Chelm

I have been thinking of Chelm* lately, not the real industrial town in Poland, home to about 18,000 Jews (60% of the population) until they were annihilated in World War II. Rather, what comes to mind is the Chelm of Jewish folklore, penned by Elijah B’al Shem of the real Chelm, and commercialized by Isaac Bashevis Singer in the 1900s – because I believe there are Chelmites among us today.

Chelm, the legend, began when God’s angels inadvertently overlooked an area while they were populating the earth with a reasonable assortment of foolish and wise souls. As one obliging angel, armed with the two bags of souls, made his way back through the clouds to correct the omission, he snagged one bag on the jagged point of a particularly high mountain peak, causing all the foolish souls to float down to earth. Thus was Chelm created with foolish, like-minded people, although there were always a few citizens who deemed themselves to be above the rest, clever and capable of discovery, analysis, and problem solving for the community.

It was on a snowy, wintry night, in fact, that the Wise Men of Chelm were seated around a wood-burning stove, trying to explain why winter was cold and summer, hot. As they sat in the firelight, watching the sparks and smoke moving upward through the chimney, one of the philosophers reasoned that as people throughout the world were burning wood to keep warm, all the heat was rising into the sky. After months of buildup, the air became warm enough to provide summer. Then, of course, when the stoves were idle and the air cooled once again, winter would return. Little did these khakhamim know that their thoughts would become the “big question” of the 21st century – Climate Change.

Despite the difficulties of migration, the Chelmites managed to leave their village, travel and spread their wisdom to others. The first Democrat debate of 2015 is the perfect example as we heard Bernie Sanders respond to what he deemed the greatest threat to national security. Without hesitation, he cited “climate change.” Challenged by the moderator about terrorism, he continued, “Of course, international terrorism is a major issue that we have got to address today, but climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism and international conflicts.” Can Sanders explain why only Muslims, specifically, are so imbued with the desire to kill because of the climate? If the syndrome has not yet been identified, we might consider “Thermocide.”

Another intellect, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, said, “Empirical evidence alone – without reference to climate models – suggests that a general warming trend is probably affecting weather and ecosystems, exacerbating the impact on humans.” Again we might ask why only the Muslim humans are so influenced as to increase the rapes in northern Sweden by more than a thousand fold since they first began arriving in the 1970s, or to detonate themselves while killing others.

Oblivious to the 14 centuries of Islamic carnage, our sages pursue a climate change issue that is scientifically constant, and not “change” at all. Climate is used by the Left to distract us from Islam’s complicity in drastically changing America. They would sooner discuss climate than the current knifing of Jews, beheading of Christians, and killing and injuring holiday revelers. Sanders and his like-minded sages should explore meteorology.

Secretary of State John Kerry, unquestionably a Chelm descendant, legitimized the Charlie Hebdo massacre and the murder of Jews in Israel as understandable, reasonable, and warranted. He proclaimed that terrorists are encouraged by poverty, despite the oil wealth and strong financial support from the Muslim Brotherhood. He denied our American exceptionalism, and pledged to appoint ambassadors, based on their sexual orientation.

Another intellectual of the Chelm mindset is Hillary Clinton, who declared: “Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” She further offered, “These Muslims over here are just peaceful, faithful people living their lives, whereas those Muslims over there are radical and seek to impose a toxic strain of their faith via terror and violence.” It may be that she envisions arrowed road signs, “Terrorists this way to Europe” and “Moderates this way to America,” or she had them posted during her many trips to Islamic countries. Unfortunately, signs are no solution for the high illiteracy rate, which could account for the 900 Islamic terrorist cells in the US, as revealed by the FBI. Of the latest act of terrorism in San Bernardino, Hillary blamed the inanimate weapons themselves.

Remember that National Intelligence Director James Clapper said to Congress, “The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’…is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence…” In fact, the Brotherhood was a co-conspirator in the trial of the Holyland Foundation, the largest terrorism-financing ever successfully prosecuted in American history. A major financier of the terrorist organization, Hamas, is dedicated to jihad, the destruction of Israel, and to turning America into a Muslim nation, to “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

The politically correct are inclined to say that a majority of Muslims loathe violence, but surveys prove that the majority of Muslims want violent sharia law to prevail over the host country’s laws, and a recent Fox News poll indicated that one in four admitted that violent jihad against America is justified. The Koran commands Muslims to engage in holy war (Jihad) in order to impose Islam and Sharia law on the entire world. Sharia demands support of terrorism and suicide bombings, and conversion to Islam or death.

To say that our Commander-in-Chief is also from Chelm, inexperienced and naïve, would in itself be naïve. He has been following a specific agenda to bringing our country to where it is today, without once veering off course. If he were inexpert and bungling, he could not have so thoroughly hidden his background, divided us into opposing factions and causing chaos on our streets, rejected and rewritten laws, dispatched the CIA for secret operations, created a runaway government, trivialized our Constitution, reduced our personal freedoms, and conspired to change our national identity and endanger our existence with tens of thousands of unvetted, Koran-inspired “immigrants.”

Now, if the incoming Syrians exhibit no violence, we may conclude that climate change is not a threat. If, however, we recognize Islamic violence in the Middle East also occurs in northern climes, we would have to ascertain which changes actually result in the atrocities, or identify their teachings and laws as the true link to violence.  As for our Commander-in-Chief, he is not of Chelm. It is his “dark impulses,” the same impulses of which he accuses Americans who seek to close our borders to jihadi invaders, that are failing us.

*Chelm, pronounced with the guttural KHelm, or the Spanish “J”

Declaration of Muslim Reform nailed to door of Islamic Center in Washington, D.C.

In the midst of the swirl of events following the Jihad massacre in San Bernardino, a “Summit for 20 Western Muslim Voices for Reform against the Islamic State and Islamism,” was organized in Washington, D.C. At the conclusion a news conference was held at the National Press Club. The press conference capped a two day conference the purpose of which was to publish Declaration of Muslim Reform principles. At the rostrum was an international contingent of reformers from Canada, the U.S., Europe and Pakistan. Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Forum for Islam and Democracy was the organizer and moderator of the event. A list of the organizations  and participants can be found here. The principles of  the reform declaration,  as published in a Gatestone Institute article, co-authored by  Dr. Jasser and Raheel  Raza are:

  • We reject interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam. We invite our fellow Muslims and neighbors to join us.
  • We reject bigotry, oppression and violence against all people based on any prejudice, including ethnicity, gender, language, belief, religion, sexual orientation and gender expression.
  • We are for secular governance, democracy and liberty.
  • Every individual has the right to publicly express criticism of Islam. Ideas do not have rights. Human beings have rights.
  • We stand for peace, human rights and secular governance. Please stand with us!

Watch this You Tube video of the Muslim Reform Summit press conference:

muslim reform declaration

Washington Islamic Center custodian removing Muslim Reform Movement Declaration December 4, 2015. Source: Muslim Reform Movement.

Following the conclusion of the National Press Club event, two women from the group headed  over to Massachusetts Avenue, the location  of the Saudi financed and controlled Washington Islamic Center. They nailed a signed copy of the Muslim reform declaration to its door. That was modeled on the 95 Theses that Martin Luther nailed to the door of the All Saints Church on October 31, 1517 that purportedly sparked  the Protestant reformation. However, within seconds a caretaker came out and tore it off the Center’s door.

The daunting problem that the Muslim reformers face is that normative Islam believes that there is no need for reform since any distortion of the uncreated words of Allah, would be deemed idolatrous. However, given the declarations by  Egyptian President  El-Sisi  in a meeting with leading  Sunni clerics at  Al Azhar University in Cairo on New Year’s 2015, at least one Muslim country leader believes that  Islam is in dire need of reform. He says that is required to combat the apocalyptic pure Islamic terrorism  espoused by the self-declared Caliphate  of the Islamic State.

One of the women who participated in the Washington Islamic Center  event  was former Wall Street Journalist and author of Standing Alone: An American Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam, Asra Nomani.  Normani was a colleague of the late Dan Pearl in Pakistan.  She saw him off in October 2002, never to return, kidnapped and slaughtered by 9/11 Al Qaeda mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM).  She was also involved in the 2011 investigations that led to KSM being identified as Pearl’s  killer. Nomani is U.S. born, the daughter of Indian Muslims from Mumbai who settled in Huntington, West Virginia. She is a graduate of both the University of West Virginia and American University.

Asra Q. Nomani

Asra Q. Nomani

Nomani  is in league with  other Muslim  and former Muslim women  like Raheel Raza,  Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Irshad Manji and other like minded reformers who believe the effort to reform should be started.  Nonetheless, she is doubtlessly viewed as an apostate, heterodox in the standards of normative Sunni Islam. Having said that she is a fearless defender of personal freedoms for Muslim women reflected in her proposed Muslim women bill of rights. Further she recognizes the problems that both she and the others at the Reform Summit  see as persisting in Political Islam. Sharia that follows of way of Allah demanding devotion to Jihad against unbelievers.

This morning Nomani was paired off against Dalia Mogahed, a former Gallup pollster on Islam ,now director of research for the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. Mogahed is what the Obama White House considers as an exemplary American Muslim woman, resplendent in her Hijab.

Back in  July 2010, we wrote  about Mogahed’s  appointment by President Obama to the White House Advisory Council on Faith Based  and Neighborhood Partnerships. She is coauthor of the book and film Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think. She worked  Dr. John L. Esposito, a Georgetown University colleague at the Prince Alaweed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding.   At the Jasser contended in a report by The Investigative Project  that Ms. Mogahed’s outreach to radical Muslim groups did not help.

Dalia Mogahed

Dalia Mogahed

The damage is immeasurable to Muslims seeking non-radical alternatives. They are going to say, why bother? The government has chosen sides in the conflict.

Note this exchange among Rich Lowry of the National Review, Dalia Mogahed and Asra Nomani from today’s  NBC Meet the Press transcript:

RICH LOWRY:

Well, it seems to me that this debate, whether Islam is a religion of peace or not, really, it’s irrelevant for outsiders. It’s for Muslims to decide whether it’s a religion of peace or not. And if enough of them do, then you cut off the oxygen to the radicals. But at the moment, the extremists have significant financial popular and theological backing in the Middle East. And that is an enduring phenomenon. And it’s one that is going to require a long, ideological war to win.

DALIA MOGAHED:

I’m sorry, I’m going to have to disagree with you. They simply do not have ideological, theological, or popular support. And this is a criminal organization that is funding their criminality with things like drug trade and selling oil. They do not have the ideological support that you’re describing at all. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. They’ve had a number of voices from across the spectrum say that what they’re doing is completely un-Islamic. They have no support popularly, in terms of the general public. So–

RICH LOWRY:

But yet they’re still there.

DALIA MOGAHED:

But so are many other terrorist organizations. And their primary victims are Muslims. I think that’s very important.

ASRA NOMANI:

And to that point, I think what speaks loudest and what speaks to your point is the blood that’s spilling from Australia, to now California. I mean, how much blood has to be spilled until we recognize inside of a Muslim community that we do have an ideological problem? And that we do have support? I mean, there are–

DALIA MOGAHED:

I think the blood is spilling in Syria and it’s mostly Muslims–

ASRA NOMANI:

Excuse me. There are hundreds and hundreds of followers of Islamic State around Europe and the U.S. The Saudis are showing this. And all you have to do is look at the conversation inside of our mosques and inside of our communities. And you will hear it. And I hear it. And I have to say that I saw it in 2002, went to Islamabad, Pakistan, and met women who were supporting this ideology. I call them the Taliban Ladies Auxiliary back then. This young woman in California would’ve been a star member of it.

Watch the Meet the Press segment with  Asra Nomani dueling Dalia Mogahed:

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

When will President Obama tell Muslims to stop clinging to their religion and guns?

President Obama has scheduled a broadcast to the nation to address the recent attacks in Paris, Mali, San Bernardino and today in London. His administration has made it a point to never blame Muslims for their individual actions, nor to blame Islam for its hate of non-Muslims and Muslims alike.

Perhaps it is now time for President Obama to face the reality that Muslims cling to their religion and guns. The difference is they use their guns to further their religion. Christians and Jews do not.

Paul R. Hollrah reports:

On Thursday, Dec. 5, 2015, Attorney General Loretta Lynch threw down the gauntlet in a speech before the Muslim Advocate’s 10th Anniversary dinner in Arlington, Virginia.  Speaking just one day after Muslim terrorists, Sayed Rizwan Farook and his Saudi wife, Tashfeen Malik, murdered fourteen innocent people in an unprovoked terror attack on the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, Lynch said, “On behalf of our nation’s Justice Department, I am grateful to count you as partners in our work to promote tolerance, to ensure public safety, and to protect civil rights (emphasis added)

This is the official narrative of the Obama administration.

As I pointed out in my column “The neo-Democrat Party: Devout followers of Marx, Mao and Mohammed“:

I believe what President Obama has truly done is fundamentally transformed the Democratic Party of JFK to the Democrat Party of BHO. I use the word Democrat because the Party of Obama is not Democratic, as envisioned by Thomas Jefferson. The membership of the neo-Democrat Party are made up primarily of the devout followers of Marx, Mao and Mohammed.

Those who oppose Obama and the neo-Democrat Party, including JFK Democrats, are subject to ridicule, rejection and bullying.

Extremism in the name of the collective is the over riding strategy of the neo-Democrat. Radicalism is the tactic. The more extreme the ideal, the more it is embraced. This leads to what some have labeled a form of political insanity. I call it political suicide. History teaches us that tyrants and tyranny ultimately lose the support of the masses. Why? Because the policies implemented harm the masses.

[ … ]

The ideal of collectivism is alive and well in the neo-Democrat Party. Collectivism is what drives the followers of Marx, Mao and Mohammed, those who make up the core of the neo-Democrat Party.

[ … ]

The Democratic Party of JFK has morphed into the neo-Democrat Party by dint of constant pressure from the radicals and the constant retreat of the Jeffersonian Democrats.

Today the Democrat Party has fundamentally transformed into the party of Marx, Mao and Mohammed.

It is a struggle between the civilized man and the uncivilized man (savage).

dietrich bonhoffer quoteI expect President Obama to defend Muslims and Islam in the name of tolerance and civil rights. But whose tolerance and who’s civil rights? Not those of Christians and Jews.

Ayn Rand wrote:

“The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.”

I expect President Obama will express more absurdities, which have become his administration’s and the Democrat Party’s official ideology.

Come on, you can do it! Say “MORATORIUM”

Tashfeen Malik dhsWhere are you Virgil Goode?

Did you see that even the New York Times wrote about the female Islamic terrorist and how there was no way to “vet” her or to “screen” her as she came to live among us.  Any logical person can see that.  There was no d*** data, no biographic and biometric information to tap! And, if asked about any terror connections in personal interviews she certainly did not tell the truth.

So, don’t you wonder why only TEN US Senators can see that and that 89 others are so willfully blind. See our post on Senator Paul’s failed attempt at a moratorium on issuing visas to those coming from jihad-producing countries.

And, here see Daniel Greenfield on the killers yesterday.  If you read nothing else from Greenfield’s post, this is the line every one must grasp:

It’s a matter of simple math that as the population most likely to commit terrorist acts increases, so do the acts themselves.

I went back to our archives to see when I first heard anyone suggest a MORATORIUM on Muslim immigration and want to give a shout-out to former Virginia Congressman Virgil Goode who saw the San Bernardino slaughter coming 9 years ago!  Learn about how the politically correct harpies at the Washington Post treated him then.  His position, in support of a moratorium on legal (Muslim) immigration to America cost him his seat.  We told you more about him here in 2010.

Political correctness is dead! Everyone of you must start saying the ‘M’ word!  MORATORIUM!  Moratorium on Muslim migration to America, NOW!

Thank you Mr. Goode!  Goode is a Trump supporter in Virginia today!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada now says it will “welcome” 50,000 Syrians by the end of 2016

Ten reasons there should be a moratorium on refugee resettlement

Terrorism: Time to Take the Gloves Off

Christie swings back at Obama over women refugees comment

Le sang à la une (Blood on Page One) – How the Media Encourages Copycats – All this has to STOP!

Written by Wallace Bruschweiler and William Palumbo.

It hadn’t even been a week since Wednesday’s terrorist attack in San Bernardino, CA killed fourteen people at a Christmas party, yet by Saturday at lunch we already learned of another shooting crisis in Neenah, Wisconsin.  A hostage situation was fortunately resolved, but as a result one person was hospitalized.  Should we be at all surprised?

The tough lessons for all the media (written and television) are that endless reporting on events involving horrific violence, i.e. terrorists, only encourages copycats by psychotic individuals who are already “on the edge.”  To save innocent lives, the entire national media must cease their breathless and extended coverage of such events.

Do we really need 72+ straight hours of non-stop reporting and commentary on the San Bernardino terrorist attack?  How is the public served by perpetually airing bloody, grisly pictures of the deceased, retrieved weapons, guns and pipe bombs, etc.?  Answer: it isn’t.  In fact, the public is directly endangered by the media’s non-stop irresponsible reporting.

A tough lesson for an already unprepared, and to a certain extent, stupid media

It’s bad enough that the American and Western media are incapable of reporting the basic truth about the Obama administration; namely, that it is stacked with Islamic terrorist sympathizers, czars, etc. all the way up to the very top.  If the media had told the truth regarding Obama and his advisors, it would be well-understood that the Arab Spring was a deliberate plan to overthrow friendly governments and empower the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood in the entire North African region.

What Europe’s history of counter-terrorism can and should teach us today

Prior to the advent of global Islamic terror, the peak of leftist-inclined terrorism in Europe was during the 1970s and 1980s.  Throughout these two decades, Communist terrorist organizations such as Baader-Meinhof (aka Red Army Faction, RAF), Brigate Rosse (Red Brigades), Prima Linea, Action Directe, ETA, and IRA took hostages, kneecapped and kidnapped political leaders, and, through similar actions as the modern Muslim equivalents, tore at the fabric of civilized society.

It didn’t take long for European governments intelligence agencies to recognize a pattern: the longer that the European media publicized and covered these attacks, the more likely it is that copycats will be inspired to commit more violent crimes.  The copycats didn’t even necessarily have anything to do with the intent of the original terrorist attack.  In fact, most copycats did not.

Indeed, the majority of copycats were just psychopaths who were already on the verge of committing violence (for one reason or another, i.e. mental instability).  The consistent drumbeat of the media merely pushed them over the edge.  From time to time, this was accompanied by the help of drugs.

Although it took nearly three years of discussion, European intelligence agencies eventually persuaded their media outlets to take action.  To prevent more violence, the governments conferenced with the heads of press agencies and urged them to show restraint in their reporting.

The media was in no way prevented from reporting the terrorist attacks.  But in the end, the news cycle was shortened to save innocent lives by inspiring copycats.

Putting Profit before innocent lives

Let’s admit it: blood on the front page of the paper sells more copies (le sang à la une).  Likewise, 72 straight hours reporting the San Bernardino attack provided a boost in ratings for cable news networks, enabling them as a result to charge more to their advertisers.

Let there be no doubt about it: the flagrant irresponsibility of the American media these days extends to putting profit above lives.

For this, the media and their owners have blood on their hands.

Loretta Lynch Must Go

lorettalynchgraphicOn Thursday, Dec. 5, 2015, Attorney General Loretta Lynch threw down the gauntlet in a speech before the Muslim Advocate’s 10th Anniversary dinner in Arlington, Virginia.  Speaking just one day after Muslim terrorists, Sayed Rizwan Farook and his Saudi wife, Tashfeen Malik, murdered fourteen innocent people in an unprovoked terror attack on the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, Lynch said, “On behalf of our nation’s Justice Department, I am grateful to count you as partners in our work to promote tolerance, to ensure public safety, and to protect civil rights (emphasis added)

She went on to say, “Since becoming Attorney General last February, I have heard from Arab Americans and Muslims who say they feel uneasy about their relationship with the United States government.  Some feel that they have not been afforded the full rights of citizenship.  Others are worried about the safety of their families, communities, and places of worship.  And, too often, Muslims and Arab Americans have told me that they feel as though they are treated by their fellow citizens, by their government, and especially by those of us in law enforcement as though it were ‘us versus them.’  That is unacceptable, and it is inconsistent with what America is all about.”

So if a few Muslims are worried about the safety of their families, their communities, and their places of worship, what is that compared to the fear and dread that radical Islamists have spread among the hundreds of millions of peace-loving people of Europe and North America?  And if Muslims and Arab-Americans feel as if they are the victims of an “us versus them” political and social environment, just who do they think created that atmosphere?  It is not Christians and Jews and other non-Muslims who have rejected Muslims, it s Muslims who have come to our country and have refused to assimilate into our culture.  Not only have they not assimilated into our culture, they have let it be known that it is their intention to obliterate our culture and our form of government from the face of the Earth.

Lynch went on to say, “Muslims and Arab Americans have helped to build and strengthen our nation.  They have served as police officers, teachers, civic leaders and soldiers – strengthening their local communities and safeguarding their country.  And the cooperation of Muslim and Arab-American communities has been absolutely essential in identifying, and preventing, terrorist threats.  We must never lose sight of this.  And, as we work to create a brighter and more prosperous future, we must not fail to heed the lessons of our past.”

No one but an Obama administration toady could ever stand up in public and say with a straight face that Muslims and Arab-Americans have helped to “build and strengthen” our nation, have played a vital role in “identifying and preventing terrorist threats,” and have worked to “build a brighter and more prosperous future” for all Americans.

When asked to comment on the Obama administration’s attitude toward anti-Muslim rhetoric in the days since the Paris attacks, she said, “My message to the Muslim community is that we

stand with you in this.  Where we do see anti-Muslim rhetoric and actions turning into violence, we do take action… We have charged 225 defendants with hate crimes over the last six years… most of those in the last three years.  Since 9/11 we’ve had over 1,000 investigations into anti-Muslim hatred, including rhetoric and bigoted actions, with over forty-five prosecutions…”

She went on to say, “I think it’s important, however, that as we again talk about the importance of free speech, we make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American.  They are not who we are, they’re not what we do, and they will be prosecuted.

Looking directly into the camera, she said, “My greatest fear as a prosecutor, as someone who is sworn to the protection of all the American people, is that the rhetoric will be accompanied by acts of violence…  When it comes to combating these heinous crimes, our message is simple: If you engage in violence fueled by bigotry – no matter the object or nature of your hate – we will bring you to justice.

Lynch challenged her Muslim audience, saying, “Often, you learn of incidents before law enforcement and I encourage you to report these incidents to the Justice Department.  I assure you: each and every report of a potential hate crime is taken seriously and, as our record of recent activity makes clear, we will investigate and prosecute violations of federal law whenever we can.  Last year, two Tennessee men were sentenced to more than 14 years in prison after pleading guilty to spray painting swastikas and the words ‘white power’ on a mosque – and then starting a fire that destroyed the mosque.  And last month, an Illinois man was sentenced to one year in prison after he pleaded guilty to sending a threatening e-mail to a mosque.”

Either the attorney general has failed to notice that, in recent years, nearly every act of violence stemming from hateful rhetoric has originated in the Muslim community, or she was delivering a stern message to the Muslim community that, unless they behave themselves, they would find themselves praying to Allah five times a day from behind prison walls.  However, being Barack Obama’s principal legal henchman, it’s pretty obvious to all concerned, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that her thinly-veiled threats were directed toward non-Muslims.

Reaction to the attorney general’s threat was swift and predictable.  Radio talk show host Joe Walsh, a former congressman from Illinois’ 8th Congressional District (suburban Chicago) produced the below YouTube video describing exactly how he feels about Muslims and challenging the attorney general to have him arrested.

In his video, he said, “You come out today and you say you’re going to prosecute Americans who use anti-Muslim speech.  That doesn’t happen in this country.   I can say what I want about Christians, Jews, and Muslims.  I think Islam has a real “fricking” problem, alright?  There’s a cancer in Islam.  And if they’re not gonna’ learn to assimilate, I don’t want them in this country.

“You got a problem, Loretta Lynch, with me saying that?  Then throw me in jail.  Here… I’ll give you a perfect opportunity.  I think Islam is evil.  I think Islam’s got a huge problem.  I think most Muslims around the world are not compatible with American values.  I don’t want ‘em here.  So, what?… you’re worried about a backlash against Muslims?”

“Fourteen Americans were killed three days ago and you come up the next day and say you’re greatest fear is anti-Muslim backlash.  Well, you know what?  I hope there is a backlash.  There should be a backlash.  I’m going to encourage a backlash.  And you know what, Loretta Lynch?  If that bothers you, prosecute me.  Throw me in jail.”

In a written follow-up, Walsh argued that “most Muslims around the world are (either) terrorists, support terrorism, and/or support Sharia Law.”  He went on to say, “Any Muslim that is a terrorist or supports terrorism should be killed.  If ‘moderate’ Muslims don’t speak out against terrorism, they are our enemy and we should call them out and kick them out of this country.”

Directing his final words to Loretta Lynch, he said, “Is that ‘anti-Muslim rhetoric’ that edges toward violence?  Go ahead and prosecute me.  I dare you.”

As sharply divided as liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, are on these issues, one wonders how those liberals and Democrats who support the Obama administration’s policies on Muslim immigration would react when posed with a problem that brings the question of life-or-death a bit closer to home.

Since the San Bernardino attack, conservatives have attempted to put the Muslim immigration question into a context that even liberals can understand.  For example, on June 13, 2014, CNN reported that more than 4,000 pounds of rib-eye and other fresh beef, produced by the Fruitland American Meat Company in Jackson, Missouri, were subject to recall because of a fear that the meats could contain mad cow disease.  The meat in question was distributed by the Whole Foods distribution center in Connecticut, which services all of New England, one restaurant in New York, and one restaurant in Kansas City, Missouri.

With the understanding that northeastern liberals and Democrats appear quite willing to go along with Obama’s plan to import more than 100,000 Muslims each year because of the belief that only five out of every 100 (5%) of the world’s Muslim population are radicalized, how much of the suspect meat would New Englanders purchase if they were assured that no more than 5% of the meat was contaminated with mad cow disease?  If, as an inducement, Whole Foods reduced the price of prime filet mignon and rib-eye steaks to 50ȼ per pound, would New Englanders and New Yorkers be willing to take a chance?

For the Obama base, the low information voters of America, conservatives have restated the question in terms that even they might understand.  They were asked, “If you were presented with a bowl of 100 M&Ms and told that five of the 100 pieces were toxic (poisonous), how many pieces of candy would you eat?”  Even they, accustomed as they are to accepting “freebies,” would have sense enough to decline.

When Loretta Lynch was before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee for confirmation in April 2015, most conservatives held high hopes that she would be a welcome change from her lawless predecessor, Eric Holder.  However, all hope were dashed when Lynch refused to assure senators that, under her leadership, even the president of the United States would be required to obey the law and to uphold the U.S. Constitution.  What a disappointment she has been.  She must go.

And as for me, I’m with Joe Walsh.  If I can’t criticize radical Islamists, then come get me.

Multi-billionaire v. Multi-billionaire: Who will win?

Mike Fernandez is the multi billionaire founder of MBF Healthcare Partners, which is a private equity firm in Florida.

He lives in my home state and perhaps for good reason not just because he came here as a Cuban immigrant. It is a state on a track for an economic boom in housing and job growth.

Florida is flourishing and thriving and also recovering from the Obama – Charlie Crist era of brimstone and hail currently still being launched from the Mosque in Washington D.C., 5 times a day.

Thanks to Governor Rick Scott’s business sense and capitalist ideology businesses are flooding to the sunshine state with their capitalist cash flow. He, like Donald Trump are capitalists who surround themselves with very smart people who get things done and create jobs.

Mike Fernandez came to Florida after immigrating from Cuba in 1964 at the age of 12. He owns the 4,000 acre Little River Plantation and 25,000 acres of property in Alabama.

His charity work includes a family foundation that has given away tens of millions of dollars. He is a good man when it comes to philanthropy.

His political mindset on the other hand is way off in left field. Perhaps deep down inside he is a left-winger and stays in the closet.

He calls himself a conservative yet he backs Obama’s unconstitutional opening of diplomatic relations with Communist Cuba (Still not approved by the U.S. Congress) while his fellow Cubans still rot in jails for their beliefs not so much for their crimes.

Mr. Hernandez is so upset at the Republican majority who are behind Mr. Trump and not his man- cub Jeb Bush he is almost on his last wits end.

Remember Jeb is the guy trying to federalize our schools across the nation in step with Obama’s Common Core UN ideology.

Mr. Hernandez was also an early supporter of Mitt Romney. Mitt is the guy that laid the ground work for Obama care in Massachusetts. Follow the money. Mr. Hernandez is a health care magnate!

Mr. Hernandez is now running front page ads against Mr. Trump. Its a billionaire verses a billionaire. A match up in the political ring.

Mr. Trump just shrugs his shoulders and looks at his lead in the polls. He is not going to waste money paying for ads in newspapers to feed the Obama stenographers in the liberal media.

Who will win? I say Mr. Trump will win.

Mr. Hernandez compares Mr. Trump to Hitler and Mussolini and other nefarious characters in our history but excludes Fidel Castro from the line up. That my friends is unusual.

Castro is an enemy of freedom and perhaps Mr. Hernandez still has an affiliation with his cause. Just my opinion.

Why he even stated if given a choice we would vote for Hillary Clinton over Mr. Trump. Hillary.

Hillary got an ambassador, 2 Navy SEALs and an aid killed then his boy Jeb presented Hillary a Freedom Medal on the eve of that event. A slap in the face to freedom.

Perhaps Hilary was trying to cover up Obama’s gun running operation from Libya to his Islamic State army in Syria.

I am assuming Hillary can still operate as a president from a federal prison after she is jailed for using an insecure server to handle and transmit Top Secret information regarding the National Security of this nation.

Maybe she will just get away with a heavy fine and lose her security clearance. How does one perform one’s duties as the Commander-in-Chief without a security clearance?

If Mr. Hernandez is now behind Hillary because his boy is 30 points behind Mr. Trump perhaps he should send her some of his capital. Perhaps a pay pal transmission through her foundation. Mix it in with some of that Saudi money.

Mr. Fernandez may have the cash but Mr. Fernandez is too thin skinned for politics and should continue to stick to his philanthropic work which we salute. Great job.

He could not even handle a little jiving from some of Rick Scott’s superstars so he departed ways from Governor Scotts massive success bringing I am assuming his ball with him.

Mr. Trump cannot be bought, he cannot be influenced by corporate money, nobody owns him and he will be elected the next President of the United States. He will make America great again.

I wish Mr. Hernandez well and look forward to seeing his face when Mr. Trump gets sworn in on January 20th 2017.

Is this a picture of: 1.) A disgruntled employee or 2.) A dead soldier of the Islamic State?

When President Obama’s Department of Defense cannot name the enemy how can his Department of Justice?

It is really sad to see the FBI, formerly the worlds premiere investigative agency reduced by President Obama to a stumbling, bumbling risk-averse group of highly trained, frustrated men and women.

Obama and his Department of Justice (DOJ) have handcuffed these excellent agents with “rules of engagement” that, a priori, rule out establishing an investigative predicate that puts Islamic jihad attack as the most logical operational theory upon which to conduct the investigation.

Nope, not in Obama’s Islamic theater of the absurd which says:“whatever just happen with those two Muslims shooting, killing and bombing a bunch of innocent people, it had NOTHING to do with Islam.”

In the old days, good gumshoe cops would look at two killers dressed for combat, with redundant weapons and ammo, combined with deadly bombs, dedicated to Islam and simply say “well, boys, we got ourselves some Muslim terrorists,” now let’s go solve this case. As they begin their unfettered investigation based upon the most reasonable theory they would eliminate “Muslim terrorists” when the facts dictated such a decision

This is the exact opposite of how America now operates.

Today, due to the Obama restrictive and destructive “rules of investigative engagement” our law enforcement agencies have to assemble a 1000 piece terror attack jigsaw puzzle with 500 of the pieces missing from the box.

If any agents complain about the missing pieces, they are condemned by terrorist groups like CAIR, written up by their superiors, admonished by the President and ISIS laughs all the way to the Caliphate.

For the observant thinker this is “rules of engagement deja vu,” all over again. We have seen this Obama mess, the inability to see Islamic Jihad (even when it shoots us right in the face) on the battlefields of the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Down range, our war-fighters are so restricted by Obama’s Department of Defense (DOD) that elite special operators like the U.S. Navy SEALs, Army Rangers and Delta, are now required to become “experts” in drinking tea with the enemy.

Drinking tea with the enemy…and you ask why we can’t figure out what happened in San Bernardino? 

Unquestionably, GROSS INCOHERENCE.

In an effort to turn this sinking ship around, The United West and a team of experts are producing an investigative documentary about the cover-up of the shoot down of SEAL Team Six, on helicopter Extortion 17, August 6, 2011, Afghanistan. Our goal, in addition to honoring our thirty fallen heroes is to change the absurd, destructive combat “rules of engagement,” so that our war-fighters can fight wars to win!

Maybe, just maybe, our movie can even impact the absurd, destructive investigative “rules of engagement,” so that our great men and women fighting the SAME jihadis on the home front will have a better chance to win this very long and very deadly war.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook on the street is courtesy of TMZ.com. To learn more about FALLEN ANGEL: Cover-up of the Shoot Down of SEAL Team Six click here.

Muslim Terrorists Target Christmas in California

For the last 2 plus weeks I have been in the hospital fighting a severe infection.  This is so small in comparison to what Christians and Jews around the world are fighting and with little or no tools to solve the out of control Islamic terrorist invasion of the free world.  I had antibiotics, the free world has no such medicine to cure the cancerous growth of Islam, the Muslims who follow the laws of their Prophet Mohammed, and the people who are at the top of the chain in the name of Islam, the Islamic terrorists who are in every city around the world.

During my hospital stay I had a few hours to watch the actors and actresses who pose as journalists try to figure out why the two Muslim terrorists targeted the people at a Christmas meeting.  This is the answer.  The two Muslims were ‘Pure Muslims’ who had reached the utopia of their religion.  They were jihadists.  Prophet Mohammed described the people as the closest to Islam.  These two Muslims had connections with the attendees at the Christmas meeting.  Also the media, politicians, or law enforcement will never tell you, I am confident the majority of the people attending the meeting were Christians or Jews who came to support their friends and co-workers.  This was a Christmas event filled with people who Mohammed has directed to be killed in every corner of the world. This was a perfect place and target for the young Muslim couple.  They murdered and if not killed, they would have continued to murder many more in the following days or weeks.

We must understand there are Muslim couples in every mosque who will their life to Allah, Mohammed, Sharia, and the Quran.  In the coming days the media will come up with ‘angles’ to show how loving this couple had been, and what great parents they were to their baby.  The reality is a ‘Pure Muslim’ has no moral character, does not love, and hold no maternal or paternal love for even their own babies.  They will drop them off at any time they feel Mohammed is calling them into action.

A few days ago while in the hospital I heard an alleged counter-terrorism expert say there are 80 ‘dangerous’ mosques in America.  I ask readers to reject this silliness but instead to adhere to the following on my analysis of Islam.

There are over 2300 mosques in America.  The Mapping Sharia Project in which I was the Director rated mosques from 1 – 10 based on the mosque followers adherence to Sharia law.  Essentially the closer the Muslim worshippers and Imams came to the total adherence and acceptance to Sharia law, the higher their rating and concern for potential violence generating from this mosque.  Since this survey in 2008/2009 in which my team and I visited over 200 mosques, and since I have conducted research at another 75.

The so called CT experts have used various aspects of the Mapping Sharia Project and other firsthand research we have conducted to come up with ‘catchy’ media flashes so the news organization can have an interesting angle on Islamic terrorism in America.  Don’t get confused that the high profile journalists who search for self proclaimed CT experts to come onto TV/Radio and provide them a news flash so their ratings will go up.

I challenge you to ask anyone on Fox, any CT expert used as an analysts, or any conservative politician if the world is at war with Islam itself.  Ask them if Islam was founded on peace and love.  Each one will deny we are at war with Islam.  They will all say Islam was meant to be a peaceful religion.   We all know the liberals believe Islam is loving and peaceful, but conservatives do expect some leading conservatives to provide the truth to Americans about Islam.

As I mentioned there are over 2300 mosques in America.  Only a naïve CT expert would come up with a number that are dangerous.  For instance 80 mosques in America.  The actual answer to how many mosques are dangerous is each and every one.  If there are 2300 then 2300 are dangerous and have the potential for violence.

Over and over I emphasize the Islam is not peaceful, the Quran is not compatible with our U.S. Constitution, and any person who follows the dangerous and satanic ideology of Islam is neither a good person or an American.  It is not me who inform Muslims in America to hold no allegiance to America, it is Islamic terrorist organization such as CAIR.  This is in their pamphlets.

In conclusion. We are not at war with Al Qaeda or ISIS.  They are just players for a large team called Islam.  The world is at war with Islam.  We must put a bitter taste in people’s minds when they hear anything associated with Islam, just as we were able to do with the Nazis.

VIDEO: Geert Wilders — Turks not welcome in Europe

Do you recall what we said when the EU caved on negotiations with Erdogan granting his Islamist government 3 billion Euros to fund those Syrian refugee camps from which hundreds of thousand have fled to enter the EU and broken borderless Schengen system. Among that stream of refugees and migrants were two suicide bombers who claimed lives in the November 13th Paris massacres. To top things off, the bureaucrats in Brussels agreed to accession negotiations and easy Visas for entry. I said that Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Freedom Party would be among the first to object.

As night follows day, Wilders has issued this YouTube video with Turkish subtitles saying that Erdogan’s Islamist government is unwelcome in Europe and that Turkey is not European.

We note that the latest Maurice de Hond political polls in The Netherlands show that if a snap election was held to day that Wilders PVV (Freedom Party) would claim 39 seats in the Hague Parliament and that current PM Rutte’s ruling VVD party in the coalition would drop from 20 to less than ten seats. Thus indicating that the majority of the Dutch polity are responding to his arguments about stopping mass Muslim immigration, denying citizenship and ejection of returning Dutch ISIS fighters, asserting national sovereignty over borders and focusing priorities on domestic health and pensioner needs.

A recent Dutch Metro interview with Wilders asked, if he was chosen to head a ruling coalition in the event of a snap or the next general parliamentary election whether the PVV might have qualified cabinet members. That is an indication that the mainstream Dutch media is taking seriously, his inexorable rise in the polls. Perhaps that message will also get through to the Hague Public Prosecutors and the Judge who will preside in the Kafkaesque ” fewer Moroccans” show trial in early 2016. Kol Hakavod to one of Israel’s best friends in the not so friendly EU with its ridiculous BDS ‘labeling’ nonsense.

Geert Wilders tells Turks: Turkey not welcome in Europe

Today, PVV-leader Geert Wilders released a video, subtitled in Turkish, adressing the Turkish people. Your country does no belong in Europe and will never be…

Note Wilders’ response to this Question from the December 1, 2015 Metro interview: Question: What will be the milestones of a Wilders cabinet?

Wilders: We do not have a two-party system, so we will have to deal with other parties. But a Wilders cabinet will reclaim Dutch national sovereignty. We want to be masters again of our own currency, our own laws and our own borders. And yes, this means that we will have to exit the European Union. Last year, we had this scenario researched. Provided that one keeps access to the single European market, an EU exit will cost money in the first year, but will be beneficial from the second year on. The British research bureau Capital Economics researched this and, according to its NExit report, this scenario is realistic. Other countries are dependent on transit through the Netherlands and, if they do not allow us access to the internal market, it will also be negative for them. It would be great if, like Switzerland, we would again be able to make our own decisions. I want the Netherlands to be a proud and sovereign country again and I believe that, in order to have a true democracy, one needs a nation state with a common culture, identity and flag.

People need to know who they are; Europe costs us a lot of money, while we hardly have anything to say.

RELATED ARTICLE: President Jimmy Carter Banned Iranians from coming to the United States during the Hostage Crisis

San Bernardino: Another Muslim Slaughter, Another Cover-Up

In FrontPage today I explain why mainstream media reporters don’t even need to show up for work. They can file their stories beforehand.

Syed Rizwan Malik

Syed Rizwan Malik

The San Bernardino jihad massacre is the latest jihad atrocity, but it’s just like the last one, and just like the next one: it has played out in exactly the same way that the last jihad atrocity did, and in just the same way that the next one will play out as well. Mass killings by “radicalized” Muslims are followed by earnest statements from the President and the mainstream media that we must not rush to judgment, that the motive of the shooters was unclear, that we need gun control, that we need to address the real threat of climate change, that Muslims fear “Islamophobia,” and so on. It’s always a new massacre, but it’s always the same story.

Surely by now mainstream media reporters don’t even need to roll out of bed to file their stories. How much legwork does it take to write, “Syed Farook and Tashfeen Melik murdered 14 people at a Christmas party in San Bernardino; yes, Farook was a devout Muslim, but authorities are searching for a motive; moderate Muslims condemned the attack and said they feared anti-Muslim backlash”? Change the names and date, change the number of victims and the place, and they’ve filed that story dozens of times. They can just take out their last New York Times or CNN piece on the Paris jihad attack, change the details, hit send, and pour a cold one.

A few years ago, a couple of writers for Salon.com showed up at a panel at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on which I was speaking, and were deservedly ridiculed after they were caught writing their story before the panel had even begun. But you can’t really blame them for trying to save some time: their story was going to be the same “Racist Bigoted Islamophobes Say Egregiously Evil Things” no matter what anyone on the panel really did say, so why not get a head start on the writing?

Tashfeen Malik

Tashfeen Malik

With San Bernardino, and every jihad attack, it works the same way. The media trims the facts to fit the Procrustean bed of their narrative, such that, in this case, most of the American public will likely never hear that San Bernardino jihad murderer Syed Farook had been “radicalized”; or that he had been in touch with Muslims being investigated for jihad terror activity; or that he spent his free time in the mosque, memorizing the Qur’an.

If they do hear about such things at all from the mainstream media, their significance won’t be explained: no one on CBS or NBC or ABC or PBS or NPR or in the New York Times or the Washington Post will remind his or her audience that the Islamic State and other jihad groups consider themselves to be at war with the United States, and have explicitly and repeatedly called upon Muslims in the U.S. to commit mass murder of American civilians. Would anyone have wondered about the motive of a German national who slaughtered fourteen Americans on U.S. soil in 1943? Of course no one would have, but that was a long time ago. Now we are engaged in a great ignored war, a war that only one side is fighting, a war in which enemy combatants are tried in civilian courts – as if they were criminals, not enemy soldiers — by a government that desperately wishes to maintain the illusion that there is no war at all.

This play has played to rapt audiences in Boston and Fort Hood, and all over the country. It is so familiar that all the players hit their marks with the nonchalant and unthinking precision of the overtrained. But it needs to close. The endless proclamations after every jihad attack, that it has nothing to do with Islam, and that Muslims are the real victims, are not only ludicrous; they’re offensive. The mainstream media and the Obama Administration have insulted the intelligence of Americans long enough. Their denial and willful ignorance are endangering us all, as they continue to behave after every jihad attack that their primary duty is not protecting Americans, but protecting Islam’s image.

San Bernardino has so far been just another production of this dreary little play, but it still has a chance to be much more than that. If Americans see the real lessons of San Bernardino and no longer accept this nonsense we are being fed; if we demand of our elected officials and presidential candidates that they must speak the truth about this threat we are facing, and formulate realistic ways to counter it, or their political careers will be over; if we no longer accept this endless portrayal of Muslims as beleaguered victims of “Islamophobia” after every murder of non-Muslims by Muslims – then San Bernardino could be a defining moment.

But for that to happen, people would have to be informed as to the true parameters of this issue, and those who are charged with informing them are instead doing all they can to spread disinformation. So San Bernardino will fade in memory once it is replaced by the next jihad carnage. And that one won’t have anything to do with Islam, either. Journalists can get their stories ready now, so that when that carnage comes, they can just fill in the requisite blanks and be the first to file. In fact, they better have five or ten jihad attack story templates ready. They’re going to need them.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Reuters: “Muslim Americans fear demonization of Islam after mass shooting”

Chris Hayes, MSNBC absolutely baffled as to SB jihadi murderer’s motive

‘I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State’

“MASS SHOOTING: San Bernardino female attacker pledged allegiance to ISIS, officials say,” by Vince Cestone, CNN, December 3, 2015:

UPDATE – Friday 7:31 AM As the San Bernardino attack was happening, investigators believe the female shooter, Tashfeen Malik, posted on Facebook, pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.

The posting was by Malik made on an account with a different name, according to one U.S. official. The officials did not explain how they knew Malik made the post.

WATCH the above video to hear a first responder’s account of the shooting, as well as the full Thursday night press conference.

SAN BERNARDINO (CNN, KRON) — Syed Rizwan Farook — who along with his wife, Tashfeen Malik, carried out the San Bernardino shooting massacre — apparently was radicalized and in touch with people being investigated by the FBI for international terrorism, law enforcement officials said Thursday.

Farook’s apparent radicalization contributed to his role in the mass shooting of 14 people Wednesday during a holiday party for the San Bernardino County health department, where Farook worked, sources said. The names of the victims were released Thursday evening.

Still, the radicalization wasn’t necessarily the only driver behind the carnage, as workplace grievances might have also played a role. President Barack Obama hinted as much Thursday when he said that the attackers may have had “mixed motives.”…

RELATED ARTICLE: Video: Robert Spencer on Hannity: the SB jihad attack and jihad denial

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of ABC News.

San Bernardino Shooting: Political Correctness Kills, Again

There was a tragic incident of climate change Wednesday, or so Barack Obama might say. As I was driving home that evening listening to the still sparse details on the San Bernardino shooting, the news report informed that there were two dead suspects, a man and woman. So I already knew more than the authorities were telling: I figured the two assailants were non-white, almost certainly Muslim. After all, if the police knew their sexes, they knew what they looked like. And if they’d been white, it would have been announced right away.

You see, I know the drill. When the suspects are non-white, politically correct authorities will never mention it for fear of condemnation. “Why are you calling attention to their race or ethnicity?!” they’ll be asked. Of course, they didn’t mind calling attention to their sex. In the leftist upside-down world, all characteristics are equal, but some are more equal than others. Really, the more consistently PC way of describing the terrorists would have been as “two sentient bipeds.” Because, you know, four legs good, two legs bad.

Then there’s the following, from CBS Los Angeles:

A man who has been working in the [Redlands] area [of terrorist Syed Farook’s home] said he noticed a half-dozen Middle Eastern men in the area in recent weeks, but decided not to report anything since he did not wish to racially profile those people.

“We sat around lunch thinking, ‘What were they doing around the neighborhood?’” he said.  “We’d see them leave where they’re raiding the apartment.”

Does it occur to this man that, in a way, he has blood on his hands? We don’t have to ask if it occurs to the media, academia and entertainment culture-killers who conditioned him to be politically correct that they also have blood on theirs. They probably blame the San Bernardino (SB) climate-change incident on white microaggressions.

It’s not that liberals don’t engage in profiling; it’s just that they do it all wrong. MSNBC wasted no time profiling the terrorists as possible pro-lifers, pointing out that a Planned Butcherhood facility was “just a few blocks away.” And recently, liberal senator Sherrod Brown averred that white males were a bigger threat to America than Muslim jihadists (this may be true about white males such as Sherrod Brown).

Downtown Brown was, of course, talking about mass shootings such as Columbine and Sandy Hook. He completely ignored that such incidents aren’t classified as terrorism for the simple reason that they’re not terrorism; they’re not generally perpetrated in the name of a cause but are the work of deranged minds. But no matter. The whole point is based on a lie to begin with.

As I reported last year using statistical analysis, it is a myth that an inordinate percentage of mass shooters are white.

In reality, mass shooters’ racial and ethnic backgrounds (insofar as major groups go) reflect the demographics of the overall U.S. population almost perfectly; the only exception is Asians, who, interestingly, are somewhat overrepresented. But, hey, the media have their narrative. And they’re stickin’ to it.

“Narrative,” you may note, was once used mainly in reference to fiction. I suppose it still is. And perhaps that’s a better name for our Teleprompter-reading “reporters”: narrators.

This brings us to the other Teleprompter reader, our Narrator in Chief. Obama called for gun control soon after news of the SB shooting broke, when what’s really needed is immigration control. But then Mr. Hussein couldn’t import any more refujihadis (hat tip: an American Thinker reader), who we know for a fact are coming in with the Mideastern Muslim migrants because the latter cannot be vetted. But, you know, eggs and omelets.

Obama never feels constrained by facts, but he probably assumed that, whoever the SB assailants were and whatever their motives, the guns just had a mind of their own. Perhaps he ought to recruit Little Lord Fauntleroy’s recessive-gene twin, Piers Morgan, to tell us how much lower gun-control poster boy Britain’s murder rate is than ours. Except that New Hampshire — with a higher gun-ownership rate than the U.K. — has a lower homicide rate. This is despite it, frighteningly, being just chock full of those dreaded white males (N.H. is 91.3 percent non-Hispanic white, versus 62.1 percent for the U.S. overall). And Dr. Thomas Sowell tells us there just might be a connection there.

Returning to profiling, there are other connections we could make. I am a member of one of the most profiled group in the nation: males. Police view males far more suspiciously than females because males commit an inordinate amount of crime. But if this is just, is it not also just to apply the exact same standard to all other groups that commit an inordinate amount of crime? And if so-called “racial profiling” is “racist” and is verboten, isn’t sex profiling sexist? Shouldn’t it be eliminated with the same vigor?

Oh, yeah, four legs good, two legs bad.

Profiling is simply a method by which we can make determinations based on scant information in situations in which obtaining more information is not feasible. In the realm of policing and personal safety, it enables us to determine the probability that a given individual has committed a crime or has criminal intent. And we all engage in profiling, mind you, such as when avoiding a group of rough-hewn young men walking down the street or being distrustful of a sleazy-looking used-car salesman. Doctors do it when assessing what conditions and diseases a patient is likely to have (Pima Indians have the nation’s highest diabetes rate; blacks have high rates of prostate cancer). Children do it when being wary of petting strange dogs.

And then childishly destructive people tell us we should do it in every way — but one.

We can profile people based on sex, age, the car they drive, dress and even race. For instance, police may stop a white man driving through a bad inner-city neighborhood in an expensive car, figuring the probability is relatively high that he’s there to buy drugs. But this willingness to “racially profile” goes out the window when the matter is politically favored groups. That, my friends, is unjust discrimination. That is prejudice.

And it’s dangerous.

This aversion to politically incorrect “racial profiling” is even more ridiculous when the matter is Muslims. Note, low-info narrators, “Muslim” is not a race. It refers to a group defined by a set of beliefs, or doctrines. And since actions originate with thoughts, what you believe matters and is the best predictor of behavior. If you want to find a good prospective soldier or UFC cage fighter, for instance, you don’t look among the Amish.

Referring to the SB terrorism and pushing gun control, the NY Daily News’ Thursday cover reads, “GOD ISN’T FIXING THIS.” No, He’s not. For He gives us free will, and you liberals are using yours wrongly and destructively. And you won’t fix it, either, because you’re spiritually diseased.

It will only be fixed by a sea-change in American culture, an about-face where political correctness becomes so stigmatized that exhibiting it means character and career destruction in the same way that being politically incorrect does today.

Political correctness kills. And for America to survive, it must die.

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

United Nations Agenda 2030 — A Primer by Sharon Shaw

Late last month, here, we mentioned that the United Nations-driven Agenda 2030 now involves the use of ‘refugees’ migrating around the world as an important tool for The Agenda.

On September 27, 2015, Obama presented remarks at the UN Agenda 2030 closing session. His drive to pour third world refugees into your towns and cities is a major objective of this agenda and so, as we have reported, he is pretty darn angry at any of you trying to impede the directives he has been given from on high. See his speech here.

A reader, Sharon Shaw, from Kentucky has been following the issue closely and has offered to provide us with a series of informational pieces to help bring us all up to speed on the larger agenda designed to destroy individual freedom, and diminish American sovereignty and power as decisions for our future would be made at an international level.

This is not in the realm of conspiracy theories, they are right up front about it.  So, maybe if we have that understanding from the beginning we won’t waste a lot of time asking, is it happening, why is it happening and just get to work defeating them!

Agenda 2030 is Agenda 21 on steroids, she says!

Here is Sharon ….

Agenda 2030:  Interpreting the components

You will likely be hearing more about the UN’s Agenda 2030 in the upcoming months.  What is it?  It is the UN’s Agenda 21 on steroids.  Agenda 21 was presented to 178 world leaders at the UN Earth Summit in 1992.  The US was among the participants and the President, George H.W. Bush and his administration began adopting parts of the agenda into American laws and lives.

President Clinton, in 1993, signed Executive Order 12852 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21.

Fast forward to September 2015:  The UN holds another world summit with hundreds of world leaders “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”  It is basically Agenda 21 revised, but its intentions are much more far-reaching to change the planet according to UN guidance.  Posing as an altruistic plan for the good of all mankind, this plan is designed to rob individuals of freedoms through its mandates and to take individual countries’ sovereignties away.

What does all this have to do with refugee resettlement?  The two go hand-in-hand, literally one supporting the other so to speak.  The main goal, as stated by the UN, is sustainable development.  Although there are 17 goals included in Agenda 2030,

What is sustainable development?  According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to “integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity.”  Authors of Agenda 2030 insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

In the Agenda 2030 document, under the heading “The New Agenda”, para. 29:

“We recognize the positive contribution of migrants for inclusive growth and sustainable development. We also recognize that international migration is a multi-dimensional reality of major relevance for the development of countries of origin, transit and destination, which requires coherent and comprehensive responses. We will cooperate internationally to ensure safe, orderly and regular migration involving full respect for human rights and the humane treatment of migrants regardless of migration status, of refugees and of displaced persons. Such cooperation should also strengthen the resilience of communities hosting refugees, particularly in developing countries. We underline the right of migrants to return to their country of citizenship, and recall that States must ensure that their returning nationals are duly received.”

This statement boldly defines the “open borders” policies adopted by the European Union, policies which, as currently evidenced, have failed miserably.  At its core, Agenda 2030 is a methodology utilizing refugee resettlement as a tool for this “new universal Agenda” (quote from Agenda 2030 preamble).

Stay tuned for our next article exploring Agenda 2030 as we delve into its components and what it means for our country, and, indeed, all nations.

Thank you Sharon!

We have an entire category here at RRW entitled, Comments worth noting/guest posts where you will find this archived for future reference.

Related information:  I’m finding that few people even know about Obama’s Task Force on New Americans which was finalized back in April.  Here is the report which lays out very clearly how Obama is changing America by changing the people and how that fits very nicely with plans coming down from the United Nations level (and whoever runs the UN!). 

One final thought….every time there is a slaughter of innocents by devout Muslims (who don’t want the UN agenda! They have their own!), as we saw in San Bernardino this week, it sets the UN/Obama agenda back as more Americans wake up to the migration piece of the plan to control us. I think that is why we don’t see a normal sad emotional response from our dear leader.  I believe deep down he is feeling it’s another setback to The Agenda because more Americans will be wakened and objecting to the transformation of their cities!

Don’t forget!  If you want to stop the migration this is where we start…..

Action Alert:  Call your members of the House and Senate at 202-224-3121 and ask them to vigorously oppose the Refugee Resettlement funding contained in the Omnibus Spending Bill that will be voted on by 12-11-15! Please call by this Friday, Dec. 4th.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of United States President Barack Obama addressing the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters, Monday, Sept. 28, 2015. AP Photo/Mary Altaffer.