September 11, 2015

I was probably the last person on the planet to learn about 9/11.  I was in the midst of writing my dissertation at the University of Georgia and did not log in to my email until mid-afternoon.  We all remember the horror we felt when we heard that our nation was attacked.

That evening NPR, however, was full of cluck-clucking about attacks on Muslims.  Virtually all of those claims turned out to be bogus.  First responders were dying as they searched for survivors, and the people at NPR were more concerned about a Muslim being called a bad name. Further horror came as one of my colleagues told me how he had conducted discussion in his freshman composition class the following day: he used the New York Times to explain the “history” behind the attack, and how American policies brought it on.

Fourteen years later, we have an entire college course devoted to the study of 9/11.  The online literature class at the University of North Carolina teaches that American imperialism was to blame for 9/11; the reading assignments are sympathetic to the terrorists.  This fact is all the more distressing considering that today’s college students were only 4 or 5 years old at the time.

They should be assigned instead Bruce Thornton’s “The Unlearned Lessons of 9/11” at FrontPage Magazine and Daniel Greenfield’s “This is the America We Live In Now” at his blog, Sultan Knish.

We are not to even speak of terrorism. In the last seven years the word “terrorism” has been declared verboten by our government.  And so it is in schools.

Except that attention is diverted from real horrors and mass murder to “microaggressions.”  Gestures, looks, and thoughts are now monitored and declared forbidden on our college campuses.  A slip of the tongue can get you into deep trouble.  Thought police masquerading under such titles as “diversity coordinators” collude on methods for controlling faculty and students.  Where will it end?  I speculate and make a “modest proposal” at theFederalist.  (Inspiration in part from a short story I used to teach, Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron.“)

The good doctor Ben Carson has a remedy for microaggressions.  It’s from his 2014 book, One Nation.

Carson recounts an experience he had while working as an intern at Johns Hopkins around 1977 and being confused for an orderly by the nurse.  He would be told by the nurse that the patient was not ready for the operating room.  The good doctor realized that the sight of a black physician was decidedly rare in 1977.  This is how he puts it:

After many years of hard work to achieve the title of doctor, many might say that I would have been justified in reacting angrily to the suggestion that I was an orderly, especially given the racial overtones of the misunderstanding.  However, I tried to look at things from the nurse’s perspective.  The only black males she had seen come onto that ward wearing surgical scrubs were orderlies who were coming to pick up or deliver a patient.  Why would she think differently in my case?  A highly sensitive individual would have created a scene and everyone would have felt uncomfortable.  I would simply say in those situations, ‘I’m sorry that Mr. Patient isn’t ready yet, but I’m Dr. Carson and I’m here for another reason.’

He continues, “The offending nurse would often be so embarrassed that I actually felt sorry for her or him and I would say, ‘It’s quite all right and you don’t need to feel bad.’  I would be very nice to that person, and I would have a friend for life. . . . that was a whole lot better than having someone who would always feel ashamed, embarrassed, or hostile when they saw me.”

So isn’t that so much nicer than sitting around and mooning over such mistakes as if they were the slings and arrows felling the potential top-notch surgeon?

Ben Carson MD

Ben Carson, MD.

This is a good tip to give to the perpetually affronted wandering our campuses, as well as to those perpetually frightened that any comment or gesture could be taken the wrong way.

The doctor has other tips, beginning with the recognition of the Alinsky strategy of goading opponents:

  1. Try to identify one instance of artificial outrage.  Explain to one other person why this is a contrived issue and outline the way it agitates people and cultivates political support for the agitators.
  2. Readily apologize to a person who is offended by something you said.  Explain what you had hoped to convey.
  3. Attempt to politely disagree with someone who makes a political statement with which you disagree.  (Be sure that you choose an appropriate setting.)  Engage in a civil discussion of the matter.
  4. Read Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to get an idea of how the political correctness police work.

Good tips to give to students.

In case you missed them. . . I’ve had several articles at Selous Foundation on Common Core and gaming in the classroom.  Read them here.

Are Law Enforcement Officers Above the Law?

Few people will write an article that even comes close to being critical of our U.S. law enforcement officers. Americans are due a non biased review of why law enforcement officers (LEO) are either treated with enormous respect or in many cases are despised by the people they are sworn to serve.

I can effectively write on this issue because my background includes serving almost two decades as a U.S. Federal Agent. I had the opportunity to work with dozens of law enforcement agencies around America.  This included local, state and federal agencies. I am happy to give our LEO a pat on the back when they do as they have been sworn to do, or write a critical article for the one’s who have forgotten they are not above any U.S. law.

In America the media and politicians have groomed us to always put LEO on a throne above all other professions aside from our military personnel.  LEO are not owed any higher allegiance to their careers than a plumber, factory worker, insurance salesman, athlete, or doctor.  People who apply for LEO positions do so because this career is very stable and the pay covers their bills and provides for their families. The popular belief is that LEO enter law enforcement to ‘serve’ the people.  This is so far from the truth that no further explanation is needed. For the vast majority it is for a paycheck and for many it feeds their ego’s.

The LEO who enter law enforcement to feed their adrenaline and ego are the one’s who believe they are one step ahead of other Americans.  The one’s who do this job for a paycheck are the honest officers and they serve the people because that is what they are paid to do.  These officers are the LEO that show respect to all Americans regardless of their wealth status, race, or religion.

The LEO who show disrespect for the people they serve are the one’s who believe some laws apply to them, but not all laws.  A few examples:  In a busy city it is more likely you will see a police officer in his/her patrol car breaking traffic laws than you will see from citizens. There are some officers who strongly believe it is their job to let citizens know they have the absolute power to make or ruin a person’s day, and in some cases have been known to alter the truth and evidence.

There are LEO who believe they are not subject to the laws of assault and battery. In most states, an assault/battery is committed when one person: 1) tries to or does physically strike another, or 2) acts in a threatening manner to put another in fear of immediate harm. Many states declare that a more serious or “aggravated” assault/battery occurs when one: 1) tries to or does cause severe injury to another, or 2) causes injury through use of a deadly weapon. Throughout America an assault by a police officer on a suspect or prisoner in a jail or prison happens much more regularly than ever reported by the media.

Technology has started to bring many assault cases by police officers into the limelight.  Seldom in our past history does a person making a complaint about officer abuse were shown even the courtesy of listening to them.  Today with cameras on every corner and many officers being required to wear body cameras the truth is being revealed.  Do you think most police officers are in favor of having to wear a body camera? No.  Even officers who are not inclined to assault a person often berate suspects to the point of the suspect admitting to crimes he/she did not commit.  In spousal or child abuse experts have shown emotional abuse of the innocent person is often worse than physical abuse.  The same applies in law enforcement.

There are two famous words every law enforcement officer is quickly taught in the academy and throughout their career. ‘Stop Resisting’ Often you will hear these two words being shouted even while a suspect may be docile. They are safety words for the officers. Without cameras it is hard to contradict an officers testimony if he/she testify they shouted this command ten times!

In conclusion citizens and police officers must be taught that mutual respect and courtesy must be shown at all times to one another.  Of course there are citizens who are serious troublemakers and deserve to be put through the legal system, but there are indeed LEO who abuse their authority.  An LEO is not above the law in America.  If you have ever been pulled over or had the police respond to your home/business on a criminal complaint, you likely did not have a pleasant experience.  These encounters of course should not be fun, but they should not be used by an ego cop to demean a person who has not been convicted of a crime.

Respect is an earned reward and not given out due to intimidation.  

An LEO doesn’t and should not believe since he/she  was hired by a police department that they automatically have earned respect from the people they serve.  If a plumber is hired by a company does he/she automatically earn the respect of the customers he serves?  Of course not.  It is only when the plumber treats the customer with courtesy and completes the job as he is being paid to, will he begin to progress in his career and earn respect from the person he/she serves.

A Jersey Boy’s Reflections on September 11, 2015

9 11 people covered in dustAs I watched the towers come down fourteen years ago, the same towers I watched go up as a kid in New Jersey, I knew my life (like many others) was about to dramatically change…forever. On that fateful September morning I knew all my years of academic work in Islam and related areas of law enforcement and activism would be required in what will be an extended, vicious, deadly, horrible war in a clash of two incompatible civilizations, the Judeo-Christian West and Islam.

In those early patriotic days if you were not moved by the thousands of American flags flying from every other car on every road in America, you lived among the dead in spirit. Today the American flags have stop waving on the cars but the flags of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State now fly worldwide indicating my next sad but very accurate observation – we are losing this war to Islam’s Jihad.

But, we can win.

We are losing primarily because of President Obama’s unprecedented capability to persuade his Democrat party to capitulate to Islam’s supremacy and then create at home a false “war-wariness” that has taken the fight out of many Americans while the same time the recruitment for the Islamic State and its affiliates increases exponentially.

Folks, you cannot beat a determined enemy who desires to die for their cause when your Commander-in-Chief does all he can to weaken the American spirit and American fighter.

In order to defeat Islamic jihad this Obama defeatist attitude must be reversed and we have a little over 400 days to make necessary political changes on Election Day, November 8, 2016.

The United West is positioned to help reverse this defeatist strategy through our continued work in the areas of defending the US Constitution, defending the State of Israel, defeating President Obama and defeating Islam. Our powerful team is extremely knowledgeable on these cultural and national security issues and has tremendous communication skills as seen through our thousands of hours of high-quality informative videos, through our regular documentaries and expose’s on Enemies of the State.

In addition, what really sets us apart from others who fight these battles for the American people is that we take the fight to the bad guys, going after them, at their events, on their turf, in their backyard and properly, professionally and legally confronting them to expose them as anti-America, anti-Israel, anti-West advocates.

If you follow the phenomenal work of The United West (formally, Florida Security Council) you realize how much our team has accomplished over the past nine years on so little money. We own a fully equipped independent TV studio that has became a central component of broadcasting our investigative and activist material worldwide.

Our highly dedicated team is comprised of all volunteers with no one receiving a salary and some of our folks are living on their friend’s couches in order to stay in this fight. Our operating expenses are a mere $9,000 a MONTH!  I can say with extreme confidence that there is no organization that accomplishes all we do, on a world-wide basis on $9,000 a month!

In an effort to make sure there are NO MORE September 11’s in America just this year on March 2, The United West was in Washington DC, live-streaming a Rally in support of Prime Minister Netanyahu, then also in March we lead a two-week tour to Israel for a small group on Zionist activists to study the “hot spots” so that these folks can come back and teach others about the truth of Israel’s precarious national security position.

In April, again in Washington DC at “Muslim Brotherhood Day” in the US Capitol our team confronted hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood activists and their well-known leaders and completely exposed this event as an anti-American activity of the Muslim Brotherhood. Soon after that operation, our team was in Garland Texas live-streaming Pamela Geller’s ground-breaking First Amendment event when we all were attacked by two Muslim jihadists with automatic weapons.

Thankfully, the Garland Police killed both Islamic State terrorists on the spot.

In August our team traveled to Santa Barbara California to help lead a national security briefing and public Rally to continue our critically important work on stopping the Iran nuke deal.

Then, just a few days ago we were in Washington DC to cover and report on the historic Stop Iran Rally at the U.S. Capitol that featured an array of speakers including Sen. Cruz, Frank Gaffney, Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michele Bachmann and many other great Americans…speaking to over 10,000 America patriots!

As I look back over these 14 years, I know full well that America, Israel and the West will be in this fight at least another 14 years. One cannot think about today, September 11 and NOT be determined as ever to give all we can each and every day.

Yes, my team and I want to be in this fight but as things look today, as crazy as it sounds we will be phasing out of action in the near future.

It seems we are experiencing the consequences of our own success.

One of our messages is that all Americans MUST get involved in the political process and help good people get elected. In that Florida is such a significant “swing-state” and that there are so many good people running for President, there has been a dramatic shift in donations going away from us and to the various candidates. On one level this is good but I dare say that the work of The United West, at $9,000 a MONTH goes a whole lot further than a ONE-MINUTE, $9,000 TV COMMERCIAL for a candidate with 2% support! And of course, much of this money is completely wasted against the media juggernaut of Donald Trump.

As America starts our fifteenth year in the Global War on Terror and you believe that The United West has a significant role to help defend America, Israel and the West, please consider helping us stay in the fight.

For more detailed information please contact me at Tom@TheUnitedWest.org

Florida Senator Bill Nelson (D) Confronted about his Support for Iran Nuke Deal

A concerned Floridian confronts Sen. Bill Nelson about his SUPPORT of the Obama Iran Deal in Reagan National Airport, on the day after the Stop Iran Deal Rally in Washington, D.C.

Watch his reaction.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Iran deal bait-and-switch – The Boston Globe

Senate Republicans Doing Nothing to Stop Obama’s Lawless Iran Treaty

An Interactive Timeline of 73 Islamist Terror Plots Since 9/1/2001

This Retired Navy SEAL’s Brother Was Killed by Hezbollah. Why He’s Against the Iran Nuclear Deal

Senate Democrats Block Vote to Reject Iran Nuclear Deal, Handing Obama Victory

Anti-Iran Nuclear Deal Rally Video: Beck, Levin, Trump & Bachmann

The Stop Iran Deal rally in Washington, D.C. was sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots and covered by Reason TV. The event drew several hundred people who showed equal amounts of contempt for the Islamic Republic of Iran, President Barack Obama—and the congressional leadership of the Republican Party.

There doesn’t seem to be a clear libertarian position on the Iran deal—some think it will open Iran up to moderating Western influence while others think it doesn’t do enough to keep the mullah’s nuclear ambitions at bay.

Reason TV caught up with Glenn Beck of The Blaze (2:18), radio host and best-seller Mark Levin (1:00), and former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (5:10), all of whom ragged on establishment Republicans as much or more than they did on Harry Reid, Barack Obama, and Islamic clerics

And we managed also to find out what Donald Trump—the big draw at today’s event—thinks about libertarians. (:51)

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Iran deal bait-and-switch – The Boston Globe

Op-ed: The “Candy” the Mullahs Gave to Obama

Iran says finds unexpectedly high uranium reserve

EDITORS NOTE: Please visit Reason.com for full text, links, and downloadable versions, and subscribe to Reason TV’s YouTube Channel to receive immediate updates when new material goes live. Produced by Nick Gillespie and Meredith Bragg. Photographs by Todd Krainin. The featured image is an AP Photo by Wilfredo Lee.

Stop Iran Rally in Washington, D.C.: Remarks by Hispanic Pastor Mario Bramnick

End the Iran Deal rally on September 8th, 2015 in Washington, D.C. at the Capitol West Lawn. Remarks by Pastor Mario Bramnick, President of the Hispanic Israel Leadership Coalition.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Iran deal bait-and-switch – The Boston Globe

50 Intelligence Analysts: ‘CENTCOM Islamic State reports cooked’

“The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.” Indeed. It shows that it doesn’t assess intelligence at all. It shows that it isn’t really interested in fighting or defeating the Islamic State. It is only interested in creating the appearance of fighting and defeating the Islamic State, so that it doesn’t suffer politically for not doing so.

“Exclusive: 50 Spies Say ISIS Intelligence Was Cooked,” by Shane Harris and Nancy A. Youssef, Daily Beast, September 9, 2015:

It’s being called a ‘revolt’ by intelligence pros who are paid to give their honest assessment of the ISIS war—but are instead seeing their reports turned into happy talk.

More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.

The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said.

Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.

That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That’s according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.

The accusations suggest that a large number of people tracking the inner workings of the terror groups think that their reports are being manipulated to fit a public narrative. The allegations echoed charges that political appointees and senior officials cherry-picked intelligence about Iraq’s supposed weapons program in 2002 and 2003.

The two signatories to the complaint were described as the ones formally lodging it, and the additional analysts are willing and able to back up the substance of the allegations with concrete examples.

One person who knows the contents of the complaint said it used the word “Stalinist” to describe the tone set by officials overseeing the military’s analysis.

Some of those CENTCOM analysts described the sizeable cadre of protesting analysts as a “revolt” by intelligence professionals who are paid to give their honest assessment, based on facts, and not to be influenced by national-level policy. The analysts have accused senior-level leaders, including the director of intelligence and his deputy in CENTCOM, of changing their analyses to be more in line with the Obama administration’s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress. The analysts take a more pessimistic view about how military efforts to destroy the groups are going.

The large number of analysts who complained to the Pentagon inspector general hasn’t been previously reported. Some of them are assigned to work at CENTCOM, the U.S. military’s command for the Middle East and Central Asia, but are officially employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The complaints allege that in some cases key elements of intelligence reports were removed, resulting in a document that didn’t accurately capture the analysts’ conclusions, sources familiar with the protest said. But the complaint also goes beyond alleged altering of reports and accuses some senior leaders at CENTCOM of creating an unprofessional work environment. One person who knows the contents of the written complaint sent to the inspector general said it used the word “Stalinist” to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM’s analysis.

Many described a climate in which analysts felt they could not give a candid assessment of the situation in Iraq and Syria. Some felt it was a product of commanders protecting their career advancement by putting the best spin on the war.

Some reports crafted by the analysts that were too negative in their assessment of the war were sent back the chain of the command or not shared up the chain, several analysts said. Still others, feeling the climate around them, self-censored so their reports affirmed already-held beliefs….

Two of the officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said that analysts began airing their complaints in October in an effort to address the issue internally and only went to the inspector general when that effort failed. Some of those who complained were urged to retire, one official familiar with the report told The Daily Beast. Some agreed to leave.

In recent months, members of the Obama administration have sought to paint the fight against ISIS in rosy hues—despite the terror army’s seizure of major cities like Mosul and Fallujah.

“ISIS is losing,” John Allen, the retired Marine general charged with coordinating the ISIS campaign, said in July.

“I am confident that over time, we will beat, we will, indeed, degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL,” Secretary of State John Kerry said in March, using the government’s preferred acronym for the group.

“No, I don’t think we’re losing,” President Obama said in May….

RELATED ARTICLES:

“‘The Complete Infidel’s Guide to ISIS’ reveals what the West is really up against”

Al-Qaeda hit list: Gates, Bloomberg, Buffett, Adelson, Koch brothers

“What disturbs people is not the Pope’s authority but his seeming unawareness of opposing evidence”

Will the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops call Fr. Schall on the carpet and demand that he not speak this way? After all, the USCCB works actively and without any apparent sense of shame to silence and discredit those who tell the truth about the jihad threat and the root causes of Muslim persecution of Christians, and who know that the Pope is wrong about the Qur’an opposing violence. The U.S. Catholic bishops are the worthy sons and heirs of those who convicted Galileo of heresy.

“On Pope Francis and Church Integrity,” by Rev. James V. Schall, S.J., Crisis, September 10, 2015 (thanks to Ming):

…The oft-discussed issues of earth warming and whether the Qur’an advocates violence are open to diverse interpretations. Pope Francis maintains that earth warming is a dangerous fact, but insists the Qur’an does not advocate violence and war. Experts can be found who panic about earth warming; we can find Muslim scholars who cannot find violence in the Qur’an. So, we might say that the Pope’s positions are backed by scholarly opinions. The only trouble with this approach is that other scholars in both areas find evidence that the opposite views are more persuasive and valid. What disturbs people is not the Pope’s authority for his views but his seeming unawareness of opposing evidence.

In this light, several writers point to what they call the “Galileo” problem as the potential danger the Church can find itself in by backing what are in effect opinions about some facts. This “Galileo problem” was the result of the Church committing to a theory that proved to be dubious. At the time—400 years ago—the arguments against Galileo could and did make sense to many. To be in error on a matter of scientific opinion is, of course, not exactly heresy. It happens every day. Indeed, it is the nature of scientific method of testing and retesting. Likewise, to be wrong (or right) about earth warming is not a matter of faith.

But if the Church takes a position in the matters of, say, evolution, science, or economics that turns out, on further investigation, to be wrong or doubtful, it will seem untrustworthy also in areas over which it does claim competence. However tempting or popular to comment on, there are some things on which the Church should just avoid taking a stand. Let it be discussed freely until there really is an issue of faith involved and reasons to think so….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama to bring 10,000 Syrian refugees to the U.S.

Scotland: Muslim medical student had al-Qaeda murder manual

Saudi Arabia refuses to take Syrian refugees, but offers to build 200 mosques in Germany

This tells you all you need to know about the “refugee” crisis in Europe. It is, as I said, a hijrah: a migration for the sake of Allah, to plant Islam in a new land. If they were really refugees, the Saudis would take them. But no, they are invaders, and the Saudis are offering to make things easier for them by providing them with facilities for the invasion — remember, four separate studies since 1998 have shown that 80% of Saudi-funded mosques in the U.S. teach hatred of Jews and Christians and the necessity to replace the Constitution with Sharia.

“Saudi Arabia Offers to Build 200 Mosques for Syrians in Germany,” by Daniel Greenfield, FrontPage, September 10, 2015:

Saudi Arabia, which doesn’t permit the construction of churches but finances a mosque construction spree in the land of the infidel, will not be taking in Syrian refugees. Even though they are fellow Muslims. It will however offer to build 200 mosques in Germany for their use.

It’s a kind offer. The only proper way for Europe to reciprocate would be to send a million soccer hooligans to Saudi Arabia and then offer to build facilities to teach them of the importance of trashing the country and abusing any native they come across.

Of course the Saudis aren’t stupid enough to fall for that one. Not even if the soccer hooligans bring along the occasional woman and child to use as emotional human shields while battering their way into a country they hate in every possible way aside from its social services.

Only Westerners are stupid enough to fall for that one.

Saudi mosques have played a key role in the rise of Islamic terrorism in the West. Just think of the explosive wonders that something short of a million migrants and all the mosques they can Allah Akbar in will accomplish in Germany.

Maybe the next Caliph of the Islamic State will even shout Allah Akbar while beheading some local infidel with a German accent. Maybe that Islamic State will even be in Hamburg.

Why is it that so few people ask themselves why the Saudis are willing to build 200 mosques for these “poor, desperate refugees”, yet won’t take a single one in?

It’s the same answer to the question of why so many Muslims claim to care about “Palestinians” to the point of genocide, yet won’t take them in and give them citizenship.

These aren’t refugees. They’re armies.

Don’t take it from me. Take it from Turkey’s Erdogan, the man more popular among German Muslims than he is among his own oppressed people. Here’s the poem that the formerly secular Turkish state sent him to jail for, before it became an Islamist hellhole of minarets, Erdogan palaces and crumbling shopping malls.

“The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers.”

Saudi Arabia just offered to build 200 barracks for the 800,000 soldiers invading Germany.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Saudis “offended” by National Geographic featuring Pope, ban the issue

Robert Spencer in PJ Media: UNC’s ‘Literature of 9/11′ Course Indoctrinates Students to Love Jihad Terror, Hate America

VIDEO: What is the U.S. Constitution? Why is it important?

The James Madison Institute recently visited a college campus in Florida, camera in hand, to ask students walking by if they’d like to answer those questions and more.

Yes. You heard that right. We randomly asked students if they would like to do an on-camera interview about the U.S. Constitution and many said, “Sure!”

We didn’t know what we were getting ourselves into. What we heard was, well, you’ll just have to watch to find out!

Watch the short video. Take a break from your day and hear what these students had to say!

Constitution Day is fast approaching. As part of JMI’s Preston A. Wells, Jr. Center for American Ideals and our Campus Representatives program, we will host several events on college campuses across Florida the week of Sept. 14 to commemorate this important day. This video was created to help promote these events, which are also featured on our website jamesmadison.org.

Please help us share by forwarding this email. You can also visit our Facebook and Twitter pages and share from those social media platforms.

Trump on Syrian Muslim refugees: ‘We have too many problems of our own!’

The other day, Presidential candidate Donald Trump sounded a bit squishy on the issue of bringing in large numbers of Syrian refugees, but on Hannity last night he says what sure sounds like a NO!

Watch the clip, he does mention that the wealthy Gulf Arab States and Russia aren’t taking any (terrorism fears?).  He could mention that China is never asked to take any as well!  The UN does pound Japan to take refugees, but they only take a tiny number as they are wisely trying to save their unique culture.

Here he is in a far-ranging interview that begins with his views on the Iran nuclear deal.  For the refugee discussion begin watching at 7:50 minutes.  Thanks to Richard at Blue Ridge Forum for alerting us to this news.

Please see our earlier post this morning where we reported that fellow GOP Presidential hopeful, Gov. Scott Walker, is saying no as well.

If you see more on what position other candidates are taking, please send a link in a comment to this post.

Obama will likely be telling the world sometime this month how many he will “welcome” to live in your towns and cities.

Georgia Governor: No thanks to Syrians, we have enough refugees!

Back in 2013, when I attended an Office of Refugee Resettlement meeting in Lancaster, PA, government officials identified Georgia as having a‘pocket of resistance’ because the Republican Governor, Nathan Deal, had asked the feds to stop sending so many, that Georgia was overloaded.  So it is no surprise that Gov. Deal is saying the same thing today.  (And, it looks like his appeal to the US State Department fell on deaf ears!)

From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Gov. Nathan Deal’s administration doesn’t want to see the number of refugees resettling in Georgia increase, despite pleas from humanitarian officials urging the U.S. to take in substantially more Syrians fleeing their war-torn country.

In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Tuesday, Deal urged a cautious approach to the desperate refugee crisis unfolding across the Mediterranean Sea and Europe. The governor repeated his assertion – disputed by some advocates – that Georgia takes in more than its fair share of refugees.

[….]

Deal’s administration confirmed Tuesday it has asked the State Department to keep the number of refugees resettling in the Peach State “static” going into the next fiscal year.

“We will be welcoming,” Deal told the AJC. “But we want to make sure we’re not taking a disproportionately large share of them compared to other parts of the country.”

This is very interesting considering Reed has been promoting Atlanta as a welcoming city.

Deal’s wary approach to the escalating crisis was echoed by Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, typically one of the region’s most forceful advocates of a welcoming policy to immigrants and refugees. He said he needed more time to evaluate the city’s position and that he would likely follow the lead of the Obama administration, which is weighing its options.

“I’m not going to get ahead of the federal government with regards to the Syrian refugee crisis,” he said.

[….]

The Deal administration has previously called on the U.S. State Department to sharply reduce the numbers of refugees being resettled in Georgia, citing state and local taxpayer costs associated with taking in the refugees, school budget shortfalls and other concerns.

Local resettlement agencies have long pushed back, beyond arguing that Georgia has a moral obligation to embrace refugees. They say refugees attract millions of dollars in federal aid money, form a ready pool of eager employees and ultimately create businesses and pay taxes.

LOL! A reduction of 16 refugees sure doesn’t sound like a reduction to me!

Last year, the U.S. State Department confirmed it had limited the number of all refugees coming to Georgia, based partly on the Deal administration’s concerns. The number of refugees who have been resettling in Georgia dropped by less than 1 percent over the past two fiscal years, from 2,710 to 2,694.

Deal is right here.  The resettlement contractors put “natural enemies” together in some cities expecting (naively?) that the mythical magic melting pot will do its work and the lion will lay down with the lamb or some such foolishness!

“When they decide where they bring in individuals,” Deal said, “they need to do a better job of making sure they haven’t put an over-concentration of people from different countries, some of whom have been natural enemies of each other. Trying to put them side-by-side in a small community like Clarkston is not doing a service to those individuals.”

EndNote:  I don’t know whatever happened with Athens, GA where the mayor (a Democrat) wanted answers from the feds before she put a stamp of approval on a refugee program for Athens.  Does anyone know whatever happened? Did the contractor, the International Refugee Committee, set up shop there?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Senator Lindsey Graham: we need to bring in our “fair share” of Syrian Muslims

Trump reverses himself on Syrian refugee question, says we have too many problems of our own!

Germany: ISIS fighter caught posing as asylum seeker

Disobeying the Supreme Court

There is growing concern among the Christian community in America. The concern is that their Christian beliefs, which shall not be infringed, are under attack by the law givers. This has happened before during the rule of the pagan Roman Empire.

The question: Should Christians disobey the law givers?

I took the title of this column from an email I received from Dr. William Lane Craig, a noted Christian apologist. Dr. Craig in his email is responding to Nathan, an agnostic, who states, “Now, as of recent, with the legalization of gay marriage across the United States, someone pointed out to me that the Bible says that to resist the authorities would be directly against God’s wishes. To support this, he showed me Romans 13 verses 1-7. The verses seem to suggest that authority is placed by God, and we are to obey them because disobeying would be akin to disobeying God.”

Dr. Craig responds with:

Now as right-thinking people and as Christians, we cannot acquiesce in the Supreme Court’s attempt to re-define what marriage is. Five lawyers (as the dissenting justices called them) can no more change the essence of marriage than they can change the essence of a horse or a chair. So we now find ourselves in a society where there are legal marriages which are in actuality pseudo-marriages. These people are not really married, but they are legally married.

Now since, as you note, we Christians are to be submissive to the governing authorities of the society in which we find ourselves, we have to obey the laws unless they require us to do things which would be immoral, that is, contrary to God’s will or commands.

For example, when the Jerusalem authorities commanded the early apostles to quit preaching the name of Jesus, Peter and John boldly responded: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4.19-20). Similarly, when pagan Roman Emperors commanded Christians to burn incense to the pagan gods, Christians resolutely refused, undergoing unspeakable tortures and execution rather than violate their conscience.

[Emphasis added]

Is it time for a new wave Christian civil disobedience as we saw with Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, a Democrat, who emerged from a rural jail on Tuesday, September 8th, 2015, proclaiming praise for God and indicating that her fight against marriage licenses was worth the six days behind bars?

The Three forms of Civil Disobedience

There are three forms of civil disobedience, two of which are against God’s will.

  1. The anarchist view says that a person can choose to disobey the government whenever he likes and whenever he feels he is personally justified in doing so. Such a stance has no biblical support whatsoever, as evidenced in the writings of Paul in Romans 13.
  2. The extremist patriot says that a person should always follow and obey his country, no matter what the command. This view also does not have biblical support. Moreover, it is not supported in the history of nations. For example, during the Nuremberg trials, the attorneys for the Nazi war criminals attempted to use the defense that their clients were only following the direct orders of the government and therefore could not be held responsible for their actions. However, one of the judges dismissed their argument with the simple question: “But gentlemen, is there not a law above our laws?”
  3. The position the Scriptures uphold is one of biblical submission, with a Christian being allowed to act in civil disobedience to the government if it commands evil, such that it requires a Christian to act in a manner that is contrary to the clear teachings and requirements of God’s Word.

Peaceful Christian disobedience to evil commands is mandated by God. That is today’s lesson.

RELATED ARTICLES:

What’s Next for Freed Kentucky Clerk? Her Lawyer Speaks Out

At What Point Does the Homosexual Agenda Become a National Religion?

Why the Marriage Debate Isn’t Over: An Interview With Ryan T. Anderson

Kerry briefs Senators: U.S. will take more Muslim Syrian refugees in 2016

Secretary of State John Kerry is probably getting a tongue-lashing at this very moment from refugee resettlement contractors who want the President to raise the ante and permit 200,000 refugees to be admitted to the U.S.

The norm from the Obama Administration in recent years has been 70,000 (from all countries) which is already way above a sustainable economic level considering the large numbers of refugees already on welfare.

McCain and dead baby

This is deplorable! Didn’t McCain do some fact checking before he went to the Senate floor with this shameful propaganda. That poor baby is dead because his father wanted free teeth in Europe! It has nothing to do with U.S. immigration policy.

Kerry told Senators today that they are looking to boost that number by only 5,000 to accommodate a Syrian refugee stream.  That is a tiny number when you consider that the Lutherans, the Catholics and the Evangelicals, who are paid to resettle refugees, have been asking for 65,000-100,000 this week.

It occurs to me that if the contractors want to bring in the mostly Muslim Syrians maybe it is time to cut back on the Somali and Iraqi Muslim refugees, groups which are now both way over 100,000 in number in the US (not including the children they have produced here).  

From the Associate Press:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States is prepared to increase the number of refugees it resettles by at least 5,000 next year as European countries struggle to accommodate tens of thousands of refugees from the Middle East and Africa.

Two officials and a congressional aide said that Secretary of State John Kerry told members of Congress in a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill Wednesday that the United States will boost its worldwide quota for resettling refugees from 70,000 to 75,000 next year, a number that could increase further. A fraction of those would be from Syria.

Kerry said after the meeting that the United States would increase the number of refugees it is willing to take in but did not give a specific number.

Hillary wants a UN pow-wow to guilt-trip western countries (surely she isn’t going to embarrass the Saudis, the Chinese or the Russians).

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, Kerry’s predecessor, called for an “emergency global gathering” at the United Nations General Assembly meeting later this month, where countries could pledge aid money and to accept some of the migrants.

Of the three largest ethnic groups being resettled right now, the Burmese are mostly Christians, but some 10,000 or so Burmese Muslims came in in the last ten years; the majority of the Iraqis are Muslims and virtually all of the Somalis are.  The Somali refugees have been coming for 30 years, or nearly so, so maybe it’s time to cut them off.

The top three groups of people resettled by the U.S. are Burmese, Iraqis and Somalis. Beyond Syrians, the administration wants to increase the number of Africans coming to the United States next year, according to a senior U.S. official involved in the process.

The article implies that we were to blame for Vietnam and for Iraq—you know we broke it so they are ours.  However, Syria is not our problem and most Americans know that.

Many Americans will feel differently about taking large numbers of Syrians displaced by a war that the United States has tried hard to avoid.

And, look at this, even Obama’s people are worried about security:

In addition, U.S. intelligence officials say they are concerned that the flow of migrants into Europe has been infiltrated by Islamic State group extremists who are bent on carrying out terror attacks.

“Exactly what’s their background?” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Wednesday during an industry conference. “We don’t obviously put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees.”

More here….

Remember folks!  The stars are aligning for Obama to choose an extremely large number of refugees for FY2016.  His determination letter is due in Congress this month, Europe is being overrun (Obama won’t like Merkel getting all the love), the contractors are ginning-up their lobbying forces demanding more paying clients (refugees), 14 Senators of the Democrat’s Jihad Caucus are yammering for more voters AND the Pope is coming to town!  Obama will want to give him a little ‘gift.’

I’ll eat my hat if something really big doesn’t happen this month.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Does The State Department Fund An Anti-Israel Organization With Communist Leadership?

Gov. Walker: We don’t need more Syrian refugees, we need to deal with ISIS

Judge Could Order Questioning of Hillary Clinton’s Backup E-mail Archives

HOLMDEL, N.J. /PRNewswire/ — Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court for the D.C. Circuit is expected to hear arguments to order the State Department to question Hillary Clinton on the existence of emails on backup tape archives, The Hill Reported, but information management company Index Engines can explain exactly what this means and how it is done.

When Clinton implemented an email server to control and manage her correspondence, her team hired Platte River Networks to host this environment. This is a third-party organization that likely has procedures in place to protect data and ensure it can be restored in the case of a disaster such as a flood or fire by copying all email ever created onto backup tapes.

This standard “IT” process produces a snapshot of what actually happened and it is secure and tamper proof, and represents a factual record of the past and are much more reliable than the records stored on local servers and hard drives that can be accessed by many and easily spoiled.

In this case, the backup of the email server most likely occurred at an offsite location chosen by the hosting provider, Platte River Networks, and the data was placed on tapes that are typically preserved in offsite storage vaults. When the main server was shut down, the tapes could have been forgotten about.

Index Engines has software that can quickly scan backup tapes, index the contents of the email, and make it searchable and accessible without the use of any other third party software or infrastructure. Through this process keywords, time frames and file types can be quickly produced and extracted without corruption.

“Data never dies,” said Tim Williams, CEO of Index Engines. “All modern organizations have robust data protection processes that make copies of everything and archive it on backup media to ensure it can survive a disaster. In cases like this, those copies represent the factual truth. They can’t be changed after the fact.

“When an email is sent, it is copied and archived and preserved many times over. This is a disaster recovery feature standard in any data center. What Hillary Clinton probably didn’t know is that exact copies of what existed is archived in data center disaster recovery archives, or backup tapes, that allow for a rebuilding of an email server in case of a failure.”

EDITORS NOTE: To learn more about securing your organization’s legacy tape data, contact info@indexengines.com or visit www.indexengines.com.