VIDEO: How do you tell when a civilization is dangerously close to collapse?

CIVILIZATION IDENTITY will he increasingly important in the future, and the world will be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations. These include Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African civilization. The most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another. – Samuel P. Huntington, Foreign Affairs, Volume 72, Number 3.

Huntington warned:

On both sides the interaction between Islam and the West is seen as a clash of civilizations. The West’s “next confrontation,” observes M. J. Akbar, an Indian Muslim author, “is definitely going to come from the Muslim world. It is in the sweep of the Islamic nations from the Maghreb to Pakistan that the struggle for a new world order will begin.” Bernard Lewis comes to a similar conclusion:

We are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations—the perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both.

[Emphasis added]

Huntington wrote the above in an article published in 1993 titled “The Clash of Civilizations?

Paul Weston explains, in the video below, that when one civilization fails to see the existential threats from another, the collapse of one is inevitable.

Hunting concluded his article with these prophetic words:

Western civilization is both Western and modern. Non-Western civilizations have attempted to become modern without becoming Western.

And so it is today, more than ever.

RELATED ARTICLE: 39 of the Most Influential Islamist Activists in America

RELATED VIDEO: Killing for a Cause: Sharia Law & Civilization Jihad

Bill Clinton Summons Attorney General Lynch To His Private Jet … Why?

Just hours ago, on the west side of Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix, Arizona in a secure area, former President Bill Clinton met current US Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the Clinton plane. Bill Clinton was about to depart Phoenix Sky Harbor in his private jet when he learned the Attorney General was inbound and on final approach. Clinton parked his jet and awaited the touchdown of the AG’s plane.

Clinton had staff summon Attorney General Lynch for an impromptu meeting aboard the Clinton plane which she agreed to even though the Phoenix Police Department was awaiting the Attorney General’s arrival for her speech and meeting with Phoenix Police Department, and the plan for Phoenix PD to become part of the United Nations International Police Force (UNPOL).

Call it a coincidence, but the appearance of the former President summoning the current Attorney General of the United States to his plane at a critical time when Clinton’s wife is under active investigation by the Department of Justice (Loretta Lynch is the boss at DOJ), and it will be Lynch making the decision as to whether or not to prosecute Bill Clinton’s wife on a variety of possible charges, including but not limited to; Treason, and this meeting at this time is highly questionable with bad optics.

But then again one must care whether it really matters what the appearance looks like, especially if no national media will say a word or raise a concern, nor will anyone in high elected office. Such is the life of an Elite…you pretty much get to do whatever the hell you want with no opposition, no accountability, not even a question raised. Try something like this when you are not a member of the Elite Club and see what happens. You surely will not be given the benefit of the doubt.

Hillary Clinton raised countless millions of dollars for the Clinton Foundation during her tenure as US Secretary of State. Millions and into the hundreds of millions of dollars from rogue leaders running rogue nations and regimes who oppose the United States, and even treat our country as an enemy, but whose money is just as spendable as the next guys.

Bill Clinton surely has a stake in keeping Hillary from being indicted. But I am sure all the former president wanted to share with the current Attorney General was a baby picture of the new Clinton grandchild.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Bill Clinton & Loretta Lynch meeting: ‘Incredibly bad judgment’

Lynch pressured to recuse herself after Clinton tarmac meeting

Attorney General Loretta Lynch Met Privately With Bill Clinton

Democrats groan after Bill Clinton meets Loretta Lynch – POLITICO

Lynch to Accept FBI Recommendations in Clinton Email Inquiry, Official Says

RELATED VIDEO:  “Lies, Lies, Lies.” Former Navy SEAL Dom Raso calls out Hillary Clinton’s false claims of having dodged sniper fire as dishonorable and proof that she is unworthy to be president.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch at the Phoenix airport is courtesy of Channel 15 ABC News in Arizona. Loretta Lynch was appointed lead federal prosecutor in the New York area by Bill Clinton in the 90’s. She also worked on Hillary Clinton’s defense team during the white water trials in Arkansas. The FBI is conducting two investigations against Hillary Clinton and her husband. The first deals with the email server, the second with the Clinton Foundation.

Whigs to Republican to Whigs

Back in the days when our school-marms and teachers were teaching civics, they left certain important elements out, such as learning the mistakes recorded in history that should never be repeated.  Alas, even during the times I was in school this was never taught.  Today, it has gotten worse.

These things I am talking about is not slavery, or things of that matter, but, the indices of politics and politicians.  We are witnessing today what was witnessed at the little schoolhouse in the earlier 1800s, when Abraham Lincoln emerged as the leader of the new “Republican Party”.

In simple terms, this Republican Party was inclusive of the people of the United States.  It included ALL groups of people then, as it should now.  The dissidents then were the Whig Party.  This Party was the party of big business, oil, donors and corporate welfare.  Although, corporate welfare was not a term used then, it certainly was a player in politics, as it is a player today.  The Whig Party excluded the typical American for money and power.

History learned in school did not fill in the blanks and we are seeing, today, some of the blanks being filled in.  The words that are being entered into these blanks were probably seen by Abraham Lincoln, plus others of that time period and are being reflected today.  The statements being said by the Whigs are the same statements being said by the Republicans today.

The Republican Party, in whom they claim to be the “Party of Lincoln”, have slowly regressed to being the Whig Party.  The Party of Lincoln, considering, is gone.  The “All for one and one for all”, (the Big Tent of Reagan) has left the American people behind to pursue those interests of donors, lobbyists, corporate welfare and a host of other Whig policies.

What we are seeing today is a rise in a new stance in Republican politics and politics in general.  It has sparked a new meaning in which the American people are allowed to say again what should have been said years ago, but has been stifled by the Republican Party of today.

This new stance has been marked at the ballot box.  The one name that has come out on top at most ballot boxes was Donald Trump.  Donald Trump is saying what the American people has been saying for years, but afraid of governmental repercussions.  Donald Trump poses a threat to the status quo.  This status quo is nothing more than the dynasties of the Bush and the Clintons.  The dynasty of the Clintons, more so, than the Bush dynasty, has much to lose.

This election will be another turning point in American politics.  Trump, if he becomes the president, will mark a turning point, whereas, the other turning points, was Lincoln when he included all Americans.  Another was Ronald Reagan when he succeeded in breaking up the Soviet Union.  The importance of this turning point today, is that the Republican Party is losing their grip on the American people.  The elites of the Republican Party have tried everything they could to defeat Donald Trump and the American electorate would have none of it.

As of late, a federal lawsuit has been filed by a sore loser, a Virginia Cruz delegate to release the bound delegates to Trump to vote for whomever they want.  As in my home State of Washington, all of the bound delegates are Cruz supporters.  If this lawsuit is successful in releasing all of Trump’s delegates and another person is nominated, the sore losers will have destroyed the Republican Party.  A form that is being passed around the internet by, “Save Our Party”, has Glenn Beck’s fingerprints all over it.

This destruction will lead to a 5-way race.  Hillary Clinton; Gary Johnson; Jill Stein; Donald Trump and the “new” GOP Nominee (probably Cruz).  Trump, may as well be prepared to run as a write-in candidate.  When the dust settles and the smoke clears, Hillary will be president.  This is what the elite Republicans want and this is what they will get.

Upon the return about history, schools never teach the mistakes that historians have recorded.  To go back and study the history that was never taught, will be much too late.  The today’s Whig Party is repeating the original Whig Party and what the American people will be left with is a country that has no purpose.  We will have a single party rule, though, the Democrats and Republicans does exist, their ties have been getting closer together.  The laws created by one party, benefits the other party and the American people will suffer under the laws made for the elites.

Would You Want To Know if the Islamic State Wanted to Kill You?

We asked our readers if the FBI should tell people who are on an Islamic State kill list that they had been marked for execution.

The FBI neglected to tell Americans whose names were released on an Islamic State kill list that they had been targeted.

Clarion Project asked our subscribers whether they thought the FBI has a duty to inform people if they are on a terrorist kill list.

The results: Out of  2,391 people who responded, 93 percent said “YES” and less than two percent said “NO.”

Here are some the comments that accompanied the vote:

People wanted to make sure they could take steps to protect themselves:

“I believe everyone put on a hit list should be notified of that fact. That way they can take precautions to hopefully save their lives.”

“So I could take measures to protect myself.”

Many were skeptical about the efficacy of government protection:

“I don’t believe the government would take the list seriously, I personally would want to protect myself as well as have the FBI help, if they actually would”

“I want to be able to protect myself and my family. The FBI can only protect so many people at once. I want to be prepared if I need to be.”

Some mentioned the second amendment

“The FBI does not have enough people to protect all those on the list. It is my right by the 2nd Amendment to be able to protect myself. If I know I am on the list I can alter my life to help protect myself and not make myself such an easy target.”

Others wanted a warning to get ready:

“Forewarned is forearmed.”

“If someone is coming to try and kill me I would like some warning.”

And spoke about a “right to know”:

Yes, because of freedom”

“If I go to the doctor and he see’s something wrong, I have a right to know what it is so I can seek treatment, as with ISIS kill list. If my name is on that list I have a right to know so that I can prepare to protect myself and my family against any attack by them, it’s that simple.”

“I find it outrageous the government is not informing citizens that are on ISIS kill list.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Turkey, Why Now? ISIS Suspected in Airport Attack

Al-Qaeda: Kill Whites or US Won’t Think Its Jihad

FBI Fails to Inform Citizens They Are on an ISIS Kill List

ISIS Releases Video of Attack on ‘American Jordanian’ Base

Film ‘Beneath the Helmet’ attacked by a UC Irvine mob shouting “Intifada”

Last month the film Beneath the Helmet, was attacked by a mob shouting “Intifada” at a campus screening at University of California, Irvine (UCI).

Beneath the Helmet: From High School to the Home Front explores five young soldiers personal lives, dreams, fears and dilemmas, revealing the human side of Israel’s military and the inspiring young people who make up the IDF. Here is the official trailer:

under the helmet event audience

Under the Helmet event audience at UC Irvine.

Here are just a few articles about the incident:

We mounted a full response which included a “response screening” of Beneath the Helmet two weeks later at UC Irvine.

The event was a huge success, with a full house of over 450 people!

It was a very smooth and impressive event, without disruptions or protesters.Most important, we pushed back at the ‘bad guys’ in the face of intimidation and violence. A strong statement was made to both pro-Israel groups (we can and must stand up for our rights) and anti-Israel groups (don’t mess with us). These radical anti-Israel groups need to understand that any action they take will elicit a response that will be disproportionately better – and I think they might finally understand it.

Among the students (and partner orgs), there had been mixed feelings about having this event, but after the event, students and partner organizations couldn’t thank us enough!

Hillary’s ‘smart power’ foreign policy makes her unfit for command

Today’s headlines are about the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report on Benghazi. Benghazi is the expected outcome of Hillary Clinton’s “smart power” policy while she was Secretary of State. This policy is part of her platform as the Democratic Party nominee for president.

According to Chester A. Crocker, smart power,

Involves the strategic use of diplomacy, persuasion, capacity building, and the projection of power and influence in ways that are cost-effective and have political and social legitimacy.

It was smart power that Hillary used to depose Muammar Gaddafi, the former Prime Minister of Libya. David Brooks in a June 2011 New York Times op-ed “Smart Power Setback” wrote:

When she became secretary of state, Hillary Clinton sketched out a very attractive foreign policy vision that would use “the full range of tools at our disposal: diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural.” But it could be that cultural and economic development works on a different timetable than traditional foreign policy.

Perhaps we don’t know enough, can’t plan enough, can’t implement effectively enough to coordinate nation building with national security objectives.

The peace and security timetable is measured in years or decades. Development progress, if it comes at all, is measured in generations.

In February 2016 a New York Times article by Jo Becker and Scott Shane titled “Hillary Clinton, ‘Smart Power’ and a Dictator’s Fall” noted:

President Obama was deeply wary of another military venture in a Muslim country [Libya]. Most of his senior advisers were telling him to stay out. Still, he dispatched Mrs. Clinton to sound out Mr. Jibril, a leader of the Libyan opposition. Their late night meeting on March 14, 2011, would be the first chance for a top American official to get a sense of whom, exactly, the United States was being asked to support.

In her suite at the Westin, she and Mr. Jibril, a political scientist with a doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh, spoke at length about the fast­moving military situation in Libya. But Mrs. Clinton was clearly also thinking about Iraq, and its hard lessons for American intervention.

Did the opposition’s Transitional National Council really represent the whole of a deeply divided country, or just one region? What if Colonel Qaddafi quit, fled or was killed — did they have a plan for what came next?

“She was asking every question you could imagine,” Mr. Jibril recalled.

Mrs. Clinton was won over. Opposition leaders “said all the right things about supporting democracy and inclusivity and building Libyan institutions, providing some hope that we might be able to pull this off,” said Philip H. Gordon, one of her assistant secretaries. “They gave us what we wanted to hear. And you do want to believe.”

Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafi’s forces. In fact, Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a “51­49” decision, it was Mrs. Clinton’s support that put the ambivalent president over the line. 

The consequences would be more far ­reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven, a place where the direst answers to Mrs. Clinton’s questions have come to pass.

[Emphasis added]

Ironically is was American diplomat John Christopher “Chris” Stevens who Clinton sent to Libya to implement the “5149” decision. Gaddafi was toppled and executed by those same “opposition leaders” who convinced Secretary Clinton they were on our side. Clinton implemented smart power.

Fast forward to September 11, 2012. Hillary’s smart power caused her and the State Department to rely on local militia to protect now Ambassador Chris Stevens at the compound in Benghazi. Stevens knew the risks and expressed them in his diary on that fateful day.

Stevens’s final entry in his diary, dated Sept. 11, reads: “Never ending security threats…”

Security threats ignored because of Hillary’s smart power policies. Four died on that day, the cause Hillary Clinton and smart power.

RELATED REPORT: Proposed Additional Views of Representatives Jim Jordan and Mike Pompeo

Supreme Court Decision: Protecting Abortion Industry More Important than Woman’s Health, Safety

On Monday (6/27), in the case Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-3 decision, struck down a Texas law that ensured abortion facilities are clean and safe.  Justice Kennedy, a Republican appointee, sided with the four Democrat appointees on the Court.  The Court’s decision was a debilitating blow to women’s health care and continued the Court’s history of pandering to pro-abortion groups that prey on women in crisis.

Supreme Court Decision—Protecting Abortion Industry More Important than Woman’s Health, Safety

The ruling forces women seeking abortions to receive below-standard health care by allowing abortions facilities to circumvent the minimum standards of care required for other surgical facilities simply because their product is abortion.

Kate Oliveri, Trial Counsel at the Thomas More Law Center, involved in several pro-life cases, commented:

“In effect, the Court has given abortionists a constitutional right to increase their profit margin by providing second-class healthcare to women. We must rise to the challenge of protecting women from this profit seeking industry that preys upon women and makes a mockery of the women’s rights movement.”

In 2013, Texas passed new legislation “enacted to raise standards of care and ensure the health and safety of all abortion patients.” This legislation, House Bill 2 (“HB2”), included two provisions challenged up to the Supreme Court:

  1. Physicians performing abortion procedures must have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion facility (“admitting-privileges requirement”).
  2. Abortion facilities must comply with the minimum standards of care for surgical facilities (“surgical-center requirement”).

A group of abortion providers challenged these provisions as too costly, arguing many abortion providers would close down.   The Supreme Court bought their argument.  It held that easy abortion access is more important than safe abortion procedures done by competent doctors with local hospital privileges.

Here are some of the standard Texas surgical-center requirements that the Court felt women receiving surgicalabortions do not deserve:

  • an “adequate number” of registered nurses;
  • scrub facilities;
  • fire emergency precautions;
  • ceiling, wall, and floor finishes;
  • separate soiled utility and sterilization rooms;
  • regulated air pressure, filtration, and humidity control; and
  • plumbing requirements.

              Quoting the recently departed Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas chastised the majority in his dissent for “bend[ing] the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even speak in opposition to abortion is at issue.”  Justice Thomas noted, today’s decision “will surely mystify lower courts for years to come.”

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, observed:

“The Court marginalizes itself as it repeatedly fabricates new legal standards that are not found in the Constitution to reach the ideological results it wants. This is especially clear with the decisions surrounding the Court-created right to abortion.”

In the wake of this decision, abortion advocates are already plotting to minimize the quality of healthcare for women across the country by filing new lawsuits challenging health and safety provisions in numerous other States.

 [Read the Court’s Decision Here]

Florida: Term Limited Levy out! Citizens win 100% victory in Palm Beach Gardens

It is not an uncommon scenario: Citizens pass a simple term limits law and self-interested incumbents tie up the courts and murder the English language to protect their positions of meager power. Sometimes they’ll force illegal elections and round up the local establishment and media to come to their aid.

dloughy150

James D’Loughy

The battles are fierce and often exciting but then when good guys finally win, it almost seems anti-climactic. Well, of course the good guys won. The law was so clear…

No! No! No!

When rogue 4-term Palm Beach Gardens Council member David Levy challenged the retroactive term limits law passed by some 70% of his fellow citizens by running for a fifth term, City Clerk Patricia Snider and even the county’s Supervisor of Elections Susan Bucher lawyered up and circled the wagons around him. Local media treated Levy’s campaign as legitimate in spite of the unambiguous results of the 2014 election in favor of retroactive term limits.

The lower courts, too timid to enforce the law in this environment, allowed the election to go on and then, after it ended in a runoff, tried to broker a compromise solution between the local political establishment and the citizens of Palm Beach Gardens.

Sid Dinerstein

The local political bullies came close to winning a partial victory, allowing Levy to run for office for a fifth term. But thankfully two citizen heroes, lawyer James D’Loughy and plaintiff Sid Dinerstein wouldn’t settle. They took the case to the Fourth District Court of Appeals where judges on Friday, June 24, ruled that — surprise! — the voters overwhelmingly approved term limits and made them retroactive and that 4-term incumbents like David Levy are not eligible to run unless they sit out a term first.

This victory for the citizens was by no means preordained. They won only because D’Loughy and Dinerstein insisted on fighting the corrupt local power until the citizens got 100% of what they voted for.

Yes, we can fight city hall. D’Loughy and Dinerstein proved it once again. So, if this happens in your town, you know what to do.

U.S. Muslim Organization admired Bin Laden, conspired to influence Congress, tipped off a terror suspect

Chris Gaubatz delivers jaw dropping details about CAIR operations at Senate Judiciary Hearing.

Senator Ted Cruz presided over a Senate Judiciary hearing Tuesday titled, Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts to Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism. The panelists were equally divided, half fit the title, willfully blind, while the other half see clearly that the enemy is Islam.

gaubatzOne of the panelists was Chris Gaubatz, a national security consultant. He has every reason to be awake to the threat of the Islam since he conducted undercover research with HAMAS/Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) at their Washington, D.C. headquarters as well as in Virginia and Maryland. He worked alongside them as an intern, and was able to keep many physical files that were to be destroyed.

According to Gaubatz, HAMAS/CAIR actually,

“Discussed coordinating with Bin Laden and his associates, placed staffers and interns inside congressional offices, conspired to influence congress, (specifically judiciary, intelligence, and homeland security committees), and worked with a Muslim law enforcement officer to influence a major terrorism investigation by accessing a classified federal police database and tipping off the suspect.”

The panelist also relayed being at a convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) in which DHS and the FBI had booths set up to recruit members there. Now why would those agencies want to recruit from a group of Muslims most likely to have ties with terrorism? This sounds like another case of willful blindness.

In addition he saw Imam Siraj Wahhaj, a strong advocate for implementing Sharia Law, and also an unindicted co-conspirator of the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing, actually ask for money to support HAMAS.

So much for see something say something. It appears Gaubatz has amazing evidence to support the facts that HAMAS/CAIR who is the Muslim Brotherhood in America, remains alive and well influencing our government and its national security apparatus, and not one of the senators felt the need to ask a follow-up question to his statements.

In stark contrast the opening statement by Senator Coons was equally stunning in a display of simply failing to grasp the truth of the terrorism problem we have here in America, not to mention his misunderstanding of who ISIS is.

Senator Coons stated,

“ISIS is not Islamic. It is a perverted misinterpretation of one of the world’s great religions. No religion condones the massacring of thousands of innocent people,”

It sounds as though Senator Coons may be taking a play out of the Obama playbook as he also expects some mental gymnastics to take place while we are to accept that Islamic State in Iraq and Syria isn’t Islamic. And it doesn’t seem as though the good senator has looked back into the history of Islam. Certainly if he did he would see deaths in the hundreds of millions of people throughout the peaceful Muslim history.

Two more zingers from Coons,

“The country is still trying to make sense of a tragic event in Orlando. 16 days ago a man entered the Pulse nightclub armed with dangerous weapons and massacred 49 innocent people, injuring 50 more leaving our nation and world shaken…I utterly reject the notion that there is some sort of political correctness preventing us from fighting our enemies.”

Senator Coons, if you reject the notion of political correctness then your above statement should read like this,

“16 days ago America experienced yet another Islamic terrorist attack, when an armed Muslim jihadi, swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the Islamic State, entered the Pulse nightclub and killed 49 innocent people and wounded another 50. In short order, the majority of Americans knew exactly what the motive was as did the whole world, yet the Obama administration, his DHS and FBI are still to this day baffled as to his reasoning. In fact, the denial of what is clear to all with the exception of the “experts” brings shame to the leadership and makes our country even more vulnerable to Islamic attacks.

The hearing was meant to bring light to how our law enforcement agencies continue to down-play Islam’s ideology as the culprit for numerous terrorist attacks because of the political correct approach of Obama’s administration. Part of fixing a problem is identifying it, and the Obama law enforcement agencies miss clues about these Islamic terrorists within our country that would alert them to potential terror threats because the agents are not properly trained as to who the enemy is.

One thing was obvious, the senators in the chamber were given clues over and over by the expert panelists who have 20/20 vision when it comes to understanding and seeing the threat, but until our leaders remove the scales from their eyes they will miss the mark on nailing terrorists in our midst.

Hillary’s 65,000 Syrians would cost U.S. over $400 Billion over their lifetimes

That is the estimate the highly respected Heritage Foundation expert on welfare, Robert Rector, has estimated.

Hillary got the 65,000 number from her pal, former British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who is now the head honcho at the financially largest U.S. refugee resettlement contractor (International Rescue Committee).

The Daily Caller has the story, here.

Hillary Clinton’s proposal to accept an additional 65,000 Syrian refugees annually could potentially cost $403 billion in lifetime costs if implemented all four years in a hypothetical first term.

David-Miliband-Hillary-Cl-002

David Miliband with Hillary Clinton.

That’s according to a new analysis released Monday by the Senate subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.

Currently, the Obama administration is planning to take in 10,000 Syrian refugees in fiscal year 2016, which ends September 30.

In total, the Obama administration is planning to take in 85,000 refugees, while the original plan was to take in 100,000 refugees. Clinton’s proposal would potentially increase that number to 155,000 refugees entering the United States annually.

Robert Rector, a scholar at the Heritage Foundation, estimated the costs of local, state, and federal benefits for refugees and found that the lifetime cost of admitting 10,000 refugees is $6.5 billion.

It is extremely hard to estimate the cost of the massive welfare that refugees receive so we have never even tried here at RRW, but Rector has put pencil to paper to do the calculations. Continue reading here for more.

Where does this 65,000 number come from? Well initially it came from David Miliband, Hillary’s pal who runs the International Rescue Committee.  The other nine federal contractors followed suit and then the Senate Jihad Caucus (our name!) sent a letter to Obama telling him that they want 65,000 Syrians ASAP.   We addressed the demand here in a YouTube video last year.

The resettlement contractors subsequently upped their demand to 100,000 Syrians.

Galling isn’t it to think that you pay for the resettlement of third worlders who will ultimately out-populate you and your posterity.

RELATED: All the World’s Immigration Visualized in One Animated Map

VIDEO: First speech in European Parliament after Brexit vote by Nigel Farager

Below is Nigel Farage’s full speech to the European Parliament on 28 June 2016 after Britain voted to leave the European Union:

Isn’t it funny? When I came here 17 years ago and I said that I wanted to lead a campaign to get Britain to leave the European Union, you all laughed at me – well I have to say, you’re not laughing now, are you? The reason you’re so upset, you’re so angry, has been perfectly clear, from all the angry exchanges this morning.

You as a political project are in denial. You’re in denial that your currency is failing. Just look at the Mediterranean! As a policy to impose poverty on Greece and the Mediterranean you’ve done very well.

You’re in denial over Mrs. Merkel’s call for as many people as possible to cross the Mediterranean – which has led to massive divisions between within countries and between countries.

The biggest problem you’ve got and the main reason the UK voted the way it did is because you have by stealth and deception, and without telling the truth to the rest of the peoples of Europe, you have imposed upon them a political union. When the people in 2005 in the Netherlands and France voted against that political union and rejected the constitution you simply ignored them and brought the Lisbon treaty in through the back door.

What happened last Thursday was a remarkable result – it was a seismic result. Not just for British politics, for European politics, but perhaps even for global politics too.

Because what the little people did, what the ordinary people did – what the people who’d been oppressed over the last few years who’d seen their living standards go down did – was they rejected the multinationals, they rejected the merchant banks, they rejected big politics and they said actually, we want our country back, we want our fishing waters back, we want our borders back.

We want to be an independent, self-governing, normal nation. That is what we have done and that is what must happen. In doing so we now offer a beacon of hope to democrats across the rest of the European continent. I’ll make one prediction this morning: the United Kingdom will not be the last member state to leave the European Union.

The question is what do we do next? It is up to the British government to invoke article 50 and I don’t think we should spend too long in doing it. I totally agree that the British people have voted, we need to make sure that it happens.

What I’d like to see is a grownup and sensible attitude to how we negotiate a different relationship. I know that virtually none of you have never done a proper job in your lives, or worked in business, or worked in trade, or indeed ever created a job. But listen, just listen.

You’re quite right Mr Schultz – Ukip used to protest against the establishment and now the establishment protests against Ukip. Something has happened here. Let us listen to some simple pragmatic economics – my country and your country, between us we do an enormous amount of business in goods and services. That trade is mutually beneficial to both of us, that trade matters. If you were to cut off your noses to spite your faces and reject any idea of a sensible trade deal the consequences would be far worse for you than it would be for us.

[Laughter from MEPs]

Even no deal is better for the United Kingdom is better than the current rotten deal that we’ve got.  But if we were to move to a position where tariffs were reintroduced on products like motorcars then hundreds of thousands of German works would risk losing their jobs.

Why don’t we be grown up, pragmatic, sensible, realistic and let’s cut between us a sensible tariff-free deal and thereafter recognise that the United Kingdom will be your friend, that we will trade with you, cooperate with you, we will be your best friends in the world. Do that, do it sensibly, and allow us to go off and pursue our global ambitions and future.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Brexit: Charlemagne vs. ‘Rule Britannia!’

Brexit Calls for U.S. to Reconsider Foreign Policy

Rule Britannia, and Now What?

America, Globalization and Brexit

President Of The European Parliament: ‘It Is Not The EU Philosophy That The Crowd Can Decide Its Fate’

Don’t Believe the Brexit Prophecies of Economic Doom

VIDEO: FBI fails to inform some Americans they were on Islamic State kill list

Perhaps to do so would have been “Islamophobic,” or Obamoid FBI agents were too busy conducting outreach at the local mosque to get around to informing these people.

“FBI didn’t inform some Americans they were on ISIS kill list,” by Sara Carter, Circa News, June 27, 2016:

The FBI did not alert numerous Americans that they were placed on secret Islamic State kill lists or notify their local police about the potential dangers, a lapse in the government’s efforts to combat the terrorist group’s evolving strategy to target everyday citizens.

To date, the terror group that goes by the acronym ISIS has published on encrypted web sites several hit lists naming more than 15,000 people it would like to see killed by sleeper cells or lone wolves in New York, Texas, Florida and California.

The lists aren’t public but Circa News obtained copies of some and made sample calls to the everyday Americans who appeared on them, from college professors and military personnel to art collectors and homemakers.

In Texas alone, Circa identified 22 people in a sampling of 24 names who did not receive any notification that they were in ISIS’s crosshairs. It also identified two local police departments whose citizens were on the list that also got no alert from the FBI.

“I was terrified. We live in a different world and the Jewish community is a number one target of these radicals,” said a woman in Austin who found out from Circa that she and several of her friends in the Jewish community were on a list. The woman agreed to be interviewed only on condition of anonymity, fearing using her name would only increase her risk.

“I’m very upset that I was not notified by the FBI or local law enforcement,” she said.

Since the hit lists began emerging more frequently earlier this year, FBI officials have said they intended to notify all Americans threatened by ISIS and to work with their local police departments.

FBI officials said they are confident most American on the lists were alerted in some manner but it was possible some people may have fallen through the cracks. They stressed to date no one on the list has actually been attacked.

“The FBI routinely notifies individuals and organizations of potential threat information. We perform these notifications so potential victims are aware of possible threats and take appropriate steps,” the bureau said. “Those measures may include paying close attention to your surroundings at all times, protecting personally identifiable information, and immediately calling the local authorities if you observe something suspicious. The FBI will continue to work closely with federal, state, and local partners to keep the public informed of potential threats.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ramadan in Baghdad: Muslim murders 12 in jihad attack on mosque

Hizballah top dog: “As long as Iran has money, we will have money”

Florida: Anti-Marijuana ‘Vote No On 2’ releases new video ‘Budtenders’

The “Vote No On 2” Campaign has released a new TV ad titled “Budtenders.” The ad “demonstrates the complete sham that Amendment 2 is by visually showing that there are no Pharmacists or Pharmacies involved in ‘medical marijuana,’” according to a Vote No On 2 email.

You can view our new ad “Budtenders”:

Budtender Mason Davila from Ontario, Oregon

Budtender Mason Davila from Ontario, Oregon.

StonerDays.com defines Budtender as:

noun 1. a person who weighs out portions of medical marijuana and provides information about the suggested use of each product to his or her patient/members 2. a volunteer at a medical marijuana collective.

ABOUT VOTE NO ON 2

Vote No on 2 is a grassroots campaign bringing the truth about Amendment 2 to the voters of Florida.Our coalition includes members of law enforcement, business leaders, Constitutional law attorneys,doctors, other medical professionals, parents and Floridians from all walks of life. We know that Amendment 2 is simply a guise to legalize pot smoking in Florida and our goal is to point out the loopholes and explain why this Amendment is bad for Florida.

Click here to learn more about Vote No On 2.

RELATED VIDEO: Three things…

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Budtender Jason McDaniel behind the counter at Sticky Medz in Los Angeles, California.

Trump’s Rock N Roll Approach Can Win the White House

NEW YORK, NY /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Out of the box electoral mechanics could possibly produce an election victory for Donald Trump in the 2016 United States President’s election. More specifically, approximately 219 million people in the United States are eligible to vote, but only a little over 146 million are actually registered to vote. That means that there are almost 73 million people who could swing the election in 2016 if this unregistered population made the effort to register to vote and participate in the 2016 United States President’s Election.

In the 2012 President’s election, President Barack Obama bested Mitt Romney by approximately 126 electoral votes. A recent ABC News – Washington Post poll has Hillary Clinton leading Donald Trump by a double digit margin. Assuming voters replicate their 2012 voting patterns in 2016, the odds are against Donald Trump.

However, what if Donald Trump was able to change the odds by increasing the voter population in his favor by reaching out to the rebels of society.

States with significant electoral votes where President Obama bested Mitt Romney include, New York, New Jersey, California, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Maryland, Minnesota, Virginia and Wisconsin. How could Donald Trump change the voter dynamics in these states. Possibly, what if Donald Trump was to do a voter registration drive targeting unregistered potential voters who would favor Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.

The fact of the matter is that the over 70 million people who are not registered to vote but are eligible to register are people who don’t believe that they have a stake in today’s system.

Perhaps, Donald Trump’s rebel campaign approach may be just the type of campaign to bring these rebels into the mainstream. A Possible way to reach these people is by leveraging the services of Trump’s rebel celebrity followers who include: Kid Rock, Ted Nugent, Mike Tyson and Pete Rose.

Winning the 2016 United States President’s Election by leveraging the over 70 million unregistered possible voter population via a celebrity rebel campaign appeal would be the kind of strategy to make history books.

sean oloughlinABOUT SEAN O’LOUGHLIN, ESQ

Sean O’Loughlin is a Constitutional Conservative Manhattan attorney. O’Loughlin a member of the International Lawyers Association, the United States Press Agency and the US Press Association.

RELATED ARTICLE: Donald Trump Thinks Axl Rose ‘Is The Donald Trump Of Rock And Roll’

Is your Chamber of Commerce working with the ‘progressives’ at Welcoming America

They apparently are in Nashville, TN according to this story at a website called The New South?’

For background on ‘Welcoming America’ (click here ) for our past posts.

tfna_infographic_bwc_map

Infographic from the White House website.

To tell you the truth, this, to me, is one of the great mysteries of the whole refugee resettlement industry—how is it that Republicans like Paul Ryan (backed by the Chamber) are so doggedly pro-refugee and the only answer that continues to make any sense is that refugees are needed as cheap labor for businesses (workers salaries are low, but welfare fills the gap) and they are all new consumers (food, used cars, housing etc.).

I don’t see any other explanation than this—your community is disrupted socially and culturally so these business interests can make more money, and politicians can fill their campaign coffers.

To add insult to injury, all of the myriad economic interests have figured out how to hide under that white hat of humanitarianism. Do they have training sessions on how to snooker the public? I wonder!

Perhaps one of the most shocking photos I’ve seen in a long time is this one (posted in this story).  Certain special people—‘NEW Americans’—are not required to pledge allegiance to their new country.

Somalis swearing

From The New South?

In 2014, speaking from Casa Azafran where TIRRC [Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition—ed] and its allied organizations are headquartered, Obama talked about his New American Task Force*** and his end-run-around-the-Congress DACA program. He specifically recognized, David Lubell, TIRRC’s first director and creator of “Welcoming Tennessee/ Welcoming America” who also won an award from the National Council of La Raza awarded.

Welcoming America will judge how progressive your community is

Nashville is among the “Welcoming Cities” in Welcoming America’s (WA) network. Last year, Welcoming America paid the Nashville Chamber of Commerce for an economic report to support their story that legal and illegal immigrants are the hub of Nashville’s economic success. The Chamber’s report looks strangely just like the WA website, suggesting a WA templated product that will be replicated by Chambers in other “welcoming cities.”

The real agenda of groups like TIRRC and WA is to mutate our communities until they satisfy a leftist open-borders, one-world, globalist vision of an ideal society.

Continue reading here.

Read about Obama’s New American Task Force, here.

Find out if your Chamber of Commerce is peddling a similar report!

RELATED: All the World’s Immigration Visualized in One Animated Map

EDITORS NOTE: To learn more about the Obama administrations Welcoming Immigrants and Refugees from Around the World initiative click here.

Also read STRENGTHENING COMMUNITIES BY WELCOMING ALL RESIDENTS: A Federal Strategic Action Plan on Immigrant & Refugee Integration.