, she hinted this could be a prelude to the 2017 Presidential elections.  Given the low poll standing of Socialist Premier Hollande amid the floundering French economic problems unless turned around, this could be a possibility. However, the fallout from  the Euro parliament elections also may upset the possible future plans of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and leader of the UMP.

The FT account of her victory noted:

Ms Le Pen now has her sights firmly fixed on the battle to win the nearby Elysée Palace in the 2017 presidential election. “This is just the first step,” she said as she arrived to join revelers.

Few commentators are yet ready to predict that Ms Le Pen, with her fiercely anti-EU and anti-immigrant policies, will make it. But the scale of the FN’s triumph has planted genuine fear in both President François Hollande’s ruling Socialist party and the centre-right UMP.

The 25 per cent score achieved by the FN on Sunday had been predicted by some polls, but the four point gap over the UMP and the slump in the Socialist tally to less than 14 per cent prompted alarm.

The FN broke out of its strongholds in the south and post-industrial north. It came top in 71 electoral departments, compared with 28 for the UMP and just two for the socialists.

A socialist parliamentarian who saw Mr Hollande on Monday reported him saying: “I expected it to some extent, but it was still a big shock.”

In the wake of Marine Le Pen’s stunning victory in France, French President Hollande went on television today. The FT in an article about changes in leadership for the EU reporting him saying:

He would use an EU summit on Tuesday to call for a marked shift from austerity to growth to combat the populist surge. He said the EU had become “incomprehensible. “This cannot go on,” he said, adding it must be reformed to “be efficient where it needs to be and to withdraw from where it is not needed”.

geert widlers

Geert Wilders of the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) at the Polls. Source EFP

When we posted on Thursday exit poll results in the Netherlands indicated the Freedom Party (PVV) led by Geert Wilders might have experienced a set setback in the 23 seats held by Dutch parties in the Strasbourg parliament, effectively losing two seats.

On the heels of a conversation with a colleague in Geneva, came  a news brief from the Chicago Tribune  indicating that the PVV was tied with  Democrats 66 with four seats each, bested by the Christian Democrat Appeal  with five. Wilders’ comment in the Chicago Tribune article was “Four Seats, that’s great.  Now we make the first gains for a new alliance of Eurosceptic and anti-immigration parties in the European Parliament”

The FT in its analysis of the Euro Parliament elections was not so sure that the Eurosceptic alliance can be achieved. It commented:

The surge of anti-establishment parties has also led to a scramble to rebuild anti-EU blocks in the parliament, with the two biggest populist groups – France’s National Front and Britain’s UK Independence party, which both secured 24 seats, making them the fourth largest in the assembly – vying for allies.

Marine Le Pen, Front National leader, may struggle to find the six parties needed to form a new anti-EU group in parliament.  Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader who already heads a Eurosceptic group, has seen several of his allies – including the Danish People’s party and the True Finns – wooed by Mr. Cameron’s Tories. Since the Tories left the EPP, they have led the small European Conservatives and Reformists group.

Perhaps the wisest comment on the European Parliamentary election results could be that ancient Chinese curse: “may you live in interesting times”.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Council on American Islamic Relations visits Franciscan Sisters

/in , , , /by

Good Friday 2011 Franciscan Sisters Silent Walk for Peace through the City of Little Falls, MN. Photo by Sister Mary Lou.

The  Franciscan Sisters of Little Falls were visited by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, aka CAIR, an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).  These trained public relations groups reach out to the under informed, accommodating citizens, in political and religious institutions, public libraries, schools and universities, and government security forces, to whitewash their history, hide their intent, inhibit discussion, prohibit news coverage of acts of violence, and control language that exposes the truths of Islam.

violentislam-150x150CAIR and ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) were unindicted co-conspirators of the Holy Land Foundation, a front organization for Hamas, a designated, chartered terrorist group.  They are no different than the Muslims who are killing Christians and Jews throughout the world; the same as Boko Haram that kidnapped, converted and killed the female students in Nigeria; the same as those who burned to death male students just weeks before; and the same as those who recently destroyed entire villages in Nigeria, burned down 200 homes and butchered 16 while intoning Allahu Akbar. They differ only in their attire.

Among the many strategies of Islamic conquest is to use a grassroots network of social and charitable organizations to expand their membership base. Their God demands conversion or death to infidels and Islam is responsible for the slaughter of 270 million people over 14 centuries – with more than 23,000 deadly jihad attacks since 9/11/01.  Eighty percent of their Koran incites and advocates death.

Their claim of victimization is bogus; they are the aggressors in today’s world. They do not live the Gospel of tolerance and peace, or the Biblical Commandments or Golden Rule. Rather, they advocate the cruelest set of laws, Sharia, on the planet. Behind a façade of Mohammad’s earlier writings and their five pillars of faith, the later writings in their Koran, Hadith, and Sura contain a doctrine of hate and commands to kill Jews and Christians primarily, but also Hindus, Buddhists, all infidels and apostates. Sexual slavery continues in Islam.  This is a political ideology couched as religion, to globalize Islam. They have made continents unsafe; Jews are fleeing for their lives and Christians who have nowhere to run are beginning to experience the crimes of Islam – riots, no-go zones, rapes, terrorism, honor killings, and a loss of their native identity.

I ask the Franciscan sisters to please research this themselves and perhaps obtain the documentary, “Honor Diaries,” for how women are severely mistreated in Islam.  I also urge them and all their coreligionists to go to www.memritv.org and download a cross-section of weekly sermons translated into English, for an analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural and religious trends in the Middle East. Books by Nonie Darwish or Brigitte Gabriel or Ayaan Hirsi Alli would also provide a truthful exposé of Islam.

  • The Sisters were told that Muslims and Christians need to come together to stop the violence, but it is the Muslims, not the Christians, who are committing the crimes against five religions in dozens of countries. CAIR’s purpose is to soften their history and temper any possible resistance against their imposition of Sharia.
  •  The Sisters were told that individuals commit violence, not religions, but it is the Islamic individuals who are commanded by their religion/culture/ideology who commit the violence – not only against other religions but among themselves, particularly against their women.  It is the Muslims who are taught to hate in their schools, mosques, and television programs and their Koran that promises heavenly reward for carrying out jihad.
  • The Sisters were told they had to return to their moral compass, but does CAIR have a moral compass when Muslim deeds include rape, beheading, dismemberment, castration, gouging-out eyes, flogging, stoning, hanging, blinding women with acid; enforcing genital mutilation on young girls, enforcing their marriage to considerably older men; and keeping many women enshrouded, unable to drive, socialize, or attend school?  Their god advocates murder and destruction in at least 109 Koranic verses.
  • The purpose of CAIR’s visit was to tell the sisters what to think, what to do and what to say.  Today CAIR is challenging Oklahoma to not show a film about Muslims and the Oklahoma bomber; not show the film “Honor Killings,” and not show the film being used by the 9/11 Memorial Museum. They have control over our school textbooks, which parents are attempting to fight.

We must not allow ourselves to be misled by the Islamic propaganda or by the evaded answers to citizens’ questions. We must ask ourselves if CAIR’s intentions were indeed as honorable as those of the immigrants who preceded them, would they really need these image-management teams to define themselves?  Rather than integrate and become Americans, they are requiring American acquiescence to their demands, and they are changing the history that is being taught in our schools today.  This is not assimilation, but conquest. It is they who hate all others, and your tolerance of their intolerance is not tolerance, but civilizational suicide.

I hope the Sisters will contact me or ACT! for America for more information about this scourge that has insinuated itself into our public schools, our places of worship, businesses, and government. We must all become aware of how we might be instrumental in protecting ourselves, and our country.

RELATED STORIES:

Interfaith outreach in Pakistan: Four Christians arrested for “distributing religious materials”
Raymond Ibrahim: Islam: ‘Appalling and Abhorrent’ in the Eyes of a Blind World?
Canada: Hamas-linked Muslim group to proceed with libel suit against PM Harper and spokesman for saying it was Hamas-linked

England’s Whetstone Named FEE’s First “Blinking Lights” Award Recipient

/in , /by
Linda-whetstone

Linda Whetstone

The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) is pleased to announce the recipient of its first “Blinking Lights” Award: Linda Whetstone of Sussex, England. The award was presented to Whetstone by FEE president Lawrence Reed on May 12, 2014 in London as part of FEE’s Blinking Lights Project that highlights and emphasizes the vital link between personal character and a free society.

Whetstone is Chairman of the Network for a Free Society and is a trustee of the Institute of Economic Affairs, both in London. She is a long-time member (and past board member and vice president) of the Mont Pelerin Society. She serves also on the board of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation. She is the daughter of the late Sir Antony Fisher, the founder of both IEA and Atlas. In her spare time, she is active in the competitive equestrian sport of dressage, for which she is Britain’s Director of Judges. She and her husband Francis live in a 17th Century manor house south of London.

“Linda has worked for the worldwide spread of liberty ideas for more than half a century—tirelessly, effectively and almost always quietly behind the scenes,” said Reed in making the announcement. “She’s a pillar of integrity with the tenacity of a British bulldog. Hundreds of activists for liberty in dozens of countries have been beneficiaries of her wisdom and encouragement. Tens of thousands of people around the world have read their first book or essay about liberty because Linda had something to do with getting it in their hands.”

Whetstone developed a CD called “Ideas for a Free Society” to provide access to classic articles and texts that are not accessible in many countries either in the universities or via the web because of copyright issues and lack of high speed connections. Over 100,000 copies of these have been distributed in about 60 countries and work is now taking place on the production of the CD’s 3rd edition.  Aside from English, versions of the CD exist in Portuguese, Turkish, Russian and Chinese. French and Arabic versions are being created in 2014. Even in remote Kyrgyzstan, Linda’s CD is being distributed and put to good use!

To read more about the distribution of these CDs and the other work of the Network for a Free Society, visit the organization’s web site or Facebook page.

Bardia Garshasbi of Iran, who now lives in England and works with Linda at the Network for a Free Society, says her passion can be understood best in the context of a 1945 conversation between her father, Sir Antony Fisher, and Austrian economist (and 1974 Nobel laureate) F. A. Hayek, as related by John Blundell in his book, “Waging the War of Ideas.” Fisher was seeking Hayek’s advice about the best way to influence the climate of opinion in society so it would be more favorable to liberty.

“What can I do? Should I enter politics?” he asked. Hayek replied, “Society’s course will be changed only by a change in ideas. First you must reach the intellectuals, the teachers and writers, with reasoned argument. It will be their influence on society which will prevail, and the politicians will follow.” Garshasbi says, “I think Linda Whetstone’s entire life is defined by the advice Hayek gave to her father. In fact, she has tried to live Hayek’s advice every single day.”

The farm owned by Linda and Francis is the focus of many long hours of hard work. It’s the income from it that allows Linda to carve out what seems to many a second full-time job promoting liberty. John Blundell, director general of the IEA from 1993 to 2009, notes, “Every coin has two sides and the obverse of liberty is hard work and personal responsibility. We cannot enjoy the former without fully and totally embracing the latter. Linda is a most worthy recipient of an award that recognizes that hard work, personal responsibility and individual liberty all go together.”

Linda’s work honors the immeasurable contributions to liberty of her father before her. On the Atlas web site, a short biography of Sir Antony can be found here, including a link to a book about his life.

“FEE recognizes in Linda Whetstone a woman whose light blinks for liberty as strongly today as it did decades ago,” said Reed. “She sets a very high bar for future recipients of this award.”

From all of us at FEE, congratulations Linda Whetstone!

Infiltrating the ISNA and NAIT Conference in Detroit

/in , , /by

I use the word infiltrate because the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) likes to use this word when a non Muslim attends a MB conference. Actually I spent four days with MB leaders from all across the country. There were representatives from every known MB group and some that were recently developed. The usual MB acronyms were there, but the most vocal were ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), NAIT (North American Islamic Trust), MSA (Muslim Student Association), and Muslim Advocates.

A fantastic group of American Patriots invited me to their city to obtain first-hand evidence pertaining to Islamic groups and mosques allegedly supporting the agenda of Islamic based terrorism. This report will be general in nature until I analyze all of the intelligence I was able to obtain.

I stayed at the same hotel as the conference attendees. The Double Tree (Hilton) on the Southfield Freeway, Dearborn, MI. This Masjid Forum was specifically for Imams, Board members, and senior personnel for the dozen and a half MB acronym supporters.

The first MB supporters I encountered was at the Muslim Advocates booth. The MB supporter manning the booth talked with me several minutes. He was passing out material to ‘end hate’ on the internet. I asked him to describe some examples of hate. He said anyone critical of Islam and Sharia Law are haters. He used the example of ACT For America. He went on to say anyone who opposes the building of a mosque or mosque expansion in America is a hater. Little did he know he was talking with someone who was very critical of the Islamic ideology and Sharia law.

The conference should have been titled, “The U.S. Constitution and the 1st Amendment are for MB terrorists and not for American Patriots. The Muslim Advocates group advised they were working closely with internet social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. They are asking these groups to close the accounts of anyone who is critical of Islam. This is considered serious hate speech and should not be allowed on the internet. I was provided materials of their strategies and goals.

This is directly from Muslim Advocates: “We are experts with deep experience in the courtroom and powerful connections in Congress and the White House”. I agree with them on this statement. Their supporters go all the way up to the highest level of the White House. This should be of no surprise to anyone.

I met ISNA and NAIT Executives. The main emphasis of the conference was for Muslims to continue building and expanding in America. ISNA promised to help with their projects and NAIT encouraged Muslim leaders to allow NAIT to hold the mosque and other property titles, so they can be better protected. I was informed that NAIT owned several hundred million dollars of property in America, and has the funding from 400 plus Islamic Centers in America.

While in Detroit/Dearborn, I went to some suggested mosques and Islamic bookstores in Detroit to conduct research. When I was driving around Detroit and Dearborn I thought I was back in Saudi Arabia. appeared to be Islamic related: Mosques, Islamic businesses, Islamic stores, etc… It only took a few minutes to realize the Detroit area is under invasion from the MB. The area of Detroit has been reduced to destruction. By far it is one of the most dangerous and ugliest cities in our country.

While at the conference I was able to obtain a taped lecture by none other than America’s number one MB terrorist leader (CAIR/Nihad Awad). Nihad Awad had a lecture being distributed titled “How American Muslims Can Affect Change in Politics and Media”.

Per the norm I obtained material from Detroit mosques, the conference, and Islamic bookstores, both Sunni and Shia. The material advocates treason, sedition, and abusing innocent Muslim women and girls. One such piece of evidence advocates marrying off Muslim girls at any age, and consummating the marriage of these girls at the age of nine.

There were books on establishing Sharia throughout the world and using physical Jihad to achieve these goals. I found the law enforcement from the Dearborn area supported the violent Islamic ideology and Sharia law more so than they support innocent American Patriots living in this area.

For decades there has been many people like Steve Emerson, ACT leaders, and I who have provided direct evidence about the Islamic ideology, and recently there have been actors and actresses from Fox News who are now using the data we collected for decades at great financial losses and threats to us.

The Boko Haram Islamic terrorist group in Nigeria are helping to raise the awareness of the violence within Islam. Boko Haram essentially means “Western Education is Unlawful”. Just last night I was listening to Sean Hannity attempt to explain Shariah law to his followers. It was very clear from the start that Hannity has maybe a 3rd grade level education on Islamic matters. He has good intent, but hurts America more than he helps.

Hannity made a comment such as Boko Haram has a distorted vision of the true Islam. He was suggesting there is an Islamic ideology formed by Mohammed that is peaceful. Then he went on to say Sharia law is dangerous and evil. I am sorry but only a politician can have things both ways. There is no separation of Islam and Shariah law. You can’t have one without the other. If one considers Shariah law dangerous, then you must acknowledge Islam as a whole is dangerous.

The brutality of Boko Haram is not radical Islam. Their actions are being administered exactly as Islam dictates. Murder, hatred, violence, sexual abuse of young girls, forced conversions to Islam, and slavery are all true aspects of Islam.

Until world leaders stop making excuses for Islam and blaming it on so called radicals, ‘Pure Islam’ and it’s dangers will spread throughout the world. America will soon see the type brutality being committed by Boko Haram in the name of Islam, being carried out at American schools and neighborhoods. Only you can stop Islamic based terrorism. Do not count on our political leaders, media, or senior law enforcement to counter Islamic terrorism.

First hand evidence as I and my team obtain is the only way we can show the dangers of Pure Islam.

In closing, a point to ponder: If American Patriots are indeed haters because they do not want more mosques and their expansions in America, what are the billions of Muslims to be called who would kill in the name of Islam anyone who began building churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia?

School Choice: Historic developments in KS, FL, AZ, as other states play defense by Leslie Hiner

/in , , , , , /by

Alabama – Stephanie Linn @StephanieJLinn

U.S. District Judge Keith Watkins dismissed a lawsuit that challenged the Alabama Accountability Act on grounds that the school choice program contained within the Act violated equal protection. The Southern Poverty Law Center had filed a lawsuit contending that its clients, students in “failing” public schools, were unable to take advantage of the program because they do not live near a non-failing public school or a participating private school, and, thus, no student in the state should have the ability to participate in the program. The judge issued his opinion stating:

“The requested remedy is arguably mean: Withdraw benefits from those students who can afford to escape non-failing schools. The only remedy requested thus far would leave the plaintiffs in exactly the same situation to which they are currently subject, but with the company of their better-situated classmates. The equal protection requested is, in effect, equally bad treatment.”

In 2013, the Alabama Supreme Court blocked a challenge to the Accountability Act. A separate lawsuit from the Alabama Education Association is still pending in Montgomery County Circuit Court.

On April 1, the Alabama Senate Fiscal Responsibility and Accountability Committee passed HB 558 that would have amended the Alabama Accountability Act to lift the cap on individual donations and expand the types of entities that could contribute to scholarship granting organizations. The bill died when the Senate adjourned sine die without taking up the bill.

Alaska – Michael Chartier @Mchart1

The legislative session in Alaska was dubbed “The Education Session” by Gov. Sean Parnell (R), and it certainly lived up to that name. The legislation that most interested the Friedman Foundation was Senate Joint Resolution 9, a constitutional amendment that would have removed sections of the state’s Blaine amendment, allowing for a universal voucher system. Unfortunately for the people of Alaska, that amendment did not make it through the legislature. However, the bright spot on the horizon was in the education funding bill. It contained a corporate tax credit for donations to private and religious schools. It is the Friedman Foundation’s hope that money could be used for scholarships for students. Please see our previous coverage of Alaska’s education funding bill for more information on that unique proposal.

Arizona – Leslie Hiner @LeslieHiner

April 23 was a day of victories and defeats for school choice. Here is a summary of significant legislation:

  • Gov. Jan Brewer (R) signed into law HB 2150, which will allow children of active duty military families to enroll in the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program upon being stationed in Arizona; no prior Arizona public school enrollment is necessary.
  • Gov. Brewer signed into law HB 2139, which expanded the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program to include siblings of current ESA recipients and children with disabilities who are eligible to enroll in a preschool program.
  • Gov. Brewer vetoed SB 1048, which would have allowed chapter S corporations to contribute to Arizona’s corporate tax-credit scholarship program.
  • The Senate defeated SB 1236, which would have expanded the ESA to include children living in ZIP Codes where the average income is 185 percent of poverty or less; children of various emergency services personnel and siblings of current scholarship recipients would also have been eligible. It is estimated that more than 100,000 children would have become eligible. A similar bill, HB 2291, was defeated in the House on April 17.
  • The House passed HB 2328 and sent the bill to Gov. Brewer. This bill removes the requirement that children with disabilities who qualify for Lexie’s Law scholarships must first attend an Arizona public school to qualify for a scholarship. The bill was signed by Gov. Brewer on May 5.

A week later, Gov. Brewer signed into law HB 1237, which added clarifying language to the existing ESA program. Some of the new specifications include:

  1. requiring parents to use a portion of funding for the child’s current educational needs,
  2. specifying that an individual or facility accredited by a state, regional, or national accrediting organization may provide teaching/tutoring service,
  3. clarifying that only children with disabilities may use the ESA for certain therapies, and
  4. improving the funding formula.

Florida – Stephanie Linn @StephanieJLinn

The Florida House of Representatives passed a bill, April 11, to expand the existing tax-credit scholarship program and a new Personal Learning Scholarship Account Program for students with special needs, similar to Arizona’s ESA program. The expansion to the tax-credit scholarship program included increasing the per-student funding amount, increasing student eligibility by raising the limit on household income, and providing eligibility to students in kindergarten and first grade and siblings of students already in the program. Check out our legislative update for more details of the bill.

Kansas – Michael Chartier @Mchart1

Gov. Sam Brownback (R) signed a school funding bill into law, April 21, that included a provision creating a corporate tax-credit scholarship program. This development ushered Kansas into the school choice club as the 24th state. Low-income children from failing schools are eligible for up to an $8,000 scholarship from approved nonprofits. Corporations that donate to such nonprofits are eligible to receive a 70 percent income tax credit, with the total amount of credits capped at $10 million. Click here for more program details.

Louisiana – Leslie Hiner @LeslieHiner

On April 10, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court ruling denying parents the right to intervene in the Department of Justice request for injunction against the Louisiana voucher program in the decades-old desegregation case, Brumfield v Dodd, 405 F. Supp. 338 (E.D. La. 1975). Parents now have the right to intervene in the case.

Mississippi – Stephanie Linn @StephanieJLinn

The Mississippi House voted down an ESA bill for students with special needs by a vote of 57-63 on April 2. House sponsor, Rep. Carolyn Crawford said she intends to file the bill again next year.

New Hampshire – Leslie Hiner @LeslieHiner

The New Hampshire Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Duncan v. State of New Hampshire on April 16. This case positions individuals represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Americans United For Separation of Church and State (AU) against the state’s new tax-credit scholarship program, that is currently serving well over 100 students in schools of their choice. Check out our explanation of that lawsuit here.

Oklahoma – Leslie Hiner @LeslieHiner

On April 24, the House passed HB 2643, enlarging Oklahoma’s Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship program, making sub-chapter S corporations eligible for participation and providing a 75 percent state tax credit to those donors who commit to give for three years. The House dissented in Senate amendments, and the bill is currently in conference committee.

Tennessee – Stephanie Linn @StephanieJLinn

A voucher bill backed by Gov. Bill Haslam (R) made great progress in the Tennessee legislature, but the bill failed to garner enough support to make it over the finish line.

On April 10 the Senate passed the Tennessee Choice & Opportunity Scholarship Act, SB 196, a voucher program capped at 5,000 students in the first year of operation. If the bill had passed, students from low-income households who attend a “failing” public school would be given the first opportunity to receive a voucher. If remaining spots were available, students from low-income households in districts containing failing schools would be eligible to apply. The House companion bill, HB 190, stalled in the House Finance Committee. The bill sponsor, Rep. Bill Dunn, withdrew the bill citing a lack of support in the committee.

ABOUT LESLIE HINER

 serves as the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice’s Vice President of Programs and State Relations. She also serves on the Schools That Can National Advisory Board. She is an appointee to the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights Indiana State Advisory Committee, and also serves as an appointee to the Indianapolis City-County Ethics Commission.

The Congressmen Who Lied About WMD in Iraq

/in , , /by

I love America, I served our country in the US Air Force for 24 years, went into war (Iraq/2003), would have sacrificed my life for the innocent Muslims in Iraq who were being slaughtered by Saddam, and to this day I devote myself to doing the little bit I can to educate people on the dangers of Islam and Shariah law.

To this day I still get emails and phone calls about the issue of WMD in Iraq. Although this is now going on eleven years since we went into Iraq to hunt for WMD, it is still as important an issue for me today as it was in 2003. Most people do not know the truth about WMD in Iraq. I believe President Bush was betrayed by senior U.S. officials who were on the ground in Iraq and supposed to be carrying out a high priority mission of searching for WMD.

I was sent into Iraq for two primary objectives. One was to hunt the Saddam supporters, and the second was to search for WMD. I was in southern Iraq and numerous Iraqi’s risked their lives to provide information about WMD sites. There were four primary sites identified near Nasiriyah, Iraq. My team and I reported our information to the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) in Baghdad. We needed heavy equipment and personnel to excavate the four sites. The Iraqi’s from different backgrounds said if the U.S. doesn’t excavate the WMD, then insurgents from Iran would do so, and some would go to Syria. After repeated requests to the ISG, the sites were never excavated. In late 2003, President Bush says the hunt for WMD is over.

When I returned from Iraq in the summer of 2003, I left federal service because I wanted to go public about the suspected sites in Iraq that were never searched. I was informed by U.S. Federal Agents that some of the Iraqi’s who had identified the sites had been killed by Saddam forces and Al Qaeda. I have always said I don’t know if there was WMD in Iraq, but I do know that sites the ISG team told President Bush were excavated, in reality were not.

In early 2004 a prominent journalist who is still active today contacted me. He wanted to do a TV interview about WMD in Iraq. The interview was aired. This journalist again contacted me and wanted me to meet with a U.S. Congressman to provide all of the details about WMD. For 24 years I had not been aware of the major differences between Republicans and Democrats. I just loved my country and would have gave my life for any Commander in Chief, regardless of political views.

The journalist said Congressman Curt Weldon (R – PA) wanted to meet with me. I was flown to DC. I met Congressman Weldon and gave him all of the intelligence about WMD and how to verify my information. While in Iraq I had written several classified intelligence reports and a Congressman could easily obtain them. Weldon obtained the reports and this verified my information. Weldon was very excited and he wanted Congressman Pete Hoekstra to speak with me. This occurred. Weldon and his Chief of Staff Russ Caso then wanted me to arrange to have one of the Iraqi’s who had identified one site, to come to DC and meet with him and Hoekstra.

You can see the emails between Caso, Weldon, and I about bringing the Iraqi to Weldon’s office. After Weldon met the Iraqi he came up with a plan for us to travel to Iraq, go to the suspected WMD sites and then have a team excavate the sites. Weldon said if WMD is found we will inform the media, but if nothing is found no one would be informed. He said the trip to Iraq would be setup as a visit of the troops. Weldon and Hoekstra informed me that no other politician should be told about this, not anyone in the military and especially no one from the CIA.

Weldon went on to say we would bring four of the Iraqi informants along to Iraq. They had been granted asylum in America because of their assistance to our country. Weldon said the Iraqis would likely not be able to return from Iraq because their asylum stated they could not return to Iraq, and if they did they would lose their asylum. I told Weldon and Caso that I did not want to be part of any scenario that would put the Iraqi’s in danger. They had saved many American lives and I would not take them to Iraq, left, and definitely to be killed by Al Qaeda. This upset Weldon, Hoekstra, and Caso. I cancelled the trip back to Iraq.

A sampling of the emails from Caso and Weldon to me about bringing the Iraqi’s to his office and the trip to Iraq:

Dave,

Please contact him and I can go pick him up. Also please give me a call when you get a minute at 202-225-xxxx..

Thanks

Russ

—–Original Message—–
From: curtpa07
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:05 AM
To: Caso, Russell
Subject: Fw: Updated info Gaubatz

Please arrange this for me tomorrow

—–Original Message—–
From: dave gaubatz <pdgaubatz@yahoo.com>
To: curtpa07 <curtpa07@mail.house.gov>
Sent: Wed May 03 11:03:49 2006
Subject: Re: Updated info Gaubatz

Yes Sir, I can contact him now. I do not know if he has transportation, would there be any possibility for a car to pick him up? .If you tell me
what time, I know he would want to speak with you. He id’d the site in Basra. He speaks English pretty good, but his wife speaks perfect English (she was an Iraqi Doctor). It might be good for her to come also. thank
you, Dave Gaubatz

curtpa07 <curtpa07@mail.house.gov> wrote:

Dave,

Can I meet with him privately tomorrow?

Thanks,

Curt

—–Original Message—–
From: dave gaubatz <pdgaubatz@yahoo.com>
To: curtpa07 <curtpa07@mail.house.gov>
Sent: Wed May 03 10:52:01 2006
Subject: Updated info Gaubatz

Congressman Weldon,

Below is additional information: Hassan XXXX (former Nasiriyah and Basra Iraqi Police Captain) was granted humanitarian parole (political asylum) in 2003 by the U.S. State Department partly due to his information he provided on one of the WMD sites near Nasiriyah. He risked his life to take me to a site. He lives in Washington DC with his family and would assist by going to sites as well. He is very familiar with the locations and understands the people from the area. He would be good for language and safety issues as well. thank you, Dave Gaubatz

I have numerous emails from Weldon and Caso. I have again reported on this matter because I know there is a high probability insurgents from Syria and Iran excavated the WMD in Iraq, and there is a high probability it will be used against innocent people. Possibly some of it was used against Syrians by the Syrian government. I also believe it is important for people to know that I do not play the politics card. Regardless if one is a Democrat or Republican, if they put our country in danger I will expose them.

It should be noted that during our out processing from Iraq we had to have a medical checkup. My medical report says I was exposed to high levels of radiation and the water in Iraq had high levels of radiation.

While the media goes wild about an 82 year old owner of an NBA team (Clippers) going on a racist rant, we have Islamic terrorists who will likely use WMD inside our country. Where are our priorities?

US lawmakers pressure Obama to grant asylum to Christian Sudanese mom sentenced to death for leaving Islam

/in , , , , /by

Why aren’t all the Muslim spokesmen in the West, who claim that Islam has no death penalty for apostasy, such as Harris Zafar, Mustafa Akyol, Salam al-Marayati, M. Cherif Bassiouni, and Ali Eteraz (among many others), jetting to Khartoum now to explain to Sudanese authorities that they are misunderstanders of Islam and must release Meriam Yehya Ibrahim immediately?

One wonders: why, if it is so clear that Islam has no death penalty for apostasy, do so many Muslims misunderstand that? And why is it “Islamophobia” to point out that so many don’t seem to get the memo?

Muhammad said: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57).

“US Lawmakers Pressure Obama Administration to Grant Asylum to Christian Sudanese Mom Sentenced to Death,” Chinatopix, May 24, 2014:

Lawmakers in the US are calling on the Obama team to provide asylum to a pregnant Sudanese wife of an American citizen after she was sentenced to death for upholding her Christian faith.

Meriam Yehya Ibrahim has been imprisoned with her 20-month-old son for over three months because she refused to recant her Christianity. Last week, a Khartoum judge stirred international condemnation by sentencing the 27-year-old mom to death by hanging after giving birth and nursing her baby for two years, wrote Fox News.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Marco Rubio said he was shocked with the “inhumane verdict” given to Ibrahim. GOP senators Roy Blunt and Kelly Ayotte have already sent two letters to the White House requesting for “immediate action” and political asylum for Ibrahim and her child.

On Wednesday, four senators filed a resolution condemning the death sentence and urging Sudan to respect their people’s religious freedom in order to restore their ties with the US or reduce their economic sanctions. Republican Jim Inhofe and Democrats Chris Coons and Bob Menendez co-sponsored the said resolution.

Ibrahim was raised as a Christian when her Muslim father abandoned the family when she was still a child and has now been charged by the Sudanese court has charged with apostasy, or leaving Islam. In some Muslim countries, this crime has a corresponding death penalty.

Ibrahim was also sentenced to receive 100 lashes after she gives birth, for adultery, for having relations with her Christian husband. Her lawyers said the eight-months-pregnant woman is chained by her feet in jail.

Jen Psaki, the State Department’s spokesperson, said the Obama team is doing their best on Ibrahim’s case.

Daniel Wani, Ibrahim’s husband, is confined to a wheelchair and is fully dependent on his wife for everything, the lawyer explained. Wani said he called the US Embassy in Khartoum before the death sentence, but the embassy showed no interest in their problem.

After stating that his son was an American citizen, he was asked to present DNA evidence. He conceded and provided their wedding documents and his son’s birth certificates as additional evidence, but Wani said the embassy still did not offer any help.

Ibrahim’s case is being further complicated by political forces in her country. According to Sudanese Parliament speaker Fatih Izz Al-Deen, it is not true that Ibrahim was raised as a non-Muslim and added that it was her Muslim brother who filed the complaint against her….

RELATED STORIES:

Uganda: Churches step up security after threats from Islamic jihad group
Nigeria: Islamic jihadist murders two in bungled jihad/martyrdom suicide bombing
Sharia Egypt: Christian gets four years prison, $1400 fine for insulting Islam by drawing cartoon of Muhammad on Facebook